Want to fix the debt problem? We need to print more money!

[Mr Neutron]

Unfortunately we do not have exports

Sure we do. We export our military wherever the POTUS gets a boner for. We give them all the bombs and bullets they could ever handle.

 

[sync0s]

Inflation doesn't always result in a destroyed currency. That is a false assumption. How does printing more money put the problem on future generations?

We need to deal with the immediate problem now. That problem is unemployment, not debt. If we don't fix the unemployment, we'll fall into a depression. A depression will result in much much more debt. Printing money actually decreases the value of the debt, it doesn't add to it.



And that interest and that debt becomes worth less if we print more money.

You're not taking into account the fact that business men and capitol investors are sitting on their hands and part of the reason for that is the large debt. Think of it like this: If you are an investor with $1 million ready to invest, which market would you rather invest in:
1) A market where debt is being handled without printing money so that you know your $1,000,000 will be worth $1,000,000 a year from now
or
2) A market where debt is being increased and money is being printed so your $1,000,000 will be worth $984,251.97 (Inflation rates based on 09-10) a year from now due to inflation.

Which is more appealing? You want to talk about jobs, we need to create a market where investing and creating jobs can actually prove profitable.

 

[jeff f]

In a liquidity trap, printing money will not lead to significant growth nor will it lead to significant inflation unless you commit to enough to push interest rates negative - but this is just a theory, I dont think it's ever been done. If Bernkanke pursued a policy like this it would define his chairmanship; Whether it pulls the U.S. out of the liquidity trap or causes a myriad of undesirable consequences that will only make it worse will surely be the story of this not-recession either way.

The only safe and sure option, of course, is fiscal stimulus but it's politically unlikely - print away!

disagree. what you are going to get is a huge tax decrease. the best stumulus money can buy. and you will also propably get a modest domestic spending bill. mark my words.

and it will be the peoples/businesses spending their money o what they need.

they could aslo reap big business bennies by eliminating the epa msha, osho. or atleast so deplete their offices that miners will have a chance to harvest their lifes work

 

[mame]

You're not taking into account the fact that business men and capitol investors are sitting on their hands and part of the reason for that is the large debt. Think of it like this: If you are an investor with $1 million ready to invest, which market would you rather invest in:
1) A market where debt is being handled without printing money so that you know your $1,000,000 will be worth $1,000,000 a year from now
or
2) A market where debt is being increased and money is being printed so your $1,000,000 will be worth $984,251.97 (Inflation rates based on 09-10) a year from now due to inflation.

Which is more appealing? You want to talk about jobs, we need to create a market where investing and creating jobs can actually prove profitable.

Profits aren't the problem, aggregate demand is; In fact, profits are at record highs.

 

[Dan Kone]

You're not taking into account the fact that business men and capitol investors are sitting on their hands and part of the reason for that is the large debt.

And the reason they are doing that is because there is no demand because everyone is unemployed and lacks the disposable income to shop. That exactly why we need a second stimulus. The government doesn't require demand to create jobs. We can build infrastructure which has the dual bonus of giving people jobs and improving long term commerce. We print 2 trillion dollars and put it into infrastructure spending and people will have jobs and be able to afford to buy the products the private sector create. Then the private sector will create jobs. If it's profitable for them to create jobs, that's what they'll do.

Think of it like this: If you are an investor with $1 million ready to invest, which market would you rather invest in:
1) A market where debt is being handled without printing money so that you know your $1,000,000 will be worth $1,000,000 a year from now
or
2) A market where debt is being increased and money is being printed so your $1,000,000 will be worth $984,251.97 (Inflation rates based on 09-10) a year from now due to inflation. Which is more appealing?

False question. The question is how much of a profit can they create by investing that money. If they can make a 30% profit on a hire it doesn't matter if their money is worth 5% less. The goods and services that companies are selling now are INCREDIBLY profitable right now. The only problem is not enough people can afford them because they don't have jobs.

You want to talk about jobs, we need to create a market where investing and creating jobs can actually prove profitable.

As long as no one has a job, demand for goods and services stays low, so there is no profit in job creation. That's our core problem right now. It's not debts or deficits. It's the fact that no one has a job. All our other problems are symptoms of that.

That's also the problem that conservatives and other anti-government types are doing everything they can to insure we won't address that core problem. When you ask for spending cuts, you're making that problem worse, not better. We can not successfully fix any of our other problems until that's taken care of. And you guys asking for cuts in deficit spending are asking to make our core problem of employment much worse.

 

[Dan Kone]

disagree. what you are going to get is a huge tax decrease. the best stumulus money can buy.

Question - I don't understand why you want to make your argument based on stating something that is blatantly not true. Why bother doing that? What do you get out of it? What you're saying has no basis in reality what so ever and is proven false. So why insist on it?

