Unlikely to happen with an aging and declining population across first worlds, if you fix healthcare and education systems. Housing will need some regulation too to prevent a rush of capital pushing up prices (more). Supply is sufficient in most other goods and service sectors.
Money is already worthless. It's paper. It only has value that we as a society set on it. If the shit really hit the fan, governments of the world could decide to scrap all currencies give everyone an 'equivalency' of their old lifestyle in a 'new currency' and reboot the virtual monopoly game.
Why do you think billionaires horde money? It's the same reason debears hordes diamonds, if all the diamonds that exist actually were available on the markets they wouldn't be worth shit. By hording all the diamonds mined, they get to set the prices.
Sure if you spread more money out to more people, some prices may adjust up a bit, but you're not going to get runaway price gouging across everything like many who are against UBI claim.
It is not quite that simple. Money does eventually get removed from the system when loans are canceled without being fully repaid. When people die with an estate that is too small to repay their debts that is exactly what happens; it also often happens when businesses go bankrupt, which would likely happen when the population shrinks. Obviously this is a bit oversimplified, but the point is that the money supply is not static thing where money is "printed" by some central authority and then stays in circulation forever.
See: Greece and Argentina over the ages, Venezuela, Weimar Republic.
It's different for the US than for others due to seignorage (others need the currency) but for basically everyone else, it's dangerous.
Also for countries that don't need to borrow heavily internationally like China or Japan.
For for everyone else it's very scary game.
The Canadian government is about to embark on a major spending spree after the biggest spending spree in history, including possibly permanent UBI. Of course without mandate, and from a PM who has absolutely no experience in anything, and a well educated and smart Finance Minister who specializes in History and Journalism - it's very bad.
There is also the classic laddering strategy, where you buy bonds with a range of maturities in order to reinvest the principle from shorter maturity bonds if you anticipate rising rates on longer maturity securities, while mitigating the risk that rates do not rise (i.e. inflation never comes).
The irony is that the economic problems stem not from the pandemic, but from the existing debt fueled economies that can not afford to slow down or pause for any length of time.
As usual governments think borrowing and spending is the answer to all economic woes, even those caused by debt in the first place.
The alternative, an economy where borrowing is hard, would be even worse. Such a system would basically amount to feudalism, where the wealthy perpetually own everything and everyone else needs the support of some wealthy lord to proceed with a project.
Moreover, an economy slowing down is a bad thing even if you ignore debt. A small but noticeable example in the USA this year are the COVID-induced supply chain disruptions. An economy that slows down is an economy that will delivery fewer goods and services, and in the extreme it means not finding the things you need when you go to the store (it is hard to forget the empty shelves in supermarkets earlier this year). Nobody should delude themselves into thinking that debt is the reason we cannot afford to pause the economy for an extended period of time.
This is the correct reading. The Economist is just a bunch of young nameless writers carrying water for hardcore capitalists. Their lack of bylines is the perfect cover for those in power to push their agenda in a PR neutral way.
21 comments
[ 4.7 ms ] story [ 63.7 ms ] threadAm I missing something obvious?
Why do you think billionaires horde money? It's the same reason debears hordes diamonds, if all the diamonds that exist actually were available on the markets they wouldn't be worth shit. By hording all the diamonds mined, they get to set the prices.
Sure if you spread more money out to more people, some prices may adjust up a bit, but you're not going to get runaway price gouging across everything like many who are against UBI claim.
It's different for the US than for others due to seignorage (others need the currency) but for basically everyone else, it's dangerous.
Also for countries that don't need to borrow heavily internationally like China or Japan.
For for everyone else it's very scary game.
The Canadian government is about to embark on a major spending spree after the biggest spending spree in history, including possibly permanent UBI. Of course without mandate, and from a PM who has absolutely no experience in anything, and a well educated and smart Finance Minister who specializes in History and Journalism - it's very bad.
I guess I should have asked also what is the best that could happen, one way or the other.
My parents retirement is screwed..these small interest bonds will mean nothing with 10x inflation..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasury_Inflation_Protected_S...
There is also the classic laddering strategy, where you buy bonds with a range of maturities in order to reinvest the principle from shorter maturity bonds if you anticipate rising rates on longer maturity securities, while mitigating the risk that rates do not rise (i.e. inflation never comes).
As usual governments think borrowing and spending is the answer to all economic woes, even those caused by debt in the first place.
Moreover, an economy slowing down is a bad thing even if you ignore debt. A small but noticeable example in the USA this year are the COVID-induced supply chain disruptions. An economy that slows down is an economy that will delivery fewer goods and services, and in the extreme it means not finding the things you need when you go to the store (it is hard to forget the empty shelves in supermarkets earlier this year). Nobody should delude themselves into thinking that debt is the reason we cannot afford to pause the economy for an extended period of time.