Subscribe to the free Daily Upside Newsletter: bit.ly/3Mwwbnq
@PoliticalEconomy101
Жыл бұрын
Cant believe you didnt press him on the multiple problems and disinformation of MMT. You should do a follow up video debunking most of it.
@thomasd2444
Жыл бұрын
@@PoliticalEconomy101 - - Sometimes a good visual is just the help a person needs to learn about Modern Monetary Theory kzitem.info/news/bejne/paWDtqB9bp2YgXo MMT in Minsky at the 2nd Poznan MMT Summer School 2022 . The best beginning point is a college course (there are many online also) about an introduction to accounting which teaches how professionals "account" for the movement of money from place to place; from person to person; from person to firm; from firm to firm. It took me 7 seconds to see the correct sequence. Don't be discouraged if it takes you more time. Sounds like someone told you there are multiple problems. FYI, those are often people who follow another school of economics Sounds like the same someone (or maybe other someones) told you there is dis-information about MMT. That is when it is time to return to the source texts to learn. You are fortunate to be learning MMT now, in 2022, when there are several popular books, a textbook, & several college courses online.
@PoliticalEconomy101
Жыл бұрын
Im a socialist. MMT is capitalist garbage. Its useless for socialism.
@branbello
10 ай бұрын
The audio on this video is very unpleasant
@john-lenin
6 ай бұрын
You have no clue what he's talking about because you've been brainwashed your entire life by Capitalist bullshit.
@11Gotama11
Жыл бұрын
Hey Joeri, it would be great if you would publish your money and macro talks as a podcast. Because I don't have KZitem Premium and I would like to do something else in these 1,5 hours with my phone. Also, I really like your show. Keep it up.
@NoirMorter
Жыл бұрын
I'd listen to it...
@Mr.Nichan
Жыл бұрын
Erdoğan should hire this guy. As long as he's only hiring people who think lowering interest rates will reduce inflation, this guy's probably a good pick.
@Alex-fm5ke
11 ай бұрын
Turkey has a lot of foreign debt
@webfreakz
Жыл бұрын
Thank you
@clarestucki5151
11 ай бұрын
This is one of the most ridiculous conversations ever to appear on the internet.
@kyanjenkins5932
Жыл бұрын
Props to the interviewer here. It is rare that the interviewer actually inputs value further to just platforming the subject, and your knowledge really took this interview to the next level
@MoneyMacroTalks
Жыл бұрын
Thank you Kyan! Very happy to hear that.
@gwho
Жыл бұрын
you'll find that academics (except for social justice subjects) generally do this, while marketers and politicians generally do the opposite.
@sandworm9528
Жыл бұрын
@@MoneyMacroTalks you did great man, really interesting to watch
@Snaperkid
6 ай бұрын
@@gwhoEven the social justice subjects do. It’s just that most of the clips are from feel good events rather than serious policy discussions
@52darcey
Жыл бұрын
God 30min in and this is annoying …Mosllers goes on way too much about this tax aspect and his buckaroo example is just annoying - I get the point he’s trying to make but what he ignores is this discussion is that money in general only has value because there is stuff available to buy. It’s not just about tax - which is why the Zimbabwean currency collapsed - because they didn’t have enough stuff to buy. Mosler obviously understands this as this is what MMT describes, but I just think he obsesses on the tax stuff too much and this explanation so far is just going to confuse people who don’t understand MMT. Also - it’s not just the ‘government’ that creates money - its central banks too and most of all commercial banking which MMT seems to unforgivably overlook altogether ….the origin of fist currency was not from taxation, it was via banking …
@trixn4285
Жыл бұрын
_"Also - it’s not just the ‘government’ that creates money - its central banks too and most of all commercial banking which MMT seems to unforgivably overlook altogether"_ They don't overlook that at all, Randall Wray writes and talks a lot about that as well as many other MMTers. It's simply not possible to comprehend all the body of work MMTers have created over the past 25 years and Mosler mostly focuses on a few very simple points. It's not like any MMTer denies the importance of private banking. Also when MMTers talk about "the government" they often consolidate the CB and the treasury for simplicity because many balance sheet operations have exactly the same outcome no matter if you consolidate those entities or not. The CB is a creature of law and a public institution. Although it is somewhat independent in it's day to day decisions (also simply by law) it's not nearly as independent as some people suggest. _"the origin of fist currency was not from taxation, it was via banking"_ Okay, what are the origins of banking and when was it? What's the historical evidence? You seem to be so sure about this, shouldn't be hard for you to present it. We have a lot of historical evidence that contradicts that dating as far back as ancient Babylonia about 5000 years ago. Taxation is much older than banking.
@ChannelMath
Жыл бұрын
these college community service "buckaroos" probably just result in rich kids paying poor kids to work more outside of classes
@myleshungerford7784
Жыл бұрын
I absolutely loved this. I wish you could have pressed him more for better explanations on certain things, but obviously that’s not possible for either you or him absent significant preparation with data. I would love it if you did a series of follow up videos on some of these topics, getting more in depth with some of his claims.
@happipat3374
Жыл бұрын
Bizarre. Just bizarre ideas. No relation to reality whatsoever but the gullible lap up his sophist nonsense. He was basically asked what problem MMT solves and his answer was none! He just wants people to accept his bizarre version of monetary economics. Feel free to hit me up with what problem *you* think MMT solves.
@hexinjune362
Жыл бұрын
@@happipat3374 weird, to me what he's saying seems much more internally consistent than the orthodox story and way more based in reality. Perhaps it comes off as exotic to you because it contradicts the information you've come around to believing?
@parallaxcrafttale
Жыл бұрын
@@happipat3374 I mean, I think using the perspective of MMT helps change how people think about govt spending. Lots of people wanna reign in congressional spending and think that’s at the heart of inflation. MMT makes them consider other kinds of money creation that are actually more important like private bank credit creation and CB activity. It also makes them consider other factors like taxation and how they affect the money supply and thus inflation/deflation/savings/spending etc.
@parallaxcrafttale
Жыл бұрын
@@happipat3374 Id argue a revelation of MMT, at least it was for me personally, is that, when you have a monetary system like ours, you can tax/redistribute quite a lot of the money that the top 1-10% of the population makes and put that into a jobs program, public education, etc. A lot of the money will just end up back in the hands of the property owners after the working/middle class spends it on stuff. Instead of creating more billionaires and trillionaires we should be creating a healthy flow of money so Americans, in general, are more prosperous, not just the top 1% of wealth holders.
@Rob-fx2dw
Жыл бұрын
@@happipat3374 Agreed. - The ideas Mosler puts out are the most badly thought out ideas that anyone could pursue. His example of how the accounts could work is does at all address the central problem of what the study of economics is aimed at and merely describes a post factum way of accounting for what has happened. It really shows him putting the cart before the horse.
@Achrononmaster
Жыл бұрын
@24:00 "No unemployment" (in buckeroos for 25 years of operation). But he took a short-cut. The imposition of the liability for students getting their grades creates unemployment for students in buckeroos. But the UMKC Dept. then eliminates all the unemployment they just generated when they pay buckeroos to students who do the hour of community service. They never refuse a student the community service if they want their grades. *_That's the lesson!_* You do not create unemployment (ethically) unless you are prepared to then immediately eliminate it, otherwise you're damaging people like a sociopath, with no need or purpose.
@Baxwell.
Жыл бұрын
So that's the job guarantee right? UMKC can always buy student labour priced in it's own currency (buckaroos). Real currency sovereign governments can always buy labour priced in it's own currency (dollars, pounds, yen etc). Doing so would ensure that no one is left unemployed, everyone is gainfully employed, and the country is producing more wealth than it was before.
@trixn4285
Жыл бұрын
@@Baxwell. Yes, exactly that. The issuer can of course always afford to hire labour that is willing and able to work for the currency it issues. This is eliminate involuntarily unemployment. Of course there can still be people that do not want to work in those job programs or that are transitioning from one job to another but that is not involuntarily. There are only two possibilities: You either have an unemployed labour buffer stock for the private economy to hire from or an employed one. The discussion ist mostly about inflation when it comes to the question which would be better. After all everybody needs an income anyways, even in a system with an unemployed buffer stock. The question is, what about the philips curve and inflation?
@Rob-fx2dw
Жыл бұрын
@@trixn4285 You are misdirecting people by saying that government 'issues' the currency. You are in denial of the fact that most of the money in the economy is created by private banks and they are not government . They are private institutions owned by shareholders who take profits and losses. They create credit fiat money which is the same as the Federal reserve bank creates and lends to government. Private banks lend on a risk and return basis. They are not government agents since they actually create the money they lend. You can see the explanation of this if you really care to look at the site which explains the operations of how money is created and by whom you can find it on the government of Canada's parliament. It states Money is created in the Canadian economy in two main ways: through private commercial bank loans or asset purchases, and through the Bank of Canada’s asset purchases. The majority of money in the economy is created by commercial banks when they extend new loans, such as mortgages. see :- lop.parl.ca/sites/PublicWebsite/default/en_CA/ResearchPublications/201551E
@trixn4285
Жыл бұрын
@@Rob-fx2dw _"You are misdirecting people by saying that government 'issues' the currency. You are in denial of the fact that most of the money in the economy is created by private banks and they are not government"_ That's a Strawman, Rob. I never claimed that only the government can issue money. The central bank issues the currency. Private banks can and do issue money. But that is their own private money in their own private books limited to the bank itself. If they want to make ANY transaction to another bank they need central bank money to settle the transaction because other banks do not accept the book money of that bank. _"They create credit fiat money which is the same as the Federal reserve bank creates and lends to government."_ NO, of course not. It's not THE SAME money. That's the whole point. If banks could issue reserves they wouldn't have to take billions in loans at the central bank. That's the whole point of a two-tier-monetary system. Everybody can issue money. A private bank can do it, I can do it, you can do it. The problem is to get it accepted. When a private bank makes a loan it only creates book money in its own books, NOT reserves. This money has no acceptance outside of its own books. If ANY transaction needs to happen to another bank the other bank will demand central bank reserves and this can ONLY be created by the central bank. Bank money is not the same as central bank money. Those are two independent circuits of money and central bank money is higher up in the hierarchy. _"It states Money is created in the Canadian economy in two main ways: through private commercial bank loans or asset purchases, and through the Bank of Canada’s asset purchases. The majority of money in the economy is created by commercial banks when they extend new loans, such as mortgages."_ Of course. I know that. What makes you think I say anything else? I mean, every MMTer says exactly that. Why the straw manning? What you don't want to accept is that the bank has to go to the central bank to borrow enough reserves (or sell assets to the central bank) to settle any transactions with other banks. So yes, the bank can create money, but it is not accepted by other banks at all. Other banks will always demand CB reserves for settlement because this can not created by private banks. It would be completely pointless if any bank could settle any payment with money it can create itself.
