4 ms·

The problem isn't investment in houses, its the monetization of houses. Unlike gold or bitcoin with finite supply, demand for houses creates a corresponding inc

The problem isn't investment in houses, its the monetization of houses. Unlike gold or bitcoin with finite supply, demand for houses creates a corresponding increase in supply which is a waste of resources which could have gone elsewhere. If inflation is particularly bad you could end up with Chinese ghost cities. Lowering the difficulty of exams so that previous scores are reached again sounds like curing the symptom to me. How are the benefits outweighing the costs? > Making a few people rich is the usual outcome of high-value expenditure Its high value expenditure with newly created wealth taken from the savings of everybody else. It matters a great deal if it doesn't pay off.

clienthunter 13y ago
The benefits outweigh the costs because the alternative is a depression - and that's a really bad thing, people die etc. Also this isn't a symptom of a problem needing cured, it's more a symptom of the human condition. > Its high value expenditure with newly created wealth taken from the savings of everybody else. It's either savings or new wealth, it can't be both. > It matters a great deal if it doesn't pay off. I'm not sure you'd be of that opinion in a depression.
- grinnbearit 13y ago
  > - and that's a really bad thing, people die etc. I'm all for saving people, lets call it charity though and not investment. > It's either savings or new wealth, it can't be both. True, I meant currency, its new currency taken from the savings of everybody else > I'm not sure you'd be of that opinion in a depression. Hypothetically if we used a global hard money system, like bitcoin, and the government was so sure that spending now would boost the economy in the future. I see no problem in them taking a loan and building some highways. They would have to pay it back though...
  - clienthunter 13y ago
    Investment is the act undertaken. Call the outcome what you will. > True, I meant currency, its new currency taken from the savings of everybody else New currency is new currency. It comes from nowhere. It devalues all existing currency, not just savings. > I see no problem in them taking a loan and building some highways. These projects are typically undertaken with debt. New currency is generally introduced in the bond market.

clienthunter 13y ago

The benefits outweigh the costs because the alternative is a depression - and that's a really bad thing, people die etc. Also this isn't a symptom of a problem needing cured, it's more a symptom of the human condition. > Its high value expenditure with newly created wealth taken from the savings of everybody else. It's either savings or new wealth, it can't be both. > It matters a great deal if it doesn't pay off. I'm not sure you'd be of that opinion in a depression.

grinnbearit 13y ago
> - and that's a really bad thing, people die etc. I'm all for saving people, lets call it charity though and not investment. > It's either savings or new wealth, it can't be both. True, I meant currency, its new currency taken from the savings of everybody else > I'm not sure you'd be of that opinion in a depression. Hypothetically if we used a global hard money system, like bitcoin, and the government was so sure that spending now would boost the economy in the future. I see no problem in them taking a loan and building some highways. They would have to pay it back though...
- clienthunter 13y ago
  Investment is the act undertaken. Call the outcome what you will. > True, I meant currency, its new currency taken from the savings of everybody else New currency is new currency. It comes from nowhere. It devalues all existing currency, not just savings. > I see no problem in them taking a loan and building some highways. These projects are typically undertaken with debt. New currency is generally introduced in the bond market.