MMT & Post-Keynesianism
System Change (RIDE instead of RICH)
Repairing · Institutional · Democratic · Evolutionary
💡 Does the monetary system need to be completely replaced to make the economy
and society more just? Not necessarily.
Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) and Post-Keynesianism show a different path:
improving the existing FIAT system from within –
through better rules, smarter fiscal policy and more democratic monetary governance,
using familiar concepts, existing institutions and without systemic disruption.
This page is a deliberate counterpoint to
HMW / RICH,
the monetary system reform concept presented on cibwal.com.
It gives the MMT and Post-Keynesian perspective its proper space –
with its strengths, its limits
and an honest comparison against the 15 HMW/RICH future perspectives.
🎓 Key Thinkers
🇩🇪
Prof. Dr. Dirk Ehnts – one of the leading MMT economists
in the German-speaking world, currently a scientific adviser
at the European Parliament.
His book "Geld und Kredit: Eine €uropäische Perspektive"
(Metropolis-Verlag, 4th ed. 2020, ISBN 978-3-7316-1433-3)
explains how money actually comes into existence and how
sovereign money creation works.
dirk-ehnts.de
·
Book at Metropolis-Verlag
📖
Aaron Sahr – social researcher at the Hamburg Institute
for Social Research, author of "Keystroke-Kapitalismus" (2017).
Sahr describes money not as a technical mechanism but as a
social relationship of debt and trust,
shaped historically and politically – and therefore open to democratic redesign.
📊
Prof. Dr. Heiner Flassbeck – former State Secretary
at the German Federal Ministry of Finance and UNCTAD economist.
He emphasises the central role of
aggregate demand, wage policy and investment
as drivers of economic development –
against the neoclassical supply-side dogma of the "Agenda 2010" era.
flassbeck-economics.de
🏛
IMK – Institute for Macroeconomics and Business Cycle Research
at the Hans Böckler Foundation (Düsseldorf) and its annual
FMM Forum for Macroeconomics and Macroeconomic Policy –
the most important Post-Keynesian research and discourse institution
in Germany, bringing together international economists
outside the neoclassical mainstream.
imk-boeckler.de
🗝
Keynes Gesellschaft e. V. – a German-speaking association
for a pluralist, demand-oriented economics in the Keynesian tradition.
It fosters dialogue between academic research, economic policy practice
and the broader public.
keynes-gesellschaft.de
🧠 The Core Argument
Money is not a scarce resource.
A sovereign state that owes debts in its own currency
cannot become involuntarily insolvent.
The real limits on government action are not euros –
they are real resources: labour, raw materials, energy, productive capacity.
💰
Money is created as credit, not as savings:
Over 90 % of circulating money is created by private commercial banks
through lending – it is not "printed" by the central bank.
A government can finance its spending through the central bank
without first collecting taxes
(MMT: "The state spends first – and recovers money later through taxes").
🔁
Taxes do not primarily fund the state:
They control inflation (withdrawing purchasing power), redistribute income,
steer behaviour and create fundamental demand for the state currency
(chartalist function).
This shift in perspective is fundamental for all fiscal policy thinking.
📈
Demand is the key (Flassbeck):
Production does not emerge automatically from supply.
Businesses only invest when they anticipate sales.
Wages, government spending and investment create the demand
that makes growth and employment possible.
Wage restraint – as practised in Germany since the 2000s –
structurally weakens domestic demand and exports the country's
deflationary problem abroad.
🤝
Money as a social trust relationship (Sahr):
The value of the euro does not arise from a gold backing or intrinsic worth,
but from the legal order, tax obligations, social acceptance and trust.
Understanding this allows monetary policy to be seen as a
democratically configurable instrument –
not a law of nature.
✅ What an improved FIAT system can achieve
Within the existing institutional framework –
with the ECB, the Bundesbank, national parliaments and democratic processes –
MMT-informed policy can achieve substantial improvements.
These are the genuine strengths of this approach.
🏗 Full employment as a state goal
A government job-guarantee programme (a core MMT proposal) can structurally
reduce unemployment towards zero – as an automatic stabiliser that
preserves purchasing power in downturns and dampens overheating in booms.
📐 End of austerity dogma
"We can't afford it" is, in a sovereign monetary system,
a political choice – not a mathematical necessity.
Schools, healthcare, railways and energy infrastructure can be financed
without dependence on bond markets.