@Rob-fx2dw
Жыл бұрын
@@trixn4285 You are wrong about the central bank money being needed to settle accounts at other banks. The mistake you make is not understanding that transfers between banks are only done through a process known as a clearing house. Clearing houses do not create or use money themselves from central bans. They operate only in the margin of payments where the flow of funds is in an imbalance for a limited time between the two banks involved in the settlement. Sometimes that imbalance is very small for instance when two banks each transfer nearly the same from bank "a" to bank "B" and vice be versa. The central bank will require funds for a short time then those funds are no longer required after the situation balances out and they are returned to the respective banks. the reason is that private banks cannot create their own money and lend it to themselves or other banks.
@hourglassflipper
Жыл бұрын
I'm only halfway through the video right now, but I have to confess I don't understand where exactly MMT predicts fundamentally different outcomes from the mainstream. His examples were not very clear to me. I'll have to read that white paper and come back
@PoliticalEconomy101
Жыл бұрын
MMT policy prescriptions differ in that they want more fiscal policy control over the economy and have the CB support fiscal policy more closely. They theory part is just a gimmick to combat the US RW narrative against fiscal policy.
@pebblepod30
Жыл бұрын
The comment above from Polical Economy has no idea what he is talking about.
@pebblepod30
Жыл бұрын
@@PoliticalEconomy101 Hi 101, where on earth did you get that from? I have been reading the blogs of people who formulated Mmt lens (it is not a policy prescription, but common sense flows from a change in paradigm).
@pebblepod30
Жыл бұрын
Here is my understanding, not as an expert, but as someone who is pretty well informed from original sources (rather than most ppl talming about it, who don't seem to bother With that): The main difference is that maimstream economic ideology & paradigm assumes the Currency Issuer is like a houehold that must get money from somewhere before it spends, assumes any new money is always inflationary (by strict ideology), but it also tends to ignore private bank created money ( called "credit creation process") being inflationary to the same degree. The MMT perspective is neither a "deficit hawk" or a "deficit dove", but a "Deficit Owl" - seeing what is a self imposed restriction, rather than reality based restrictions. So MMT Lens is to see that money is a system we created, rather than a master we must serve (that imo always seems to mean serving financial system elites). So what actaully matters for a sane Currency Issuer is not "where will we get our own currency, we must borrow it from ppl we gave it to". Instead it is: (1) The amount of money supply in economy - is it too small or too big? Currency is put in & leaked out (e.g. tax, imports) (2) What real resources are available in the currency? (3) various inflation issues for a Currency Issuer. Also, Legal requirement to pay tax is what backs the value of a fiat, and taxing something is what makes it valuable as a currency. Like The Buckaroo (in the above interview), which Mosler used as a base case for analysis, a currency can be designed to serve whatever interests we want - in the university Buckaroos case, it is serving the community that has the value (pay 10 buckaroos tax, which means either work X hours for community, or buy Buckaroos from free market from those that did). We create the money system, it can serve us, rather than we be its slaves (or imo at least, slaves of financial elites that fund & spread economic ideology & beleifs by what they own & fund; or hire & fire).
@pebblepod30
Жыл бұрын
@@PoliticalEconomy101 What do you make of Prof Richard Wolfs take on MMT? He seems to realize that the MMT Lens, description & insights are absolutely nessesary to break the hold of Captalist Elites. You can't change a money system to serve the public, if we don't understand it. MMTers also do not tend to praise or trust those who run central banks, not sure if you are aware of that, quite the opposite - except Bank of Japan to some degree, on Prof Bill Mitchell's blog.
@OneEyedMonkey9000
Жыл бұрын
I’m mostly listening to this while walking the dog… but… Marco does need to light himself better. Unless the Dr Doom look is a style choice 😅
@myleshungerford7784
Жыл бұрын
One further comment, he was absolutely right that the reason the ruble is up is because they can’t import anything. One of the most misunderstood aspect of Western sanctions is that the purpose wasn’t supposed to stop Russian exports. They were meant to, and did, stop Russian imports. This is why you’re seeing Russia scrambling to import things like ammunition from North Korea. Because any raw, intermediate, or final components are sanctioned. This is ultimately why Russia cut off natural gas exports to Europe, because they realized that all the money that they were getting from selling natural gas couldn’t actually be used to buy anything, so why sell it?
@xman7695
Жыл бұрын
And they could give the Europeans the same anxiety and give them back some of their own medicine
@Rob-fx2dw
Жыл бұрын
I disagree with your statement "This is ultimately why Russia cut off natural gas exports to Europe, because they realized that all the money that they were getting from selling natural gas couldn’t actually be used to buy anything, so why sell it?". They could have bought plenty from other countries such as those who take US dollars or Euros or other currency that the contracts designated as the currency of payment.
@trixn4285
Жыл бұрын
@@Rob-fx2dw The components and intermediate products they need are mostly sold by western countries that all adopted the sanctions. Sure, they could use Dollars or Euros to buy from China or India (given they accept them in payment) but those countries do not produce a lot of the stuff they need. Also a big chunk of russian currency reserves have been frozen and the russian government isn't even allowed to move their euros, because those are simply balances in the european banking system (as every euro with the exception of cash). So if they wanted to spend euros they have to do it with a middle men that has enough euros at a bank account that is not frozen and that is not sanctioned which is certainly possible but harder to do.
@Rob-fx2dw
Жыл бұрын
@@trixn4285 Yes of course it is harder and they need a middle man scenario or someone in between but they still could buy and it would not be impossible to get those middle man dealers living in other countries which are not sanctioned. There are a lot of products sold to non sanctioned countries and a lot of actual services which can be applied and that makes it even harder to trace. There are even deals done through share acquisitions in companies which are almost impossible to trace.
@trixn4285
Жыл бұрын
@@Rob-fx2dw _"There are a lot of products sold to non sanctioned countries"_ Again. Those products produced elsewhere are not those in need. A lot of stuff Russia needs has been produced by western countries and those other countries can not easily produce those things as they lack the know-how and the production equipment to do so. Also it's not about the country where the owner of a bank account lives. Russian bank accounts currently frozen aren't in russia either. They are in the Eurozone. Euros are ONLY held at european bank accounts ultimately. There might be correspondent banks in other countries that manage accounts for foreigners but those banks can only operate because they have a partnering bank in the Euro zone. A Euro can not leave the european banking system at all as all Euros are ultimately accounted for in the european banking system. The ONLY exception is cash, printed paper notes which can actually physically leave the country. I'm not saying that it is impossible to circumvent the sanctions (through said middle men). But it is much harder and also the products russia wants aren't available for sale to begin with in those other countries.
@Achrononmaster
Жыл бұрын
@1:04:00 no dude! What matters is fully employing willing workers, because you want to maximise needed output and minimise the hours each _one_ person has to work (no bullsh*t jobs) to produce the needed ouput. So the deficit should be _whatever it needs to be_ to guarantee full employment. That's why the deficit never matters! You do not even have to publish the number, and you never know what it _should be!_ That's an inapplicable question. "How much should the deficit be to ensure full employment?" You cannot say! Once you show you've got no one turning up to collect unemployment benefits, and everyone can pay their rent and grocery bills, then you know you've got the "right deficit" residual at the end of the year. C'mon Mr Macro. Do better.
@Achrononmaster
Жыл бұрын
I should've written "Krugman could do better." Your interview was good, very informative to listeners I hope.
@mikealexander1935
Жыл бұрын
But under QE the Fed is buying securities from entities that presumably wanted securities (which is why they had them in the first place). So it seems logical that the recipient of the cash received from the Fed will be used to acquire some other financial asset that the seller values more than the security sold. Why would they want more reserved earning them essentially a zero return. It seems to be that the money used by the Fed for QE will eventually end up in the stock market or other high-return asset. So QE should be expected to produce large rises in asset prices, which it seems to have done so.
@trixn4285
Жыл бұрын
Yeah, I find that to be plausible too. The whole idea of QE boosting investment and taking loans is silly. It is simply an asset swap. Demand for money is endogenous and you can't force cash onto people and you also can't force them to invest into something they deem unprofitable even at zero interest rates. Part of QE was probably absorbed by governments taking more debt which increases the amount of bonds in the secondary markets again (and actually boosts the economy through demand increase). _"end up in the stock market or other high-return asset"_ Not necessarily high-return assets. Bonds are usually owned because they are the safest asset there is, not because they have a high yield. It is used for hedging, for example by pension funds or on the money market, where they are used like in a pawn shop. You probably would want another asset that can be considered safe (and therefore has a lower yield). QE makes sense if the central bank wants to support fiscal expansion through increased government debt. It makes no sense to "boost" the economy on it's own.
@NS-pj8dr
3 ай бұрын
Exactly it causes asset price increases in the stock market and real estate market, which is exactly what we've seen in the last few years
@myleshungerford7784
Жыл бұрын
I know it’s nerdy but I’m super excited for this video.
@pouya5625
Жыл бұрын
Hahaha same
@pebblepod30
Жыл бұрын
Meee tooooo
@happipat3374
Жыл бұрын
It ain't nerdy. It's a fairy tale. Fantasy economics.
@pebblepod30
Жыл бұрын
@@happipat3374 It's the exact opposite actually: simply describing how fiat is actually created based on institutional operations, vs the limitations the govt puts on it out of ideology.
@pebblepod30
Жыл бұрын
@@happipat3374 And btw, where are u getting your info on mmt from? Did you learn from original sources?
