MMT makes no difference at all:
In the work that I am doing I am presuming that the government is seeking to create full employment. I am also presuming that it will do so by meeting the demand for government services on which most of the population are dependent, meaning that more must be spent upon them.
As a consequence, whilst additional tax will not fund additional services, extra tax revenues will be necessary if those services are to be supplied. This, as a consequence, requires that those potential additional sources of tax revenue that might be used to achieve this purpose be identified, and identifying and quantifying those additional taxes is what I am working on.
Before MMT. Lefties wanted a large government high tax country.
After MMT – lefties want a large government high tax country.
The difference is? Nowt, obviously.
Smurf wants Richard Burgon deciding how much your pocket money may be.
He’s also wrong even in theory. Tax is to reduce the inflation form the lots of spending:
From there, the work explores the theoretical reasons why raising additional tax from those with higher incomes and wealth would be appropriate at this moment, even if it was simply for the purpose of redistributing the overall current tax due.
Doesn’t work. Inflation is caused by people spending money. As even Spud will point out the rich can maintain their spending in the face of higher taxation – they will just save less. Therefore taxing the rich does not reduce aggregate spending – nor inflation.
My editors will begin to look at what I have written on this project in the next week, and I hope that thereafter parts of the report will be published in stages on this blog over the weeks to come so that it can have a form of peer review here before the work is finalised.
Bet the peer review won’t mention that.