💪 Stronger wage and collective bargaining policy
Flassbeck: wages must grow in line with productivity and inflation.
A clear political framework – nationally and across Europe –
prevents wage dumping and sustainably strengthens domestic demand.
🌿 Targeted investment in the future
Climate transition, digitalisation, education: the state can finance
these transformations directly, without waiting for debt brakes
or bond markets – as long as real productive capacity is available.
🏛 Democratising monetary policy
When money is understood as a public good (Sahr),
legitimate demands emerge for greater parliamentary oversight
of central bank decisions and for credit allocation
guided by the common good.
📉 Ending the government-debt hysteria
Government debt in the state's own currency is private-sector savings.
The fear of public debt as a burden on "our children"
is a categorical error of thinking –
and urgently needs political correction.
⚖ Better tax policy
Taxes on wealth, inheritances and financial transactions
serve primarily redistribution and inflation control –
not state financing.
This opens entirely new political room for manoeuvre.
🔗 Immediately implementable
MMT and Post-Keynesianism need no new currency, no new institutions,
no international coordination as a precondition.
They build on what already exists –
and make it better. Starting today.
📊 Comparison with the 15 HMW/RICH Future Perspectives
The following overview shows which of the 15 future perspectives
presented on the HMW/RICH page
are achievable through an improved FIAT system
(MMT + Post-Keynesianism) – and which are not.
🟢 largely achievable · 🟡 partially / with effort · 🔴 not systemically resolved
🟢 largely achievable · 🟡 partially / with effort · 🔴 not systemically resolved
🏭 Work that pays again
🟡 Partially. Better wage policy and full employment
help significantly – but as long as unearned capital income
remains structurally privileged by the system,
the solution is incomplete.
It is also questionable how a government job guarantee affects individual performance incentives.
📉 Lower prices
🟡 Limited. Interest rate reductions can dampen prices –
but compound interest embedded in value chains remains structurally present.
RICH eliminates this mechanism more thoroughly.
💶 More purchasing power & prosperity
🟢 Yes, significantly. Full employment, higher wages,
better social services through public spending –
this is a clear and direct MMT strength.
📦 Decentralisation
🟡 Indirectly possible. Regional investment programmes
can strengthen local economic zones – but no structural
monetary mechanism drives decentralised production forward systemically.
🚀 Less red tape & tax avoidance
🟡 Partially. Simpler tax structures are possible
in an MMT framework – but the tax system remains complex
as long as it is wrongly understood as the primary source
of state financing.
⚖️ Free & fair competition
🟡 Conditionally. Better access to capital through
public investment support is possible. Structural market distortions
from capital concentration persist without RICH-like mechanisms.
👨👩👧👦 Social security
🟢 Strongly achievable. Full employment, job guarantee,
social infrastructure through public spending –
here lies a genuine strength of MMT and Post-Keynesianism.
🌍 Fair international trade
🟡 Partially. Flassbeck stresses the need
for European-coordinated wage and currency policy –
but structural currency arbitrage remains possible
without deeper reform.
🎓 Cultural renewal
🟢 Yes. Public investment in education,
research, arts and culture is immediately possible –
without debt-brake logic.
This is a direct and immediate MMT gain.
🗳️ Genuine democracy
🟡 Possible, but limited. More democratic control
over monetary policy is an MMT goal – but money itself
remains essentially in the hands of private banks.
Complete monetary democracy requires more.
⚖️ Systemic common good
🟡 Partially. Government spending can be aligned
with the common good – but private money creation by banks
continues to follow return principles,
not common-good criteria.
🤝 Spirit of solidarity
🟢 Supportable. A framework guaranteeing full employment
and social security strengthens social cohesion
and reduces fear of downward mobility –
an essential foundation for collective solidarity.
🌱 End of the growth compulsion
🔴 Not resolved. As long as private credit-money creation
with interest obligations dominates the system,
the structural growth compulsion in the private economy persists.
MMT does not address this fundamentally.
🏗️ Debt-free money
🔴 Not achievable. This is a fundamental difference:
in the FIAT system, money is created as interest-bearing debt –
in RICH through the debt-free Monetative.
MMT improves how debt is managed
but does not change the basic construction.
🏠 Stable asset prices
🔴 Not resolved. This is the greatest weakness
of an improved FIAT system: without demurrage
and without a structural brake on capital accumulation
in asset markets, asset price inflation
and the wealth gap remain structurally entrenched –
regardless of how good fiscal policy is.
