viel gluck

Not in the UK:
Legal tender has a very narrow and technical meaning in the settlement of debts. It means that a debtor cannot successfully be sued for non-payment if he pays into court in legal tender. It does not mean that any ordinary transaction has to take place in legal tender or only within the amount denominated by the legislation. Both parties are free to agree to accept any form of payment whether legal tender or otherwise according to their wishes. In order to comply with the very strict rules governing an actual legal tender it is necessary, for example, actually to offer the exact amount due because no change can be demanded. [My emphasis,Royal Mint]

I think that the most potent of the presentation is about fiscal transfers.
EU is under the spell of Mundell’s “optimal currency area” and believe that persistent deficit and surpluses can and must be dealt with. Not understanding that such permanent deficit and surplus areas exist within every state, currency union, dollar or euro standard pegged currencies, regions within states, between cities, between areas within cities and in household. Fiscal transfers are essential mechanism that can keep currency union alive long term. Redistributive mechanism that counters distribution upward of capitalist economy, between rich and poor, between surplus and deficit areas is esential to long term functioning of any system and size.

Fiscal transfers by unified tax, retirement and health system, military production investment in poorer areas, state investment into deficit areas infrastructure to reduce regional finacial constraints or ECB guaranting deposit insurance of all EU banks independent of individual country budget are all ways of keeping Nominal Surplus Circulation (as i like to call it) going uninterupted.

On another note, i would like to write about MMT wider acceptance and confusion that initialy creates.
Reading Kaldor i got idea that largest confusion comes from basic assumption under MMT operates. It is not given nowhere i could find. The basic assumption that separates MMT from neoclasical economic theory.
Neoclassical economics is based on movement of goods and services while analizing economy and implying that such movement is also moving currencies, not other way arround as MMT is all about.
Neoclassicals imply that value of goods and services is precisely reflected in prices of those goods and proceed as nominal value is same as real value. But along the way there are contradicting problems that are insolvable since prices change. That is the reason they all preffer that prices be fixed by gold standard to reflect true values of goods and services in order to get away with anoying discrepancies.

I believe that this assumption by MMT that flow of currency dictates the flow of goods and services should be the starting point of any description of MMT to contradict neoclassical basic assumption. Flow of money or Nominal Surplus Circulation is what dictates flow of goods and fiscal transfers are countering destributive effects of surplus areas accumulating more and more liquidity from deficit areas preventing sufficient distribution of real values within deficit areas.

Hi John,

if you are talking about P.B. I personally do not think that it is a good idea…
It would be great! but he do not esteem a lot Grillo.

I’m also personally not 100% sure that Grillo is totally aware of how MMT works.
He is talking about lot of things… when the very simple way to follow is the
tax backed bonds!

regards,
G-

Warren, I just saw this video of Beppe Grillo in 1998, the new independent party leader in Italy. The video starts off crude, and he is vulgar, but towards the end of the video (about 7:40 in), he brings up the very core of your MMT 7DIF proposals. He talks about the banking system being a problem because they will not put more money into the economy that the people need. That there is a scarcity and the people own the money, so the people should give themselves more money.

I thought I was listening to you. Have you reached out to him through Pablo? He seems to have been preaching your form of MMT for at least 15 years now.

I have just recently discovered MMT and have seen your policy interview with the, I’m assuming, editorial staff of the Norwich Bulletin on youtube. I am wondering if you plan on running for office again? If you were, I would love to be able to sign up and volunteer. I have seen very few political candidates with the awareness and honesty to actually propose governing according to reality instead of by doctrine and dogma. Look forward to your response which I sincerely hope is in the affirmative.

Sincerely,
Auburn Parks III

Let’s start Occupy Q&A!