The real problem is using monetary policy as a tool at all. We should have ZIRP forever and use fiscal policy to target price stability and full employment.
I’m pretty sure they mean zero interest ZIRP with regard to MMT. But people forget the second part of MMT which is confiscatory in effect even if not by name, it’s still your money but you are no longer allowed to spend it until inflation comes down, by which point your money is obviously worth less than it was and that value is in effect confiscated.
I remember reading it in a Harvard white paper, I deleted my MMT archives once it became obvious that it was not only economically unworkable (which I had already assumed) but also politically unworkable.
Economists used to think that inflation was hard to start which made MMT more tenable and now they think inflation is hard to stop. It was only hard to start because speculative asset bubbles soak up liquidity and reduce money velocity.
What makes you think appealing to authority at Harvard is impressive? Or using the term “economist” when you have Powell talking about being guided by the stars?
MMT is a description of how reserve accounting works in an economy with a floating exchange rate and how that is linked to the physical economy.
If you have something that shows how that isn’t the case in practice then I’m all ears.
The Harvard white paper was supportive of MMT while I am not - so it wouldn’t have worked as an appeal to authority for my position.
One of the reasons that MMT gained any traction at all is that many of their tenets are equally wrong to the tenets in neo-Keynesianism. So MMT people are correct when they say if X in neo-Keynesian is true then Y is also true. Which is why they can say they are simply describing what is already the case. But they’re both wrong because X is not true, you can’t presuppose neo-kensianism and expect to end up with a rational and coherent economic model. On that basis and more I really don’t respect practicing economists and wouldn’t use them as an appeal to authority either.
Also my invocation of economists was highlighting their fickleness and incorrect beliefs.
Since MMT is now politically impossible I no longer worry about it becoming a reality. It could have only been done at the same time as a raging speculative asset bubble and before the negative consequences of inflation has been felt by the middle and lower classes. But that’s too late now, Covid killed it. The lower classes blame the government for inflation and even if you don’t agree with them you’d still have to convince them otherwise and we have seen how futile that has been. It might still be possible to get MMT as part of a wartime economy but at that stage I’ll have bigger issues to worry about.
ZIRP is an artificial intervention in the market: Whenever it costs money to borrow money, the government will print some and give it for free to whoever is looking to borrow it.
Not in the slightest. We have these things called “autostabilisers” that are temporally and spatially more precise than jiggling a single interest rate and indirectly hoping something moves in the right direction two years later
