Horrela dio R. Wray[1].
Eta horretarako, AEB eta Europari buruzko politika ekonomikoaz, ondoko link ona aipatzen du[2].
Darrell Delamaide-k DTM goraipatuz[3] eta teoria berri horrek suposatzen duen iraultza ptolemaikoa ekonomialariek ez onartzeak[4], ezta establishment politikoak eta jendeak ere[5], ekarriko digun katastrofea azpimarratzen du[6].
‘Belatz jarrera’ fiskala[7], gobernu defiziten aurkakoa, ezagunegia dugu eta blog honetan behin baino gehiago aipatua.
Jarrera horren aurka dagoen posizio zientifiko justifikagarri bakarra Abba Lerner-en Functional Finance izeneko metodoa da[8], gaur egun ‘defizit hontza’ ikuspegitzat ezagutzen dena.
Hona hemen Wray-k argi eta garbi dioena:
i) Ex ante-ko aurrekontua behar da lehentasunak markatzeko eta benetako baliabideak esleitzeko[9].
ii) Gobernuak ez duela dirurik esatea erabat ergela da[10].
iii) Defizit belatzen eta defizit usoen ergelkeria literalki jendea hiltzen ari da. Heriotza horiek erabat baztergarriak dira
[1] Ikus Obsolete Dogmas about Government Budgets are Killing Us: http://www.economonitor.com/lrwray/2014/11/15/2219/.
[2] Ikus Darrell Delamaide: Opinion: Obsolete dogmas are crippling the world economy (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obsolete-dogmas-are-crippling-the-world-economy-2014-11-14?page=2).
[3] Ingelesez: “MMT, which bases models on the reality that the U.S. dollar is a fiat currency created out of thin air through government spending…”
[4] Ingelesez: MMT “represents a Ptolemaic revolution for flat-earth economists mired in an 18th-century view of the world.”
[5] Ingelesez: “… however, neither the political establishment nor the public are ready for this radical a change…”
[6] Ingelesez: “In the meantime, we will continue to suffer the travesty of citizens in the two richest economies in the world, the U.S. and the EU, thrust into poverty, stress, and lower standards of living by bumbling politicians using obsolete paradigms for understanding how the world works.”
[7] Ikus Modern Monetary Theory, an unconventional take on economic strategy: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/modern-monetary-theory-is-an-unconventional-take-on-economic-strategy/2012/02/15/gIQAR8uPMR_print.html.
[8] Ikus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_finance eta http://k.web.umkc.edu/keltons/Papers/501/functional%20finance.pdf.
Izatez, “A government’s budget should be formulated with a view to achieve the public purpose. The ex post budgetary outcome–whether surplus, deficit, or balanced–should never be a goal and should never be a measure of success.”
[9] Ingelesez: “Sure, we need an ex ante budget to prioritize, to allocate real resources, and to hold project management accountable. In some cases, it might even make sense to loosely link government spending on some projects to certain tax sources (bridge building to gasoline taxes or tolls). But there is no sense in gauging government policy effectiveness against the difference between total government revenues and total government spending.”
[10] Ingelesez: “Foregoing needed infrastructure, healthcare, pensions, education, housing, policing, or defense on the pretense that a sovereign government “has run out of money” (as our President says all the time) is just plain stupid. If we have unemployed resources domestically (or can hire and purchase them from abroad) then we can “afford” to put them to use.”
