Comments by "" (@blackbulldog4897) on "Modern monetary theory is not a policy" video.

As well as reading the core literature, I'd say the best and most accessibe way to understand that JG is in fact central to MMT and how it works is to read Bill Mitchell's "Essence of MMT"; it's a three part series.
3
@adenwellsmith6908 really, you are still using "the dog ate my homework excuse" 😂 If you had read the core literature and understood it then you wouldn't be posting this guff, so ... Go and read the core literature and, if you can understand it, you'll realise what nonsense you've been posting. Come back when you've read it 👍
2
@count-beany Sure, there are other factors involved but interest rate setting is a fundamental, it's the mechanism used to attempt to regulate the money supply and cause enough unemployment for any inflationary pressure to be relieved. I'd recommend reading the core literature to get a fuller understanding of what MMT actually is then, once you have the basics, maybe read Bill Mitchell's Essence of MMT series and see what you think.
2
@count-beany the MMT framework asserts the base rate should always be set to zero (or close to). The MPC is a nonsense, it's completely under the control of govt; it's govts way of being able to point and say "it wasn't us, it was them".
2
@katiecannon8186 yes, my fellow traveller, I agree. Many don't realise that private sector credit creation is a political choice.
2
@katiecannon8186 potentially, yes but I don't think we're allowed to say that are we.
2
The Act you are looking for is the The Exchequer and Audit Departments Act 1866, sections 13 & 15 are the important ones. To answer your second question, government doesn't "have to auction Gilts", it chooses to. Gilts aren't a funding operation, they are a refinancing operation.
2
@colincampbell4261 this is correct, it's a direct transfer from those under a certain age to those over a certain age.
2
I suggest you read the core literature to gain a basic understanding of the subject under discussion.
1
@adenwellsmith6908 ok, which part(s) of the core literature are you getting the "you cannot use printing" etc. from? Double the money supply you say, ok can you explain how that would happen and any timescale you are referring to?
1
@adenwellsmith6908 I see no explanation which answers the questions I asked above.
1
You could always try reposting to answer the questions I asked.
1
@adenwellsmith6908 "All deleted" 😂 No chance of reposting then? Please come back when you can answer the simple questions I asked. Until then I advise you to spend some time researching the subject; less chance of you having to rely on the "dog ate my homework" excuse.
1
Richard doesn't understand MMT and he doesn't understand the fundamental role the Job Guarantee has within it. The whole point of the JG is to drop the moronic idea of trying to run an economy on the price of money and shift it to anchoring it to the price of labour.
1
@garethmills105 Except of course for ZIRP and JG.
1
@garethmills105 which proponents are you referring to? As I said, the JG is core to the framework; without it, it's not MMT. Of course you can disagree, we should have reasonable, informed debate. However, you cannot simply say JG isn't required and still call it MMT. If you do the above you are doing what Richard does; he gives his own version, which is absolutely fine but he shouldn't pitch it as MMT, he should pitch it as RM-MMT (Richard Murphy's version of MMT). There's nothing stopping you doing the same but for clarity you should call it GM-MMT. Btw, have you read the core literature?
1
@garethmills105 Sorry, to be clear, we only disagree on what you should call your opinions; you should call them GM-MMT as they are what you believe MMT to be, not what it actually is. Which parts of MMT do you believe are theoretical?
1
 @adenwellsmith6908 The DMO refinances any govt debt and converts it into a tradeable commodity.
1
The Job Guarantee is fundamental to MMT. If you say it isn't then I'm afraid you simply don't understand what MMT is. That being the case, what you are putting forward here is RMMT - Richard Murphy's M
1
@garethmills105 The statement: "You can tell how much someone understands about MMT by how often they talk about the Job Guarantee (buffer stock employment framework, "superior to using unemployment as a disciplinary force against inflation") and their understanding of it's centrality to the entire framework" ... is a truism. It seems you haven't read any of the core literature or, if you have, you haven't understood it. You refer to MMT as a "theory"; it's no such thing, the descriptive portion is observable fact. Often and mistakenly, MMT is separated into two parts (and the "lens"); the descriptive part (how govt fiscal ops work in fiat, floating currency regimes) & what some mistakenly call the "prescriptive" part (two linked policies, the JG and ZIRP). The descriptive part is correct, the prescriptive part fixes the macro problems. Please, read the core literature. Once you have, you can move on to Bill Mitchell's 3 part series "Exploring the Essence of MMT", the second part of which will help to educate you on the centrality of the JG to MMT.
1
@garethmills105 It's absolutely correct. The statement "You tell how much someone understands MMT by how much they talk about the JG (buffer stock employment framework)and it's centrality to the framework." is a truism. Often, and mistakenly (I suppose for simplicity), MMT is separated into two parts (without mentioning the "lens"); the descriptive part and the prescriptive part. The descriptive part is not theoretical, it's observable fact so why are you referring to "the theory"? The descriptive part explains how govt fiscal ops work in a fiat, floating currency regime; the prescriptive part explains the two mandatory policies, the JG and ZIRP. The prescriptive part is absolutely core to the entire framework.
1
@garethmills105 you are doing exactly as Richard does; you are telling everyone what you think MMT is, not what it actually is. See the truism I posted earlier. It's simple, if you don't understand the centrality of the JG to MMT then you simply don't understand MMT 🤷
1
@malcolmbarnett8470 taxation performs multiple roles but the primary one is to free up resources for govt to use i.e. drain enough demand in the private sector to free up the resources govt wants to use. For
1
@wsollers1 what, in your opinion, is the split between govt £s and bank credit £s in terms of % and, upon what do you base your assertion?
1
@garethmills105 can you explain why the descriptive part of MMT doesn't describe the reality of govt fiscal ops in a fiat, floating currency regime?
1
How do you think government "creates increased money"?
1
@LurchLures The relation between inflation and money growth for low-inflation countries (on average less than 10% per year over 30 years) is weak, if not absent” (De Grauwe and Polan 2005: 256).
1
@LurchLures You are welcome. I try to keep things civil. If you read the research you will understand the 10% point. You are correct about CB's, the BofE is wholly owned by the UK govt; the Bank of England Act 1998 lays out which is master and which servant. Our government is self funding, it issues new £s into existence (it's the only entity legally allowed to do so), via it's own bank, every time it buys something/spends. Issuing HMT securities is a purely political choice which happens ex-post of spending. These securities convert a static, non tradable entity into a tradeable commodity at a higher rate. These securities are not a funding operation, they are a refinancing operation. “The use of quantity of money as a target has not been a success,” concedes the grand old man of conservative economics. “I’m not sure I would as of today push it as hard as I once did. Simon London, “Lunch with the FT – Milton Friedman,” Financial Times (7 June 2003)
1
@pauldandurandboots The govt should never compete with the private sector for the resources it wants to use.
1
The JG is not a policy choice, it's fundamental to MMT.
1