I'll begin by addressing today the dominant concern critics have expressed here -- the government might act badly with the funds. This is, of course, a real concern. But it is some ways a very odd concern and not a logical objection to MMT. The extreme variant of this critique argues that MMT is "fascist."
he good news from the standpoint of MMT is that this critique agrees that MMT is accurate and makes available policy choices that are effective in increasing income and employment -- and claims that MMT's effectiveness is the problem because the government leaders might use the increased income and wealth for evil purposes.
If that is a valid criticism of an economic theory (it works -- it increases income, wealth, and employment) then virtually any accurate economic theory that improves the economy is "fascist" because the government might be ruled by a fascist and the ruler might use the increased wealth and income to do evil. No one (economist or otherwise) can ever guarantee that a government ruler will not be evil and use the increased national wealth to do evil. Under this logic all effective economic theories are fascist and we should try to make the world as poor as possible so that fascistic governmental leaders have fewer resources with which to do evil.Read it at New Economic Perspective
Addressing the Dominant Critique of MMT
By William K. Black
(h/t Clonal in the comments)
"Under this logic all effective economic theories are fascist and we should try to make the world as poor as possible so that fascistic governmental leaders have fewer resources with which to do evil." This is position of the folks that want "small government" in order to block "the road to serfdom."