If you have "no place to go," come here!

Krugman actually cites to an MMT link!


First of all, yes, I have read various MMT manifestos — this one is fairly clear as they go [snort]. I do dislike the style — the claims that fundamental principles of logic lead to a worldview that only fools would fail to understand has a sort of eerie resemblance to John Galt’s speech in Atlas Shrugged — but that shouldn’t matter.

I like "manifestos." Heaven forfend that Professor Krugman should treat
MMT advocates as academically qualified professionals who write papers, instead of issuing manifestoes! And the Galt snark really slips in the ol' shiv....

When you can blog like that... Well, I'm thinking Professor Krugman really missed his metier!

Here's a massive takedown from Bill Black. Read it for the background, too.

NOTE * Swedish Central Bank Award-winner Krugman must be reading the blog that everybody hates and nobody reads. Because far as I know -- it's a big blogosphere -- Corrente's been the only blog pointing out that Krugman has consistently failed to cite to MMT sources when debating MMT. So, baby steps. Would it be too much for Krugman to cite to a source that's more institutionally based? Like UMKC's New Economic Perspectives, which has a fine MMT primer? Of course, Krugman might also consider citing to primary sources. That is, after all, what a scholar would do.

No votes yet


danps's picture
Submitted by danps on

Still chuckling as I write this. Well played, lambert.

You're perfectly right on the substance too, and it's an important point. He's by and large been debating phantoms, imaginary people who believe the caricatures he's conjured up in his head. Good on Corrente for persistently requesting citations. This stuff matters.

Joe's picture
Submitted by Joe on

Congratulations to Lambert and Corrente for putting the heat on him. The lack of professionalism is very disappointing. I've been a Krugman disciple for the past 10 years so I'm especially bummed to see this.

It would be one thing to be snarky and dismissive of other specific academics (like the Freshwater economists) who have a demonstrated track record of wrongness.

The MMTers haven't even been given a shot yet. They are experts who deserve a professional response to their work.

He's clearly pulling rank. It's all about this:

Cujo359's picture
Submitted by Cujo359 on

The one substantive claim that Krugman made in that article was that financing a government deficit via segnoriage (sp?), rather than via borrowing, could put the economy into a hyperinflationary spiral.

What do MMT proponents think of that assertion? I don't see why he made it.