@williammcfarlane6153
Жыл бұрын
One of the things that comes up in this conversation that we're really bad at in our current media platforms is nuance!! Contacts always matters when talking about anything in detail and our tendency to just try to make things into a this or that is very destructive to thoughtful communication
@danielhutchinson6604
9 ай бұрын
The desire to eat, does inspire a lot of innovative methods of creating Income. The stability to insure a comfortable lifestyle, seems to drive some Folks to be inventive. Inventing new methods to insure Capital as a measure of Value remains constant, seems to be a popular subject lately?
@sambarlien7856
Жыл бұрын
I hate to say it but I came out of this more confused than before😅 extremely interesting and some great discussions but I felt like his answers relied on a level of understanding already that I and most may potentially lack. Any chance Joeri of a summary/break down of his points in a more succinct and articulate way? Mosler is definitely a wealth of knowledge but it was such a deluge I felt like key stuff either wasn’t touched upon or I wasn’t able to understand. He seemed to hand wave away a lot of stuff that I think would’ve made it easier to understand if it was explained or examined more especially to someone as smooth brained as myself.
@happipat3374
Жыл бұрын
Warren has that effect, but I take the view he relies more on a level of MISunderstanding...
@clearandsweet
Жыл бұрын
This is great content, thank you so much for making it happen
@SilaliS
10 ай бұрын
Incredible crossover
@gusby_gh7581
Жыл бұрын
So who is impossing the tax to incentive people to trade in crypto? 🤔
@mikealexander1935
Жыл бұрын
In the buckaroo example Mosler says there were 100 extra buckaroos left at the end of the term.These buckaroos are worthless because there is nothing left to spend them on. So why would anyone accumulate these things? My guess is a secondary market developed in which buckaroos were being exchanged for things other than discharging class obligations. Likely these things were dollars. So we can imagine a buckaroo:dollar exchange rate. Such a rate would not be constant, but rather would tend to lower near the beginning of the term, when there was plenty of time to get the needed buckaroos through volunteering. But as the end of the term approaches, procrastinating students who haven't acquired their full set of buckaroos will be willing to pay more for buckaroos, if necessary because they no longer can earn enough of them. So there is a potential for the exchange rate to rise at the end of the term. This might incent some students to acquire extra buckaroos to sell at a premium at the end of the term. Of course if too many people have this idea, then there will be excess buckaroos seeking buyers at the end of the term with nobody needed any. Mosler calls the excess 100 buckaroos left over at the end of the term "savings", but i would call them losses, since someone did an hour of work and got nothing in exchange. Terms like "savings," or "inflation," cannot be applied to buckaroos because they are not yet *money*. For buckaroos to be money they (1) have to be exchangeable for all sorts of things outside of volunteering and discharging course obligations, and (2) be used to denominate credit. In actual human societies, credit came first. Money showed up a couple of thousand years later. Money was indeed created by states that desired to access a more complex array* of goods through the imposition of taxes that were required to be paid with money. This created a need for money. Since people who paid taxes needed to have money, credit began to be denominated in terms of money rather than, say, measures of wheat or weight of silver. So right from the start of money you had it used for many more purposes than just paying taxes, which makes it different from the buckaroo example. *Prior to money, states were more autarkic with the king producing most of everything he needed inside of his own domain.
@Achrononmaster
Жыл бұрын
The buckeroo has appreciated against the USD pretty continuously. That's because the buckerooo has a fixed value. The USD does not.
@Rob-fx2dw
Жыл бұрын
@@Achrononmaster Fixed against what ? You are fooling yourself . There is nothing to measure it against? If you disagree then point out what it is fixed to or has been able to actually buy. It's just a Ponzi like idea.
@Rob-fx2dw
Жыл бұрын
Of course you are right. The Buckeroo is worthless because it has bought nothing in the real world.
@idonnow2
Жыл бұрын
It's fixed against labor hours
@Rob-fx2dw
Жыл бұрын
@@idonnow2 What value of labor hours ? - A very low rate due to very low productivity. Heading for the bottom level of wealth creation.
@erikeparsels
Жыл бұрын
Hmm, something strikes me as not quite right when Warren says QE doesn't affect inflation. When the government sells a bond, it is removing liquidity from the market, dollars you can actually use to buy a car, buy dinner, pay your taxes, whatever. You can't buy those things with treasury bonds, you have to first find a buyer for the bond and convert it into actual dollars. True, you can sell that bond at any time to someone else, but then THAT person has lost liquidity and parked HIS money in the time-lock money garage, and so on until the bond either reaches maturity or the government buys it back through QE. So bond sales would seem to be a way for the government to slow down the aggregate velocity of money, except I suppose that banks can use bonds as collateral for issuing loans, betting that the interest rates won't rise.
@EMan-cu5zo
4 ай бұрын
Not working for the banks so well.
@edoson01
Жыл бұрын
First 30m.. terrible interviewee. Keeps bubbling about bakerus and Don't let the interviewer confront or ask elaboration. If he's the leading authority of NMT, no wonder it's all crashing down.. expected a much more professional discussion
@waterbloom1213
Жыл бұрын
In order for MMT to be "successfully implemented" one needs for government, government intervention and government monopolies enforced via security... Perfect monetary theory for breeding tyrants, politicians and bureaucrats, which this channel unintentionally has a tendency to support. Zimbabwe, Argentina, Venezuela, Weimar Republic (ok there was still a "Gold Standard" but money printing is money printing), The Roman Empire, Diocletian's price controls... Spending for the sake of spending and printing for the sake of printing...
@ErsatzGhost
Жыл бұрын
👏 🎉couldn’t agree more. Great tv drama but just feels like a cnbc talking head
@tragicvision775
11 ай бұрын
MMT is garbage
@Mr.Nichan
Жыл бұрын
The Buckaroo example has similarities with how school works in general: Students normally have to turn assignments in to get individual grades, and they need a certain sum of grades to pass. (It's usually expressed as an average, but the total number of assignments divided out doesn't change much, even if you don't do those assignments, so it's really more like a sum.) The individual assignments are usually very specific, but I had a (0 credit hour but mandatory) "recital attendance" class as a music major, where, in addition to having to attend the regular student recitals of music majors we had at the school, we also had to go out and attend a certain number of other performances each semester. Now, we didn't get any "buckaroos" to turn in in exchange for proving we went to a performance - they mostly just wanted us to collect the programs from the concerts we went to and turn them in at the end of the year - but getting some tokens like that alone wouldn't matter much. The main differences from the Buckaroos is that I don't think we had a regular system for saving programs from one semester to the next, and, though I'm sure it was possible, it would have been considered cheating to trade programs for money or anything else (just as with other school assignments), so no larger economy than the student-teacher relationship was supposed to, or very much allowed to, develop.
@Basta11
Жыл бұрын
Yes. Basically, to compel action like learning, the school/teacher imposes a liability on the student "You will fail this course unless". You weren't failing in class when you were not in school. The teacher then has monopolistic/dictatorial powers and defines how you pass through assignments, quizzes, projects, extra credit etc. The difference is that students don't earn currency they can trade with each other, only that the work is immediately translated into grades. In a video game, the game imposes dangers on you to which you must respond else you die. You pay the game with your activity. For example, in Minecraft you must find food or else you'll die of hunger, you must find protection - shelter/weapons or monsters will kill you, to get resources you need to cut trees, make tools, mine for minerals, etc etc. In Minecraft, Diamonds serve as a sort of currency for trade in many multiplayer worlds because of the rarity, usefulness in the game, and work involved to acquire them. In the Monopoly game, you have to roll the dice and play the game to earn money, to pay fines, and buy properties. All the money comes from the game, the game never goes bankrupt. The price of properties and fines is calibrated in Monopoly games based on the rate of earnings. If the prices are too high, the game becomes too difficult and slow. If the prices are too low, then acquiring property becomes easy and game speeds up. In sovereign currency, the government wants your goods or services, it imposes a tax on you which compels you to earn the government currency. People offer goods and services which the government can then buy. For example, in the Bible, Jesus says "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's". The Roman government minted those coins, why would they spend them just to tax them back? Taxes were imposed to create demand for these coins which seems was well understood back in those days.
@Basta11
Жыл бұрын
Markets can only price items relative to each other, in order to have absolute prices - something must be used as the measuring stick. When prices are denominated in a sovereign fiat currency, the issuer sets the anchor with supply (from accumulated government deficit spending). Demand is what people are willing to do for that currency which is based on their faith in the legitimacy and policies of the sovereign. Hyperinflation can happen if the government spends too much to a ridiculous degree, or it can also happen when the people lose faith in the currency and thus demand collapses. Usually, both are happening in these occasions.
@georgeokello8620
Жыл бұрын
@@Basta11In regards to hyperinflation, government having to excessively spend to boost up money stock is not a sufficient condition to create hyperinflation with examples like Japan, China and USA having higher GDP/Govt debt ratios. My theory on it is that the rule of law dynamics that govern contractual arrangements for trading capital have to dramatically collapse that it forces capital retreat to a nation that is a net exporter and that capital retreat forces the nation to revert to net importing position drastically. These kind of conditions tend to have extreme market volatility not limited to pricing but in certainty expectations of production of future goods near term and it will encourage a rush to get more goods and govt money printing becomes a result that already aggravates 2nd to third order effects that will push the inflation rate of all goods.
@Basta11
Жыл бұрын
@@georgeokello8620 Essentially people have lost faith in the currency due to the policies of the national government. And so instead of transacting and working in that currency, they use other means of exchange such as foreign currency, trading goods and services directly, private credit arrangements (but not derived from the value of the falling currency). This means the demand for that currency falls which means its price falls. You need higher amounts of it to buy things = inflation. People hoard goods. Workers stop working for wages that don't pay for anything. Factories stop producing because workers left. Shops close as owners hoard the stuff for themselves. They go into the black market - selling goods in foreign currencies. Farms stop selling produce, keep the food to themselves, barter directly for the things they need. People who can leave, people such as businessmen and professionals as well as the hard working people. The best human capital goes abroad. Foreign capital left a while ago. With a less stuff to buy, less services available, the money is worth less and less creating a viscous cycle. Government deficits explode pouring more money into the economy. It spends more money paying for inflation adjusted goods and services. The country is most likely very indebted in foreign loans. The print money to buy foreign currency to pay off foreign debts and to import things needed by the population. This makes the exchange rate fall even more. There is a massive need for imports but no profitable exports to bring in foreign currency. Foreign importers can't import more to take advantage of the exchange rate because there is no spare production. Political insiders short the currency as well, take on huge loans from government controlled banks. They exchange them for foreign currencies and assets, then pay off the loan when its value is worthless. The central bank foolishly increase interest rates to ridiculous degree. All this does is put more new money into the hands of bond holders (usually rich people) who in turn buy foreign currencies and assets with the returns. Basically, wiping out the purchasing power of the poor with inflation to increase the foreign bank accounts of the rich.
