Modern Monetary Theory

Interview with Stephanie Kelton on Pitchfork Economics

Classical economic theory is obviously wrong. It gets the sequence of events backwards. I have long been puzzled by the fact that instinct-driven people who get most of their information from what I call superficial optics (what things look like) are also prone to relying on the spoken word AND tend to reverse the normal process of events.
People with a faulty sense of direction seem to have a similar proclivity for going wrong more often then right.
Since vision is a problematic functionality, much dependent on the amount and source of lighting, that the information vision provides is often incomplete, if not downright wrong, is to be expected. That individuals handicapped in this way might fall back on hearing for amplification and accuracy seems logical. That the result is to prefer a reversal of process is not. More likely, a preference for a reversal of process is the result of people starting from a desired outcome and trying to figure out how to get there.
Classical economic theory seems a good example. The theorists, not the practitioners, wanted to be supplied with their necessities of life despite being practically incompetent. So, they came up with a theory that said their interest in being sustained prompted productive behavior for the market where it could be acquired by them by handing over currency that they had collected either by force or because of their good name. (I cannot forget that all the gold plundered from Central and South America by Spain ended up in the vaults of the Dutch within one generation. And then the Dutch invented paper currency by issuing certificates of deposit instead of the gold).