An economics, investment, trading and policy blog with a focus on Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). We seek the truth, avoid the mainstream and are virulently anti-neoliberalism.
"just days after the inauguration of President Barack Obama, Charles and David Koch met in their company headquarters in Wichita with their longtime political strategist, Rich Fink.... The country was headed toward bankruptcy, they agreed."
Give me an "m"... give me an "o"... give me an "r"... give me another "o".....
You can see that often where these people will advocate for policies that are not in their best financial interests... Peterson does this too... and gives massive amounts of USD balances away...
And REAL interests too, David Walker gave a speech one time where he was advocating for military cuts while he revealed that his own son was serving at the time... funds for military force protection conceivably could be cut that would make his own son less safe...
But if it were me, I'd spend the entire next debate in the infamous Karate Kid I ending fight scene stance. And refuse to talk.
Hey, if the president can order assassinations and has his finger on the nuke button, he can certainly call BS on nat'l TV. Especially after the GOP skewered Kerry as a flip-flopper. Mitt is the granddaddy of flip-flop. Obama should have hung this around his neck in day-glow flashing neon.
The strategy Obama went in with was based on polling that indicated that undecided voters were down on confrontation and up on "working together." So he went with that, with the same result he got when he tried it with the GOP congress. I guess he is a slow learner.
Ed Dolan has a post on Economonitor which is a bit critical of MMT but also agrees with some basic, central points:
"I am in the middle of teaching a monetary economics course right now, and tomorrow’s lecture addresses just this subject. One slide in my lecture (a slide that has been there for years) contains a set of T-accounts that demonstrates precisely this point: Collection of taxes extinguishes money, spending by the Treasury creates money, and when you consolidate the two T-accounts, the two transactions net out to no change in money... Surprise, surprise! I’ve been teaching MMT for years and didn’t even know it."
"I can see from the “taxes extinguish money” thread here that members of the “serious” subset of MMTers agree with me that banknotes stored by the Treasury or CB are neither assets nor liabilities of the government, they are “nonmoney”, just paper. What many contributors to this discussion thread fail to realize that us “mainstream” economists know that and have always known it"
"The same goes for the view of whether sovereign governments can “go broke.” I think all mainstream economists recognize that there is a sense in which the answer is yes and a sense in which it is no. In the sense that they can always create new money to settle any financial obligation that has a fixed nominal value in their own currency, the answer is, almost trivially, that no, they cannot go broke. On the other hand, they face the inflation constraint, and under conditions of hyperinflation, governments can “go broke” in the sense that the cease to be able to buy real goods and services with any finite nominal amount of currency."
All of which completely undermines JKH's "contingent approach" argument.
"On the other hand, they face the inflation constraint, and under conditions of hyperinflation, governments can “go broke” in the sense that the cease to be able to buy real goods and services with any finite nominal amount of currency.""
He then ignores the reality that there is no "there" there for hyperinflation when there is so much idle capacity as a result of the shortage of spending.
How did we get to the point where the fear of inflation trumps unemployment hands-down?
Plus no mention about what to do about all of the potential spending moving out of play due to leakages.
One of my new rules…ignore any so-called "expert" that brings in the inflation monster in one of the first paragraphs.
Speaking of Big Bird and Sesame Street, maybe we could get them to introduce the Inflation Monster just to teach our kids it's not all that scary.
Glad to see that Ed Dolan and some others are acknowledging that at least some MMT points that should not be controversial are actually not controversial. But that is a long way from embracing MMT, as the post reveals.
But notice how in the end he confounds the inflation constraint with the insolvency constraint anyway, as for all practical purposes the same.
15 comments:
"just days after the inauguration of President Barack Obama, Charles and David Koch met in their company headquarters in Wichita with their longtime political strategist, Rich Fink.... The country was headed toward bankruptcy, they agreed."
Give me an "m"... give me an "o"... give me an "r"... give me another "o".....
It's like satire, these people are insane.
where is Bono ?
he should have come out dressed as Ghandi last week and made a press conference.
Trixie,
You can see that often where these people will advocate for policies that are not in their best financial interests... Peterson does this too... and gives massive amounts of USD balances away...
