Now I agree we should not panic about the sequester. A 2-3% cut to discretionary spending by the US government is, even if ham-fistedly done, better than just blithely spending the money as we have been doing over the last several years. But suggesting we have an infinite supply of money is moronic from most politicians, but especially unacceptable from a supposed financial leader. This is what happens with partisan politics blinds you from objective economic reality.
Update:
Protein Wisdom and
Weasel Zippers on the subject of Mad King Bloomy.
Bloomberg booed in Rockaways
No, it's true.
ReplyDeleteBecause we can print money, as much as we like.
BUT what is not in infinite supply is the value upon which it's based. Print money money and it's worth less.
But change the value of money, and only prices that can go up, will. Both fixed incomes and fixed denominations of debt stay the same. Which means we can print money to pay back the debt, which at the same time becomes worth less and less.
Of course, sort of like the Wiemar Republic, Argentina, or a host of other places where they have experienced hyper inflation. That is why hearing something this stupid from someone who should (and does) know better is so maddening. You think the U.S. debt is bad now, imagine it with the interest rates we had during the Carter years. Bloomberg just makes me sick with his smug piety and attitude.
Delete