by This is an excellent review and critique of Stephanie Kelton's The Deficit Myth. Michael Edesess lowers the boom in the first paragraph and then proceeds to explain it. Short and to the point, with quotes from many prominent MMT critics. The debate over the much-touted and much-criticized modern monetary theory (MMT) is the murkiest I have ever been involved with, short of secondary school debates about the existence of God. But I finally see it clearly. Incredible as it may sound to nearly all observers - once they learn what MMT says - its basic economic tenets are agreed to by most knowledgeable economists. The dispute is not really over its core economic model; it is over fears of its perceived political implications. Exactly, and this generates the perceived need for a "noble lie."
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
Robert Vienneau writes Austrian Capital Theory And Triple-Switching In The Corn-Tractor Model
Mike Norman writes The Accursed Tariffs — NeilW
Mike Norman writes IRS has agreed to share migrants’ tax information with ICE
Mike Norman writes Trump’s “Liberation Day”: Another PR Gag, or Global Reorientation Turning Point? — Simplicius
This is an excellent review and critique of Stephanie Kelton's The Deficit Myth. Michael Edesess lowers the boom in the first paragraph and then proceeds to explain it. Short and to the point, with quotes from many prominent MMT critics.
The debate over the much-touted and much-criticized modern monetary theory (MMT) is the murkiest I have ever been involved with, short of secondary school debates about the existence of God. But I finally see it clearly. Incredible as it may sound to nearly all observers - once they learn what MMT says - its basic economic tenets are agreed to by most knowledgeable economists. The dispute is not really over its core economic model; it is over fears of its perceived political implications.Exactly, and this generates the perceived need for a "noble lie."
Modern Monetary Muddle
See also
The criticism that David Glasner makes applies to a popularized version of MMT such as is presented in The Deficit Myth. Spending and taxation are not a binary as seem to be claimed, nor are inflation rate and employment rate. He is right that it is more complicated than this.
There is legitimate concern on over how to handle the purse strings once the deficit myth is debunked. One answer would be in terms of fiscal rules, which MMT economists eshew. Another is a "theory of inflation" complete with model. One doesn't exist yet, not for lack of trying.
The MMT answer is heavily dependent on automatic stabilization such as is already in place. The MMT JG would need to be added to this.
But inflation results from many different factors, both from the demand and supply sides. MMT economists have examined these factors, too.
What’s Right and not so Right with Modern Monetary Theory
David Glasner | Economist at the Federal Trade Commission
Also
Weak.
The Sydney Morning Herald
What is Modern Monetary Theory and is it THE answer?