And REAL interests too, David Walker gave a speech one time where he was advocating for military cuts while he revealed that his own son was serving at the time... funds for military force protection conceivably could be cut that would make his own son less safe...
rsp,
Goog,
"Bono": All caught up in "charity" imo, ie "playing defense" ALL THE TIME.
rsp,
But if it were me, I'd spend the entire next debate in the infamous Karate Kid I ending fight scene stance. And refuse to talk.
Hey, if the president can order assassinations and has his finger on the nuke button, he can certainly call BS on nat'l TV. Especially after the GOP skewered Kerry as a flip-flopper. Mitt is the granddaddy of flip-flop. Obama should have hung this around his neck in day-glow flashing neon.
The strategy Obama went in with was based on polling that indicated that undecided voters were down on confrontation and up on "working together." So he went with that, with the same result he got when he tried it with the GOP congress. I guess he is a slow learner.
Tom:
Ed Dolan has a post on Economonitor which is a bit critical of MMT but also agrees with some basic, central points:
"I am in the middle of teaching a monetary economics course right now, and tomorrow’s lecture addresses just this subject. One slide in my lecture (a slide that has been there for years) contains a set of T-accounts that demonstrates precisely this point: Collection of taxes extinguishes money, spending by the Treasury creates money, and when you consolidate the two T-accounts, the two transactions net out to no change in money... Surprise, surprise! I’ve been teaching MMT for years and didn’t even know it."
"I can see from the “taxes extinguish money” thread here that members of the “serious” subset of MMTers agree with me that banknotes stored by the Treasury or CB are neither assets nor liabilities of the government, they are “nonmoney”, just paper. What many contributors to this discussion thread fail to realize that us “mainstream” economists know that and have always known it"
"The same goes for the view of whether sovereign governments can “go broke.” I think all mainstream economists recognize that there is a sense in which the answer is yes and a sense in which it is no. In the sense that they can always create new money to settle any financial obligation that has a fixed nominal value in their own currency, the answer is, almost trivially, that no, they cannot go broke. On the other hand, they face the inflation constraint, and under conditions of hyperinflation, governments can “go broke” in the sense that the cease to be able to buy real goods and services with any finite nominal amount of currency."
All of which completely undermines JKH's "contingent approach" argument.
http://www.economonitor.com/blog/2012/10/ed-dolan-talks-to-fabius-maximus-about-mmt-can-it-save-us/
"On the other hand, they face the inflation constraint, and under conditions of hyperinflation, governments can “go broke” in the sense that the cease to be able to buy real goods and services with any finite nominal amount of currency.""
He then ignores the reality that there is no "there" there for hyperinflation when there is so much idle capacity as a result of the shortage of spending.
How did we get to the point where the fear of inflation trumps unemployment hands-down?
Plus no mention about what to do about all of the potential spending moving out of play due to leakages.
One of my new rules…ignore any so-called "expert" that brings in the inflation monster in one of the first paragraphs.
Speaking of Big Bird and Sesame Street, maybe we could get them to introduce the Inflation Monster just to teach our kids it's not all that scary.
Dolan is just another chump among millions.
Bono needs to stump MMT to play some offense, so true that he is always in defense mode after the fact.
MMT offers many invariants from the Norman tool kit which to easily pick off current events and how they evolve.
ROMNEY - how can a Mormon come out so tough on foreign policy and rattle the war drums ?
His jeopardizing the Mormon missions and all those Mormons out there in the 3rd world.
I don't think Romney will win the presidency based on this fact alone.
He would be putting a Palin Target on every single missionary Mormon in the world ...
Glad to see that Ed Dolan and some others are acknowledging that at least some MMT points that should not be controversial are actually not controversial. But that is a long way from embracing MMT, as the post reveals.
But notice how in the end he confounds the inflation constraint with the insolvency constraint anyway, as for all practical purposes the same.
Post title should read:
The Kochs' quest to save America…but not Americans.
Trixie:
That post on the Economics Nobel (not) came from here:
http://exiledonline.com/the-nobel-prize-in-economics-there-is-no-nobel-prize-in-economics/
Post a Comment