This is a great explanation. It's a great way to introduce MMT that really contextualizes the logic. Rohan does a great job.
@stavroskarageorgis4804
Жыл бұрын
Rohan Grey is a TREASURE!
@waynemcmillan5970
6 жыл бұрын
Excellent talk Rohan
@jorgeamar1204
6 жыл бұрын
Brilliant as usual Rohan
@georgemusa7980
3 жыл бұрын
you probably dont give a shit but if you guys are bored like me atm you can stream all the latest series on InstaFlixxer. Been binge watching with my brother during the lockdown :)
@rexbowie5048
3 жыл бұрын
@George Musa definitely, I have been using InstaFlixxer for years myself :D
@thomasd2444
5 жыл бұрын
0:23:33 - Rethinking Economics is WAY OVERDUE 0:24:18 - Money Is Power (Politics) How ($) Improves Macroeconomic 0:27:00 - Know the How to Know the How-To 0:27:30 - Starting Point 0:28:30 - 1930's Question : Why persistent private sector unemployed people? ___________ General Equilibrium Theory says Employment Self-Adjusts 0:29:05 - Politics = Visible Hand to Help Adjust Employment ___________ If Private Sector cannot demand Full Employment then Public CAN 0:30:00 - UNCERTAINTY causes rational Micro-behavior which disrupts Macro 0:31:04 - PRIVATE SECTOR STRUCTURAL SAVING SURPLUS 0:32:18 - FULL EMPLOYMENT 0:34:00 - Government Retirement Savings Plans 0:35:00 - Private & Public 0:35:55 - Political Decision For Employment Level 0:36:40 - Public Sector 0:37:40 - How to activate Excess Private Sector Savings ? 0:38:18 - More Public Expenditures or Less Taxes 0:39:05 - Savings = Deficit 0:39:38 - What about Money and Money within M M T ? 0:40:20 - J.M.K. asked how to increase Investment? A: Reduce borrow Rate. ___________ How lower rate? Way One : Expand supply of ($) 0:40:53 - Europe's Quantitative Easing = Expand ($) Supply --> Lower Interest 0:41:01 - 0:41:31 - The Present-day Economy of the Europe Zone Treaty 0:41:50 - Implications of the EU-TREATY 0:51:17 - Further Restrictions On Euro-Zone Members 0:51:49 - MMT Recommendations to a Coming EU-Treaty . 1. Look after UNEMPLOYMENT, the Budget will look after itself - Keynes, 1933 2. No Pre-Fixed Limits on Budget Deficit, nor Fiscal Policy. 3. A Fiscal Transfer Union within the Euro-Zone is a French Mirage : Unrealistic 4. Establish a National Currencies, perhaps Euro-watching, for International Trade IN ANY CASE RE-GAIN SOVEREIGN MONEY PRINTING RIGHT : Fiscal Policy RE-ESTABLISH EACH NATIONAL RATE OF INTEREST : Monetary Policy AND DO IT YESTERDAY . 0:52:22 - Many Post-Keynesian Model Economist's Suggest 0:52:26 - Two Options w/regard to exchange rate : . 1. OR 2. A Fixed (but adjustable) exchange rate WITH LIMITS on Speculative Capital Flows, a modified ERM2-system In BOTH cases : Limit Surplus (and perhaps deficit) on Payment Balance, Current Acct - Keynes 1942 . 0:52:25 - 0:53:34 - An Up-dated, modern Bretton Woods System 0:53:48 - Predatory Fi-capital (not goods-services capital) speculatively flow ? ___________ Not between 1945 and Collapse of Bretton Woods.
@clarestucki5151
3 жыл бұрын
The world wide "reserve" status of the U.S. dollar, along with the slowdown in the velocity of money due to the pandemic, will permit us to issue gazillions of Fed Res Bank "stimulus" money ("Helicopter Money" as Milton Friedman put it) without immediately causing price inflation, but that will not last . Currency inflation invariably produces price inflation, but not always instantly.
