Comments on: How about quantitative easing for the people? http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2012/08/01/how-about-quantitative-easing-for-the-people/ Sat, 03 Jan 2015 16:42:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: chrisb1959 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2012/08/01/how-about-quantitative-easing-for-the-people/#comment-377 Sun, 12 Aug 2012 14:10:27 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=57#comment-377 Good article! Certainly giving the general population x-amount of money would certainly give the economy the boost that it needs instead of going to the bankers. More importantly, however, is for people to have faith in the economy again and that their future is secure. What is going on at the moment, certainly in Europe, is that people fear the future and they fear whether they are going to be out of work tomorrow. If plenty of jobs could be created then the fear factor would be reduced and people would spend money, thus an automatic boost to the economy.

]]>
By: minipaws http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2012/08/01/how-about-quantitative-easing-for-the-people/#comment-376 Sun, 12 Aug 2012 12:16:14 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=57#comment-376 I have a better idea, why don’t we actually pay interest to people who have worked hard, lived within our means and saved their money. Our retired parents/grandparents don’t deserve to be penalized for the mistakes of others.

]]>
By: piccolomini http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2012/08/01/how-about-quantitative-easing-for-the-people/#comment-374 Sun, 12 Aug 2012 00:28:32 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=57#comment-374 it makes absolute no sense to finance debts and after that finance the debts for the debts,
because you know at the end you get a bail out

]]>
By: amibovvered http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2012/08/01/how-about-quantitative-easing-for-the-people/#comment-372 Sat, 11 Aug 2012 15:29:49 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=57#comment-372 There are serious consequences as a result bad fed policy over the past decade, primarily, deflation. All the “corrective” measures have been about staving off deflation. But at some point the fed will have to succumb to this eventualality. The sooner the better. It is well established the longer the postponement the more pain as a consequence of deflation. Ideally, this correction should’ve been addressed in 2007. Had it been, the country would’ve been on the mend by now. It gets worse with each passing year postpone?

]]>
By: zulzie http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2012/08/01/how-about-quantitative-easing-for-the-people/#comment-353 Thu, 09 Aug 2012 23:59:36 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=57#comment-353 how about public banking?

the typical american family pays 50% of its interest as mortgage, auto, education loans…..why not establish a public banking system that finances these loans….with all interest paid IN LIEU OF TAXES?…..this would amount to a tax cut of the current tax rate, fund the government with 5 times the money it gets now, pry the government AWAY from the private bankers, and wind down the too big to fail banks, all in one fell swoop……i guess its too simple and easy! i hope they don’t assassinate me for this obvious idea….think about it…..if all consumer debt loans were refinanced (at rock bottom rates) with any interest paid used AS TAX REVENUE for the government, how fast do you think people would refinance at this public bank? and only GOOD loans would be refinanced! the private banking system can keep all their liar loans, etc…..they would be out of business within a year……the banking system reformed, and if you think the private bankers have power to get paid back…..think what the government tax office power! you don’t pay your loan? TO JAIL WITH YOU!

]]>
By: chris9059 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2012/08/01/how-about-quantitative-easing-for-the-people/#comment-345 Thu, 09 Aug 2012 21:42:23 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=57#comment-345 @tygerr

BRAVO!

]]>
By: michel_behr http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2012/08/01/how-about-quantitative-easing-for-the-people/#comment-338 Wed, 08 Aug 2012 20:55:01 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=57#comment-338 No matter to whom you give new money, you don’t solve any major long-term problem – you could only increase inflation.

In reality, money is a VALUE representation, nothing more. When you print money and give it away, you are basically taking value away from people who are not receiving your “new money”, but you don’t create value.

The big question is which countries today create value, efficiently. Not the US, for sure. I think it would be China – although people around the world see China as a slave-nation, that’s an exaggeration, a generalization.

Nations, like businesses, should worried about being efficient – unfortunately democratic nations face the harm of political pressure, so governments try to do what is right for too many parties, and end up serving no one. And China? Well… they are “free as a bird” (so to speak)… it’s a terrible contradiction, and I can’t think of a solution, but the truth is that democratic nations doesn’t have what it takes to do the right think long-term.

]]>
By: donee http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2012/08/01/how-about-quantitative-easing-for-the-people/#comment-337 Wed, 08 Aug 2012 00:45:23 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=57#comment-337 Given that voters get to elect candidates selected by monied interests, it is those who Legislators must serve. Common sense leads to public campaign funding which would be a reality today if endorsed by media! Even the Supreme Court would yield to the court of overwhelming public opinion!

]]>
By: Raymond.Vermont http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2012/08/01/how-about-quantitative-easing-for-the-people/#comment-336 Tue, 07 Aug 2012 15:34:36 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=57#comment-336 If a nation state with a central bank want to not only purchase its debt and simultaneously devalue its debt to its GDP, then whats the issue as long as inflation doesnt make home basics & products unaffordable?(and you can get round that by short-term subsidies anyway!)

]]>
By: paintcan http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2012/08/01/how-about-quantitative-easing-for-the-people/#comment-335 Tue, 07 Aug 2012 15:17:11 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/?p=57#comment-335 In case it wasn’t noticed in my too long comment. There are many seniors living in nursing homes, retirement communities or still in their own homes who may be drawing annuities from “reverse mortgages”. Those don’t seem to get mentioned in the concern about collapsed home prices.

The US wants to create a very regulated economy and doesn’t want to create a regulated economy. It wants to inflate bubbles and is afraid of the bubbles. They really don’t know what they want to do or have much of an idea about how to fix the problem. And it has already used every technique it can think of. It can’t adapt to the lower cost of labor throughout the developing world without lowering it’s own standard of living and further depressing it’s own economy.
Ten years of war is only aggravating the situation and making more difficulties for it in the future. It will limp along and flail at enemies until it is exhausted and the government itself collapses. Then the problems really begin: because capital will flee to more stable countries with growth potential and the country will start to look like scenes from “Bladerunner”.

My father sees the future as a world of “hospices” for the low income (lots and lots of them) where they group in communities of mutual aid while the rich will be living in their own worlds of opulence and sybaritic luxury.

He has a point but he forgets they can’t abandon their investment in the sinking status quo without entering a future world severely starved of cash assets. They would have to create almost shaker style communities that can live without money and rely on their own labor and whatever resources they could somehow manage to acquire. The assets of the wealthy would shrink in value as substantial numbers of the population abandoned them.

It might be the time to consider experiments like Arcosanti for far more people and even with government seed money to get them started. But giving away cash is a waste of time and energy. Land – labor – capital is the triad – capital is abundant, labor is underutilized and over priced, land is available in decaying industrial centers and elsewhere. It only needs a better model of community life and that is the hardest part of the problem. People have to stop thinking like passive consumers in the market, media and advertising driven societies and realize that they are the origin of social life – not the dumb recipients of the industrialized and, more or less, burned out post war consumer economies.

It will be impossible for many because they don’t know how to live like that. In fact this country never did.

Historically, it happens to the best of them. The only trouble is, any attempts at creating alternative communities seem to fritter themselves away like the communes of the 60s or end as nightmares like Jonestown or Koresh and his adolescent messianic pretensions. Of course – anything better and more stable may never be mentioned by an economic system that needs captives or are not at all appealing to a population that has no imagination and has lost it’s ability to be very creative without being sold their creativity in a plastic wrapped carton. Shopping till you drop, or speculating on everything in sight until the money itself is a disgrace and embarrassment, is not creativity.

]]>