A new economic theory may yet cut the ground from under Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison's feet

ABC News, 17 July 2020:

We may be on the cusp of a revolution. What if everything we thought we knew about public finance over the past 40 years has been wrong? 

A new economic theory has emerged that could rewrite our understanding of how governments create and spend money and what type of society we can afford to build. 

And if it is correct, people may be furious. 

Because it could show that Australia's political elite can afford to spend far more than they are on public health and education, social housing, scientific research and green energy schemes, while eliminating unemployment. 

And yet they're not — either from a misunderstanding of government finances or because they don't want to. 

However, to embrace this radical economic theory you will have to forget what you've learned about budget deficits (that they're bad) and government debt (that it burdens future generations). 

Why? Because proponents of the theory say that far from being a problem, budget deficits are often a good thing — they can be the source of healthy economic growth. 

They argue a country like Australia that controls its own currency doesn't need to tax or borrow before its national government can spend money — the government can create all the money it needs to fund itself … within limits. 

It all sounds too good to be true, which is why critics warn the theory is naive, simplistic and potentially dangerous. 

But supporters of the theory — who are growing in number — say many of the world's problems today (extreme wealth inequality, poorly funded public hospitals and schools, chronic underemployment, stagnant wages) are a consequence of misunderstanding government financing. 

They say macroeconomic theory — which looks at the bigger picture of how the national economy works — has got too many major questions wrong. 

So what are we talking about? Let's take a closer look.... 

The theory is called Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). It is challenging the neoliberal economic orthodoxy that has dominated policymaking in Australia, the United States, the United Kingdom and many other countries since the mid-1970s. 

The reigning orthodoxy assumes a couple of things. 

Firstly, it assumes every country has a "natural rate" of unemployment and it's unwise to try to force the jobless rate below the natural level because inflation (and wages) will rise too quickly. Therefore, it assumes it's better to accept a certain amount of unemployment to keep prices stable (and to keep wage demands weak).

At the moment, Australia's natural rate of unemployment is assumed to be somewhere between 4 and 5 per cent. 

Secondly, the economic orthodoxy holds that the national government needs to collect taxes, or borrow from savers, before it can spend money. 

Politicians repeat this point incessantly. 

When you hear a politician saying the government must "live within its means," what they're really saying is the government mustn't spend more than it collects in taxes or borrowings.

However, MMT economists want to turn these orthodoxies on their head, among others...... 

The people who developed it have been working on the body of theory for decades, quietly, in countries such as Australia and the United States, but their ideas have recently burst out into the open as global leaders search for fresh ideas to deal with the unprecedented economic crisis of 2020, and the lingering effects of the global financial crisis in 2008-09.

 MMT economists make several claims: 

Firstly, they say we've been thinking about budget deficits incorrectly. 

They say budget deficits are not always bad. In fact, deficits are often necessary and beneficial. A budget deficit is merely evidence of extra government spending, and government spending boosts the wealth of private sector businesses and households.  

They say it depends what deficit spending is used for. Increasing the deficit to finance a war is not the same thing as increasing the deficit to build more hospitals and schools. 

They argue investments that will enhance productivity through better health, greater knowledge and skills, improved transport and the like are worth funding, even if it results in a budget deficit. 

Secondly, MMT economists say we've been thinking about government spending incorrectly. 

They say the argument (promoted famously by British prime minister Margaret Thatcher) that national governments must tax or borrow before they can spend is wrong. 

MMT argues it's the other way around — national governments have to spend money into the economy before they can tax or borrow. Government spending actually precedes taxation. Accepting this proposition is key to embracing MMT. 

Thirdly, they say taxes are necessary, but not for the reasons you may think. 

They say government taxes can be used to keep inflation under control, to control our behaviour (via fees and levies and rates), and to get us to produce things the government needs. 

MMT economists draw on the ideas of chartalism to make this last point. They say governments use taxes to create demand for their own currency — that is, if a citizen has to pay tax then they're going to have to work to earn the currency to pay the tax in that currency. 

Essentially, governments use taxes to put everyone to work. 

"At the end of the day, a currency-issuing government wants something real, not something monetary," writes Professor Stephanie Kelton, one of the highest-profile MMT economists and a senior adviser to Bernie Sanders in both his 2016 and 2020 Democratic presidential primary campaigns. 

"It's not our tax money the government wants. It's our time. 

"To get us to produce things for the state, the government invents taxes or other kinds of payment obligations." 

Fourthly, MMT economists say countries that issue their own fiat currency can afford to buy anything that's available for sale in their own currency, and they can never go bankrupt in their own currency. 

"Fiat" money is government-issued currency that isn't backed by any commodity, such as gold. It's paper or digital money that has no intrinsic value. We'll return to this point later too. 

Fifthly, MMT economists say "full employment" is not only possible, it's a moral imperative. Anyone who wants a job should have one. 

They say we must prioritise genuine full employment and governments should spend whatever is necessary to achieve it — no matter the debt or deficit. 

Sixthly, MMT economists say the national government should run a permanent "Job Guarantee" (JG) program to provide a job to everyone who wants one. 

They say it could be linked to other economic and social programs, such as a "Green New Deal" — a policy advocated by MMT proponents linked to the US Democratic senator Bernie Sanders, to create jobs by shifting to zero-emissions technologies.......

Read the full article here.