4 ms·

Your own article admits that the lack of inflation is due to other factors such as reduced lending and velocity of money. All else equal if there were 40 ruble

Your own article admits that the lack of inflation is due to other factors such as reduced lending and velocity of money. All else equal if there were 40 rubles in the economy yesterday and 80 tomorrow, your rubles have half the purchasing power they had before. The printing of the money prevented a deflationary effect that would have enrichened those who held onto dollars under a period of anemic lending and lowered velocity of money. So yeah, it really is a drop relative to what the value would have been if new money had not been printed. "For excess liquidity to create inflation, it needs to lead to a sustained increase in spending and loan growth. So far, bank lending has been anemic while the global velocity of money and the money multiplier (the ratio of broad money to base money) has fallen more than during the Great Financial Crisis. " "the secular trends of automation and robotization, declining labor force participation, aging population and high debt levels will continue to suppress inflation over the long-term"

rory 5y ago
Sorry, but "all else equal" doesn't, and can never, exist. Any way to expand M2 itself changes the velocity of money, inflation expectations, and (probably most importantly) the expected future value of the US economy. Your claim was: > It's a drop relative to what it would be if the money supply had not increased accordingly If the money supply hadn't increased, those secondary effects would not have happened, so any idea that M2 maps linearly to inflation net unrelated climate effects is just incorrect. If you still believe it's true after that explanation, please back the claim with some actual information.
- quantumBerry 5y ago
  >If the money supply hadn't increased, those secondary effects would not have happened I can't tell if this is supposed to be sarcasm, humor, or merely a hilariously misinformed view of the effect of the pandemic on spending and lending behavior (which apparently you think happened instead due to the change in money supply). >Sorry, but "all else equal" doesn't, and can never, exist. Which is my point! As your paper explains, these secondary effects from pandemic and other causes help explain the expression of inflation beyond the money supply effects.

rory 5y ago

Sorry, but "all else equal" doesn't, and can never, exist. Any way to expand M2 itself changes the velocity of money, inflation expectations, and (probably most importantly) the expected future value of the US economy. Your claim was: > It's a drop relative to what it would be if the money supply had not increased accordingly If the money supply hadn't increased, those secondary effects would not have happened, so any idea that M2 maps linearly to inflation net unrelated climate effects is just incorrect. If you still believe it's true after that explanation, please back the claim with some actual information.

quantumBerry 5y ago
>If the money supply hadn't increased, those secondary effects would not have happened I can't tell if this is supposed to be sarcasm, humor, or merely a hilariously misinformed view of the effect of the pandemic on spending and lending behavior (which apparently you think happened instead due to the change in money supply). >Sorry, but "all else equal" doesn't, and can never, exist. Which is my point! As your paper explains, these secondary effects from pandemic and other causes help explain the expression of inflation beyond the money supply effects.