4 ms·

Fortunately, lately I don't see any new article from the USA praising MMT.

Proven 5y ago
uejfiweun 5y ago
Unfortunately, it's because the acolytes of MMT already won. The national debt has completely exploded and there's no putting that genie back in the bottle without hyperinflation.
- wbsss4412 5y ago
  MMT is not, nor has it ever even the dominant ideology of those who are actually in control of monetary policy. I know it’s a popular boogeyman, but it’s pure fantasy.
  - uejfiweun 5y ago
    Gotcha. Well, whatever the name of the theory is that says it's OK to just rack up a ginormous national debt, that's what I am against.
    - wbsss4412 5y ago
      That theory is called “starve the beast” wherein tax hawks seem to believe shrinking the federal budget is simply a matter of cutting taxes and engaging in brinksmanship, despite the fact that their ultimate goal of cutting SS and Medicare has been a political non starter for decades.
      - uejfiweun 5y ago
        Yeah, I don't really get why you would pre-emptively cut taxes in anticipation of future spending cuts. If there's one thing we can bank on in history, it's that governments always get bigger. Spending cuts are just very unlikely to happen.
        wbsss4412 5y ago
        Seems to be good politics I suppose. The thing about MMT, is that it’s not about racking up gigantic debts per se, their thesis is that deficits and debt don’t matter in an absolute sense, but in relation to other monetary factors. Eg. once inflation picks up, then it becomes necessary to cut budget deficits.
      - notch656a 5y ago
        Then a new goal is needed. Allow anyone to opt out of SS/Medicare for life, cutting themselves off from social aid in exchange for not providing it.
        wbsss4412 5y ago
        I mean, that isn’t a different goal.
- netcan 5y ago
  The acolytes of MMT? Sheesh! How come anything touching on "what is money" gets goofy immediately? Most of the world's monetary systems have been run under Monetarist theories for 40-ish years. Theory is now entirely at odds with observed realities. New theories gain ground. National debts "exploded" a long time ago. Japan's exploded over a generation ago and most of western economies "exploded" 10-15 years ago. Except these explosions aren't explosions. Central banks continue to decree whatever interest rates they want, with no market pushbacks. The monetarists and goldbugs have been screaming "inflation" constantly for 25+ years. That does not mean that their theory of inflation (national debt) is true. It isn't.
  - argentinian 5y ago
    > Most of the world's monetary systems have been run under Monetarist theories for 40-ish years. Argentina's monetary system hasn't.
    - wbsss4412 5y ago
      It hasn’t been run under MMT either, given that it’s an entirely new academic theory.
      - netcan 5y ago
        Both true. I'd even say that "theories," is probably the wrong term. More "school of thought." I would also point out that the USD/EUR/GPM/Yen/etc are "run under MMT" in the basic sense. They simply have different ideas about inflation. Broadly, MMT thinks same year spending is the main inflationary mover. Monetarism thinks cumulative national debt is what impacts inflation.
        wbsss4412 5y ago
        Agreed in the sense that MMT theorists assert that their theories describe what happens in practice. I disagree if the assertion is that policy makers have been consciously crafting policy under MMT this whole time.
sleepingadmin 5y ago
>Fortunately, lately I don't see any new article from the USA praising MMT. UBI certainly died as a subject as well. The "basic income" benefits wasn't even universal and exactly what everyone said would happen has happened. I still think a fiscal conservative with an army of accountants could figure out UBI and make it work. Effectively it would greatly punish anyone who works under the table.
- anm89 5y ago
  > I still think a fiscal conservative with an army of accountants could figure out UBI and make it work. This is totally lost on me. Why? I don't see how any of the issues with UBI are accounting based. We already can spend money we don't have in the short term so nothing prevents transfer payments of any size in a purely logistical sense. The issues with UBI are regressive redistribution, long term effects on the labor market, and long term effects on the currency. None of those are accounting issues.
  - sleepingadmin 5y ago
    >This is totally lost on me. Why? I don't see how any of the issues with UBI are accounting based. So lets go back to what happens. Places like Switzerland or Germany have a labour participation rate of ~80%. So if you implemented UBI there. The 20% of people who were earning nothing or at most were on government services, now get a pay cheque. This will be by definition inflationary; but with such high labour rates and removal of those other services. The actual inflationary factor will be manageable. The probability of social movement increases obviously. So their participation rate near the beginning will drop. The USA on the otherhand has about 60% participation rate and their government services are poor compared to the rest of the world. They in turn have made their military their welfare system. So if UBI implemented. Nearly have the country would be paying the other half of the country to sit at home. What happened with covid? Less than 10% of people got cheques and we got >40% inflation eventually in the USA. So we can do the math. For a year or 2 of UBI at around 50% is more than 5x worse. So the USA would be looking at >200% inflation. The army of accountants would be needed to make that 100x less. >We already can spend money we don't have in the short term so nothing prevents transfer payments of any size in a purely logistical sense. It's abundantly clear that isn't true. Hence the out of control every market and sky high inflation. That debt ceiling sure is hitting lots of heads lately for the USA. >The issues with UBI are regressive redistribution, long term effects on the labor market, and long term effects on the currency. None of those are accounting issues. Oh I completely agree those are concerns as well. The approach I have in mind is that if you manage it from the economic point of view, these longer term issues will be addressable at a later time. The entire welfare system would have to die. illegal immigration becomes far less of a problem. UBI would be only for citizens. The tax system could no longer be progressive. UBI appears on face impractical or impossible. However, with said 'army of accountants' you could likely design something that works and possibly even beneficial. bviously a ton of work needed here.

