Monthly Archives: July 2013

The Buzz Over MMT

By Stephanie Kelton

The blogosphere and Twittersphere are buzzing over today’s NYT article on Warren Mosler and the proponents of Modern Money (or Monetary) Theory (MMT).  This isn’t the first time MMT has been featured by a high-profile mainstream media outlet (see here, here, here) and, as usual, there are some editorial inaccuracies.

Warren has responded to the mistakes that affect him personally, and Randy Wray followed with some quick thoughts of his own.  I spent close to 30 minutes on the phone with the journalist who wrote the latest NYT piece, so let me offer a further correction of (and for) the record.  I was quoted as saying:

These ideas definitely aren’t disseminated through published academic journals. It’s all on the Internet.

Um, no.  What I said is that we — the academics who helped develop the literature on MMT — started blogging as a way to get our ideas out more quickly than through traditional channels, where it is customary to wait two years or more before an article is finally published.  The notion that MMT has no academic footprint is astonishingly inaccurate, for there are, quite literally, hundreds of publications including: peer-reviewed articles, books, chapters in edited volumes, encyclopedia entries, working papers, policy briefs, etc. in print.  Suggesting otherwise supports the general tenor of the NYT piece — i.e. MMT is an Internet phenomenon that hasn’t been vetted through traditional peer-reviewed channels. That is patently false.

Has the Internet helped to generate a following?  I’d say so.

And it seems to ruffle a lot of feathers.

Follow: twitter.com/deficitowl

 

 

 

Beyond Pity and Safety Nets

By Dan Kervick

Paul Krugman is justifiably appalled at what he calls the “war on the unemployed”, the accelerating right-wing campaign to subdue, discipline and pauperize the jobless.  Yet there is nothing new in this campaign.  Economic conservatives and market fundamentalists have always tended to believe that the private enterprise system is both self-correcting and stringently just, and that unemployment results from a misguided combination of indulgent maternal do-gooding and inept government interference with the austere and efficient rectitude of market operations.  The fundamentalists believe unemployment happens because artificial minimum wage laws prevent wages from falling as far as they need to fall to clear the labor market, and that unemployment insurance compounds the problem by seducing potential workers into an unsustainable, dead-end limbo on the dole when they should be swallowing their strong laissez faire medicines and the bitter wages that go with them.  After all, if these dregs and flops were worth more handsome wages, then the Invisible Hand would have already dispensed those wages to them, right?

Continue reading

Drop It: You Can Call for Helicopter Money but Drop the Call for “Coordination”

By Scott Fullwiler

I suggested more than three years ago that helicopter drops are fiscal operations (printable version here), in contrast to the more traditional view that they were monetary policy operations (e.g., “Helicopter Ben”).  My argument was based almost entirely on accounting and, therefore, on the actual balance sheet effects of a money drop.  True helicopter drops of money raise the net financial assets (via income increases) of the non-government sector, which is exactly what fiscal policy does but not what monetary policy does.

Continue reading