The best stimulus money can buy is unquestionably food stamps. That's not my opinion, it's a proven fact that food stamps give the best economic return on your money. For every dollar the government hands out in food stamps, one dollar is directly and immediately spent in the marketplace. Because of the recirculating effect of market spending, the effect on GDP is actually $1.73 increase in GDP for every dollar spent on food stamps.

The effect of tax cuts as stimulus is actually one of the worst you can possibly get (avg $1.02 GDP increase for every dollar spent). Of course that depends on the tax cuts, but almost all tax cuts have less effect on the economy than unemployment benefits, aid to state governments, and infrastructure spending.

What you're saying is 100% false.

 

[RyanTheRhino]

Question - I don't understand why you want to make your argument based on stating something that is blatantly not true. Why bother doing that? What do you get out of it? What you're saying has no basis in reality what so ever and is proven false. So why insist on it?

The best stimulus money can buy is unquestionably food stamps. That's not my opinion, it's a proven fact that food stamps give the best economic return on your money. For every dollar the government hands out in food stamps, one dollar is directly and immediately spent in the marketplace. Because of the recirculating effect of market spending, the effect on GDP is actually $1.73 increase in GDP for every dollar spent on food stamps.

The effect of tax cuts as stimulus is actually one of the worst you can possibly get (avg $1.02 GDP increase for every dollar spent). Of course that depends on the tax cuts, but almost all tax cuts have less effect on the economy than unemployment benefits, aid to state governments, and infrastructure spending.

What you're saying is 100% false.

You are just making shit up. Back up what you're saying with facts or STFU.

 

[Sinsay]

theirs no debate the UN thinks thats how a slaves oops i mean a country should be run

 

[NoDrama]

People are confused over Stimulus (Something the Government does) VS. Federal Reserve Open Market Transactions ( Something a private Corporation does)

Stimulus isn't necessarily bad, UNLESS you have to cover it by buying dollars from the Federal reserve and running a Deficit to cover the spending.

Money Printing ( A euphemism for credit creation and actual physical currency creation) is not necessarily Inflationary unless it is in excess of Economic growth.

Run a Deficit, Print money like no tomorrow, Rampant corruption at the highest levels. These are the precursors to DOOM! DOOM! DOOM!!!

Got Gold and Silver?

 

[mame]

You are just making shit up. Back up what you're saying with facts or STFU.

No, he didn't make anything up.. What he described is simply a textbook explanation of how government spending multipliers work... In other words... Facts

 

[carl.burnette]

The Germans tried that back after the war... Ever seen the footage of people taking wheel barrels of money in to buy stuff? Printing money is NOT the answer. Work longer, produce more & do it more efficiently than the rest & that will fix the problem.

You can't pay a guy to sweep the floor at a gm plant $75K a year when there are 20 year old Asians (other people too.. but certainly over in Asia its pretty apparent) who will work 18 hours a day for a 1/4 of that. And be happy doing it.

Work hard & produce. That's the ticket!

People seem to be obsessed with trying to fix our deficit problem right now for some insane reason, but all reasonable people know that with the economy in the shape it's in, it would be impossible to balance the budget. So has a compromise, we should look to long term debt stabilization.

Obviously cutting spending in a recession is a ridiculous notion because the consequence will just be more job loss which leads to more unemployment, which leads to less revenue which will lead to bigger deficits.

So that means what we really need to do is print more money so we can spend more on a new infrastructure stimulus plan to put people back to work. Sounds strange but there is a dual benefit here.

By printing more money, we devalue the dollar which actually makes our debt worth less. Also we will be using that money as an economic stimulus which will put people back to work, which will increase tax revenue, which will stabilize deficits in the long run.

Print more money! Spend more! Vote Democrat!

 

[Mr Neutron]

No, he didn't make anything up.. What he described is simply a textbook explanation of how government spending multipliers work... In other words... Facts

Which textbook is that? The Socialist's Guide to Ruining a Country?

 

[sync0s]

Government multipliers only take in to account after the food stamps are given:"Every dollar of SNAP benefits generates $1.84 in the economy in terms of economic activity. If people were able to buy a little bit more in the grocery store than someones got to stock it, shelve it, package it, process it, ship it. All of those are jobs." - Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack

"The reality is that he is just moving money around. I mean, at what cost do we get $1.84?" - Lee Hawkins Wall Street Journal

 

[mame]

Which textbook is that? The Socialist's Guide to Ruining a Country?

Uhm, every textbook. go to your local library and start looking through economics books; All of them have chapters on spending multipliers.

