Blue World Media Network, (BWMN) is a broadcasting & Media production company established in Washington DC, with team members located
文字起こし
00:06
[Music]
00:12
[Music]
00:31
[Music]
00:34
thank you very much
00:36
we are very pleased to have with us here
00:38
um
00:39
a leading economist someone who is
00:42
bringing a new thinking
00:44
in the field of economic theory and
00:45
practice uh professor
00:48
dr stefani kilten she's just written a
00:51
book
00:52
that was released exactly two weeks ago
00:55
the title of the book is the deficit
00:57
myth
00:58
modern monetary theory and how
01:01
to build a better economy we are very
01:04
honored to have you with us here today
01:07
professor kelton good morning how are
01:09
you doing
01:10
i'm very well thank you for having me we
01:13
are very pleased and we are very honored
01:15
to have you in this program
01:17
only two weeks exactly after your books
01:20
have been released
01:21
how would you should we introduce you to
01:22
african viewers
01:24
and readers i'm a professor of
01:27
economics and public policy at stony
01:30
brook university which is
01:32
located on long island in the state of
01:34
new york
01:35
um i've been here for a few years and
01:38
before that i was a faculty member at
01:40
the university of missouri
01:42
in kansas city i taught there for 17
01:44
years
01:45
i served as the chief economist to
01:49
the democrats on the u.s senate budget
01:51
committee for a period of time
01:53
in 2015 and part of 2016.
01:56
i've been an advisor to the bernie
01:59
sanders presidential campaigns
02:01
and i'm currently serving as an
02:04
appointee on the economic task force
02:07
for the sanders biden unity
02:11
task force for the biden campaign thank
02:14
you very much
02:15
professor kelton and we are here today
02:17
with you
02:18
with something new that could be
02:20
summarized in three letters
02:23
mmd modern
02:26
monetary theories how did you
02:30
shift from say so to speak ordinary
02:34
economy and ordinary monetary policy
02:36
to the modern monetary theory how was
02:40
your journey studied economics
02:42
um as an undergraduate and then i went
02:45
off to graduate school i started
02:48
studying economics at cambridge
02:50
university
02:52
and i really had a fairly
02:55
conventional training in economics up
02:57
until that point and then
02:59
i won a fellowship through cambridge
03:01
university and that took me to the levy
03:04
economics institute which is a
03:06
public policy institute or a think tank
03:09
in
03:09
upstate new york and that that's the
03:12
first time i really
03:13
encountered some of the kind of core
03:15
ideas
03:16
that became part of what now we call
03:19
mmt and you know the ideas
03:22
came to me um not from an economist
03:25
really but from someone who
03:27
had worked in financial markets and he
03:30
had a different perspective he had a
03:31
different way of thinking about the
03:33
economy he had a different way of
03:34
thinking about the monetary system
03:36
and government finance and the financial
03:40
operations and
03:41
you know i uh encountered his work and i
03:45
um initially i thought well
03:48
this is so different right from
03:50
everything i've been trained
03:52
to think and understand about things
03:54
like money and taxes and deficits and
03:56
the national debt
03:58
um it didn't feel right at first but
04:01
there was something about it that was so
04:03
compelling
04:04
uh in the way that he explained his
04:06
thinking
04:07
and so i just started investigating on
04:10
my own
04:10
and eventually i managed
04:14
through research and and writing to
04:18
change my way of thinking about a lot of
04:21
things and basically it comes down to
04:23
recognizing
04:24
how the monetary system changed really
04:27
after 1971.
04:29
so we had the bretton woods system in
04:32
place which was a system of fixed
04:34
exchange rates where
04:36
you know 44 countries came together
04:38
after world war ii
04:39
and agreed to fix the value of their
04:41
currencies to the u.s dollar
04:43
and the u.s government for its part
04:46
agreed to convert the us dollar
04:48
into gold at a fixed price and that was
04:51
the monetary system we had
04:52
for a number of years but we don't have
04:54
it anymore and so
04:56
once i started to understand what that
04:59
meant
04:59
you know moving to a floating
05:02
exchange rate a fiat currency and then
05:05
thinking about
05:07
what that implies in terms of how
05:10
government can now
05:11
orient fiscal and monetary policy
05:14
to build the best domestic economy
05:17
possible
05:18
taking advantage full advantage of the
05:20
monetary system
05:22
i realized that we had been
05:24
underperforming we had been
05:26
running our macroeconomic policy in a
05:29
lot of ways
05:30
as if we were still on a gold standard
05:32
and hamstrung by the old set of rules
05:35
when in fact there is a great deal more
05:37
that we could be doing
05:39
to take fuller advantage of the monetary
05:42
system to care for
05:43
our communities and our people to make
05:45
the kinds of investments we know we
05:47
should be making and that we have the
05:48
money
05:49
to do that so it just involved a big
05:53
shift in thinking for me in the field of
05:55
economic theories
05:57
what affiliation will you put yourself
06:00
through
06:02
people have been talking about
06:04
functional finance by professor lerner
06:06
and uh even canadian economy
06:10
what is your affiliation who where are
06:13
the
06:13
former economies that you recognize are
06:16
the
06:16
the previous leaders in this field
06:20
yeah there are so many i mean i i could
06:23
give you a very long list or i could
06:24
give you
06:25
maybe the names of three people whose
06:28
own work
06:29
um is informed by the work of others
06:32
before so i'll start with three and
06:34
you mentioned abba learner or functional
06:37
finance and
06:38
and that's obviously um well or not
06:41
obviously it's important
06:43
in uh in mmt you know lerner was a
06:46
contemporary
06:47
of john maynard keynes so lerner
06:50
understood as keynes did that the
06:53
economy tends to operate
06:55
chronically with a lack of aggregate
06:57
demand with a lack of effective demand
06:59
and so you always have uh unemployment
07:04
that you could be tackling through
07:06
government policy
07:07
so uh abba lerner is one important
07:10
figure
07:11
um wynn godly a british economist is
07:13
another important figure because wynn
07:16
sort of pioneered the work in the sector
07:18
financial balance
07:20
approach and mmt adopts and incorporates
07:23
uh godly sector financial balances which
07:26
is to say
07:27
that we recognize that the government
07:30
deficit is mirrored
07:34
by a financial surplus in some other
07:37
part of the economy in the
07:38
non-government
07:39
sector and the last name i'll give you
07:41
is hyman minsky
07:43
and minsky was i think one of the most
07:46
important
07:47
economists of the last century probably
07:49
best known for his work
07:51
in um the financial instability
07:54
hypothesis
07:54
understanding how economies evolve and
