economy Markets MMT

Behold: The Most Hypocritical, Ridiculous MMT Broadside Yet

Brought to you by four people who voted for Trump's deficit-ballooning tax cut package.

Brought to you by four people who voted for Trump's deficit-ballooning tax cut package.
This content has been archived. Log in or Subscribe for full access to thousands of archived articles.

6 comments on “Behold: The Most Hypocritical, Ridiculous MMT Broadside Yet

  1. It occurred to me that an attempt at MMT may be a situation that winds up kicking the can down the road for 20 years or so .. Major changes might take root in the ensuing time frame which are a bit scary to say the least but reality is that QE shares some of the same features…Any ideas anyone…??

    • Lance Manly

      Keep in mind the history of QE. The Fed was desperate to energize the economy in 2011 so that the millennial generation would have work experience to propel themselves through their lives rather than sitting on the sidelines for 5 years. Meanwhile the tea party, as tools of the Kochs, insisted on fiscal austerity at the exact wrong time. Hello 1933 calling! Each time the Fed went before congress they complained that fiscal policy was making them tow the entire load with monetary policy. So the Fed used QE as a last ditch effort. They knew it was imperfect, but what else could they do? Now maybe if we had sound fiscal policy that worked towards economic equality so the average Joe could afford to spend to help the underlying economy maybe things would not be so bad. Don’t hold your breath though.

      • Well stated. Thanks. Since 70% of GDP comes from consumer spending and the “average” median income consumer spends a far greater portion of their income than the upper 10% (let alone the upper 1%), it seems that there is willful blindness among the GOP senators (and other knee jerk critics) to choose to ignore the impact of this suggested shift, placing some liquidity where it will be fully invested in the economy. It would also create the ability to create “New Deal” style jobs and invest in badly needed infrastructure and climate mitigation projects and potentially reduce current subsidy (Medicaid, unemployment) percentages, if it allows continuation of workforce re-entry. And, no I am not a crazy left wing zealot who thinks there is no risk to MMT, but it seems likely that we will get there one way or another, and planning thoughtfully may be a novel new strategy rather than ranting from entrenched tribal positions and then ending up at the same place emergently and eventually. This also seems to me, an apropos analogy to Thomas Kuhn’s Structure of Scientific Revolution – in that this is a paradigm shift and will undergo the equivalent stages of denial, derision, then ultimately self-evidency.

  2. jamaican

    true dat.
    Also please be reminded that the same people who insisted on fiscal austerity in the aftermath of the crisis voted for Trumps tax cuts.
    Balooning the deficit is OK when it serves to make the rich even richer, when the money is used for healthcare and education it’s socialism/Venezuela.
    GOP logic at its best.

  3. jamaican

    thanks for another excellent article btw

  4. Robert Dabob

    “The senate realizes that deficits are unsustainable,
    irresponsible, and dangerous”

    Except when it comes to defense spending and tax breaks for the wealthy.

Speak On It

Skip to toolbar