Bernard Lietaer: Modern Monetary Theory is right
Vložit
- čas přidán 17. 04. 2015
- "Academically [MMT] has not been challenged. And from what I study on it, they are right!"
The New Paradigm of Money: Monetary blind spots and structural solutions
Bernard A. Lietaer, Research Fellow, University of California
Covering the Crisis Conference, Brussels, 9-10 November 2009 coveringthecrisis.eu
• Bernard A. Lietaer on ...
• Bernard A. Lietaer on ...
• Bernard A. Lietaer on ...
• Bernard A. Lietaer on ...
• Bernard A. Lietaer on ...
Debt, Deficits and MMT
web.archive.org/web/201110190...
MMT en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chartalism
Understanding MMT pragcap.com/understand-the-mod...
MMT Primer neweconomicperspectives.org/p/...
I like to read people who is against mmt.
Its a surprise for me to see how they allways fail.
This video is a false representation of Bernard Lietaer's view of MMT/Chartalism.
10 seconds later in his speak Bernard goes on to say that he doesn't agreed with them, because MMT just puts the the state in the driver seat instead of private banks we have now.
As long as noone fixes the brakes it doesn't matter who drives the car.
and it was the private banks that caused the last crash.. and if mmt is used to invest in p e o p l e , it is not inflationary, ie 100000 Euro for each baby , as Prof . Richard Werner says... or where do you take the money for the repair of environmental damages? Or for the deconstruction of old atom-energy plants? From taxes? The state can decide best, what is best for the state, that means, the democratically elected parliamentarians... I know they make mistakes too, but at least they can be voted out of office. Its the private debts, that matter!
Why is it that no one understands that our current economies are based on a self-bankrupting Business-Labor model ?
Why is it that no one can clearly see that the Price of ALL products & services for sale contains 2 components - the cost of production and the producer's profit ?
Why is it that no one understands that the income Labor earns is part of the cost of production and the income that Producers earn is the profit.
Why is it that no one can figure out that the Price demanded by Producers of products & services will ALWAYS exceed the amount of available income ?
It is because Producers must sell their products or services to earn their income that we live in a viciously competitive world.
EVERY producer is scrambling for their piece of the limited amount of available money.
And THIS is where Central Government, as sole authority to create currency, plays a key part - it is the DUTY of Central Government to create the MISSING amount of currency and BALANCE the economic system.
The economic system is a living system - expanding & contracting according to the creativity, productivity, and consuming desires of living people.
Therefore, Central Government MUST create the necessary amount of currency to make up for the inherent shortfall of the self-bankrupting Business-Labor model and keep it balanced.
If the blindness to these facts continues, society will devour itself in a sick game of economic musical chairs.
In reply to the assertion that academically that school has not been challenged". So you will no doubt be able to answer the questions as to why government issued money (which has no value when issued until it is spent by government ) is different from counterfeit money? After all nobody treats it different when it is used to buy things. It only becomes worthless when government confiscates it.
You will also be able to answer the question as to why Sovereign currency issuing government does not just issue new money to all taxpayers instead of spending it themselves to buy goods and services? And why they do not just reduce or eliminate government taxes and just issue money to everyone based on your assertion that their new currency creates wealth?
Maybe you could just answer the question as to why new government money is not just handed out to people to reduce their debts?
Perhaps you could answer the question as to why the Chartalism belief that if taxation puts value into the money then why doesn't government tax at 95% to make it even more valuable? Or even 100% to make it infinitely valuable?
Of course the reality is that these assertions are incorrect. Have you seen what happens to the value of money when taxes rise? Have you seen the value of lower standard of living countries whose currency value has tanked when their taxes have risen.
I expect the presenter will be able to adequately answer the academic challenge.
+Rob Mews I don't know much about "MMT" but still I think I can try to answer your questions.
1/ "Why government issued money is different from counterfeit money?"
--> Definition of Counterfeit money : it is currency that is produced without the legal sanction of the state or government and in deliberate violation of that country's laws.
2/ "Why Sovereign currency issuing government does not just issue new money to all taxpayers instead of spending it themselves to buy goods and services? And why they do not just reduce or eliminate government taxes and just issue money to everyone based on your assertion that their new currency creates wealth? Maybe you could just answer the question as to why new government money is not just handed out to people to reduce their debts?"
--> I don't think chartalists believe that "taxation puts value into the money". From what I've read on the subject, they believe a currency becomes official only when a government wants his taxes to be paid in this currency. So for chartalists, that's how a currency becomes the official one. That's all I can say for this part.
Anyway, as you know, the extrinsic value of money is linked to its "scarcity". If everybody has money, nobody needs it and if nobody needs it, nobody wants it. No scarcity = no exchange value. We have a certain amount of currencies and if we extend this amount way too much, after a certain time, inflation occurs. No economists wish that, even MMT/chartalist ones.
Again, from what I learnt about chartalism/MMT, they say that a certain amount of currency is needed, but sometimes it needs to grow (needs in currencies increase in war times for example). If this expansion of the monetary base is needed, they think it is better to let the State create it (for free) than a commercial bank via credit (that we will have to repay with some interests).
Sorry if my english lacks some practice. I genuinely tried to help here :-)