The UK #Economy runs on #Profit. The #ProfitLaw ⇓ implies #PublicDeficitIsPrivateProfit. So, #DeficitSpendingMoneyCreation is a #FreeLunch for the #Oligarchy. For #MacroProfit, it does NOT matter whether the #Deficit is caused by green or war spending. ⇒https://t.co/D4B87ZItNf pic.twitter.com/swX8FoxDji
— E.K-H (@AXECorg) January 10, 2024
Showing posts with label Environmental Economics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Environmental Economics. Show all posts
January 10, 2024
Occasional Xs: How it works (CLXXXII)
November 24, 2023
Occasional Xs: The foul spirit of political economics (LV)
#Econ#War
— E.K-H (@AXECorg) November 24, 2023
One has to wonder why you did not propose 'Hey Annalena, stop the war, and let's turn the military budget into a green budget.' You certainly know that war is expensive & bad for #Climate/#Environment. #DeficitSpending for war is NOT for the benefit of #WeThePeople. pic.twitter.com/MkBM4Oh0Pb
May 10, 2023
Occasional Tweets: Deficit-spending/money-creation is always a bad deal for WeThePeople ― to paint it green makes no difference
#PublicDebt increases for 200+ yrs. The 3-sector #ProfitLaw Q≡(G−T)+(I−S)+Yd implies #PublicDeficitIsPrivateProfit. So, #DeficitSpendingMoneyCreation i.e. growing #Debt is a #FreeLunch for the #Oligarchy & a #BadDeal for #WeThePeople. ⇒https://t.co/YnttTKssWs pic.twitter.com/TvKnSuj07E
— E.K-H (@AXECorg) May 10, 2023
April 29, 2023
Occasional Tweets: Fighting global warming with deficit spending is the latest political fraud of economists
#Econ
— E.K-H (@AXECorg) April 29, 2023
The 3-sector #ProfitLaw Q≡(G−T)+(I−S)+Yd implies #PublicDeficitIsPrivateProfit. So, #DeficitSpendingMoneyCreation is a #FreeLunch for the #Oligarchy. Private #FinancialWealth grows with #PublicDebt. Fighting global warming through #DeficitSpending is a political fraud. pic.twitter.com/eHJcb6j8n7
May 22, 2019
MMT and the Green New Deal: Where is the snag? (II)
Comment on Richard Murphy on ‘Growth, MMT and the Green New Deal’
Blog-Reference and Blog-Reference
Strictly speaking, environmental protection is an issue for physicists, chemists, and other scientists. Economists are not scientists because they do not know to this day how the monetary economy works. This does not stop these abysmally incompetent folks from uttering their irrelevant opinion on every issue between heaven and earth.
Richard Murphy claims to have synthesized MMT and GND: “This one takes an explanation because it has become very closely associated with the Green New Deal, which is again at least in part my fault.”
Unfortunately, he gets the economics part of the synthesis badly wrong. In more detail:
1. “Fundamentally it [MMT] suggests that since we came off the gold standard all money is ‘fiat’ currency It’s a promise to pay and nothing more. The promise backed by the power of the state to tax.” FALSE! TRUE: The creation and value of money does NOT depend on the taxing power of the State.#1, #2 ,#3, #4
2. “But the state does not need tax to spend. All spending is effectively settled with money created by banks on demand from a customer. It is not paid for out of a stock of savings. And in the case of a government, it is not paid for out of tax received.” FALSE! TRUE: Spending on current output with newly created money is analogous to the spending of the counterfeiter.#5
3. “Instead gov’t spending is paid for by the government asking its bank ― the Bank of England ― to make payment for it. This is exactly akin to the fact that banks do not lend out customer funds: rather they make the funds they lend by a process of double-entry book-keeping and bank deposits are the result of that process, and not where it starts.” FALSE! TRUE: Money is a generalized IOU. Government deposits and overdrafts are produced simultaneously. The government spending is ‘financed’ by overdrafts at the central bank which have to be eventually repaid.#6
4. “The result is that a government with its own central bank and currency can never run short of money ― because it can instruct that it be made at will. And it can never go bankrupt if it borrows solely in its own currency because it can always create the funds to make payment. But of course, it cannot print money at will ― because inflation will result.” FALSE! TRUE: This is the good old Quantity Theory Fallacy. Continuous deficit spending and growing public debt do NOT cause inflation.#7
5. “So action has to be taken to keep inflation under control ― and that is the real purpose of tax in MMT.” FALSE because of 4.
6. “Its secondary purposes are to Ratify the value of money; Redistribute income and wealth; Reprice market failure; Reorganise the economy; Raise representation in a democracy.” FALSE! TRUE: Because of the macroeconomic Profit Law it holds Public Deficit = Private Profit and this means that the lethal effect of MMT policy is on distribution and that it secures ― intentionally or unintentionally does not matter ― the self-alimentation of the Oligarchy. Nothing could be more anti-democratic than MMT policy.
The claim of MMTers that a Green New Deal can be realized at any time by deficit spending is misleading at best. Technically, of course, there is no problem. However, as a matter of principle, any Green New Deal can be realized with a balanced budget. But in the MMT scheme of things, a balanced budget is something for the Swabian housewife and permanent deficit spending is the prerogative and duty of the Sovereign State.