@sanc9808
Жыл бұрын
I enjoyed hearing his perspective. I am sorry you had to go through his inability to let you speak. I do appreciate your patience and you interviewed him very professionally. Please keep up the good work. I liked how people explained the theory well in the comments, like what Platypus Paws wrote below, it is from him (not me): "Here is my understanding, not as an expert, but as someone who is pretty well informed from original sources (rather than most ppl talming about it, who don't seem to bother With that): The main difference is that maimstream economic ideology & paradigm assumes the Currency Issuer is like a houehold that must get money from somewhere before it spends, assumes any new money is always inflationary (by strict ideology), but it also tends to ignore private bank created money ( called "credit creation process") being inflationary to the same degree. The MMT perspective is neither a "deficit hawk" or a "deficit dove", but a "Deficit Owl" - seeing what is a self imposed restriction, rather than reality based restrictions. So MMT Lens is to see that money is a system we created, rather than a master we must serve (that imo always seems to mean serving financial system elites). So what actaully matters for a sane Currency Issuer is not "where will we get our own currency, we must borrow it from ppl we gave it to". Instead it is: (1) The amount of money supply in economy - is it too small or too big? Currency is put in & leaked out (e.g. tax, imports) (2) What real resources are available in the currency? (3) various inflation issues for a Currency Issuer. Also, Legal requirement to pay tax is what backs the value of a fiat, and taxing something is what makes it valuable as a currency. Like The Buckaroo (in the above interview), which Mosler used as a base case for analysis, a currency can be designed to serve whatever interests we want - in the university Buckaroos case, it is serving the community that has the value (pay 10 buckaroos tax, which means either work X hours for community, or buy Buckaroos from free market from those that did). We create the money system, it can serve us, rather than we be its slaves (or imo at least, slaves of financial elites that fund & spread economic ideology & beleifs by what they own & fund; or hire & fire)." Platypus Paws
@ArawnOfAnnwn
Жыл бұрын
You don't need taxes for money to exist and have value. It's quite possible to have money even sans taxes (just plop a dozen people on an island and watch them use shells as currency, even without any taxes to pay). For an entire nation state, where the govt. does have some cost for its operations, just consider an oil state where the govt. owns the oil industry and gets its income from there. That would allow it to have no taxes, direct or indirect, on its people. And yet it can still issue currency and people use it for trading.
@peteneville698
11 ай бұрын
@@ArawnOfAnnwn- Is there a fundamental difference between charging a tax for supplying the service of governing and offering protection via a state-sponsored army whilst citizens can then use their after-tax earnings to buy oil in the free market, as compared to supplying, say, govt-monopoly oil at a higher price then using the excess revenue to govern and pay for the army?
@nicoruppert4207
7 ай бұрын
@@ArawnOfAnnwnwho would use sea shells as currency. Seems rather far fetched.
@theWebWizrd
Ай бұрын
@@ArawnOfAnnwn there are many problems with the shell example. Firstly, the shells don't have any value - you have to hope that the other person you want to trade with accepts shells, which presumably they would only do if they believe other people will too. The point of the monopolistic government perspective is thst they ensure that the money has value; the money can pay taxes, and you have to pay taxes. If there was a government that took a certain amount of sea shells every month on that island then seashells do have real value there. Secondly, there is no printing sea shells, which is another big part of what MMT wants to look at - the consequences of government deficits and issuance of more currency.
@ErsatzGhost
Жыл бұрын
This guy is crazy, modern monetary theory is wild to me. Merit to some of his arguments but I struggle to see a coherent viewpoint from mmt
@thomasd2444
Жыл бұрын
kzitem.info/news/bejne/paWDtqB9bp2YgXo MMT in Minsky at the 2nd Poznan MMT Summer School 2022 . People not familiar with system dynamic mathematics & differential Calculus can be helped with a good visual .
@anteeko
11 ай бұрын
I agree MMT seem to be just "print, baby, print" craziness...
@DorJinTan
5 ай бұрын
Ditto
@EMan-cu5zo
4 ай бұрын
It is a Ponzi scheme. I can’t believe people are so stupid to believe this will last in the long term.
@poltorn4580
2 ай бұрын
Magic Money Tree
@JCResDoc94
7 ай бұрын
31:31 sold the currency to EU at the rate, no longer taxed in that currency - but req euro to pay the tax (giving worth) _JC
@jimarger8533
11 ай бұрын
Seems functional from a politician's point of view but not from a citizen's.
@gregwilliams2746
9 ай бұрын
How is the beginning about Government spending? When it comes to currency, isn't the beginning a medium of exchange that makes trading more efficient? And when you increase the money supply by printing more currency, don't you create inflation unless there happens to be spare supply of all the goods and services just waiting for that extra money?
@donkeybus
4 ай бұрын
Yeah, but mmt is a method of pseudo-logical gymnastics to try and pretend that what youve said isn't true.
@theWebWizrd
Ай бұрын
That sounds exactly like the traditional perspective that the guest believes is completely backwards but most commonly adhered to. This entirely interview is about explaining the alternative point of view.
@MatthewVanderveer
Жыл бұрын
How does a modern monetary theorist expect that increasing monetary supply (or decreasing interest rates to expand lending to effectively increase monetary supply) will create demand for the skills and goods provided by the unemployed as opposed to the skills and goods provided by the already employed (which are the people that generally speaking are determined by the aggregate of small scale free market dynamics to be the ones providing more valuable services and goods)?
@cozyojk571
6 ай бұрын
The government doesnt decide prices of everything in the economy. (Unless your in a communist country and that never worked well.) So saying that the government sets the prices of stuff doesnt make sense. They just print the money and choose what to spend it on. They pay whatever the market price is currently at. Imagine the government trying to only pay a baker $1 for bread but the current market rate is $2. The baker is going to tell them no unless they threaten to destroy him. Otherwise the government must pay the market rate. And if the government printed money to pay for the bread then the demand for bread would rise i.e. inflation and everyone else has to suffer. MMT dEbUnkEd. This guy was annoying the way he kept saying"its not complicated. A child can understand it." When he couldnt even give a good example of MMT or explain it easily lol
@Rob-fx2dw
Жыл бұрын
Mosler "You can't trade a currency based on interest rate differentials you are going to lose a lot of money". The realty is someone trading with you will win since the other person wins. It is as simple as that which makes his statement a false since he only looks at it from one perspective. i.e. the losers one rather than the winner.
@markbrzezinski8889
7 ай бұрын
This so stupid. It assumes that people will actually work to a certain level for thier Buckaroo. The reason why the Communist system failed is there was no incentive for people to work hard. They always got paid food coupons or a share of the crop whether they worked or not. That did not and does not work. You always need an incentive to work and you need counter party risk insurance which is interest. What this guy is saying is so stupid. If eneryone is fully empolyed and they all get buckaroos then they bid on an available house. Someone will always pay more than its worth if there is a shortage. Thats inflation! He has not eliminated anything.
@viorelgheorghe9772
9 ай бұрын
I will have to stop watching these 💩, he lost me wen he said that if people stop paying taxes the dollar will be worthless, so what about Bitcoin, is someone paying taxes to keep it in value? The value of a currency is given bye the ones that use it, if you accept a Bitcoin for an 10 🍏 that is the value of the currency, If after you accept a Bitcoin for 5 🍏, naw the Bitcoin value has increased 100%. If there are to many Bitcoins in circulation and not enuf apples the 🍏 will rise in value against Bitcoin
@afgor1088
Жыл бұрын
the biggest issue with MMT is it's understanding of the history of money is just factually incorrect money did not arise with the state, nor did single currency zones arise with taxation.
@rhysherridge3614
Жыл бұрын
My 2 cents... TAXES AND GOVERNMENT AS AXIOM FALACY MMT claims the PURPOSE of money is to serve a deficit created by government (or equivalent institution). This fundamental assumption is wrong, and is a faux-first-principle. Origin and purpose are not the same thing. The origin of the resource of money might be the an institution such as the government (origin is not fundamental), but the PURPOSE is to serve as a liquid medium of accounting and exchange in both the free-market and the government. A deficit as a function of the government may be a tolerable necessary part of the system. That is until the deficit affects the currency’s parallel utility (and role) which is to liquidate the market. This does enable the productive value to create taxes, but taxes are not a fundamental function of currency. MMT, allows and encourages excess sovereign debt. This excess sovereign debt is a liability, and creates increased counter party risk within the currency system. There is a tipping point of trust, where the risk-to-utility of the currency outweighs the utility, as more and more money is printed relative to the GDP which can never keep up. Currency needs no government. Currency requires participants exchanging value, that is all. NO INFLATION FALACY Another claim by MMT is that inflation is a relic function carried over from an age of exchange currencies,… Currencies of nations, must serve a large diverse number of competing stakeholders who occupy the same market domain. With no inflation, those positioned to have even a little margin of currency after essential liabilities in that market would systematically passively accumulate currency, without offering value or liquidity to the system. The liberalism that celebrates MMT, is the same one that is opposed extreme wealth gaps. Inflation encourages liquidity of the currency. Liquidity is fundamental to the purpose currency. JOB GUARANTEE FACALY 'The job guarantee’ is the claim that 100% of market participants can be employed simply by the government funding participation in the workforce, regardless of productivity. MMT advocates mistake productivity for participation. Productivity in a competitive market with scares resources is the attempt or execution to create realised market value. Productivity bring value and sustainability tot the marketplace. In a large market, where individuals are in competition with strangers, both personally and culturally, and currency is paid for ‘just turning up’… Participants are incentivised to ‘freeload’. Destroying the marketplace, and eventually the currency, as one of the fundamental purposes is to liquify that marketplace. The published number for the government will be" 100% employed"... but at that point, the measurement irrelevant.
@waterbloom1213
Жыл бұрын
I think this post is worth it, but please fix the spelling. "Falacy, Facaly, Scares"... Also, don't tell Keynesians that government creating jobs for the sake of creating jobs is bad.
