The Forum > General Discussion > The poison chalice election
The poison chalice election
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Page 4
- 5
- 6
-
- All
The National Forum | Donate | Your Account | On Line Opinion | Forum | Blogs | Polling | About |
![]() |
![]() Syndicate RSS/XML ![]() |
|
About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy |
>You say inflation is a temporary matter caused by supply-side problems.
Not quite. I say a large component of the inflation is a temporary matter caused by supply side problems. There is also some conventional inflation that can be dealt with by increasing interest rates or tightening fiscal policy, but that solution won't work for what's caused by supply side problems; it would just result in stagflation.
>I know that you are wedded to the concepts of Modern Monetary Theory and
>think that governments can borrow and spend without consequence.
No you don't know that - you IMAGINE it.
In reality I have NEVER claimed tat governments can borrow and spend without consequences. In fact I've previously said that only a complete idiot would make that claim.
What I've said is the consequences are often not what you think they are, and are always the result of the deficit not the debt.
I'm certainly not wedded to the concept of MMT; it's just that so far it always fits the facts and I've no reason to believe it won't continue to do so. Most of the criticisms of it are based on strawmen. MMT people would agree that "The notion that we could borrow money, spend it willy-nilly and not suffer consequences was always bonkers".
MMT people do tend to be more dovish on inflation than mainstream economists. That's due to the values they hold rather than MMT itself, though it's undoubtedly informed by the fact that inflation has little effect on a generation's standard of living.