You're viewing a single thread.
Great video! MMT is great as a framework for understanding money but I think like this video sorta highlights, the economists developing the theoretical side have gaps that can only really be filled by a Marxian interpretation.
I agree. Unfortunately, it seems like the MMT theorists that want to support socialism don’t understand understand Marxism, but use a Keynesian framework instead (Micheal Hudson and others), and then there are some (from what I’ve heard on an episode of Macro N Cheese) that want to turn away from Hegel toward Kant and totally redefine socialism. Sadly most of these people are trying to explain and support China, which is annoying when they can explain themselves through Marxism without distorting it.
Anyway, this is the best evaluation of MMT I’ve seen beyond random Lemmygrad users. Although, I don’t think Fellow Traveler actually supports China.
To clarify, MMT is not Keynesian, and not even post-Keynesian. The key figures that influenced the MMT development (Minsky, Hudson, Mitchell) were/are Marxists.
Keynes proposed government stimulus (deficit spending) only during crisis of capitalism, and fully supported right-wing austerity when the economy is going well. MMT says that the government should run a perpetual deficit spending program to drive the economy. That’s the key difference between Keynesianism and MMT.
I’m aware there’s a difference. Hudson’s just all over the place. The other day I was listening to him and Radhika Desai and he started using Georgist talking points and then suggesting that Capitalism has fallen to feudalism with the “rentier takeover.”
Yeah strange to focus on analyzing China instead of the major imperialist and global hegemon, although I guess there's way less of an audience for that when you live under it.
My impression is they’re like “here’s some problems with the US economy, here’s what a country like China (and Japan and Germany????) are doing right. Let’s imagine they’re the same kind of economy and they could reform into each other or be copied by the global south.” They’re not very Marxist.