[Figlio di Moros]

By full employment do you mean maximum employment as in the attempt to minimise the level of unemployment?

That's what full employment means...

How is this balanced against controlling inflation and maintaining competitiveness?

"Controlling inflation" is a false flag raised by economic illiterates screeching about Weimar Republic and Zimbabwe who can't tell the difference between 50% inflation per month and 5% per year. The real boogie man is deflation, which is too often upheld as ideal by pro-capitalist groups because it allows the haute-bourgeoisie to siphon more wealth from society; contrarily, inflation, or the increase of supply of money, eases demand for money, increasing spending and employment; simultaneously, higher inflation rates make products more affordable in an international market place. It also allows for more concerted reinvestments, new infrastructure and social support (healthcare, education, etc.).

Now, full employment in Rei's corporatism is different than in the current capitalist society since the driving mechanism is guilds or syndicates, rather than increasing the supply of money; this means that ZMP workers, as they appear, can be either reassigned to more productive purposes, or working hours/salary can be reduced.

Will the system you advocate lead to a high level of incumbency as guilds attempt to protect themselves from competitors?

Can you rephrase and clarify your question?

Will consumers, entrepreneurs and innovators be harmed by interventions designed to assist guilds?

To my knowledge, no.

What level of tolerance do you have for financial institutions?

Rei is substantially more pro-usury than myself, when we've argued about this before; however, I believe the concept of a Credit Union ought to overtake private banking interests, and she may be inclined to agree.

I oppose their attempts to extract wealth from others but don't want to go to extremes that would cause stagnation or even regression.

Such as Austerity, at least once banks pull their insurance claim for fucking up the economy? The thing about Fascism is that, while ethnoreligiously dogmatic, it's highly pragmatic concerning social and economic policy. While we've worked through alt-econ suggestions, the basic principle is "do what is right for the nation". We have no interest in vindictiveness to the point of harming society.

That said, the financier class is wholly unnecessary. That's not to say their functions aren't necessary, merely their position; again, swapping banks for credit unions.

[AFAIK]

"Controlling inflation" is a false flag raised by economic illiterates screeching about Weimar Republic and Zimbabwe who can't tell the difference between 50% inflation per month and 5% per year

.

Working class people have pensions and savings that are harmed by inflation.
Inflation encourages consumption and investment as the value of savings depreciates over time.
Deflation benefits those with savings. The rich benefit more by preserving their wealth.

I recognize that many prefer to create wealth even if it comes at the expense of damaging existing savings but the point at which you balance competing demands is important.

Will the system you advocate lead to a high level of incumbency as guilds attempt to protect themselves from competitors?
Can you rephrase and clarify your question?

In our current state-capitalist system industries lobby the govt. to impose tariffs on imports in order to protect their profits and jobs from foreign competitors. This protection comes at the expense of domestic consumers (who pay higher prices) and foreign capital and labour (who make fewer sales).

If an entrepreneur or inventor created an innovation, which damaged the position of pre-existing guilds they would resist its implementation.