Bros, could this be the solution to debt?
Think about it this way, just about everyone is indebted to someone else. So what if the government printed one dollar bill, then hands it to person/institution A, who hands the dollar to the person they’re indebted to (B) and they hand the dollar bill to C and so on. You just keep passing the dollar on until nobody is in debt anymore.
Would this work fellas?
Other urls found in this thread:
youtu.be
youtube.com
twitter.com
The total value of the money supply would be the same (or lower). In other words, you're basically just redistributing wealth. Also, it would have a huge negative impact on the overall economy. I won't get into too much detail as this probably is bait and I'm wasting my time.. If this isn't bait then read the first chapter of a macro textbook or use google.
you dumb fucking retard that is literally inflation
Hmm...I don’t buy it
Are you serious? Inflation sounds good then.
That's basically QE right now, which produces inflation and furthermore increases it. So everyone else who hasn't got the new fresh dollars is losing purchasing value.
Fucking 101 eco
Yea, as I said this is either really boring bait or you're retarded. Sage and use google.
if this happens the economy would be fucked.
It's actually deflation when you realise money is created from debt, and repaying debt destroys money
Name?
t. absolute brainlet
Nah it's inflation.. Printing money --> purchasing power of a dollar decreases = inflation.
there is no voodoo way of creating prosperity from nothing
printing the $1 is $1 of inflation.
Using it to repay debt in a cyclical fashion is $1 of deflation every time the money changes hands
yes theoretically it would work these assholes didn't understand your question
unfortunately it wouldn't actually work because as soon as person A pays back person B, person B will probably just keep the "dollar" (in reality it would probably be a sum around 30k) and invest it as person B is able to make interest payments to person C anyway
99% of the time anyone who calls you a brainlet is a miracle of science just for somehow being able to use a computer even though their IQ is effectively negative
I don't mean to sound rude, but I don't think you understand what inflation/deflation means. Inflation is literally defined as a sustained decrease purchasing power. Printing money increases the total money supply even if they're used to pay back debt. A larger money supply causes prices to rise = inflation.
I know printing money is inflation.
Heres a good video on deflation
youtu.be
Yet 29 out of 30 on this board cannot accept your truth.
Of course it's possible. Read the replies: no one said it's impossible. People simple said that it would fuck the economy over. What OP suggested is the equivalent of transferring wealth from people with a net positive net worth to people with a net negative net worth. On top of that, there would be several macro chain reactions (mainly bad ones).
Sorry buddy, posting on Jow Forums is only allowed for people 18 years of age or older.
You clearly weren't around for 2008.
I don't have time to watch the video, sorry. Central banks can decrease inflation/create deflation by selling bonds. Selling bonds decreases the circulating money supply --> higher prices on goods and service = deflation.
Nudity is not allowed on this board, please take your trash to /b/
Meant to write --> lower* prices on goods and services.
anybody know her name?
I'm not talking about bonds.
I'm saying that OP's scenario causes deflation.
If you wont watch the video I posted then stop replying to me talking out your ass about bonds and printing the initial $1.
mother of god.
@belafernandez
I have a background I finance.. I didn't feel like watching your video because I assumed it explained a super basic concept. Now I wasted 3 mins on it. Reducing lending in the economy does tend to lead to a lower inflation rate ASSUMING that no new money enters the economy (what OP is suggesting). I'm sorry, but if you don't understand why what OP is suggesting would lead to higher prices (=inflation) then I'm wasting my time. This is macro 101. Google the quantity theory of money if you're interested.
I dunno but that ass would certainly solve the inflation in my cock
We need inflation-we had high speed inflation last time we had meaningful wage growth, plus debt would be worth less and we are drowning in debt
Weirdly babyfaced brapperina
You have no idea how fractional reserve lending works. Banks want debt. Because debt = money.
Labor is the source of all value.
youtube.com
Shilling pajeet shitcoin is not a "background in finance"
>Reducing lending in the economy does tend to lead to a lower inflation rate ASSUMING that no new money enters the economy (what OP is suggesting)
It's not reducing lending, its paying off debt which decreases the money supply
OP is suggesting creating $1
That $1 is paying off most or all outstanding debt.
