MMT criticism has shirted away from affordability (budget constraint) and fiscal responsibility (default constraint) to an inflation constraint and a curency devaluation constraint.
While this is progress, it is probably an impass such as is encountered when theories and their models are founded on incompatible assumptions.
On one hand, this is likely to lead to a revisiting of economic theory in light of criticism of neoclassical economics from Keynes, Paleo Keynesians, Post Keynesians and Institutionalists.
On the other hand, neoclassical economists are never going to accept that inflation risk and foreign exchange risk can never be formalized to the standards they impose owing to the level of uncertainty that Keynes explicated by then. John Hicks and Paul Samuelson's interpretation of Keynes were meant to reconcile Keynesianism with neoclassicism. We are still living with the results of that. Fail.
A lot of these folks are going to die holding on to those views, waiting for formal models that pass the criteria they arbitarily impose. And the harder and longer one digs in, the more difficult it becomes to admit mistake. (Some reputational risk would help.) Hopefully, the world will now begin to pass them by.
Bond Economics
Changing Budgetary Procedures: Outline Of The MMT Approach
Brian Romanchuk
10 comments:
“We are still living with the results of that. Fail.“
The “fail” is built in the Platonist methodology that doesn’t discriminate.. it synthesizes... the “broad gate”... lets everything thru.. even the thesis that doesn’t work or is false...
May be purpose for Platonist dialog method (like you’re seeing currently fail in the Economics discipline) but material systems administration ain’t it...
Until the world passes capitalism by, those Platonists will keep getting new gigs.
Capitalism is a Marx Theory and Marx was Platonist...
It’s not really what we are doing there is presently large publis sector involvement .... but Marxist wouldn’t admit that they are too vain...
They would all rather blow Marx if he were still alive...
They would all line up to blow Marx in succession multiple times one after the other rather than make any adjustment to their brainwashed Marxist thesis...
They are LOCKED IN...
Running a balanced budget would be an MMT informed approach - as long as the Job Guarantee bit was put in place using "QE for Time" directly from the central bank (ie the default payroll is run by the central bank and paid from a "QE" account, not a Treasury account).
That reconciles the two views, at the cost of a larger number of people on the Job Guarantee.
as long as the Job Guarantee bit was put in place using "QE for Time" ... NeilW
At least Neil admits that a JG is about consuming time, not necessarily about doing useful work in an efficient manner.
But why pay people to waste their time when a Citizen's Dividend would allow them to work for lower wages and still come out ahead?
Btw, negative interest on large and non-citizen account balances at the Central Bank is a proper way to finance a Citizen's Dividend which does not require balancing assets, nebulous or otherwise.
"doing useful work in an efficient manner"
That's the job of the private sector. If people have a problem with the 'ineffciency', they can always hire the people off the Job Guarantee and do useful work in an efficient manner with them. And they'll get paid for doing so.
And f they don't do that then by definition those people are working in the most efficient manner possible on the Job Guarantee
"a Citizen's Dividend would allow them to work for lower wages and still come out ahead?"
You can't come out ahead doing that. It's a monetary illusion.
All pensions have a dependency ratio. There is an amount of physical output that is transferred from those doing the work to those not deploying their hours for others.
Those producing the output have the first call on their time - unless you believe in forcing or tricking people into working longer than they need to. Why should they work extra when there is nothing real to had in return? Not even a sacrifice of time.
At least those talking about Ctizens Dividends are honest Trustafarians and that it is all about topping up their inadequate middle class trust funds so they can play at being rich rather than pretending they are helping the poor and downtrodden.
The Job Guarantee transfers the output gap to the bottom end of town to level up the gig economy.
Not even a sacrifice of time. NeilW
A pointless sacrifice except for sadists. Thanks for admitting this.
And it's just another indication of our unjust economic system that it reduces people to getting satisfaction out of making others suffer needlessly.
It's called the "rat-race", Neil, and government privileges for usurers are largely to blame.
At least those talking about Ctizens Dividends are honest Trustafarians and that it is all about topping up their inadequate middle class trust funds so they can play at being rich rather than pretending they are helping the poor and downtrodden. ibid
No, a Citizen's Dividend is about equal protection under the law wrt fiat creation and that would certainly help the poor and downtrodden - rather than paying them to waste their time.
"A pointless sacrifice except for sadists. "
Correct. There is no reason why anybody should work any longer to provide for people who don't wish to work themselves.
Thank's for admitting this.
" a Citizen's Dividend is about equal protection"
It can't. It goes up and down depending upon "the economy". That's why its a "dividend". not an "income".
Equal protection under the law does not mean equal outcomes only that government does not favor either the rich or the poor.
Currently, the government favors the rich via government privileges for a private-credit-for-usury cartel. Also, by not mandating and enforcing limits to real asset ownership such as of land.
Read the Bible and learn that God is neither socialist nor fascist but is for justice. That's why a family farm might be lost for up to 49 years but the children would regain it unconditionally the 50th year so that the children can recover from their parent's mistakes or sins (Leviticus 25).
You guys best learn what justice is before we have a repeat of 1793...
Post a Comment