STICHWORTE: • • • • • • •von

MMT ist kein geeignetes Instrument

MMT – die “Modern Monetary Theory” war intensiv Thema dieser Seiten:

→ MMT als Schluss- und Höhepunkt des größten Schuldenzyklus der Geschichte?

→ Mit MMT den Euro „retten“

→ MMT kurz zusammengefasst

Und natürlich auch im Podcast:

→ Richtung Modern Mone­tary Theory: US-Noten­bank auf MMT-Kurs

Immer wenn ich einen Beitrag zu dem Thema interessant finde, möchte ich daran erinnern. Mittlerweile denke ich, dass die Beschreibung von MMT korrekt ist, aber nicht die Schlussfolgerungen. Vor allem halte ich die Idee einer schrankenlosen, lediglich “demokratisch kontrollierten” Geldmengenausweitung für problematisch.

  • “As Stephanie Kelton notes in her book The Deficit Myth, governments with access to a printing press are ‘currency issuers’ (exceptions include, most obviously, members of the eurozone). As such, all their spending could, in principle, be financed via the creation of cash. Taxes may serve other purposes — the redistribution of income and wealth, the discouragement of ‘sinful’ behaviour — but, in the world of MMT, they serve no useful macroeconomic role.” – bto: Das ist eine korrekte Beschreibung und hinzukommt, dass es in der Eurozone faktisch auch so ist und wir damit nur ein Verschieben von Vermögenswerten haben.
  • “In the real world, however, taxes are crucial. The fundamental difference between government finances and those of companies and households is not access to a printing press but, instead, the coercive power to raise taxes. A company making a severe loss cannot reduce that loss by imposing taxes on everyone else. A government can. A worker receiving a pay cut cannot force others to make up the difference. A government can.” – bto: So ist es. Der Staat kann Privateigentum belasten – Vermögen, aber auch alle Ertragsquellen. Und genau dies macht er.
  • “Still, imagine for a moment that governments embrace MMT. (…) Giving elected representatives the keys to the printing press is the equivalent of giving a gambling addict the keys to the casino. For many politicians, the primary objective is to remain in power. As such, they will too often be incentivised to pursue instant gratification at the expense of longer-term stability. In the early-1970s, the UK embarked on what became known as the “Barber boom”, thanks to the efforts of Conservative chancellor of the exchequer Anthony Barber to engineer an election victory in 1974. As it turned out, the Tories lost and, two years later, the UK ignominiously had to accept a bailout from the IMF. Central bank independence provides a useful bulwark against such behaviour.” – bto: Diese ist aber faktisch Geschichte. Oder glaubt jemand ernsthaft, dass Frau Lagarde unabhängig vom Elysee-Palast agiert?
  • “(…) inflation and taxes are, in many ways, simply two sides of the same coin. Those governments without access to tax revenues can instead ‘debase the coinage’. Supporters of MMT claim this will never happen, yet history suggests otherwise: after all, it has been a tried and tested policy of kings and queens over hundreds of years. Too often, those with access to the printing press are prepared to take undue risks in the hope that ‘this time it’s different’.” – bto: Angesichts des akuten deflationären Schocks durch Corona und der historischen Aufgabe des Kampfes gegen den Klimawandel ist doch klar, wohin die Reise geht.
  • “(…) Negative real interest rates, a result of higher-than-anticipated inflation, serve to redistribute wealth away from private creditors (pensioners, for example) to public debtors. Much the same could be achieved through a wealth tax. At this point, we come full circle: the distinction between the printing press and taxes begins to break down.” – bto: Es ist eine ungerechte Vermögenssteuer, belastet sie doch die kleineren Vermögen mehr.
  • “In the face of recurring lockdowns, we are better off allowing companies and workers to enter a period of economic ‘hibernation’ in the hope that, once the virus is under control, they can thaw out. (…)  In the process, however, we are in effect borrowing from our collective economic futures. At some point, some of us will be presented with a bill which, if hibernation policies succeed, we will be in a reasonable position to pay. The political process will decide whether that bill comes in the form of higher taxes, more austerity, rising inflation or eventual default. That, I’m afraid, is the deficit reality.” – bto: Aber es gibt schon den Punkt, dass Staaten diese Zahlungen sehr lange in die Zukunft verschieben und so real entwerten können. Ja, dies ist die “Inflationslösung”, aber eben mit normalen Raten.

→ ft.com (Anmeldung erforderlich): „MMT: The case against Modern Monetary Theory“, 22. Oktober 2020