The US is not Greece. Greece doesn’t control its own currency. The US does. It can always meet its debt requirements. It will never default.
Inflation is not a concern. Any kind of spending is inflationary.
Every dollar printed is a dollar stolen from the collective citizenry of the USA. Of course it makes sense to add money supply commensurate with increased productivity, so that money doesn't deflate, but go beyond that and that is what your are doing.
Either way, someone has to pay the debt, even if you repudiate it.
"Do your homework" is not a useful comment, b/c you can easily find eco-chambers re-enforce any point you want on the internet. Instead of trying to engage in conversation, you're just pushing them further into their own ecochamber.
There’s no economic argument to be had with someone that says monetary policy is theft.
I'm not making a value statement as to whether this is good or bad, particularly at low levels, but the fact of the matter is that if you pay for debt with money printing your are in practice taking that value from people who hold cash-denominated (ie. cash, debt etc) non-inflation-protected assets.
At lest your misconception took a base less than a hundred words long
Just as it's okay to print money corresponding to central bank gold reserves, so too it's okay to print money to pay for the construction of the gold mine. Either way currency holders have real gold on the other side of the ledger.
Taking this one step further, it should be okay to print money to fund any enterprise whose output can be traded into gold. For example if we printed money to build a silver mine then the silver could be traded for gold at some ratio, so the currency holders would be in a protected position.
In fact whether the enterprise produces silver, timber, cars or software doesn't really matter as long the output is tradable for gold; and produces enough "gold value" to justify the newly printed currency.
I think the economics on this actually checks out. Although politicians in the real world would realistically use money printing for consumption rather than production.
Any spending can be inflationary if it’s perceived to not be productive.
How that spending is financed is a footnote. Domestic debt works, foreign debt works, but the central bank can also purchase bonds and that works too (and is not inflationary). This is what Japan has been doing for decades to great success.
Not to say that the transition is easy, and if too much of the USs debt is owned by 3rd parties that means that there will be currency value shocks that have to be mitigated.
It does not mean that there will be a crash, or a recession, or a default.
Any money spent by the government in an economy is going to cause a redirection of resources from other actors to its own spending. In an economy running below its normal potential it makes it easy to justify because not much is getting done anyway, but if everyone is already doing a lot of stuff and there's not much spare capacity, then the government is effectively overriding the preferences of private citizens to its own ends to a much greater degree.
There's other arguments as well as to how efficiently the government tends to be at actually getting productive things done with its spending.
It's up to you whether this is good or not, but I'd argue it should not be our default position.
Is there a link/etc to the long form of his argument?
The mostly likely place is probably his autobiography “My Life and Work” where he talks about business/economic ideas quite a bit. Although it could also have been a newspaper article he wrote.
FWIW beware there’s a lot of serious antisemitism in that book. Which is a shame because it stains an otherwise fascinating book about early cars and 20th century business.
The whole issue is basically that, there's no guarantee the political will to never default currently exists, a classic confidence crisis is brewing.
> It will never default
It doesn't have to default, but there have been several near misses vs Republicans who want to deliberately default because they don't understand the implications.
Also, other countries that printed away their debt hyperinflated their currencies, which is just as bad. Even the US can only sustain its level of anti-debt-printing because it's the global reserve currency, and to be the global reserve currency, it needs to have massive trade deficits. Do you see an incompatibility with the way the current regime thinks?
If the US deliberately print money, it will immidiately realize kn the bond market and manifest as higher interest rates.
That is literally what the article explains.