The Trillion Dollar Coin Idea: Beyond Stupid [View article]
James,
Great article. I really enjoy your work. So thanks.
Just a few clarifications.
1) I actually don't think the coin idea would ever get implemented. I agree with James Hamilton that there are "better ways" to solve this issue. The purpose of my articles on the coin have been to highlight the stupidity of the debt ceiling. As I've described, the existence of this "constraint" is akin to eating a cheese pizza (preferably with pepperoni and sausage), tying your intestine in a knot and then threatening your stomach not to digest the food. The debt ceiling is similar in that we only get to the ceiling because of things Congress has ALREADY voted on. It's just silly. And I keep saying that silly problems call for silly policies (which this whole thing is - silly).
2) I am not an MMTer. I think MMT is superior to most of neoclassical econ, but we started MR specifically because we disagree with many of the main MMT positions. See this article if you're interested. http://bit.ly/X0Eglg
Also, I don't comment here often. Not because I don't want to, but because I answer a lot of questions about MR at my site Pragcap. So I just don't have the time to monitor all the places where my content gets syndicated. So if you ever have questions you can always email me or use the "ask cullen" section at pragcap.
I learned MMT from its founders and always had slight problems with it. But its explanation of the monetary system was far superior to most of neoclassical economics. Many of us who used much of their work had issues with some of the policy ideas MMT embedded in their work and some of the basis for these ideas. Last year there was a very heated debate about the MMT Job Guarantee and it sparked a controversy regarding MMT's view of the govt as a the "monopoly supplier" of currency. It became clear that the difference in our views of the world were far different than previously believed. So, 5 of us officially started a post-MMT school called Monetary Realism.
There are many differences, but I'd say the largest difference is that MMT views the govt as the center of the monetary system. So all money essentially comes from the govt or is a "creature of the state". In fact, MMT explicitly states that the purpose of the monetary system is to move resources from private to public domain.
MR views the private sector as the center of the monetary universe and says that the purpose of the monetary system is primarily to serve private purpose. So we start with how money is created by banks and say that the govt just supports the banking system. In essence, the govt has privatized the creation of money. So MR doesn't view money as a "creature of the state". This is a night and day difference from the State Theory of money and the foundation of MMT's views.
There's a lot more at the link I provided....Hope that helps.
I am not an MMT proponent. We created Monetary Realism because we felt that MMT required a post-MMT school due to deficiencies in explaining our actual monetary operations. MMT creates a state centric view of the world that MR says is incorrect. MR describes a market based system. See my expansive criticism of MMT.
The Fiscal Cliff And Market Uncertainty [View article]
I actually don't utilize the MMT views. MR is quite different from MMT. MMT is a state centric view of the monetary system. MR is a market based view of the monetary system. See here.
Technically, I wasn't at the beach. I was on a cliff overlooking the beach. So your question should be: "what kind of douche wears a suit to a cliff overlooking the beach". To that, I do not have a great answer. :-) Sorry.
Lessons From 5 Years Of Economic Crisis [View article]
I don't use the MMT framework. We created Monetary Realism because of our disputes with MMT's views on the state theory and government centric approach to understanding the system. I wrote a very extensive critique of MMT. You might be interested in it:
MMT, The Euro And The Greatest Prediction Of The Last 20 Years? [View article]
No need to overreact and start claiming my work is "hurting the world".
MMT deserves credit for the Euro crisis. I think my comment came out incorrectly. I intended to show that Godley was not an MMTer so it was not accurate of me to say MMT predicted the Euro crisis and then use Godley as a source. The other MMT predictions are excellent and I particularly think Stephanie's quote is prescient. Sorry for the confusion.
MMT, The Euro And The Greatest Prediction Of The Last 20 Years? [View article]
***I should probably add that Godley was not an MMTer, but a post-Keynesian. He should rightly be credited with the prediction. It's not entirely accurate of me to credit the MMT school here since Godley made the prediction long before they did and their work was highly influenced by Godley's understanding of the sectoral balances in the Euro area.***
Bernanke Does Not Understand The Depth Of His Powers [View article]
Correct Charlie. There's nothing there I disagree with. Fed policy always tries to control inflation up or down. That's one of their two mandates. So yes, Fed policy always has consequences.
