MMT in the Real World

Published on
July 10th, 2019
Duration
53 minutes

MMT in the Real World

The Exchange ·
Featuring Kevin Muir and Rohan Grey

Published on: July 10th, 2019 • Duration: 53 minutes

Modern Monetary Theory, or MMT, has suddenly become one of the hottest topics in economics and politics. But how does it stand to actually impact capital markets and public policy? In this exchange between Macro Tourist editor Kevin Muir and Modern Money president Rohan Grey, Real Vision’s Ed Harrison finds out what’s really at stake. Filmed on June 24, 2019 in New York.

Comments

Transcript

  • RR
    Robert R.
    11 August 2019 @ 00:51
    I agree with the comments about Rohan. Way out of his depth. He sounded more like a campaign manager for Bernie than a serious student of economics. This is a very important topic however that I want to see more of. Please just get someone who isn't all about reinforcing current Democratic memes.
  • LB
    Louis B.
    8 August 2019 @ 08:56
    Boy, what a waste of time this was! Worse, it's scary that people like Rohan even gets invited to speak about money is an insult to my intelligence. God help us all if lawyers become the driving force in money matters.
  • DW
    Denton W.
    19 July 2019 @ 15:51
    Great discussion. Kevin did an excellent job of explaining MMT from a trading perspective, and I was even able to glean some insights from Rohan in spite of all his political meandering. But I would be remiss if I didn't comment on Rohan's political views which I found grotesque. It was beyond disturbing how he would just flippantly say "oh government can just ban lending to such and such industry." And then use the excuse that the state doesn't allow lending for dog fighting as is if illegal dogfighting and energy production are morally the same. His view of what "freedom" is also a strawman's argument. Freedom is freedom to action and from coercion. People who own more land or assets or has more wealth than you are not "coercing" you, as Rohan would like you to believe. And the state is not granting them this wealth because they uphold property rights and the rule of law which is consistent with the small l liberal order that all free marketeers subscribe to. I could go on with countless other examples of Rohan being intellectually dishonest, but I will leave it with those two examples.
  • BP
    Byron P.
    18 July 2019 @ 12:57
    this whole interview is a great example of a real life trader talking from experience vs. complete sophistry from an illusory lawyer.
  • BP
    Byron P.
    18 July 2019 @ 12:12
    Rohan is incredibly naive in thinking the state would even consider allowing an alternative currency.
  • KS
    Kathleen S.
    17 July 2019 @ 13:14
    I have been thinking about MMT and gold (fixed exchange rate) and these two camps. It seems most people are in one camp or the other. You either believe in fiat Keynesian economics or you are Hard Money Gold standard guy who believes one must always be on guard against the government and its politicians for spending and putting us into the ever present danger of hyperinflation. I think what is missed in all of this is private banking and THEIR MONEY CREATION. The US Federal Government does not have a monopoly on money creation - PRIVATE BANKS create money “out of thin air” every time they make a loan, it is called Fractional Reserve Banking. When you step back and look at our FAKE Financialized Economy (Wall St vs Main ST) you see that it is NOT the Federal Govt Debt and Deficit spending that is killing the “real economy” it is the DEBT that is created by private banks that is killing people and turning them into debt slaves. People have no money to spend into the real economy because they are spending all their money servicing mortgages or student debt. What is a house worth? What is a college education worth? Answer: The amount of money a private bank will lend on it. Our enemy is not the Federal Govt and its spending - it is private banks money creation and fractional reserve lending. These private commercial banks need to be on a gold standard and thus limiting their ability to create debt slaves and drive up housing and education costs. A government should NEVER have to be on the gold standard because it limits their ability to foster economic growth through research and infrastructure, it limits their ability to help citizens in a time of need, and it limits their ability to spend on defense to protect their citizens. I am for both --- HARD MONEY for private banks and private sector --- Fiat for Govt. MMT is not a theory or an idea it is an accurate description of what we have now. PRIVATE BANKS are the ones destroying the economy, the ones creating massive income inequality and the ones responsible for much of unrest and misery we have today. "It’s fractional reserve banking, stupid". My interpretation of James Carville Quote --
  • SB
    Stewart B.
    15 July 2019 @ 21:13
    Perhaps this should have been categorized on RealVision as: Real Vision Trade Ideas: The Case for Gold ;)
  • SB
    Stewart B.
    15 July 2019 @ 18:59
    The problem is not starting MMT, its stopping MMT. Free money is the most addictive substance known to politicians. And, if hypothetically some of our politicians are corrupt, all the better.
  • RC
    RJ C.
    15 July 2019 @ 17:49
    I feel fear when I hear people like Gray speak, the disconnected, marxist, "i know better than thou" mentality just makes me nauseated and concerned that these people have spread like a virus thru the word. But what made me hopeful, appreciative, and excited for the future was reading thru the RV viewers comments. They can see thru this pandering elitist choking on platitudes just the same as I. Cheers to you all, you're great company.
  • SH
    Stephen H.
    15 July 2019 @ 11:48
    Great commentary and insights from Kevin Muir as always. Far too many analogies, euphemisms and tangents from Rohan Grey. On too many occasions his responses avoided the question completely and began with a simple logical construct, “can we agree this is a table” and never referenced back to the question. I suspect he was both out of his depth or nervous about the interview as he did not really fall back on the economic concepts, factual constructs or even separate the economic from the political. A shame really, always like hearing different views, they sharpen the focus, here I’m not sure what I heard. Rohan if you are reading this feedback please do feel free to reach out, happy to help shape specifics for you.
  • SP
    Stephen P.
    15 July 2019 @ 11:37
    Mushy as soggy cornpone. No takeaways. Then at the end the lawyer perks up about digital currency but wants to have universities or communes or some such issue it. Then he says he is in favor of decentralization for these.
  • ev
    ernie v.
