Ezra's piece is worth reading, though his description of MMT is puzzling. MMT is not about gov being able to spend what it wants b/c it can "print money to pay its debts." What MMT is actually about is, well, the substance of what @ezraklein calls "supply-side progressivism". 1/
As @M_C_Klein put it, The Deficit Myth "is ultimately a plea to use permanent wartime mobilization for civilian ends." 2/ barrons.com/articles/the-c…
In my book, I introduced the concept of "mission-oriented budgeting". The idea is to *start with where you want to end up* and then work backwards to show how you're actually going to get there. As Alec Stapp (quoted in Ezra's piece) put it, focus on "the ends of production." 3/
Here's an example of me doing this is at a conference on a Green New Deal, where I ask the audience to "think like a beaver." The point is to start with the mission (building a dam) and then work out how to resource it. 4/ vimeo.com/359778899
And here I was back in December 2018, invoking WWII and urging us to draw on those lessons as we think about doing big transformative things. 5/
Agree completely with @ezraklein here. We have not seen anything like this from the Biden administration. 6/
But I wrote a whole piece about how the Biden administration could go MUCH bigger *if* it could shift gears and stop thinking about how to "pay for" the spending in conventional terms. 7/ nytimes.com/2021/04/07/opi…
The problem with the way that virtually everyone on the left is trying to justify another fiscal package, is that they're all suggesting that deficit neutral = inflation neutral--it doesn't! A point I stress emphatically in The Deficit Myth. 8/
I realize that some consider it uncouth to point this out, as it gives "aid and comfort" to opponents of a GND. Suffice it to say (for now) that I disagree with these sentiments. It is better to get the economics right than to mislead the public. 9/ nytimes.com/2022/02/11/opi…
So again, MMT isn't about "printing money to pay its debts." It's about understanding the monetary system and the mechanics of government finance well enough to not get bamboozled in an exchange like this one. 10/ stephaniekelton.substack.com/p/jon-stewart-…
It's about understanding that government "borrowing" isn't borrowing in the sense that most people understand the term. 11/ ft.com/content/53cb3f…
And it's about understanding that there are alternatives to raising interest rates to bring down inflation and that rate hikes might even have perverse effects. neweconomicperspectives.org/2013/01/functi…. 12/

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Stephanie Kelton

Stephanie Kelton Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @StephanieKelton

Feb 8
“Where is the [Social Security] crisis? Just over the horizon…the promises that are being made to those now working cannot be honored.” nytimes.com/1996/10/20/boo…
“I’m terrified about what will happen to interest rates once financial markets wake up to the implications of skyrocketing budget deficits.” nytimes.com/2003/03/11/opi…
“The only question now is when foreign investors, who have financed our deficits so far, will decide to pull the plug.”
nytimes.com/2005/03/04/opi…
Read 9 tweets
Jan 18
Some nuggets from the post. Subscribe if you'd like to read the entire thing (it's long).
"As governments embraced the use of robust fiscal policy, a growing number of commentators started to assert that 'We Are All MMTers Now'.”
Read 12 tweets
Dec 31, 2021
What follows is a THREAD, posted on behalf of Professor James Galbraith, who is not on Twitter but who asked me to share his reaction to this.
"I'll bet that Paul Krugman has not read Isabella Weber's magisterial history, How China Escaped Shock Therapy, recommended by Adam Tooze in Foreign Policy, by Martin Wolf in the Financial Times, and by yours truly in Project Syndicate, among many other plaudits and prizes...
If he had, Krugman might be aware that Professor Weber knows a great deal about price controls and their role in a larger policy setting. And not only in China, but also in the US, which Chinese reformers studied closely in coming to their decisions...
Read 7 tweets
Apr 13, 2021
Let’s play the “pay for” game. Suppose you want to spend $3-$10 trillion on a Build Back Better agenda. You’ve decided that you’re going to play the “pay for” game, which means you will show where every dollar you plan to spend is going to “come from.” 1/
The whole point is to appear “fiscally responsible,” showing that you can carry out your spending without adding to the deficit. In other words, for every dollar you want to spend INTO the economy, you have a plan to rip a dollar OUT of someone’s hands. 2/
The Biden administration has put forward their plan, which mostly relies on raising taxes on corporations. The president says it will raise more revenue (over 15 yrs) than he is proposing to spend (over 8 yrs). Don’t ask me why. 3/
Read 10 tweets
Apr 9, 2021
Yesterday, @jasonfurman tweeted out my NYT piece on the Biden infrastructure proposal. He claimed I had ignored the most obvious way to deal with any inflationary pressures that might arise—i.e. Fed rate hikes. 1/ nytimes.com/2021/04/07/opi…
I don’t share Jason’s view that fiscal policy can safely ignore inflation risk since the Fed can always handle any resulting inflation. Congress should not ignore inflation risk when contemplating a multi trillion-dollar spending package. That’s just irresponsible. 2/
I also don’t share the the view that the Fed can easily keep inflation in check via rate hates. I think it’s complicated and not settled science that rate hikes will temper inflationary pressures by dampening aggregate expenditures. 3/
Read 19 tweets
Mar 3, 2021
Had some further thoughts on the Orzag intervention. 1/12
The big breakthrough will come if/when Congress changes the way it approaches the use of "offsets." Right now, offsets = pay-fors. The purpose of *offsetting* spending is to neutralize the impact of the spending on the budget outcome--i.e. to keep it deficit neutral. 2/12
That is not how we should think about offsets. In MMT, offsets are explicitly about inflation. You don't need a binder full of revenue-raisers--i.e. offsets--to neutralize the impact on the budget. 3/12
Read 12 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

:(