You, Me and MMT – Let’s Talk
I'm approaching one year of writing about Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) on Substack. It's time I got to know you better.
Next month will mark one year since I started this MMT101 Substack newsletter. My aim was, and still is, to spread the word about MMT by teaching the basics and beyond – in a way that is as accessible and jargon-free as I can make it. To that end, so far, I’ve published 47 posts and 8 video-based podcasts.
It’s time I got to know you better
So, this feels like a good time for some reflection and a good time to get to know you better. I suspect I've pushed enough content at you that you have formed an opinion. i.e. whether or not I’m doing a good job at helping you understand MMT. And whether or not I’m actually giving you something you value and that you find useful.
Maybe my approach doesn’t quite suit you? Maybe I’m pitching my content at the wrong level or maybe I’m delivering it in the wrong format? Or maybe I’m missing something entirely; the one thing that would help you? Or perhaps, by accident as much as by design, I’ve got it about right?
Give me your feedback
I want to know your opinion. I want you to tell me how I can help you to learn about MMT – and/or give you the most value from the newsletter that arrives in your inbox each week.
There are two ways you can give me your thoughts and opinions. You can either just click reply to this newsletter and tell me what you think, or you can fill in the questionnaire I’ve put together below.
I hope you don’t mind me saying this, but I’d prefer if you filled in my questionnaire, simply because it gives me your response in a more structured way, which (at least in theory) should help me better tailor my approach to your needs. I’ve provided a text area at the bottom of the form for your ‘free form’ thoughts, which, of course, I welcome. :-)
I want to do a better job - tell me how to do it for you personally
I want to do a better job and I can only do that if I get a sense of what that looks like. It’s unlikely that I’ll start sounding like a different person in my writing style – as I can’t write in a tone than my own. But what I can do is open myself up to the possibility of providing content in a different format. Perhaps my articles are too long, perhaps you would rather get a summary of each topic rather than a full exploration? Or perhaps they are not long enough, don’t have enough statistics or enough examples? I don’t know what suits you – tell me.
If you give me some of your time by responding to this newsletter with your thoughts - we will both get something in return. What you will get will be something closer to what you need and what I’ll get is a better idea about how to satisfy your needs. In the process I’ll be spreading the word about Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) in a more effective way. I really do want to make a difference as I’m sure you do too.
When we learn we change ourselves. When we learn together we can change the world.
Note that paid subscribers resources are now here.
Thanks for subscribing
You took the step of subscribing to my newsletter. And if you are a paid subscriber, you took the step of supporting my writing. Whether you are a free subscriber or a paid subscriber, I thank you. I would not have continued to write about MMT if you had not responded to my content by subscribing to receive my weekly newsletter. I’m truly grateful to you. Thanks.
Jim Byrne
I feel a bit guilty for not publishing my usual MMT-focused newsletter, so here are some thoughts on whether or not deficits are a good thing or a bad thing. This is an extract from, ‘My MMT Top Ten: Modern Monetary Theory’s Best Ideas Explained’.
Deficits are neither good nor bad
MMT tells us that deficits (i.e. governments spend more than they bring in taxes and other income) are not inherently good or bad. For governments that issue their own currency it’s not the size of the deficit that is important, it is whether or not the government achieves its economic goals.
So, whatever amount of spending it takes to achieve those goals - within the resource, planet and inflation constraints - is the right amount of spending. So, does the government want an educated workforce, to reduce poverty, move to more sustainable energy sources, build more houses or does it only want to worry about avoiding a deficit?
In the context of a government that issues its own currency, MMT tells us that the size of the deficit is irrelevant. So, what should currency issuing governments be focused on? They should be focused on achieving their real goals.
Stephanie Kelton writes that a balanced economy should be the aim not a balanced budget.
“The point is, not every deficit serves the broader public good. Deficits can be used for good or evil. They can enrich a small segment of the population, lifting the yachts of the rich and powerful to new heights, while leaving millions behind. They can fund unjust wars that destabilize the world and cost millions their lives. Or they can be used to sustain life and build a more just economy that works for the many and not just the few. What they can’t do is eat up our collective savings.” Stephanie Kelton, The Deficit Myth: Modern Monetary Theory and the Birth of the People's Economy
Whether you agree or disagree with the MMT approach, I welcome your comments. :-)
Links to some of my most popular newsletters
Become a paid subscribers for access to additional content:
A Permanent Home for MMT101 Paid Subscriber Resources – Factsheets, book recommendations, academic papers, MMT podcasts and more.
MMT Factsheet 3: If Taxes Are Not For Spending What Are They For?
The survey section that asks about length of article is not working
Australian economist Warwick Powell gives detailed answers to 18 questions concerning Deficits and Bonds, many of which are often asked of the regular Post Keynesian / MMT specialists- in my experience without being satisfactorily answered. Most (particulary Q1 to Q10) are applicable to economies generally , some are more USA specific.
Mr Powell’s Substack is a unpaywalled for the time-being and ought to be very widely read by those determined to escape the Neoliberal bind.
https://warwickpowell.substack.com/p/us-government-deficits-and-bonds