    15 July 2019 @ 01:50
    I am not sure how this Mohan Gray will be taken by most of the people in this forum. But he does not pass the smell test. He has an agenda. That type of agenda needs a lot of non-thinking people to make MMT "work" I am not looking forward to this unproven experiment. Gray is a bag of hot air. Reminds me of a used car salesman.
  • Hv
    Hannah v.
    14 July 2019 @ 20:51
    F*#k it. Just exercised my capitalist right and bought the album. I know what I’m doing for the next hour.. hehe.
    • SS
      Shanthi S.
      15 July 2019 @ 07:13
      You’d better make the most of that capitalistic right while you still have it. Before too long Rohan “Breadlines” Grey will be rationing out approved melodies to the grateful (but hungry) masses. “That’s a good thing.” Right?
  • Hv
    Hannah v.
    14 July 2019 @ 20:31
    And now just listening to Crime of the Century. Supertramps finest. Thanks Rohan!!
  • Hv
    Hannah v.
    14 July 2019 @ 20:27
    Part way through this interview I got up to play Supertramps “Dreamer” on my big huge awesome sound system. It’s been 45 years since I’ve listened to that. Thanks for the throw back! And a couple of realizations: 1). The smartest people in the room tend to say the least. 2). Was his minor in “kindness”? 3). What’s with everyone wanting to change the world? Things ran better when we left it alone. Have a great day, Hannah
  • SS
    Shanthi S.
    14 July 2019 @ 09:43
    I’m a huge Market Huddler and LOVE Kevin Muir, and appreciate his pragmatism with regards to the inevitable MMT, but thanks to him being coupled with this commie, totalitarian lunatic I could only get half way through this discussion before the nausea became intolerable. Can’t understand why Kevin wasn’t given his own segment. As an agnostic I’m praying my butt off that this cocky little despot never makes it to the halls of power. God help us all if he does.
  • BG
    Bruno G.
    14 July 2019 @ 06:27
    Any zipper head who believes in global warming lose all credibility in my mind when it comes to monetary policy. What a dueche bag
  • GB
    Gary B.
    13 July 2019 @ 22:09
    It seems like an MMT'r is allocating realvision viewing resources. Waiting for the guest who soundly slam dunks these socialist ideas in the trash bin.
  • JS
    Jordan S.
    13 July 2019 @ 22:00
    I enjoy listening to Kevin Muir and his reasonable position (market huddler here), but Rohan Grey is difficult to agree with. He doesn't believe that having a Government set zero percent interest rates on loans leads to bad investments. He also believes that Governments should determine all investment choices by criminalizing areas that they deem unfit. His position on climate change seems extreme to say the least. I cringe at the idea of his Socialist society becoming a reality. Traditional free markets need to return to fix our crony capitalist system.
  • RC
    Ryan C.
    12 July 2019 @ 20:03
    I appreciated Kevin’s balance on the understanding of MMT and on the awareness of its risks. While it was hard to listen to Rohan, I think it’s incredibly important to understand how these people think as they are driving the conversation and it feels like MMT (in some form or fashion) could be here sooner than we think. Like most extremist monetary policies, I’m sure MMT will work great until it doesn’t.
  • JA
    John A.
    12 July 2019 @ 11:38
    Sooooo... lemme see. I have this paycheck that I get periodically. MMT begins to reduce my purchasing power by creating inflation (hidden tax), so MMTers solution to remedy inflation is to directly tax me more so I can’t “over spend”? First, I’d love a definition of that term. Who decides when I am over spending, pray tell? Second, I have a question: Who ends up with ALL the money? Please read your monetary history. Every fiat currency in history has gone down in flames because the government no longer has any restraint on what it can print and spend. These guys are way over-educated, and sadly, haven’t learned some of the most important stuff, when it comes to monetary systems. Hang on to your hats, people. May you live in interesting times.
    • DS
      David S.
      13 July 2019 @ 19:15
      I think Muir is on your side. He is using it as an investment tool, not promoting it. DLS
  • JG
    Jory G.
    12 July 2019 @ 00:34
    Interesting discussion but I think quite a few very smart guys have been educated beyond their intellect. Trying to feed and raise a family, and make ends meet while working for a manufacturing company or retail outlet might considerably change their perspective as to who should be making decisions about what is best for all of us as they trying to manage an economy. I would prefer to make my own choices thank you and. If Real Vision has not done so I would really like to see an intelligent debate on the reality of climate change.
    • MA
      Melanie A.
      13 July 2019 @ 00:00
      Ditto on the intelligent debate on climate change.
  • DR
    David R.
    11 July 2019 @ 19:31
    I couldn't listen to this unfortunately, this Rohan Grey guy is to much.. Mabey I have a low tolerance for acidemia logic these days but, MMT, in my opinion, is only worth discussing if it's honestly applied to the real economy.. Grey over speaking with platitudes is a big red flag. Maybe I'm just over MMT, meaning I understand the intent of it's creators and advocates.. if being honest MMT's net effect will largely be determined by receptive psychology, which changes every day and is extremely difficult to forecast as an investor. I think conservatively MMT is an undefined risk, until implemented and proven otherwise. I lean toward MMT staking more risk on government and pushing investors and households into more complacent behavior over the long run.
    • DS
      David S.
      11 July 2019 @ 23:21
      David R. - If you have nothing to do some time, you might want to watch the video. Kevin Muir uses MMT to make trades which is up your alley. I also enjoyed Rohan Grey later in the interview when he added more substantially to the conversation. I like your J/K comment on DB. DLS
  • DC
    Devin C.
    11 July 2019 @ 16:58
    Statist says "basically the govt. should run everything"... i just saved you a watch.
  • DD
    Daljit D.
    11 July 2019 @ 12:44
    Rohan didn't come across as a good rep for MMT in this interview. When someone comes into a discussion only wanting to get their own narrative out there and then starts waving their obnoxious finger about what's morally right or wrong..I struggle to listen. He didn't even answer some of the questions but instead went into rants about 'planet earth burning' and how 'uber is not an investment' and 'doesn't do any social good.' Kevin Muir's head drop in response to one of these rants at 20.37 says it all.