@rhysherridge3614
Жыл бұрын
@@waterbloom1213 Thanks for the complement, I'll leave the spelling mistakes for now though... a) I think comments are stronger look they haven't been edited, b) Its authentically my work, worts and all. :)
@rhysherridge3614
Жыл бұрын
@@waterbloom1213 If there was a job going, where all I had to do was 'turn up' I would go for it. I would have no negative intention towards my fellow citizens. But I would be on tiny protozoa, blindly feeding myself in a parasitic system. As a librarian, I find one of the strongest steel man arguments against my position is 'the tragedy of the commons'.
@theodorearaujo971
11 ай бұрын
People will believe, especially intelligent people will believe, whatever is necessary to justify their desires, no matter how delusional. Such is MMT.
@anteeko
11 ай бұрын
"People will believe, especially intelligent people will believe, whatever is necessary to justify their desires, no matter how delusional. Such is MMT." I agree well said.
@MatthewVanderveer
Жыл бұрын
Let’s play a game called who can come up with more obvious flaws in the whole buckaroos experiment in under a minute. I’ll go first: 1) it assumes an endless outside source of demand for the students time 2) it assumes that each students time is equally valuable 3) it doesn’t take into account the amount of time/energy/resources expended on necessity items (food, water, shelter, warmth…) 4) selection bias of participants 5) doesn’t relate the buckaroos to the cost of providing the services to the participants (infact it assumes that people aren’t actually being provided a service by the administration in the first place… which it obviously is otherwise no one would give a fuck about the buckaroos… you can’t just come up to some random land owner and say hey I’m starting a government I’ll be needing you to start paying taxes on your property it’s ok tho I’m going to give you the credits to do so in the first place and expect them to just say oh cool guess these taxes need to be paid and this currency is therefore valuable) Jesus there’s so many to choose from. You get the point the fact someone tries to prove a point using this experiment is simply laughable.
@Rob-fx2dw
Жыл бұрын
Agreed. - Which is typical of MMT. Full of obvious flaws throughout.
@ginalley
Жыл бұрын
on your last point I suppose it works because behind you is 100 000 soldiers to his 100. Also I don't understand what you mean in point 4 about selection bias?
@JCResDoc94
7 ай бұрын
39:50 QE is Gvt (fed) buying own bonds _JC
@MagnusAnand
Жыл бұрын
The problem with MMT is not its history analysis, the problem is the conclusion it arrives. Look at Argentina (not even mentioning Venezuela). That’s what you get when you don’t have an independent central bank that finance government spending.
@toletoles
Жыл бұрын
I am from Argentina and MMT is absolutely correct in practice on how money actually works... What we have in Argentina's media is the opposite of this, is a population under the belief that money is still a commodity somehow or has a representation in gold or somewhat, because everyone is terrified of the "fiscal deficit" and then the untrust increase prices, people save in foreign exchange, etc. Inflation has been an issue for a long time but is not related exclusively to money printing at all and can be fixed with increasing salaries and just spending, there is no real risk on "fiscal déficit" USA has an increasing fiscal déficit since the country was funded... Price formation/price levels is a separate discussion and like Mr. Mosler here said, there's no consensus on what the value really should be, so inflation can be caused by many different factors... Of course like now some absurd libertarians in Argentina are proposing, to dolarize the economy would get rid of the current inflation but the consecuences of not being able to print your own money is pretty much the only way a government can get insolvent... Because if you can print your PESOS, create a tax liability like mosler said and spend, you can basically inject money to the economy.
@MagnusAnand
Жыл бұрын
@@toletoles If you're from Argentina you should know that MMT sucks.
@toletoles
Жыл бұрын
@@MagnusAnand I am from Argentina and MMT is correct. Inflation doesn't have to do with money "printing" (not really printed), it might have an effect on inflation, yes, but inflation is a mixture of many differrent factors.
@orangutanfan3179
Жыл бұрын
Argentina's problem was it's wealthy elite kept taking money out of the country to stuff into offshore bank accounts or to buy overseas property.
@Alex-fm5ke
Жыл бұрын
Neither of these countries have currency sovereignty and have a lot of debt in foreign currencies. MMT only applies to countries where the vast majority of government debt is donated in a currency it controls. E.g usa, Japan, uk, Australia etc
@endthecorruption6663
Жыл бұрын
It's too bad such a smart guy is not more conscience of how his speaking style is to dominate the conversation and constantly talk over another....kinda hard to watch because of this.
@christiansmith-of7dt
9 ай бұрын
It really sucks the way they treat people like me in america , i dont like it
@crocodilegamingtv1178
Жыл бұрын
I agree with Warren Mosler. MMT unquestionably explains the current monetary operations better than any other economic school of thought. That being said, even if we put all the policy that he has championed (not only the ones from this video), in my opinion, the financial sector has become a parasite on the real economy. It seems like everything takes second nature to the financial side. The only reason companies produce a product is to increase their financial assets. If a company can achieve their goal without hiring or selling anything, they'll gladly do it. Now I know the U.S. in particular, prides itself on a culture of harboring small business. But small business don't tank an entire economy with their financial activities.
@peteneville698
11 ай бұрын
I didn't like the way Moser skirted around the issue of interest rates. Two things spring to mind - can we say that issuing a loan against an asset to be purchased is not really creating money as the money eventually gets paid back? But banks don't lend money for no profit so inherent in the process is the idea of charging interest - this in turn means that at the end of the entire process the "created" money will have been repaid from money that already existed and the asset bought with it could be sold to replace that money, but the interest charged must suck more money out of the system than what was originally there unless new money is injected and therefore the value of the money must reduce over time if there is any amount of borrowing and lending in any economy. Without interest there are fewer factors driving prices and investments up, nor reasons for the value of the currency to go down. Interest is the effective time-value of money. With no interest there's no urgency to pay back loans and less incentive to work or make a business successful vs competitors. Second - if interest rates were zero there would soon be no properly functioning stockmarket. Every company that was making a profit could borrow money for free to buy back it's own shares to earn a positive dividend return paid out of its own profits. Or in the absence of borrowing it could simply use its profits to buy back its own shares over a longer period - eventually buying itself out completely. Companies that were consistently losing money wouldn't be able to borrow cos the lender would not accept only risk for no return, so instead these companies would have to keep issuing endless amounts of equity on the promise of future dividends until, barring the occasional spectacular turnaround, each share was worth zilch.
@crocodilegamingtv1178
11 ай бұрын
@peteneville698 The interest rate that Mosler is talking about is the overnight rate. This is what mostly everyone is referring to when speaking on the "interest rate." There is an overwhelming amount of research that suggests that this overnight rate does nothing to influence the private sector's economic decisions. And even if it did affect the private sector's decisions, it doesn't borrow at zero rate. Borrowers need to meet certain criteria set by banks, and that determines what rate they get when they borrow money. The overnight rate almost entirely only comes into play when banks borrow among themselves.
@Rob-fx2dw
5 ай бұрын
@@peteneville698 If interest rates were zero then the money would be easier to borrow but the obligation to pay it back would still be there but the continuation of guaranteed interest rates at zero would mean almost anyone would be able and willing to continue borrowing at no cost (no interest) therefore the money would be utterly worthless. Presently and in the past there has been no guarantee that interest rates would stay at zero so that effect has not materialised.
@NjonjoNdehi
Жыл бұрын
When the British invaded Kenya in the late 1890s for 70 years, they needed labour but the locals were pretty happy in their farms tending to crops and livestock. So they introduced a tax for each home payable in the British currency. Sad.
@Rob-fx2dw
5 ай бұрын
You are terribly wrong if you think the tax made the money worth something. You have drawn the wrong conclusion. Taxes are money transfer and that is all. It was and still is the existence of goods and services that makes the money worth something. No goods and services means no value to money. If you have hundred dollars and are lost in the desert with friend what is the value of the money? - Nothing because it can buy nothing when there is nothing to buy. Ask yourself if transferring money from you to someone else or them taking it without permission makes it worth more in purchasing power than it had previously. The obvious answer is No ! just like the government taking it as tax does not put any value into it.
@DorJinTan
5 ай бұрын
Brits!
@back2d_lobby
5 ай бұрын
@@Rob-fx2dwgreat comments
@kurnaPunk
4 ай бұрын
@@Rob-fx2dw what a bunch of nonsensical analogies. Taxes are enforced by the currency issuers. In the desert of course it has no value because no government is there to force you to pay taxes! Anyone takes money from me by force of course doesn't make the money more valuable because they are not the currency issuer! You're missing the whole point!
@Rob-fx2dw
4 ай бұрын
@@kurnaPunk Who are the currency issuer in an economy where 90% or more of the money is created by private banks through lending and the rest is created by the central bank by lending money they created the same was as private banks created it ? Either take your shoes off and let that thinking of yours get out of your socks without getting confused or start using your head to think instead of swallowing rubbish MMT.
@danhass6194
10 ай бұрын
I'm a fan of Mosler (and Kelton), and agree with a lot of their observations regarding the way macro government budgets and spending work. However, they have a fundamental flaw in their models. Governments are not the monopolists of currency. Currency/money is debt. And most debt in the modern economies are created by private entities. Fractional deposit banking in the U.S. now accounts for more money creation that any other mechanism. The money created by the federal U.S. government is probably the 3rd most prolific money creator (through deficit spending).
@goatmeal5241
11 ай бұрын
When your core "base case" model bases the entire understanding of money on a version of taxation that doesn't exist (mandatory flat tax on everyone), and you still have the ego to say it's not a theory it's simply the way the world has always worked... economists astound me
@crimony3054
11 ай бұрын
It's Communism. No linkage to reality. Just a religious doctrine for your followers to use to satisfy their selfishness. And Mosler and Felton know it.
@chessenthusiast
10 ай бұрын
What, economists aren’t allowed to use illustrative examples? It’s not analytical, it’s descriptive. I’m guessing you just don’t like the truth it’s describing, therefore you feel compelled to clumsily accuse Mosley of having an “ego.” Swing and a miss, my dude.
@chessenthusiast
10 ай бұрын
What, economists aren’t allowed to use illustrative examples? It’s not analytical, it’s descriptive. I’m guessing you just don’t like the truth it’s describing, therefore you feel compelled to clumsily accuse Mosley of having an “ego.” Swing and a miss, my dude.