❤️🩹 Healing Chances for the 15 Wounds of Turbo-Capitalism
As per slide 2 of the presentation: which systemic wounds of turbo-capitalism
does MMT/Post-Keynesianism address – and how completely?
🟢 fully addressed (4) · structurally resolved
🟡 partially addressed (9) · improvement through changed incentives in the system
🔴 structurally barely addressed (2) · the architecture leaves correct action to the individual
🟢 fully addressed (4) · structurally resolved
🟡 partially addressed (9) · improvement through changed incentives in the system
🔴 structurally barely addressed (2) · the architecture leaves correct action to the individual
1. 🟡 Structural Wealth Inequality
MMT enables wealth, inheritance and financial-transaction taxes as well as full employment. This can politically reduce inequality. However, the actual wealth accumulation mechanisms (capital returns, asset inflation, interest and property structures) remain in place.
2. 🟡 Unearned Income
Capital returns can be taxed more heavily. However, MMT eliminates neither interest nor unearned ground and asset returns. This type of income remains fundamentally intact.
3. 🟢 Market Distortions
Post-Keynesians critique monopolies, financial market power and lobbying. Through regulation, competition policy and public investment, many market distortions can be reduced.
4. 🔴 Privatised Money Creation
Private credit-money creation by banks remains fundamentally intact. MMT explains this system differently from mainstream economics but does not replace it.
5. 🟡 Debt Dependency
State debt dependency is substantially relativised, since the state does not have to finance its spending like a private household. However, private debt dynamics remain.
6. 🔴 Asset Price Inflation
MMT has no systemic brake against real estate, equity and land price bubbles. Additional regulation would be possible but is not central to the model.
7. 🟢 Democratic Deficit
MMT strengthens the role of democratically legitimised fiscal policy relative to technocratic debt brakes and austerity pressures. This substantially increases the political capacity of elected parliaments.
8. 🟡 Opacity & Power Concentration
MMT makes the actual money creation processes more understandable and transparent. However, the concentration of economic power in large banks and corporations is not automatically eliminated.
9. 🟢 Exploitative Labour
The MMT job guarantee is considered one of the strongest instruments of the approach. Anyone who wants to work receives an employment opportunity with social value and minimum standards.
10. 🟢 Unequal Opportunity
Large public investments in education, healthcare, infrastructure and social security can substantially improve equality of opportunity.
11. 🟡 Loss of Time Sovereignty
Full employment and social security reduce existential anxieties. However, the system contains no structural working-time reduction or decoupling of income from paid employment.
12. 🟡 Consumerism & Planned Obsolescence
The approach reduces crisis pressure and existential anxieties, but contains no direct solution against advertising, throwaway products or consumption-driven status competition.
13. 🟡 Environmental Degradation
MMT can finance ecological transformations (climate protection, energy transition, infrastructure). However, the model contains no automatic ecological limiting logic or resource cap.
14. 🟡 Unfair Globalisation
In particular Flassbeck addresses trade imbalances, wage dumping and export surpluses very strongly. However, the correction takes place politically rather than through automatic systemic mechanisms.
15. 🟡 Social Fragmentation
Full employment, social security and strong public services substantially reduce social tensions. However, structural wealth concentrations partially remain.
❌ What an improved FIAT system does not solve
Here lies the decisive limit: MMT and Post-Keynesianism are
demand-side reform approaches
within the existing interest-rate system.
The structural design flaws of money itself –
debt-based money creation, compound interest, capital accumulation –
are not fundamentally addressed.
🏠
Asset price inflation remains unresolved:
As long as money can be hoarded as a store of value and invested
in asset markets (real estate, equities, commodities),
asset prices will structurally rise faster than wages and consumer prices.
MMT offers no systemic brake against the Matthew effect.
📊
The wealth gap remains structural:
Without a demurrage charge on large fortunes and without
a structural brake on capital accumulation,
MMT-financed prosperity can repeatedly collapse back into inequality.
Taxes can counteract this – but they do not resolve the mechanism systemically.
♾
The growth compulsion remains at the core:
Interest and compound interest in the private banking sector
systemically compel continuous GDP growth.
MMT can improve public investment –
but it does not structurally address the growth pressure
generated by interest obligations in the private economy.
🏦
Private money creation remains uncontrolled:
Over 90 % of money continues to be created by private banks –
guided by return expectations, not the common good.
RICH creates a democratic alternative through the Monetative
(a fourth branch of state power for money issuance);
MMT leaves this power essentially with the banks.
