It's certainly got some animated detractors. Notice though, that a lot of "orthodox" economsists tend to accuse mmt of being both crackpot and trivial. The tri

It's certainly got some animated detractors. Notice though, that a lot of "orthodox" economsists tend to accuse mmt of being both crackpot and trivial. The trivial shot implies that it's trivially derrivate of Keynes. I'm not sure where mmt begins and ends. Currently, a lot of mmt is associated with guaranteed jobs ideas. I don't like that policy idea at all. That's why I caveat with "mmt's description of fiat money." Their description of central banking is far superior to monetarism and other "orthodox" theories of the past few decades. It's simpler, less abstract, more universal and more parsimonious with major, observable reality in more places. By comparison, all neokeynesian models if central banking are cludgey minstrosisies.