3 ms·
It's not me who said that it created demand. The grandparent suggested it. I just said that it have been used successfully as a way of buffering prices, withou
by RobertoG 11y ago
It's not me who said that it created demand. The grandparent suggested it.
I just said that it have been used successfully as a way of buffering prices, without the need of burning anything, in comparison to this "creative destruction" that he sees as necessary.
- Houshalter 11y agoWell if you don't burn it, then you have to sell it at some point. When you sell it, you decrease demand. So it can work to stabilize prices, but it isn't going to stop a recession.
- RobertoG 11y agoObviously I'm not explaining myself very well. I will make a last try. The comment I was answering, talked about a government buffering mechanism as something wrong and destructive (burning real wealth). I just pointed that this kind of mechanism is not necessarily destructive. In the next paragraph he proposes that the only way to go out of recessions is the "creative destruction" of capitalism. This is effective destruction of real wealth. It seems, that if the markets decide to destroy real wealth, then it's OK. My answer was only about that and I was not saying that the buffering mechanism created demand. Interestingly enough, even if I was not claiming anything about that before, there is a buffering mechanism that would create demand, and keep inflation in check: Job Guarantee as a buffer mechanism of jobs. http://www.epicoalition.org/docs/buffer_stock_employment_model_in.htm http://www.epicoalition.org/docs/buffer_stock_employment_mod... I am not totally convinced about the idea myself, but I think it deserves more attention