EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Why Printing Money Makes Sense
Right now, even a counterfeiter issuing dud dollars would be better for the economy than our deficit-fixated policymakers
Beneficent Counterfeiters and Economic Stimulus
President Reagan once famously quipped that everyone who is supports abortion has already been born. In the same vein, it is worth noting that all the policymakers who don't think we should worry about 9.6% unemployment have jobs.
This simple fact cannot be repeated enough times because it explains a huge amount about current economic policy. For the tens of millions of people who are unemployed, underemployed or have given up looking for work altogether, we are in a crisis. The economy is an absolute disaster, ruining their lives and also jeopardising the futures of their children and grandchildren.
But that is not the way that the people paid to contemplate economic policy in Washington see things. This gang is busy congratulating themselves because things could have been worse. They point out that if they had been even more incompetent that we could be in a second Great Depression with unemployment staying in the double digits for a decade.
Instead of worrying about the millions of unemployed workers today, they are worried about their deficit projections for the years 2018, 2020 or even 2025. This crew, which could not even see the $8tn housing bubble that was about to wreck the economy, wants the whole country to genuflect before their projections of deficits for 10-15 years into the future. This situation really would be funny if it did not lead to so much unnecessary suffering.
Obviously, we have to teach some elementary economics to the geniuses who design economic policy. The basic problem we face is a lack of demand. Note that this is the exact opposite of the deficit fixation – budget deficits are a problem when we have too much demand.
To better understand this demand problem, suppose that we had a super-effective counterfeiter: someone who could make near perfect copies of $50 or $100 bills. Suppose this person printed up $2tn of counterfeit money and began to spend it on all sorts of items. Our counterfeiter buys up houses and cars. They pay for incredibly lavish parties and trips. They hire all sorts of servants, groundskeepers and investment advisers.
What would be the effect of this counterfeiting scam on the economy?
In the current situation, it would provide an enormous boost to GDP and create millions of jobs. After all, everyone thinks the money is real. It is no different whether the counterfeiter and his underlings spend $2tn of counterfeit money or if firms suddenly start investing their hoards of cash or households begin to spend again as though the housing bubble had never collapsed.
That may sound troubling, but this is because the current economic situation is so extraordinary. In normal times, the economy is, at least partially, supply-constrained. Collectively, we want more goods and services than the economy is capable of producing. If our counterfeiter manufactured his $2tn in normal times, it likely would cause a serious problem of inflation. There would be more demand for cars, houses and other goods than the economy was able to supply. This would push up prices and wages, leading to a cycle of inflation that would persist until policy measures were taken to slow the economy – or the counterfeiter was caught.
In our demand-constrained economy, however, there is no problem of inflation. The economy can produce more of almost anything right now. The reason that we are not doing it is simply the lack of demand.
But the interesting part of the counterfeiter story is that his $2tn of phony money will not create problems even in the long run, assuming that he is eventually shut down. Suppose that the counterfeiter's lavish spending gets the economy back towards full employment around 2012, at which point he gets nailed by the FBI who finally figure out how to recognise the dud notes.
At that point, the $2tn will be grabbed out of circulation and destroyed. Assuming that the economy is strong enough at this point to remain near full employment even as this counterfeit wealth disappears, then there would be no lasting damage from the episode. The fictional wealth had generated demand when the economy needed it, but then was pulled out of circulation at the point when it could have generated inflation and "competed away" goods and services from others.
While it is unlikely we will see a successful counterfeiter on this scale, the government and the Federal Reserve Board can imitate the counterfeiter's actions. This is the story of fiscal stimulus: safe, fun and legal. Instead of putting people to work filling the counterfeiter's frivolous whims, we could have them work to build up the economy and meet important needs. The list of necessary tasks is long and well-known.
As is the case with the counterfeiter's illicit stash, the stimulus spending need not even create any long-term debt burden. The Fed could simply buy and hold the bonds issued to finance the spending. When the economy returns to more normal levels of employment, the Fed would raise interest rates, as it always does, to prevent inflation from posing a serious risk.
