The wonderful world of negative nominal interest rates There is a looney in UK central banking circles who is advocating negative nominal interest rates. http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/3626 http://blogs.ft.com/maverecon/2009/...n-are-they-coming-to-a-central-bank-near-you/
yeah your right that guy is a looney. i read the first half of the voxeu paper up until he started talking about the extreme methods of implementing negative interest. the concept of stopping currency and then giving everyone an account at the central bank seems to say the least unrealistic (i assume I read that right). the fact of the matter is, in a free market economy you have to have incentive to save to provide investment for new start ups if that money is not there (due to not having incentive from negative returns) the economy will not recover. he is putting emphasis on money supply and demand and ignoring market fundamentals. it is similar to inflation targeting but the other way. if the fundamentals of a working market do not exit the economy will decline regardless of the money supply. sometimes i wonder if the money supply matters at all because the market will rectify. however i then remember that the market takes time to respond to price alterations, it can create problems with confidence in the currency and can mess up foreign trade. saying that i do not think the money supply target should be the main concern, the ability to provide capital generation and saving supersede the necessity to control the level of aggregate demand. although the above points as to why controlling aggregate demand do have to be taken into consideration they are secondary to capital generation and saving.
why complicate. make people happy. That is good thing for society. Inform all of them they won lottery price in amount 2x what they loan balance is. Print money and credit their accounts. See how consumption will come back! Happy people, & saved economy. Win/win. You will also turn savers into spenders at the same as they got no lottery win this time.
i am unsure if i understand your point. are you saying they should devalue the currency to pay peoples debts off by giving them the printed money. you do realise that would undermine market fundamentals. people who saved money would have lost it and would not lend again the confidence in the system would go people would not lend again (if people do not lend no credit). savers would not be spenders because their savings would have gone so they would have nothing to spend.
As opposed to direct the money to Goldman Sachs putting their competitors out of business. You do realize everything the government has done up to know is undermining market fundamentals. I agree devaluing the currency would be disastrous but we already doing that anyways. Regarding the OP original questions. I am for hangings in the following orders 1) Politicians who particiapated and profited in this fraud, there names are obvious. 2) Any Politicians who continue to vote for more spending especially, cap & trade, porkulus, universal healthcare 3) The morons who keep electing the same politicians 4) CB who continue to oppose transparency and auditing of the FED 5) All the top execs at Goldman Sachs and AIG, countrywide, BAMC, MER, MS etc. Maybe hanging is a bit extreme but a good public flogging and the gallows would be in order.
i completely agree with you. the government is not following market fundamentals and it will cost. but to devalue the currency to write of all debts is going much further. as i said i agree with you that the government is not following fundamentals this is why there will not be a recovery soon. by the way i like your posts.
I'll settle for hanging anyone from the trailer park acting as economist. ie most of the congenital retard trailer park conservative monkeys on this board. People who think the world is 4000 years old shouldn't be allowed to walk in the streets. I'm referring to joe-the-bumble-fuck-plumber types who are on welfare yet worry what their taxes will be when they win the lottery.
What exactly is wrong with this? He's making a purely academic argument about the zero bound and how to circumvent it.
some of the methods explained are extreme. also it prevents the free market fundamentals. no incentive to save no investment no new start ups no recovery.