@Rob-fx2dw
4 жыл бұрын
MMT fallacy" - Taxes drive money - REALITY - Taxes do not drive money and failed to do so in all countries where the currency failed to have any value at all and their own governments ditched them. MMT fallacy: - government is the issuer and not the spender of money. REALITY - Government is the FIRST spender of new money from the Federal reserve and CONTINUES to spend that money after they collect it in taxes on the private sector. MMT fallacy:- The government can never go into default because it can print more money to pay it's debts. REALITY - Government spending more and more money to pay for it's debts or obligations will send the currency broke through inflation thus it will default in value on it's debt obligations by repaying in worthless money just like happened tens of times through the last century in other countries. MMT fallacy:- The government issue money first then taxes it back - REALITY: Government does Not issue money. It spends new money first taking real goods and services from the private sector in exchange for that money. MMT fallacy- The government force makes the money valuable. - REALITY- No only goods and services makes the money valuable. The government just takes the goods and services and uses force and money as an intermediary if it can buy real goods and services but the money has no value and governments have abandoned their own money at times because of the lack of it's ability to buy goods and services. It can only do those purchases if the people still accept it. Look at what has happened in ALL of the countries where the government money failed to have any purchasing power despite government taxes.
@thomasd2444
5 жыл бұрын
0:00:12 - Thorvaldsen Grung Moe Welcome Preview 0:00:17 - Panel To discuss Modern ($) : 1st principle ___________ - What is ($) what is the origin of ($) . In the beginning BIG LOAN . 0:00:35 - Rohan Grey 0:00:44 - modernmoneynetwork.org 0:01:00 - Professor Jesper Jesperson, professor . Book THE MACROECONOMIC METHODOLOGY: A Post Keynesian Perspective . 0:01:25 - John M Keynes : Economics is the science ___________ of thinking in models joined to the art of ___________ of finding models which are relevant to ___________ the contemporary world -- J.M.K. 0:01:38 - Erling Steigum professor 0:02:00 - Rohan Grey 0:03:00 - Modern Money is also a quote from J.M.K. 0:04:14 - Like, "I owe you one." 0:05:15 - 0:06:00 - Dispute resolving ways & means w/o war 0:07:00 - Quantify the personal relationship Quality 0:07:38 - Humans associate to debt instrument 0:08:20 - Arbitrator of harm repudiation, harm remediation 0:08:35 - Arbitrate relationship between Apples & Oranges 0:08:50 - . The politics of Numbers Double Entry Politics . 0:09:00 - 0:09:30 - Time/energy too save ($) milk price vs auto price 0:9:53 - Historic competition for debt arbitrator . The Creator ; The First Cause Book DEBT : 5000 Year Book Forgive Them Their Debts . 0:10:35 - 0:11:15 - Obligation 0:12:00 - Slogan : Taxes Drive Currency movement __________ (Current = electron flow T = F * W {lol}) 0:13:44 - The unit of account 0:14:49 - 0:15:20 - Why give only to receive 0:16:17 - An added violence in the mutual need equation 0:16:50 - 0:17:00 - Keep the violent in mind a moment . ___________ 10 AM TUE 05 FEB 2019 - Yep . 0:17:20 - 0:17:50 - 0:18:00 0:19:15 - Unemployment is a monetary phenomenon 0:19:30 - Fish not unemployed 0:19:35 - Slaves not seeking more work 0:19:45 - Unemployment defined as people wanting to earn ($) ___________ and not being able to get ($) is an economy designed ___________ with a problem to be solved 0:19:53 - Who designed the Monetary Economic Model System ___________ which has the problem to be solved of Unemployment? 0:20:03 - Second, who within the Monetary Economic Model System ___________ creates ($) 0:20:09 - Many departments / agencies / institutions / offices / kiosks 0:21:00 - 0:21:33 - Currency Issuer has issues different from User Issues 0:21:40 - The 'Give-er' & The 'Give-ee' 0:21:50 - Political Sovereignty to GIVE 0:22:35 - EURO 0:22:58 - Have not talked about . . .
@liamwalsh983
3 жыл бұрын
Beginnings of another period of humans trying to design a perfect system for society which will end up in disaster
@Rob-fx2dw
4 жыл бұрын
It is poor thinking and a very poor argument that Taxes do Not drive the value of a currency and the claims that it does are totally false because historical facts show this to be true. Only a fool argues against historical facts. If the taxes did drive value into money then in all of the countries where the sovereign money failed totally through inflation there were taxes and despite those taxes the money fell in value to become utterly worthless. So worthless that their own governments ditched their own currency. What more proof could anyone want? That fact makes the whole argument that MMT bases itselfs pivotal understand and bases much of their understanding of how the economy works to be utterly false.