The point is that MMTers are not so much interested in how the government’s budget is allocated but that the government runs a deficit because it is the deficit as such that produces the macroeconomic profit for the Oligarchy.#8
MMT is NOT science but political agenda pushing in a social/environmental bluff package. MMT and GND together are the dream team for deceiving WeThePeople for the benefit of the Oligarchy.#9
Egmont Kakarot-Handtke
#1 The creation and value of money and near-monies
#2 MMT, money, value, and transcendental Capitalism
#3 The canonical macroeconomic model
#4 MMT: fundamentally false
#5 How counterfeiters save America with an extra profit and make WeThePeople pay for it
#6 How to pay for the war and to be bamboozled by economists
#7 Settling the MMT―Inflation issue for good
#8 MMT and the promotion of Wall Street's idea of social policy
#9 Just one more day: How deficit-spending postpones the breakdown of Capitalism
Immediately preceding
Related 'MMT and the Green New Deal: Where is the snag? (I)' and 'Economists: Trolls with a mortarboard' and 'The half-truths and half-falsehoods of MMT' and 'Fraud comes always in the cloak of philanthropy, salvation, or threat of doom' and 'MMT: If you’ve got a problem, I don’t care what it is, let me help' and 'MMT is NOT bold policy but spineless fraud' and 'Econogenics in action'.
Economists fall into two categories: political economists (= agenda pushers) and theoretical economists (= scientists).
As in every walk of life, there is the genuine thing and the lookalike: “A genuine inquirer aims to find out the truth of some question, whatever the color of that truth. ... A pseudo-inquirer seeks to make a case for the truth of some proposition(s) determined in advance. There are two kinds of pseudo-inquirer, the sham, and the fake. A sham reasoner is concerned, not to find out how things really are, but to make a case for some immovably-held preconceived conviction. A fake reasoner is concerned, not to find out how things really are, but to advance himself by making a case for some proposition to the truth-value of which he is indifferent.” (Haack)
Political economists in general, and MMTers, in particular, are fake scientists. MMT is provably false, i.e. materially and formally inconsistent.
When I as an economist say “Economists are not scientists because they do not know to this day how the monetary economy works.” the word “economists” clearly refers to political economists.
Needless to say, the general public does NOT discriminate between P-economists and T-economists and does not realize that P-economics is fake science. The point to grasp is: MMT is proto-scientific garbage and MMTers are agenda pushers for the Oligarchy.
Blog-Reference and Blog-Reference
Strictly speaking, environmental protection is an issue for physicists, chemists, and other scientists. Economists are not scientists because they do not know to this day how the monetary economy works. This does not stop these abysmally incompetent folks from uttering their irrelevant opinion on every issue between heaven and earth.
Richard Murphy claims to have synthesized MMT and GND: “This one takes an explanation because it has become very closely associated with the Green New Deal, which is again at least in part my fault.”
Unfortunately, he gets the economics part of the synthesis badly wrong. In more detail:
1. “Fundamentally it [MMT] suggests that since we came off the gold standard all money is ‘fiat’ currency It’s a promise to pay and nothing more. The promise backed by the power of the state to tax.” FALSE! TRUE: The creation and value of money does NOT depend on the taxing power of the State.#1, #2 ,#3, #4
2. “But the state does not need tax to spend. All spending is effectively settled with money created by banks on demand from a customer. It is not paid for out of a stock of savings. And in the case of a government, it is not paid for out of tax received.” FALSE! TRUE: Spending on current output with newly created money is analogous to the spending of the counterfeiter.#5
3. “Instead gov’t spending is paid for by the government asking its bank ― the Bank of England ― to make payment for it. This is exactly akin to the fact that banks do not lend out customer funds: rather they make the funds they lend by a process of double-entry book-keeping and bank deposits are the result of that process, and not where it starts.” FALSE! TRUE: Money is a generalized IOU. Government deposits and overdrafts are produced simultaneously. The government spending is ‘financed’ by overdrafts at the central bank which have to be eventually repaid.#6
4. “The result is that a government with its own central bank and currency can never run short of money ― because it can instruct that it be made at will. And it can never go bankrupt if it borrows solely in its own currency because it can always create the funds to make payment. But of course, it cannot print money at will ― because inflation will result.” FALSE! TRUE: This is the good old Quantity Theory Fallacy. Continuous deficit spending and growing public debt do NOT cause inflation.#7
5. “So action has to be taken to keep inflation under control ― and that is the real purpose of tax in MMT.” FALSE because of 4.
6. “Its secondary purposes are to Ratify the value of money; Redistribute income and wealth; Reprice market failure; Reorganise the economy; Raise representation in a democracy.” FALSE! TRUE: Because of the macroeconomic Profit Law it holds Public Deficit = Private Profit and this means that the lethal effect of MMT policy is on distribution and that it secures ― intentionally or unintentionally does not matter ― the self-alimentation of the Oligarchy. Nothing could be more anti-democratic than MMT policy.
The claim of MMTers that a Green New Deal can be realized at any time by deficit spending is misleading at best. Technically, of course, there is no problem. However, as a matter of principle, any Green New Deal can be realized with a balanced budget. But in the MMT scheme of things, a balanced budget is something for the Swabian housewife and permanent deficit spending is the prerogative and duty of the Sovereign State.
