konki

Sovereign govervments shouldn't need to levy anything to be able to "fund" themselves, but this is what you get when you surrender your monetary sovereignty.

No, it doesn't. What could lead to inflation is government bidding up prices by spending in areas where the resources are already fully employed. That can happen whether the government runs a deficit or a surplus. If the government spends on something where there is idle productive capacity, the spending is not necessarily inflationary, as the increased demand is easily met by an increased supply. If, on the other hand, the government spends on something where the production is already at full employment, they will be engaged in a bidding war against the private sector (a bidding war the government will always be able to win) which will drive prices up. My point is that both these scenarios are independent of whether or not the governemnt runs a deficit. It is simply a question of real resources.

It could, but it isn't. The US national debt is solely denominated in US dollars: A currency of which the US government is the monopoly issuer. Thus the US government cannot run out of money to pay its obligations.

I just want to point out that the debt itself is not an issue. The problem with this bill is its cuts in welfare and horrible distributional consequences, but the increased deficit and debt are not.

I have a similar problem on OpenSUSE. The solution for me is running modprobe rndis_host.

The "debt" of a monetarily sovereign state is really nothing like the debt of a household or business. The US could pay off all its debt in an instant by an act of Congress. Not saying that would be a good thing, but there are no financial constraints stopping Congress from doing that; only political ones.

Increasing the government "debt" isn't bad in itself though.

Now fix climate change by global reduction of CEOs.

How is that? In my view, MMT follows logically from the simple accounting idintity that debits and credits must balance, and the oberservation that the government is the monopoly issuer of its own currency. I'd be glad to hear your perspective though.

Totally agree. The intial tax liability declared in a currency has the purpose of creating demand for the currency so that people, either directly or indirectly, want to work for the government to get the money they are issuing. This effect is probably most import when the currency is first created, but at the same time also the most important function of tax: It is what goves the money its value.