You bury the lead if you don’t put inflation front and center in the discussion. As Vince Lombardi might have said, it’s not the biggest risk, it’s the only risk. In modern monetary theory, preservation of the currency needs to be the central point.

Inflation happens when too much money chases too few goods. Taxes (taking money) and borrowing (renting money) are two ways in which the government diverts money from chasing goods. They are inflation preventers, nothing more, but, centrally, nothing less.

I think the job guarantee is unworkable. Too many devils in the details. What government job worth doing can be done by someone who is constantly looking for a better one in another field for which they have better training and experience? It’s like that old joke about the the two guys, one of whom digs holes and the other of whom fills them again, because the guy who plants the tree called in sick. Real work is done in teams by people who know how to do it. Short-term makework jobs, as opposed to New Deal style projects in a depression, don’t make sense.

Finally, I would not relate the creation of money to the productive capacity of the country. One advantage of being the United States of America is that other countries will happily trade their outputs for our money. We cannot put into play more money than we can honor in the usual course of business, but like a bank practicing fractional reserve banking, we need only be able to produce as much stuff as dollar-holders demand. Where we need to be careful is in allowing ownership of our real assets — especially real estate, but also constitutionally protected interests in business profits. I do not believe we should allow our trade deficit money to buy anything but claims on our outputs through the usual auction/barter process.