@idxerr
10 ай бұрын
Agreed. Contrast this odd, coercive definition of money to the more common sense definition from Lyn Alden in recent talks about broken money: Two people want to trade goods or services; "Money is the tradeable item where you never feel like you have too much." It's a common unit that both parties want more of. Different items can fill this role. For example, Bitcoin, which has no government or taxation beneath it. The Austrian definition given by Lyn is based on voluntary consent to transact. One must wonder: What opportunity cost do we pay when we instead build our entire economy from a premise of government coercion, threats of imprisonment or worse, and forced seizure of your private property to non-consensually transfer it into the "public domain," such as the definition given in the early part of this video above?
@crimony3054
10 ай бұрын
@@idxerr Currency has no diminishing marginal utility. It converts to whatever you need or want most right now. If the govt wants its taxes in dollars, hold Bitcoin until tax day, and then buy dollars and pay Auntie Samantha.
@mentalgame5608
Жыл бұрын
One thing Warren Mosler is doing incorrectly is that he is neglecting the fact that the MARKET set rates. He should know how OPEN MARKET OPERATIONS work with Bonds.
@trixn4285
Жыл бұрын
What about open market operations contradicts what Mosler said? Can you elaborate a little bit? I'm sure Mosler knows how OMOs work.
@mentalgame5608
Жыл бұрын
@@trixn4285 1. FED rate is for BANKS. General public don’t get those rates. 2. FED buy/sell bonds in the open market where the private sector also buy/sell bonds. That is what sets rates.
@trixn4285
Жыл бұрын
@@mentalgame5608 You are missing the crucial point here. The central bank SETS the interest rate on reserves (it literally declares the target) and then buys/sells as much bonds as needed to achieve that rate. by adding/draining reserves from the interbank reserve market. There is no second opinion about that the central bank is the one that sets the interest rate and not the market. Also the inter bank market for reserves has dried out since the global financial crisis. That means that central banks around the world act in permanent unconventional monetary policy mode, crisis mode if you want so. It's kind of arrogant the way you put it because you don't seem to have a good understanding of OMOs yourself. Mosler is a very successful bond trader for decades and he talks to many central bankers and bond traders. And they all basically agree with him on the way it works. Funnily enough there is a lot of agreement from bankers about MMT and not so much from economists which often even fail to express their views with sound balance sheet techniques. Many mainstream economists completely fail to understand modern banking operations. Mosler is an insider. He knows what he's talking about. Maybe you should be a little bit more humble and actually study the things you are making claims about. It doesn't seem you understand it very well. _"FED rate is for BANKS. General public don’t get those rates."_ Of course. You must have misunderstood that point. No MMTer, including Mosler, claims anything else. The interest rate on reserves that the central bank sets and carries out through by OMOs ist the base rate. Private banks obviously add to that rate based on risk assessment and expected profit rates. Nobody claimed otherwise. Banks need to refinance their credits by borrowing from the central bank. They need to pay the interest the central bank sets. Therefore they will mark up their interest rates based on that interest rate. This is the whole point of monetary policy.
@mentalgame5608
Жыл бұрын
@@trixn4285 I understand now that you’re a Fan of Mosler and hence you’re blinded from noticing a lot of his inaccuracies. When he and other MMT folks stated that “raising interest rates is inflationary” You didn’t notice how wrong he was? Or even when it played out in REAL LIFE when he claimed Erdogan was right for lowering rates only for the Turkish lira to DEVALUE That wasn’t enough evidence to see that he is in fact WRONG!
@Rob-fx2dw
Жыл бұрын
@@mentalgame5608 You are correct and the supporting evidence is that lower interest rates deceases also the value (purchasing power) of money. Interest rates have been described as the price of borrowing money which increases the ability of people to do just that. It does that in practice.
@TySmoothie
11 ай бұрын
MMT = print forever and it’s fine (Its not)
@silentwilly2983
Жыл бұрын
Interesting, sounds extremely reasonable. Have to let it sink in a bit and maybe re-watch in a few days!
@parallaxcrafttale
Жыл бұрын
I think there’s a lot of propaganda that strawmans MMT. Gives people a simplified and incorrect view.
@silentwilly2983
Жыл бұрын
@@parallaxcrafttale It's not like the alternatives are so correct that they'll lead to reliable predictions.....
@trixn4285
Жыл бұрын
Although it is depicted as a "new" theory in fact most of the foundations are not new and simply post-keynesian economic theory. It's shouldn't be hard for a post-keynesian to accept most if not all of MMT. It mostly differs in focus and framing, not so much in theoretical implications. The foundations of MMT are the "state theory of money" (Georg Friedrich Knapp) and the "credit theory of money" (Alfred Mitchell-Innes). Both are authors that Keynes already knew at the time and that he made favourable comments about. He even wanted Knapp's work to be translated into english in the first place. It's also based on stock-flow-consistent modelling, also something that Keynes, Wicksell and Kalecki already thought and which was further developed by Wynne Godley. Another important influence is the "functional finance" approach (Abba Lerner). So you see all the foundations of MMT are quite old and made by established and credible economists of the last century. Mosler is an insider from the financial world and he has come to his conclusions based on his experience and observations of banking and currency trade independently without knowing the work of those economists in detail. If you want to study MMT scientifically you should read the work of Randall Wray (a student of Hyman Minsky - also a post-keynesian that had very similar views on money as MMTers do) and Bill Mitchell.
@Rob-fx2dw
Жыл бұрын
@@trixn4285 You direct people to Randall Wray and Mitchell. That about sums up your knowledge and lack of inability to think critically. They can't explain why the MMT (including Kelton, Randall Wray and Mitchell) say the national debt is not a debt for the future and never has to be paid off when the reality is ALL of it is paid off as the bonds which it was created from all mature and all of the past national debt . I suppose you can explain that ? Randall Wray and Mitchell along with Mosler and any other MMT economists cannot explain why their theory says taxes pit value into the money and get it accepted when the reality is in all of the countries where the inflation made the currency worthless there were taxes which did nothing to keep it accepted or put any value into it. But I am not very hopeful that you can even do that or understand that it is part of the denial of reality you are avoiding.
@trixn4285
Жыл бұрын
@@Rob-fx2dw _"say the national debt is not a debt for the future and never has to be paid off when the reality is ALL of it is paid off as the bonds which it was created from all mature and all of the past national debt "_ Rob, you literally follow those debates for years and you still do not understand anything about it? All money in literally every economy in the world is debt. How can you not understand that? It's not about that one bond that has to be serviced. It's about sectoral balances and how much credit is taken out vs how much is paid back vs how much is saved. Nations are rolling over debt and they can do that until the sun implodes. The question is NEVER the size of the debt but how much is saved, spent and invested in the economy. Sure, bonds are serviced when they mature, SO WHAT? That is not the point. And that you think this is the crucial point just shows that you did not understand it. You simply are unable to think macroeconomically and this is why you miserably fail to understand anything about macroeconomic relations. If the private sector saves another sector can and has to go into debt. Monetary debt and assets are two sides of the same medal.
@cavokmc
Жыл бұрын
This is the most tyrannical monetary theory based on coercive statist control ever conceived.
@zadig08
Жыл бұрын
MMT appears to make constitutive and functional claims rather than normative ones.
@chessenthusiast
10 ай бұрын
MMT is explaining how it works. MMT is not a system in itself.
@Mr.Nichan
Жыл бұрын
1:20:13 "I think nobody can deny that no current economic systems have sustained full employment: That's never been the case." Taking "full employment" completely literally is kind of ridiculous, at least for something as large as a whole country, but I wonder if you're considering "communist" states in this statement, because I was under the impression that some of them did quite well in terms of fulfilling their job guarantees, and, in fact, his whole MMT way of looking at things reminds me a bit of state socialism and makes me wonder how the people running "communist" state economies understood these things. I guess maybe that kind of communism isn't a "current economic system" anymore, though.
@trixn4285
Жыл бұрын
I don't know how you define communism. A JG has nothing to do with that. Communism means "no privately owned means of production". Certainly this is nothing that MMTers propose at all. They simply say that unemployment is caused by the monetary system imposed (people seeking for work that pays the currency). And unemployment is used as a policy variable to tame inflation which means that some poeple can not possibly find a job even if they want to. Do you know the game "musical chairs" (not sure if it's called like that in english)? There is always one chair less than people dancing around them and when the music stops everybody tries to get on a chair. Obviously there is no chance that everybody gets one even if they all try as hard as they can. This is kind of the system we have. Isn't it very cruel to make paid work the only way to sustain yourself but then intentionally and systematically prevent that there actually are enough jobs? There are only two possible ways you can have it: You either have an unemployed buffer stock of labour force (NAIRU) for the private sector or you have an employed buffer stock (JG).
@Mr.Nichan
Жыл бұрын
@@trixn4285 You seem to be reacting more to the "reminds me a bit of" part rather than the part before. Saying it reminds me a bit of "communist" countries is not the same as saying I think MMT is communism. Also, it looks like you spend some time at the end defending job guarantees, which makes me think that you view a comparison to "communism" as a criticism. This is a valid guess, given how common it is as a right-wing epithet, but not what I was doing. In fact, what I was trying to do was call out "first world" economists for what I suspect is a common habit among them of not thinking much about the economics of socialist countries, particularly those that have become heavily maligned in the "first world", although I admitted that it might actually have been a valid omission in this particular case, since I didn't know if any state _currently_ has a job guarantee. Since then, what I've found interesting is that countries that DID have something that looks like a job guarantee still reportedly had unemployment levels around 1~3% (and that's not even the inverse of labor participation rate, which I somewhere saw as 80% in the USSR at some point). As for how I define "communism", I specifically avoided doing that, but my point was that I have heard of job guarantees in countries that are often called "communist", such as the USSR, although I wonder exactly what those entailed. I also wonder if it's truth or just ignorance that caused Buisiness Insider to label Marienthal, Austria's job guarantee as "the world's first universal jobs guarantee experiment".
