Discussions about fiscal statements, analysis and controversies from an MMT perspective

The Japanese government is investing heavily in high productivity sectors and revitalising regions in the process

Last week I noted in my review of the Australian government’s Mid-Year Economic and Financial Outlook (MYEFO) – Australian government announces a small shift in the fiscal deficit and it was if the sky was falling in (December 19., 2024) – that the forward estimates were suggesting the federal government’s fiscal deficit would be 1 per cent of GDP in 2024-25, rising to 1.6 per cent in 2025-26 before falling back to 1 per cent in 2027-28. The average fiscal outcome since 1970-71 has been a deficit of 1 per cent of GDP. I noted that the media went crazy when these estimates were released – ‘deficits as long as the eye can see’ sort of headlines emerged. It was fascinating to see how far divorced from reality the understandings in Australia are of these matters. Meanwhile, the RBA keeps claiming that productivity is the problem and the reason they are maintaining ridiculously high interest rates even though inflation has fallen back to low levels. My advice to all these characters is to take a little trip to Hokkaido (Japan) and see what nation building is all about. The Japanese government has already invested ¥3.9 trillion for semiconductor industry development since 2021 (that is, 0.7 per cent of GDP) and the Ishiba government recently announced a further ¥10 trillion (1.7 per cent of GDP). Meanwhile, the overall deficit is around 4.5 per cent of GDP and no-one really blinks an eyelid. The Japanese government is investing heavily in high productivity sectors and revitalising regions in the process.

Read more

Australian government announces a small shift in the fiscal deficit and it was if the sky was falling in

Yesterday (December 19, 2024), the Australian government published their so-called – Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook 2024-25 (MYEFO) – which basically provides an updated set of projections and statuses of the fiscal position six months after the major fiscal statement was released in May. One would have thought the sky was falling in given the press coverage in the last 24 hours. The standard of media commentary in Australia on fiscal matters is beyond the pail.

Read more

British Labour Government is losing the plot or rather is confirming their stripes

At the moment, the UK Chancellor is getting headlines with her tough talk on government spending and her promise to keep an “iron grip on the public finances”, which she defined as “taking an iron fist against waste”. Okay. This tough guy talk (guy being generic) seems to be the flavour of the month with the incoming US administration also talking about creating a Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to hack into public sector spending and employment. Once again we see a Labour government consorting with the ideas of the conservatives. And extreme conservatives nonetheless. The British Chancellor has also determined that public officials are incapable of understanding the priorities and means to provide public services and is going to force the department officials to appear before a so-called ‘independent committee’ of bankers and other financial market types who will scrutinise the financial plans with the aim of cutting 15 per cent over three years from each department’s budget. Another example of conforming to neoliberal ideology. The problem with all this talk, which generalises into public discussions about government spending, is that there is an implicit assumption that it is dysfunctional and just goes up in smoke (waste) somewhere. I never hear these politicians acknowledge that if they actually succeed in making these cuts then a spending gap will emerge and that gap has to be filled in some way or the economy moves towards recession. In other words, what a person might deem to be wasteful expenditure, will always be underpinning GDP and employment growth. Clear up the ‘waste’ and there are additional consequences that may not be considered desirable. At least these politicians and their advisors should make that clear to the public.

Read more

Austerity cultist Kenneth Rogoff continues to bore us with his broken record

One would reasonably think that if someone had been exposed in the past for pumping out a discredited academic paper after being at the forefront of the destructive austerity push during the Global Financial Crisis, then some circumspection might be in order. Apparently not. In 2010, Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff published a paper in one of the leading mainstream academic journals – Growth in a Time of Debt – which became one of the most cited academic papers at the time. At the time, they even registered a WWW domain for themselves (now defunct) to promote the paper and tell us all how many journalists, media programs etc have been citing their work. While one can understand the self-promotion by Rogoff and Reinhart, it seems that none of these media outlets or journalists did much checking. It turned out that they had based their results on research that had grossly mishandled the data – deliberately or inadvertently – and that a correct use of the available data found that that nations who have public debt to GDP ratios that cross the alleged 90 per cent threshold experienced average real GDP growth of 2.2 per cent rather than -0.1 per cent as was published by Rogoff and Reinhart in their original paper. So all their boasting about finding robust “debt intolerance limits” arising from “sharply rising interest rates” – and then “painful fiscal adjustments” and “outright default” were not sustainable. Humility might have been the order of the day. But not for Rogoff. He regularly keeps popping up making predictions of doom based on faulty mainstream logic.