  • CG
    Christine G.
    11 July 2019 @ 11:54
    Brilliant. Both speakers were spot on. Both were aware of the preponderance of the data in the areas each discussed and could discuss policy in the context of data. They did not devolve into into prejudice and name calling, as many of the comments on this post do. RV needs to stay on these topics.
    • SS
      Shanthi S.
      14 July 2019 @ 09:45
      By saying “both speakers”, are you referring to Kevin and Ed?
  • KD
    Karl D.
    11 July 2019 @ 11:37
    Outstanding interview one of my favorites of all time. The critics of this interview either don't get it or they're so clouded by their political biases that they can't accept that MMT accurately describes how the economy works, and how applying that understanding can improve the economy and therefore people's lives. And Rohan, mate, lay off the politics... you need to persuade the world so the economic
    • KD
      Karl D.
      11 July 2019 @ 11:41
      *system can be improved.
  • WM
    William M.
    11 July 2019 @ 09:12
    RV and Ed are right to focus on MMT because it's going to be at the center of all our political and economic considerations in the next few years or longer. Ed Harrison's excellent comment below about the generational difference in perception about MMT and greater government control is spot on. Even if we're uneasy about all this...as investors and as citizens we ignore it at our peril...
  • JL
    James L.
    11 July 2019 @ 08:03
    get off the climate change bandwagon, seriously. if you're so smaert, how come you can't figure out this hoax?
    • JL
      James L.
      11 July 2019 @ 08:03
      smart*
  • zz
    zilu z.
    11 July 2019 @ 04:26
    Dude has to realize that when people spends tax money they do not care. Assuming government to be benevolent is not even funny.
    • SS
      Shanthi S.
      14 July 2019 @ 09:46
      Agree.
  • DY
    Damian Y.
    11 July 2019 @ 03:29
    This just ended up being too painful to watch and I had to turn the interview off. Listening to a couple of guys pontificate on how the world economy should work is really painful. We need to go back to free market capitalism and get rid of this crony government pseudo capitalism. The reason why the economy is in a mess is because of central bank policies and crony government intervention.
    • SA
      Stephen A.
      11 July 2019 @ 11:42
      So a 40% corporate tax cut and Trump slashing all regulation is not going back to "free market capitalism"? If you can't admit, "free market capitalism" is at its highs right now, I have no idea what you mean by "free market capitalism". If you think "free market" means lack of government, who the hell is going to enforce your property right? You gonna buy your own army?
    • SS
      Shanthi S.
      14 July 2019 @ 09:50
      Steven A. If you think this is the the height of free market capitalism, as you say, you clearly have no idea what is meant by free market capitalism. Wonder what role you feel Jay Powell serves in this anarcho-topia you feel we’re living through...
  • BA
    Bruce A.
    11 July 2019 @ 02:42
    We need the academic types to theorise and we need the practitioners to bring things back to reality. Kevin Muir is the kind of practical, thoughtful guy that I would trust with implementation strategy. For sure, monetary policy has reached a ridiculous extreme and new approaches are needed. I just hope that there are enough 'Kevins' out there to help guide us into this new world. Great job by Ed.
  • PC
    Philip C.
    11 July 2019 @ 01:48
    Someone please tell Rohan not to use scientific terms like 'heat death' that he does not understand. It is a thermodynamic term referring to a system in a state of maximum entropy. Even if you did want to use it in a more general sense, the earth is not going to experience a heat death, although it will probably become uninhabitable in a few billion years' time when the sun turns into a red giant. Describing climate change using terms like heat death or extinction events harms the cause of environmentalism because it makes its supporters sound like they are spouting pseudo-scientific claptrap.
    • DC
      Dan C.
      11 July 2019 @ 08:19
      Spot on correct! I cringed at that as well.
    • JL
      James L.
      11 July 2019 @ 08:21
      Well, in believing this climate change dribble, he is talking pseudo-scientific claptrap
    • SA
      Stephen A.
      11 July 2019 @ 11:40
      We are in the 3rd phase of Earth extinction. The original "world is going to end in 12 years" was in 1989. So 3 12-year "end of world" cycles and here we are worried about Version 4.0.
    • DS
      David S.
      11 July 2019 @ 23:50
      Philip C. - You are correct. Heat death has nothing to do with global warming. It has to do with a possible death of the universe – no thermodynamic free energy, therefore no way to sustain the processes that increase entropy. Thanks for bring up the point. DLS
  • PC
    Philip C.
    11 July 2019 @ 01:22
    I think one of the most fundamental objections to MMT is simply that it places monetary policy under the control of politicians. Millennials have not sussed this out yet, but politicians are ignorant, stupid, incompetent and frequently corrupt. This is not a statement about any particular political colour, it is universal. Anything that is placed under the control of policitians they will find a way to screw up. MMT theorists like to think that politicians will introduce just the right amount of monetary and fiscal stimulus to eliminate unemployment and they will pull back just at the right point where inflation starts to rise too high. Politicians will not do this. They will use stimulus money to buy votes and they will direct money towards their own supporters. And they will be unwilling to put the brakes on when inflation rises because an economy that has come to depend on stimulus will go into contraction when it is removed. Too many economists, especially younger ones, are blasé about price inflation because they have never had to live with it. It is very, very bad. In the west, most people have become complacent because high inflation has not happened in their lifetime. Elsewhere in the world, a great many people know from experience that fiat currencies can experience a catastrophic loss of purchasing power when politicians screw up.
    • JL
      J L.
      11 July 2019 @ 01:52
      you will get higher nominal rates though, and then you will see who is swimming naked
    • SA
      Stephen A.
      11 July 2019 @ 11:38
      High inflation hasn't happened in the West? My house went from $100,000 to $500,000 from 2000 to 2006.
    • JE
      Jos E.
