The "technical" solution doesn't require the consumer to spend their cash on what you refer to as "non-essential" items. In fact, the consumer's role in the "technical" solution is minor.![]()
Care to elaborate on how you think this is possible?
The "technical" solution doesn't require the consumer to spend their cash on what you refer to as "non-essential" items. In fact, the consumer's role in the "technical" solution is minor.![]()
Oops, I left out the word NOT, as in "will NOT be spared".
Care to elaborate on how you think this is possible?
According to MM theory, there are 2 "actors" in the economy, the private sector and the public sector. We're in a balance sheet recession which means that the private sector is paying down debt and saving instead of spending or borrowing. MMTers argue that it is the function of the public sector to take the place of the consumer in such a scenario, so the government should spend through infrastructure projects and grants, as well as tweaking the tax system and we'll probably some form of UBI/job guarantee. It hasn't worked in the past because governments haven't followed through with proper MMT policy ideas - this time may be different.
The basis of your premise requires governments to follow proper MMT policy. Something which you concede hasn't happened in the past.
. Infrastructure projects, grants, tax breaks, and a UBI all take time to filter down. Initially (i.e. my two year guesstimate) the bulk of that money, when it reaches consumers, will be used to pay living costs, pay down debt, and save. Only when the psychological "I feel safe" barrier is reached will people spend again.
I'm not interested in the function consumers have to play. Their role is not required. It is the government's role that is important. So consumer spending is not part of the solution. All that is required is for the government to announce its intention to fund infrastucture projects Australia wide and upgrade public services such as hospitals and lower taxes. The market always moves up on a positive sentiment of the future - buy the rumour sell the the news.![]()
Consumer confidence and spending are key. Without them there is no economy. No matter how much the government spends on infrastructure projects.
I've made the mistake in the past to listen to Austrians when it comes to what is happening in the world.
I'm not interested in the function consumers have to play. Their role is not required.
And now I suspect you're making yet another mistake by listening to MMT with regard to what the future holds.
"Consumer spending is the single most important driving force of the U.S. economy." - LINK
"Consumer spending is a key driving force in the economy" - LINK
"Over the past decade, consumer spending accounted for between 67% and 69% of our total economy" - LINK
"Consumer spending accounts for 70 percent of American economic growth" - LINK
You could be right. I think MMT has nailed it, but it will come down to politicians.
I prefer not to rely on politicians.
I'm not interested in the function consumers have to play. Their role is not required.
"70 Percent: The Myth of the Consumer Economy" LINK
"Consumer Spending Drives the Economy?" LINK
"Three Widely Believed Economic Fallacies" LINK
"The ‘Consumer Spending’ Myth" LINK
The articles were posted to rebut your argument about the value of consumer spending to an economy.
Now Austrians don’t like governments spending money. We don’t have any Austrians in charge so we need to look to MMT and their position that is doesn’t matter whether the spending is public or private, as long as there is enough spending going on.
MMT is gaining traction.
“My guess is that the next debt deflation signal will come when bonds begin to price in negative interest rates. That day is coming soon... and that will be the signal to sell equities and the insolvency phase will begin.”