If governments can allegedly print infinite money / "inject liquidity" then why...

[John Connor]

does anyone have to work?

Further more, why does anyone have to pay taxes? Can't the government just generate the money at will? Why do they need to charge us taxes?

If we can just print money and everything is the same the next day except "captain government has saved the day once again!" then why don't they just give every man woman and child a check for $100,000,000 tomorrow?

Can anyone answer these questions?

I already know the answer... I just find this whole thing absurd. Please wake up.

[n00bie]

Problem is, the more money they print, the less it's worth. Inflation will go crazy. 100k will be like having 10k. how you going to live off that?

Also,if no one worked.. where will we get our food from? No one's working to produce them. There won't be any products being produced. Nothing for us to buy. You want us all to go back to times where there was no commerce?

I guess when AI comes along, they'll be doing all the jobs for us.. but until then, there will be no benefits for everyone to sit at home and not work.

[Stephonit]

does anyone have to work?

Further more, why does anyone have to pay taxes? Can't the government just generate the money at will? Why do they need to charge us taxes?

If we can just print money and everything is the same the next day except "captain government has saved the day once again!" then why don't they just give every man woman and child a check for $100,000,000 tomorrow?

Can anyone answer these questions?

I already know the answer... I just find this whole thing absurd. Please wake up.

Money is inherently worthless if people give no value to it. That's why if stranded on a deserted island with $1 billion dollars it's not going to help you. What has value? Work. Money is just a carrot dangled in front of people to get them to work.

[AlternativeAcc.]

OP is retarded

[John Connor]

Problem is, the more money they print, the less it's worth. Inflation will go crazy. 100k will be like having 10k. how you going to live off that?

Also,if no one worked.. where will we get our food from? No one's working to produce them. There won't be any products being produced. Nothing for us to buy. You want us all to go back to times where there was no commerce?

I guess when AI comes along, they'll be doing all the jobs for us.. but until then, there will be no benefits for everyone to sit at home and not work.

Bolded is basically the crux of it all. Like I said in the OP, I already know the answers. Are you legitimately asking me those questions or what is that post exactly?

Money is inherently worthless if people give no value to it. That's why if stranded on a deserted island with $1 billion dollars it's not going to help you. What has value? Work. Money is just a carrot dangled in front of people to get them to work.

Money, more specifically and as currently constructed, is "...made up. Pieces of paper with pictures on it so we don’t have to kill each other just to get something to eat." So you get the idea... but the point I'm trying to make is basically... how can the given made up value/belief by people remain the same if we keep printing it at will? Hi?

If the supply... let's say... doubled... do you think people's belief would be the same? It's also tied into supply and demand. They're inflating the supply like crazy right now.

And if the argument is that we can print it and the value remains the same because the belief remains the same, why stop at $1200 and untold bailouts and loans? Why not $5000?

OP is retarded

That's helpful. Says the guy that abandoned the other thread.




The OP was a rhetorical post. I'm not trying to get anyone to explain it to me. I clearly understand it quite possibly the best out of anyone on this entire board that I've seen so far.

[AlternativeAcc.]

You have a 5 year old understanding of Economics

Literally retarded

You actually thought the Fed was buying up stocks, so obviously you know nothing about the subject and have no idea how much trouble wed be in if it wasnt for QE.

Go do some actual research before posting

[John Connor]

You have a 5 year old understanding of Economics

Literally retarded

You actually thought the Fed was buying up stocks, so obviously you know nothing about the subject and have no idea how much trouble wed be in if it wasnt for QE.

Go do some actual research before posting

They are openly discussing buying stocks, which they have never done in U.S. history.

Yes, the short term pain would be worse without QE... I understand. There is no doubt that is true. The long term pain is made significantly worse by QE. Unimaginably, horrifically... exponentially worse. That's what you, seemingly, do not understand. Not only is inflation going to spiral out of control, but wages will not keep up with inflation, thus widening the gap even further. There is no doubt that the short term pain is better and the long term pain is substantially worse.

It's likely that half of all U.S. small businesses will fail within the next six months. That is not to be taken lightly. The printing will not stop.

Apparently you, like most of corporate America and most people in general, only see and only think in the short term.

Thank you.

[Stephonit]

If the supply... let's say... doubled... do you think people's belief would be the same? It's also tied into supply and demand. They're inflating the supply like crazy right now.

