4 ms·
you seem to assume that printing money absolves a (nation-)state from future liability. it doesn’t. it’s still a moral hazard either way. you’re still leaving t
by clairity 5y ago
you seem to assume that printing money absolves a (nation-)state from future liability. it doesn’t. it’s still a moral hazard either way. you’re still leaving the future with less; it’s only the accounting that changes.
- lotsofpulp 5y agoI am aware it devalues the currency, it is the least morally hazardous way though. It is inevitable that the longer people live during their non working years and the more top heavy the population pyramid becomes, that there will be less for future generations’ during their younger years.
- clairity 5y agothe least morally hazardous way is to not take from the future at all. there’s no reason for the top-heavy not to take less into retirement. there’s also plenty of excess wealth to easily avoid stealing from the future while still providing for all the top-heavy now.
- lotsofpulp 5y agoThe only way to not take from the future is to kill yourself after you become unable to support yourself.