Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: On America - Printing Money

  1. #1
    Senior Member bruno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Last Online
    Friday, December 31st, 2010 @ 10:39 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Switzerland Switzerland
    Location
    Engadin u. Italien (Toskana)
    Gender
    Family
    Married, happily
    Occupation
    Besitzer
    Politics
    Aristokratisch
    Religion
    Theismus
    Posts
    57
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Cool On America - Printing Money

    Printing money – and its price

    By Peter S. Goodman , The New York Times

    Sunday, December 28, 2008


    Borrowing and spending beyond ordinary limits largely explains how
    Americans got into such economic trouble. For decades, businesses and
    consumers feasted relentlessly, as if gravity, arithmetic and the
    tyranny of debt had been defanged by financial engineering.



    Armed with credit cards and belief in a bountiful future, Americans
    brought home ceaseless volumes of iPods and cashmere sweaters, and
    never mind their declining incomes and winnowing savings. Banks lent
    staggering sums of money to homeowners with dubious credit, convinced
    that real estate prices could only go up. Government spent as it saw
    fit, secure that foreigners could always be counted on to finance
    American debt.



    So it may seem perverse that in this new era of reckoning — with
    consumers finally tapped out, government coffers lean and banks
    paralyzed by fear — many economists have concluded that the
    appropriate medicine is a fresh dose of the very course that delivered
    the disarray: Spend without limit. Print money today, fret about the
    consequences tomorrow. Otherwise, invite a loss of jobs and business
    failures that could cripple the nation for years.



    Such thinking carries the moment as President-elect Barack Obama puts
    together plans to spend more than $700 billion on projects like
    building roads and classrooms to put people back to work. It is the
    philosophy behind the Federal Reserve's decision to drop interest
    rates near zero — meaning that banks can essentially borrow money for
    free — while lending directly to financial institutions. This is the
    mentality that has propelled the Treasury to promise up to $950
    billion to aid Wall Street, Detroit and perhaps other recipients.



    But where does all this money come from? And how can a country that
    got itself in peril by borrowing and spending without limit now borrow
    and spend its way back to safety?



    In the case of the Fed, the money comes from its authority to print
    dollars from thin air. Since late August, the Fed has expanded its
    balance sheet from about $900 billion to more than $2.2 trillion,
    creating $1.3 trillion that did not exist to replace some of the
    trillions wiped out by falling house prices and vengeful stock
    markets. The Fed has taken troublesome assets off the hands of banks
    and simply credited them with having reserves they previously lacked.



    In the case of the Treasury, the money comes from the same wellspring
    that has been financing American debt for decades: Investors in the
    United States and around the world — not least, the central banks of
    China, Japan and Saudi Arabia, which have parked national savings in
    the safety of American government bonds.



    Americans have gotten accustomed to treating this well as bottomless,
    even as anxiety grows that it could one day run dry with potentially
    devastating consequences.



    The value of outstanding American Treasury bills now reaches $10.6
    trillion, a number sure to increase as dollars are spent building
    bridges, saving auto jobs and preventing the collapse of
    government-backed mortgage giants. Worry centers on the possibility
    that foreigners could come to doubt the American wherewithal to pay
    back such an extraordinary sum, prompting them to stop — or at least
    slow — their deposits of savings into the United States.



    That could send the dollar plummeting, making imported goods more
    expensive for American consumers and businesses. It would force the
    Treasury to pay higher returns to find takers for its debt, increasing
    interest rates for home- and auto-buyers, for businesses and
    credit-card holders.



    "We got into this mess to a considerable extent by overborrowing,"
    said Martin Baily, a chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers
    under President Bill Clinton and now a fellow at the Brookings
    Institution. "Now, we're saying, 'Well, O.K., let's just borrow a
    bunch more, and that will help us get out of this mess.' It's like a
    drunk who says, 'Give me a bottle of Scotch, and then I'll be O.K. and
    I won't have to drink anymore.' Eventually, we have to get off this
    binge of borrowing."



    Some argue that the moment for sobriety is long overdue, and
    postponing it further only increases the ultimate costs. "Our
    government doesn't have enough spare cash to bail out a lemonade
    stand," declared Peter Schiff, president of Euro Pacific Capital, a
    Connecticut-based trading house. "Our standard of living must decline
    to reflect years of reckless consumption and the disintegration of our
    industrial base. Only by swallowing this tough medicine now will our
    sick economy ever recover."



    But most economists cast such thinking as recklessly extreme, akin to
    putting an obese person on a painful diet in the name of long-term
    health just as they are fighting off a potentially lethal infection.
    In the dominant view, now is no time for austerity — not with
    paychecks disappearing from the economy and gyrating markets wiping
    out retirement savings. Not with the financial system in virtual
    lockdown, and much of the world in a similar state of retrenchment,
    shrinking demand for American goods and services.



    Since the Great Depression, the conventional prescription for such
    times is to have the government step in and create demand by cycling
    its dollars through the economy, generating jobs and business
    opportunities. That such dollars must be borrowed is hardly ideal,
    adding to the long-term strains on the nation. But the immediate risks
    of not spending them could be grave.



    "This is a dangerous situation," says Baily, essentially arguing that
    the drunk must be kept in Scotch a while longer, lest he burn down the
    neighborhood in the midst of a crisis. "The risks of things actually
    getting worse and us going into a really severe recession are high. We
    need to get more money out there now."



