Yes - Wray points out the fatal flaw in MMT as a paradigm changer. While MMT may paint an accurate picture of our convoluted and byzantine monetary system, it uses terminology and concepts which already have meanings that are firmly entrenched in the public mind. You can say public debt or deficits are a good thing but don't be surprised by the pushback. What is really meant is that government spending is a good thing. This is exactly the message than true monetary reformers are giving. Its direct, understandable and doesn't lead into the hour-long explanations that MMT invariable does.
In order to have real long term change we have to lobby to change the names of the governments fiscal system Govt Spending = Public Investments Budgets = Public Investment Plan (PIP) Govt Debt = Publicly Issued Assets (PIA) Deficit = Net Public Assets (NPA) Just changing the wording would fix the problem forever and we owe it to our kids to do that much atleast.
![Why American Cities Are Broke - The Growth Ponzi Scheme [ST03]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/7IsMeKl-Sv0/mqdefault.jpg)
Yes - Wray points out the fatal flaw in MMT as a paradigm changer. While MMT may paint an accurate picture of our convoluted and byzantine monetary system, it uses terminology and concepts which already have meanings that are firmly entrenched in the public mind. You can say public debt or deficits are a good thing but don't be surprised by the pushback. What is really meant is that government spending is a good thing. This is exactly the message than true monetary reformers are giving. Its direct, understandable and doesn't lead into the hour-long explanations that MMT invariable does.
In order to have real long term change we have to lobby to change the names of the governments fiscal system
Govt Spending = Public Investments
Budgets = Public Investment Plan (PIP)
Govt Debt = Publicly Issued Assets (PIA)
Deficit = Net Public Assets (NPA)
Just changing the wording would fix the problem forever and we owe it to our kids to do that much atleast.
Agree!
Maybe once a few people break that boundary, many more will?
Why are you only speaking with "Progressive" politicians?