The Canadian dollar is, in fact, a reserve currency, although not to the same degree as the US dollar. A point you, in fact, you make, undercutting your own initial claim.
I'd like to also add you're mischaracterizing Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). It's not a "Money for Nothing" crowd. It's a 'crowd' (to use your disparaging term) that exposes the mythology of debt and deficits and provides descriptions of what they actually are. You're creating a straw man, then attacking him.
Proponents of MMT agree that the "Central banks need to be able to focus on...keeping the value of our currency stable by controlling inflation." It's central to MMT. You might want revisit MMT, learn what it is, and then provide your commentary. MMT is not so much a 'theory' as it is a description of how macro economics works for countries, like Canada, which have their own sovereign currency, issue debt in that currency, have a central bank, and a robust economy.
By the way, if your analysis was correct, all the major democratic economies should be suffering massive inflation. None are. Evidence, as clear as it gets, there's something wrong with your analysis and commentary.
Thank you for explaining this distinct possibility so plainly. As I have opined on this site before, Trudeau's underlying governing ethos can be summed up by "I-want-dessert-without-eating-my-vegetables-ism." I don't have the macroeconomic background to come to my own understanding of how this policy approach applies to our national debt, but your article lays it out well. It seems that the actual spending power and quality of life of most Canadians may be yet another casualty of Trudeau's omnipotent fantasies.
This doesn't sound fun. If we become beholden to our debtors in this way, could other countries and/or the IMF begin to have control over parliament's agenda? It's one thing in the EU, but what would this look like in Canada?
The Canadian dollar is, in fact, a reserve currency, although not to the same degree as the US dollar. A point you, in fact, you make, undercutting your own initial claim.
I'd like to also add you're mischaracterizing Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). It's not a "Money for Nothing" crowd. It's a 'crowd' (to use your disparaging term) that exposes the mythology of debt and deficits and provides descriptions of what they actually are. You're creating a straw man, then attacking him.
Proponents of MMT agree that the "Central banks need to be able to focus on...keeping the value of our currency stable by controlling inflation." It's central to MMT. You might want revisit MMT, learn what it is, and then provide your commentary. MMT is not so much a 'theory' as it is a description of how macro economics works for countries, like Canada, which have their own sovereign currency, issue debt in that currency, have a central bank, and a robust economy.
By the way, if your analysis was correct, all the major democratic economies should be suffering massive inflation. None are. Evidence, as clear as it gets, there's something wrong with your analysis and commentary.
Thank you for explaining this distinct possibility so plainly. As I have opined on this site before, Trudeau's underlying governing ethos can be summed up by "I-want-dessert-without-eating-my-vegetables-ism." I don't have the macroeconomic background to come to my own understanding of how this policy approach applies to our national debt, but your article lays it out well. It seems that the actual spending power and quality of life of most Canadians may be yet another casualty of Trudeau's omnipotent fantasies.
This doesn't sound fun. If we become beholden to our debtors in this way, could other countries and/or the IMF begin to have control over parliament's agenda? It's one thing in the EU, but what would this look like in Canada?