• grte
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Those people are wilfully ignoring the 3 trillion pumped into the market to prop it up when it crashed in 2020, which absolutely dwarfs the pittance handed out as stimulus.

    • MxM111@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s different. That money is the federal reserve printing, well, money and exchanging it for existing securities. They can always get money back in exchange for those securities if there is money oversupply. It is reversible.

      When federal government spends more money than it has, there is no reverse mechanism, because the government does not get securities in exchange of new money it introduced to economy.

      • markon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Don’t forget Money Center banks like BofA went from 10% fractional reserve (they needed to theoretically have 10% of the amount they were lending) to 0%. That’s just a fancy way of saying they can print money by fiat just like the Fed does. The Fed is weird though because it may as well be owned by the banks as well, but the head of the Fed is appointed by the president.

        There are arguments though that given our somewhat teetering system that they did some “goodish” things to prevent all out collapse. Their actions have not changed anything systemic though, and the system it’s arguably the problem.

        • MxM111@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I am not quite sure how big the impact of it is on inflation. I thought even before, banks could just go and take cash from federal reserve (borrow), essentially unlimited amount and that counted as reserve. So, from practical point of view, if they saw that they can lend the money with foot risk/benefit profile, they could always do that. And they would not have to pay rate for the money which is in reserve. So, not quite sure if inflation depends on this much.

          • markon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I think this is a reasonable argument. A lot of it seems to just have been companies using inflation as an excuse to raise prices causing more inflation.

            • MxM111@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Company does not need excuses. It needs explanation for shareholders, to show that they adjust the price to have maximum profits. Nearly no customer will look at the increased price of the product and think “it is expensive, so I can’t afford to buy it, but they have good excuse why it is expensive, so I will buy it anyway”.

      • grte
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yeah, I bet. Did they? Reverse it?

        • MxM111@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, that’s what the high fed rate means - they are taking it back, but because it was combination of the what Federal Reserve printed and the USGov “printed”, there is disbalance, and the rates end up too high, thus inflation.