%% Most likely. BUT i like the WSJ ad passed BEFORE Pres Joe wisely asked the king of Arabia to cut oil prices. That WSJ ad said ''Wage War on Waste Cut 10% [gov waste]'' Many of the best + biggest US companies paid for that full page ad. PAY off the national debt or cut 20% gov spending. And put out 10 or 20 %of social security out of what some call junk[gov] bonds/LOL+ put that % into SPY or QQQ............................................................................................or QLD,SSO. LOOK what followed me home, i thought i was alone/ i see i was wrong\ wrong wrong,look what followed me home\lower bond prices followed me home Rino Records/Warner Bros Song/Thinkin Problem Album.
I am somewhat well known in my former profession. Yes. And I assure you it was NOT economics. However as i have pointed out many times I have become a student of economics and was fortunate enough to have an economics professor (radical Rutgers/Harvard trained), who is well known in his specialty area, more or less as a private tutor. But I have put many, many hours into studying economics with particular emphasis these past few years in money and banking, and that necessarily includes a detailed study of MMT. You can't get away from this , because this is were everything is moving to. I was shocked when not long ago Powell said, MMT is nuts. (I'm paraphrasing.) It told me all i need to know about Powell. It is sad when the head guy does not really understand everything the outfit he runs does for a living. When someone was discussing MMT with Bernanke recently, Bernanke's response was different. He said, whats so different about that, that's just economics, isn't it. (Again paraphrasing.) Bernanke understanding is so much deeper than Powell's!
If you are interested in reading about new economics then you will need to read my work. It is now a school of economic thought that has been applied in a top ten wealth nation and has hit all of the targets since it was implemented. Also one of my books is on the list of resources for the Euro so it is important in Europe. There has been a massive aspect of neglect in macroeconomics in the past because the impact pension saving rates has on the economy has been ignored. On another note can I ask what was your profession?
I did not find much to disagree with in your original post in this thread. I'd rather not be rude, but honesty sometimes makes it unavoidable. Until your posts stop evidencing a complete misunderstanding of the role of taxes and sovereign bonds, how money is created and the real constraints and problems to be faced, I see little value in trying to discuss these things with you. I have mentioned some details of my background in various threads before. I am not inclined to repeat that now, as it is not germane. Did you read any of the introductory material I suggested : Wray, Mitchell, Mosler, Kelton? There is a young guy, Nathan Tankus; you might google him, and take a look at his stuff as well. https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aH...jktMTA2Mi00Mzg0LThjMWItZGU4MmRhZTJkZGUw?hl=en
In terms of outgrowing the debt, it is more viable than you think. Economic growth compounds it therefore has a tremendous ability to magnify a nations output. You are looking at economic growth purely as a monetary issue and ignoring the requirement to increase output at the same time. I feel your understanding of what GDP is has been confused as money, which enables transactions (money) instead of the number of transactions that are created in a period of time (GDP). I have read Mosler like you recommended but feel it lacked many aspects of economics especially seeing money as a commodity, which is traded in it self to determine its value.
You've made a big point of this in the past. Have you considered who the big participants are? It's Central Banks! Mosler's little book is just to get your feet wet. Read L. R. Wray next, "Understanding Modern Money" , scholarly, with abundant citations, somewhat out of date but not in any serious way.