Hona hemen Bill Mitchell-ek dioena, berriki argitaratutako How to discuss Modern Monetary Theory izeneko artikuluan[1]:
“Aukera baterantz:
1990eko lehen urteotan, egun MMT (hots, DTM) izenarekin ezagutzen denaren lehen defendatzaileek (alegia, Bell/Kelton, Fullwiler, Mitchell, Mosler, Wray) sistema monetarioari buruzko zenbait intuizio operatibo plazaratu zuten, alternatiba bat garatzeko asmoz.”
Randall Wray-ren hitzez[2], hasieran hauexek egon ziren:
“A group of us first at the Levy Institute in NY and then at UMKC, but also including others, especially Warren Mosler and Bill Mitchell and Charles Goodhart, dug deeper into this and gradually developed what is now called MMT.”
Eta hemen[3], Wray-k berriz:
“Warren Mosler, Bill Mitchell, and I used to meet up just about every year to count the number of people in the world who understood what we were talking about.”
Hasiera, hortaz, nahiko argia izan zen.
Geroago, krisia etorri zen, hobe esanda, nahita antolatu zuten.
Harrigarria bada ere, Alain Greespan-en hurrengo adierazpen berezia egin zuen 2008an[4]:
“Mr. GREENSPAN. Well, remember, though, whether or not ideology is, is a conceptual- framework with the way people deal with reality. Everyone has one. You have to. To exist, you need an ideology.
The question is, whether it exists is accurate or not. What I am saying to you is, yes, I found a flaw, I don’t know how significant or permanent it is, but I have been very distressed by that fact …
Chairman WAXMAN. You found a flaw?
Mr. GREENSPAN. I found a flaw in the model that I perceived is the critical functioning structure that defines how the world works, so to speak.
Chairman WAXMAN. In other words, you found that your view of the world, your ideology, was not right, it was not working.
Mr. GREENSPAN. Precisely. That’s precisely the reason I was shocked, because I had been going for 40 years or more with very considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well.”
Hortaz?
Hortaz, ikus Alain Greenspan-i buruz blog honetan bertan esandakoa[5].
Batzuek uste dute Greenspan-ek barkamena eskatu behar diola AEBetako jendeari[6], damututa dagoela esanez eta gero isilik geratu:
“If Greenspan doesn’t have the decency to keep himself out of public view after all the damage he has done to the country, then the media should do it for him. The only thing he has to say that would be newsworthy is that he’s sorry.”
Esan bezala, DTM eratuz eta zabalduz joan da. Une honetan munduko hainbat lekutan ezaguna edo oso ezaguna da, ez soilik maila akademikoan.
Liburuak, artikuluak, konferentziak, hitzaldiak, blogak etengabe ari dira hedatzen nonahi. Kasu, AEBetatik kanpo Italian badago zerbait baino gehiago[7]; halaber, Bulgarian[8].
Hona hemen DTMkoek egindako lan batzuk, ingelesez, Eurolandian eta nonahi zabaltzeko[9].
Guri dagokigunez, Warren Mosler-ek hiru biderrez idatzi dit esanez prest dagoela Euskal Herrira etortzeko. (Baina nor arduratuko litzateke horretaz, diruaz eta abarrez? Any proposal?)
Gure aldetik segituko dugu Euskal Herrian hitzaldiak ematen…
Bien bitartean, hona hemen DTMko aitapontekoen webguneak:
Bill Mitchell-ena[10].
Warren Mosler-ena[11].
Randall Wray-rena[12].
(Halaber, ikus Stephanie Kelton-ena[13].)
Gaur egungo ekonomia ulertu ahal izateko, hona hemen DTMren eta ortodoxiaren arteko zenbait ezberdintasun, Bill Mitchell-ek proposatu dituenak[14]:
Makroekonomia ortodoxoa:
i) Aurrekontu defizitak txarrak dira
ii) Aurrekontu superabitak onak dira
iii) Aurrekontu superabitak aurrezki nazionalaren parte dira
iv) Aurrekontuak orekatua izan behar du negozio zikloetan
v) Aurrekontu defizitek interes tasak altxatzen dituzte zeren aurrezki pribatu eskasarekin lehiatzen baitira
vi) Bonu merkatuek gobernuaren kostuen fondoak determinatzen dituzte
vii) Aurrekontu defizitek etorkizunean zerga handiagoak ekartzen dituzte
viii) Gobernua dirurik gabe gera daiteke
ix) Aurrekontu defizitek gobernu handia berdintzen dute
x) Gobernuaren gastua inflaziogilea da
xi) Sektore pribatuei bonuak jaulkitzeak defiziten inflazio arriskuak murrizten dituzte
xii) Belaunaldien arteko zamak lotuta daude heredatutako aurrekontu defizitekin, atzera ordaindu behar den zorraren eran
xiii) Langabezia erabiltzen da inflazio tasa kontrolatzeko
xiv) Zerga ordaintzailearen dirua funtsezkoa da
xv) Gizakiok erabaki arrazionalak hartzen dituzte, norberaren interesetan oinarrituta
Diru Teoria Modernoa (DTM):
a) Aurrekontu defizita ez dira ez onak ez txarrak eta beharrezkoak dira ez-gobernuko sektorearen gastu susmoak ez-nahikoak direnean baliabide produktibo eskuragarrien erabilera osoa segurtatzeko.