Unfortunately, it's because the acolytes of MMT already won. The national debt has completely exploded and there's no putting that genie back in the bottle without hyperinflation.

wbsss4412 5y ago
MMT is not, nor has it ever even the dominant ideology of those who are actually in control of monetary policy. I know it’s a popular boogeyman, but it’s pure fantasy.
- uejfiweun 5y ago
  Gotcha. Well, whatever the name of the theory is that says it's OK to just rack up a ginormous national debt, that's what I am against.
  - wbsss4412 5y ago
    That theory is called “starve the beast” wherein tax hawks seem to believe shrinking the federal budget is simply a matter of cutting taxes and engaging in brinksmanship, despite the fact that their ultimate goal of cutting SS and Medicare has been a political non starter for decades.
    - uejfiweun 5y ago
      Yeah, I don't really get why you would pre-emptively cut taxes in anticipation of future spending cuts. If there's one thing we can bank on in history, it's that governments always get bigger. Spending cuts are just very unlikely to happen.
      - wbsss4412 5y ago
        Seems to be good politics I suppose. The thing about MMT, is that it’s not about racking up gigantic debts per se, their thesis is that deficits and debt don’t matter in an absolute sense, but in relation to other monetary factors. Eg. once inflation picks up, then it becomes necessary to cut budget deficits.
    - notch656a 5y ago
      Then a new goal is needed. Allow anyone to opt out of SS/Medicare for life, cutting themselves off from social aid in exchange for not providing it.
      - wbsss4412 5y ago
        I mean, that isn’t a different goal.
netcan 5y ago
The acolytes of MMT? Sheesh! How come anything touching on "what is money" gets goofy immediately? Most of the world's monetary systems have been run under Monetarist theories for 40-ish years. Theory is now entirely at odds with observed realities. New theories gain ground. National debts "exploded" a long time ago. Japan's exploded over a generation ago and most of western economies "exploded" 10-15 years ago. Except these explosions aren't explosions. Central banks continue to decree whatever interest rates they want, with no market pushbacks. The monetarists and goldbugs have been screaming "inflation" constantly for 25+ years. That does not mean that their theory of inflation (national debt) is true. It isn't.
- argentinian 5y ago
  > Most of the world's monetary systems have been run under Monetarist theories for 40-ish years. Argentina's monetary system hasn't.
  - wbsss4412 5y ago
    It hasn’t been run under MMT either, given that it’s an entirely new academic theory.
    - netcan 5y ago
      Both true. I'd even say that "theories," is probably the wrong term. More "school of thought." I would also point out that the USD/EUR/GPM/Yen/etc are "run under MMT" in the basic sense. They simply have different ideas about inflation. Broadly, MMT thinks same year spending is the main inflationary mover. Monetarism thinks cumulative national debt is what impacts inflation.
      - wbsss4412 5y ago
        Agreed in the sense that MMT theorists assert that their theories describe what happens in practice. I disagree if the assertion is that policy makers have been consciously crafting policy under MMT this whole time.

sleepingadmin 5y ago

>Fortunately, lately I don't see any new article from the USA praising MMT. UBI certainly died as a subject as well. The "basic income" benefits wasn't even universal and exactly what everyone said would happen has happened. I still think a fiscal conservative with an army of accountants could figure out UBI and make it work. Effectively it would greatly punish anyone who works under the table.

anm89 5y ago
> I still think a fiscal conservative with an army of accountants could figure out UBI and make it work. This is totally lost on me. Why? I don't see how any of the issues with UBI are accounting based. We already can spend money we don't have in the short term so nothing prevents transfer payments of any size in a purely logistical sense. The issues with UBI are regressive redistribution, long term effects on the labor market, and long term effects on the currency. None of those are accounting issues.
- sleepingadmin 5y ago
  >This is totally lost on me. Why? I don't see how any of the issues with UBI are accounting based. So lets go back to what happens. Places like Switzerland or Germany have a labour participation rate of ~80%. So if you implemented UBI there. The 20% of people who were earning nothing or at most were on government services, now get a pay cheque. This will be by definition inflationary; but with such high labour rates and removal of those other services. The actual inflationary factor will be manageable. The probability of social movement increases obviously. So their participation rate near the beginning will drop. The USA on the otherhand has about 60% participation rate and their government services are poor compared to the rest of the world. They in turn have made their military their welfare system. So if UBI implemented. Nearly have the country would be paying the other half of the country to sit at home. What happened with covid? Less than 10% of people got cheques and we got >40% inflation eventually in the USA. So we can do the math. For a year or 2 of UBI at around 50% is more than 5x worse. So the USA would be looking at >200% inflation. The army of accountants would be needed to make that 100x less. >We already can spend money we don't have in the short term so nothing prevents transfer payments of any size in a purely logistical sense. It's abundantly clear that isn't true. Hence the out of control every market and sky high inflation. That debt ceiling sure is hitting lots of heads lately for the USA. >The issues with UBI are regressive redistribution, long term effects on the labor market, and long term effects on the currency. None of those are accounting issues. Oh I completely agree those are concerns as well. The approach I have in mind is that if you manage it from the economic point of view, these longer term issues will be addressable at a later time. The entire welfare system would have to die. illegal immigration becomes far less of a problem. UBI would be only for citizens. The tax system could no longer be progressive. UBI appears on face impractical or impossible. However, with said 'army of accountants' you could likely design something that works and possibly even beneficial. bviously a ton of work needed here.