キーン2020MMT関連字幕

https://youtu.be/p8iprAg14-Y

another first-time owners grant for sure they're already doing that aren't they mm-hmm yeah okay and 

－－now you can renovate your house as well with a with 

 a grant first-time renovators grant yeah so all this is all the money creation capability of the the government which it does have in australia is going into propping up house prices rather than rather than developing the economy or giving people um um you know a basic income.

 so yeah uh in that sense they they claim to be anti-mmt but they're practicing it but all the pressure's going into the house bubble housing bubble rather than going into um into the real economy.

 and we end up therefore with the with the emaciated manual almost non-existent manufacturing sector and suddenly we can't import from countries overseas anymore because of the virus what do we do well we do without.

　－－but and and um so in terms of house prices then so it's we've taken the view that um yeah as you said they're going to do whatever they can to prop it up but we're not quite sure if they can or not and we sort of feel as if they if they don't manage to prop them up there's actually a uh it's a non-linear relationship you know you go off the cliff and and you'll sort of get that the snowball effect of people selling and and you know unemployment and and banks foreclosing and having to pull these things um i guess what what are your thoughts on on that view and and where are you what's the range of possibilities and the probabilities that that you're seeing .

 

oh like i think i think that's i mean they'll continue obviously propping up house prices no matter what because for a start the banks would fold if their house prices fall substantially.

and the politicians listen to the banks rather than listen to the people so even the people themselves want not everybody but those with property the speculators want prices to keep on rising and because you see nothing wrong with the increase in the house price index.

um so yeah that that is highly likely um that they'll continue propping it up i think again this is one thing the government has this is one thing about MMT there is no limit to the state's capacity to create money so if you have a state which is dedicated to creating money to maintain a housing bubble.

then they'll do it and this is the trouble you can continue doing this even while the physical economy falls apart around you.

もう一人の初めてのオーナーの方への補助金ですね もうすでにやっているんですよね？

--今、あなたはあなたの家をリフォームすることができます。

 初めてのリフォーム業者への補助金 オーストラリア政府の資金創出能力は、経済の発展や国民に基礎収入を与えるよりも、むしろ住宅価格の上昇に使われています。

 その意味では、政府は反MMTと主張していますが、実際にはそれを実践しています。

 その結果、製造業は、ほとんど存在しない状態になりました。突然、海外からの輸入ができなくなってしまいました。

　--住宅価格については、あなたがおっしゃったように、彼らはできる限りのことをして価格を支えようとしていますが、それができるかどうかはよくわかりません。 崖っぷちから外れていくと、雪だるま式に人が売れて、失業や銀行の差し押さえなどの影響が出てきて、それらを引っ張っていかなければならなくなるというような直線的な関係になります。

 

私が思うに、彼らは何があっても明らかに住宅価格を支え続けるだろうということです。

政治家は国民の声に耳を傾けるよりも銀行の声に耳を傾けるので、国民自身もみんなではなく、不動産を持っている人たちを望んでいるし、投機家は価格が上昇し続けることを望んでいるし、住宅価格指数が上昇しても何も問題ないと思っているからだ。

住宅価格指数の上昇は何の問題もないと考えているからです。

住宅バブルを維持するためにお金を作ることに専念している国家があれば、彼らはそれをするでしょうし、これが問題なのですが、あなたの周りの物理的な経済が崩壊している間でさえ、これを続けることができます。

＿＿

－－    um i guess switching back to a a global view i guess you you typically think that the us would sit um more on the you know just let things fail and then we'll clean up the mess later whereas europe would sit more on the let's let the government step in and and and help as much as possible.

    is that um is that see what you're seeing as well and what do you in terms of the different uh the different candidates that from the election do you think um you think you might see more or government supports in in the u.s than you might have otherwise seen.

    i don't know mate we're talking about donald trump so um i mean the way things are going right a feeling is going to win he's going to will not win the knicks well win in the same sense that uh somebody who fixes a horse race wins the horse race .

um but yeah he's doing everything he can to steal the election i think he probably will succeed um and and i'm not about to try to pick the behavior of a of a malignant narcissist over the future.

－－    i i do so um but absolutely yeah i sort of feel as if if someone.

 if someone could explain mmt properly to donald trump though he'd actually love the idea of free money it's um. 

-- 世界的な視点に話を戻しますと、あなたは一般的に、アメリカは「失敗してもいいから、後始末は自分たちでする」という考えを持っていると思いますが、ヨーロッパは「政府が介入して、可能な限りの支援をしよう」という考えを持っていると思います。

    それは、あなたが見ているものと同じように、あなたが見ているものと同じように、あなたが見ているものは何ですか？

    私は知りません ドナルド-トランプの話をしているのですが......つまり、物事がうまくいっている方法は.....

    どうかな

ドナルド・トランプの話をしているので......つまり........今の状況では........フィーリングが勝つだろう

 彼はニックスには勝てないでしょうね 競馬を治した人が競馬に勝つのと同じ意味で勝つ

彼は選挙を盗むために全力を尽くしている......彼はおそらく成功すると思う。

ええと...

 悪質なナルシストの行動を 未来よりも選ぼうとはしない

-- 私はそう思っていますが... でも、もし誰かが...