07:58
how balance sheets evolve through time
08:00
and how the financial system itself
08:02
becomes more fragile and subject to
08:05
crises when small events happen
08:08
minsky also was an advocate of something
08:10
he called the employer of last resort
08:12
we call a federal job guarantee so
08:15
those three together godly lerner and
08:18
minsky
08:20
fill out a lot of but not all of mmt
08:24
professor stephanie kelton mmt has been
08:27
there
08:28
more or less for decades
08:31
but you are one of the ones who are who
08:33
are reviving it
08:34
these days how is it that a silence was
08:38
kept on it for so long
08:41
no you need people um
08:44
to pay attention to you and then you
08:46
need people to start
08:48
writing and talking about the work that
08:51
you've been doing
08:52
so i think you're right that it did take
08:55
a very long time
08:56
to get the work out of sort of the
08:59
academic journals i mean this is
09:01
the usual pathway for economists is to
09:04
you know perform research to write up
09:06
that research in the form of
09:08
uh you know academic papers to put those
09:10
papers through a peer-reviewed process
09:13
and you wait a period of time and they
09:14
get published in a journal that's not
09:16
widely available you know these things
09:18
are usually by
09:19
subscription only so the ideas
09:22
are sort of contained in a in a small
09:26
network of people who read academic
09:28
journals
09:29
and it's very hard to make to popularize
09:32
those ideas and so while we did
09:34
that work and we have you know hundreds
09:36
or even maybe thousands of publications
09:39
as a group of scholars um it wasn't
09:42
really until
09:44
journalists and people in the finance
09:46
community really started paying
09:48
attention to the work
09:49
and then uh writing about it you know in
09:52
popular forums and talking about it so
09:55
i think that was sort of part of the
09:56
breakthrough for us and also
09:58
you know probably to some extent um my
10:01
time in the senate and
10:03
being involved with presidential
10:05
campaign probably also helped to
10:07
push the ideas forward we thank you very
10:10
much for leading this
10:11
mmd movement here now let us come to
10:14
your book
10:16
let us consider the title it's already
10:18
puzzling
10:19
the deficit myth in fact there are six
10:22
myths
10:23
and you're going after each of this myth
10:25
and tackling them
10:26
in a very original way and it may
10:30
seem paradoxical to many of people
10:32
giving the thinking that have been
10:34
widespread in the population if you
10:38
agree professor let us start by the
10:40
first myth
10:42
the first myth you say that the
10:44
government budget
10:46
should look like a household budget
10:49
that's why people think they say you are
10:51
the household
10:52
balance your budget people say oh the
10:54
government please balance your budget
10:56
and you say no no no this is a myth it
10:59
is
11:00
please explain it to us and to the
11:01
ordinary people finances that we're all
11:04
most familiar with are our own
11:06
and so when we hear somebody say that
11:08
the government should
11:09
manage its own budget and its own
11:11
finances like a household
11:13
must manage its finances we say yeah
11:15
that makes sense right
11:16
uh except it doesn't make sense uh the
11:19
federal government
11:20
in a country like the us or i say in the
11:23
book like australia
11:24
or canada the japan the uk
11:28
these are all what we can call currency
11:30
issuing governments they have a
11:32
sovereign currency okay they define
11:35
their own currency they call it a dollar
11:38
or a yen
11:38
or a pound um and then they
11:42
tax and borrow only in a currency
11:46
that they and only they can issue so the
11:49
government
11:50
in the united states of america the us
11:52
government is the issuer of the dollar
11:54
that means that it can never run out of
11:56
money it can never have bills coming due
11:58
that it can't afford to pay
12:00
unlike a household right households can
12:02
run out of money
12:03
households can go broke households can
12:06
have
12:06
debt that they don't have the cash flow
12:08
to be able to make the payments the
12:10
federal government
12:11
is different and the key distinction i
12:13
make in that chapter
12:14
is the distinction between the issuer of
12:17
the currency
12:18
and the user of the currency so i'm a
12:21
currency user
12:22
so i have to go out and get the dollar
12:24
in order to spend the dollar
12:26
the federal government is the issuer
12:28
they have to spend the dollar
12:29
before anybody can have the currency
12:33
right so uh makes a big difference yes
12:36
as you are debunking this first myth and
12:39
bring
12:40
us to reality how is it that such a
12:43
self-evident reality
12:45
has not been popular and it's not put
12:47
into practice in public policy
12:49
well sometimes it is put into practice
12:52
but nobody explains it quite that way
12:55
right like so right now
12:57
congress in the u.s and governments
12:59
around the world
13:00
australia and the uk are committing to
13:02
spending
13:04
vastly more than they had originally
13:06
intended to be spending in the year 2020
13:09
because of the coronavirus
13:11
pandemic and the economic fallout we
13:13
will come back to it later
13:15
stepping up and behaving the way that i
13:18
just described like a currency issuing
13:20
government
13:21
they aren't raising taxes in order to
13:23
collect money
13:24
to spend fighting the coronavirus and
13:27
and helping ailing economies they're
13:29
just spending the money
13:31
but the the thing is that we don't
13:34
normally explain it that way
13:36
okay normally we pretend like the
13:39
government is supposed to budget like a
13:41
household and so we hear politicians
13:44
talk about wanting to spend money on
13:46
programs but then
13:47
asking how will we pay for it and as
13:49
soon as they start asking how will we
13:51
pay for it they're sort of back in that
13:53
household
13:54
frame where they're looking for the
13:56
money they're trying to
13:58
raise revenue in order to be able to
14:00
spend like a household would need to do
14:02
there are many implications of what
14:04
you've just said that since the
14:05
government
14:06
is a sovereign in the system of fiat
14:08
currency
14:10
there is the risk and this come come to
14:12
your
14:13
sec the second myth because there is
14:15
isn't that
14:16
a risk of overspending and for you there
14:20
is no such
14:20
risk you say deficits because in the
14:22
second the second myth you are
14:24
attacking is that myth that also is
14:27
widespread and it's thought
14:29
in economies courses it is that deficits
14:32
are evidence of
14:34
of overspending and you say this is a
14:36
myth
14:37
and you you don't agree with it and you
14:39
come with a counter reality to this myth
14:42
please well okay so at first i would say
14:46
that there is a risk of governments
14:48
overspending that can happen
14:50
um but what i'm the myth that i'm um
14:53
pushing back against in this chapter
14:55
is the idea that a deficit itself
