The only way I would support MMT is in conjunction with Yang's freedom dividend and a complete destruction of the entire USA's political elite.
The American Monetary Institute founded by Stephen Zarlenga has the best approach. AMI is saying a lot of what MMT is saying but AMI isn't oblivious to the issue of debt, both public and private. MMT seems to gloss over the debt issue.
This stuff goes back a ways. But the real (and uncredited) founder of the modern version is Robert Barro, from a 1974 JPE piece. (And, per the JPE, a *great* set of sources.) At any event, Barro shows that a key assumption is whether (or to what degree) the macro-economy's households consider themselves to be infinitely-lived -- if they do, then there is no net wealth effect: credit issued now (through debt) is repaid with decreased consumption or increased savings later. If households do not consider future generations, then the liquidity machines must boost the supply of money, with consequent (and predictable) effects. And we're still back to M • V = P • Q https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/3451399/Barro_AreGovernment.pdf