@mpmitchell2112
5 жыл бұрын
Yeah lets centrally plan the monetary system... what could go wrong?
@AlanDownunder
5 жыл бұрын
It is centrally planned. By institutional structures, legislated constraints and personnel selection of treasury secretaries and central bankers. Let’s not pretend either that it is unplanned or that the answer is less rather than better planning.
@mpmitchell2112
5 жыл бұрын
@@AlanDownunder "It is centrally planned. By institutional structures, legislated constraints and personnel selection of treasury secretaries and central bankers." Yeah, exactly. that's why we have so many economic problems. "Let’s not pretend either that it is unplanned or that the answer is less rather than better planning." the answer is to stop centrally planning the monetary system and let the market do that. Just like we would have an unmitigated disaster if the government centrally planned food production, its a disaster when they centrally plan the monetary system for all the same economic reasons. there is always "planning". the question is, who plans? does the government plan everyones life or do they plan their own lives? let the market "plan" the monetary system.
@Achrononmaster
5 жыл бұрын
MMT or MCT are not proposing central planning you utter dorks. 97% of money is credit money, not centrally planned spending. Deficit spending is also not necessarily central planning, it is budget allocation decided democratically. Central planning is when you do not have a proper democracy, and instead an unelected central committee. The USA is closer to that than you might like to think, it is a sham of a democracy.
@mpmitchell2112
5 жыл бұрын
@@Achrononmaster I'm talking about centrally planning the quantity of base money in the economy, which is exactly what you guys are talking about doing. That IS central planning. It makes no difference whether the central entity controlling the amount of base money is democratic, dictatorial, or composed of a committee of smurfs, its central planning either way. If some democratic committee decides something that is binding for the rest of society (for instance, the quantity of base money) , then that aspect of society is, by definition, centrally planned. The problems of central planning to not magically go away because the central planning committee is ran democratically. you guys also seem to be arrogating to yourselves (if you had your way) a compulsory monopoly over the monetary system instead of letting market participants freely choose what they want to use as a medium of exchange.
@thadtheman3751
9 ай бұрын
@@mpmitchell2112 Not mention grey-market currency such as Bitcoin, and Black-market currency ( which stymied a lot of Soviet block countries to plkan their own economies ).
@vitarkamudra4548
2 жыл бұрын
MMT is the most naiive fairy tale I have ever seen. But what surprises me is how many people in ties and suits and glasses have fallen for it.
@Rob-fx2dw
2 жыл бұрын
I agree totally. It's rubbish - But at least it proves one thing - Someone wearing a suit or having a university qualification as some of these guys have is not necessarily any indication they are smart !!
@AnthonyTolhurst-dw1nc
7 ай бұрын
99% will have none. OK?
@se7ensnakes
5 жыл бұрын
John Kenneth Galbraith once wrote “The study of money, above all other fields in economics, is one in which complexity is used to disguise truth or to evade truth, not to reveal it.” I think of this when I think of MMT. They appear to de-emphasize where most of the money is created. Private commercial banks create most of the money we use. On one hand the MMT crowd acknowledges that Banks do not lend from deposits. They acknowledge private bank endogenous money. But then they claim that "THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS WHERE THE MONEY COMES FROM" and follow with a de-emphasis in the endogenous money that private banks create. When we actually look at data we see the the M0 (which is government created) and the M2 (if you subtract 1.70) you find the endogenous money that the bank created. Are they trying to explain this difference using the Fractional Reserve Lending money because that was debunk decades ago? I believe that MMT is another ideology meant to confuse the public. They are paid shills to misinform and keep people off the track to what is really happening. So what is really happening? Bank of America et al are creating over 90% of the money stock with absolutely no supervision from the Federal Government. This is highly illegal as the constitution gives only the congress the power to manage the nation's money supply. Please refer to article 1 section 8 clause 5.
