MMT in a nutshell
Get flash to fully experience Pearltrees
By J. D. Alt Why does it seem like there isn’t enough money to pay for the things we really need?
Promoted from the comments: I’m not sure how any non-MMT economists are interpreting the MMT view of “monopoly money” (and I don’t really care—there are blogs by MMT economists that can answer and authoritatively discuss that question rather easily for those interested, so I’m not quite clear on why there’s any interest in relying on secondary sources), but here’s what it actually means: 1. By virtue of naming the thing that settles a tax payment (i.e., reserve balances in the US, which provide the final settlement of tax payments; while the IRS and govt accept checks drawn on private bank accounts, these are not what is actually transferred to the Treasury’s account at the Fed), there is a demand created for this particular “thing.”
By Dan Kervick In Part One of this essay I defended the MMT view that the national government is the monopoly issuer of the currency in the US, and I attempted to clarify the actual economic status of that government currency with respect to the Fed’s conventional balance sheet accounting. In this concluding part of the essay I will further develop the contrast between the government’s role as currency issuer and the role of private sector households and firms – including commercial banks – as currency users . I will then make a few points about how the government supplies currency to the non-governmental sectors of the economy before concluding with a discussion of several topics that tend to engender resistance to the very idea that such a currency monopoly exists. The Role of Banks
By Dan Kervick Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) emphasizes the central role of governments in sovereign monetary systems. MMT co-developer Warren Mosler has described the US dollar system, for example, as a “simple public monopoly.”
Listen To Audio March 9, 2012 MEDIA ROOTS — Dr. Michael Hudson calls it “a financial grab of infrastructure” by banking and financial elites; some call it the new world order ; others use less provocative descriptors. This class warfare being waged by the world's ruling-class against the U.S. working-class has been described as a “ financial coup d’état ” by Catherine Austin Fitts and others.
A rampaging mutant macroeconomic theory called , or MMT for short, is kicking keisters and smacking down conventional wisdom in economic circles these days. This is because an energized group of MMT economists, bloggers, and their loyal foot soldiers, lead by economists Warren Mosler , Bill Michell , and L. Randall Wray are swarming on the internet. New MMT disciples are hatching out everywhere. They are like a school of fresh-faced paramedics surrounding a gasping heart attack victim.
A rampaging mutant macroeconomic theory called Modern Monetary Theory , or MMT for short, is kicking keisters and smacking down conventional wisdom in economic circles these days. This is because an energized group of MMT economists, bloggers, and their loyal foot soldiers, lead by economists Warren Mosler , Bill Michell , and L. Randall Wray are swarming on the internet. New MMT disciples are hatching out everywhere. They are like a school of fresh-faced paramedics surrounding a gasping heart attack victim. They seek to present their economic worldview as the definitive first aid for understanding and dealing with the critical issues of growth, unemployment, inflation, budget deficits, and national debt.
Fifteen Fatal Fallacies of Financial Fundamentalism A Disquisition on Demand Side Economics William Vickrey October 5, 1996 Much of the conventional economic wisdom prevailing in financial circles, largely subscribed to as a basis for governmental policy, and widely accepted by the media and the public, is based on incomplete analysis, contrafactual assumptions, and false analogy.
Goes nicely with Warren Mosler's 7 Deadly Innocent Frauds & just want it noted it is not quite MMT as I have put it in my MMT in a nutshell category. by Nov 6
Bill Mitchell is the Research Professor in Economics and the Director of the Centre of Full Employment and Equity at the University of Newcastle, Australia. The following is an edited transcript of the interview, conducted August 15, 2011. Thanks for joining us, Professor Mitchell. I wanted to talk with you today about Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)—the theoretical approach you’ve been integral in developing—and its relevance to current debates over public finances. I know you’ve been quite scathing of mainstream economic discourse.
Many people have drawn to my attention in recent weeks the evolution of the Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) Wikipedia entry and raised concern about the criticisms that are now on that site. I thought I better go and read the entry. I certainly have not added material to the site. Having said that I am happy that there is a page available. It seems that the criticisms cited are sourced to blogs by an Austrian Schooler, a graduate student blogger, and Brad DeLong.
By Darrell Delamaide WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) – Deficit hysteria is rising to fever pitch in Washington as the political jockeying over the budget begins in earnest. “Fiscal nightmare,” “buried under a mountain of debt,” “awash in red ink” – these are some of the colorful phrases being bandied about by politicians, pundits and even journalists ostensibly reporting facts. Most of them are winging it on a single undergraduate course in economics, if that, but they know they’re right because everybody agrees. Yet, if you look out the window, you don’t see any red ink or mountains of debt. The only nightmare is unemployment continuing near 10% and ongoing waves of foreclosures – neither of which is attributable to the federal deficit and neither of which will be fixed by budget cuts.
When President Obama announced in December 2009 that “We don’t have enough public dollars to fill the hole of private dollars that was created as a consequence of the crisis,” the leader of the largest economy in the world told us that, despite having caused the worst economic crisis in eighty years, neoliberalism was still firmly in charge. The global economic crisis might suggest that the neoliberal promise—that markets can self-regulate and deliver sustained prosperity for all—was a lie. But that doesn’t seem to have registered with governments, which have, without exception, built their responses to the crisis on a series of myths—the same myths that caused the crisis.
Tom Hickey Reply: April 3rd, 2010 at 12:38 am MDM, the key here is the MMT concept of vertical and horizontal in relation to money creation. This is sometimes called exogenous (outside) and endogenous (inside).
By Andrea Terzi The Civilized Money View (aka MMT, or Modern Monetary Theory) has historical precedents: First, the notion—developed by Adam Smith —that the wealth of a nation is measured not by monetary values, but by its capacity to produce goods and services. Second, the notion of money—developed by John Maynard Keynes —that any modern state claims the right to declare what money is. While Smith’s concept hints to full employment as the primary policy objective, Keynes’s concept hints to the management of money as instrumental to reach such objective.