💳
No debt-free money:
Every FIAT euro continues to be created as a debt bearing interest.
The MMT framework improves how the state handles this reality –
but it does not change the basic construction.
The difference from RICH's debt-free Monetative remains fundamental.
🔬 Flassbeck and HMW / RICH: Diagnosis and Dividing Line
Heiner Flassbeck and the Humane Market Economy (HMW/RICH) share
a surprisingly large number of diagnoses –
but differ fundamentally on
causes and solutions.
🩺
Flassbeck's diagnosis:
He locates the main problems in wrong macroeconomic policy:
insufficient demand, wage dumping,
current account imbalances,
financial market dominance and the design flaws of the Eurozone.
He is particularly critical of countries like Germany
boosting their competitiveness through suppressed wages,
thereby structurally deepening imbalances within Europe.
🏦
Flassbeck's starting point:
He accepts the current FIAT monetary system, including
private money creation by commercial banks.
In his view, the problem arises not from the fact that
banks create money, but from the fact that politics and regulation
steer the economy badly.
📋
Flassbeck's policy demands:
coordinated European wage policy ·
stronger public investment ·
active fiscal policy instead of austerity ·
stricter regulation of financial markets ·
limiting speculative capital flows ·
correcting current account imbalances
through better European coordination.
🔩
HMW/RICH goes deeper:
It looks not only at economic policy
but at the structure of the monetary and economic system itself
as the root cause of many problems.
Asset price inflation, money as a commodity,
systemic wealth concentration, unearned income
and persistent trade imbalances are understood not primarily
as regulatory failures – but as consequences
of the existing system architecture itself.
🌍
Foreign trade as an example:
While Flassbeck seeks to correct trade imbalances politically
(coordinated wage policy, European alignment),
HMW/RICH aims to balance them systemically –
through currency parities, real-economy adjustment mechanisms
and, where necessary, balancing tariffs.
The real dividing line:
Flassbeck: "The system is fundamentally sound – we are simply running the wrong policies."
HMW/RICH: "Policy makes mistakes, but many of those mistakes are themselves produced by the structure of the system."
This is precisely the dividing line between Post-Keynesianism / MMT and most deeper-reaching monetary and economic reform approaches.
Flassbeck: "The system is fundamentally sound – we are simply running the wrong policies."
HMW/RICH: "Policy makes mistakes, but many of those mistakes are themselves produced by the structure of the system."
This is precisely the dividing line between Post-Keynesianism / MMT and most deeper-reaching monetary and economic reform approaches.
💡 Why this path is still valuable
MMT and Post-Keynesianism are not a compromise born of convenience –
they are an intellectually serious path
that functions within real political systems with real institutions.
🚪
The low-threshold entry:
No constitutional amendment, no building of new institutions,
no international coordination as a precondition.
An enlightened parliament, an engaged central bank
and a changed fiscal culture suffice –
in theory – for substantial improvements.
🗣
Communicable and connectable:
"The state is not a household", "government debt is private sector savings",
"full employment is financeable" – these are statements that work
in parliamentary debates, in the media and in classrooms.
That has communicative and political value.
🛤
As an intellectual bridge to deeper reform:
Once someone understands that money is not a scarce resource,
they are open to the next step: why not change
the construction of money itself?
MMT can be a springboard for deeper reforms like RICH.
🔀 Two paths, one goal – an honest assessment
MMT and Post-Keynesianism solve the problem from within:
they make the existing system more usable.
RICH solves the problem at the root:
it changes the construction of money itself.
Both paths lead in a more just direction – but only one breaks through the structural core of asset price inflation, the growth compulsion and the debt-money system.
Both paths lead in a more just direction – but only one breaks through the structural core of asset price inflation, the growth compulsion and the debt-money system.
"The state spends money first and subsequently draws part of it back in through taxes."
– Dirk Ehnts, paraphrased from: Geld und Kredit: Eine €uropäische Perspektive
– Dirk Ehnts, paraphrased from: Geld und Kredit: Eine €uropäische Perspektive
"Money is not a thing, but a social relationship of trust."
– Aaron Sahr, Keystroke-Kapitalismus
– Aaron Sahr, Keystroke-Kapitalismus
"What matters is not the quantity of money, but effective demand."
– Heiner Flassbeck, paraphrased
– Heiner Flassbeck, paraphrased
📚 Further Reading & Resources