Modern Monetary Theory

Redpill me on modern monetary theory.

>Government's are not like households.
>They can't run out of money.
>They can run budget deficits indefinitely.
>Full employment is easily achieveable.
>Hyperinflation is a meme for meme governments.

Why isn't Sup Forums pro MMT for economic policy?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=wpG97hQrNKI
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

lol, our impeached president tried to pull the same scam, she called it "New Economic Matrix".
Led to stagflation, joblessness and riots.
>She was also a woman, coincidence? Are they not capable of understanding economics because they're hardwired to be provided for

I'm not familiar with Brazil besides it's crime rates and corruption in all levels of government. What did she do that accurately represented MMT policies?

Also is Brazil even a demand constrained economy?

>Government's are not like households.
No they aren't because they don't have a family unit to protect. Civilisation is built up of individuals but decisions are ultimately for the benefit of the family.

>They can't run out of money.
And yet it can run out of value.
Keynesian dogma.

>They can run budget deficits indefinitely.
According to -
Keynesian dogma.

>Full employment is easily achieveable.

>implying everyone actually wants to work

>Hyperinflation
The result of -
Keynesian dogma. When they realise they dun printed too much, better print more to even out the cost eh m8.

An excerpt from your forefather:
>Most of the Bloomsbury group were descendants of the intellectual aristocracy of nineteenth century England who, for the most part, had abandoned traditional religion but retained an outward moral and social ethic. Keynes and his friends had no use for such moral baggage: "There was one chapter in the Principia," he later recalled, "of which we took not the slightest notice. We accepted Moore's religion, so to speak, and discarded his morals. Indeed, in our opinion, one of the greatest advantages of his religion, was that it made morals unnecessary...." Keynes goes on to say:

We entirely repudiated a personal liability on us to obey general rules. We claimed the right to judge every individual case on its merits.... We repudiated entirely customary morals, conventions and traditional wisdom. We were, that is to say, in the strict sense of the term, immoralists.

This horseshit isn't going to fly here m8, we can spot a closet marxist entire continents away.

I can redpill you on modern monetary theory in 5 words.

DON'T

WORRY

ABOUT

IT

GOY

>>Full employment is easily achieveable.

It's neither achievable nor necessarily desirable.

>No they aren't because they don't have a family unit to protect. Civilisation is built up of individuals but decisions are ultimately for the benefit of the family.
The point refers to the fact that when a recession hits a househould wants to save money. However one man's spending in another man's income, so when everyone saves during a recession it makes the recession worse. A government has the ability to print money without debt, allowing people to facilitate their saving while still keeping spending high enough to prevent the recession.

>And yet it can run out of value.
A country's value is all of its natural resources+all the products and services it can provide-all the products and services it exports. For a country such as Australia or USA to run out of value, with work forces as strong and educated as they are, would require deliberate effort by the government. Germany's hyperinflation was causing by printing half it's GDP a month.

>implying everyone actually wants to work
Full employment is defined as everyone "seeking a job" getting a job. If people don't want to work they're not unemployed.

>An excerpt from your forefather:
I got no fucking clue what you're smoking here, mate.

The unemployed are a buffer stock to keep inflation under control. When inflation is a risk federal interest rates are raised, creating unemployment and slowing the economy.

The problem with this is that unemployed people depreciate in value in the same way warehouse of fruit depreciates over time and goes rotten. Their skills wane and become outdated, their mental health deteriorate and their marriages and families fall apart.

Better instead to have an employment buffer stock than an unemployment buffer stock. When the economy slow the government should print more money to keep people employed, and then when the economy speeds up stop printing and let it drive itself.

>>They can't run out of money.
>>They can run budget deficits indefinitely.

Wait a second

They print money and decide the rate at which they repay it. So they cannot run out of money.

A sovereign government doesn't need to balance the budget anymore than a referee needs to balance the points.

>Team A scores 1 point
>Better deduct it from Team B so I can "afford" it

This has been true ever since the gold standard was dropped. The only real value of the currency is that it's accepted to pay tax.

So why don't they distribute the money to the populace then? Everyone will be rich right?

