Is the U.S. / Democrats printing money?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: SleeperHasAwakened
Wrong[/url]. Quantitative Easing involves the central banks purchasing a broad variety of securities from the market place, including assets like stocks and corporate debt

LOL. You source says what I said. It's primarily T-Bills but if you want to be pedantic and think that I'm not aware other instruments are not part of that's on you.

This is also not the same as 'printing money' which is about increasing the M3 without the velocity being a prime factor.

Sigh.

Nowhere in my OP did I say anything about the composition of what was in Q.E. You threw that out there.

The Federal Reserve doesn't "purchase it's own bonds". The Fed doesn't issue any bonds. T-bills, you know Treasury bonds, are issued by the U.S. Treasury.

Aside from what Ghostsdogood reinforced, I have posted 3 links that all say Q.E. is tantamount to printing money, which is on top of hundreds of articles from dozens of market observers/economists out there that are easily found via Google. Still waiting on your source that says Q.E. doesn't result in creation of new money in the economy (we'll wait a looong while for that to make it here, as that information doesn't exist).

As usual, the pedantry is on your side. You made factually inaccurate statements, most egregious being that Q.E. does not result in monetary creation, myself and another member called you on it, and now you're nitpicking semantics.

I'm not going to do this dance with you that results in pages and pages and pages of back and forth arguing. So I will conclude my involvement in the discussion here.

O.P., apologies for your thread derailment. Some people make a living off that here.

AM can spew all the ponzhi scheme words and numbers he wants but yes YES

If money is debt and you taking out more debt then no amount of mental gymnastics will derail the fact

You pay for it in our purchasing power, all your homes are going to cost way more and everything else not because the cost more, it’s you need more of your dollars to attain the same item

They say an ox of gold will always be worth the cost of a fine mans suit…that’s the essence of the cost of goods production

You could buy a fine suit for 200 dollars in 1999 when that was the price of gold, now gold is 1900 and that’s about the cost of a nice suit

The value of your money is being debased for awhile and now for the final time before a switch to digital

originally posted by: SleeperHasAwakened
Nowhere in my OP...

You aren't the Original Poster.

...did I say anything about the composition of what was in Q.E.

You did, you claimed it's just 'printing money', it isn't, it's purchasing instruments, primarily T-Bills.

The Federal Reserve doesn't "purchase it's own bonds"....

More pedantry, using your pedantic argument the Federal Reserve, which controls QE, doesn't print money since that's the Treasury's function.

Aside from what Ghostsdogood reinforced, I have posted 3 links that all say Q.E. is tantamount to printing money...

No, you are misreading/misrepresenting them, 'printing money' and QE have two different impacts on the M3/velocity metric. They are not the same thing.

originally posted by: ADUB77
The value of your money is being debased for awhile and now for the final time before a switch to digital

A 'digital' dollar, which already exists, is worth the same as a physical dollar.

a reply to: Bloodworth

Sure there is. There was several trillion loaned out right before COVID hit, mostly to Chase, Citigroup, BOA, and one other...can't recall.

Ill tell you what is crazy: The NY Fed, which is owned by the banks aforementioned, are able to print their own money. So if they want access to cash to prop up their bad investing, all they need to do is print it, then loan it to themselves at a ridiculously low rate.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Its not technically "printing" money. They infuse value via loans, but its just over leveraging in the end. What are they leveraged, like 250 to 1 or something ridiculous?

Its not printed cash (so the cash amount in circulation doesn't change). But the value is still loaned.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
Its not technically "printing" money.

Agreed, some people don't quite grasp the nuances.

They infuse value via loans, but its just over leveraging in the end.

It's more about purchasing securities to provide liquidity when interest rates are too low to lower further to prevent deflation. Currently we have an inflationary economy so the last thing they Federal Reserve would be doing is Quantitative Easing.

Its not printed cash (so the cash amount in circulation doesn't change).

Which is why I also mentioned the M3 and Velocity of Money metrics, they are both impacted differently when money is just printed versus QE.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I was reading something last night about tens of billions of dollars made available in Q3/Q4 2019 to retain liquidity among the "big 4" that seem to have gotten us into the 2008 issue.

www.reddit.com...< br />
Im pretty interested in what is happening here. It seems as though we have a lot of young people who are doing everything they can to lay it all bare no matter the cost.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
I was reading something last night about tens of billions of dollars made available in Q3/Q4 2019 to retain liquidity among the "big 4" that seem to have gotten us into the 2008 issue.

Yes, it's by buying up their securities and providing them liquidity. Not really a loan per se but more akin to cleaning out their yard sale.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Its not technically "printing" money. They infuse value via loans, but its just over leveraging in the end. What are they leveraged, like 250 to 1 or something ridiculous?

Its not printed cash (so the cash amount in circulation doesn't change). But the value is still loaned.

I was talking about when the new style hundred dollar bills were being physically printed.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I was reading something last night about tens of billions of dollars made available in Q3/Q4 2019 to retain liquidity among the "big 4" that seem to have gotten us into the 2008 issue.

www.reddit.com...< br />
Im pretty interested in what is happening here. It seems as though we have a lot of young people who are doing everything they can to lay it all bare no matter the cost.

Okay... I went hunting for some proof (government documents, news stories, etc) that this story is real (out of curiosity) and I don't find a blessed thing on it... except the "discovery" announcements in a blog and on Reddit.

Do you have any documentation on this?

a reply to: Byrd

Search instead "Federal Reserve Reverse Repo" to find more traditional sources.

I hate to be that guy and tell you to look it up, but I don't think I understand the system well enough to make a fair description on the practice.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: Byrd

Search instead "Federal Reserve Reverse Repo" to find more traditional sources.

I hate to be that guy and tell you to look it up, but I don't think I understand the system well enough to make a fair description on the practice.

I did look it up. It simply shows what's going on. What I wanted was some proof that the motivation determined by the researchers is actually documented/shown somewhere and isn't wild speculation based on the researcher's assumption of what's going on.

a reply to: Byrd

Yea, and I'm not confident enough with my comprehension of it to make that connection.

All I can say is as a financial instrument, reverse repo have been at historic levels since COVID. What the possible ramifications are I'm unsure....

So far the only thing I could confidently say is the program has helped increase stock prices with liquidity. All the short term loans are backed by securities, which many of us believe are unnaturally inflated. It's just speculation to say that could bite us in the ass.

There is the other possible side effect of more loans on the market because of the reverse repos (but probably more specifically low interest rates).

So a bank doesn't have enough cash to satisfy fractional reserve policy to make new loans, they take a reverse repo, have the liquidity and make the loans and possibly act as security to back another loan? This is the only way I see a large increase in the supply of USD as a direct result of the policy, but I haven't myself seen evidence of such. Just seems theoretically possible.