      11 July 2019 @ 11:58
      This is spot on. No matter what sensible rules you put in place initially to govern spending, politicians will change them and wind up spending money until the currency implodes.
    • KS
      Kathleen S.
      11 July 2019 @ 16:42
      Have you met the FED --- these guys have made the rich -- richer than ever and this okay with u?? U think a FED that destroys pension funds and middle class is good thing?? LOL And for some reason you still don't get what causes inflation --- and why countries with debt denominated in a currency that they don't create are subject to runaway inflation. This does not describe US.
  • DM
    Doug M.
    11 July 2019 @ 01:17
    Inflation is already here, no? Student loans (US), housing... the expansion of private credit is key, not just the government spending money into existence.
  • SA
    Stephen A.
    10 July 2019 @ 22:31
    That was a good discussion and Kevin was good antidote to Rohan. The only thing I would like to mention that while we are all enamored with MMT right now and with the concept of the government creating money, we have to understand that MMT and government backed money is a fairly recent concept. As recent as 2008 when QE in the US was launched. Historically, money is created when a bank issues a loan and the original FED notes were issued in exchange for bank loans and those loans were backed by 1/3 gold (or whatever the original requirements were). So the original "reserves" were gold and loans and thus money supply was tied to economic activity in the private economy. Later on, the FED started accepting US treasuries (or government spending) as backing for money to fund WWW1 and WW2 military buildups but really the concept of government spending as backing of money is mostly from 2008 on. So the reality is that we are in a mixed money regime, where some of money is backed by government debt, some of it by gold and some of it by bank (private) loans. While it is important to use MMT, it would be foolish to think that government money is all there is. The creation of the FED was a 5 year process and a ton of legislative sausage had to be put through to come up with its Federal design and the FED is still primarily run by bankers and not politicians. This wild monetization of all kinds of government spending that people like Rohan envision is simply not going to happen, partly because majority of the money supply does NOT come from government spending! The bankers who are the holders of the private savings have a major say and better believe it, the government can't walk all over them. I mean it can, but then you have the USSR and I don't think anybody wants that, even a guy like Rohan.
    • DY
      Damian Y.
      12 July 2019 @ 02:55
      Hello Stephen, thanks for you comment. Your statement "we are all enamored with MMT right now and with the concept of the government creating money, we have to understand that MMT and government backed money is a fairly recent concept. As recent as 2008 when QE in the US was launched." History is full of examples of government creating money. In the colonial era of the United States many states created and spent paper money into circulation to aid trade. The UK has done it, up until 2000 the UK had an overdraft account at the BoE and used it to finance fiscal spending. Australia had state owned bank like CBA until they went private. The argument of States issuing money has been going on for centuries. One of the first nations to surrender to private banking was the BoE back in 1694. Most governments create the notes and coins of a nation today. Not all money is created through private banks by the credit creation theory. If you go back to the middle ages it was the state that coined the money you can trace this back to Roman times. I was in a coin vault in Rome a few months ago looking at gold coins that were minted by the state 2000 years ago. History is full of cases where the state has ruined the economy by issuing money. Nero back in 54 CE debased the coin by lowering the amount of silver in the coins, yes even Rome went through periods of hyperinflation because of the debasement of coin which was state back money. It would be scary to have people like Bernie Sanders or AOC or any politician to issue the money and control the money. One of the reason why money went to the private bankers was because the state always ruined it by funding their wars. If you read your history you'll see that it has always ended in tears. With regards to your statement of QE. The Japanese started doing QE back in the 1990, the Fed wasn't the first to do it either in 2008 as you stated.
  • DC
    Darren C.
    10 July 2019 @ 22:20
    Can't do it. It sure appears the MMT people will eventually get their way, which will make any seemingly absurd bitcoin projection come true. Note to self; since you cannot stop the inevitable stock up on popcorn and enjoy the show.
  • JB
    Jason B.
    10 July 2019 @ 21:33
    Austrian School Economists have been debating MMT people for a decade. And it's nothing new. It's most similar to the economic of John Law.
  • jm
    joeri m.
    10 July 2019 @ 21:08
    I really enjoyed this interview. I don't understand what everyone has against Rohan Grey. He seems to understand very well the monetary system. This quote of him is of crucial importance: Rohan: . "So every time a private bank makes a loan, nobody's standing outside going, what about the inflationary impact? What about the inflationary potential there? Even though that might lay claim on real resources that otherwise could be employed in other ways." Almost all the money that is being created today by private banks goes to real estate, no wonder it is so expensive. But nobody is complaining that the banks are creating money to blow up the real estate prices. And when the idea comes that the government can create money, everybody loses their mind. The private sector has been creating money for decades with enormous consequences (housing bubbles etc). I see no problem whatsoever with the government creating money because it already happens by the private sector. The real question is, what is the money used for? And then you can debate if climate change is the right thing. Read the history of Japan after WWII, they went from total destruction and huge debts to one of the most productive countries in the world because they knew how the money system worked and they used it to their advantage by using credit guidance to invest in productive sectors. In the 80s banks started to lend money to real estate and that is when the bubble came and popped. So creating money is not the problem, the allocation is.
    • JM
      John M.
      11 July 2019 @ 18:25
      Joeri: I don't think you have to worry about the inflationary impact of bank lending - IF rates are high enough (BTW a lever which central banks already control)! Real estate prices are high most likely due to unusually low rates due to NIRP/ZIRP policy not bank lending! Banks are already subject to some oversight re lending decisions - for example the Community Reinvestment Act. You want more oversight lending? Maybe with zero deposit rates (you get the behaviour you reward) and boomers drawing down their retirement savings as they age we should all start to think about deposits rather than loans. I
    • DS
      David S.
      11 July 2019 @ 23:55
      Banks have their own skin in the game. Politicians have other peoples' skin in the game. A big difference. DLS
    • RC
      RJ C.
      15 July 2019 @ 17:40
      You do not understand how any of this works.