@trixn4285
Жыл бұрын
@@Mr.Nichan _"Saying it reminds me a bit of "communist" countries is not the same as saying I think MMT is communism. Also, it looks like you spend some time at the end defending job guarantees, which makes me think that you view a comparison to "communism" as a criticism"_ It's not uncommon to hear from people that a policy proposal that involves the government planing basically anything to be "communism" or a "planned economy". Of course that's just a ridiculous straw man. A JG wouldn't be communism or a planned economy. Only people that can not find a job in the privately organized and market based economy are eligible for the job program and it serves a macroeconomic anchor for inflation and the value of the currency. I'm sorry if I suspected you to try to put it in the communism corner. Have probably done you wrong there. But it just happens so often that people come up with this. It's kind of a reflex to reject it. There are actually other notable job programs that you could point to. To list some of them: The New Deal (1930s USA), Plan Jefes y Jefas de Hogares (Argentina), National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (India) to name a few. Those countries wouldn't be considered communist at all I guess. Anyways the defining feature of communism is that all means of production are publicly owned, so there are no capitalists (people that own companies) and no profit-driven production, only "workers". As there is no profit-driven production where companies compete on markets for profit it's usually also is a planned economy. Of course that doesn't exist anywhere in the world and I'm not even sure if it can exist. The whole point of a job guarantee is to eliminate what is caused by the monetary system imposed on people, without risking macroeconomic instability. Unemployment is used as a policy variable (see e.g. NAIRU or the Philips Curve). That means unemployment is depicted as a "necessary evil" primarily to tame inflation. This is a sadistic system because no matter how hard everyone tries some will always be involuntarily unemployed. _"reportedly had unemployment levels around 1~3%"_ Well, it depends on the implementation of JG and the definition of "involuntarily unemployed". But yeah, of course there might always be people that are unemployed but a JG would reduce that to the bare minimum. Everybody should get an offer. They are always free to accept it. And of course there should also be a social safety net beyond a JG.
@Mr.Nichan
Жыл бұрын
@@trixn4285 One thing that complicates things is that a government program designed to give jobs to the unemployed is not the same as a universal job guarantee. For example,* obviously South Africa's Expanded Public Works Program can't be working as a universal job guarantee if a third of South Africa's potential workforce is still unemployed, unless this is another definition problem like adults living in farming families being called unemployed or something. Anyway, I don't think it is, because the final recruitment guidelines contain the text: """ The high demand to participate in an EPWP project coupled with local and municipal dynamics may impact negatively on the recruitment of participants. Potential challenges include: a) patronage in the recruitment of participants, b) inconsistency in the process of recruiting participants, c) lack of transparency, and d) poorly defined criteria and processes. These pose a reputational risk to the EPWP brand and where such problematic practices occur, or are perceived to occur, they may lead to delays or disruptions in the implementation of projects. Thus a clearly defined recruitment process that speaks to the recruitment of participants and defines the role of stakeholders is needed. """ *another example showing how we mirror Wikipedia
@BarrySlisk
11 ай бұрын
@@trixn4285 Communism means "no privately owned means of production" No, that's Socialism.
@pebblepod30
Жыл бұрын
The Buckaroo - where the Currency Issuer pays for community based labor done - seems like a great national economic solution to me as a 2nd currency that doesn't inflate. In fact it's value only grew against US dollar.
@Jesus-kt5dc
Жыл бұрын
*That's the whole point of the federal job guarantee. That's why MMTers are not for a UBI.*
@Rob-fx2dw
Жыл бұрын
You are misdirecting people again. Why do you do that when the facts are available and contradict you. There is no such thing as government currency issuer. Government does not issue currency . Government is the biggest single spender of existing money in the economy. Most money is created in the economy is created by private banks who create it when they lend. It is not money created by the government or the Federal reserve bank. Even money created by the Federal reserve bank is loaned to government in exchange for Treasury bonds and has to be paid back in time when those bonds mature.. I have directed you previously to the explanation given on the Parliament of Canada which lays out what happens in this statement " Money is created in the Canadian economy in two main ways: through private commercial bank loans or asset purchases, and through the Bank of Canada’s asset purchases. The majority of money in the economy is created by commercial banks when they extend new loans, such as mortgages."
@pebblepod30
Жыл бұрын
@@Rob-fx2dw Oh hello again Rob, I see you still have basic facts wrong. Both private banks & govt create currency, actually. There is no reason for Govts to sell bonds, unless to benefit the usually very wealthy people or organizations that buy them. Bank of Japan has almost zero interest on their bonds......they still have currency to spend. Why do you always seem to be for the WEF types of cronies in the world, Rob?
@pebblepod30
Жыл бұрын
BTW if anyone wants to think Rob has any humility about these questions, just go to Deficit Owls & see him argue, then delete his comments instead of a admit he made a mistake. Never changes his mind on anything, that I have ever seen in the years he has been trying to vilify he very things that could help our society, instead of elites.
@pebblepod30
Жыл бұрын
@@Rob-fx2dw I note you changed the subject too. The topic was the Buckaroo, not normal fiat.
@kolober2045
Жыл бұрын
I've only watched a few presentations on MMT, but most of them start with the assumption that MMT is true and a good thing. I like that the interviewer here comes across as skeptical, putting the interviewee in a position of having to defend MMT against skepticism. The arguments presented by the interviewee feel more grounded.
@SinistralEpoch
9 ай бұрын
When done correctly, I think critical engagement in interviews is the best way to handle it. This doesn't come off adversarial, but skeptical. And there's an important difference. Ideas should always be challenged, but you can't challenge an idea correctly if you're not actually *engaging* with the idea honestly in the first place. That said, I agree.
@dougsheldon5560
Жыл бұрын
You're giving the electorate WAY more credit than it deserves.
@donkeybus
4 ай бұрын
And the fed....
@pauldandurandboots
Жыл бұрын
Great interview and I'm learning more about MMT and it's changing my understanding of macro economics and how money really works. I hope Dr. Schasfoort brings on Dr. Dirk Ehnts to discuss how money really works in the EU market. I learned a lot from a podcast interview with him (titled "Dirk Ehnts: Do Markets Control Our Politics?"). It would be great to hear Joeri and Dirk speak together about the money situation in the EU.
@HenriettaKerr-g1u
8 күн бұрын
Lopez Patricia Taylor Kenneth Thomas Richard
@SherwoodBurke-g9s
15 күн бұрын
Walker Christopher Lopez Laura Anderson Timothy
@elliottmcintyre9092
9 ай бұрын
So a currency is really a tax credit
@jaege411
Жыл бұрын
I would love to hear the statement made at @10:47 expanded on. He just slipped it in there, but it seems to be a completely and obviously false statement "In a non-monetary system, you wouldn't have people looking for paid work at all." Does this just mean, without a monetary system, the only way to trade is through barter? If we all traded in Bitcoin, would that be considered a monetary system, or no?
@BarrySlisk
11 ай бұрын
One could be paid in potatoes, so yeah, that sounds like a BS statement.
@PreferablyBiased
7 ай бұрын
Austrian economics actually has a theory on where the price level derives from
@timemanagementisinvesting
Жыл бұрын
What’s the relationship between interest rates and trade deficits?
@yasirpanezai5690
10 ай бұрын
Hi
@MaudWinston-t8n
15 күн бұрын
Harris Jose Lopez Shirley Davis Kenneth
@Sam-tb9xu
11 ай бұрын
His sequence assumes people will pay taxes without any gvt employees to enforce tax payment…am I missing something?
@customersupport9055
Жыл бұрын
Why do we chairs for social security and other tax based funded programs if taxes don’t matter when it comes to gov spending. Seems like a redundant position?
@cortomaltese5038
6 ай бұрын
Value of desired work (product, sevices) is captured in some sort of money. Paper money or gold. If one side is inflated it looses its value. Spain in 16tn century is a good example with all its silver and gold from S. America. Then Weimar Germany 1930s or Yugoslavia are excellent examples of hyperinflation. US has trust of ALL the World as SAFE haven and happy to invest and store money there plus US exports in crude oil, gas, wheat, corm, soybean, military products, WALLSTREET FEES etc.
@UlaanBaatuur
Жыл бұрын
Great conversation, learned a lot.
@bernardmccole3215
6 ай бұрын
Soooo...people work to pay taxes...hmm....not to live and survive. What about people that don't ever work and don't want to work... I get it that we technically can't go bankrupt but what should we spend money on? does it matter?
@NickApex
2 ай бұрын
The interchangeable word for monopoly here, is slavery.
@henrytan5707
3 ай бұрын
MMT or not mmt, the fact is that money can be totally unnecessary for an economy to work, but with money the economy can operate at a higher rate, ie. the much higher speed of exchanges of goods and services.
@TheCommonS3Nse
Жыл бұрын
I would like to hear him discuss Anwar Shaikh’s critique. If you guarantee jobs in your economy at a certain rate of reimbursement, you are artificially limiting your reserve army of labor and will therefore see wages rise (why would I work for a demanding employer for $15/hr when I can work the gov job carefree for the same amount? Therefore the employers will have to outbid the gov for workers, hence wages rise), which reduces profits and makes your country less appealing for investment. That limits your growth, which causes inflation. I’d like to know if he has a good answer for this dilemma, because I can see the merit in that argument.
@josiasnkwana9282
11 ай бұрын
The scenario depends on the needs and resources of the economy, if the govt jobs increase the productivity of the country that's a win and good incentive to invest Otherwise your conclusion happens. Hiring almost everyone is not a bad thing, the problem arises when they are hired into producing something the economy doesn't need which results in wastage n higher wages to inflation.
@mensrea1251
7 ай бұрын
“That limits your growth, which causes inflation” I don’t think that’s a statement that can always be true. I mean Japan exists right? Or am I missing something?
@davidwilkie9551
8 ай бұрын
Relative-timing ratio-rates Perspective of Logarithmic Time makes "modern, money and theory" definitions all Vapourware, thought experimentation for Analysts.
@davidwilkie9551
8 ай бұрын
Must admit to being a slow (un)learner, because it's obvious that when you are not working in the national system of Provisioning, money is meaningless fiat, not a measuring value of the process of living, which is why land areas on which we live and sometimes grow food are critical to the Common Good.., "economics". If the Authorities have Supreme Court confidence in their minds, that the confrontational businesses of administering force of will by Commandments and use of violence, then there's the self-defining explanation of Virtual Work, ..that the benefits of a society are earned by working in the system and willingly contributed to, (which is mostly political propaganda but true in the degree of conformity/compliance with acknowledged laws).