The point is that MMTers are not so much interested in how the government’s budget is allocated but that the government runs a deficit because it is the deficit as such that produces the macroeconomic profit for the Oligarchy.#8
MMT is NOT science but political agenda pushing in a social/environmental bluff package. MMT and GND together are the dream team for deceiving WeThePeople for the benefit of the Oligarchy.#9
Egmont Kakarot-Handtke
#1 The creation and value of money and near-monies
#2 MMT, money, value, and transcendental Capitalism
#3 The canonical macroeconomic model
#4 MMT: fundamentally false
#5 How counterfeiters save America with an extra profit and make WeThePeople pay for it
#6 How to pay for the war and to be bamboozled by economists
#7 Settling the MMT―Inflation issue for good
#8 MMT and the promotion of Wall Street's idea of social policy
#9 Just one more day: How deficit-spending postpones the breakdown of Capitalism
Immediately preceding
Related 'MMT and the Green New Deal: Where is the snag? (I)' and 'Economists: Trolls with a mortarboard' and 'The half-truths and half-falsehoods of MMT' and 'Fraud comes always in the cloak of philanthropy, salvation, or threat of doom' and 'MMT: If you’ve got a problem, I don’t care what it is, let me help' and 'MMT is NOT bold policy but spineless fraud' and 'Econogenics in action'.
***
ADDENDUM (re. Andrew (Andy) Crow on May 24, submission closed)Economists fall into two categories: political economists (= agenda pushers) and theoretical economists (= scientists).
As in every walk of life, there is the genuine thing and the lookalike: “A genuine inquirer aims to find out the truth of some question, whatever the color of that truth. ... A pseudo-inquirer seeks to make a case for the truth of some proposition(s) determined in advance. There are two kinds of pseudo-inquirer, the sham, and the fake. A sham reasoner is concerned, not to find out how things really are, but to make a case for some immovably-held preconceived conviction. A fake reasoner is concerned, not to find out how things really are, but to advance himself by making a case for some proposition to the truth-value of which he is indifferent.” (Haack)
Political economists in general, and MMTers, in particular, are fake scientists. MMT is provably false, i.e. materially and formally inconsistent.
When I as an economist say “Economists are not scientists because they do not know to this day how the monetary economy works.” the word “economists” clearly refers to political economists.
Needless to say, the general public does NOT discriminate between P-economists and T-economists and does not realize that P-economics is fake science. The point to grasp is: MMT is proto-scientific garbage and MMTers are agenda pushers for the Oligarchy.
May 20, 2019
MMT and the Green New Deal: Where is the snag? (I)
Comment on Randall Wray on ‘How To Pay For The War’
Blog-Reference
MMT claims to be a theory, i.e. a materially/formally consistent mental representation of reality, and NOT a policy.#0 Accordingly, MMT is, as a matter of principle, compatible with any policy: “Consequently, the message from the MMT camp to all those campaigning on progressive … economic issues is that MMT macro is complementary, is something to be added and should prove a boost to whatever the specific issue, e.g., GND, happens to be.”#1
This is correct, MMTers jump on any bandwagon from unemployment to healthcare to a Pony-for-every-American to the Green New Deal.#2 MMTers have a solution to almost all social/economic problems and it consists of deficit-spending/money-creation.#3
The first schizophrenic fact of the matter is, though, that MMTers present themselves as real Progressives ― in contradistinction to the debilitated old Left ― who fight hard for the cause of WeThePeople. The second schizophrenic fact is that MMTers are not so much social activists but agenda pushers for the Oligarchy. On closer inspection, MMT is neither a scientific theory nor a social program but a political fraud.
The first thing to note is that MMTers always mix up Employment Theory and Allocation Theory and Monetary Theory. For the purpose of analysis, these issues have to be treated separately.
Since Keynes, most economists agree that unemployment can be reduced by government deficit spending. However, most economists do not know the macroeconomic Profit Law which entails Public Deficit = Private Profit. By consequence, to fight unemployment with deficit-spending/money-creation means to feed the Oligarchy.#4
Let us assume for a moment that the employment problem has been solved and turn to the question of allocation. So, what is now the answer to the question of how will you pay for the Green New Deal?
The answer is pretty obvious: shift the money from the military budget to the environmental protection budget. This has two effects, (i) because the military is the greater polluter compared to the average household, CO2 emissions and other negative environmental impacts go down immediately as a result, and (ii), neither tax increases nor additional deficit-spending/money-creation is necessary. A quite ordinary re-allocation of the existing budget is sufficient for the implementation of a Green New Deal program.
So, the answer of MMTers that a Green New Deal can be realized at any time by deficit spending is a bit misleading.#5, #6 As a matter of principle, any New Green Deal can be realized with a balanced budget. But in the MMT scheme of things, a balanced budget is something for the Swabian housewife and permanent deficit spending is the prerogative of a Sovereign State.
The point is that MMTers are not so much interested in how the government’s budget is allocated but that the government runs a deficit because it is the deficit as such that produces the macroeconomic profit for the Oligarchy.#7 From a higher standpoint, it is a matter of economic indifference whether a deficit stems from military or environmental spending. This is the reason why MMTers jump on any popular social movement with the well-received message that money is not a problem for a sovereign government because the money-issuer cannot go bankrupt. This is true, of course, but only obfuscates the economic fact that MMT policy amounts to stealth taxation of WeThePeople and a free lunch for the Oligarchy.
Real Progressives would answer the question How are you going to pay for a GND? with Simple, by re-allocating the budget. Phony Progressives answer with Simple, by telling the Central Bank to digitally create some extra money on the government’s account.