14:59
is evidence that the government has
15:01
overspent so i say that is not the case
15:03
we shouldn't think like that we should
15:05
recognize that
15:06
evidence of overspending is inflation
15:09
not a deficit itself okay we have
15:12
deficits and very big ones in the u.s
15:14
right now the deficit is going to be
15:15
something like
15:16
4 trillion dollars this year but it's
15:19
not
15:20
evidence of overspending because those
15:22
deficits aren't creating
15:24
economic problems right they're not
15:26
creating inflationary problems in the
15:28
economy
15:29
so those are very good deficits we those
15:31
deficits are helping to support
15:33
incomes and to support the economy right
15:36
now in fact if anything
15:37
they're probably um still quite
15:40
quite a bit too small they should be
15:42
bigger um
15:44
so the the purpose of that chapter is to
15:47
remind us
15:48
that uh as long as the economy
15:51
can safely handle additional spending
15:55
that is you know without creating
15:57
inflationary problems then the spending
15:59
itself is not problematic
16:01
inflation is the relevant constraint but
16:03
the problem here is
16:05
by this uh safely handling the spending
16:08
so what how do you safely handle
16:10
spending
16:11
is there not a risk of overspending
16:15
if there is no uh anything that will
16:17
guide this spending
16:19
and you yourself you're admitting that
16:21
there's a problem and there is a risk of
16:23
overspending
16:24
it is easy to formulate it but how do
16:27
you put it in practice
16:28
and how will you advise policy makers in
16:31
this regard
16:32
okay so right now congress is passing
16:34
legislation and governments around the
16:36
world are passing spending bills
16:39
so we've already committed here in the
16:41
u.s to spending trillions of dollars
16:44
we have a house and we have a senate the
16:45
house has already passed another
16:48
spending bill
16:49
this one would be 3 trillion more
16:51
dollars on top of what's been done
16:53
the senate hasn't taken that up yet so
16:55
it's it's being held up
16:57
but let's suppose that the senate passed
17:00
that bill
17:01
and authorized another 3 trillion in
17:03
spending
17:04
my position is that right now because
17:08
the u.s economy is
17:09
so depressed because unemployment rate
17:11
is so high because businesses
17:14
are you know um struggling to find
17:16
customers
17:17
as the economy begins to reopen and so
17:20
forth
17:20
we could safely handle three trillion of
17:24
additional dollars what does it mean to
17:25
safely handle that spending
17:27
it means that when the government spends
17:30
another dollar into somebody's pocket
17:32
and they have that dollar and they can
17:34
go out and get a haircut
17:36
or go to the grocery store or put gas in
17:39
the car
17:40
or you know buy a new pair of tennis
17:42
shoes
17:43
if the economy has the capacity to
17:46
supply
17:47
the food the gasoline the tennis shoes
17:50
without raising prices then that is safe
17:53
spending
17:54
right it's only if you pass too many
17:56
bills authorizing too many trillions
17:59
as the economy recovers and you run out
18:02
of
18:03
idle capacity you run out of
18:06
the ability to produce more to meet
18:09
higher demand
18:10
then you're going to create bottlenecks
18:11
in your economy you're going to get some
18:13
inflationary
18:14
pressure but look every dollar that
18:16
government
18:17
spends is a new dollar that exists in
18:20
the economy and then that dollar will
18:22
travel around it will change
18:24
hands it will chase after some goods and
18:26
services and
18:28
when the government ultimately taxes it
18:30
back
18:31
the dollar dies okay it's removed from
18:34
the system so the question is
18:36
how much can the economy keep up with
18:39
in terms of producing more goods and
18:42
services
18:43
to satisfy demand while that dollar
18:45
travels around the economy
18:47
before we reach full employment and so
18:49
the limit really
18:50
for congress is to recognize that as the
18:53
economy recovers
18:55
and gets back to something that looks
18:56
closer to full employment
18:59
that it can stop passing additional
19:01
legislation
19:02
right you don't need to continue to try
19:04
to stimulate the economy
19:06
once the economy has recovered yes as
19:09
you're speaking like that
19:11
um it sounds more or less like old
19:13
canadian
19:15
policy of the 60s or the early 70s
19:18
would you agree with such a statement
19:21
well i
19:22
i will agree that mmt recognizes
19:25
as abalerner did that unemployment
19:29
exists because of a lack of effective
19:31
demand that's what keynes would have
19:33
told us
19:34
and that uh a way to tackle the problem
19:38
is through the use of fiscal policy but
19:40
look you know
19:41
keynesians have by and large for the
19:44
last
19:45
at least two to three decades leaned in
19:48
a different direction they have favored
19:50
the use of monetary policy
19:52
over the use of fiscal policy to try to
19:55
address
19:56
problems like unemployment a
19:59
lack of aggregate demand in the economy
20:01
and managing
20:02
inflation risk and so they really would
20:04
rather see the central bank
20:06
deal with this problem they would agree
20:09
that
20:10
you know once the central bank gets
20:11
interest rates very low
20:13
then it's time to turn to fiscal policy
20:15
to address the problems mmt
20:18
is different right we don't believe that
20:20
monetary policy
20:22
is an effective uh reliable policy tool
20:26
we would prefer to see fiscal policy
20:29
primarily used to steer the economy not
20:32
just in times of crisis
20:34
when interest rates are low and the
20:36
central bank has done
20:37
about all it can but in normal times as
20:39
well so
20:41
mmt is not just uh standard conventional
20:44
keynesian economics but in a moment like
20:48
this we are
20:49
we both agree keynesians and mmt
20:52
economists that fiscal policy
20:54
has to play a leading role
20:57
let us pass to the third myth which for
21:00
me was
21:00
quite strange because uh the third myth
21:03
according to
21:04
to your book is the myth that say one
21:06
way or another we all
21:08
on the hook in terms of that that you
21:10
have these calculations
21:12
that are posted in the streets or every
21:15
americans
21:16
you are because of the government that
21:18
your every american's
21:19
calculated you have thousands of of that
21:22
that you're going to pay
21:23
or you're going to pass it to your the
21:25
future generations
21:26
and you say no professor kelton come and
21:29
say no forget about all this thing this
21:31
is me
21:32
how will you convince people that it is
21:34
a myth
21:35
and that you are coming with another
21:37
reality which is more in line
21:39
with what a better economy should be
21:42
well
21:42
look i think and i say this in this
21:44
chapter i think that
21:46
what we have is not a debt problem or
21:48
debt crisis what we have is a
21:49
communications problem
21:51
we should not be referring to the
21:54
outstanding stock of u.s treasuries
21:57
as the national debt it's just the wrong