  • TC
    Timothy C.
    10 July 2019 @ 20:28
    Color me shocked that an academic (and a lawyer no less) would be in favor of MMT. I am afraid this (MMT) is coming and it is going to be disastrous. I agree that our current policies are less than ideal but MMT may just be the medicine that will kill the patient.
  • SW
    Scott W.
    10 July 2019 @ 20:03
    How does an economist escape from a deep hole into which he's fallen? He assumes a ladder... These MMT folks assume specific concepts can be interchanged without consequence. But their arguments are sleights of hand. In the real world one produces something valued by the community and through exchange obtains the valued produce of others. Generally money serves as a proxy for valued produce. In the (fake) world of MMT, one is paid money for a job - any job - and wealth is "created". That this works just fine in certain models with certain assumptions does not however mean it will translate. Wealth derives from that which is grown, caught, or mined, but not from that which is merely printed.
  • CB
    C B.
    10 July 2019 @ 19:46
    Do Kevin and Rohan use methamphetamine? Probably not. Why not? Because they have a sense that never sleeping is unhealthy. Yet some how the economy must never sleep, must never cease to grow, must never be tested. Why would a system that is a part of nature be treated as though it is apart from nature. MMT is not a bad idea, it's just an idea. An idea that may not be necessary if we have a market place of competing ideas.
  • SS
    Sam S.
    10 July 2019 @ 19:42
    This interview sounds more like the promotion of politics, more taxation and climate change foolishness. Man has no ability to change the friggin climate. Man only has the ability reduce pollution and protect the environment where possible. Germany turned off it's nuclear plants after Fukushima, them had to fire up it's coal plants as the electric grid has failed and not enough power to run the country. Most of this discussion is a bunch of opinions that Peter Griffin would say, who the hell cares. Government miss manages everything and in the world today, does nothing for the people. Not sure the point of all this nonsense.
    • JL
      James L.
      11 July 2019 @ 08:07
      couldn't watch it anymore after he kept saying climate change garbage. seriously, wake up and listen to scientists.
  • JM
    John M.
    10 July 2019 @ 19:05
    The speakers are assuming that government fiscal policies have been too tight because there hasn't been enough inflation but make no mention of negative population growth in many western countries (incl. Japan) or population aging, or globalization. Haven't all these other forces depressed inflation?
  • DS
    David S.
    10 July 2019 @ 18:18
    I agree with Mr. Grey statement: “I think Uber is a regulatory avoidance scheme masquerading as a company.” Along with other “sharing” programs like Airbnb it does deregulate from the bottom up that which could not be deregulated from the top down. Now that the new “sharing” enterprises are being regulated more locally, they will fit the community better. Nothing will be perfect, but I do think that the “sharing” businesses do provide a public and individual benefit. DLS
    • AV
      André V.
      10 July 2019 @ 19:34
      Great, now even if I agreed... nothing to do with MMT.
    • DS
      David S.
      11 July 2019 @ 00:52
      Nothing to do with MMT, but the statement was made during the discussion. DLS
  • rr
    rlw r.
    10 July 2019 @ 18:08
    Well Done Ed, keep it going w the MMT series (Hunt, Koo, Rickards et al). Let’s find out what if anything may really hold up with MMT. Kudos Kevin, well placed questions & comments. Sorry Rohan, the lawyerly answers sucked. Every answer = central “authority” control omg.
    • OB
      Oussama B.
      10 July 2019 @ 19:27
      every time the MMT experts use the central authority to solve something a part of the free market dies. keynesian economics that we have been experiencing some the 30s didn't achieve in 80 years what MMT will do in 10 years in terms of moving towards complete Soviet central planning
  • DC
    Dan C.
    10 July 2019 @ 17:16
    Someone needs to glue a pointy goatee onto Raoul and get seriously confrontational with one of these MMT guys. I just want answers to basic questions. Though I do appreciate the civility in today's world, I still feel like we're traipsing around very basic issues with MMT, like "how do you so glibly underestimate Chinese overcapacity as a force for deflation?", "how on earth can you advocate central planning, given literally every experience, ever?", etc.
    • HH
      HODL H.
      10 July 2019 @ 23:35
      agreed, more challenges in interviews is always great
  • DC
    Dan C.
    10 July 2019 @ 17:09
    "I'm Australian, I have no vested interest in keeping the American empire alive" Are you kidding me, dude? Rohan seems to believe it's a natural state of affairs for a superior, resource hungry nation to pay market prices for raw materials. That one comment alone serves as an indication of Rohan's disconnectedness from actual reality. Simplifying investment decisions to "casinos vs schools" is a gross underestimate of how complex resource allocation is in the real world. The complex questions that arise in allocating resources over the entire world economy can only be addressed through free markets. Advocating for centralized control or a firmer hand on resource allocation makes problems worse. Also, the way he always slides back into HIS goals for money betray the fact that MMT is just the newest way certain members of society wish to control it. No thank you.
    • SA
      Stephen A.
      10 July 2019 @ 22:36
      The reason why there are so many casinos vs schools is because people are in school for 10 years of their lives and in casinos for the next 60.
  • AV
    André V.
    10 July 2019 @ 17:02
    If one agrees to MMT's principles and wants the economy to run at full employment, one can choose and defend reducing taxes to zero to everyone and having the govt just print the money equivalent to govt spending (instead of printing money and at the same time taxing the hell out of the rich); Also govt can print and send an equal amount of currency to everyone (instead of giving debt jubilee to a few, or instead of embarking on large government employment programs, or green new deals or whatever). So no Rogan, MMT is not an excuse to justify any of your policies.
  • DS
    David S.