b) Aurrekontu soberakinak ez dira ez onak ez txarrak eta baldintza batzuetan kaltegarriak izan daitezke baldin eta beraiek suposatzen badute hazkunde egoerako narraz ibiltze bat, zereginik gabeko baliabideak daudenean.
c) Ez dauka inongo zentzurik esateak moneta jaulkitzailea den gobernu batek bere monetan aurrezten duela. Aurreztea egungo gastuari dagokio etorkizuneko gastu posibletasunak hobetzeko eta finantzialki murriztuta dagoen ez-gobernuko erakundeari aplikatzen zaio. Gobernuak ezin du inoiz behar aurretiko fondorik gastatzearren eta, beraz, ezin du inoiz ‘aurreztu’ behar.
d) Aurrekontuari baimendu behar zaio enplegu osoa lortzeko eta bermatzeko behar den gastu netoko mailari egokitzearren[15].
e) Aurrezte pribatua errentari dagokio[16].
f) Banku zentralak interes tasa jartzen du[17].
g) Aurrekontu defizitak ez dira inoiz atzera ordaindu behar, gizaldi bakoitzak aukeratzen du berak ordaintzen duen zergapetze maila[18].
h) Moneta jaulkitzen duen gobernuak beti moneta horretan salgaia den edozein gauza eros dezake. Gobernu hori ezin da inoiz dirutik gabe geratu.
i) Aurrekontu defizitek isla dezakete gobernu handia zein txikia[19].
j) Gastu guztiak (publikoa zein pribatua) inflazio arriskua ekartzen du. Gobernu gastua ez da inflaziogilea baliabide errealak jardun gabe dauden artean[20].
k) Inflazio arriskua gastuari dagokio eta ez berari lotuta dauden antolaketa monetarioari (kasu, bonuei)[21].
l) Generazioen arteko zamak baliabide errealei daude lotuta[22].
m) Enplegua erabiltzen da inflazio tasa kontrolatzeko.
n) Moneta subiranoko jaulkitzailea ezin da inoiz egon ez ordaintze egoeran[23].
o) Zerga ordaintzaileek ez dute ezer finantzatzen[24]. Zergak gobernuaren erremintak dira programa sozio-ekonomikoa praktikan jartzeko.
p) Gizakiok konplexuak gara[25].
Ikasiko ote dugu?
[2] Ikus http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2012/12/a-meme-for-money-part-1-introduction.html#more-3842.
[4] Ingelesez: “On October 23, 2008 as the crisis was escalating, the former US Federal Reserve Chairman appeared before the US House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, which was investigating the “The Financial Crisis and the Role of Federal Regulators”.
The Chairman of the Committee, Henry Waxman asked Greenspan whether his free market ideology that pushed him to make regrettable decisions. He replied (US House of Representatives, 2008, page 36-37).
[7] Ikus http://memmt.info/site/. Italian, besteak beste, W. Mosler, R. Wray eta S. Kelton jadanik egon dira.
[8] Ikus http://bulgaria-mmt.blogspot.com.es/. Laster Warren Mosler and Pavlina Tcherneva Bulgarian egongo dira:
http://mikenormaneconomics.blogspot.com.es/2013/10/mmt-conference-in-bulgaria-organized-by.html.
[12] Ikus http://neweconomicperspectives.org/category/l-randall-wray eta http://www.economonitor.com/lrwray/.
[15] Ingelesez: “Budget should be allowed to adjust to the level of net spending required to achieve and sustain full employment given the spending decisions of the non-government sector, irrespective of the state of the business cycle.”
[16] Ingelesez: “Private saving (…) is related to income. Spending always brings forth its own saving because saving rises and falls with income movements, which are directly related to movements in spending.”
[17] Ingelesez: “Central bank sets interest rate and can control any segment of the yield curve it chooses. The costs of government spending are the real resources that are utilized in any particular public program.”
[18] Ingelesez: “Budget deficits never need to be paid back. Every generation can freely choose the level of taxation it pays.”
[19] Ingelesez: “Even small governments will need to run continuous deficits if there is a desire of the non-government sector to save overall and the policy aim is to maintain full employment levels of national income.”
[20] Ingelesez: “Government spending is not inflationary while ever real resources are idle (ie. There is unemployment). All spending is inflationary if it drives nominal aggregate demand faster than the real capacity of the economy to absorb it.”
[21] Ingelesez: “There is no difference in the inflation risk attached to a particular level of net public spending when the government matches its deficit $-for-$ with bond issuance relative to a situation where it issues no debt. The inflation risk is embodied in the spending rather than the monetary arrangements that are associated with it (bond-issuance or not).”
[22] Ingelesez: “Intergenerational burdens are linked to the availability of real resources. For example, a generation that exhausts a non-renewable resource imposes a burden on the next generation. A future generation cannot transfer real resources back in time.”
[23] Ingelesez: “Sovereign issuer of currency is never at risk of default. The issuer of a currency cannot always meet any liabilities it incurs in that currency.”
[24] Ingelesez: “Public currency. The taxpayer does not fund anything. Taxes are a device to free up real resources so our agent, the government can instigate a socio-economy program for our collective benefit.”
[25] Ingelesez: “Humans are complex and rarely predictable, reason and emotion are inseparable.”
