A focused study group for the discussion of economics and economic policy.
32036 Members
We'll be adding more communities soon!
© 2020 Relevant Protocols Inc.
A focused study group for the discussion of economics and economic policy.
32036 Members
We'll be adding more communities soon!
© 2020 Relevant Protocols Inc.
Relevant
Hot
New
Spam
Relevant
Hot
New
Spam
0
27.6K
0
27.6K
I am non-economist and really curious about these "theories". Do they really work??
I am non-economist and really curious about these "theories". Do they really work??
[@PaulWhiteman](/user/profile/PaulWhiteman) I am glad to know that you know about MMT. MMT has both a descriptive and prescriptive aspect. Descriptively it is simply true, and it is the only economic theory which accurately describes what money is - whether it is fiat or fixed exchange rate, or commodity backed money. And no other economic theory has been able to challenge them on this. They don't even try anymore. Once you know what money really is, then you can decide what it makes sense to do.
[@PaulWhiteman](/user/profile/PaulWhiteman) I am glad to know that you know about MMT. MMT has both a descriptive and prescriptive aspect. Descriptively it is simply true, and it is the only economic theory which accurately describes what money is - whether it is fiat or fixed exchange rate, or commodity backed money. And no other economic theory has been able to challenge them on this. They don't even try anymore. Once you know what money really is, then you can decide what it makes sense to do.
[@PaulWhiteman](/user/profile/PaulWhiteman) "Theory” in this case is simply meant to be the best explanation given the evidence for a set of known variables. For those not familiar with MMT, it’s important to remember not to conflate MMT as a description of the economy with people who understand MMT and support certain prescriptive policies. For instance a person that understands and accepts MMT might support and even recommend a Job Guarantee. MMT as a theory has nothing to say about a Job Guarantee other than to evaluate potential results of the policy any more than physics, as an explanation of how objects interact, has anything to say about whether we should or should not construct a building, though a person that understand physics might support the creation of a building given potential desired outcomes. If you are genuinely Interested about MMT I am sharing link of some research papers. Please take time to read them. [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=55043](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=55043)
[@PaulWhiteman](/user/profile/PaulWhiteman) "Theory” in this case is simply meant to be the best explanation given the evidence for a set of known variables. For those not familiar with MMT, it’s important to remember not to conflate MMT as a description of the economy with people who understand MMT and support certain prescriptive policies. For instance a person that understands and accepts MMT might support and even recommend a Job Guarantee. MMT as a theory has nothing to say about a Job Guarantee other than to evaluate potential results of the policy any more than physics, as an explanation of how objects interact, has anything to say about whether we should or should not construct a building, though a person that understand physics might support the creation of a building given potential desired outcomes. If you are genuinely Interested about MMT I am sharing link of some research papers. Please take time to read them. [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=55043](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=55043)
[deleted]
Bravo sir. One of the best reads on MMT I've seen in some time.
[deleted]
Bravo sir. One of the best reads on MMT I've seen in some time.
[deleted]
Good on you for discussing MMT. Seems everyone is talking about it, which I believe is a good thing. Used to be on the fringe - now it's out there and gaining traction. I suspect that a person who has a vested interest in undermining confidence in fiat currency systems - i.e. economist for gold/silver dealers - is not perhaps the most dispassionate objective critic one could find. If one were so concerned about the functional, proportional overt monetary finance of government debt to ensure growth and full employment, I would suggest betting ones life savings on shorting JGBs. It has worked out well for a lot of people.... (widowmaker trade I believe it is called).
[deleted]
Good on you for discussing MMT. Seems everyone is talking about it, which I believe is a good thing. Used to be on the fringe - now it's out there and gaining traction. I suspect that a person who has a vested interest in undermining confidence in fiat currency systems - i.e. economist for gold/silver dealers - is not perhaps the most dispassionate objective critic one could find. If one were so concerned about the functional, proportional overt monetary finance of government debt to ensure growth and full employment, I would suggest betting ones life savings on shorting JGBs. It has worked out well for a lot of people.... (widowmaker trade I believe it is called).
[deleted]
Yes you're right its a biased article. It has an agenda. Still a good read but must be considered of course.
[deleted]
Yes you're right its a biased article. It has an agenda. Still a good read but must be considered of course.
[deleted]
Midway MMT becomes compared to infinite money printing, where in MMT they actually seems to have a hard upper limit based on productivity.The argument that some government official think that you can just dump a couple of billion into the market in case of a recession seems to confuse MMT with QE. Is mainstream economics bogus? For me, pretty much yes (not an offense to you two as you are clearly more clever). But the math is awful and whenever something happens outside of the book they throw up their arms in the air and shout that no one was able to predict it. That just does not go well for me, you either understand the system or you don't. Besides the mainstream is telling us Greece is saved where it clearly is not. Comparing hyperinflation numbers is completely meaningless in my opinion because that is more of a political trust problem and once you go into that zone all bets are off the table and nothing makes sense any more. Edit : If the government is in direct control of the money, that would have to mean the end of the fractional reserve system, otherwise they would not have control.
[deleted]
Midway MMT becomes compared to infinite money printing, where in MMT they actually seems to have a hard upper limit based on productivity.The argument that some government official think that you can just dump a couple of billion into the market in case of a recession seems to confuse MMT with QE. Is mainstream economics bogus? For me, pretty much yes (not an offense to you two as you are clearly more clever). But the math is awful and whenever something happens outside of the book they throw up their arms in the air and shout that no one was able to predict it. That just does not go well for me, you either understand the system or you don't. Besides the mainstream is telling us Greece is saved where it clearly is not. Comparing hyperinflation numbers is completely meaningless in my opinion because that is more of a political trust problem and once you go into that zone all bets are off the table and nothing makes sense any more. Edit : If the government is in direct control of the money, that would have to mean the end of the fractional reserve system, otherwise they would not have control.
Some low-ranking comments may have been hidden.
Some low-ranking comments may have been hidden.