← Back to context

Comment by hgomersall

1 day ago

The quantity theory of money is trivially shown to be nonsense just by considering what happens to savings (i.e. nothing). You need to up your analysis if you want to truly understand.

8 comments

hgomersall

Reply
philipallstar  1 day ago

What happened to savings in Zimbabwe when they printed trillions of dollars? Did that do anything to what those savings would buy?

  • inigyou  8 hours ago

    It is possible that curves are not linear. That is, it is possible that doing 1 of a thing is good, while doing 1000000 of a thing is bad. Your argument is the same as "you say you need water to survive? But what happens if you're trapped in a giant fish tank with no air pocket?" It is not a good argument.

    • DANmode  4 hours ago

      > It is possible that curves are not linear.

      Only reason this one wouldn’t be, is human sentiment being nonlinear.

      You’re asking to be trapped in a small fish tank with no air pocket…still not a good argument.

      1 reply →

joe_mamba  1 day ago

You've made accusations but have not brought arguments to support that my take on EU leaders and elites being the ones fucking us, our CoL and purchasing power, is wrong.

And savings absolutely did eventually get obliterated by excessive Covid money printing, what are you on about?

  • hgomersall  1 day ago

    I've not made any accusations, nor do I think that the elites are not to blame. I said that "money printing" is not the problem here. The reason it's not the problem is because the quantity of money simply reflects savings. By focussing on "money printing", you're missing the actual problems. Arguably, that's the point, since the elite tend to do well when money is considered a scarce commodity.

    Sure, spending might cause inflationary effects, but that's orthogonal to quantity (flows not stocks), but then economics is the science of confusing stocks with flows.