As anyone who has ever been responsible for legislative oversight of central bankers knows, they do not like to have their authority challenged. Most of all, they will defend their mystique — that magical aura that hovers over their words, shrouding a slushy mix of banality and baloney in a mist of power and jargon.
As a result, tormenting central bankers is great fun. John Maynard Keynes famously tormented Montagu Norman, the governor of the Bank of England (BOE) from 1920 to 1944.
Then-US representatives Wright Patman and Henry Reuss, who chaired the US House of Representatives Banking Committee in the 1970s, did the same to then-Federal Reserve chair Arthur Burns.
I know that Reuss enjoyed it; I assisted him at the time.
In our day, the voices of modern monetary theory (MMT) perturb the sleep not only of present central bankers, but even of those retired from the role.
They prowl the corridors like Lady Macbeth, shouting “Out damn spot!”
Two fresh cases are Raghuram Rajan, a former governor of the Reserve Bank of India, and Mervyn King, a former BOE governor.
In recently published commentaries, each combines bluster and condescension (in roughly equal measure) in a statement of trite truths with which one can, for the most part, hardly disagree.
However, Rajan and King each confront MMT only in the abstract. Neither cites or quotes from a single source, and neither names a single person associated with MMT.
For example, King begins: “If you can’t explain something, try an abbreviation. The latest in economics is MMT — Modern Monetary Theory or, in other words, a magic money tree.”
Does King mention that there are whole books explaining MMT, including The Deficit Myth, a current best-seller by a fully credentialed economics professor, Stephanie Kelton?
He does not.
Nor does Rajan mention books by Pavlina Tcherneva of Bard College or L. Randall Wray of the Levy Institute, to mention just three prominent exponents of the MMT school.
The inconvenient fact that two leading advocates of MMT are women will perhaps have caught the reader’s notice.
Especially given the record of modern mainstream economics with respect to its female practitioners, it would be too generous to attribute the omission of names to a misplaced chivalry.
One rather suspects that King and Rajan know very well who Kelton and Tcherneva are. Both are forceful and formidable foes, of exactly the type that central bankers tend to fear.
King and Rajan characterize MMT as an argument about the low cost of “printing money.”
In King’s description, the thinking is that money created by the central bank can “be given to the public … to enable people to spend more, so raising output and employment.”
He then claims that such an approach has already been tried, “from Roman emperors through Henry VIII and the Weimar Republic to present-day Zimbabwe and Venezuela.” That does sound pretty bad.
However, those with long enough memories may recall the turbulent spring of this year, when in the face of the COVID-19 collapse, the US disbursed US$2.2 trillion in fresh money to the public to enable people to spend more, thereby raising output and employment.
The US economy did not have a great year this year; but it did not experience runaway inflation. It did not become Zimbabwe, Venezuela or the Weimar Republic.
Is it possible that King did not notice this? Rajan, to his credit, does not push quite so hard on the Zimbabwe string.
King and Rajan both complain that MMT is not new, and this is a sure “tell” that neither has done his homework.
MMT advocates do not claim novelty. Unlike their critics, they understand that “modern” and “new” are not precise synonyms.
The word “modern” in MMT is deployed in the precise sense used by Keynes in his 1930 Treatise on Money, in which he describes the nation-state’s prerogative to define what money is for those subject to its laws: “This right is claimed by all modern states, and has been so claimed for some four thousand years at least.”
It is a bit sad — even shocking — that King, one of my contemporaries at King’s College, Cambridge, has so thoroughly forgotten his Keynes.
What, then, is MMT?
Contrary to the claims of King and Rajan, it is not a policy slogan. Rather, it is a body of theory in Keynes’ monetary tradition, which includes such eminent thinkers as the US economist Hyman Minsky and Wynne Godley of the UK Treasury and the University of Cambridge.
MMT describes how “modern” governments and central banks actually work, and how changes in their balance sheets are mirrored by changes in the balance sheets of the public — an application of double-entry bookkeeping to economic thought.
Thus, as Kelton writes in the plainest English, the deficit of the government is the surplus of the private sector, and vice versa.
MMT shares Keynes’ view that a proper goal of economic policy in a sovereign and developed country is to achieve full employment, buttressed by a guarantee of jobs to all who might need them.
This is a goal that I helped write into law in the US under the Humphrey-Hawkins Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act of 1978, along with balanced growth and reasonable price stability.
With occasional successes in practice, this policy objective, known as the “dual mandate,” has been the law of the land in the US ever since.
In short, as an example of good economics made popular, accessible and democratic, MMT represents what central bankers have always feared — as well they might.
James Galbraith, a former executive director of the Joint Economic Committee, is a professor of government and chair in government/business relations at the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin.
Copyright Project Syndicate
Deterrence is fading; war is looming on the Taiwan Strait and for other targets of the China-enabled dictatorship alliance, and after three years the cure is just dawning on the Biden Administration. Now mind you, for a May 28, 2024 interview with Time magazine, President Joe Biden made his 5th public commitment that the United States would defend Taiwan. Less than three weeks later the United States Navy, along with ships from navies of Japan, Canada, the Netherlands, and France, were conducting the Valiant Shield joint force exercise in the Philippine Sea south of Taiwan and in the South China Sea to
The official media of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) reacted to the May 20 inauguration speech of President William Lai (賴清德) by asserting: “Lai’s words reveal his true intention of sacrificing peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait for his own desire for power.” This baseless accusation by Beijing that Lai is manipulating Taiwanese to resist unification with China for his personal gain, is part of a broader CCP information warfare campaign that has intensified since Lai’s election. This campaign, orchestrated by the United Front Work Department, the CCP’s agency for coordinating influence operations and propaganda, aims to demoralize Taiwanese,
A facile way to frame the future of US foreign policy is to set up two scenarios as a binary choice. If former US president Donald Trump returns to the White House, the US becomes isolationist. If US President Joe Biden wins re-election, the US remains broadly internationalist. That framing neglects a change that might be less obvious but more consequential for other countries, a shift that would keep playing out no matter who wins in November: For the first time in its two-and-a-half centuries, the US would stop looking at the world through the lens of its own exceptionalism, and
Minister of Health and Welfare Chiu Tai-yuan (邱泰源) on Friday said the ministry supports keeping priority seats on public transportation, but is considering expanding the eligibility criteria and renaming the seats. Chiu’s remarks came after local news media over the past few weeks reported incidents involving priority seats, once again sparking heated discussion about whether the seats should be abolished or regulations regarding them should be revised. On June 11, an older woman asked a young woman on a Taipei MRT train to yield her priority seat. The young woman refused, saying that she needed the seat after working a 12-hour shift.