    10 July 2019 @ 16:42
    Using MMT to understand an investment is one thing, but to enable Congress and the Administration to print money at will is another. Even without MMT the US has the greatest deficits of all time. Why allow Congress to add unlimited fuel to the fire. Does anyone think that the common good will constrain Congress? The only benefit I can see in MMT is that Washington lobbyist will kill each other trying to get to representatives first, thereby reducing the population. Mr. Harrison, I would very much like to hear Mr. Koo opinions in an interview with just you as soon as possible. He proposes, I believe, government spend money on constructive assets like infrastructure when corporation are paying off debt and not investing in constructive assets. At least every Japanese coastal village has a new harbor. DLS
    • WS
      Wm S.
      10 July 2019 @ 18:23
      Yes, an interview with Mr. Koo or, better yet, Richard Duncan would be most welcome. After all, it's Mr. Duncan who introduced the provocative and altogether fitting substitution of "creditism" for "capitalism." I would like to hear from Mr. Duncan with regard to MMT's descriptive accuracy.
  • MF
    Michael F.
    10 July 2019 @ 16:30
    The first 10 minutes of how the world can be acceptable with much greater central planning is precisely why I believe that although MMT will likely ascend for some time the loss of freedom in so many ways will be the outcome. . Maybe I am too old to believe that more government (political) control l is a healthy idea.
  • VB
    Vance B.
    10 July 2019 @ 16:23
    Rohan is emitting too much CO2.
  • CJ
    Charles J.
    10 July 2019 @ 15:21
    Listening to Rohan honestly scares me.... Not the MMT portion as much as his belief in centralized power. Sure because that's worked so well throughout history. The ole create a national emergency to concentrate power trick.... I'll risk an uncertain climate change future to maintain our form of government every single time.
    • GS
      Gordon S.
      11 July 2019 @ 14:11
      I suspect that as a millennial (as correctly pointed out by Edward in the comment section) the chance that a gen Xer will disagree with me is high and feel free to downvote or respond to my comment. But in any case, please consider the following thought experiment: What if your assumption were that the state of our environment (not specifically related to climate issues) is in a *severely* critical situation and that this would significantly matter for human flourishing? How would this assumption affect your thinking? I fear that one’s belief in this assumption is critical in understanding the resulting difference in viewpoints between millennials and gen Xers. As you might suspect, I deeply believe this assumption to hold and here I would highly recommend RV’s interview with Chris Martenson: https://www.realvision.com/tv/shows/interviews/videos/expand-your-capital-for-the-next-crisis And the following article describing the current global insects mass die-off (and why it matters) also mentioned in the above interview: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/27/magazine/insect-apocalypse.html (or my shortened version: https://gordonschuecker.com/2019/05/27/the-insect-apocalypse-is-here-nyt-article-shortened-version/ ) Unfortunately, most people nowadays conflate the environment with climate, but this is often too narrow of a view. While I am currently doing a deep dive into the climate science on both sides of the debate, something I urge everyone to do as I suspect this to become the “religion” of the century, I fear that even on “this narrow view”, the previously mentioned assumption holds true. There might be a chance that CO2’s effect is not as alarmingly pronounced as forecast by the IPCC, but I would not bet on it, especially not when reading articles about scientists on the “front line”: https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2019/07/weight-of-the-world-climate-change-scientist-grief/
    • GS
      Gordon S.
      11 July 2019 @ 14:28
      And to everyone who has gone down the rabbit hole on the dark side (I'm a few hundred hours deep into it), how much have they spent on the other side? Even the most skeptics btw admit that CO2 will become an issue in the future (c.f. people interviewed in the "Great Global Warming Swindle": Carbon Dioxide or Solar Forcing? http://www.sciencebits.com/CO2orSolarHYPERLINK Swindled: Carl Wunsch responds http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/03/swindled-carl-wunsch-responds/ So it is a fact that we are running an experiment on a global scale.
    • CJ
      Charles J.
      12 July 2019 @ 17:00
      I'm a millennial so it's probably not that.... The funny thing is that I don't doubt that human's are having an impact on the environment. What I doubt is that scientist's models come even close to actually replicating such a complex system as the earth is in reality. So your assumption that the state of our environment is in a severely critical situation is a complete guess and ignores the complexity of the system that is the earth and its environment. In this case, the devil I know, a totalitarian government, has proven throughout history to cause the very thing you're trying to protect against death and destruction. And you would like me to accept this for my family to prevent a future that is at best completely uncertain and largely unknowable because of the findings of scientists on the "front-lines" whose jobs are dependent on funding based off the assumption that climate change is akin to the global apocalypse. Given those alternatives, I'll roll the dice with our current form of government thank you very much. Furthermore, if the coming disaster is as you say, I'll put my money on innovation rather than centralized power to navigate our impending doom, but that's just me.
    • GS
      Gordon S.
      14 July 2019 @ 11:59
      @Charles J.: Again the question is not “having an impact” on the environment (I doubt anyone would say no) vs. “having a life-threatening impact” (your answer here is obviously no). “Unfortunately, most people nowadays conflate the environment with climate, but this is often too narrow of a view.” (my quote) Your answer addresses only the “climate crisis” you do not believe in. Fair enough, but how about the other issues, e.g. “the insect apocalypse” (c.f. linked article)? Here zero “complex modellings” has been done as almost no research has been done. The only thing we know is that total insect population is crashing hard. “I'll put my money on innovation”. How much of your own money are you putting in innovation that would prevent environmental degradation, or under what conditions will you in the future? To address an issue we first need to know about it. And the response should be adequate to the severity of the issue. It does not automatically result in a totalitarian government (I hope as much as you that it doesn’t). Remove taxes on wages. Remove/increase taxes on goods & services with low/high environmental footprint. Solutions could be a simple as these and would not mean the end of the world.
  • OB
    Oussama B.
    10 July 2019 @ 15:11
    the guy pretending is the economy is running under its full capacity when places like Europe and Japan have overcapacity and zombie companies is mind boggling
  • OB
    Oussama B.
    10 July 2019 @ 15:09
    I couldn't listen to more than 10 minutes these guys are hardcore leftists
    • WS
      Wm S.