21:59
thing to label it
22:01
it's the wrong description the the
22:04
stockpile of treasuries that exist today
22:07
the thing we call the national debt is
22:09
really nothing more
22:10
than part of the net us money supply
22:14
okay they're interest bearing dollars
22:17
that's what they are
22:18
and they were put there over a period of
22:22
you know our history
22:24
because the government spent more
22:25
dollars into the economy
22:27
than it taxed back out and it allowed
22:30
those dollars to be turned into u.s
22:33
treasuries okay that's all that's
22:35
happened so if the government
22:37
has a budget deficit and it spends a
22:39
hundred dollars into the economy
22:41
and it only taxes ninety dollars back
22:44
out it has left ten dollars somewhere in
22:46
the economy okay the government's
22:48
deficit
22:49
makes a financial contribution to some
22:51
other part of the economy
22:53
now it could just leave those ten
22:54
dollars sitting in somebody's hands
22:56
leave them on their balance sheet but it
22:58
doesn't do that it chooses
23:01
to take those dollars back away from
23:03
people and replace them
23:05
with u.s treasuries not treasuries are
23:07
interest bearing currency
23:09
and that's perfectly fine thing to do
23:12
it allows somebody who already had money
23:15
to have more money
23:16
because they get the currency plus the
23:18
interest on top of it
23:20
and that's a choice that the government
23:22
has made we don't have to do that
23:25
but there's nothing inherently risky or
23:28
or dangerous about allowing a portion of
23:31
the money supply to be held
23:33
in interest bearing form and that's
23:35
really all that's going on
23:37
there's nothing to pay back later
23:38
there's it's already been the spending
23:40
has already been
23:41
paid for it's just that we chose to pay
23:44
for part of the spending
23:45
with interest-bearing currency and
23:46
that's really all that's happened
23:48
no they are here a social problem
23:52
and it is right that you started by
23:53
mentioning the communication problem
23:55
because of the anxiety among the people
23:59
the anxiety that the media have been
24:01
producing are people are very afraid oh
24:04
the government
24:05
deficit is too large we have every
24:07
american is going to pay 50 000
24:09
of that so how do you cool
24:12
down this anxiety because it is a real
24:15
problem within the
24:16
the society i wish i had the ability to
24:20
to you know cool the national
24:22
temperature and change the entire
24:24
uh discourse on my own i don't but what
24:27
i would
24:27
uh i guess a step in the right direction
24:30
is to get
24:32
journalists and reporters and
24:34
politicians
24:35
to change the language that they use
24:37
when they communicate with the
24:38
population about what's really
24:40
going on it would be helpful if some of
24:43
our
24:44
federal agencies you know if the
24:46
congressional budget office
24:47
which publishes the long-term budget
24:50
outlook
24:50
instead of you know using words like
24:53
deficit and debt
24:54
if they would communicate differently
24:56
you know they could just as easily
24:58
replace the word deficit or fiscal
25:00
deficit
25:01
with non-government surplus throughout
25:03
the publication throughout the report
25:05
and people would have a very different
25:07
feeling
25:07
don't use national debt use you know
25:11
currency uh interest currency or part of
25:14
the net money supply or
25:15
you know give this thing another name um
25:19
because that would go i think a long way
25:21
toward
25:22
helping people kind of you know reduce
25:25
the level of anxiety that we create
25:27
professor carlton has you assessed
25:31
or you know anyway the implication
25:35
in the producing power of the us dollar
25:38
of
25:38
mmt well i don't think there is one i
25:40
mean mmt is a description
25:43
of how the monetary system works
25:46
and how government finance operations
25:49
work
25:49
right how the government spends what is
25:51
the purpose of taxes what role does
25:53
do bond sales play how does it work with
25:56
the treasury and the fed so
25:58
it's a description of the system we have
26:01
so there is no inherent implication
26:04
for the value of the currency the
26:07
question is
26:08
with that understanding of how the
26:11
system works
26:12
what might a future congress do now just
26:15
look back in time right
26:17
we had a financial crisis in 2008
26:20
congress responded um with legislation
26:23
that increased the deficit we had the
26:26
american recovery and reinvestment act
26:28
they called it the obama stimulus
26:30
and that committed a little less than a
26:32
trillion dollars
26:33
uh in spending and that the deficit
26:36
increased but the deficit
26:38
increased also because the economy was
26:40
so weak right we had a very sharp
26:41
downturn and the debt increased
26:43
and people got very anxious at the time
26:45
i said oh this is terrible
26:47
this is going to require higher taxes in
26:49
the future we're not going to be able to
26:51
um
26:52
you know fund programs and all that kind
26:54
of stuff and then what happened
26:56
you know the republicans get elected
26:58
after president obama we have trump
27:00
the republicans are in the senate
27:02
they're in the house they pass
27:03
huge tax cuts massively increasing
27:06
deficits
27:07
adding to the national debt people said
27:09
oh this is terrible
27:10
this means we're never going to be able
27:12
to spend we won't be able to afford
27:13
things in the future because the
27:15
republicans just created all this
27:17
you know new debt and so forth and then
27:19
what happened
27:20
coronavirus and congress is passing
27:23
trillions of dollars of new spending so
27:26
the point is
27:27
we have been running deficits and some
27:30
pretty big deficits
27:31
in response to crises like the
27:34
financial crisis and the coronavirus and
27:37
also
27:37
just for fun because the republicans
27:39
wanted to pass tax cuts
27:41
and has not let none of that has led
27:44
to a sharp decline in the value of the
27:46
dollar the dollar remains
27:48
strong investors around the world want
27:50
to hold
27:51
our currency and so there is no inherent
27:54
relationship
27:55
between the way the government has
27:58
operated its budget thus far even with
28:01
some pretty
28:02
big deficit spending and the
28:04
implications for
28:06
inflation and the value of the currency
28:08
dollars remain strong
28:09
as you were just answering you mentioned
28:12
taxes
28:13
for the first time and to what uh
28:17
i feel reading your book in terms of
28:21
government spending you put taxation
28:25
not at the highest level as people it
28:27
used to be
28:28
and this is a strange and this is also
28:32
part of what you call a paradigm change
28:35
because ordinary people would think that
28:37
it is true taxation
28:39
that government should be able to
28:42
to manage its business but i don't know
28:46
if i heard you perfectly
28:47
or when i read your book do you mean
28:50
that
28:51
taxation is no more is no or let it put
28:54
it away
28:55
