4 ms·
Yes, it's a mind-bender. My thinking used to center on the money, and the inevitable inflation if you debase money by printing more of it for free. But the evi
by panarky 13y ago
Yes, it's a mind-bender. My thinking used to center on the money, and the inevitable inflation if you debase money by printing more of it for free.
But the evidence of the last six years proves how wrong my thinking was. Dollars are not like shares of stock, that get diluted when you create more of them. When there's a lot of slack in the real economy, when people aren't working, and factories are idle, printing money doesn't cause inflation.
Today, I think about the real economy of workers and trucks and factories instead of money.
If we print $1000 per month per person and give it away for free, it's very possible to get the real economy moving, raise standards of living substantially, and incur very little cost in the real economy of work, goods and services.
For what it's worth, here's a radio show that turned my understanding of money upside down. Skip ahead to the 10th minute for the story on how Brazil created a totally fictitious virtual currency, named it the "real", and ended decades of debilitating inflation.
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/423/the-invention-of-money http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/423/t...
- dllthomas 13y ago"If we print $1000 per month per person and give it away for free, it's very possible to get the real economy moving, raise standards of living substantially, and incur very little cost in the real economy of work, goods and services." I'm a staunch support of a moderate basic income, and I'm open to printing some of that, but this seems absurd. In the first year, you'd be printing more dollars than we have in circulation. I can't imagine demand for dollars would keep up.