@creighgordon2898
5 жыл бұрын
The Federal Government's role in the private banking system is often misconstrued as a money-creating "privilege" granted by the Government to the private banking system. There have been attempts to argue that money-creating should be retained as a public function (see positivemoney.org, monetary.org, monetaryalliance.org) and that granting such a right to private banks is illegitimate, exploitative, and unnecessary. What the private banking system does is extend credit. It could, would, and historically has done that without any Government involvement at all. When the private banking system extends credit, it does so on a fractional reserve basis. Essentially, fractional reserve allows a bank to "lend" the same money to more than one borrower (because doing so multiplies the interest it can collect). A bank can get away with this because--dirty little secret--the money it "lends" rarely leaves the banking system; it just lands somewhere else in the banking system. In the course of a day, a bank will "lend" a bunch of funds which wind up as deposits in another bank; during the same day other banks "lend" funds which wind up as deposits in the first bank. The banks get together overnight and settle any net differences. If necessary, some interbank borrowing may be involved. We could philosophize as to whether this is "money creation" or not, but private banks clearly create buying power out of thin air with fractional reserve banking, so it's at least some kind of money equivalent or substitute. (It is sometimes referred to in MMT literature as horizontal money, or endogenous money, or bank money.) What is also certain is that all this could, would,and has been done without Government involvement or "privilege". The US banking system exists today as a public-private partnership because a public interest lies in making sure that a supply of credit is available when needed to keep commerce moving smoothly. The Fed ensures this by supplying unlimited liquidity to the banking system at its target interest rate. Liquidity can become a problem for the private banking system because the private banking system's liabilities (deposits, the "money" banks create out of thin air) are ultimately payable in Government dollars, and Government dollars exist in far smaller amounts than outstanding banking system liabilities. The banking system therefore needs a "lender of government dollars of last resort" when liquidity crunches turn into widespread default, as they did regularly before the Federal Reserve System was created in 1913 (And as happened in 1929 when the gold standard tied the Fed's hands). Not surprisingly, the "lender of government dollars of last resort" turns out to be--the Government. In return for backstopping the banking system, the Government naturally imposes restrictions and regulations on credit creation, to ensure the stability and integrity of the system. And when a private bank becomes insolvent, the Government acts to close down its operation with minimal disruption to the wider economy, selling off its assets and assuming its liabilities. The private banking system also is supposed to perform another essential function; evaluating and pricing risk of default at the retail level. Not that the private banking system always does this well; in 2008 it willfully failed to evaluate mortgage risks properly. But if the private banking system was eliminated in favor of direct lending by the Federal Reserve, that function would have to be taken over by the Government. And that's something the Government probably wouldn't do well and shouldn't try doing.
@davidleahy6141
5 жыл бұрын
@@creighgordon2898 Please answer the basic question of who owns the Federal Reserve? I have watched a number of videos that claim this institution was set up by the largest private banks conceived at the Jekyll island secret meeting, and they had deliberately destabilized the banking system prior to 1913 to make this possible. Also President Jackson had previously dissolved an earlier version of a Central bank.
@creighgordon2898
5 жыл бұрын
@@davidleahy6141 It's a little complicated. Commercial banks own stock in the regional Federal Reserve Bank corporate entities and earn a dividend based on that stock ownership, and it is deliberately set up to be independent from political manipulation. But the Federal Reserve system was created by Congressional law, its objectives (low inflation and full employment) are dictated by the government, the important members of the Board of Governors are appointed by the US President, and profits earned by Fed operations including interest earned on Treasury bonds owned by the Fed are returned to the Treasury. I don't think it's right to say that bankers deliberately destabilized the banking system, but they fairly regularly do it nonetheless by making loans that can't be repaid, as they did during the housing bubble. The Panic of 1907, which provided the impetus for the Federal Reserve Act in 1913 was basically the result of large loans made to a copper magnate that went bad, and subsequent fears that depositors would lose their money.
@davidleahy6141
5 жыл бұрын
@@creighgordon2898 I appreciate such a factual and intelligent reply. Could I ask have you read, or heard of this Jekyll island secret meeting, or do you put it in the conspiracy theory basket?
@creighgordon2898
5 жыл бұрын
@@davidleahy6141 Apparently there was a secret meeting that was one of the inputs to what became the Federal Reserve Act.
Пікірлер: 48