it's no longer important oh no
28:58
taxes are important and i i think i give
29:01
at least
29:02
four reasons in the book why taxes are
29:05
important
29:06
they're not important because the
29:07
government needs our money
29:09
in order to spend and that's the key
29:12
point i guess in mmt is to recognize
29:16
that the government is not revenue
29:18
constrained it doesn't need to get
29:20
dollars from the rest of us
29:22
in order to have the capacity to spend
29:25
its own currency
29:28
that's an important point so recognizing
29:31
that then the question
29:32
so why does the government bother taxing
29:34
it all and
29:35
in the book i tell a little bit about
29:38
how you could start up a currency from
29:40
scratch
29:41
if you if you were trying to monetize an
29:43
economy that wasn't previously monetized
29:46
taxes are a a pretty
29:49
efficient way to go about introducing a
29:52
currency for the first time so you can
29:54
give value to the
29:55
currency to an otherwise intrinsically
29:58
worthless
29:59
token simply by requiring people
30:03
to pay a tax to you or other fines or
30:06
fees
30:07
to the government so i talk about that
30:09
in the book the other important thing or
30:11
another important thing taxes do
30:13
is that they help to regulate
30:14
inflationary pressure if the government
30:17
always just spent its currency and never
30:20
collected anything back again that is a
30:22
recipe for disaster that is a recipe for
30:26
high or even hyper inflation right you
30:28
have to regulate
30:30
the amount of currency that is available
30:32
to chase after goods and services in the
30:34
economy so when i said before
30:36
that every time the government spends it
30:39
gives birth to a new dollar okay a
30:41
dollar is born
30:42
and now that dollar is in someone's
30:44
hands and it can travel around the
30:46
economy
30:47
and you know some government worker can
30:50
use that dollar to buy groceries and
30:52
then the grocer can use the dollar to
30:54
pay
30:54
the um the worker and then the worker
30:57
can use the dollar to pay their rent and
30:59
then the landlord can use the dollar to
31:01
buy gasoline you see so that dollar is
31:04
chasing around goods and services in the
31:06
economy
31:07
until the government taxes it back
31:10
and then that is the death sentence for
31:12
the dollar that and
31:13
and so the trick is to regulate
31:17
the difference between how many dollars
31:20
you are spending into the economy
31:22
and how many you are subtracting away
31:24
through taxes
31:25
so that you don't have excessive
31:28
money creation and spending in the
31:30
economy creating inflationary pressures
31:33
net and taxes are important for
31:35
distribution and for
31:37
you know creating incentives and
31:39
disincentives and that sort of thing as
31:40
well
31:41
the myth number four in this wonderful
31:44
book
31:44
the book titled the deficit myth modern
31:47
monitoring
31:48
and how to build a better economy
31:52
in this book which is really we
31:55
recommend it
31:56
which is fantastic written
31:59
very well written and we can read it and
32:02
even
32:03
if you're not a economist by profession
32:06
it is possible for ordinary lay people
32:07
to understand
32:09
the fourth myth that you're tackling
32:13
is this one it is a miss that also is
32:16
widespread
32:17
and it said that government deficit
32:20
crowds out
32:21
private investment and by doing that
32:24
making the population poorer and you
32:27
come
32:28
and professor kelton comes and say no no
32:30
no this is a myth
32:31
so this is a reality what is the reality
32:34
so look
32:34
imagine that there is a pile of dollars
32:38
somewhere in the world and those dollars
32:40
have been put there by
32:41
savers people who had dollars but didn't
32:44
want to spend everything they had so
32:46
they saved some and they put them in a
32:47
great big pile
32:48
and the story that we're told is that
32:51
those savings are
32:52
available to people who wish to borrow
32:56
now some of the people who want to
32:57
borrow our households some of the people
32:59
who want to borrow our
33:00
businesses some of the people who want
33:02
to borrow our governments
33:04
and so this myth is about telling us
33:07
that if governments are running larger
33:09
deficits
33:10
that that requires them to borrow more
33:14
and so they have to gobble up a bigger
33:17
share
33:17
of the available supply of dollars
33:21
leaving behind fewer dollars to finance
33:24
everybody else okay so now businesses
33:27
don't have the financing they need
33:29
to invest in new capital equipment and
33:31
so forth
33:32
so this myth tells us that deficits are
33:35
bad
33:36
because government deficits crowd out
33:40
private investment they elbow the other
33:42
guy out of the room
33:44
and that business doesn't have access to
33:47
the dollars that
33:48
he needs or it needs to make investments
33:51
which are assumed to be
33:52
more productive than government spending
33:54
so that over time you get a less dynamic
33:58
slower growing economy lower
33:59
productivity
34:01
lower future prosperity and that sort of
34:03
thing so
34:04
in this chapter i just remind people
34:07
that can't possibly be true
34:09
because government deficits themselves
34:12
don't gobble up savings in the rest of
34:15
the economy
34:16
they augment them they increase them
34:19
remember if the government is engaged in
34:21
uh running a fiscal deficit it means
34:24
it's spending more dollars into the
34:26
economy
34:26
than it is subtracting away and that
34:29
obviously means that it's
34:30
adding to the number of dollars that are
34:33
outside
34:34
the government and once the government
34:36
sells the treasuries the borrowing piece
34:39
the government is just trading in those
34:41
dollars that it put in the economy
34:43
for treasuries after the fact so that's
34:45
all that's happening there
34:47
the fifth one was a surprise to me
34:50
because a conventional economy thing
34:53
teaches how you have to balance your
34:56
trade
34:57
you have to export more than you import
34:59
but you come and you say
35:01
that trade deficit people looking at
35:04
trade offices as if america was losing
35:06
is a myth also
35:07
so are you against the exports and are
35:10
you
35:11
in favor of import or in favor of trade
35:13
deficit
35:14
in the us so can you please elaborate in
35:16
this so again i think that this word
35:19
deficit
35:19
is part of the problem once you attach
35:22
the word deficit to something it sounds
35:24
like
35:24
somebody's done something wrong right
35:26
and the trade deficit the the president
35:29
trump
35:30
believes that the us is losing at trade
35:32
and the evidence that we're losing
35:34
is the fact that we have a trade deficit
35:36
so he sees
35:38
dollars leaving the us because we buy
35:41
more goods and services from the rest of
35:43
the world than they buy from us
35:45
and so he pays attention to money and
35:47
cash flows that's what interests him
35:50
so he sees the trade deficit and he
35:52
thinks that means china's taking all of
35:54
