In the beginning there were taxes.

There are several conflicting stories about the origin of money. Many of them may even be true, but most don’t deal with “modern” money. Accounting has been a necessity since we first formed societies and things, even simple lines carved in sticks, have been used to represent other things, but accounting isn't money in the context we currently use. Money must be universal as a representation of value in many things, so it cannot be a consumable or perishable with intrinsic value itself. The value of money may be “pinned” to a commodity, but…


Us, them, and everyone else. Sectors are everything.

Sector, section, sect; to divide, cut, partition. We can divide just about any numbers into groupings according to varying criteria to gain a better understanding of their movements, or the groups themselves. We most often define people by sex/gender, age, politics, income, to gain insights into how each compares to others. In economics, sectors are defined most often by their relationship with the currency and how they use it. As we saw in Part I, the federal government is both the creator and destroyer of the currency. It creates the dollar (US)…


Bank money and its place in the big picture.

To this point, I have addressed money as defined by our monetary system as a tax credit. The federal government will only accept its own currency in payment of tax obligations as it is those obligations that create the demand for the currency and allow for the government’s management of the money supply. However, the government has not restricted the creation of “money” to itself. In fact, those grocery coupons you clip from the prolific amount of junk mail most of us detest are a form of money. They offer a…


Opportunities lost

America has been tightening its belt steadily since Saint RayGun brought us the revelation of supply side economics (it’ll work this time, I promise) down from the mount. Every honest graph of the economy that doesn’t include Wall St gains shows we are riding a sinking ship and its leakage is clearly tied to our imposed austerity measures. I think that over three decades is sufficient time to judge an economic policy and that we can assume trickle down has failed, again. If we are smart, which there is no indication of in recent decades, we will accept…


Spoiler Alert: It’s a poor attempt at comedy that can only be understood by the authors. Not even all of the actors get it.

General Plotline:

A mostly meaningless number is given temporary importance as Congress chooses up sides and rants about the legislation “THEY” previously approved and its cost that will surely bring about the failure of the American economy.

The “D” team will take the position that the best way to “pay for” things is to remove more money from the economy with higher taxes, while the “R” team will argue for cutting the amount of money the…


What’s with all of the book download links that now make up 75–80% of my feed? It would seem a lot easier to simply go to the Kindle page and get a category selection if that was my driving interest in paying for my membership here.


I'll admit that I didn't read much of your article. That is because it started out from the worst position possible, paying for it. That is a sure way to bankrupt the nation and destroy its already lousy healthcare in one blow.

Any economist I would consider credible recognizes that moving to a single-payer healthcare system would be a serious "deflationary" event that would leave up to millions involuntarily unemployed with no back up field to transition into. I think most would agree that we would owe them more than the pittance of state unemployment plus some relevant training in…


It would be refreshing to see just one article attempting to debunk MMT that showed a minimum effort to understand its premise and concept. Here's a clue: It isn't all about spending more. You also don't get to mix MMT with your heterodox econ at will. Pick a lane.

"The US dollar was created in 1785, and the country did not have any significant income taxes until the 20th century. Most of the government revenue came from import and export tariffs. The assumption that taxation drives up demand for the currency has not been backed by substantial proof"

The US…


"When the wealthy don’t pay enough in taxes to keep the society running, then the money is borrowed, which has to be repaid by future citizens."

This would be true if we still used the gold standard or taxes actually paid for federal spending. Neither is correct. All federal spending is the creation of new monetary assets in the private sector. …


Your piece is mostly accurate except for one thing. It presents the old "limited money" logic that says "if only they would pay more we could afford more". That is a falsehood, albeit a generally accepted one.

They, and their media and political puppets, have done a real good job of perpetuating the concept of "job creators" and the source of the money we all need to exist. In fact, there is only one source of US dollars and that is spending in the private sector by Congress, the monopoly patent holder for the US dollar. …

Keith Evans

Meandering to a different drummer.

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store