There’s a non-debate here, which has been “won” handily by MMT proponents who now run almost every central bank on the planet:

That is the debate over whether it’s better to assume you can dynamically and effectively control prices and in doing so risk the solvency of the very unit of account OR whether it’s better to assume human ability to control prices is lacking, and to focus on real world solvency instead of piling up ever greater modes of centralized control.

The folks in the second camp think we could face a global depression brought on by currency crises, as people lose faith in monetary management.

And those folks have been pointing out the ammunition depletion of the MMT folks, and where it’s leading.

Of course I’ll hear a cascade of “that’s not real MMT” from central bank water carriers.

But either MMT is exactly what you would design if you were an authoritarian bent on drawing increasing power and wealth to yourself, or it is simply another tool in the authoritarian tool box. Either way, I’m not optimistic about the end-game.

If you don’t own gold at this point, I have to wonder about the limits of human credulity. After 2008’s crisis, it should have been clear that central banks aren’t in control of the economy. They have no idea what’s coming. And as further proof: they inflated the biggest asset bubble in world history for 10+ years as a solution to a deflated asset bubble.

Whether it’s “real MMT” or not, this currency experiment is extremely long in the tooth, and we’ve entered into a bizarro-world of negative interest rates, absurd, ski high unexpungable debt loads, endless bailouts, bail-ins(!), and the increasingly obvious likelihood that central banks don’t have all the answers.

But I could be wrong. This is the MM Theory’s chance to prove me wrong.