our money or japan is taking all of our
35:56
money
35:57
and mmt says well hang on there's
35:59
another way to look at this
36:00
right just like there's another way to
36:02
look at fiscal deficits
36:04
there's another way to think about the
36:05
trade deficit so
36:07
the trade deficit which we tend to think
36:10
of in money terms
36:11
in financial terms is also in real terms
36:15
our stuff surplus right so in exchange
36:18
for the dollars
36:20
that we pay to china or to japan
36:24
um we are importing we are getting
36:27
net importing the cars and the
36:30
high tech and the manufactured goods
36:32
right those are coming to us
36:34
so in real terms imports are a benefit
36:38
and exports are cost think about it you
36:41
put your people in factories
36:43
they work all day long they manufacture
36:46
things
36:47
and then they put them in a container
36:48
load the container on the ship and send
36:50
it to somebody else to consume
36:52
the the imports are the benefit in real
36:55
terms
36:56
right so mmt is in a sense agnostic
37:00
as to um whether the trade
37:03
uh but whether the trade balance is
37:05
positive or negative we just want to
37:07
explain
37:08
more clearly what's actually happening
37:12
and recognize that not every country can
37:15
be a net exporter
37:16
you know for one country to have a trade
37:18
surplus somebody's got to be
37:20
running a trade deficit we can't all
37:22
have trade surpluses
37:24
and it turns out that um the u.s is
37:27
has run persistent trade deficits
37:31
for decades and those trade deficits
37:35
are a source of dollars to many other
37:38
countries in the world
37:39
many of whom for whom it's a critical
37:41
lifeline and i talk in the book about
37:44
you know countries that don't have the
37:46
same
37:47
um sort of luxury or freedom that the
37:49
u.s
37:50
has with respect to its trade balance we
37:52
can sustain
37:54
trade deficits and pretty big ones uh
37:57
and a lot of countries around the world
37:59
can't they need to net export
38:01
to earn the dollar in order to get the
38:03
currency that they need
38:04
to buy critical imports food medicine
38:08
technologies energy that sort of thing
38:11
professor carlton you said something
38:12
that strikes me and
38:14
somehow shocked me i want to make sure
38:16
that i heard you properly
38:18
have you said that imports it's a good
38:20
thing
38:21
and that export is about things
38:25
well what i'm saying is that some
38:27
countries don't have
38:29
much room to choose right for a lot of
38:32
developing countries they need
38:36
to export they need to put their people
38:38
to work
38:39
making uh things that they sell to the
38:42
rest of the world
38:43
because they need a currency that they
38:45
can use
38:46
to buy critical imports so they just
38:48
don't have the same freedom of choice
38:51
that countries like the us for example
38:54
have
38:54
but it is true that um every time you
38:58
build something or manufacture something
39:00
a service whatever it is you provide
39:02
if you don't keep it and consume it
39:05
domestically
39:06
uh you are releasing some real benefit
39:10
to someone else in some other part of
39:11
the world
39:12
right your exports become benefits to
39:15
the importing country
39:16
that is that is true but your capacity
39:19
of exporting
39:21
in the long run will improve your
39:24
capacity to produce different goods
39:26
but if you are not able to compete and
39:28
export
39:29
how are you going to to improve
39:32
and to enlarge your capacity of
39:35
producing goods and services
39:38
yeah so for a lot of countries this is a
39:42
long-term development uh issue
39:45
right you've got to be able to begin to
39:48
transition to make the investments
39:50
in the domestic economy that
39:53
open up the policy space for your
39:55
individual country so that you aren't
39:57
reliant on the rest of the world
39:59
for critical imports that's a tough
40:02
thing for some countries it's going to
40:03
take
40:04
years or even decades to make those
40:07
investments to become energy independent
40:09
to become food independent right to
40:11
develop
40:12
so you know it's not an easy problem to
40:16
solve
40:16
for many countries and this is where the
40:18
rest of the world can
40:20
play i think an important role and i
40:22
talk about this in the book
40:23
in terms of providing aid and assistance
40:26
and
40:26
and helping developing countries because
40:28
what we've ended up with is a situation
40:30
where
40:31
um too many developing countries just
40:34
stay
40:35
developing countries and they aren't
40:37
able to
40:38
get to the point where they become
40:39
developed economies and i think there's
40:42
a lot the international community can do
40:44
to aid and assist countries that
40:48
you know if you just leave them to their
40:50
own devices will continue
40:52
um you know extracting whatever
40:56
natural resources they have and
40:59
you know selling them to the rest of the
41:01
world in exchange for a currency that
41:03
just allows them to
41:04
provide the bare subsistence for their
41:06
populations and we'd like to see
41:08
countries do much much better than that
41:10
what you have just said about
41:12
this uh fifth myth don't you think that
41:16
is quite unique in the world to the
41:18
united states
41:20
given the dollar status i'm not sure
41:22
that japan
41:23
can do the same thing i'm not sure that
41:25
germany
41:26
even though they are highly
41:27
industrialized country even china
41:29
are you not describing something that is
41:32
absolutely unique
41:35
to the status of the united states and
41:37
its currency the u.s dollars
41:40
no i don't think so i mean i'm not
41:42
suggesting that uh
41:44
every country attempt to become a net
41:47
importer that that's somehow the pathway
41:50
to prosperity there again there are
41:53
going to have to be
41:54
a net export for every net exporter
41:58
there's got to be
41:58
a net importer on the other side of that
42:01
right
42:02
but with respect to mmt what i'm saying
42:04
is
42:05
that there are a lot of countries that
42:08
have
42:08
a monetary system and the fiscal
42:11
capacity
42:12
to run their domestic policy their
42:15
monetary and fiscal policy
42:17
to orient them toward generating full
42:20
employment and sustaining full
42:21
employment domestically
42:23
while managing inflationary pressures so
42:27
that's sort of the the goal of mmt is to
42:30
help
42:31
i guess if you want to say it this way
42:33
to help as many nations as possible
42:36
recognize what the fiscal capacities
42:39
of their governments are for those that
42:41
have limited capacity
42:43
either because of the nature of their
42:45
monetary system
42:46
or because of you know certain
42:50
domestic challenges with respect to you
42:52
know what it's
42:53
possible to produce and export how do we
42:57
increase the degree of monetary
42:59
sovereignty
43:00
so that countries can be as
43:03
well suited as possible to care for
43:06
their people and provide full employment
43:09
thank you
43:10
the last the last myth this is really a
43:13
big myth
43:13
