George Selgin exposes some important details lurking in the lunacy of “modern monetary theory.” Here’s George’s conclusion:
I realize that, in pointing to a seemingly minor error within the large body of writings that make up Modern Monetary Theory, I might be accused of nit-picking. But I plead not guilty, for such minor errors are an important source of MMT’s popular appeal. It’s often by dint of them, rather than any genuinely innovative or profound insights, that Modern Monetary Theorists succeed in turning otherwise banal truths about the workings of contemporary monetary systems into novel policy pronunciamentos that are as tantalizing as they are false.
George Will rightly ridicules the nonsense peddled by proponents of this lunatic ‘monetary theory‘. A slice:
Today’s Democratic presidential candidates sound like late-night infomercials: “A Green New Deal! Medicare-for-all! Reparations for some! Free college for the young! Increased Social Security for the elderly! BUT WAIT! THERE’S MORE! At no additional cost, you get Modern Monetary Theory.”
Scott Sumner again joins the fun of revealing ‘modern monetary theory’ lunacy.
Vincent Geloso counsels economists to first do no harm.
Omar Al Ubaydli writes sensibly about so-called ‘trade deficits.‘
Chris Edwards points out the folly of subsidizing passenger rail service.
Wall Street Journal columnist Holman Jenkins warns that the biggest threat to 5G is the D.C. swamp. Here’s his conclusion:
When so many competitors are screeching that a deal is “anticompetitive,” it’s a pretty good sign that the public interest would be served by letting it go ahead. That’s a more reliable rule than any [the U.S. Department of] Justice seems likely to apply in the case.
