> Know any good critiques of chartalism? It rubs me the wrong way but I'd like to deepen my critique.
This short paper by Perry Mehrling is good: "Modern money: fiat or credit", Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, March, 2000, pp. 397-406.
Against the chartalist 'ab origio' argument (that money is essentially a thing of the state because that's how it started), he puts my thoughts exactly: "It is speculative history at best, and would not bear much on the matter at hand, even if the history were more convincing. Lest the point be misunderstood as antihistory, I hasten to add that I have gained much from Fernand Braudel's (1982) historical account of primitive monetary arrangements in Europe, and accordingly build my own understanding of modern money on private business finance not palace finance. The point is not that modern money has its historical origins in private money (though I believe a convincing case could be made that it has), but that private finance is a better place to start when trying to understand modern money, or so I have come to believe."
I can supply a pdf for anyone who wants it but doesn't have access.
I made my own criticisms in a debate with Bill Mitchell, which I think you already read.
Mike