3 ms·

Money is limitless, it's restraint in printing too much at once that ascribes value to the existing money supply.

• paganel 6y ago
  Limits in how to best "share" that money to regular people do in fact mean that money is not limitless, de facto. Assuming you go over the logistics of what's the best way to actually hand in money to people: through tax rebates? through an envelope sent by the Post Office? through citizens' bank accounts? (then how do you handle the non-banked population?) etc etc the powers that be still have to decide what criteria should they use to send said money: according to one's needs? what are those needs? according to one's contribution to society? but then who decides about another person's real contribution to society? All these questions were first asked at least 200 years ago (I'd say starting with the French Revolution, maybe even with with the Levellers in the ~1640s), questions for which we haven't found any reasonable and definitive answer so far and we'll probably never will.
• clairity 6y ago
  you've got the value chain backwards. money isn't printed and then that magically becomes the value of the economy. the money supply is managed so as to try to match the decentralized and organic value created by us in the economy. that causal chain limits how much money can be printed without adverse effects (and at the extreme, economic and political collapse). if we generate ~$1T/mo of value, printing a couple billion extra here or there gets drowned out in the estimation error of the size of our value creation. we print an extra $1T/mo and we have start to have serious problems. so money is not limitless. it's bounded by our collective product.