Activity
Mon
Wed
Fri
Sun
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
What is this?
Less
More

Memberships

Rebel Economist Challenge

1k members โ€ข $10,000/year

Rebel Economist (Free)

1.2k members โ€ข Free

5 contributions to Rebel Economist (Free)
Big News: Lectures natively on Skool soon
There are almost 700 people in the class now, and almost 100 attend the Europe/USA lecture each week, which is the limit for Jordan's Zoom subscription. I just asked Jordan to purchase the higher level (which allows 500 people), and then saw the post from Skool that literally today, they enable video calls in Skool. I'll still use Zoom for today's lecture in just under 4 hours' time, but in future I'll use the Skool system--once I've done some test runs.
0 likes โ€ข Oct '25
@Steve Keen Not for me. Whatever "it" is.
Legacy class now--testing Methodology lecture for new course
There's been a SNAFU on the calendar. Please use this link: https://www.skool.com/live/WN75yfSr3s4
0 likes โ€ข Oct '25
Would be nice to join but not possible. Adam asked for my email address but there seemed to be no way to provide it to him. I responded to his request but then there was no way to send it.
Sign-in
If I am not new? How do I sign in?
0 likes โ€ข Oct '25
How do I sign in to the class?
The MMT Fallacy
For those that don't want to read this entire post, let's not bury the lead: MMT is wrong: - The U.S. does not have a spend and then tax system, we have a tax then spend system - The U.S. Treasury does not issue the U.S Dollar - The Fed does not issue reserves for the Treasury to spend - The Fed does not issue new reserves to pay the Gov's bills directly - The Gov cannot spend before receiving tax receipts or revenue from bond sales Below I explain in detail exactly why. Please let me know if you think I made any mistakes. After many, many hours of discussions with friends here and elsewhere, I think itโ€™s finally becoming clear, I have finally gotten to the bottom of the MMT debate, so please let me know if you agree. We can have a tax and spend system, which many people believe we have today, and under a tax and spend system in 2024, the USG would have taxed roughly $5T and spent roughly $7T, showing a roughly $2T deficit, and the Gov would have had to borrow roughly $2T to cover the deficit spending. Or we can have a spend then tax system, which MMT believes we have today, and in 2024 the USG would have issued and spent $7T and taxed back $5T, showing a $2T deficit, as the USG spent $2T more than they received back in tax revenue. Two different systems that in practice donโ€™t matter much until you have a deficit. Under a tax and spend model, to cover deficit spending the Gov has to borrow, because desired spending exceeds tax receipts. Under a spend first then tax back model, the Gov already spent the $, so the deficit is covered by issuing money, no borrowing or debt, the deficit is created because tax receipts are lower than currency issued and already spent, so all the money issued is not all taxed back. Which model we have is the heart of the MMT debate. A currency issuer always has a liability for the currency they issue, which means when they issue their currency they increase their Liabilities on their Balance Sheet, and when they receive their currency back as payment, they reduce their Liabilities. If they receive 100% of the currency they issued back as payment, their Liabilities go to zero and all currency is removed form circulation.
1 like โ€ข Jul '25
@Jon Underwood The first governor of the Bank of Canada was asked about the growing debt during WWII. When asked, he agreed that the federal debt was a private sector asset. That may or may not be the same as equity. Assets minus liabilities equals equity. I can use the equity in my house to obtain assets from the banks which then becomes a liability of mine and an asset of theirs. The federal deficit is the money created and spent by the federal govt but not taxed back. It is a private sector surplus. The only debate as pointed out in 1942 by J. L. Ilsley is how to make it an asset of the people. Social constructivists usually identify money as a social construct meaning defined as real by social consensus. All money is thought by some to be an IOU. It allows us to settle our accounts with others. Anything left over after settling our liabilities is equity. Federal taxes and fees cancel liabilities -- bonds or reserves -- created when the govt also created the money it spends into the economy.
1 like โ€ข Jul '25
@Jon Underwood 79.
Today's Legacy Class: Two Books
Systems Thinking: A primer by Donella Meadows Systems Thinking for Social Change by David Peter Stroh
1-5 of 5
@herb-wiseman-7860
I am retired after working as a social worker for 48 years. Now I work to to fix the economic system that failed so many of my clients.

Active 64d ago
Joined Mar 10, 2023
Powered by