There is no obligation to balance the books, after all. There is only an obligation to use the power of office for the public good, and that means that the power to create money must be used to deliver full employment for all who want it, at which point it may well be that tax revenues will cover all spending the government desires because for it to do otherwise would be inflationary. So, to create money (and not, I stress, borrow it) would in that case be the sacred duty. And there would be no need to reverse that money creation so long as the public, or at least the private sector, wished to save and so keep those funds with the government, which is what the actual consequence would be as the sectoral balances would show.
So tax revenues will, at full employment, more than cover the extra money printed to get there. Further, peeps will invest in government bonds because they want to.
Perhaps not so much really, For Snippa also claims that peeps want to invest lots in govt bonds now because uncertainty. Uncertainty that will disappear once we’ve got full employment and less uncertainty. Or, more technically, he#s missing that peeps will invest abroad.
But OK. Now think of his other assertion. We’ve a risk there of inflation given that full employment and money manufacture. So, this is when people are going to want to invest more in fixed income bonds from government?