And if the argument is that we can print it and the value remains the same because the belief remains the same, why stop at $1200 and untold bailouts and loans? Why not $5000?

It depends if the money circulates. I believe there is more than enough money already in the system. The problem is that most of it is controlled by a small minority of people who are already very well off and don't need to spend more to maintain their lifestyle and just keep stuffing it into assets that don't circulate like real estate. It's like needing water and having a very large glacier as a source of it. There's a lot of it but you need to melt it to get it to flow and gain access to it. In theory there is an overwhelming supply but it is stuck.

The current cash injections will add to liquidity but it will just flow to those with money in the end and freeze up again. The way to remove money from the system overall if necessary is obvious: tax. That would have the effect though of increasing liquidity temporarily as those being taxed find ways to liquify and spend their assets instead of being hit with the full impact of the tax.

[AlternativeAcc.]

Because of the corona virus the demand for goods is low. The hit to the economy decreases the marginal propensity to consume, which further decreases the demand for goods and the circulation of money. (More saving)

On the other hand, supply is increasing as inventory accumulates, which diminishes the price of goods. This is a deflationary spiral and often occurs in economic downturns.

Stores desperate to offload inventory = lower prices and a lower consumer price index. Oil being this low is also deflationary. This is why the fed isnt worried about inflation.

[DoctorP]

this is a basketball site full of jocks. try reddit/economics

[Hawker]

It depends if the money circulates. I believe there is more than enough money already in the system. The problem is that most of it is controlled by a small minority of people who are already very well off and don't need to spend more to maintain their lifestyle and just keep stuffing it into assets that don't circulate like real estate. It's like needing water and having a very large glacier as a source of it. There's a lot of it but you need to melt it to get it to flow and gain access to it. In theory there is an overwhelming supply but it is stuck.

The current cash injections will add to liquidity but it will just flow to those with money in the end and freeze up again. The way to remove money from the system overall if necessary is obvious: tax. That would have the effect though of increasing liquidity temporarily as those being taxed find ways to liquify and spend their assets instead of being hit with the full impact of the tax.

Investing in real estate = lower rent.

That's why draconian regulations in San Fran and NY are self-defeating.

Also, these individuals get criticized for saving too much and not spending it and then when we get into a crisis and ask for a bailout, they get criticized for not saving enough. Seems ridiculous.

[Stephonit]

Investing in real estate = lower rent.

That's why draconian regulations in San Fran and NY are self-defeating.

Also, these individuals get criticized for saving too much and not spending it and then when we get into a crisis and ask for a bailout, they get criticized for not saving enough. Seems ridiculous.

The incentives are what they are. That real estate conundrum is a thorny mess and is what makes solutions complicated. Let the market crash to make things more affordable and kill people's nest eggs or continue to inflate and exacerbate the affordability crisis but keep real estate owners happy. San Francisco and New York have that problem because that's where all the money is flowing to. It creates an affordability crisis for regular people when they are competing with multi-millionaries for housing resources. Other areas of the country are far cheaper but it's harder to make money. More equitable distribution both in terms of income and geography is called for.

[Hawker]

The incentives are what they are. That real estate conundrum is a thorny mess and is what makes solutions complicated. Let the market crash to make things more affordable and kill people's nest eggs or continue to inflate and exacerbate the affordability crisis but keep real estate owners happy. San Francisco and New York have that problem because that's where all the money is flowing to. It creates an affordability crisis for regular people when they are competing with multi-millionaries for housing resources. Other areas of the country are far cheaper but it's harder to make money. More equitable distribution both in terms of income and geography is called for.

The only way to increase housing affordability is to allow investors to build. So yes, that means a high rise apartment that blocks the sun to your 1 story house. It's basic supply and demand.

[Stephonit]

The only way to increase housing affordability is to allow investors to build. So yes, that means a high rise apartment that blocks the sun to your 1 story house. It's basic supply and demand.

That's just concentrating the problem. Spreading out the wealth is more sustainable.

[Phoenix]

'Just print more' devalues money as well as disincentivizes people to do all the mundane everyday shit we call 'work' that makes life go. This IS the Matrix, not one run by AI machines but very much an intricate system designed to engineer class, assign value to people based on their occupation/wealth and ensure you spend the majority of your life consumed as a battery and preoccupied with acquiring depreciating trinkets( clothes, electronics etc) to make running on the hamster wheel somehow more tolerable.