I think what some are trying to say here is that it's "like a tax." The government is imposing a "kind of" tax on you by devaluing the currency via printing more of it. The government "has" more money when it prints more, so it has somehow generated revenue. So..."kind of a" tax.
Except it's not really, and a government's influence over the money supply is one of the tools it uses to smooth out the bumps in the economy.
Have a look at this article:
Money supply - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
At this point in the business cycle (recession, trough, leading to recovery), a boost in the money supply—while putting the dollar more at risk of inflation—has a good chance of bolstering real production. More dollars flowing through the economy have a greater chance of being spent, devalued somewhat or not. Too few dollars out there being spent tends to make things grind to a halt.
And let's not forget that a devalued dollar is good for domestic producers who have foreign customers. The depressed greenback is attractive to people outside of the U.S. who buy U.S. goods. This is good for local manufacturing, especially if you want a recovery. (And I know there are several people here at TFP who gripe about the state of local manufacturing, outsourcing, and losing jobs overseas.)
Before jumping to the conclusion that printing money is always bad, look at the big picture and realize all of the economic elements that are influenced by it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
Is it necessarily good? No. Is it necessarily bad? Not necessarily.
|
Exactly. It all depends on the timing and the factors that it influences, not to mention the magnitude. Governments consider both short-term and long-term consequences/benefits and then make decisions based on that.