because they were an outcry why obama
43:17
started with the obama the obamacare
43:20
these entitlement programs there we have
43:23
a newspaper writing article say
43:27
oh no this is unsustainable uh social
43:30
security
43:31
deficit it is unsustainable medicare is
43:34
unsustainable and you professor kelton
43:37
you're coming and saying oh please cool
43:38
down
43:39
this is sustainable can you elaborate
43:42
and explain exactly what you mean by
43:45
about this six myth social security is a
43:48
program that looks after the elderly
43:50
right it is a retirement program but it
43:52
also provides benefits to
43:55
survivors of people who paid into social
43:57
security and also
43:59
the disabled medicare is health care
44:02
uh for people 65 and older so the
44:05
government is
44:05
promising to do what to pay medical
44:08
bills
44:09
in the case of medicare and to provide
44:12
um benefit payments to pay out benefits
44:16
send checks to retirees their disa
44:19
dependents and the disabled so in other
44:21
words they're promising to spend dollars
44:23
on these programs so the question then
44:25
is it could there ever be a situation
44:28
where these programs become
44:29
unaffordable where the government can't
44:32
come up with the money
44:34
to pay the prescription drug bill
44:37
that someone incurred on medicare or to
44:39
pay for their hospitalization or their
44:42
primary care could there ever be a
44:44
situation where
44:45
um you have a a senior right somebody
44:49
who
44:50
leaves the workforce reaches retirement
44:52
age moves into retirement
44:54
and you can't afford to provide the
44:56
benefits that you've promised to that
44:57
person the answer is
44:59
clearly unequivocally no the federal
45:02
government can
45:03
always afford to meet any financial
45:06
obligation it has
45:07
provided that those payments are due in
45:10
a currency that
45:11
it and only it can create so
45:14
again the u.s government can't run out
45:16
of dollars it's the issuer of the
45:17
currency
45:18
it can always pay any bill that comes
45:21
due
45:22
as long as the bill is denominated in
45:24
our currency we're not borrowing in a
45:26
foreign currency
45:27
so um you know we've been focusing on
45:31
the wrong thing
45:32
we can these programs are perfectly
45:34
sustainable as long as there is the
45:36
political will
45:38
to continue to support these programs it
45:40
cannot be
45:41
a financial crisis it can only be about
45:44
whether
45:44
congress is prepared to continue to
45:47
support these programs
45:49
thank you professor kelton we almost at
45:51
the end but
45:52
let's i have some very general questions
45:56
uh one sentence is your book
45:59
that strikes me and which i think
46:01
summarizes this book is this one
46:04
and i've read that you say spending
46:08
should never be constrained by some
46:10
arbitrary
46:12
target or any allegiance
46:15
to what you say so-called sound finance
46:19
would that be a good summary of your
46:21
book
46:22
yes i think so okay now
46:26
if we look in europe in europe you may
46:29
be
46:29
aware of the mastery criteria
46:32
regarding the target i don't know where
46:35
they get the figure from
46:36
they said the government debt should not
46:38
be over 60 of gdp
46:40
and the government deficit should not be
46:42
over
46:43
three percent of gdp what is your
46:46
comment
46:48
regarding this type of criteria
46:51
well i actually wrote about this while i
46:54
was finishing my phd this became part of
46:56
my doctoral dissertation
46:58
um i i think that if i remember
47:01
correctly
47:02
according to one economist they
47:05
those numbers were chosen because they
47:07
were historical
47:09
averages so not a lot of thought went
47:12
into that except to look at the
47:13
numbers and say well that's about the
47:15
the historical average across
47:17
these countries so we'll just pick these
47:19
numbers um
47:21
i think they're crazy i think that it
47:24
makes no sense
47:26
to commit yourself to arbitrary fiscal
47:29
targets
47:30
one because they're depending on
47:33
changing economic conditions
47:35
you might well need to be running uh
47:38
budget deficits that far exceed three
47:41
percent of gdp
47:42
or uh a debt you might need to allow the
47:46
debt ratio
47:47
to far exceed 60 of gdp the other thing
47:50
is
47:50
these aren't really why set a target
47:53
that you can't hit
47:54
because if the economy goes into full
47:56
meltdown
47:58
as it did after 2008 and as it's doing
48:01
now
48:01
in many countries the the ratio is going
48:05
to take off
48:06
on its own right because it's a debt to
48:08
gdp ratio
48:10
which means if the denominator gdp is
48:13
collapsing the ratio is going to blow up
48:16
and so you look at italy today and you
48:18
can see that the italian
48:20
government is on path to hit a debt to
48:23
gdp ratio of 160 percent
48:26
and you know it's not a manageable thing
48:29
when the denominator
48:31
is not under your control right and
48:33
frankly neither
48:34
is the the deficit so the numerator also
48:36
isn't under your control
48:38
so you don't want to focus on uh the
48:41
numbers that fall out of the budget box
48:43
at the end of each year you want to
48:44
focus on
48:45
numbers that matter right focus on the
48:47
unemployment rate
48:48
focus on real metrics you know what is
48:50
the poverty rate
48:52
um orient your budget to solving real
48:56
problems in your economy and you would
48:58
ideally want to be able to use the
49:00
budget as a tool
49:02
to achieve real meaningful goals
49:06
right rather than to target the budget
49:08
outcome itself the difficulty
49:10
these countries have is obviously that
49:12
they are operating
49:13
with a currency that they can't issue so
49:15
there are differences
49:17
the subtitle of your book is quite
49:20
interesting
49:21
it is modern monetary theory and how to
49:24
build
49:25
a better economy how will you describe a
49:27
better economy and how far are we from
49:29
it
49:30
well i mean it's easiest for me to do
49:33
this
49:34
a better economy so i live in the united
49:36
states okay and
49:37
before the coronavirus pandemic when the
49:41
unemployment rate was
49:42
about three and a half percent and you
49:45
know
49:45
donald trump would say it was the
49:47
greatest economy in the history of the
49:48
world
49:49
no one's ever had a better economy but
49:51
if you look
49:52
beyond that headline number you would
49:55
see that 87
49:57
million americans before the coronavirus
50:00
87 million americans
50:02
either were uninsured or underinsured
50:04
when it comes to health care
50:06
that 500 000 americans
50:10
sleep out on the streets every night
50:13
that
50:13
you know uh 40 percent of the population
50:17
doesn't have 400 dollars set aside for
50:21
an emergency that a half a million
50:24
people
50:25
file for bankruptcy go broke every year
50:27
because of
50:28
medical related debt that child poverty
50:31
you know i could go on and on
50:32
right that there are a lot of problems
50:35
in the economy so when i say
50:37
building a better economy i mean an
50:39
economy
