Guest Post by Jim Grant
Modern monetary theory is not so theoretical anymore. In all but name, it’s the description of Republican fiscal policy in this living moment. “Federal Borrowing Soars as Deficit Fear Fades,” said the headline on page one of Tuesday’s Wall Street Journal. For the second year in a row, the Trump administration is spending $1 trillion more than the government expects to extract from the taxpayers.
The Bourgeois Gentleman is the Molière play in which a character comes to the proud realization that he has been speaking prose all his life without even knowing it. By the same token, the Trump administration has been implementing the essential doctrines of “functional finance,” also known as MMT, without seeming to realize it.
No harm came to Molière’s character, M. Jourdain, for his funny lack of self-awareness. The stakes are higher for all who live under the influence of the 20th-century progenitor of MMT, the economist Abba Lerner.
You can boil down MMT, as James Montier did in Barron’s last week, to a few handy precepts. The first is that money is the government’s creation, not society’s. It derives its value from the fact that you can pay your taxes with it.
Right away, you understand the political foundation of the body of ideas associated with Lerner, an avowed Marxist. But MMT is a big tent, and there’s plenty of room for Republicans.
“[W]hatever may have been the history of gold,” Lerner wrote in 1947, “at the present time, in a normally well-working economy, money is a creature of the state. Its general acceptability, which is its all-important attribute, stands or falls by its acceptability by the state.”
President Donald Trump has never put it exactly that way, but Lerner’s idea is implicit in the way 21st-century central banks do business. They set interest rates and print money to achieve prosperity—full employment, as Lerner defined it; full employment plus record-high stock prices, for Republicans. Borrow money, spend it, materialize it out of thin air, Lerner counseled. Stop when economic growth reaches its physical constraints of spare labor and capital. If inflation accelerates, lower the boom by taxing the rich instead of borrowing from them. Except for the admonition to tax, the White House and Lerner are on the same page.
The second big idea in MMT concerns the nature of the public debt. There’s nothing to fear from it, said Lerner—at least, not if a government can borrow indefinitely in its own currency. “The greater the national debt,” the economist wrote, “the greater is the quantity of private wealth. The reason for this is simply that for every dollar of debt owed by the government, there is a private creditor who owns the government obligations…and who regards these obligations as part of his private fortune.”
Lerner carried the argument to its logical Keynesian conclusion: The greater our collective fortune, the less we need to save. The lower our savings, the greater our spending. The greater our spending, the higher the level of our employment.
The Trump White House talks an orthodox fiscal game, even now; Lerner made no such pretense, believing as he did that the public’s liabilities are identical to the public’s assets. We owe it to ourselves, in other words—and, of course, nowadays, to the foreign bondholders, too.
Lerner was a close reasoner and lucid writer. In his carefully constructed theoretical world, the public debt would not grow indefinitely but rather tend to melt away. Why? “The greater the national debt, the greater is the quantity of private wealth” and, hence, the lower the need to borrow.
It has not worked out quite that way. Famously, the debt has not melted away, but spurted. In the past 20 years, the ratio of federal debt to gross domestic product has leapt to 105% from 60%. Over the same two decades, observe Van Hoisington and Lacy H. Hunt, guiding lights at Hoisington Investment Management, in Austin, Texas, GDP has grown at 1.2% a year per capita, 37% below the long-term U.S. average.
Lerner failed to anticipate today’s looming entitlements crisis, the falling national birthrate, and the striking decline in the rate of private saving these past 10 postcrisis years. The empirical fact, again to draw on Hoisington and Hunt, is that “large indebtedness eventually slows economic growth as resources are transferred from the highly productive private sector to the government sector.”
“We have, indeed, been told that the public is no weaker upon account of its debts,” wrote an earlier commentator, “since they are mostly due among ourselves, and bring as much property to one as they take from another. It’s like transferring money from the right hand to the left; which leaves the person neither richer nor poorer than before.” That was David Hume, Scottish philosopher and contemporary of Adam Smith, writing in 1777. Anticipating MMT in an essay entitled “Of Public Credit,” Hume called it “buncombe.”
In fairness to MMT, England did not default, as Hume feared it would, and as American patriots, then fighting the Revolutionary War, hoped it would. In fairness to Hume, many another nation did subsequently default. Indeed, in 1933 and 1971, the U.S. itself left its creditors high and dry by refusing to honor its promise to pay dollars denominated in a fixed weight of bullion.
