tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2761684730989137546.post2695644109839993748..comments2024-03-28T20:28:01.733-04:00Comments on Mike Norman Economics: Warren Mosler - MMT White Papermike normanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03296006882513340747noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2761684730989137546.post-89854096122399673562019-03-29T22:25:06.993-04:002019-03-29T22:25:06.993-04:00He said the GnD is part of MMT recently. I was ho...He said the GnD is part of MMT recently. I was horrified.<br /><br />Those polls are pretty old, before most people knew what was in the GND. The name is kind of snappy and innocuous sounding. Ryan Harrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04815033054435303399noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2761684730989137546.post-83355062589153503112019-03-29T13:58:23.747-04:002019-03-29T13:58:23.747-04:00I wouldn't be surprised if Warren Mosler likes...I wouldn't be surprised if Warren Mosler likes the GND, as he's no conservative. I might ask him. Kaiveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04195639305785321786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2761684730989137546.post-91383178030385969392019-03-28T00:53:30.789-04:002019-03-28T00:53:30.789-04:00"At least he didn't bring the wildly unpo...<i>"At least he didn't bring the wildly unpopular GND into it."</i><br /><br />Too much Rush Limbaugh and Koch brothers media, you need to up your game. In fact the GND is very well received, especially considering how recently it was unveiled. Conservative media is shocked at how well the GND has polled and is doing everything in its power to denigrate it - exactly the same way they are trying to quash MMT. <br /><br />https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/421765-poll-majorities-of-both-parties-support-green-new-deal<br /><br />https://www.businessinsider.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-green-new-deal-support-among-americans-poll-2019-2/<br /><br />http://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/the-green-new-deal-has-strong-bipartisan-support/Noah Wayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12012500819097539976noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2761684730989137546.post-37029073384719164242019-03-27T15:41:28.066-04:002019-03-27T15:41:28.066-04:00Part 2
If employment L is doubled, the average st...Part 2<br /><br />If employment L is doubled, the average stock of transaction money M doubles. In a well-designed fiat money economy, growth is not hampered by a lack of the transaction medium.<br /><br />Ramifications: (i) The State is needed for the institutional setup of the monetary order, (ii) the State is NOT needed for injecting money into the economy, (iii) what is needed is an accommodative Central Bank, (iv) neither the State nor the Central Bank interferes with the autonomous transactions of the household and business sector, (v) money is a generalized IOU, (vi) money is created and destroyed by the transactions between the household and the business sector, (vii) the value of money is given by W/P=R (1b), i.e. is equal to the productivity, (viii) the value of money does NOT depend on the (average) stock of money M, (ix) the functionality of monetary institutions and the value of money does NOT depend on the taxing power of the State.<br /><br />If the State deficit-spends money into the elementary production-consumption economy it follows from the macroeconomic Profit Law#4, #5 that Public Deficit = Private Profit.<br /><br />Bringing money into the economy by public deficit spending is NOT distributionally neutral, just the opposite: it is a free lunch for the Oligarchy.<br /><br />So, MMT is not only scientifically worthless#6 but economically harmful to the ninety-nine-percenters.<br /><br />Egmont Kakarot-Handtke<br /><br />#1 Geometrical Exposition of Structural Axiomatic Economics<br />https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2060073<br /><br />#2 Wikimedia, Elementary production-consumption economy<br />https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:AXEC31.png<br /><br />#3 Wikimedia, Idealized transaction pattern<br />https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:AXEC98.png<br /><br />#4 Profit Law Q=Yd+(I−S)+(G−T)+(X−M)<br /><br />#5 How counterfeiters save America with an extra profit and make WeThePeople pay for it<br />https://axecorg.blogspot.com/2019/02/how-counterfeiters-save-america-with.html<br /><br />#6 Refuting MMT’s new Macroeconomics Textbook<br />https://axecorg.blogspot.com/2019/03/refuting-mmts-new-macroeconomics.htmlAXEC / E.K-Hhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10402274109039114416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2761684730989137546.post-43687660182672910152019-03-27T15:40:04.895-04:002019-03-27T15:40:04.895-04:00MMT: fundamentally false
Comment on Warren Mosler ...MMT: fundamentally false<br />Comment on Warren Mosler on ‘MMT White Paper’<br /><br />The purpose of Warren Mosler’s white paper is “to publicly present the fundamentals of MMT.”<br /><br />This is the first fundamental proposition: “MMT Alone Recognizes that the US Government and its Agents are the Only Supplier of That Which it Demands for Payment of Taxes<br />That is, the currency itself is a simple public monopoly.<br />The US government levies taxes payable in $US <br />The $US to pay those taxes can only originate from the US government and its agents.<br />The $US to purchase US Treasury securities can only originate from the US Government and its agents.<br />The economy has to sell goods and services to the US Government or borrow from the US Government, or it will not be able to pay its taxes or purchase US Treasury securities.<br />Ramifications: 1. The US government and its agents, from inception, necessarily spend first, only after that can taxes be paid or state securities purchased.”<br /><br />Because the first MMT axiom is false the rest of MMT is false.<br /><br />MMT lacks sound macroeconomic foundations. As the correct analytical starting point, the elementary production-consumption economy is defined with this set of macroeconomic axioms: (A0) The economy consists of the household and the business sector which, in turn, consists initially of one giant fully integrated firm. (A1) Yw=WL wage income Yw is equal to wage rate W times working hours. L, (A2) O=RL output O is equal to productivity R times working hours L, (A3) C=PX consumption expenditure C is equal to price P times quantity bought/sold X.<br /><br />Under the conditions of market clearing X=O and budget balancing C=Yw in each period, the price is given by P=W/R (1a). The price P is determined by the wage rate W, which takes the role of the nominal numéraire, and the productivity R.#1 The elementary production consumption economy is shown on Wikimedia.#2<br /><br />What is needed for a start is two things (i) a central bank which creates money on its balance sheet in the form of deposits, and (ii), a legal system which declares the central bank’s deposits as legal tender. These institutions have to be established by the State.<br /><br />Deposit money is needed by the business sector to pay the workers who receive the wage income Yw per period. The need is only temporary because the business sector gets the money back if the workers fully spend their income, i.e. if C=Yw. Overdrafts are needed by the household sector for consumption expenditures if the households want to spend before they get their income.<br /><br />For the case of a balanced budget C=Yw, the idealized transaction pattern of deposits/overdrafts of the household sector at the Central Bank over the course of one period is shown on Wikimedia.#3<br /><br />The household sector’s deposits/overdrafts are zero at the beginning and end of the period. Money is continually created and destroyed during the period under consideration. There is NO such thing as a fixed quantity of money. The central bank plays an accommodative role and supports the autonomous market transactions between the household and the business sector. From this follows the average stock of transaction money as M=kYw, with k determined by the transaction pattern.<br /><br />See part 2AXEC / E.K-Hhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10402274109039114416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2761684730989137546.post-30309546217983377552019-03-26T22:41:51.915-04:002019-03-26T22:41:51.915-04:00At least he didn't bring the wildly unpopular ...At least he didn't bring the wildly unpopular GND into it. MMT's big moment was such an policy blunder and unremittent disaster, not a single vote in the Senate!!! and polling in single digits, I wonder if Kelton is going to become politically toxic as well.Ryan Harrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04815033054435303399noreply@blogger.com