MMT is NOT science but political agenda pushing in a social cloak. MMT and GND together are the dream team for a financial coup of mind-blowing proportions in the tradition of John Law.#8
Egmont Kakarot-Handtke
#0 “MMT should not been seen as a regime that you ‘apply’ or ‘switch to’ or ‘introduce’. As I have noted regularly, MMT is rather a lens which allows us to see the true (intrinsic) workings of the fiat monetary system. … The point is that MMT is agnostic about policy bar its preference for an employment buffer rather than an unemployment buffer to discipline inflation. … In general, it makes no sense to talk about an “MMT-type prescription” or an “MMT solution”. To make that MMT understanding operational in a policy context, a value system or ideology must be introduced. MMT is not intrinsically ‘Left-leaning’.” (Bill Mitchell)
#1 Twitter David Merrill Message from the MMT camp
#2 MMT: If you’ve got a problem, I don’t care what it is, let me help
#3 Twitter William J. Luther, MMT in a nutshell
#4 Keynes, Lerner, MMT, Trump, etc. and exploding profit
#5 How counterfeiters save America with an extra profit and make WeThePeople pay for it
#6 How to pay for the war and to be bamboozled by economists
#7 MMT and the promotion of Wall Street's idea of social policy
#8 Wikipedia John Law (economist)
Related 'MMT and the Green New Deal: Where is the snag? (II)' and 'Full employment through the price mechanism' and 'Economics debate ― just another variant of hardcore wrestling' and 'MMT Progressives: stupid or corrupt or both?' and 'Deficit-spending/money-creation is always a bad deal for WeThePeople ― to paint it green makes no difference'. For the full-spectrum refutation of MMT see cross-references MMT.
Twitter Nov 10, 2021
Blog-Reference
MMT claims to be a theory, i.e. a materially/formally consistent mental representation of reality, and NOT a policy.#0 Accordingly, MMT is, as a matter of principle, compatible with any policy: “Consequently, the message from the MMT camp to all those campaigning on progressive … economic issues is that MMT macro is complementary, is something to be added and should prove a boost to whatever the specific issue, e.g., GND, happens to be.”#1
This is correct, MMTers jump on any bandwagon from unemployment to healthcare to a Pony-for-every-American to the Green New Deal.#2 MMTers have a solution to almost all social/economic problems and it consists of deficit-spending/money-creation.#3
The first schizophrenic fact of the matter is, though, that MMTers present themselves as real Progressives ― in contradistinction to the debilitated old Left ― who fight hard for the cause of WeThePeople. The second schizophrenic fact is that MMTers are not so much social activists but agenda pushers for the Oligarchy. On closer inspection, MMT is neither a scientific theory nor a social program but a political fraud.
The first thing to note is that MMTers always mix up Employment Theory and Allocation Theory and Monetary Theory. For the purpose of analysis, these issues have to be treated separately.
Since Keynes, most economists agree that unemployment can be reduced by government deficit spending. However, most economists do not know the macroeconomic Profit Law which entails Public Deficit = Private Profit. By consequence, to fight unemployment with deficit-spending/money-creation means to feed the Oligarchy.#4
Let us assume for a moment that the employment problem has been solved and turn to the question of allocation. So, what is now the answer to the question of how will you pay for the Green New Deal?
The answer is pretty obvious: shift the money from the military budget to the environmental protection budget. This has two effects, (i) because the military is the greater polluter compared to the average household, CO2 emissions and other negative environmental impacts go down immediately as a result, and (ii), neither tax increases nor additional deficit-spending/money-creation is necessary. A quite ordinary re-allocation of the existing budget is sufficient for the implementation of a Green New Deal program.
So, the answer of MMTers that a Green New Deal can be realized at any time by deficit spending is a bit misleading.#5, #6 As a matter of principle, any New Green Deal can be realized with a balanced budget. But in the MMT scheme of things, a balanced budget is something for the Swabian housewife and permanent deficit spending is the prerogative of a Sovereign State.
The point is that MMTers are not so much interested in how the government’s budget is allocated but that the government runs a deficit because it is the deficit as such that produces the macroeconomic profit for the Oligarchy.#7 From a higher standpoint, it is a matter of economic indifference whether a deficit stems from military or environmental spending. This is the reason why MMTers jump on any popular social movement with the well-received message that money is not a problem for a sovereign government because the money-issuer cannot go bankrupt. This is true, of course, but only obfuscates the economic fact that MMT policy amounts to stealth taxation of WeThePeople and a free lunch for the Oligarchy.
Real Progressives would answer the question How are you going to pay for a GND? with Simple, by re-allocating the budget. Phony Progressives answer with Simple, by telling the Central Bank to digitally create some extra money on the government’s account.
MMT is NOT science but political agenda pushing in a social cloak. MMT and GND together are the dream team for a financial coup of mind-blowing proportions in the tradition of John Law.#8
Egmont Kakarot-Handtke
#0 “MMT should not been seen as a regime that you ‘apply’ or ‘switch to’ or ‘introduce’. As I have noted regularly, MMT is rather a lens which allows us to see the true (intrinsic) workings of the fiat monetary system. … The point is that MMT is agnostic about policy bar its preference for an employment buffer rather than an unemployment buffer to discipline inflation. … In general, it makes no sense to talk about an “MMT-type prescription” or an “MMT solution”. To make that MMT understanding operational in a policy context, a value system or ideology must be introduced. MMT is not intrinsically ‘Left-leaning’.” (Bill Mitchell)
#1 Twitter David Merrill Message from the MMT camp
#2 MMT: If you’ve got a problem, I don’t care what it is, let me help
#3 Twitter William J. Luther, MMT in a nutshell
#4 Keynes, Lerner, MMT, Trump, etc. and exploding profit
#5 How counterfeiters save America with an extra profit and make WeThePeople pay for it
#6 How to pay for the war and to be bamboozled by economists
#7 MMT and the promotion of Wall Street's idea of social policy
#8 Wikipedia John Law (economist)
Related 'MMT and the Green New Deal: Where is the snag? (II)' and 'Full employment through the price mechanism' and 'Economics debate ― just another variant of hardcore wrestling' and 'MMT Progressives: stupid or corrupt or both?' and 'Deficit-spending/money-creation is always a bad deal for WeThePeople ― to paint it green makes no difference'. For the full-spectrum refutation of MMT see cross-references MMT.