The issue you speak of (currency collapse) is essentially a hyperinflation scenario. I've long predicted that hyperinflation would not result from the Fed's policies and thus far been right. Perhaps see my primer section on hyperinflation to better understand where I am coming from. Some of my views are pretty unorthodox here...
The Burden We Leave Our Grandchildren [View article]
Sounds like many here are not quite understanding the modern monetary system and the perspective from which I am working. Maybe read this and shoot me an email if you have questions.
Is Abenomics Working? [View article]
http://bit.ly/X0Eglg
We started MR because of these disagreements.
http://bit.ly/ttAnSh
Hope that helps.
The Trillion Dollar Coin Idea: Beyond Stupid [View article]
Great article. I really enjoy your work. So thanks.
Just a few clarifications.
1) I actually don't think the coin idea would ever get implemented. I agree with James Hamilton that there are "better ways" to solve this issue. The purpose of my articles on the coin have been to highlight the stupidity of the debt ceiling. As I've described, the existence of this "constraint" is akin to eating a cheese pizza (preferably with pepperoni and sausage), tying your intestine in a knot and then threatening your stomach not to digest the food. The debt ceiling is similar in that we only get to the ceiling because of things Congress has ALREADY voted on. It's just silly. And I keep saying that silly problems call for silly policies (which this whole thing is - silly).
2) I am not an MMTer. I think MMT is superior to most of neoclassical econ, but we started MR specifically because we disagree with many of the main MMT positions. See this article if you're interested. http://bit.ly/X0Eglg
Thanks again.
Cullen
Gold Is Not An 'Investment' [View article]
I would recommend starting with the following links. Some of the content is quite dense while other parts are more basic.
http://bit.ly/SG0vJP
Also, I don't comment here often. Not because I don't want to, but because I answer a lot of questions about MR at my site Pragcap. So I just don't have the time to monitor all the places where my content gets syndicated. So if you ever have questions you can always email me or use the "ask cullen" section at pragcap.
http://bit.ly/QzRtlD
Hope that helps.
Cullen
Gold Is Not An 'Investment' [View article]
There are many differences, but I'd say the largest difference is that MMT views the govt as the center of the monetary system. So all money essentially comes from the govt or is a "creature of the state". In fact, MMT explicitly states that the purpose of the monetary system is to move resources from private to public domain.
MR views the private sector as the center of the monetary universe and says that the purpose of the monetary system is primarily to serve private purpose. So we start with how money is created by banks and say that the govt just supports the banking system. In essence, the govt has privatized the creation of money. So MR doesn't view money as a "creature of the state". This is a night and day difference from the State Theory of money and the foundation of MMT's views.
There's a lot more at the link I provided....Hope that helps.
Gold Is Not An 'Investment' [View article]
http://bit.ly/X0Eglg
The Fiscal Cliff And Market Uncertainty [View article]
http://bit.ly/X0Eglg
Gold Is Not An 'Investment' [View article]
U.S. Recession Odds: 100%? [View article]
Lessons From 5 Years Of Economic Crisis [View article]
http://bit.ly/X0Eglg
Lessons From 5 Years Of Economic Crisis [View article]
http://bit.ly/X0Eglg
MMT, The Euro And The Greatest Prediction Of The Last 20 Years? [View article]
MMT deserves credit for the Euro crisis. I think my comment came out incorrectly. I intended to show that Godley was not an MMTer so it was not accurate of me to say MMT predicted the Euro crisis and then use Godley as a source. The other MMT predictions are excellent and I particularly think Stephanie's quote is prescient. Sorry for the confusion.
MMT, The Euro And The Greatest Prediction Of The Last 20 Years? [View article]
Bernanke Does Not Understand The Depth Of His Powers [View article]
Bernanke Does Not Understand The Depth Of His Powers [View article]
The issue you speak of (currency collapse) is essentially a hyperinflation scenario. I've long predicted that hyperinflation would not result from the Fed's policies and thus far been right. Perhaps see my primer section on hyperinflation to better understand where I am coming from. Some of my views are pretty unorthodox here...
http://bit.ly/I7la31
Thanks for the good comment.
Cullen
The Burden We Leave Our Grandchildren [View article]
Happy new year everyone.
http://bit.ly/oTJ9Bn