More MMT follies (Sympathy for Krugman)

by | Mar 2, 2019

More MMT follies (Sympathy for Krugman)

by | Mar 2, 2019

Paul Krugman must be pulling his hair out about now. He recently complained that it was almost impossible to figure out what MMTers were advocating, and then tried to pin them down with some very specific questions:

Are MMTers claiming, as Kelton seems to, that there is only one deficit level consistent with full employment, that there is no ability to substitute monetary for fiscal policy? Are they claiming that expansionary fiscal policy actually reduces interest rates? Yes or no answers, please, with explanations of how you got these answers and why the straightforward framework I laid out above is wrong.

Today, Stephanie Kelton responded as follows:

Quick responses first, followed by explanations behind my thinking.

#1: Is there only one right deficit level? Answer: No. The right deficit depends on private behavior, which changes. MMT would set public spending always to the level required to achieve full employment, and then accept whatever deficit may result.

Read the rest at econlib.org.

Our Books

Recent Articles

Recent

TGIF: Notes on Anarcho-Capitalism

TGIF: Notes on Anarcho-Capitalism

I'm pretty sure I won't be around long enough to see anarcho-capitalism—or what I call market-ordered anarchism—prevail in the United States. I'm just as sure that I won't see government strictly limited to protecting individual rights and never violating them (if...

read more
WMDs for a MIC in Need

WMDs for a MIC in Need

In the closing days of 2025, the White House turned an opioid crisis into a national security drama. Standing in the Oval Office during a Mexican Border Defense Medal ceremony on December 15, President Donald Trump declared that he would sign an executive order to...

read more
Smashing the ‘Roosevelt Myth’

Smashing the ‘Roosevelt Myth’

David T. Beito’s FDR: A New Political Life offers a bracing, deeply researched, and welcome reassessment of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, one that decisively breaks with the hagiographic tradition that has dominated twentieth century American historiography. The book’s...

read more

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This