***
Twitter: MMT in a nutshell
Twitter Jun 20
Twitter Jun 20
Twitter Nov 10, 2021
Twitter Jun 29, 2022
February 9, 2019
Fraud comes always in the cloak of charity, salvation, or the threat of doom
Comment on Jacob Weindling on ‘What Is Modern Monetary Theory and Why Is It So Important to the Green New Deal?’*
Blog-Reference
Jacob Weindling asserts: “… the question of … how do you pay for the Green New Deal?’ has already been answered. The HuffPo piece was written by Professor of Economics and Public Policy at Stony Brook University, Stephanie Kelton, who was also the Chief Economist for the Democrats on the U.S. Senate Budget Committee. Yesterday, she posted a thread outlining some legitimate economic questions that MMT claims to answer.” and “The question of how to pay for the Green New Deal is pretty silly when you take a step back and look at the larger issue at hand. Scientists are nearly in unanimous agreement that unless we do something unprecedented in the next twelve years, the Earth will become irreversibly hostile to human life in twenty years, with an estimated cost of $69 trillion to deal with this apocalyptic future.”
Jacob Weindling is either a confused blatherer or a fake Progressive agenda pusher.#1
The answer to the question “How are you going to pay for it” has two progressive answers: the genuine and the fake. The genuine Progressive answers: simple, by cutting military spending,#2 The fake Progressive answers: simple, by deficit-spending/money-creation.
MMTers are fake Progressives. In fact, MMTers are agenda pushers for the Oligarchy. How can one be sure of it?
Economically, there are two questions for government spending (i) on what is the money spent (e.g. (ia) administrative-, (ib) military-, (ic) social budget, etcetera), and (ii) is government spending G less, equal, or greater than taxation T, i.e. (iia) G<T, (iib) G=T, (iic) G>T? Needless to emphasize that these questions are constantly confused, whether intentionally or unintentionally does not matter. The question is further confused by lumping it together with full employment policy.
MMTers claim that the answer to almost all economic/social problems is permanent deficit-spending/money-creation with some caveats with regard to inflation.
Now, MMT policy has one property that makes it disadvantageous for WeThePeople and advantageous for the Oligarchy,#3, #4, #5 i.e. because of the macroeconomic Profit Law it holds Public Deficit = Private Profit. So, no matter how the money is allocated between administrative, military, social, and environmental spending, as long as there is deficit-spending/money-creation the Oligarchy makes a profit equal to the deficit.#6
As a rule of thumb, the financial wealth of the Oligarchy grows in lockstep with the public debt. In other words, the fabulous wealth in the U.S. is the mirror image of fabulous public debt ($21.5 trillion).
No matter what MMTers claim that permanent public deficit spending is good for,#6 it is ultimately good for the permanent self-alimentation of the Oligarchy.
While MMTers have hitherto posed as friendly helpers for the unemployed and socially disadvantaged, they now sell deficit spending as the last hope for saving humanity and the planet.
MMT is proto-scientific garbage and social fraud. This is what economics has been since Adam Smith/Karl Marx. Economics is failed/fake science. The major approaches ― Walrasianism, Keynesianism, Marxianism, Austrianism, MMT ― are mutually contradictory, axiomatically false, materially/formally inconsistent, and all got the foundational concept of the subject matter ― profit ― wrong.
Egmont Kakarot-Handtke
* Paste
#1 MMT Progressives: stupid or corrupt or both?
#2 What the world wants and how to pay for it using military expenditures
#3 How MMT makes everybody happy
#4 MMT, money creation, stealth taxation, and redistribution
#5 Deficit-spending/money-creation is ALWAYS a bad deal for WeThePeople
#6 MMT: If you’ve got a problem, I don’t care what it is, let me help
Related 'The Kelton-Fraud' and 'Down with idiocy!' and 'Stephanie Kelton on how to become fabulously wealthy' and 'MMT sucks' and 'MMTers are NOT Friends-of-the-People'.
Blog-Reference
Jacob Weindling asserts: “… the question of … how do you pay for the Green New Deal?’ has already been answered. The HuffPo piece was written by Professor of Economics and Public Policy at Stony Brook University, Stephanie Kelton, who was also the Chief Economist for the Democrats on the U.S. Senate Budget Committee. Yesterday, she posted a thread outlining some legitimate economic questions that MMT claims to answer.” and “The question of how to pay for the Green New Deal is pretty silly when you take a step back and look at the larger issue at hand. Scientists are nearly in unanimous agreement that unless we do something unprecedented in the next twelve years, the Earth will become irreversibly hostile to human life in twenty years, with an estimated cost of $69 trillion to deal with this apocalyptic future.”
Jacob Weindling is either a confused blatherer or a fake Progressive agenda pusher.#1
The answer to the question “How are you going to pay for it” has two progressive answers: the genuine and the fake. The genuine Progressive answers: simple, by cutting military spending,#2 The fake Progressive answers: simple, by deficit-spending/money-creation.
