How government is funded

Posted on May 2 2023

I was podcasting again last night, this time with Scotonimics at the invitation of Kairin van Sweeden and William Thomson, its co-hosts.

We discussed the basics of how government is funded, and the MMT explanation for this, missing the controversies on the way. The resulting YouTube is here:

This is a very different style from Steve Keen and Friends. If anyone has seen both (and William from Scotoniomnics did), I would be interested in comparison and opinion on relative worth.

Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:

You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.

And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:

11

11 Responses

  1. Ian Stevenson says:
    May 2 2023 at 12:44 pm

    Last month I was talking to a volunteer Archaeologist and we got onto Michael Hudson’s book about debt in the ancient world, specifically the Near and Middle east.
    Her day job was in a bank and her observation was that we don’t sacrifice people to gods anymore but ‘to the economy”. The starting point of our priorities for spending is what we need. Your remark about Keynes reminded me of this. The issue is not just a technical one of how to fund the state but also a moral one of what we do fund within our resources. To paraphrase Jesus ‘the economy was made for Man, not man for the economy.’
    I suspect a lot of the resistance to new thinking is an avoidance of the moral choices or very different values.
    I enjoyed Steve Keen and Friends (but not the sidebar comments) but I found this format better.

    • Richard Murphy says:
      May 2 2023 at 1:43 pm

      As a presentation it is better, and cleaner, I think.

      There were lots of comments as we spoke, but they are not on the video and did not dominate during it – being an option

  2. Howard says:
    May 2 2023 at 7:37 pm

    Richard – Just watched the video and wanted to post in response to you 3.3 blog posts a day for 17 years.

    Somehow I stumbled across your blogs about a year ago which ignited my curiosity and then fury at why my parents are suffering on a shockingly long NHS waiting list purely down to economic lies.

    My point is about storytelling.

    I told the STAB/TABS story to my 2 boys (19 and 17) who now get it.

    My 17 y/o challenged his A level Politics teacher on the whole taxes fund spending. He got the expected indignant denial from him and his classmates but he knows he is in the right and will hold his ground.

    This is how it starts. Thanks for starting this particular fire and 1,000s of others over the last 17 years

  3. Anne Cruise says:
    May 2 2023 at 9:19 pm

    I watched the Steve Keen video from start to finish.

    I gave up after 38 minutes of the Scotonomics.

    What I didn’t like in the second video, having had my first experience of a MMT live video in the first:
    1. The facilitator *also* being an expert with an agenda. A position of power that was easy to abuse.
    2. The setup was not about exploration, but about expansion of the facilitator’s opening remarks and his interruptions. You (and the lady K whose name I cannot spell, I am sorry) seemed to be there just to add weight to his statements and *his* answers to the questions received.
    3. The tight framing of the Keen video images kept the focus on the words, not the number of books on the shelves.
    4. The unprofessionalism of the facilitator, displaying all the signs of St Vitus’ Dance.

    OK, so the last was a very personal reaction. But it was so distracting I had to stop.

    On the plus side, the absence of scrolling sidebar comments was welcome.

  4. Howard says:
    May 2 2023 at 10:34 pm

    I watched both videos and here are my thoughts

    The Scotonomics session was set up clearly to teach a specific element- which it did pretty well. By its nature it was more controlled and ,to a degree, more formal.

    The Steve Keen set up was much freer and discursive by design. It was more entertaining and varied as a result. This format brings out the nuances each participant has and allows personality to shine. It has the potential to be more ‘humane’ – depending on the guests of course!

    There’s room for both set ups but personally I prefer the freer riffing version.

    Hope that helps.

  5. Brendan O'Brien says:
    May 3 2023 at 7:17 pm

    Richard, would there be any chance of getting a transcript of the podcast?

  6. Brendan O'Brien says:
    May 3 2023 at 7:26 pm

    Thanks.