Please give me a list of names of Central Bankers that don't lie. Typing out the list won't take much effort. It will be bloody short. Researching for a list might be like trying to find a needle in the haystack.
So long as population and productivity grows we will have to accommodate that growth by printing some more money. Otherwise the economy will stagnate and then ultimately be thrown into recession and deflation. This is an unavoidable consequence of using fractional reserve banking to grow both credit and the economy. So far this has been quite successful for the U.S. But of course we have to be careful not to print money that can't be justified in terms of future productivity. This is a topic were there is certainly room for debate, so long as those debating the issue have their facts correct..
Total nonsense. Fed and Treasury operations are NOT one and the same, in fact in normal times they have nothing to do with each other and not a single bill or note or bond is bought by the fed. Next, a deficit has nothing to do with the total debt outstanding except that a deficit is added to the total debt. Hence, total debt is non temporal while a deficit is an amount of negative cash flow in a defined timespan. Definitions. You can look them up. Next, of course is every penny of the debt repayable. In fact every single month the treasury is redeeming debt at par value to make investors whole who lent years or months ago. I stop here because your post is littered with factually wrong information. Worst, I already regret I replied because not even once have I ever seen you apologize or correct yourself even when proven wrong. As usual, you seem to know some basics about economics, (though even some very basic parts you already got dead wrong in this post alone) and some real esoteric weird stuff that contradicts facts and how the treasury and fed operates in the real world
If you are familiar with debating and/or the subject of lying, having the facts correct is a necessary condition but not a sufficient condition to have a useful debate/conversation.
Just a few hopefully short replies. I am confident you'll correct me if in any way I am wrong here. I don't believe a said the fed and the Treasury are one in the same. I said they are coordinated operations (separate of course) that appear as one giant operation when you view their consolidated books. When the Fed credits the Treasury's reserve account to cover short falls this is an example of the coordination I am speaking of. You may not be aware that the Treasury always spends first, and then later appears to borrow when it sell bonds to primary dealers at auction. This I believe is quite incorrect and possibly the source of confusion. There is no debt. The nation "prints" the money it needs beyond its income to pay its debts. The deficit is equal to the penny what you, I and others call "the National Debt." That you could be confused about this issue is understandable. Most people such as yourself believe he government actually borrows to pay its debts. But it doesn't. It 'prints' when the fed credits the Treasuries Reserve Account to cover overdrafts, and then later appears to borrow when it sells bonds. What is it actually doing however is exchanging an interest paying form of money, the bond, for the money the fed printed and the Treasury spent into the economy. This is the money that economists refer to as "outside Money." This is of course is what it appears as to all of us, but it one of the things that isn't what it appears to be. And that makes it difficult to understand to finances of a Government that issues its own fiat money and has very deep sovereignty over the money it issues. When the Government redeems "debt" at par value, it is merely putting back into bank reserve accounts the readily spendable money it drained from the economy when it sold the bond in the first place. To quote economist Randall Wray: "Of course governments believe that they must sell bonds to borrow the funds necessary to finance spending. However this is an illusion, as the spending must come first. ...bond sales (whether by the the Treasury or the Central Bank ) function to drain excess reserves; they cannot finance or fund deficit spending." While others here have seen me apologize and correct myself when I have been wrong, you of course have not. You jumped to conclusions it seems when you went on to say "even when proven wrong." You yourself of course have not proven we wrong in anything I wrote, at least in the specific post we are referring to, although there could of course be a mistake. I would strongly urge you to read at least some of the voluminous literature on this very topic we are considering. I always recommend Randall Wray's seminal book on Government Fiat Money though it is a bit out of date and there is much more recent stuff covering the same ground, but not as well as Wray did in my opinion. The book is "Understanding Modern Money." Wray was a Minsky protege and it's Minsky where you want to go to understand the ins and outs of "Inside" and "Outside Money". Other important authors who have written extensively on these same topics are the Australian Economist, William Mitchell, and I also should mention a new book just out that received very good reviews, and is written so that even a person without an economics background can follow it. It's Stephanie Kelton's "The Deficit Myth." Kelton, you may recall, was the chief economist for the Senate's Budget Committee. She teaches Economics at Stony Brook now. Also you might find Warren Mosler's books interesting reading because I think you come from a similar Background as Mosler, which I believe is Wall Street. I recall something of your background, and so i have always assumed you have at least an undergraduate background in economics and likely a strong background in finance and bonds. But you do make my point that even those engaged in trading for banks and on Wall Street often do not understand the real nature of Treasury-Fed-Economy interactions and the role Fiat money plays that is both the topic here and also appears for all the world to be something they are not! I myself find this topic fascinating and have made a study of it over the past fifteen or so years. I invite you to join this study. You'll be very surprised to learn that would you were absolutely convinced was happening is not what's happening at all. In reality, there is no National Debt.
Short? As usual you burry every rebuttal in a litany of words. Others have seen you apologize? How about you post some examples where you apologized and stood corrected from your past post history? Then i can apologize myself and we can dive right into the subject matter. And please stop being a constant asshole pretending only you read literature, research and gained knowledge. I worked as trader in the frontline as market maker and PM in prop groups and hedge funds for close to 20 hears and have been profitable. Whats your track record? Stop pretending others dont know anything. Its upsetting and makes you look like an arrogant prick.
1. You don't mention Fed purchase of non-treasury bonds: everything from corporate bonds to commercial paper to munis. 2. You didn't answer the question: what will be the first signs of tapering, where will it first manifest itself, and what is your best timeline projection? Thank you for writing this up.