*“Solo quando l’ultimo bene pubblico sarà stato privatizzato,*

*quando l’ultima protezione sociale sarà stata abbattuta,*

*quando anche l’ultimo imprenditore avrà dichiarato il fallimento,*

*solo allora capirete che l’Italia non è monetariamente sovrana.”*

Una rivisitazione MMT tratta da:

*“Solo quando l’ultimo fiume sarà prosciugato,*

*quando l’ultimo albero sarà abbattuto,*

*quando l’ultimo animale sarà ucciso,*

*solo allora capirete che il denaro non si mangia.”*

(Capo Toro Seduto dei Sioux Lakota)

about the sectoral bcaenals equation.So we know from the formula that (I – S) + (G – T) + (X – M) = 0. Now if we assume a closed economy, the formula is now (I – S) + (G – T)= 0. Thus (G-T)=-(I-S). Now lets assume the government starts running constant budget surpluses. Because of the vertical nature of government spending, these surpluses mean the government is destroying net financial assets from the economy. MMT says that if this happens, the private sector must run a deficit’ to compensate for this loss of assets.But if we think about this in terms of the formula, the government surplus means that the left side of the (G-T)=-(I-S) equation is a negative number (because taxes are greater than spending). Thus in order to be equal, (I-S) must be a positive number so the right side is negative too. This simply means that (S-I)<0 and thus Savings<Investment. The way I view this is in terms of credit. If savings is less than investment, there is a funding gap between the two. The banks will not have enough financial assets through deposits to fund the amount of investment it wishes to provide credit for. However, MMT says lending isn't reserve constrained so the bank will be able to come up with the reserves either through interbank lending or from borrowing from the fed. This is where the vertical and horizontal view of money come back to haunt us. Lending is horizontal spending meaning that it will not create any new financial assets since there is always a liabilities side that must cancel out. As a result, if the government continuously runs surpluses, the amount of net financial assets in the system will continue to deteriorate (or with a balanced budget remain the same). This is where the Private Sector 'deficit' runs into trouble. The bank lending based on the additional reserves has basically been a promise that in the future there will be additional net financial assets created and this will allow the loans to be paid off. However, if the government doesn't actually inject these into the system, there is nowhere else it can come from (in a closed economy) and as a result this lending will be unsustainable and will lead to "bubbles" and defaults and credit crunches like we've seen recently.Thus, it is necessary for the government to run deficits or else the system will rely completely on credit which is not a net financial asset and is not sustainable.To me, this seems like a clear explanation for how the sectoral balance equation operates, but since there seems to be some debate I am assuming I have interpreted something wrong and would appreciate it if anyone could point me in the right direction.Thanks!Colt