 もし誰かがドナルド・トランプにＭＭＴをきちんと説明してくれたら、彼はタダのお金のアイデアが本当に好きになるだろうけど、それは...... 

＿＿

3:30

yeah i mean if you realize i mean he's got probably got some knowledge of accounting because he's been involved in so many bankruptcies i'm sure he's learned a fair bit uh
but this is the point was actually probably worth talking the technicals of mmt here because this is something which i mean.

 my work as you as you probably know has been focused upon private private debt credit and what banks do in the economy.

and i've really treated the government as a sideline in the sense that i haven't tried to build models of government behaviour.

 but recently i've done that using my minsky software and this was after reading stephanie Kelton's book the deficit myth and nothing most things in the deficit weren't any surprise to me at all.

but there's one claim that i have always hedged on my own because i haven't worked it out myself and that is that stephanie was claiming that the deficit itself creates the money that's necessary to finance itself .

and i was when everybody asked me does a government deficit create money my gut interpretation was was saying oh well to the extent the central bank buys the government the treasury bonds.

    when you look at the accounting that's wrong and so i i'm happy to say i got something wrong there and my my minsky software has established it for me.

4:46

so when you what you need to look at is is when people like Ku Klux[ Klan] and others panic about the government uh you know because of so much uh deficit it's got to pay the debt back later and it's all a panic can the government manage to sell the bonds will bond vigilantes demand too high a price for government bonds will they not be able to sell enough of the bonds to fund that's all accounting nonsense.

 but it takes a comprehensive view of accounting to understand that and that's what i minsky software let me develop.

so the insight that i that i got out of building a model of MMT uh was that when you look at it and say what actually creates what is money first of all um money is fundamentally what's in our bank accounts plus cash so leaving cash out of the equation anything that creates money has to create more money in uh bank accounts in total which means you can't create money by shuffling money between two people's deposit accounts.

and you can't create money by shuffling things between one asset and another asset on the bank's books the stuff that creates money is something that happens both on the asset side of the bank and the liability side therefore assets rise and liabilities rise the things that do that are lending money if banks lend they increase their loans and they increase their liabilities because um alone you a million dollars means they put a million dollars in your deposit account that increases their asset by a million dollars as well.

    spending government spending does the same thing if the government spends it puts money in your private bank accounts and that is balanced by increase in bank reserves precisely the same amount.

so those two activities create money now once you the gap between tax and spending the gap between lending and repayment creates money.

and once that's done in the case of government spending exceeding taxation that's created excess reserves that banks now have that earn them no interest.

so the treasury comes along and says we're going to sell your treasury bonds equivalent to the deficit what they're saying to the banks is here's their swap from one asset to another one you donate interest the other one you do would you like to buy some bonds the answer is bloody hell yes which is why they buy the bond so there's no problem in selling government bonds to finance any scale of deficit.

 yeah and i've always said as well you know with the bond vigilantes

彼は多くの破産事件に関わってきたから 会計の知識はあるだろうし かなりのことを学んだはずだ

しかし、これは私が言いたいことですが、実際にはここでMMTの技術的な話をする価値があったと思います。

 ご存知のように、私の仕事は民間の民間債務信用と銀行が経済で何をしているかに焦点を当ててきました。

私は政府の行動モデルを構築しようとしていないという意味で、政府を副業として扱ってきた。

 しかし最近、私はミンスキーのソフトウェアを使ってそれを行った。これはステファニー・コルトンの本「赤字神話」を読んだ後のことであり、赤字のほとんどのことは私にとって全く驚きではなかった。

ステファニーが主張していたのは、赤字そのものが資金調達に必要なお金を生み出すということです。

ステファニーが主張していたのは、赤字自体が資金調達に必要なお金を生み出すということです。私は、政府の赤字がお金を生み出すのかと聞かれた時、私の直感的な解釈では、中央銀行が政府の国債を買っている範囲で、

    会計を見ると、それは間違っているので、私は何か間違っていたと言って良かったと思います。

会計を見た時に必要なのは、クカラスや他の人たちが 政府についてパニックに陥った時に... ...赤字が多すぎて、後になって借金を返さなければならないので、パニックに陥っているのです。

 しかし、それを理解するには、会計の包括的な見方が必要です。ミンスキーソフトウェアが私に開発させてくれました。

MMTのモデルを構築して得た洞察は、何が実際にお金を生み出すのかということです。まず、お金とは、基本的には、銀行口座にあるものに現金を加えたものです。

つまり、二人の預金口座の間でお金をやりとりしても、お金は作れません。銀行の帳簿上で、ある資産と別の資産の間でお金をやりとりしても、お金は作れません。お金を生み出すものは、銀行の資産側と負債側の両方で起こることなので、資産が増え、負債が増えます。

    政府の支出は、政府の支出と同じことをします。政府が支出した場合、政府は個人の銀行口座にお金を入れます。

ですから、この2つの活動がお金を生み出すのです。税金と支出のギャップが、貸し出しと返済のギャップが、

政府の支出が税金を上回った場合には、一旦それが行われると、銀行の過剰な準備金が作られ、

国庫が来て、赤字分に相当する国債を売りますと言ってきました。銀行に言っているのは、ある資産から別の資産へのスワップです。あなたは利子を寄付し、別の資産には利子を寄付します。

 国債を売ることに問題はありません。私はいつも言ってきました。

＿＿