Here are two theoretical insights from heterodox economics that can help the Left make sense of MMT:

1. When we do resource analyses with input-output tables, we& #39;re talking about FLOWS rather than STOCKS. Inputs (outputs) are produced HERE as they& #39;re used THERE, and so on.

...

2. The act of public investment does not merely activate an available pool of resources. It is a future-facing act of linguistic poiesis, which constantly defines and redefines what is socially useful (i.e. what is a resource) and what is not.

And so what& #39;s the significance?

These two theoretical points taken together suggest that today& #39;s scarcities of XYZ goods are really the result yesterday& #39;s political decisions not to decide to produce adequate flows of those things.

In other words, politics isn& #39;t a static distributional conflict.

There is a certain kind of materialism that disavows these future-facing commitments to include everyone as a form of idealism.

It& #39;s a failure to understand the ongoing interplay between what is materially available now and the monetary abstraction that which organizes it.

This is what needs to be rejected for the left to get off of this treadmill.