I would agree, economics is not a science, and the fact that neoclassicals have attempted to turn it into one is a large part of the reason we are in the shit show we find ourselves in today. I would favor a political economy approach.
Care to explain your Austrian leanings?
its ideologically blind to a resource crunch. is the main one I come across. I find it interesting because Keynesianism has worked well everytime I it implemented
Austrians are viewed as cranks by almost all mainstream economists for their refusal to use math so I doubt it.
Hmm, define resource crunch in the context of a developed country...
If you're (or whoever the critic is) implying that governments face real constraints on spending, MMT acknowledges that. No school refutes that, nor could they.
However, to impose 'sound finance' budget constraints based on arbitrary measurements, such as debt tic GDP, while resources and more importantly labor sit unutilized, well, that is the problem the neoclassicals have created and allowed to permeate
Do you read Bill Mitchell's blog? I study at his university, but I dropped my macro stuff cos the lecturer was an African woman that barely spoke english. I can't really find any flaws with MMT, but there is no way any country will be able to implement it without a major catastrophe and public outcry.
Have you looked into natsoc economics too? I've only compared on a surface level, but the funding of expansionary spending with treasury notes is basically the same as using a central bank to fund spending no? Shows what we are capable of with a big imagination and proper use of monetary policy.
mainly the forthcoming energy crisis. like, most countries have passed peak oil, wood is continuing to get scarce, etc.
The main resource MMT is concerned with managing is labour, as undersupply of labour will drive inflation, but if you are referring to, say another oil price shock, what solution does other branches offer? It is simply a market failure that needs to be worked around.
If economics is all about forgoing morality and theories of justice in favor of pure utility, then why don't economists debate the utility to be gained from slavery for the greater common good?
idk. this is just what I hear around my union when mmt is brought up. as I said, I'm sympathetic to Keynesian thought, it's always worked well when implemented in my country.