@PIMCO writes: "In addition, so long as policymakers are committed to balancing their budgets in the long run, helicopter money and modern monetary theory (MMT) are not inflationary per se."
Some quick comments...
Some quick comments...
It is correct to note that MMT is not inflationary. It is a monetary theory and understanding it does not drive up the rate of inflation just as understanding the theory of gravity does not make the apple fall down.
It would not be correct to say that central banks or the Treasury is *applying* MMT. The US monetary system has not been changed. It's just that leading politicians are framing deficits and debts in a different way. c-span.org/video/?512625-…
The rate of inflation does not depend on "balancing the budget" today or in the future. You can huge public deficits and deflation, as 2020 has shown (Eurozone). MMT understands that inflation is not driven by quantities of money, however measured, but...
... it is driven by developments in wages and productivity. If wage growth is weak, you cannot have high rates of inflation. If prices outgrow wages, firms will not sell what they produce. The stockpiles force them to reduce prices.
Since government cannot run out of money (which the central bank provides), the wages of public workers are the anchor for the inflation rate. The data supports this view (see below). Changes in wages paid by government are mirrored by the changes in the price level (inflation). 
This has nothing to do with "balancing the budget". The public sector usually had deficits, sometimes surpluses (late 90s) – that had no effect on the rate of inflation. If anything, higher public deficits – caused by lower tax revenues – go together with low inflation rates.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