@danielhutchinson6604
9 ай бұрын
Mosler implies that Capitalism works. 62% of respondents reported they are incapable of financial stability in any Pay period. That number appears to indicate a majority of Citizens of the USA do not seem to feel that Capitalism works. Like all Economists the idea that Capital is essential for their economic survival, seems to influence their point of view. Without it where would economists be?
@mokawi
7 ай бұрын
In "normal" social science, I don't think you can get away with putting so much on common sense, and coercing your audience into believing you by implying that anyone who disagrees is an idiot. You have to establish causality. I don't care what you think about me, I care about the facts.
@davidwilkie9551
8 ай бұрын
If the world had known by a study of the environmental conditions at Fukushima that Tsunami had washed away the entire hinterland up to the level of the flood levels of previous events, (and they did, but chose to do the cheap option of deliberate ignorance), then taking the Engineering warning to shield the backup systems with tanks above the flood level would have been vastly cheaper than doing the proper design. The persistence of Dark Money dominance over adoption of proper Engineering Design of Nuclear Power Generation in general, is still killing millions. This is a global ecosystem Provisioning strategy that is well aware of the consequences of deliberate ignorance of Mutual Respect and Protection. Because the Return Times of known catastrophic destruction are never precise, only absolutely accurate in potential possibilities, opportunistic predators confuse and conflate the eventual known disaster with the design requirements of avoiding or alleviating it.
@coonhound_pharoah
9 ай бұрын
"The idea that deficits don’t matter for countries that can borrow in their own currency I think is just wrong." ~Jay Powell, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States of America
@ДмитрийВербицкий-у7д
25 күн бұрын
Moore Thomas Thompson Helen Young Barbara
@PabloTBrave
7 ай бұрын
What about all the unemployed people whos only "income" is the benefits, they pay very little tax and the tax they pay is givem by the government . Sime of soad unemploed actually looking work others have no internet in work at all.
@viorelgheorghe9772
9 ай бұрын
I’m getting so bored, is these a critic of Capitalism or something like that? What is these modern theory that these guy is promoting? Some hunter gandering, or I give you apples you give me potatoes? Some North Korea, Venezuela tip economy? Are we going to live in caves?
@livingsoilharvest
7 ай бұрын
Hard to watch. Every time you tried to summarize to see if you understood what he was saying he'd cut you off and repeat something he already said.
@joseftaghizadeh8655
8 ай бұрын
US goverment don't print dollar.Private owned FED print dollar from nothing and lends with interest to US gorenment and people pay stat dept interest by taxes.In this case people and government are dependent of those print dollar.Dollar is world money then people of world are alt so depndent of those print dollar from theen air.If US stat had printed dollar why is us stat 34 trillion dollar in dept? It should be lender instead.
@hernanmurua8088
11 ай бұрын
You are wrong. Bukaroo coins are not equivalente to production there are no transactions on Bukaroos, if someone starts working 1 Bukaroo value hours and sells for 100 US a Bukaroo for someone that needs it, then you have inflation working.
@Rob-fx2dw
Жыл бұрын
False information from Mosler again. Very poor observation by him. Tax liabilities are not capable of creating wealth or putting a value on anything. Why ? Firstly value does not come from something itself or from moving or exchanging one thing from the legal possession of one person or entity to another which is what taxes do by moving money from one ownership to another. His "buckeroo" is only of value because of the education that it enable students to get. Without that access to get educated by the university the buckeroos are worthless no matter how many there are.
@jbwentworthe6082
Жыл бұрын
Central Planning has never ended well for the man who would live "Free". If a man were only his "stomach" these ideas would suit the creature - keeping him safe and corralled. Fortunately, (or not so), there is another dimension to a man's existence - for that, "Buckaroo Bucks" just won't cut it ! Still, the conversation is appreciated - thank you. Let's hope the Republic is still standing long after the MMT'rs have disappeared into the sunset.
@Alex-fm5ke
Жыл бұрын
That’s why you have the means of production owned by the workers
@ast453000
Жыл бұрын
Lack of central planning has never ended well for anyone. That's why people have always banded together to form societies with governments. As for the Republic, it has always operated on MMT principles, just like any other country. The USA literally wouldn't exist if hadn't been able to print money to pay the Revolutionary Soldiers :)
@diggernash1
11 ай бұрын
Paper money printed during the revolution created great conflict following the war and contributed to the failure of the Articles of Confederation.
@BarrySlisk
11 ай бұрын
@@ast453000 Well governments used to mainly be about justice and stuff like that, not planning the entire economy.
@ast453000
11 ай бұрын
@@BarrySlisk Like, how far back are you talking about? The Romans planned their economy. So did the Egyptians. So did the Sumerians. Literally the first civilizations planned their economy. What are you talking about?
@eightyfiv32
7 ай бұрын
I watched throught it all yet I am more cunfused than when i came in. Still dont get the clear picture what MMT is. Makes no sense to me.
@kennethisaac233
11 ай бұрын
I hope you see this question, how does Bitcoin, as a currency get its value?
@renaudfilippi2599
7 ай бұрын
Stupidity and criminals who needs It on internet ?
@kennethisaac233
7 ай бұрын
@@renaudfilippi2599 I was thinking it was bcoz it is tied to the dollar
@inkacolasinazucar6495
2 ай бұрын
How does he look so young at 73 that's the most important question
@Georgggg
Жыл бұрын
Thats the other side of overloaded overcomplicated term - coin. Deal with it. It is intrinsically flawed. Good things are never so compliated. Only scam ones.
@Rob-fx2dw
11 ай бұрын
Mosler says at 35:55 "The currrency value is defined by what the government says is the tax liability". Absolutely WRONG and proven so by the fact that the currency's value became Zero in the countries where massive inflation made the currency worthless despite taxes being collected. Some examples are Zimbabwe, Hungary, the Weimar republic. Even their own governments abandoned their worthless currency.
@trixn4285
11 ай бұрын
The government defines its value in terms of what the government pays in order to get the currency. Of course it does not set prices for what else can be privately exchanged but nobody claimed that to begin with. You are again fighting a straw man you put up yourself. And weimar did not abandone a national currency all together, they did a currency reform. And they kept collecting taxes in the currency at all times.
@Rob-fx2dw
11 ай бұрын
@@trixn4285 You don't connect financial things very well in your head. If the government hasa tax of 25% then by MMT theory it issues a dollar the 25% tax would make it worth $0.25 . So effectively it would always be always going broke. But of course the reality is all money of the country is fiat credit money and government does not issue the money at all. It borrows money and taxes the private sector to get the private sector's money which the banks ptivate banks have created. You say the Weimar did not abandon a national currency at all. What about Zimbabwe and Hungary and others who did abandon their currency entirely.
@Rob-fx2dw
11 ай бұрын
@@trixn4285 You say the Weimar id not abandon their currency - OK . The reality is they exchanged it at a rate of One Billion marks for one Rentenmark. So the how much did the tax make every mark which earlier exchanged with the UK pound at 98 marks to the pound in 1919. In 1922 it was 461,468 for one British pound. So what part of the value did the tax put on the mark ?
@Rob-fx2dw
11 ай бұрын
@@trixn4285 Your reply is so absurd that it is laughable. Firstly- The reality is nothing can make itself anything other than it is by exchange form on person to another. So tax can't put value into anything because it is merely exchanged and never becomes worth anything else by mere exchange. Secondly the term 'value' does not mean anything other than buying power of something else.
@trixn4285
11 ай бұрын
@@Rob-fx2dw Look Rob, I know you are a troll on the mission to comment nonsense under every video about MMT on the internet. You make absolutely no sense at all and you still do not know even the basics of MMT or macro economics in general. Your comments generally make no sense, show a lack of knowledge about MMT and macroeconomics and you are very stubborn and unable to follow any argument. You have proven this over and over in hundreds of comments you wrote under basically every MMT video there is on YT. So it is completely pointless to debate you. I don't know many people that are so hopelessly lost as you. If you genuinely listened to all the videos you commented you should by now know the answer to all the silly questions you repeatedly ask. And the reason some countries are dollarized is foreign debt, import dependence on basic goods and the unability to enforce taxes due to political struggles and corruption. Nobody ever said that being a developing country and running an own currency is easy. But that does not invalidate anything said in this video. Also MMTers do not say that there can't be inflation. But that is usually also caused by again foreign debt, import dependence, war, political crisis, supply shocks in general. It is NOT caused by the government investing in streets, schools and the like and it is not caused by the government deficit.
@bigbubba4314
9 ай бұрын
When something does not work consistently, it isn’t misunderstood, it is incorrect. Go see what Milton Friedman has to say
@jbyrd655
10 ай бұрын
Certainly mmt is mesunderstood by these guys. sucks to be you (11L:34)
@againstthestate
10 ай бұрын
11:20 why is it when people discuss unemployment they never ask "at what price"? I mean if I was talking about some steel that wouldn't sell, the price is the first thing you would ask about.
@alesh2275
10 ай бұрын
Irritating that too much talking over is happening, mostly by the guest.
@hunglukenguyen
Жыл бұрын
Real incomes go down compared to home prices, please focus on that and this guy ignores that topic
@bonanzatime
10 ай бұрын
The Father of DooDoo💩 Economics. ..There he is folks! Take a good look.
@gwho
Жыл бұрын
i like how the creator is pretty humble about his theory. like a true academic. the opposite of Paul Krugman's attitude.
@Ggianni10
Жыл бұрын
People who have experience risking their own money in financial markets tend to be more humble about their theories lol
@DoneDealAC
Жыл бұрын
Ok, he is still wrong and krugman is still right. MMT = 🗑
@againstthestate
10 ай бұрын
10:19 in fact most of the money used in the united states during the 18th century was spanish gold coins
@ck88777
Жыл бұрын
the way he interrupts/talks over you constantly and doesnt fully listen to the questions is extremely annoying ive liked his lectures in the past but this is insufferable
@maxmustermann5932
Жыл бұрын
I think this is caused by high latency on their connection.
@PoliticalEconomy101
Жыл бұрын
No, ive had personal convos with him. He usually answers questions with a riddle or koan. They guy is somewhat autistic I think.
Пікірлер: 673