      10 July 2019 @ 18:26
      You must be an ear plug manufacturer. Bravo. Such an open mind.
    • sm
      stephane m.
      13 July 2019 @ 12:38
      Maybe Oussama is just as tired as I am of earing about this non sense every day!! Man made climate change is a joke to justify taxing more...Wake-up!!
  • MC
    Minum C.
    10 July 2019 @ 14:50
    This is total crap. I couldn't watch to the end. The interviewers skills are lost in the process. Sorry. I was expecting something much better than this.
  • TJ
    Terry J.
    10 July 2019 @ 14:13
    I somehow managed to watch this to the end, but it was a struggle listening to many of Rohan's arguments. He strikes me as being a classic Keynesian, incredibly smart and intelligent with all the answers, at least on paper, and as always the answer to every economic problem is more debt. Monetary debt's ability to stimulate developed economies is spent so now let's open the spigots on the fiscal pumps, and hey we will worry about excessive inflation or worse after the fact. Obviously Rohan believes strongly in climate change but seems oblivious to the fact that many, possibly most other people whom have done the research are not so convinced, but that's another story. More importantly, I appreciate as Ed says that I need to have an open mind on diverse opinions other than my own, and so I am happy to listen to the views of people like Rohan but I look forward to the episode when hopefully you have the economics scholar and successful institutional investor Dr Lacy Hunt on your show to talk about MMT.
    • SW
      Scott W.
      10 July 2019 @ 19:38
      I would absolutely give full consideration to anyone willing to expound the case for anthropogenic global warming (and the extent and range of consequences), but unfortunately many proponents too quickly dismiss any degree of skepticism as anti-science and heresy. Such attitudes are likely the reason "A World on the Brink" was panned; Smith gave CNN-style rock and roll sound bites and characterized "deniers" as evidence of Luddite tribalism.
    • DC
      Dan C.
      10 July 2019 @ 21:19
      I agree, I got through to the end and I consider it to be a minor miracle. It's not because I'm close minded; I really, really enjoy when I can listen to something that can make convincing points that I'm wrong about something I believe. However, Rohan just kept banging on the moralistic drum with a scant mention of real world economics. He made a couple okay points but I can't say it was worth the time.
  • MS
    Mark S.
    10 July 2019 @ 13:53
    Unfortunately MMT is the almost inevitable response to the de-evolution of capitalism over the past generation into the current system of cronyism. And Trump, as the epitome of crony leadership, is the exact wrong person to be able to prevent this from becoming reality. Either we find new leadership that can steer us clear of the iceberg, or in 10 years (or sooner) the whole thing is going to blow up.
  • PU
    Peter U.
    10 July 2019 @ 13:29
    OMFG! These two guys are SOCIALISTS! Ed did a great job. I would have walked out on them. Complete rubbish!
  • MT
    Mike T.
    10 July 2019 @ 13:18
    I have a confession to make. I understand how important to be able to listen to views very different to my own, I tried, gave it 20 mins then I couldn't take it any more and shut down. I await with interest to see if Mr Grey reponds to my previous question does he trade/invest himself?
    • MT
      Mike T.
      11 July 2019 @ 09:29
      still waiting for a response from Mr Grey, does he trade/invest himself? If nothing, his silence will be most informative
  • MS
    Mark S.
    10 July 2019 @ 12:54
    The more I see of Ed Harrison, the more I like him.
  • AR
    Alejandro R. | Contributor
    10 July 2019 @ 12:17
    Hi Ed, We laid out a number of holes in MMT, including the Policy rate being set to 0%, the fact that the Job Guarantee rate is actually the Minimum wage, and various other non-starters for this economic collection of ideas called MMT. I would have thought we would have tried to address some of those issues in this video. Perhaps it is time to go back to the Real Vision Video from Richard Koo in 2016 when Richard Koo explains exactly what is happening in Europe, and what is going to happen next in this Global Balance Sheet Recession. Certainly worth another watching in this environment. https://www.realvision.com/tv/shows/interviews/videos/breaking-down-balance-sheet-recessions
    • EH
      Edward H. | Real Vision
      10 July 2019 @ 12:25
      The policy rate at zero is something we talked about (with Kevin saying it would lead to bubbles). We didn't address the job guarantee though. I think Pavlina Tcherneva would be a good MMT'er to take that on in a future Exchange. What specific questions about the Job Guarantee would you like to see presented?
    • AR
      Alejandro R. | Contributor
      10 July 2019 @ 14:29
      Kevin is not Warren Mosler. Mr. Mosler still seems to think it is not that big of a deal to set the policy rate at 0% forever. Do you think he will admit that on camera? Or still tap dance around the facts? Wouldn't it be great to get all the MMT Bosses on the same stage? Stephanie Kelton. Warren Mosler. Randall Wray. Let's get to the bottom of this "theory" once and for all. If the policy rate set at zero will cause bubbles, then MMT is not appropriate for Global Macro Economic Policy in an International Price System World.
  • EH
    Edward H. | Real Vision
    10 July 2019 @ 11:55
    Ed Harrison here: A few comments from me on this. I look at this Exchange as one in a series, and hope to keep this debate about MMT going. I know this is tough material for the more libertarian and hard-money-minded of you. Don't downvote it because you don't like it. Watch it with a suspension of disbelief and appreciate that RV has this diversity of content. Personally, I think the MMT debate critical to understanding the operational constraints of governments and the political dimensions of economics. On the political side of this, I found it interesting how much more comfortable Rohan is with government intervention than Kevin. You could chalk this up to their simply being different. But the sense I get is that Millennials have a different reference point than Gen X'ers or Baby Boomers and are, thus, more comfortable with government intervention than those two groups. Even within the MMT community, I get the sense that the younger crowd is more comfortable making full-throated policy choices, using MMT as the justification, where Mosler and some older MMT advocates seem less comfortable. My personal view is that marrying the operational aspects of MMT with policy choices has made MMT a political vehicle, an economic school viewed as partisan, with a partisan agenda. And that means MMT cannot be divorced from politics in the future. It will be interesting to see how this debate develops when the next recession hits the US and Europe.
