Hi Brian, scary article. I was thinking about the Achilles heels of pop MMT and you may have a point. However , if MMT is truly just a window framing how the system actually works, as the claim goes, then the Achilles heel is the weakness of the system not the window which we view it through. MMT, as I understand it, can't change the system but at least we can observe it with a clear view.
The issue is: do you want to be correct about the economy, or win the political contest? Politics is not a debating contest, sometimes you need to lie through your teeth to win.
The problem is that's what we've been doing (MMT comment)! How has that worked out? I'm reading this for the first time and agree with you to the point that you go off the rails about MMT...too bad you had to throw that nonsense in! I would have liked to share it if not for the MMT comment! I have no idea what "pop MMT" means. MMT is about much more than fiscal policy balance sheets. It's about understanding the true story of money and where it comes from (monetary system). I think it's very important that people know that the federal government is the currency "issuer" (State Theory of Money/Chartalism) to have an honest discussion about policy choices. It sounds like you are proposing we continue this back-and-forth argument about who is responsible for the "federal government "debt." The "taxpayer" doesn't fund the federal government; the federal government funds the taxpayer! It's essential that people understand that "all money is created as debt." US dollars are federal government IOUs; when you understand that, it becomes self-evident that the program going to people with very little "money" (Fed debt) cannot possibly be responsible for the large federal government deficits. Those programs are pass-throughs (high multiplier factor) that become the income of businesses. The cause of the abnormally high "federal government Deficits" is "demand leakages." The problem I see for orthodoxy is that MMT sheds light on the fiction in which they are heavily invested. I don't know if that is the problem you are struggling with, but it sounds like it.
Hi Brian, scary article. I was thinking about the Achilles heels of pop MMT and you may have a point. However , if MMT is truly just a window framing how the system actually works, as the claim goes, then the Achilles heel is the weakness of the system not the window which we view it through. MMT, as I understand it, can't change the system but at least we can observe it with a clear view.
The issue is: do you want to be correct about the economy, or win the political contest? Politics is not a debating contest, sometimes you need to lie through your teeth to win.
The problem is that's what we've been doing (MMT comment)! How has that worked out? I'm reading this for the first time and agree with you to the point that you go off the rails about MMT...too bad you had to throw that nonsense in! I would have liked to share it if not for the MMT comment! I have no idea what "pop MMT" means. MMT is about much more than fiscal policy balance sheets. It's about understanding the true story of money and where it comes from (monetary system). I think it's very important that people know that the federal government is the currency "issuer" (State Theory of Money/Chartalism) to have an honest discussion about policy choices. It sounds like you are proposing we continue this back-and-forth argument about who is responsible for the "federal government "debt." The "taxpayer" doesn't fund the federal government; the federal government funds the taxpayer! It's essential that people understand that "all money is created as debt." US dollars are federal government IOUs; when you understand that, it becomes self-evident that the program going to people with very little "money" (Fed debt) cannot possibly be responsible for the large federal government deficits. Those programs are pass-throughs (high multiplier factor) that become the income of businesses. The cause of the abnormally high "federal government Deficits" is "demand leakages." The problem I see for orthodoxy is that MMT sheds light on the fiction in which they are heavily invested. I don't know if that is the problem you are struggling with, but it sounds like it.
Can't wait to see how this 'run the country like a business' approach pans out.