MMTers are fake Progressives. In fact, MMTers are agenda pushers for the Oligarchy. How can one be sure of it?
Economically, there are two questions for government spending (i) on what is the money spent (e.g. (ia) administrative-, (ib) military-, (ic) social budget, etcetera), and (ii) is government spending G less, equal, or greater than taxation T, i.e. (iia) G<T, (iib) G=T, (iic) G>T? Needless to emphasize that these questions are constantly confused, whether intentionally or unintentionally does not matter. The question is further confused by lumping it together with full employment policy.
MMTers claim that the answer to almost all economic/social problems is permanent deficit-spending/money-creation with some caveats with regard to inflation.
Now, MMT policy has one property that makes it disadvantageous for WeThePeople and advantageous for the Oligarchy,#3, #4, #5 i.e. because of the macroeconomic Profit Law it holds Public Deficit = Private Profit. So, no matter how the money is allocated between administrative, military, social, and environmental spending, as long as there is deficit-spending/money-creation the Oligarchy makes a profit equal to the deficit.#6
As a rule of thumb, the financial wealth of the Oligarchy grows in lockstep with the public debt. In other words, the fabulous wealth in the U.S. is the mirror image of fabulous public debt ($21.5 trillion).
No matter what MMTers claim that permanent public deficit spending is good for,#6 it is ultimately good for the permanent self-alimentation of the Oligarchy.
While MMTers have hitherto posed as friendly helpers for the unemployed and socially disadvantaged, they now sell deficit spending as the last hope for saving humanity and the planet.
MMT is proto-scientific garbage and social fraud. This is what economics has been since Adam Smith/Karl Marx. Economics is failed/fake science. The major approaches ― Walrasianism, Keynesianism, Marxianism, Austrianism, MMT ― are mutually contradictory, axiomatically false, materially/formally inconsistent, and all got the foundational concept of the subject matter ― profit ― wrong.
Egmont Kakarot-Handtke
* Paste
#1 MMT Progressives: stupid or corrupt or both?
#2 What the world wants and how to pay for it using military expenditures
#3 How MMT makes everybody happy
#4 MMT, money creation, stealth taxation, and redistribution
#5 Deficit-spending/money-creation is ALWAYS a bad deal for WeThePeople
#6 MMT: If you’ve got a problem, I don’t care what it is, let me help
Related 'The Kelton-Fraud' and 'Down with idiocy!' and 'Stephanie Kelton on how to become fabulously wealthy' and 'MMT sucks' and 'MMTers are NOT Friends-of-the-People'.
February 7, 2019
Thinking about economic policy for future PM Corbyn
Comment on Richard Murphy on ‘The political economy of Labour’s fiscal rule’
Blog-Reference
What is the unique selling proposition of MMT vis-a-vis good old Keynesianism? Keynesianism stands for temporary deficit spending with budget-balancing over the business cycle, MMT stands for permanent deficit-spending/money-creation.
However, with regard to the current situation in the UK with the interest rate close to the ZLB, this amounts to the same anti-Austerity policy. In practical policy terms, the fuss between Simon Wren-Lewis/Jonathan Portes and Richard Murphy over the relative merits of monetary and fiscal policy seems a bit overblown.
So let us look at politics. For political planers, the main issue is to make provisions for their worst-case scenario that Jeremy Corbyn becomes the next PM. There are two groups who compete for the role of Mr. Corbyn’s economic policy adviser. The Wren-Lewis/Portes group attempts to keep Mr. Corbyn on the old path of monetary/fiscal policy albeit with more active employment and social policy, the Murphy group tries to get a handle on the Treasury/Central Bank for a permanent MMT deficit policy that spends on everything from employment to the NHS to a Green New Deal. The common denominator, though, is to prevent a potential PM Corbyn from pursuing a genuine socialist policy.
Because of Public Deficit = Private Profit, there is some perverse humor in the idea that Mr. Corbyn either adopts a temporary or a permanent free-lunch program for the Oligarchy.#1
Egmont Kakarot-Handtke
#1 Keynes, Lerner, MMT, Trump and exploding profit
Related 'MMT Progressives: The knife in the back of WeThePeople' and 'How Bill Mitchell stalks Jeremy Corbyn' and 'Richard Murphy: the MMT fraudster dressed up as realist' and 'Economics has arrived at the bottom of the proto-scientific shithole' and 'Mr. Corbyn and the perils of political economics' and 'Endtime for soapbox economists' and 'MMT and grassroots movements' and 'MMTers are NOT Friends-of-the-People' and 'Why the British Labour Party should NOT adopt MMT' and 'Economics as a cover for agenda pushing' and 'MMT: A Trojan Horse for Labour courtesy of the Oligarchy' and 'MMTers are false Progressives and false Friends-of-the-People' and 'MMT and the promotion of Wall Street's idea of social policy' and 'How to spot economics trolls' and 'Prophet Stephanie divines the seizure of the means of production of currency' and 'How Bill Mitchell stalks Jeremy Corbyn' and 'Economic backstabbing: Bill Mitchell hits again' and 'Bill Mitchell’s pure MMT teachings for British Labour' and 'The economist as useful political idiot' and 'Links on MMTers push Wall Street’s agenda' and 'Links on Austerity' and 'Political economics and intellectual corruption' and 'The retirement of a fake scientist and real agenda pusher' and 'Mission accomplished: Economists as useful idiots of the Oligarchy'.
For details of the big picture see cross-references Political Economics/Stupidity/Corruption.
