Richard D. Wolff

I have had trouble finding a modern socialist explanation for the value of money in this post gold-standard time. The only explanations stem from free market neo-liberal think tanks. From what I can gather, we have commodified debt instead of precious metals. This is troublesome to translate into marxist terms as thusfar in my reading industrial capital is only supported by money capital(augmenting or subsidizing the hoard), but the commodification of debt blurs the lines between credit and currency. From debt collection agencies, to trade deficits, to international purchase of treasury bonds there is a hidden world of debt that completely determines the value of what it is produced, where it can be sold and what can be bought. By deliberately targeting inflation benchmarks(since the 70's), we have prevented the devaluation of usury rates over time while simultaneously stagnating wages and engaging in the purest form of currency manipulation. The enforced austerity programs seemed designed to pay dues to the holders of these debts regardless of social and economic consequences. So my question is why? Why should we the people eliminate the "risk" of investment by directly subsidizing the the cost regardless of the effectiveness(let alone the corrupt self-enrichment) of that stimulus? Do we strip the earth of all it's assets to reward the predatory speculation of a minority foisted upon the majority by corrupt and inept bureaucracy? I find it ironic that conservatives babble about liberal entitlement but simultaneously want the public to subsidize the risk of wall street loans. If you agree with my implied opinion here than there is a more important question. How do we combat this "accumulation by dispossession"? At the end of the day every generation tries to pass the bag onto the next and the bag keeps getting heavier and heavier. The inevitability of split seams only seems to be outpaced by our inherent drive to self-destruct.