4 ms·

Printing money wouldn't work - you just make all of the existing money less valuable.

Schiendelman 2y ago
That doesn't mean the new money doesn't have value, just has a small percentage less value. It's a wealth transfer from people who currently have money to the new money. It works out well for people who have a negative net worth, as well!
- kreetx 2y ago
  Yeah, the salaried folk who find out in hindsight will be really happy as well. /s
  - Schiendelman 2y ago
    I don't think sarcastic comments really help, people who aren't capable of having real conversations about this already bring enough of that. It is definitely worth talking openly about whether it's worth trading short term inflationary pain for long-term climate pain.
    - kreetx 2y ago
      I guess you're right. The parent speaks of inflation as if printing money is the new norm. If you are going to take money from your citizens then be upfront about it!
      - Schiendelman 2y ago
        All the money we have was printed. Printing money has always been the norm, it's just a matter of how much - at what rate.
        kreetx 2y ago
        You can print but still have a cap, see Bitcoin.
        Schiendelman 2y ago
        We do have a cap. It's not even clear to me that the federal government prints more slowly than bitcoin as a percentage of issued currency.
- lotsofpulp 2y ago
  It is a wealth transfer from people who currently have cash and earn cash (workers, since increases in pay lag the rate at which currency loses purchasing power) to people who have assets and COLA adjusted annuities (wealthy people and old people).
  - Schiendelman 2y ago
    Assets and cola adjusted annuities also lag. They may lag less, but that's a discussion to have. Real median wages have gone up more than inflation has over the last few years. It's just not evenly distributed.
kelseyfrog 2y ago
It actually would even if it made existing money less valuable. Econ 101
kylebenzle 2y ago
Ever heard of quantitative easing?
- baq 2y ago
  Look at Covid fiscal response causing permanent 30% inflation in the last 4 years. The climate+demographic response money printing operation will be way bigger than that.
  - czinck 2y ago
    Most of the inflation from the last 4 years is attributable to Russia invading Ukraine. You can't have the largest natural gas exporter and second largest oil exporter invade one of the largest grain exporters without causing basically everything in a supermarket or restaurant to be more expensive.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      Source? America is a natural gas exporter.
      - abenga 2y ago
        When the prices of fungible products rise in one place, they rise everywhere, otherwise there would be arbitrage opportunities everywhere.
    - therealdrag0 2y ago
      Also shipping interruptions and lockdowns. Giving people money to not work is goin to have a much larger inflationary effect than giving people money to build things we want.
    - switch007 2y ago
      > Most of the inflation from the last 4 years is attributable to Russia invading Ukraine Source? Other than media articles repeating "due to the war in Ukraine" Assuming you are talking about the USA, supposedly the USA is a net /exporter/ of grains [0] [0] Not loading for me but https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistics-charting-the-essentials/agricultural-trade/ https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistic... . Copilot said "The United States is a net grain exporter. According to the USDA Economic Research Service (ERS), the U.S. typically exports more agricultural goods, including grains, than it imports1. In fiscal year 2023, the value of U.S. agricultural exports was $178.7 billion, despite a decline from the previous year. Grains and feeds are among the leading U.S. agricultural exports"
ajross 2y ago
It wouldn't work linearly, but it still works. If you print 10% of your GDP in a year, you'll be sitting on only 1/11th of the GDP in cash at the end of the process.
jjallen 2y ago
You are essentially forced borrowing from the cash holders of the printed currency. So yeah it would work. Wouldn’t necessarily be fair or popular; but it would work. Just have to account for the new money also being worth less because of the increase in the denominator of this equation.

That doesn't mean the new money doesn't have value, just has a small percentage less value. It's a wealth transfer from people who currently have money to the new money. It works out well for people who have a negative net worth, as well!

kreetx 2y ago
Yeah, the salaried folk who find out in hindsight will be really happy as well. /s
- Schiendelman 2y ago
  I don't think sarcastic comments really help, people who aren't capable of having real conversations about this already bring enough of that. It is definitely worth talking openly about whether it's worth trading short term inflationary pain for long-term climate pain.
  - kreetx 2y ago
    I guess you're right. The parent speaks of inflation as if printing money is the new norm. If you are going to take money from your citizens then be upfront about it!
    - Schiendelman 2y ago
      All the money we have was printed. Printing money has always been the norm, it's just a matter of how much - at what rate.
      - kreetx 2y ago
        You can print but still have a cap, see Bitcoin.
        Schiendelman 2y ago
        We do have a cap. It's not even clear to me that the federal government prints more slowly than bitcoin as a percentage of issued currency.
lotsofpulp 2y ago
It is a wealth transfer from people who currently have cash and earn cash (workers, since increases in pay lag the rate at which currency loses purchasing power) to people who have assets and COLA adjusted annuities (wealthy people and old people).
- Schiendelman 2y ago
  Assets and cola adjusted annuities also lag. They may lag less, but that's a discussion to have. Real median wages have gone up more than inflation has over the last few years. It's just not evenly distributed.

kelseyfrog 2y ago

It actually would even if it made existing money less valuable. Econ 101

kylebenzle 2y ago

Ever heard of quantitative easing?

baq 2y ago
Look at Covid fiscal response causing permanent 30% inflation in the last 4 years. The climate+demographic response money printing operation will be way bigger than that.
- czinck 2y ago
  Most of the inflation from the last 4 years is attributable to Russia invading Ukraine. You can't have the largest natural gas exporter and second largest oil exporter invade one of the largest grain exporters without causing basically everything in a supermarket or restaurant to be more expensive.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    Source? America is a natural gas exporter.
    - abenga 2y ago
      When the prices of fungible products rise in one place, they rise everywhere, otherwise there would be arbitrage opportunities everywhere.
  - therealdrag0 2y ago
    Also shipping interruptions and lockdowns. Giving people money to not work is goin to have a much larger inflationary effect than giving people money to build things we want.
  - switch007 2y ago
    > Most of the inflation from the last 4 years is attributable to Russia invading Ukraine Source? Other than media articles repeating "due to the war in Ukraine" Assuming you are talking about the USA, supposedly the USA is a net /exporter/ of grains [0] [0] Not loading for me but https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistics-charting-the-essentials/agricultural-trade/ https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistic... . Copilot said "The United States is a net grain exporter. According to the USDA Economic Research Service (ERS), the U.S. typically exports more agricultural goods, including grains, than it imports1. In fiscal year 2023, the value of U.S. agricultural exports was $178.7 billion, despite a decline from the previous year. Grains and feeds are among the leading U.S. agricultural exports"

ajross 2y ago

It wouldn't work linearly, but it still works. If you print 10% of your GDP in a year, you'll be sitting on only 1/11th of the GDP in cash at the end of the process.

jjallen 2y ago

You are essentially forced borrowing from the cash holders of the printed currency. So yeah it would work. Wouldn’t necessarily be fair or popular; but it would work. Just have to account for the new money also being worth less because of the increase in the denominator of this equation.