Talk:NEED Act

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the NEED Act article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

United States: Government Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Low-importance).

Economics Low‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sources

Greetings, all. After a few additions, the article seems adequately sourced, in that it cites independent, secondary sources containing text devoted at length to the article's subject. Ravensfire, would you agree? -The Gnome (talk) 17:42, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AGREE. Thank you The Gnome for having created this entry. The article is indeed adequately sourced in the sense that the sources used are RS. Schullerius (talk) 20:35, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

At the same time I have to admit to detect a bias in the article towards Modern Monetary Theory (Mosler, Wray, Mitchell), which school of thought is critical of the monetary analyses underlying the NEED Act. This lopsidedness will have to be balanced by sources which embrace what Prof. Jospeh Huber calls New Currency Theory (Steve Keen, Richard Werner, Stephen Zarlenga, Michael Kumhof), which are in harmony with the thinking underlying the NEED Act, though not all of these sources would use that name. The article will also have to be filled out a little more with relevant sources mentioning the NEED Act as found in Google Scholar "National Emergency Employment Defense Act".

The sources I am thinking of would be:

·Huber, Joseph. 2017. Sovereign Money. Beyond Reserve Banking. London: Palgrave Macmillan

· Phillips, Ashton S. 2014. "Bank-Created Money, Monetary Sovereignty, and the Federal Deficit: Toward a New Paradigm in the Government-Spending Debate". Western New England Law Review, 36: 221-56.

· Yamaguchi, Kaoru. 2010. “On the Liquidation of Government Debt under A Debtfree Money System: Modeling the American Monetary Act”. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, Seoul, Korea, 2010. The System Dynamics Society.

· Yamaguchi, Kaoru. 2012. “On the Monetary and Financial Stability under A Public Money System (Revised): Modeling the American Monetary Act Simplified”. Paper presented at the 8th Annual AMI Monetary Reform Conference in Chicago, USA, Sept. 20 - 23, 2012. Originally presented at the 30th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, St. Gallen, Switzerland, July 22 - 26, 2012.

Hope this is an adequate opening argument. Schullerius (talk) 20:35, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]