> Somehow Keynesianism—and monetarism—limped into the 1970s, saying you can manage domestic demand and supply, and therefore growth and employment, by adjusting taxes and spending and the money stock in a country, even though Mundell’s field-defining articles of the previous two decades had shown that capital movements will overwhelm all efforts at domestic authorities to fine-tune their way to a desired result.

On the one hand is an attractively reasoned theoretical argument as to why it can’t ever work. [0]

On the other side is the repeated, concrete experience that it does work.

[0] Although, even per the article, it doesn’t show that in the case of “a solitary global economic hegemon”, which might, even if it was otherwise completely correct, be a pretty important limitation to its applicability to late-20th and early-(as in so far)-21st Century US policy.