***
Twitter After the election
Twitter Oct 29, 2020
Blog-Reference
What is the unique selling proposition of MMT vis-a-vis good old Keynesianism? Keynesianism stands for temporary deficit spending with budget-balancing over the business cycle, MMT stands for permanent deficit-spending/money-creation.
However, with regard to the current situation in the UK with the interest rate close to the ZLB, this amounts to the same anti-Austerity policy. In practical policy terms, the fuss between Simon Wren-Lewis/Jonathan Portes and Richard Murphy over the relative merits of monetary and fiscal policy seems a bit overblown.
So let us look at politics. For political planers, the main issue is to make provisions for their worst-case scenario that Jeremy Corbyn becomes the next PM. There are two groups who compete for the role of Mr. Corbyn’s economic policy adviser. The Wren-Lewis/Portes group attempts to keep Mr. Corbyn on the old path of monetary/fiscal policy albeit with more active employment and social policy, the Murphy group tries to get a handle on the Treasury/Central Bank for a permanent MMT deficit policy that spends on everything from employment to the NHS to a Green New Deal. The common denominator, though, is to prevent a potential PM Corbyn from pursuing a genuine socialist policy.
Because of Public Deficit = Private Profit, there is some perverse humor in the idea that Mr. Corbyn either adopts a temporary or a permanent free-lunch program for the Oligarchy.#1
Egmont Kakarot-Handtke
#1 Keynes, Lerner, MMT, Trump and exploding profit
Related 'MMT Progressives: The knife in the back of WeThePeople' and 'How Bill Mitchell stalks Jeremy Corbyn' and 'Richard Murphy: the MMT fraudster dressed up as realist' and 'Economics has arrived at the bottom of the proto-scientific shithole' and 'Mr. Corbyn and the perils of political economics' and 'Endtime for soapbox economists' and 'MMT and grassroots movements' and 'MMTers are NOT Friends-of-the-People' and 'Why the British Labour Party should NOT adopt MMT' and 'Economics as a cover for agenda pushing' and 'MMT: A Trojan Horse for Labour courtesy of the Oligarchy' and 'MMTers are false Progressives and false Friends-of-the-People' and 'MMT and the promotion of Wall Street's idea of social policy' and 'How to spot economics trolls' and 'Prophet Stephanie divines the seizure of the means of production of currency' and 'How Bill Mitchell stalks Jeremy Corbyn' and 'Economic backstabbing: Bill Mitchell hits again' and 'Bill Mitchell’s pure MMT teachings for British Labour' and 'The economist as useful political idiot' and 'Links on MMTers push Wall Street’s agenda' and 'Links on Austerity' and 'Political economics and intellectual corruption' and 'The retirement of a fake scientist and real agenda pusher' and 'Mission accomplished: Economists as useful idiots of the Oligarchy'.
For details of the big picture see cross-references Political Economics/Stupidity/Corruption.
***
mainly macro Feb 5
***
Twitter Feb 18, The splitting comes faster than signaled
 |
| Source: Twitter |
***
Twitter Feb 23, According to the Financial Times, Britain needs no "Corbynism"
 |
| Source: Twitter |
***
Twitter Feb 24
 |
| Source: Twitter |
***
Twitter Feb 26
 |
| Source: Twitter |
***
Twitter Apr 8
 |
| Source: Twitter |
***
Twitter May 12
 |
| Source: Twitter |
***
 |
| Source: Twitter |
***
 |
| Source: mainly macro |
***
Twitter Aug 1
 |
| Source: Twitter |
***
mainly macro Aug 11
 |
| Source: mainly macro |
***
Twitter Aug 15
 |
| Source: Twitter |
***
Twitter Aug 28
 |
| Source: Twitter |
***
Twitter Sep 5
 |
| Source: Twitter |
***
Twitter Oct 29
 |
| Source: Twitter |
 |
| Source: Twitter |
Twitter Dec 7
 |
| Source: Twitter |
 |
| Source: Skwawkbox |
Twitter Dec 9
 |
| Source: Twitter |
Twitter After the election
 |
| Source: mainly macro |
Twitter Oct 29, 2020
 |
| Source: Twitter |
Twitter Oct 29, 2020
February 4, 2019
MMT: If you’ve got a problem, I don’t care what it is, let me help
Comment on Stephanie Kelton/Andres Bernal/Greg Carlock on ‘We Can Pay For A Green New Deal’
Blog-Reference
Stephanie Kelton again jumps the ship. The day before yesterday she promised a pony for every American, yesterday she promised to care for the unemployed, poor, vulnerable, elderly, and debt-laden students, today she vigorously promotes Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal.
Stephanie Kelton and the MMTers have good news for everybody: “Anything that is technically feasible is financially affordable. And it won’t be a drag on the economy ― unlike the climate crisis itself, which will cause tens of billions of dollars worth of damage to American homes, communities and infrastructure each year. A Green New Deal will actually help the economy by stimulating productivity, job growth and consumer spending, as government spending has often done.”
How does MMT solve any social/economic problem? By deficit-spending/money-creation.#1 Does this work? Yes, as long as the government can increase public debt. At present, nobody can say where the limit is. MMTers claim that there is none.
As a matter of principle, all these social/environmental programs can be realized either with a balanced budget or with deficit-spending/money-creation. This is known to governments and economists since time immemorial. However, the MMTers' unique selling proposition is that the one and the only right way is deficit-spending/money-creation.
