by Dalio, however, agrees that MMT has weaknesses. He said, “The big risk of this approach arises from the risks of putting the power to create and allocate money, credit, and spending in the hands of politically elected policy makers.” He states that the system has been designed in a way that “highly skilled people” are in charge of decision making rather than politically motivated people. He added, “At the same time it is inevitable that we are headed in this direction.” This is both a pertinent concern and also a legitimate one. Ralph Musgrave had observed this in the comments on the link to Dalio's article.It's basically conservatism versus liberalism, "republicans" with a small "r" and "democrats" with a small "d" — Hamilton versus Jefferson in the US and Tories versus Old Labour in
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: MMT, MMT and policy, MMT and politics, Ray Dalio
This could be interesting, too:
Mike Norman writes Jared Bernstein, total idiot. You have to see this to believe it.
Steve Roth writes MMT and the Wealth of Nations, Revisited
Matias Vernengo writes On central bank independence, and Brazilian monetary policy
Michael Hudson writes International Trade and MMT with Keen, Hudson
Dalio, however, agrees that MMT has weaknesses. He said, “The big risk of this approach arises from the risks of putting the power to create and allocate money, credit, and spending in the hands of politically elected policy makers.” He states that the system has been designed in a way that “highly skilled people” are in charge of decision making rather than politically motivated people. He added, “At the same time it is inevitable that we are headed in this direction.”This is both a pertinent concern and also a legitimate one. Ralph Musgrave had observed this in the comments on the link to Dalio's article.
It's basically conservatism versus liberalism, "republicans" with a small "r" and "democrats" with a small "d" — Hamilton versus Jefferson in the US and Tories versus Old Labour in the UK.
The former assume that the people at large are not qualified to make decisions that require any degree of expertise; hence, governing should be put in the hands of experts. This is the basis of "republicanism" as representative government. They especially fear "Jacobinism" as the rule of the rabble and recall "the reign of terror" during the French Revolution.
The later assume that sovereignty resides in the people, that a liberal government is a government of, by and for the people, and that political freedom is based on self-determination in a society in which all persons are equal before the law. They doubt that any government by experts will eschew privilege for the elite classes and and fear institution of a double-standard before the law.
The former favors hierarchical technocracy and the latter, consensual democracy. While lip-service is paid to democracy in liberal states today, the reality is that there are no genuine democracies. Moreover, there never has been, perhaps excepting some so-called primitive tribes.