> This Cantillon effects [...] is not accurate in modern financial markets > The FED intervenes by buying financial assets which directly benefits people who h

> This Cantillon effects [...] is not accurate in modern financial markets > The FED intervenes by buying financial assets which directly benefits people who hold these financial assets [...] Poor people without savings (and without financial assets) don't benefit Would you mind expounding on this a little bit? From my perspective, you seem to be decrying the Cantillon effect in one sentence yet acknowledging its existence in the next. Edit: To explain my confusion a bit more: In my (albeit limited) understanding, the Cantillon effect claims that monetary injections will spread unevenly across the economy. So, I read your comment as: "The claim that monetary injections will spread unevenly across the economy is not accurate. The reality is much simpler. The FED just injects money in a way that it spreads unevenly across the economy."