5 ms·

It would also destroy the confidence in US Dollar worldwide, provide further proof that Biden is indeed an idiot, and basically pushed the US to the slippery sl

by 988747 5y ago

It would also destroy the confidence in US Dollar worldwide, provide further proof that Biden is indeed an idiot, and basically pushed the US to the slippery slope, that ends with the US economy being in the same condition as Venezuelan.

hellojesus 5y ago
I'm honestly surprised the above hasn't happened with Yellen coming out and telling everyone that the US will default on its debt if it can't borrow more money to pay back the people it already borrowed from. Peter Schiff has touched on this, but who in the world is willing to lend to the US at the moment when the US just came out on record as running the biggest ponzi scheme ever?
- headShrinker 5y ago
  Peter Schiff is a broken clock that was right once in the last 20 years. Even broken clocks are right twice a day.
  - hellojesus 5y ago
    He has been arguing mostly the same points for the past decade, but at least he's been consistent. The old saying comes to mind, "Markets can remain irrational longer than you can stay solvent." I wanted to believe in MMT; it sounded at first like it could be something completely counterintuitive that just works, and some time later a rational quantity of math would explain it. At the present, I think that was too wishful. The US seems to be able to print unlimitedly because of its unique status as the reserve currency. Once other countries opt out, and some are making concrete steps towards doing so, our dollar will quickly collapse, and it'll take the rest of our lives to experience a quality of living akin to today's.
headShrinker 5y ago
> It would also destroy the confidence in US Dollar worldwide, No it wouldn't > provide further proof that Biden is indeed an idiot, Idiot or not, the coin is actually a solid move. > and basically pushed the US to the slippery slope, Nope. > that ends with the US economy being in the same condition as Venezuelan. TF?! Not at all. You do not belong in this conversation. You have no clue what you are talking about.
- cheeseomlit 5y ago
  You didn't refute any of his points, political jabs aside. I'm not sure how arbitrarily minting a Trillion dollar coin wouldn't harm confidence in the USD worldwide, it's one of the most blatant examples of debasing a currency I can imagine. I sure as hell don't want to sit on too much cash with ideas like this being seriously considered, or do you think expanding the money supply without expanding the value it represents has no impact on its spending power (or confidence in its spending power)? Look at any charts of the M1/M2 money supply (that haven't been discontinued) and they seem to strongly indicate we're on a slippery slope towards hyperinflation, that's been the trend for several decades and seems to be rapidly accelerating- At least that's what it looks like to a dumb layman like myself
  - headShrinker 5y ago
    > You didn't refute any of his points "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence" OP provided no evidence, so I dismissed without evidence. > it's one of the most blatant examples of debasing a currency I can imagine No. QE is. look it up. Actually minting a coin is smart.
dragonwriter 5y ago
> It would also destroy the confidence in US Dollar worldwide If it was used to redeem debt held by outside parties, that would be an issue. Redeeming Fed holdings has no effect on circulating holdings or public debt holdings, and is basically a nonevent. The money creation that matters regarding those already happened when the Fed created real circulating money to buy the Treasuries in the first place. (Which, btw, did not have catastrophic effects on confidence in the US dollar.)
- dllthomas 5y ago
  Insofar as there would be legitimate worry, it would be of new money creation made procedurally more available by the move. And also worry about other people's worries, legitimate and otherwise.
  - dllthomas 5y ago
    On reflection, this is too narrow. Previous lending put more money in circulation, but to the degree people expected that money to be removed from circulation later as the loans were repaid they should (on deposit of the coin) expect there to be more money (ceteris paribus) in circulation at that future time than there would have been sans coin.

by 988747 5y ago

hellojesus 5y ago

I'm honestly surprised the above hasn't happened with Yellen coming out and telling everyone that the US will default on its debt if it can't borrow more money to pay back the people it already borrowed from. Peter Schiff has touched on this, but who in the world is willing to lend to the US at the moment when the US just came out on record as running the biggest ponzi scheme ever?

headShrinker 5y ago
Peter Schiff is a broken clock that was right once in the last 20 years. Even broken clocks are right twice a day.
- hellojesus 5y ago
  He has been arguing mostly the same points for the past decade, but at least he's been consistent. The old saying comes to mind, "Markets can remain irrational longer than you can stay solvent." I wanted to believe in MMT; it sounded at first like it could be something completely counterintuitive that just works, and some time later a rational quantity of math would explain it. At the present, I think that was too wishful. The US seems to be able to print unlimitedly because of its unique status as the reserve currency. Once other countries opt out, and some are making concrete steps towards doing so, our dollar will quickly collapse, and it'll take the rest of our lives to experience a quality of living akin to today's.

headShrinker 5y ago

> It would also destroy the confidence in US Dollar worldwide, No it wouldn't > provide further proof that Biden is indeed an idiot, Idiot or not, the coin is actually a solid move. > and basically pushed the US to the slippery slope, Nope. > that ends with the US economy being in the same condition as Venezuelan. TF?! Not at all. You do not belong in this conversation. You have no clue what you are talking about.

cheeseomlit 5y ago
You didn't refute any of his points, political jabs aside. I'm not sure how arbitrarily minting a Trillion dollar coin wouldn't harm confidence in the USD worldwide, it's one of the most blatant examples of debasing a currency I can imagine. I sure as hell don't want to sit on too much cash with ideas like this being seriously considered, or do you think expanding the money supply without expanding the value it represents has no impact on its spending power (or confidence in its spending power)? Look at any charts of the M1/M2 money supply (that haven't been discontinued) and they seem to strongly indicate we're on a slippery slope towards hyperinflation, that's been the trend for several decades and seems to be rapidly accelerating- At least that's what it looks like to a dumb layman like myself
- headShrinker 5y ago
  > You didn't refute any of his points "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence" OP provided no evidence, so I dismissed without evidence. > it's one of the most blatant examples of debasing a currency I can imagine No. QE is. look it up. Actually minting a coin is smart.

dragonwriter 5y ago

> It would also destroy the confidence in US Dollar worldwide If it was used to redeem debt held by outside parties, that would be an issue. Redeeming Fed holdings has no effect on circulating holdings or public debt holdings, and is basically a nonevent. The money creation that matters regarding those already happened when the Fed created real circulating money to buy the Treasuries in the first place. (Which, btw, did not have catastrophic effects on confidence in the US dollar.)

dllthomas 5y ago
Insofar as there would be legitimate worry, it would be of new money creation made procedurally more available by the move. And also worry about other people's worries, legitimate and otherwise.
- dllthomas 5y ago
  On reflection, this is too narrow. Previous lending put more money in circulation, but to the degree people expected that money to be removed from circulation later as the loans were repaid they should (on deposit of the coin) expect there to be more money (ceteris paribus) in circulation at that future time than there would have been sans coin.