The old "should the government issue bonds" debate has come up again. I would point the reader to this article at Mike Norman Economics, as well as the Richard Murphy article it refers to. I would argue that there is limited room for debate. The Treasury of the central government certainly can stop issuing bonds, conditioned on there being changes to the legal/regulatory framework for the central bank. The more important question is whether such a policy is a good idea. My argument is that doing so would run into a variety of consequences, and other policy decisions would need to be rethought (mainly the structure of pension provision).Bond Economics
Do Central Governments Need To Issue Bonds (Again)?
Brian Romanchuk
4 comments:
Should we have welfare for the rich or not is the real question.
But what has ethics to do with anything as Tom ponders whether another World War is nigh? It's not as if the last World War had anything to do with finance, is it? /sarc
"We live in environment where pension provision has been pushed onto individuals. Taking away the only easily understood source of safe assets will make personal pension planning even harder. "
Oh boy Brian you are at high risk of being thrown out of the MMT Club with this one here...
Dont you know that retired pensioners are "the rich!" by MMT inference... as according to MMT, all bond interest paid is "a subsidy for the rich!"... theyre as religious about it as Andrew Anderson here all the time...
Dont you know that retired pensioners are "the rich!" Franko
No they all aren't but the rich hiding behind widows and orphans is an old ploy that fools fewer and fewer as time goes by.
Hint: That the money system is corrupt is old news; how to fix it is where it's at; not how to perpetuate it.
Matt, yeah, I could see that complaint coming...
Post a Comment