All economics is horseshit.
Coated in maths to hide its intellectual nakedness.
Economists spend most of their time in restaurants, drinking wine and networking with other insiders.

What a great idea. Jesus, the people that come up with these theories are idiots.

That's what they ought to do. However they, or rather the people who vote for them, have bought into the "government is a household" meme and are terrified of announcing budget deficits.

...

And obviously you don't give money away for nothing. This isn't UBI, this is spending money on things the government wants.

youtube.com/watch?v=wpG97hQrNKI

I have a graduate degree in applied economics/econometrics and an MBA with a concentration in economics.

AMA.

>Government's are not like households.
Yup.

>They can't run out of money.
As long as you're a western capitalist market country, nope. Just look at how the Fed extended (by some estimates) upwards of 50x the US real GDP to financial institutions. I personally don't believe it's that much, but whatever.

You might ask, where is the inflation? There is none because of liquidity preference. Financial institutions are holding on to financial capital instead of circulating it in the economy or investing.

>They can run budget deficits indefinitely.
Yes. The only problem would be, say, if Russia or China made some kind of commodity back currency to challenge the USD/Euro. Perhaps an oil/rare-earth metal backed one?

>Full employment is easily achievable.
What is full employment anyways? Have you ever taken a look at what constitutes employment? Go to the BLS's website and check.
>Last week, did you do any work for (either) pay (or profit)?
So, did you walk your m8's dog for $5? Employed. Also, they do statistical sampling to determine the unemployment rate. Also which unemployment measure? U-3 is standard. What about U-5 or U-6?

I personally believe that we are always at full employment because if you won't work for the prevailing market wage (minimum), then you are choosing not to work. Therefore, voluntary unemployment.

This whole discussion has been done so many times though, it's mind-numbing at this point. But, yes, the government can create jobs through government investment in the economy. Government spending is also included in the GDP.

>Hyperinflation is a meme for meme governments.
Yes. But, there is a wage price spiral that will happen eventually given that business and financial investing in the economy is happening, consumers are spending, etc. As long as there is an active Federal Reserve this shouldn't be a problem.

Money has to be "hard to get" to be worth something.

You lost him I think.

>If people don't want to work they're not unemployed

Just fuck off. And take that cunt Keynes with you.

When they print money like that, the money supply for that currency is increased, causing inflation, and therefore devaluing the purchasing power of all other units in that currency.

So it basically functions like a tax, where a percentage of any currency you possess at the time is devalued to collectively provide the appropriate value to the newly created currency.

>They can't run out of money.
Any state can and will go bankrupt if the businesses don't pay taxes.

Well, it's not hard to get because you can just print it. There's no thing such as a budget deficit if you say you can run it indefinitely.

Alright, riddle me this.
Why does the government need taxes if it can just print the money?

This just sounds like semantics and mental gymnastics to me tbqhwy.

Holy shit this

>"The few who understand the system will either be so interested in its profits or be so dependent upon its favours that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests." -(((God's Chosen People)))

I keep getting fucking cloudflare errors.

You don't run a budget deficit by giving everyone in the economy a blank cheque. You prioritize things then run a deficit equivalent to what's needed to reach full employment that year. Just because there's a deficit doesn't mean there's infinite money.

>You might ask, where is the inflation?
Low velocity, yes. That's because they spent it on banks in an economy where there are no investments (10 year bonds with negative interests in some countries). Spend it on infrastructure and I guarantee you the velocity will be higher.

>if Russia or China made some kind of commodity back currency to challenge the USD/Euro
This is interesting. Can you expand on how that's a threat to the US's currency in this situation?

>What is full employment anyways?
That's what a minimum wage is for. The Obama administration has been jewing the numbers to look like job growth when all their "jobs" are shit, as you say. But they know they're shit and if they weren't trying to trick the public they could easily measure employment as 30+ hours at or above minimum wage.

> there is a wage price spiral
Just run a surplus and the spiral will end. The government can act counter cyclical to the market, unlike anyone else.

Yeah, supply and demand. Supply too much money and the price goes down. The problem is that people save money, and it goes out of circulation. You need to run a deficit to replace that money, or a surplus if they start unloading their savings.

