My new podcast episode is out.

Julian Millie and Matt Tomlinson — Infrequently asked questions: The Monologic Imagination

The topic we are focusing on is monologism, the practice of presenting one’s voice as pure and singular, unquestionably true, and, in the case of groups, unified. Monologism is a common feature of religious and political projects

The categorical versus the dialectical approach.

OUPblog
Infrequently asked questions: The Monologic Imagination

Julian Millie and Matt Tomlinson

The Sad Death Of An Adjunct Professor Sparks Some, But Too Little, Labor Debate, Possibly Too Late

Commentary by Roger Erickson

Here is another example of how more people in more professions every year are "just eking out a living" - without any explanation for why we should settle for that outcome.
The Sad Death Of An Adjunct Professor Sparks A Labor Debate
   (hat tip John Leonard)

With this kind of dis-coordination, our Output Gap must be - voluntarily - off the charts. We've been slogging away at our current course for over 30 years now. Isn't it past time to stand up, look around, and consider other options more carefully?

As a start, who are they, exactly, who are volunteering us for this suicide mission? Why? And to what purpose?

And if both their motives and desired outcome are suspect, where are the legions declaring "Hell No, We Won't Go" quietly into a state of total dis-coordination? If reducing our Output Gap is an alternative goal, then halting compliance with the anarchists is an obvious, early step. They can't volunteer us for self-assisted suicide if we simply refuse to cooperate.

If return-on-coordination - i.e., teamwork - is the highest return, by far, why are we throwing it away, instead of discarding stuff we DON'T need anywhere near as much? What other selections might we be making, instead? If there are so many options, why aren't we exploring them?

This is natural selection at work, folks, and at the moment WE are not selecting wisely. Is the sad death of the entire US Middle Class really our choice?

Livestream recording of Mosler v Murphy now available

A high quality video of the seminar is currently being edited. In the interim, please see the livestream recording below.Note: the debate begins at 22:08.

Money and Public Purpose
(h/t Rohan Grey on FD)

Modern Monetary Theory (Warren Mosler) Vs. The Austrian School (Robert Murphy) Macroeconomic Debates Among The Heterodox – June 3, Columbia Law School

Modern Money and Pubic Purpose
Modern Monetary Theory (Warren Mosler) 
Vs. 
The Austrian School

 (Robert Murphy) Macroeconomic Debates Among The Heterodoxy

Part of the 2012-2013 Modern Money and Public Purpose Series on Contemporary Issues in Law and Political Economics, organized by the Workers' Rights Student Coalition

When: 6.15pm June 3rd, 2013
Where: Room 103, Jerome Greene Hall, Columbia Law School

Moderated by John Carney, Senior Editor, CNBC.com

The debate will be livestreamed.

Quiggen asks about MMT, Murphy disses it

Two blog posts brought MMT further to the fore in the blogosphere today.

John Quiggen posted Some propositions for chartalists at Crooked Timber.

Robert Murphy posted The Upside-Down World of MMT at Mises.

A good exchange was had by all at Matt Rognlie's over his post, The fallacies of MMT.

Some gems in the comments.

FLASH: Steve Randy Waldman Engages MMT

Steve Randy Waldman adresses MMT at Interfluidity in MMT stabilization policy — some comments & critiques. This promises to be the mother of all MMT debates thus far, so expect the heavyweights to show up in force. This is a "big deal," so y'all mosey on over there. It's history in the making. Don't miss it.

SRW: "First, I want to make clear that the critiques I’ll offer below are not intended to discredit or dismiss MMT. As I’ve said before, I think MMT offers a coherent and important perspective on fiscal and monetary issues that ought to be understood, on its own terms rather than in dismissive caricature, by anyone serious about macroeconomics. MMT is not 'true', but then no theory is 'true'. We ultimately judge theories by how useful they are, both in making sense of 'the data' we already know and in offering guidance for policy going forward. In my opinion MMT is one of the most useful perspectives in thinking about fiscal and monetary questions.

"However, it is still just a perspective. Enthusiasts sometimes present MMT in a manner that’s too complete and hermetically sealed. While some MMT theorizing is based on 'double entry accounting' or 'obvious, unarguable facts', when MMT adherents offer non-trivial conclusions, they rely upon assumptions about human behavior that are in fact contestable. I continue to place non-zero weight on theories of government insolvency that MMT-ers have persuaded me are, in a sense, incoherent. Life is complicated, and even absurd prophesies can prove self-fulfilling.

"This will be a long post. I’ll discuss each of the seven points I outlined in my summary of MMT stabilization policy. Then I’ll offer some general comments. Before you continue, you should understand the point of view being examined. Please read my previous post first. Or much better yet, read Chapter 1 (Tymoigne and Wray)and Chapter 5 (Tcherneva) of A handbook of alternative monetary economics (ed. Arestis & Sawyer). These essays offer a polished, concise introduction to the MMT perspective. Then spend some time with the 'mandatory' or '101' readings on Warren Mosler and Bill Mitchell’s websites. [links provided in SRW's post]

"The summary points from my previous post are repeated below in bold. New comments then follow. I am critiquing my own distillation of MMT stabilization policy, so there is the danger I have set up straw men. If I have, I apologize and look forward to being set straight in the comments. As usual, almost nothing I say will be original. Many of the points I’ll make have been made better by others, for example, in the comments to the previous post, which are extraordinarily good. At a Kauffman Foundation blogger convention last week, I discussed MMT informally but at some length with David Beckworth, Megan McArdle, Mish, and Mark Thoma. My comments will undoubtedly be informed by those conversations."