This isn't something new folks, almost every economist worth mentioning has done some work on multipliers - Keynes, Hicks, Friedman, etc... Multipliers are a very important tool for policymakers and economists as they identify the most efficient forms of government spending and also help us to realize what kind of conditions include "crowding out". Seriously, to deny such a basic aspect of economics as fact is... Well, I dont know what it is - you couldn't call it partisan as even conservative economists work with multiplier effects... Maybe we'll just call it ignorant, I hate to sound harsh but I feel like you are just contesting the validity of multipliers because you have an urge to oppose anything liberals post on these boards. Fiscal spending multipliers are supported by EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE - something some of you righties seem to out of your way to ignore.

 

[Sinsay]

why it would hurt us their was Americans saying the same thing why spend our childrens Social Security benefits ? did we get more jobs nope better roads nope Plus thats Taxation Without Representation !!!!!!! that aint even born yet Because someone did it to us we have no benefits but still get taxed for them We work till we are dead & your K 1 plan maybe they wont steal it from you in 20 years & say wow thoses are the trickyest sense Enron Their money junkies the more they have the more they waste S & P said aaa to a aa 1st time in history

Plus try to understand this if everyone around you started growing pot you couldnt ask so much for yours more pot on the market the less the price is If your the only game in town you can sit the price yourself Follow me so far ? well much the same for money the more thats printed
The less the ones are ready out their are worth

One more thing because more is printed dont mean their going to hand how the extra`s Your boss your friends no extra money because its printed They dont show up at the bank to cash their check & the bank say here government sent us extra so we are giveing away a 100 dollars on every cashed check Think with your head out of your ass
Yall sound like people i wouldnt let vote sorryed we tryed that now your I Q must be higher then 85 & you must know the issues Whispers I wanted 115 but we agreed 100 pretty good & why should it start where you start
Im guess`in <- someone who dont understand why not print more money could be around .....................50 so i wouldnt even suggest trying to wise up just shut up nod here & their If you dont open your mouth so much people wont know how dumb you are someone may think your a 85 being agreeable but no open`in your mouth thats blow the deal maybe 50 a smart 5th grader

 

[0011StealTH]

People seem to be obsessed with trying to fix our deficit problem right now for some insane reason, but all reasonable people know that with the economy in the shape it's in, it would be impossible to balance the budget. So has a compromise, we should look to long term debt stabilization.

Obviously cutting spending in a recession is a ridiculous notion because the consequence will just be more job loss which leads to more unemployment, which leads to less revenue which will lead to bigger deficits.

So that means what we really need to do is print more money so we can spend more on a new infrastructure stimulus plan to put people back to work. Sounds strange but there is a dual benefit here.

By printing more money, we devalue the dollar which actually makes our debt worth less. Also we will be using that money as an economic stimulus which will put people back to work, which will increase tax revenue, which will stabilize deficits in the long run.

Print more money! Spend more! Vote Democrat!

print more worthless paper money. are you hearing your self.
we will have so much fake money that we will have to burn it. to keep us warm in the winter time like old Germany did lol.

 

[0011StealTH]

a load of bread will cost 300 dollars instead of 2 dollars
since more money means inflation.

 

[0011StealTH]

The Germans tried that back after the war... Ever seen the footage of people taking wheel barrels of money in to buy stuff? Printing money is NOT the answer. Work longer, produce more & do it more efficiently than the rest & that will fix the problem.

You can't pay a guy to sweep the floor at a gm plant $75K a year when there are 20 year old Asians (other people too.. but certainly over in Asia its pretty apparent) who will work 18 hours a day for a 1/4 of that. And be happy doing it.

Work hard & produce. That's the ticket!

i just read this right after i wrote that about Germany.
good post

people are just Stupid and think money is the answer for EVERYTHING.
Stupid People.

 

[MrDank007]

You honestly think our creditors wouldn't notice this? Gov spending has proven to be ineffective. Not to mention that you would erode all the wealth in this country.

 

[jeff f]

Question - I don't understand why you want to make your argument based on stating something that is blatantly not true. Why bother doing that? What do you get out of it? What you're saying has no basis in reality what so ever and is proven false. So why insist on it?

The best stimulus money can buy is unquestionably food stamps. That's not my opinion, it's a proven fact that food stamps give the best economic return on your money. For every dollar the government hands out in food stamps, one dollar is directly and immediately spent in the marketplace. Because of the recirculating effect of market spending, the effect on GDP is actually $1.73 increase in GDP for every dollar spent on food stamps.

The effect of tax cuts as stimulus is actually one of the worst you can possibly get (avg $1.02 GDP increase for every dollar spent). Of course that depends on the tax cuts, but almost all tax cuts have less effect on the economy than unemployment benefits, aid to state governments, and infrastructure spending.

What you're saying is 100% false.

bahahahahhah food stamps stimulus?hahahah yes, then we should be realy stimulated considering there is more people on them than ever.

you are a lib, i dont expect you to get it. you wont.

but keep your eyes open, cuz a tax cut is what you are gonna get, and sooner than later.

food stamps, best stimulus ever....its proven....hahahah i still cant stop laughing.