Of course, almost every economy is printing money as there is no tomorrow, diluting current assets dramatically, and who will suffer that most are those with fixed income like pensionist. Is a very very bad scenario that we are getting into it.
In the US, people wonder how markets are growing since the beggining of the pandemic despite the colossal impact in the real economy, there are many reasons but my contention is that people should take that growth as the new baseline of value, and see how their assets compare with that growth. The difference is how much value your assets lost in that timeframe. Printing money is the magic invisible taxation that most people don't see or complain until its too late.
[0] Maybe Norway and its massive sovereing fund is an exception, but the fund took an over 100B USD loss in the first quarter of 2020, and it will be a lot worse in the second. Even that sovereing fund, which is the gold global standard for a rainy day state fund, can be depleted very quickly with the current scenario
The government support you mention is for the most part financed through bonds (at very low or negative interest rates), not by "printing money".
IMHO the difference of the monetary growth and the GDP growth in the same period is the value lost for each money unit. I concede GDP growth is not the perfect indicator of the value of an Economy, but it is what we have.
This is not post Bretton Woods, standard modus operandi we are talking here. Since 2008 we can see a change of scenario, and in Q1 2020 we can see once again a clear jump.
Inflation may result of an increase in the monetary base, but, as we saw with Japan, since they already tried[3], other factors as a productivity shock alongs with a liqudity trap might lead to deflation[4], which may be a far worse scenario.
One could argue that if equity and assets prices, on one hand, and salaries and pensions on the other, are stable while money is diluted as per above definition, you are already on a deflationary cycle.
[0]https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/BOGMBASE [1]https://tradingeconomics.com/euro-area/money-supply-m3 check 10y [2]https://www.bis.org/publ/bppdf/bispap19l.pdf [3]https://www.bis.org/publ/bppdf/bispap70c.pdf
[0]https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirus-deat...
However, the US is still in the midst of the pandemic, and I expect the US to catch up on this lamentable metric.
[1] https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/07/15/tracking...
This is the problem with a socialist solution. We can make things ‘fair’ now, but SOMEONE, at some point in the future, has to pay. Is it really fair that the bill for this falls on future generations? They‘re likely to still be paying off OUR debt in 50 years time. What happens if they have their own ‘Covid‘ before the bill is paid? They’ll already be on the back foot financially.
I don’t resent us helping folks now. But I do resent what it means for my kids, and their kids, and so on.
In these cases or many others where a developing country shied away from heavy-handed lockdown, government support of the type you mention is nearly nonexistent. That you take its existence for granted suggests to me that you yourself live in a place where there is support and simply assume it should be the case anywhere (it's not).
The same for the taxes you mention for social support. Sure, the taxes some developer pays in California, or the UK, or New York or X developed place might be used to help social benefits programs in that place. In many if not most other places in the world though, any collected taxes for social programs are mismanaged, often stolen or simply don't exist in the first place. Again, that's how much of the world actually is, most of its people very definitely don't have much access to government support or public healthcare.
I speak from experience here by the way, living in a large developing country with a famously corrupt government at all levels, and 60% of its 130 million person population living day to day, hand-to mouth. I can't even begin to image the social and even humanitarian catastrophe of full lockdown here had it been applied (fortunately it wasn't despite the pressures of COVID deaths). Even partial quarantine has been damaging enough.
I don't even understand the meaning of your last sentence. This isn't about "weakly collapsing" at the first sign of trouble, it's about the hard math of what inevitably happens if you force-stop daily outdoor economic activity in any country with a majority population that must engage in exactly such activity in order to keep from literally going hungry.