Read more

RBA monetary policy decision defies logic

Well, as I write this late in the Kyoto afternoon, Donald Trump has just made a victory speech after an incredible day of election outcomes unfolding. As I wrote last week, the only moral and reasonable position for a progressive to take in this election would be to vote for Jill Stein and send a strong message to the two major candidates that they were totally unelectable. I reject the claim that that strategy would just deliver a victory for Trump. However, the Democrats can’t really deflect blame like that for their horrendous policies in relation to the Israel issue and more. So the US faced a Hobson’s choice and I hope progressive parties elsewhere heed the message of Harris’s loss. But today I want to write a bit about yesterday’s (November 5, 2024) decision by the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) to hold their cash rate target interest rate (the policy rate) constant. With inflation falling quickly, there is no logic to that decision. The RBA keep claiming that there is excess demand in the economy but that is an unsupportable claim given the evidence.

Read more

Government job creation programs deliver significant (net) long-term benefits

On April 5, 1933, US President Roosevelt made an executive decision to create the – Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) – which was a component of the suite of government programs referred to as the – New Deal – that defined the Federal government’s solution to the mass unemployment that arose during the early years of the – Great Depression. These programs have been heavily criticised by the free market set as being unnecessary, wasteful and ineffective. Critics assert that no long-term benefits are forthcoming from such programs. However, those assertions are never backed by valid empirical evidence. A recent study by US academics has provided the first solid piece of evidence that the CCC delivered massive long-term benefits to the individuals who participated in it. And these benefits considerably outweigh the dollars outlaid by the government. I discuss that research today. The results also point to the effectiveness of a Job Guarantee program.

Read more

Classic deception from the Australian Treasurer

There is a pattern. Start with an aim which usually involves advancing the interests of some powerful lobby group. It is known that if the citizens realise that there is special pleading going on they will not be supportive. The solution – create some metaphorical language that will help convince us that the aim is worthwhile and legitimate. Then add a dose of ‘technical’ sounding language and some ‘scientific’ sounding concepts (for example, NAIRU), which ensures that only the metaphors, which have common parlance, resonate and the ‘detail’ is not challenged. Especially exploit the fact that most people are too embarrassed to question so-called ‘experts’ for fear of being humiliated for displaying ‘ignorance’. That is how fictional macroeconomics becomes mainstream and that is how we all become passive agents in spreading the fiction. The Australian Treasurer was at it again over the weekend after he had been rubbing shoulders with other Finance Ministers, Chancellors, and Treasurers in Washington D.C. at the annual IMF/World Bank meetings, which are akin to those evangelistic religious festivals where everyone is geedup – with a sense of self-importance and sanctimonious zeal.

Read more

These claimed essential fiscal rules in the UK seems to be disposable at the whim of the polity

Regular readers will know I have been a long-time critic of the fiscal rules that successive British governments have invoked as part of a pretence that they were being somehow responsible fiscal managers. The problem was that in trying to keep within these artificial thresholds, governments would do the exact opposite to what a responsible fiscal manager would do, which is preserve the integrity of public infrastructure, ensure public services reflected need, and steer the nation in a direction where it was able to meet the challenges that beset it. This period of ‘fiscal rule’ domination has been defined by relentless fiscal austerity and a degradation of living standards as successive governments pursued the neoliberal agendas. Now, it seems the British Labour government is finally realising that it cannot achieve its aims while retaining the fiscal rules they so tenaciously claimed were essential. Back when John McDonnell was the shadow chancellor I told him the rules were unachievable given his policy ambitions. His support crew – academics and apparatchiks vicariously slandered me for running that line. They were wrong and the current decision by the Chancellor to alter the rules proves that. But it also proves how ridiculous these rules are anyway.

Read more

The EU is in terminal decline

Some Wednesday snippets. First, I juxtapose the political machinations that the EU President is engaged in to consolidate and expand her power within the European Commission with the reality that Member State governments are becoming dysfunction because social instability and political extremism are rife. Then I reflect on my experience as Chancellor of Britain – a great success I should say, although I was told I had broken all the rules. It tells one how stupid the rules are. Then, finally, some music to enjoy.

Read more

The British government does not have to appease the financial markets

Sometimes one journalistic piece captures the problem facing those who are trying to change the economics narrative and promote an alternative framing that is ground in the reality of the system rather than one that serves to reinforce the dominant ideology of the elites. The opinion article by Larry Elliot in yesterday’s UK Guardian (October 13, 2024) – Labour’s challenge is complicated by the triumph of finance. That’s bad news for UK plc – is one such article. It summarises how far the progressive debate and the British Labour Party has become trapped by fiction. It demonstrates clearly how if we start off assuming that there is a rigid constraint on decision-making then the bind will lead, invariably, to poor decision making because the opportunity set is so artificially limited by the starting assumption. I am amazed really that progressives in Britain (and everywhere by the way) still adopt this flawed framework for debate and decision-making. So let’s work it out properly.

Read more
Back To Top