Now that dollars are fashioned from paper or (an even lighter-weight material) digital keystrokes, formal default is unnecessary. The government can print whatever it needs to service its fixed charges. The question is whether the creditors will cheerfully accept the currency so effortlessly tossed off the 21st-century presses.
Hume, steeped in the classics, reminded his readers that Roman emperors stored up treasure against some future day of peril. The “modern” expedient, Hume disapprovingly continued, “is to mortgage the public revenues, and to trust that posterity will pay off the encumbrances contracted by their ancestors: and they, having before their eyes so good an example of their wise fathers, have the same prudent reliance on their posterity; who, at last, from necessity more than choice, are obliged to place the same confidence in a new posterity.”
Speaking for the newest posterity—that’s us—I have arrived at one certain conclusion: The word “modern,” written or spoken in the fiscal, monetary, or financial context, is trouble—nothing but trouble.
James Grant, founder and editor of Grant’s Interest Rate Observer, is the author of Bagehot: The Life and Times of the Greatest Victorian, which was published in July.
After 8 long years of ultra-loose monetary policy from the Federal Reserve, it’s no secret that inflation is primed to soar. If your IRA or 401(k) is exposed to this threat, it’s critical to act now! That’s why thousands of Americans are moving their retirement into a Gold IRA. Learn how you can too with a free info kit on gold from Birch Gold Group. It reveals the little-known IRS Tax Law to move your IRA or 401(k) into gold. Click here to get your free Info Kit on Gold.
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal
-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
Grant is a brilliant voice in the Wilderness. Prices and rates must be discovered by the marketplace of seven billion people via their actions and interactions. A room with a handful of Ivy League Shitheads setting prices and rates based on their personal prejudices and “data” has not worked and will never work as well as letting you and I setting the rates by what we as the “market” are willing to pay.
It isn’t about what’s best for the 7 billion, now is it?
Nope.
MMT is all fraud. All the verbosity tries to obscure it.
Begs the question, when is debt no longer debt?
As soon as the conflagration is ignited and 6-1/2 billion of us dies.
Not excusing the deficit spending, but Trump was presented with a game already in play. He has chosen to the continue the game thru his first term, rather than provoking the necessary bitter correction and reset that might cost him a needed 2nd term.
He has called for his cabinet Secretaries to compile lists of achievable drastic cuts in a 2nd term. Whether they will be implemented remains to be seen, but should a global monetary reset occur, and it is apparently needed, there would need to be a dramatic domestic reset as well.
This is all in keeping with the 4th Turning scenario. The transformational shocks occurring in global trade arrangements, banking, blockchain, and the like are just part of that greater cycle, with Trump as the Grey Elder.
There are not going to be any cuts. T obviously is in league w/ Wall St and the Bankers (perhaps he had to as a survival mechanism). That won’t change. His presidency is supported and enabled by Wall Street and the MIC – Full Stop. This thing’s going over the edge and the only question is when and how huge will be the crack-up bang at impact.
Lerner wrote that, but he did not create MMT. In fact, MMT economists are adamant that there is no point to debt with fiat, just credit the accounts directly. Nothing that Hume could conceive off. They also predicted the problems of private debt in 2007, when the “state of macro was generally good”.
The greatest debt to the future is the crumbling infrastructure, inequality, precariousness and climate change, not some bits representing an abstract value of a trade commodity.
This is nonsense. The truth is, the US government debt is not a problem in any way shape or form. In fact, it can be repaid tomorrow without a negative repercussion. That would simply involve replacing government bonds with deposits at the Federal Reserve Bank with similar interest and maturities. The similar or even better risk/reward terms assure no change in investor savings/spending preference or desire to hold dollars. Not recommending this course of action, just pointing out that it is possible.
See blurb regarding equity from an intergenerational perspective:
Francisco, you would be correct if the Federal Reserve System were actually a part of the US Government. Then it would be a right pocket vs left pocket exercise as you suggest.
But IT IS NOT! The Fed is a PRIVATELY owned bank!
If the Fed assets are deducted from the equity of the member-owner banks, those banks would have ALL assets depleted, and would have to recall all consumer and corporate loans outstanding, creating a deflationary contraction unparalleled in history!