If you’re a progressive and want to fix problems like unemployment, the health care and health insurance systems, infrastructure, education, our energy and climate crises and want Government to deficit spend to do it, sooner of later you’ll get the question: “Aren’t you just ‘printing money’? Here’s my answer to that one.
No!
Because:
1) Today the Government prints very little money. It mostly just “marks up accounts” using a computer when the Treasury spends, or when the Fed buys financial assets, in return for reserves it creates. So, literally, I’m not saying we should “print money,” I’m saying we should deficit spend by “marking up” non-Government accounts.
2) Also, the idea of “printing money” being a bad thing is a hangover from the days before 1971 when money was backed by gold or other commodities. “Just printing money” referred to printing it without acquiring the gold or silver or other commodities needed to back it. So, before 1971, there was a contrast between old money, which was commodity (largely gold) -backed, and merely printed money which was not. Money that was backed was worth something; printed, but unbacked, money was worth less, or even worthless, depending on conditions.
3) Now that we have our fiat currency system, to describe Government deficit spending as “printing money” is way off-base, because it ignores two important realities:
First, these days ALL US Government money is fiat money. It is all unbacked by any commodity. There is no distinction between old money and newly created money. And the new money created when Government deficit spends, is worth no more and no less than the old money.
Second, assuming that the Government did create money without issuing debt (the closest thing you can get right now to the old “printing money”) to pay its bills, would the effect be bad or intolerable, or would it be good? That’s the real issue raised by Government spending deficit or otherwise.
4) So, I know your printing money” question is raising the issue that Government deficit spending for state revenue sharing programs, payroll tax holidays, Job Guarantee programs, or other Government deficit spending I favor would have a bad outcome because it would cause inflation. What you’re really asking me is not whether I’m in favor of “printing money” but whether I’m in favor of inflationary deficit spending?
My answer to that REAL ISSUE is no, I’m not proposing inflationary government deficit spending. I’m proposing Government deficit spending targeted on job creation and other valued outcomes until we get full employment. There’s no evidence that such spending is inflationary at all.
If you have any I’d love to see it, but all I see right now is some commodity inflation which has nothing to do with Government deficit spending, and also a great deal of deflation in other areas of the economy that has everything to do with the fact that the Government is deficit spending far too little, and also on the wrong things, to enable the economy to perform up to its potential.
(Cross-posted at All Life Is Problem Solving and Fiscal Sustainability).



6 Comments

Read this.
http://my.firedoglake.com/cmaukonen/2011/06/15/seven-deadly-innocent-frauds-of-economic-policy/
Which references this.
http://moslereconomics.com/wp-content/powerpoints/7DIF.pdf
Thanks. Warren’s is a great book, and he and I have been working together closely for some time now.
Read this: http://my.firedoglake.com/letsgetitdone/2009/12/08/myths-scares-lies-and-deadly-innocent-frauds-part-one/
this: http://my.firedoglake.com/letsgetitdone/2009/12/09/myths-scares-lies-and-deadly-innocent-frauds-part-two/
and
this: http://my.firedoglake.com/letsgetitdone/2009/12/10/myths-scares-lies-and-deadly-innocent-frauds-part-three/
Also, Warren is one of the three central figures in developing the Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) approach. Right now, at New Economics Perspectives, Randy Wray and Stephanie Kelton are running a weekly series of posts providing a Modern Money Primer. It’s a good opportunity to start getting involved: http://neweconomicperspectives.blogspot.com/p/modern-money-primer-under-construction.html
The book is interesting – but as he notes “This is not to say that excess government spending won’t possibly cause prices to go up (which is inflation). But it is to say that the government can’t go broke and can’t be bankrupt. There is simply no such thing.”
But he does not address the inflation problem – so I disappoint MMT folks by waiting for more information.
There is nothing he says that I disagree with – how could there be since he deals in simple Econ 101 macro economics linear algebra that is expressed as spreadsheet rules? But I have always found the “details” to be of interest in any subject – indeed “fiat” – by faith – suggests folks response to any action may be more complicated than “logic”. I’d like to see Krugman and Warren in a Cspan debate.
As to the immediate post by letsgetitdone to do immediate hiring that is so logical that only a knee jerk hate of gov spending could get anyone to reject it.
Hi papau, Bill Mitchell’s great on inflation. Here: http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=10554
Here: http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=13035
and here:
http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=3773
And this one on why Keynes got it right.
http://www.amconmag.com/blog/why-not-keynes/
I think it’s a little more complicated than that. I think I agree largely with you.
I would say that most of the inflation is caused by the private sector banking system, not the gov’t. I’m more afraid of banks lending like crazy, vis-a-vis inflation.
But yeah, cutting the deficit now ain’t too bright.