It would seem that using the printing press on currency always leads to trouble ( inflation, assault on savings ect ) , can you ever justify printing money?
No.
If you want to buy a new Mercedes or BMW.
Sure, Monopoly is a fun game.
Efficient banking
LOL.
fyp
So money can only be printed by governments?
(By the way, as a general aside to this concept, the tax often spoken of is a little misleading here. Seignorage levels in the US are actually only at about 1 to 2% of the actual federal budget).
Only when your Monopoly set is missing money.
Yes, if the currency is being provided by the private sector and that is what people choose.
If tyrannical government (one that does not have consent of all the governed) is printing the money, then it is impossible to know, since they do not have any way to know what the market wants.
There’s no way for ‘people’ to ‘choose’ inflation. There’s no way for ALL holders of a currency to declare that they want the currency devalued.
The idea that ALL holders of a currency will ask for a ‘free-market’ devaluation is sheer nonsense since devaluation ultimately means that a group of people steal from another group of people. For instance, in the case of debtors, devaluation means they can cheat their creditors, but there’s no way in hell for creditors in a free market to voluntarily submit to being cheated.
IOW the scam known as FRB, and other forms of ‘fiduciary media’, won’t be able to compete with sound money.
One shouldn’t be against printing money, it is after all a free-market. I simply think that no will accept any unbacked paper.
So… You’re saying that if I were a pig farmer and decided to increase my production of hogs because the demand for hogs was high, I’d be doing something illegal because it would take away from the value of my hog farming neighbor’s hogs?
How the hell did you come to this conclusion? What he’s saying is that the money he deposits in his bank, which he assumes is held by the bank, should not be used for a thousand different kinds of financial transactions. Transactions which deleverage the banks, cause trade cycles, and panics. He hopes that at any point in time he can simply go to the bank, get his money, without being told: “I’m sorry, we don’t have your money at the moment.” If the demand for my pizzas are great, I actually need more dough, cheese, toppings, ect. I can’t just create cardboard pizzas and deliver them hoping that no one notices; unfortunately, money is fungible. Are you trolling or what?
Because money is just like any other commodity. It has a supply/demand curve.
But there is qualitative difference between issuing fiduciary media without the necessary reserve backing commodity and producing more of this commodity.
Wrong analogy.
I’m saying you do not know what you are talking about. It seems you believe that throwing around words like ‘supply’ and ‘demand’ means your analysis is sound … but it is not.
I don’t understand this comment. Commodities are not homogenous, in fact, there are three separate categorizations. Creating production goods and consumption goods increases wealth; the same is not true for money.
By the way, I suppose I’m free to print as many notes of the Rochester Bank as I wish, in order to satisfy my (and others’) “demand for money”. Amoralist ‘libertarians’ surely won’t object to such use of my ink, my paper and my printing press.
This is a question regarding economics, not ethics.