    • MC
      Minum C.
      10 July 2019 @ 14:53
      Your comment was better than the interview.
    • PG
      Philippe G.
      10 July 2019 @ 18:35
      Thanks for chiming in Ed. Keep up the great work!
    • JL
      James L.
      11 July 2019 @ 08:11
      Totally understandable Ed, however it is hard to take someone seriously who drank the climate change kool aid
    • GA
      George A.
      11 July 2019 @ 13:13
      Very mature, measured comments, Ed. Like some others, I found myself recoiling at a lot of Rohan's comments. It is clear we have very different worldviews. But, his worldview is increasingly shared and I'd rather try to understand it than run from it. Please continue to explore these subjects.
    • PD
      Peter D.
      12 July 2019 @ 00:18
      Can't even begin to describe how useful this MMT series has been. After viewing these pieces, like it or not the general public is going to fall for MMT - and its accompanying political and fiscal outcomes - hook line and sinker. Invest accordingly, Great work again Ed.
    • DW
      Denton W.
      19 July 2019 @ 05:09
      Spot on Ed. Great analysis as always. You have been a huge addition to the Real Vision team. I can tell you though as a millennial I am not comfortable with the government intervening in the economy and I cringed every time Rohan voiced his policy prescriptions.
  • MT
    Mike T.
    10 July 2019 @ 11:53
    quick question for Rohan Grey, do you trade/invest yourself? I really hope you are able to respond to this simple question.
  • LJ
    Lawrence J.
    10 July 2019 @ 11:16
    Have Jim Rickards debate Rohan on Causes of Climate Change.
  • JS
    John S.
    10 July 2019 @ 11:14
    MMT and the Great Climate Hoax!
  • SW
    Scott W.
    10 July 2019 @ 10:59
    Always amazing to hear folks like Rohan say that governments around the world have engaged in needless austerity. Debt/GDP ratios in the developed world have been marching higher for at least 20 years, entitlement reform seems impossible, states like Illinois have unmanageable obligations, etc. Seems like Keynesians will never admit the error of their ways.
    • DS
      David S.
      10 July 2019 @ 17:59
      You are certainly correct about a whole lot of debt was generated in saving Wall Street and bankers gone amuck in many countries. The concept that sovereigns cannot go broke is certainly spurious. I believe that politicians will abuse MMT just like any other theory that comes along (Keynes said to pay back the deficits during good times - never happened.) Like other comments, I would direct you to Mr. Koo RVTV interviews to help understand how it can be done better. A cohesive society like Japan, however, may be one of the few places it will work. It is time to add a little gold to the portfolio, and that is only a hope. DLS
  • TE
    Tito E.
    10 July 2019 @ 10:58
    I sometimes think the debate is completely upside-down. Its a politico-finance agenda to have constant growth in a finite world and this constant fiddling of books via 'creating inflation'. Why the need to "create inflation". Should we not just have a spell and just let prices of assets come down to affordable levels? Would this not (big picture) be the natural way to solve this? Just let go. The reason that nature's not allowed to take its course is because system driven and gets stretched by political and financial interests.
    • TE
      Tito E.
      10 July 2019 @ 11:03
      btw im not averse to thoughts on MMT - when digital money is created and abused so much as to sustain wars and other spurious spending, the idea of giving everyone a basic wage for living so they can eat and have an acceptable standard of life seems a civilised thing to do. The world is about people and the wellbeing of nature. Money systems come and go. Its blatantly obvious this one is on its last legs anyway.
    • TE
      Tito E.
      10 July 2019 @ 11:46
      Funny thing is: None of these discussions are modern. They're as old as money itself.
  • DT
    Dane T.
    10 July 2019 @ 09:22
    There's something about Rohan that doesn't sit well. His alarmism re the environment is guiding his thinking which seems to lead to less freedom and more government, which is something I doubt any of us watching real vision want to see. smart guy obv but potentially dangerous ideas. great interview tho id love to see and hear more from these MMT proponents! cheers RV
  • km
    kenneth m.
    10 July 2019 @ 08:31
    Rohan calls it "private" investment. Yet, for him, its all about forcing savings in things that he likes (like sustainable energy), taxing to reduce some people's "purchasing power" etc. - HE gets to decide - using your money. The real problem here? So- called capitalists have egregiously gamed the system for years (artificially low interest rates and crony capitalism). In other words, the world abandoned real capitalism and markets years ago. Consequently, even the most idiotic and dangerous ideas cannot be called unreasonable. Bernie, AOC etc. ask why its worse to bail out students than it was to bail out banks. And, because the capitalists sold their souls, they have no answer for this....
  • TH
    Timo H.
    10 July 2019 @ 07:28
    Rohan is essentially proposing Soviet Union 2.0 with centralized money price & availability control. That such proposal is gaining acceptance, is outright scary.
    • JS
      John S.
      10 July 2019 @ 10:42
      He's an academic- the prosecution rests!
    • WS
      Wm S.
      10 July 2019 @ 18:57
      Hyperbole. The USSR forbade private property and imposed 100% capital gains tax. And didn't hold elections. Mr. Grey is suggesting nothing of the sort.
  • BH
    Bin H.
    10 July 2019 @ 07:07
    Become a fan of Kevin Muir
  • HK
    H K.
    10 July 2019 @ 06:51
    man, what a mismatch in the level of the two interviewees!
    • tr
      tom r.
      11 July 2019 @ 00:57
      Wow, Rohan just simply doesn't understand much. He obviously just wants to promote his agenda which is to fight global warming. In my opinion, he and his opinions are useless and very misinformed. There are more REAL scientists coming out everyday debunking global warming. He is just another Bernie fan no one needs. To me, this was a useless interview and disappoints me in Real Vision. I'm glad that is rare though as most of your interviews are exceptional.