It's all very simple. Unfortunately, our Washington politicians lack the courage to take the necessary steps to get the economy back on its feet. That means that the best hope we have right now might be a very successful counterfeiter.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


25 Comments so far
Show Allwhatever......
the important thing is:
good or bad "times" ...the most important thing for americans to remember is to PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE to the United States of America...One Nation Under GOD...
let the world burn (even if america primarily built the Burner)...let's SWEAR allegiance to the COUNTERFEITING EMPIRE of the world.
SWEAR ALLEGIANCE to the Flag of the United States..and that for which it stands: COUNTERFEIT Economy, Counterfeit Nation, Counterfeit "wealth"...and ABOVE ALL... Counterfeit "freedom and democracy".
that's all that matters.
the arguments get more and more bizarre as the physical planet exhausts...
to which fictitious moment in this hijacked country's fanciful dream-history are we clinging, economically?
pre-WWII? during WWII? post-WWII? the 70s? the 80s or 90s?
which moment are we ignoring, chemically?
DDT? PCB? CFC? Chernobyl? TMI? DU? Deepwater Horizon?
human industry kills life...money kills life...
print more to encourage economic activity, with no thought given to environmental consequence?
insane...
You said it.
More money isn't what we need.
DUBET: Your post is where poetry meets calculus (or is it algebra?). Nice work. I fully agree.
Are you guys actually advocating primitivism? Way to scare people away from the left. No powerplants would mean millions of individual fires every night-would that be better for the environment?
He's been making the same correct arguments for years.
He's advocating a more just future, what's history got to do with it?
Money is just an invention that conveniently facilitates trade and when did he suggest ignoring environmental consequenses?
our is not to question why
ours is but to consume and die.
the corporate citizen is a paper construct
a two dimentional entity and were all f____!
SUPERB LINES!!! YOU ARE AMAZING!
I would much rather see the Fed Reserve be abolished and have our system go from fiat to barter. Yes, it may be painful. However, don't we have enough pain trying to decide between more funny money and lame brain "policy makers"?
Inflation wouldn't be a problem with your unenployment levels. Check out neweconomicperspectives.blogspot.com
The level of fantasy in the article and most of the postings is sobering. How so many seemingly thinking adults can indulge in such flights is mind-boggling.
Money is nothing more or less than tokens representing value. Through producing value with labor or resources, lending, and moving that value, is the economy created. Manipulating the numbers of tokens does nothing to change the value in the economy. The only way to increase value is to produce more or supply more resources.
You are making an a fortiori argument for Mr. Baker's thesis although you may not realize it. You can produce things 'til the cows come home and that won't do anything but bankrupt your company since no one has any money to buy your product (unless the government steps in to buy - it ALWAYS has money) You need demand - demand needs cash to create more demand. Best thing to do right now is give money to the poor and suffering amongst us. They'll spend it and you can sell all that surplus shit you've "produced" with nary a customer in sight.
Actually, just the opposite. Adding money to the system, without corresponding increases in value (printing cash and giving it to poor people) does not create demand. It increases prices (see the housing bubble, gov't subsidies for anything).
Also, if you have been following any business news at all for a while, you certainly realize that there isn't a bunch of surplus sitting around, except surplus labor. Factories have not been producing at previous levels, have not been stocking excess inventory, and have not been paying idle employees. Giving a bunch of worthless cash to people who consume it immediately will only create "runs" on lottery tickets and junk food.
As with several posters on here I agree that there is a great deal of stupidity in this article. Others have focused on what happens when a state just starts printing money.
But the following line from the article bothers me far more:
"The basic problem we face is a lack of demand. Note that this is the exact opposite of the deficit fixation – budget deficits are a problem when we have too much demand. "
Stimulating demand for demand's sake is bad for many reasons:
1). The previous crisis was fueled by using debt to pay for this demand. There is no indication from the author that something similar wouldn't come about again.
2). "Demand" for all the latest tat that you can get from all the trendiest shops generates a hell of a lot of carbon that is not doing this planet any good.
If you have a job in a western nation then you likely are making plenty of money to own a small house, raise a single child (population is the overarching problem we all love to ignore), go on a vacation once or twice, and own a car.
But the growth/demand economy requires far far more consumption than this! You have to spend fortunes throwing out 'old' things and buying 'new' things because of 'trends' or 'fashion' and people do it!
this needs to stop if we are to continue improving the lives of most of the people on the planet.