    Had the government worried more about limiting spending than about the
    potential collapse of the mortgage giants, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,
    it might have triggered precisely the dark scenario that consumes
    those who worry most about growing American debt, argues Brad Setser,
    an economist at the Council on Foreign Relations.



    China purchased a lot of Fannie and Freddie bonds with the
    understanding that they were backed by the American government. No
    bailout "would have been portrayed in China as defaulting on the
    Chinese people," Setser said. That would have increased the likelihood
    that China would start parking its savings somewhere other than the
    United States.



    The most frequently voiced worry about the bailouts is that the Fed,
    by sending so much money sloshing through the system, risks generating
    a bad case of rising prices later on. That puts the onus on the Fed to
    reverse course and crimp economic activity by lifting interest rates
    and selling assets back to banks once growth resumes.



    But finding the appropriate point to act tends to be more art than
    science. The Fed might move too early and send the economy back into a
    tailspin. It might wait too long and let too much money generate
    inflation.



    "It's a tricky business," says Allan Meltzer, an economist at Carnegie
    Mellon University, and a former economic adviser to President Ronald
    Reagan. "There's no math model that tells us when to do it or how."



    But that, as most economists see it, is a worry for another day. Some
    policy makers are focused on staving off the opposite problem —
    deflation, or falling prices, as demand weakens to the point that
    goods pile up without buyers, sending prices down and reducing the
    incentive for businesses to invest. That could shrink demand further
    and perhaps even deliver the sort of downward spiral that pinned Japan
    in the weeds of stagnant growth during the 1990s.



    "Those who claim that sharp increases in federal borrowing and the
    national debt would be ill advised at the present time, when the
    economy is weakening while deflation threatens, have failed to study
    Japan's history," declared the economist John H. Makin in a report
    published by the conservative American Enterprise Institute —
    ordinarily, a staunch advocate for lean government.



    So back to the well Americans go, putting aside worries about debt,
    unleashing another wave of synthesized money in an effort to prevent
    deeper misery.



    "Right now," Setser says, "the risk is not doing enough."



    Source http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/12/.../28goodman.php

  2. #2
    Senior Member Carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Online
    Thursday, March 29th, 2012 @ 11:51 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo - Saxon.
    Ancestry
    English
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    England England
    State
    Wessex Wessex
    Location
    south
    Gender
    Occupation
    [Psychologist]
    Politics
    Patriotic
    Religion
    Pagan
    Posts
    1,940
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts
    A grave fear that Britian will start doing the same thing - assuming we haven't already. Tough times require tough action .... not unending borrowing to soften the pain of previous excesses. Or am I mistaken here ?

  3. #3
    Senior Member bruno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Last Online
    Friday, December 31st, 2010 @ 10:39 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Switzerland Switzerland
    Location
    Engadin u. Italien (Toskana)
    Gender
    Family
    Married, happily
    Occupation
    Besitzer
    Politics
    Aristokratisch
    Religion
    Theismus
    Posts
    57
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    I think this is the case for all western countries, but the worst thing is a secret that few know and those who can not say: the states rent the money (but not coin) only from private bankers which are everywhere the true masters of power

  4. #4
    Senior Member SwordOfTheVistula's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    Sunday, July 1st, 2012 @ 01:21 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    50% German, 25% English, 25% Irish
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Virginia Virginia
    Location
    Washington DC
    Gender
    Age
    40
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Construction, writer/editor
    Politics
    Libertarian
    Religion
    Atheist
    Posts
    2,984
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by bruno View Post
    I think this is the case for all western countries, but the worst thing is a secret that few know and those who can not say: the states rent the money (but not coin) only from private bankers which are everywhere the true masters of power
    This is very true. In Zimbabwe and other 3rd world countries, the government prints money and then spends this money.

    In the US, the federal reserve prints money, and then loans at a discount rate to private banks, who then multiply this via 'fractional reserve banking' and then loan this money to the US government to spend via the purchase of Treasury Bonds.
    Contact Congress on immigration
    Contact Congress to reject banker bailout
    "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." --Ben Franklin

  5. #5
    Senior Member bruno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Last Online
    Friday, December 31st, 2010 @ 10:39 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Switzerland Switzerland
    Location
    Engadin u. Italien (Toskana)
    Gender
    Family
    Married, happily
    Occupation
    Besitzer
    Politics
    Aristokratisch
    Religion
    Theismus
    Posts
    57
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Zimbabwe is a country that cannot make the best with its money, but China is a demonstration of what can be done when a state is master of the issue. The real riches are the real goods and the intelligence and the work’s capability of a people while the money is only a tool that represents them and allows the dynamic of economy. The difficulty lies in maintaining the proper ratio between representation and reality.

Similar Threads

  1. The Real Story of the Money Control over America
    By Nordid in forum The United States
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: Saturday, June 16th, 2012, 07:59 PM
  2. Struggling Towns Printing Their Own Cash
    By Zimobog in forum Economics, Business, & Finance
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Wednesday, February 17th, 2010, 08:42 PM
  3. Milwaukee Neighborhoods Consider Printing Their Own Money
    By ChaosLord in forum The United States
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Saturday, December 6th, 2008, 09:50 PM
  4. America Created its own Money in 1750
    By Agrippa in forum The United States
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Monday, May 29th, 2006, 04:25 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •