by Summary:
In short, Liu et al present an entirely different set of expected consequences for extremely low interest rates. Instead of faster growth, they lead to slower growth. Instead of higher productivity growth, the lead to lower productivity growth. While in theory enabling government to address income inequality, they actually exacerbate it by encouraging market concentration and monopolization. More time and research is needed, of course, to see how much impact the market concentration effect truly has. More than a few economists will have questions about the paper, as it should be. However, at the very least, advocates for looser money in general – and MMT in particular – might want to take into account the strong possibility that their methods are running contrary to their avowed policy
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: MMT, MMT criticism, MMT critics
This could be interesting, too:
In short, Liu et al present an entirely different set of expected consequences for extremely low interest rates. Instead of faster growth, they lead to slower growth. Instead of higher productivity growth, the lead to lower productivity growth. While in theory enabling government to address income inequality, they actually exacerbate it by encouraging market concentration and monopolization. More time and research is needed, of course, to see how much impact the market concentration effect truly has. More than a few economists will have questions about the paper, as it should be. However, at the very least, advocates for looser money in general – and MMT in particular – might want to take into account the strong possibility that their methods are running contrary to their avowed policy
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: MMT, MMT criticism, MMT critics
This could be interesting, too:
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
Matias Vernengo writes Modern Money Theory in the Tropics: A Reply to Agustin Mario
In short, Liu et al present an entirely different set of expected consequences for extremely low interest rates. Instead of faster growth, they lead to slower growth. Instead of higher productivity growth, the lead to lower productivity growth. While in theory enabling government to address income inequality, they actually exacerbate it by encouraging market concentration and monopolization.
More time and research is needed, of course, to see how much impact the market concentration effect truly has. More than a few economists will have questions about the paper, as it should be.
However, at the very least, advocates for looser money in general – and MMT in particular – might want to take into account the strong possibility that their methods are running contrary to their avowed policy goals.Ignores the role of functional finance.
Lower interest rates set by the Fed is an indication of substandard economic performance. The MMT remedy is not increasing interest rates but rather increasing targeted government spending and targeted tax cuts to stimulate lagging effective demand.
Bearing Drift
Do Lower Interest Rates Actually Make Income Inequality Worse?
D. J. McGuire