Reply #20 Kennichi's post
A few analysts also believed that the dot-coms would rule the world, and that Time Warner-AOL would be a game-changer for all the tech and media titans out there. Great stuff.
I'm not saying that printing more money is a good idea. In fact, I believe that the US made a huge error in bailing out companies and easing monetary policy. They obviously did not learn from the lessons of Japan, and it's pretty clear that a lot of decisions made by the Obama administration were primarily political in nature. You either pay now, or pay later. The US decided to gloss over the pain and hope that a round or two of stimulus would fix the problem - this approach is looking less and less likely to be successful.
However, your claim about fiat money and the money system in general is just bollocks.
The comparison between the US, Russia, Zimbabwe, Argentina, Brazil ... (add country name in here) is ridiculous. None of these countries has the underlying economic structure of the US, far from. The underlying fundamentals of the UK economy is so far removed from the state of the US economy it's laughable that you try and compare the two.
Having more US dollars circulating outside the US is actually a good thing for the US, if you understood the implications. A currency that i used for over 90% of world trade is not about to spontaneously implode, so yeah, you are touting a conspiracy theory.
Your claims that printing money dilutes the value of existing bills in circulation is correct, but it's not as simple as that. All the stuff you are writing looks like it was lifted from an Economics 101 class in College. Or yeah, I can believe you have experience computing actuaries, it certainly sounds like it.
|