Thread by @MMTpodcast

“How would Paul Krugman react to an orthodox scholar’s demonstration of the predictive accuracy of key MMT insights – if Krugman did not know that the orthodox scholar’s work was verifying key MMT predictions?”

Another great piece from @WilliamKBlack

neweconomicperspectives.org/2019/03/three-…

“[an] orthodox scholar, unknowingly, confirmed the predictive strength of many of MMT’s most important insights. Krugman praised [his] findings as “seminal.”  Krugman had no idea he was praising predictive successes of MMT scholars b/c he had never read MMT scholars’ work.”

“Stephanie Kelton was one of the MMT scholars who demonstrated precedence, making Krugman’s use of the word “seminal” as a descriptor even more unintentionally humorous.”

“When Krugman did not know he was evaluating an MMT original insight he was lavish in his praise of our ideas.”

“...We call it “revealed preferences.”  [Krugman’s] preference is to treat MMT scholars as non-colleagues and non-equals.”

”Krugman, without reading any MMT scholarship assumed there would be no meaningful difference between the work of experienced MMT scholars and a rant by a non-scholar [Cullen Roche]... That is every bit as absurd, arrogant, biased, un-collegial, and insulting as it sounds.”

Related piece from @stf18:

Ignoring MMTers + others is “deliberate marginalization.”

Scott Includes a list of material by #MMT ers +others who explained the difference between currency issuers/users and exchange rate regimes that preceded DeGrauwe 2011

neweconomicperspectives.org/2014/07/krugma…