Money supply increased: $1
Money supply decreased: $Billions
What the fuck is so hard about this for you STILL not to understand
Yes I work in finance. You're either retarded or this is bait. You can't pay off all debt with a single dollar like OP suggested. Increasing the money supply by $1 to pay off debt would reduce lending by $1. This would create a net increase in inflation. If you wanted to print enough money to pay off all debt then it would net increase the inflation rate as well. I'm done explaining macro 101 to you. As I said, you can google this stuff if you're interested.
I don't know whos stupider, you or the person who hired you in the field of finance.
The money supply decreases by $1 for every successive person who pays off their debt
I don't mean to sound rude, but you don't understand what he is talking about. Look up Dunning Kruger effect, you're a textbook example of it.
>why can't we just print our way to prosperity rather than work
because money has no intrinsic value. it's not an end, just a means. you can create systems sufficiently abstract so that a large number of parasites can live off those who do real work, but in the end you haven't "solved" anything, you've just done some clever sleight of hand that makes anyone, even the supposed beneficiairies, poorer in the process
a society without absurd amounts of effort dedicated to money policy and money games could put all that brainpower to work towards solving real problems and improving quality of life for anyone
imagine if there was one universal currency pegged to a hard standard, for example. the billions of dollars worth of profit currency traders collectively make is their supposed fair market rate for the service they provide (acting as a prediction market for the respective value of each currency). that profit has to come from somewhere; essentially, it's siphoned from real labor. with a single global standard backed by something concrete, you are then "liberating" billions of dollars worth of labor to build real infrastructure, provide services, save lives, invent better things
(if you need it spelled out further... this is why bitcoin the idea is important, even if bitcoin the implementation may not be ideal)
Holy shit biz is retarded. Let's assume person A holds a $1 bond issued by person B and person B holds a $1 bond issued by person C. If you give person C $1 to pay off his debt to person B then there's absolutely no reason why person B would pay off his debt to person A. Why? Because if person B wanted to do that then he would've sold the bond issued by person C in the first place and used that money to pay off person A. In other words, printing $1 for person C only reduces debt in the economy by $1.
Congratulations. You have got to be the lowest IQ poster on all of Jow Forums.
Literally nowhere in any of my posts, or OP's post does it say anything about not paying debt because you don't want to in the first place.
The thread is about a situation where
>the government printed one dollar bill, then hands it to person/institution A, who hands the dollar to the person they’re indebted to (B) and they hand the dollar bill to C and so on. You just keep passing the dollar on until nobody is in debt anymore.
Which I said was deflationary, and you have been arguing the whole time that this is inflationary, which is ultimately wrong.
>you're retarded
>no you're retarded
wauw
You are beyond retarded. Even if you force person B to pay off his debt to person A then it doesn't lead to NET deflation. It's irrelevant how many people/institutions are between person A and C. You said that
> Using it to repay debt in a cyclical fashion is $1 of deflation every time the money changes hands
This is completely wrong. Removing person B from the equation does NOT lead to less deflation and adding more people does NOT lead to more deflation. Adding more people between person A and C does NOT affect the money supply. All the people between person A and person C do not affect inflation/deflation.
Let me make it really simple for you: you lending $1 to you dad who then lends that $1 to your mom who then lends that $1 to your sister who then lends that $1 to you friend is the SAME as you lending $1 directly to your friend. It doesn't matter how many people are between you and your friend. If the government hands your friend $1 to pay off his debt then it's irrelevant how many people are between you and your friend. It doesn't affect the money supply or the inflation/deflation how many people between you and your friend (how many times in changes hands). You absolute moron.
What you are saying is: the more times the money changes hands between me and my friend the more deflation once the debt is paid off. This is ONE HUNDRED PERCENT wrong. It doesn't affect deflation if we add your grand dad to the equation or remove your mom from the equation.
Fuck. I wasted so much time on a random complete idiot. I will never get that time back.