50:40
that works for all of our people and
50:43
doesn't just perform well
50:45
for a small segment of the population at
50:48
the very very top
50:49
so we we have a lot of deficits and i
50:52
have a chapter on this in the book
50:53
called the deficits that matter
50:55
we have a retirement crisis people
50:57
aren't prepared to retire
50:59
we have um a student debt crisis
51:02
we've got 1.7 trillion dollars in
51:05
outstanding student loan debt with
51:07
people struggling not just to go to
51:09
school
51:10
but to then pay back the loans after
51:12
they graduate
51:13
um you know there are a lot of problems
51:15
in the economy and i think that
51:17
the way the book is trying to point us
51:19
in the direction
51:20
of setting aside the obsession with
51:23
balancing the budget
51:25
and getting us to focus on rebalancing a
51:27
lot of inequities
51:29
and plugging a lot of holes in various
51:32
parts of our economy
51:34
professor carton i thank you again thank
51:35
you very much one
51:37
last question relating to africa and to
51:40
development economics
51:41
you are well aware of the action of the
51:43
international monetary funds
51:45
of the world bank how they have been
51:47
advising it
51:49
what changes do you think that modern
51:51
monetary
51:52
theory could bring in terms of
51:55
development economics
51:57
and if you were to advise african
51:59
governments
52:00
in their path to the economic
52:02
development what
52:04
would you say because i do have a
52:07
chapter and much of a chapter that takes
52:09
up some of this but look
52:10
and we talked about this a little bit
52:12
already i think that
52:14
you know to the extent that it's
52:16
possible and it isn't always possible
52:18
but to the extent that it is possible to
52:20
avoid
52:21
borrowing in a foreign currency i
52:24
absolutely
52:25
uh we in the mmt community absolutely
52:28
believe
52:29
that government should do everything in
52:31
their power but
52:33
but the world bank has been working for
52:36
in the 80s
52:37
and 90s to diminish the role of the the
52:39
government in those countries
52:41
they're laying out people the the civil
52:44
servants
52:44
they cut the government budget they will
52:47
impose
52:48
this country to help to balance the
52:50
deficits and to
52:51
what you call the so-called sound for
52:54
sound
52:54
finance that's the issue i want and you
52:57
are bringing a new perspective
52:59
and i think it will be interesting to
53:01
the leaders in africa to hear
53:03
your voice you're bringing a new
53:05
perspective and authority and you're
53:07
demonstrating everything you've chosen
53:08
your book i want you to address please
53:11
very specifically this world bank
53:14
policy on imf and to give you advice
53:16
sorry to have interrupted you
53:18
no that's fine i i think that again it
53:21
it is critically important to understand
53:24
that
53:24
when you go to the imf let's say
53:28
and you're borrowing in foreign currency
53:32
that um you can expect that loan
53:35
to come with a variety of strings
53:37
attached you can expect that
53:39
the imf is going to ask you to
53:42
do structural adjustments where that
53:45
means
53:45
you're going to liberalize your capital
53:47
markets labor
53:49
you're going to relax regulations that
53:51
protect industries and people
53:53
and communities in your countries that
53:57
um you're gonna you know maybe um
54:00
renege on commitments you've made with
54:02
respect to worker pensions
54:04
and and other programs that support
54:06
public sector workers you're gonna lay
54:08
people off
54:09
so what i'm saying is it's a bad deal in
54:12
many cases and to the extent
54:14
that you're able to avoid placing
54:17
yourself in a position
54:18
where you go to the imf and then you
54:20
have to accept the conditions
54:23
of of the loans try to avoid going to
54:26
the imf
54:27
and allowing them to force that sort of
54:30
those sort of structural adjustments and
54:32
policies on your country it's not always
54:34
possible
54:34
to do that but the international
54:36
community can be helpful to you
54:38
in this regard and i think you know look
54:42
debts that can't be paid or shouldn't be
54:44
paid
54:45
we shouldn't be trying to collect on
54:46
them the international community can
54:48
play
54:48
a role here and there can be debt
54:51
forgiveness and we have to
54:52
begin to make i think a a concerted
54:56
effort the
54:57
wealthier advanced countries to help
55:00
developing countries to truly
55:02
develop and that means not keeping you
55:05
attached to the imf and the world bank
55:08
on an ongoing basis where you see them
55:11
as your only lifeline and you never
55:14
are able to to make the kinds of
55:17
investments in your economy they're
55:18
going to allow you
55:19
to become a developed country how do you
55:22
see
55:22
mmt let's say in the coming decades
55:26
and how do you see your role in it in
55:29
particular in the academia
55:31
and in the curriculum in the teachings
55:33
of economic science
55:35
well so i i obviously uh have an
55:39
academic position
55:40
and i get to work with graduate students
55:42
and we have
55:44
you know trained goodness knows how many
55:47
hundreds of students who are now
55:48
themselves
55:49
professors of economics and chairing
55:51
economics departments
55:53
all across this country and beyond so
55:56
it's an important
55:57
um role that we play in continuing to
56:01
educate the next generation of
56:02
economists so that
56:04
there are more people um you know
56:07
in the public policy sphere and in
56:09
academia
56:11
who i think better understand
56:14
the limits on government what
56:15
governments can do
56:17
how government finance works the
56:18
monetary system to be able to approach
56:21
uh policy making from a more functional
56:24
finance as opposed to a
56:26
dysfunctional sound finance approach
56:29
um but also you know i have a role to
56:31
play i think in terms of the public
56:33
discourse and i
56:35
want to continue to be able to do that
56:37
and to engage
56:38
with people around the world like here
56:40
talking with you today
56:42
um and and so i think it's critically
56:45
important
56:46
and the number of people who are
56:48
beginning to gain a better understanding
56:50
and appreciation
56:51
of how it all works i think is
56:53
increasing exponentially
56:55
and i think that can only offer us
56:58
hope in terms of where we have the
57:01
potential to go
57:02
as a global community in terms of
57:05
addressing
57:06
really um significant challenges that
57:09
we're all facing you know climate change
57:11
isn't is an obvious one
57:13
thank you very much professor galton we
57:16
very much appreciate
57:17
everything with us and uh we wish you
57:20
all the best and the success in the
57:23
books to spread
57:24
a new language a new view in terms of
57:27
economics and
57:28
how the government really performs
57:31
to create what we all look we are
57:34
looking for
57:34
a better economy thank you again thank
57:37
you so much
57:38
nice to be with you okay
57:42
[Music]
英語 (自動生成)
0 件のコメント:
コメントを投稿