It seems, Divitas, that you are somewhat confused or ignorant about macroeconomic theory, as MMT is a looooooooonnnnngggggggg way away from Keynes’ The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money and Hayek’s Good Money and The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money.
Hmmmm?
d fb
Because MMT does NOT say deficits don’t matter. It does say deficits are necessary if you are a currency printer (and a reserve currency too). It also says there are good times and bad times to raise spending/deficits.
I understand fully. MMT is what is happening now, not Keynesian economics. Keynes theory was based on the belief that government intervention could stabilize the economy. In his book The General Theory… I do recall that he wrote that the government should keep one eye on the credit market so as not to scare off lenders.
MMT has no such worries (yet).
OK. That is a sane response, the increasing deficits are a main concern of mine, and should be a real concern to all.
However, let us not forget the crux moment in our economic history when Clinton, using all the political capital he could muster, had successfully put the USA on course to “erase the national debt”, or at very least (and more likely use) have a big cash flow cushion to use with low risk for fiscal stimulus if a recession hit, and then the absurdly idolatrized Greenspan squashed it:
A few short days after Bill Clinton vacated the White House this January, Federal Reserve Board head Alan Greenspan publicly endorsed the new tenant’s $1.6 trillion tax cut. Democrats who had been convinced by both Clinton and Greenspan to give paying off the debt priority over education, health, and other social investments were “shocked” and “stunned” to hear the chairman brush aside concerns that the government would have to borrow money in order to finance George W’s largesse, 40% of which would go to the richest 1% of Americans. The New York Times announced that we had entered the “Greenspan-Bush” era, following the “Greenspan-Clinton” era, in which the president of the United States came to be the junior partner in the management of the U.S. economy.
…and of course after endorsing the Bush tax cuts Greenspan went on to mismanage the Fed, refusing to impose regulatory sanity, contributing mightily to the financial catastrophe of 2007 - 2008 and nasty corrupt aftermath.
MMT has never been actually implemented, but its ancestry in practice is, uhm, highly promiscuous…
d fb
MMT is just a summary of modern Keynesian economics that has been rebranded. The part that Keynes wouldn’t recognize is the idea that government spending is constrained only by inflation.
If MMT were happening now, the government response inflation should have been to raise taxes.
That was it! He ignored his allegiance to sane fiscal policy (budget for surplus when economy strong and for debts when economy weak).
d fb
Prop up their currency.
India has a federal debt balance in the trillions and runs an annual federal deficit - neither of which are possible under a gold standard.
Like a gold backed currency 
We have a lot of gold and do not have a gold-back currency. In fact we have the most of any country, about 4X what China has, 10X what India has.
Which you need if you don’t have the world standard economy and currency that everybody else wants. But if you have it, or at least while you have it you don’t need the funny metal in a box, people accept your specie as though it was the funny metal anyway.
Here is my prediction for a gold-based currency:
The Indian GDP is $3.4 Trillion
There are $34 Trillion in rupees in circulation
As of May, India held 820 tons of gold
A ton of gold is worth about $75 million
Thus, India has roughly $62 billion in gold.
India would need to increase their gold holdings 530x their current holdings just to have enough gold on hand to replace the amount of rupees in circulation today.
So, ya, good luck switching to the gold standard.
All gold back currencies have a run on the gold
In the immortal words of Homer Simpson
D’oh!
[quote=“Divitias, post:1, topic:106503”]
Russia wanted to put a gold backed trade settlement currency on the 2023 Johannesburg agenda but failed. I suspect that they will try again later in the year at the October 2024 BRICS Annual Summit. Making slow progress, but progress it is:[/quote]
Hmm, no gold backed trade settlement currency again this year.
As Rockefeller noted JP died a poor man.
Look at the comparison to Rockefeller.