Randy Wray and Stephanie Kelton Present at Fields Institute

Randy Wray and Stephanie Kelton presented at Fields Institute at University of Toronto in conjunction with INET. The conference was Mathematics for New Economic Thinking. The presentation links below will take you to Field’s site where slides appear side by side with the video. Below the links to the videos are links to view and download PDF versions of the slides as well.

Randy Wray’s presentation, “The Nature of Money: A Series of Debits and Credits” can be viewed here.

Stephanie’s presentation, “Fiscal Space and Financial Stability: A Differential Analysis” can be viewed here.

Randy’s slides are available here.

Stephanie’s slides are available here.

 

7 Responses to Randy Wray and Stephanie Kelton Present at Fields Institute

  1. Mark Robertson

    L. Randall Wray mentions a quote by Bernanke.

    It’s an example of how Bernanke continually contradicts himself in order to keep the public confused and submissive.

    The quote comes from a “60 Minutes” program about Bernanke.

    Titled “The Chairman,” it aired in March 2009.

    Here’s a link …
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odPfHY4ekHA

    At 04:24, Bernanke says of AIG, “It’s unfair that taxpayer dollars are going to prop up a company that made these terrible bets outside the view of regulators.”

    Of course, taxpayer dollars prop up nothing, since the US government does not need or use tax revenue. Indeed, Bernanke admits this moments later, at 07:57…

    SCOTT PELLY: Is that tax money the Fed is spending (to prop up Wall Street)?

    BERNANKE: It’s not tax money. The banks have accounts with the Fed, much the same way that you have an account at a commercial bank. So to lend to a bank, we simply use the computer to mark up the size of the account that they have with the Fed. It’s much more akin to printing money than to borrowing.”

    Such contradictions abound in the “60 Minutes” program. At one point Bernanke says Congress granted him the authority to give trillions to Wall Street. At another point Bernanke says, “The Fed cannot put capital into an institution. All we can do is make loans against collateral.”

    Oh? Then why did Bernanke give $160 billion to AIG, which had no collateral? Bernanke says it was necessary to prevent the destruction of the world economy.

    Bernanke spouts endless lies, blather, and bulls—t.

    That’s why he is a perfect Fed chairman.

  2. Great presentations, I would have liked to see the Q&A session, if it was recorded?

    • The Q&A were very interesting. I wrote a short blog with two of the questions asked of MMT:
      http://neil.lancastle.com/2013/11/04/mathematics-for-new-economic-thinking/
      There was a third was about asymmetry in governments’ abilities to tax… so you might think of that in terms of tax avoidance, or capital flight, or the ability to enforce trade and tariffs, or just downright poverty and a lack of real investment… the questioner simply pointed out that there is a power dimension to tax, and therefore to government money… which is under attack.

  3. In a recent podcast conversation between Randall and Stephanie, R stated that monetary policy could not get us out of the current economic situation. But the economy has been growing, even whilst fiscal policy has been contracting, so WHAT is driving the current growth, if not monetary policy?

    • Mark Robertson

      The growth is primarily in the financial economy, not the real economy.

      QE, for example, is a monetary policy that juices the stock market and other markets by fueling more speculation.

      QE is a stimulus for the financial economy, not the real economy. Indeed, QE is toxic for the real economy, since the financial economy is a deadly parasite on the real economy.

      The bigger and more deadly the parasite grows, the more the corporate media says, “See? We are in a recovery! And QE is stimulative! We can use monetary policy to stimulate the economy!”

      This despite the fact that the parasite (i.e. the financial economy) is killing the host (i.e. the real economy).

  4. Stephanie Kelton,

    isn’t that the case that current account surpluses for the countries that are in the eurozone equal current account deficits for other eurozone countries ‘zones external current account is at balance?

    And that EZ’s current account have been historically, roughly at balance:
    http://sdw.ecb.europa.eu/quickview.do?SERIES_KEY=118.DD.Q.I6.BP_CU.PGDP.4F_N

    It swinging mostly from +0.5% of GDP to -0.5% of GDP, deficits equaling surpluses, nothing accumulating until 2012 when it moves to small surplus in the range of +1 to 2.5% of GDP. I wonder what the cause is because it is not the competitiveness measures for sure. My quess is that either ECB is bying dollar reserves or there is massive capital outflows going on. Balance of payments does balance after all.

    Eurozones balanced current account demonstrates that Germany does not run CA surpluses against ROW, but against rest of the eurozone, with the exception that in recent times there is something funky going on.

  5. “Current account surpluses act like artificial budget deficits” -Kalecki

    What is funny is that current account surpluses are usually caused by, essentially, deficit spending. Government bying foreign currency and accumulating foreign currency reserves. Apparenly those purchases are not recorded as deficit spending, foreign currency purchases are off-balance sheet deficit spending says Warren Mosler.