At present, a number of economists are attempting to revise the narrative to make it appear that my profession is not profoundly implicated in the Eurozone crisis and the GFC, more broadly.
In the last year, we are seeing several public statements acknowledging issues about the unsustainable buildup of private debt, the inflexibility of the fiscal rules in the Eurozone, and other obvious things that have been staring them in the face for years only to meet met with ideological denial.
Some of these economists even have the audacity to claim that the existing body of mainstream macroeconomic literature readily explains the crisis and prescribed the cure.
This is laughable when we think back to the dominant New Keynesian models, which didn’t even have financial sectors integrated within them.
There is also an on-going denial of the historical factors that have created the EMU and why it failed. Acknowledging those factors would be tantamount to a rejection of mainstream macroeconomic theory and practice.
It is thus convenient to black sheep Germany because its behaviour during the crisis and prior has been nothing short of reprehensible. But it was only acting within the parameters of the system that France and the other Member States eagerly embraced as a manifestation of their Monetarist ideals.
That is enough for today!
Ma ei räägi siinkohal higist haisvatest, madalalaubalistest parempoolsetest, kes pole mitte ühegi majandus- ega sotsiaalteooriaga tuttavad. Samuti mitte näiteks kommentaatorist Priit, kes pole peale kõiki neid aastaid aru saanud, et mida MMT väidab või mida muuta püüab. Jutt on siin vasakpoolsetest intellektuaalidest, kes on eitusfaasis ning süüdistavad Saksamaad. Ma leidsin internetist ühe väga hea kommentaari:
Saksamaa süüdistamine EMU jamades on sama nagu Mercedese süüdistamine, et Vormel1 on jama sari. Mercedes ei loonud Vormel 1-e reegleid.