And the purpose of government spending should be to obtain full employment. — Rank Amateur

What's the basis of this statement? Is it supposed to be scientific? Ethical? What?

What's the basis of this statement? Is it supposed to be scientific? Ethical? What? — frank

Keynesianism is what it is.

- just what MMT says - the proponents basis is that government spending creates an increase need for good and services, increased need for good and services should create a need for more employment, and higher wages. More employment and higher wages lead to increases in private consumption of goods and services, and then government can reduce spending to the degree private spending increased.

It's fairly obvious why government spending would increase employment. The statement you posted was about purpose, though. Why should the government take responsibility for employment?

also - in almost all economic models full employment is a goal. The reason is labor is a factor of production, all factors of production should be used efficiently to maximize wealth ( not money - wealth) - un-employment is a waste of a factor of production - limiting productivity and wealth.

because it can

Why should the government concern itself with production? I'm not saying it shouldn't. I'm asking for the basis of the comment that it should.

because it can — Rank Amateur

The government can arrange to send astronauts to Mars. It doesn't have any responsibility to do that.

Why should the government concern itself with production? I'm not saying it shouldn't. I'm asking for the basis of the comment that it should — frank

it has no obligation to do so - it is a political decision - And again MMT is not a framework that is being implemented - it is an explanation of what is happening.

MMT , and all other economic theories are academic explanations of what is going on. They are not a political platform or some blueprint to economic bliss. You can't implement it- you can use it only to explain what is happening.

In the case of this topic -

Someone says - " the deficit is awful, it will bankrupt our children - it is an awful economic catastrophe - the butchers bill is coming.

When in reality - employment is good, interest rates are low, inflation is low, capital is plentiful - why is that ?? and i am not talking about this week - this is decades long ( with a blip or 2 )

MMT is an attempt to answer that question.

I see. Thanks.

Frank: You are simply wrong. You claim that lowering taxes causes the economy to grow. You saying it always does, no matter the circumstances? You are aware there is absolutely no support for your claim in economics?