If everyone didn't pay their taxes (like Greece) then the currency would stop having meaning (except that Greece uses the Euro and Germans pay their taxes). But that wouldn't happen in a reasonable economy so the most you'll get is not pay as much tax as the government spent. But that's no problem.

Looks a lot like mummy from that angle

Since the 70s USD is no longer gold backed so it has no "real value". Except taxes. When the US gov pays the janitor in the White House they then tell him "you now have to pay taxes". Taxes, enforced by the law, are the base value to the currency.

I can see how you'd say that.

>one man's spending in another man's income
By that logic everyone should spend his entire salary down to the cent so as to "avoid recession". And this spending you speak of, doesn't consist of savings or earnings, it includes debts, in fact the majority of spending is debt.
>"oh b-but keynes said there is no such thing as debt!"
..this again

>everyone saves during a recession it makes the recession worse. A government has the ability to print money without debt, allowing people to facilitate their saving while still keeping spending high enough to prevent the recession.
Yet another naive arguement whereby, clueless, economically inept fools like yourself think that there's a quick, easy and painless way out of recession.
There is no easy way. A recession hits, like the withdrawal after a heroin binge (overspending) prices fall, wages fall, unemployment rises as businesses try to stay afloat. It has to get worse, there are tough times before there is once again enough saved for the next cycle of overspending - caused because too many people didn't learn the first time, exacerbated by frivolous loaning.

>For a country such as Australia or USA to run out of value, with work forces as strong and educated as they are, would require deliberate effort by the government.
We're walking about devaluation of the dollar here keynes, wake up.

>Germany's hyperinflation was causing by printing half it's GDP a month.
Precisely because they tried to spend themselves out of a recession, using the "techniques" your currently bleating, which have been done to death by the way,.

>Full employment is defined as everyone "seeking a job" getting a job.
>so here you're implying it's the gubmints job to give people a job, seeing as how it's up to businesses whether they hire or not
>also implying a gubmint job isn't the very definition of your "print money without debt" and spend it
>oh wait it is

It's fucking hilarious how you made this thread "asking to be redpilled"

And then promptly start spewing your keynesian dogma everywhere, rofl. Expecting no one would find out.
>this is from a cunt who wants to restric national speed limits to 50km/hr nationwide to "stop pollution".

Holy fucking rofl. Mosley's MMT is basically damage control for the debt that keynesianism brings. MMT itself is basically keynesianism, rehashed once again, like every

How do you fall so hard for this?

I'll say it again. Your keynesian dogma isn't to convert anyone who isn't as naive and full of wishful thinking as yourself. We have all seen his policies fail time and time again, and the same people give the same "oh but it wasn't done properly" excuse.

It's not going to work mate, you will never win with this - your counterparts in civics have succeeded only in wasting time and money. Like them, you are an idealist of the cringiest kind.

>By that logic everyone should spend his entire salary down to the cent so as to "avoid recession"
Well if I spent everything I have on you you'd be a lot richer, but I'm not going to do that because then I'd be fucking broke, wouldn't I? It's a fallacy of composition, what makes sense for each of us individually doesn't make sense for the economy as a whole. Except for the government, because it can spend without "losing" money.

>no such thing as debt
I said no such thing.

>God works in mysterious ways. He does terrible things and you just have to have faith that one day things will get better.
Yeah... no.

>Precisely because they tried to spend themselves out of a recession
They weren't spending themselves out of a recession, they were deliberately dicking off Britain and France for the war reparations.

>it's the gubmints job to give people a job
By that reasoning it's currently the gubmints job to take away jobs when inflation is high. Another phrase for an employment buffer stock is "employer of last resort". I.e., the gubmint is literally the LAST group that would employ you. But it would employ you. If a strong economy companies would be competing ferociously for labor and the government wouldn't even need to bother.

>"asking to be redpilled"
And yet you still took the bait.

>speedlimits
wtf does that have to do with anything?

>"oh but it wasn't done properly"
Name one country that's run deliberate budget deficits since the hold standard was abolished.

You got nothing. Just keynesianism this, keynesianism that.