Printing money is inflationary. Don't do it. A better course is to tax corporate and individual wealth steeply and adjust the tax code so that money does trickle down. It's not inflationary and it restores demand to the economy. Go away Baker. Economists are not to be trusted. It is they who encouraged free market fundamentalism and profit maximization.
Economists have no credibility.
Harry Truman was once quoted, "If you laid all the economists end-to-end, they would all point different directions."
Economists try to predict the future by misinterpreting the past.
One of the more foolish articles on CD.
The environmental consequences of "demand" are completely overlooked.
Also, we already print forests of money to pay for the wars.
That lead to higher energy prices because the dollar became less valuable.
That contracted the economy enough to cause the financial collapse of 2008.
This guy has written an article on economics, but is he an economist?
I'm not.
But I'm not sure he is either.
yet another fancy garbage suggesting a revival of the problem (global fascist capitalism) as a solution to the problem.
Inflation---the easiest thing to stop in the world. Simply make raising prices a crime punishable by beheading in the public square.
MD --- whose father could swing a mean axe
I follow Dean Baker's CEPR blogging and link to the website on my own blog, but I either don't agree with everything he's stated here or don't understand it all. I'm sure I don't understand it all, but I've been trying to achieve a basic, layman's understanding of how things work for some time.
Money is just a tool, so the real question is, Will those using it have good or bad intentions? Printing it is indeed a solution - if the government printing it has good intentions. We only have corporatocracy governments at present. Fixing a particular part of the system instead of ditching the whole system and building something that works may not work. Expect a corporatocracy gov. to pretend that things can't be fixed or to pretend to be trying.
Here in Canada, Linda McQuaig has written about things like our federal tax system and how the rich have got enough control over tax policy to basically make the rules that favor their class only. Banks receive 'the' charter to print money from the central bank here, which they get every 5 years or so (and that hasn't always been the arrangement), and with that freedom they then take policy making out of the hands of the government, and, by extension, the people - to the extent that we can get these governments to act responsibly.
Governments, which deliberately mismanage the economy in order to privilege their capitalist class, shovel out endless deficit-causing tax cuts to corporations and then plead poverty. It shuts the people up. Claims that the people make on 'their' government for social spending (which is supposed to follow upon the promise-making of stumping politicians who get elected on the strength of those promises) can now be denied because of the excuse of the deficit. - And that, of course, aids and abets the privatizers (capitalist class again) who point to crumbling (poorly funded) publicly funded systems (education, health, transportation) and say "The government can't do it! But we can! Let us privatize it all!," to which the public responds, after sufficient propaganda has been spread, with "Can't be worse if we let you." What we really need are governments that are neutral and not fascist and so are properly governing and spending money responsibly.
So governments themselves, strapped for cash (by design), turn to the commerical banks that can charge whatever interest rates they want, for funds to pay down the debt and do other things and the interest charges are enormous. Our Can. commerical banks(which, collectively, use something like 89 offshore tax havens, believe it or not) didn't always have this cozy arrangement working for them here. If we could take government away from them (yes, that evil government which 'they' say is the people's enemy, so that the people will abandon it - to them) and make it work for everyone again, then these sorts of arrangements could be killed. Our central bank could print the money it needs to get rid of it's debt for example. It's only crazy high because of interest charges.
In the meantime, It helps to know just what's going on, because it isn't a result of natural laws that are beyond our reach. It's a result of special, unprincipled interests.
Dean Baker is assuming an unlimited supply of cheap energy.
The Fed is already printing money (to benefit US banks) - and the rest of the world is not happy:
http://www.counterpunch.org/hudson10112010.html
"But the interesting part of the counterfeiter story is that his $2tn of phony money will not create problems even in the long run, assuming that he is eventually shut down... ...At that point, the $2tn will be grabbed out of circulation and destroyed. Assuming that the economy is strong enough at this point to remain near full employment even as this counterfeit wealth disappears, then there would be no lasting damage from the episode."
There will be no "lasting damage" except to the poor schmuck who earned the counterfeiter's new money in his new job, trusted it as a store of value and then saved it for his retirement. When the counterfeit money is confiscated, poof! There goes the schmuck's retirement security.
Dean Baker claims to know "elementary economics." Yeah, right.