This, of course, is NOT true. The point is that deficit-spending/money-creation does NOT help WeThePeople as a whole in real terms but only the Oligarchy.#2, #3 MMTers are NOT the real Friends-of-the-People. Just the opposite, they try to hijack genuine grassroots movements.#4
Basically, the political agenda of MMT is pushing public deficits. The economic rationale lies in the macroeconomic Profit Law which implies Public Deficit = Private Profit. From the macroeconomic standpoint, it does NOT MATTER AT ALL whether the deficit is caused by war spending, social spending, or environmental spending. From a marketing standpoint, though, it matters a lot. Military deficit spending does NOT go down so well with the general public but social/environmental spending does. A green label helps to camouflage the distributional effects.
With the sudden rise of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s new environmental populism and the eclipse of Bernie Sander’s old social populism, agile MMTers like Stephanie Kelton have to jump ship and sell Wall Street’s deficit-spending agenda in the updated bluff package of a Green New Deal (GND).#5
Egmont Kakarot-Handtke
#1 How MMT makes everybody happy
#2 MMT, money creation, stealth taxation, and redistribution
#3 MMT is ALWAYS a bad deal for the 99-percenters
#4 MMT and grassroots movements
#5 Stephanie Kelton’s legendary Plain-Sight-Ink-Trick
Related 'MMT’s virtue-signaling distracts from failure/fraud' and 'MMT is NOT bold policy but spineless fraud' and 'MMT Progressives: stupid or corrupt or both?' and 'Fraud comes always in the cloak of philanthropy, salvation, or threat of doom' and 'MMT Progressives: The knife in the back of WeThePeople' and 'Meet the MMT smart arses' and 'Q: How are you going to pay for it? MMT: By stealth taxation!' and 'No MMT illusions! YOU are going to pay for it'. For the full-spectrum refutation of MMT see cross-references MMT.
Twitter Nov 19, 2018, "Kelton Stephanie, Pavlina and Alexandria the Great"
Blog-Reference
Stephanie Kelton again jumps the ship. The day before yesterday she promised a pony for every American, yesterday she promised to care for the unemployed, poor, vulnerable, elderly, and debt-laden students, today she vigorously promotes Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal.
Stephanie Kelton and the MMTers have good news for everybody: “Anything that is technically feasible is financially affordable. And it won’t be a drag on the economy ― unlike the climate crisis itself, which will cause tens of billions of dollars worth of damage to American homes, communities and infrastructure each year. A Green New Deal will actually help the economy by stimulating productivity, job growth and consumer spending, as government spending has often done.”
How does MMT solve any social/economic problem? By deficit-spending/money-creation.#1 Does this work? Yes, as long as the government can increase public debt. At present, nobody can say where the limit is. MMTers claim that there is none.
As a matter of principle, all these social/environmental programs can be realized either with a balanced budget or with deficit-spending/money-creation. This is known to governments and economists since time immemorial. However, the MMTers' unique selling proposition is that the one and the only right way is deficit-spending/money-creation.
This, of course, is NOT true. The point is that deficit-spending/money-creation does NOT help WeThePeople as a whole in real terms but only the Oligarchy.#2, #3 MMTers are NOT the real Friends-of-the-People. Just the opposite, they try to hijack genuine grassroots movements.#4
Basically, the political agenda of MMT is pushing public deficits. The economic rationale lies in the macroeconomic Profit Law which implies Public Deficit = Private Profit. From the macroeconomic standpoint, it does NOT MATTER AT ALL whether the deficit is caused by war spending, social spending, or environmental spending. From a marketing standpoint, though, it matters a lot. Military deficit spending does NOT go down so well with the general public but social/environmental spending does. A green label helps to camouflage the distributional effects.
With the sudden rise of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s new environmental populism and the eclipse of Bernie Sander’s old social populism, agile MMTers like Stephanie Kelton have to jump ship and sell Wall Street’s deficit-spending agenda in the updated bluff package of a Green New Deal (GND).#5
Egmont Kakarot-Handtke
#1 How MMT makes everybody happy
#2 MMT, money creation, stealth taxation, and redistribution
#3 MMT is ALWAYS a bad deal for the 99-percenters
#4 MMT and grassroots movements
#5 Stephanie Kelton’s legendary Plain-Sight-Ink-Trick
Related 'MMT’s virtue-signaling distracts from failure/fraud' and 'MMT is NOT bold policy but spineless fraud' and 'MMT Progressives: stupid or corrupt or both?' and 'Fraud comes always in the cloak of philanthropy, salvation, or threat of doom' and 'MMT Progressives: The knife in the back of WeThePeople' and 'Meet the MMT smart arses' and 'Q: How are you going to pay for it? MMT: By stealth taxation!' and 'No MMT illusions! YOU are going to pay for it'. For the full-spectrum refutation of MMT see cross-references MMT.
***
Twitter Nov 19, 2018, "Kelton Stephanie, Pavlina and Alexandria the Great"
Twitter Feb 1, 2021, Nice things
Twitter Apr 25
Twitter Aug 20 Nice things again
Twitter Sep 15 The nice MMT folks "solve" ALL problems of WeThePeople with deficit-spending/money-creation and as it so happens (because of the macroeconomic Profit Law) the rich always get richer
Twitter Apr 6, 2023 Any green agenda that does not feature as a top priority the reduction of the military in order to reduce damage to the environment can not be taken seriously. At the same time, the reduction of the military budget provides the money for investing in ecological measures. For "green" deficit spending holds the macroeconomic Profit Law, which implies PublicDeficit=PrivateProfit.
Twitter/X Nov 6, 2023
Twitter/X May 15, 2025 Shares of total government spending
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)