Reply #12: Am I opposed to monetary growth? Of course not. Is Qualitative Easing 'growth'? Not in my opinion [View All]

[ixion]

because all you're doing is printing and/or borrowing more money, which isn't growth. So-called 'growth' is organic. It is not a constant, and it does not always move forward. There are expansions and contractions, and what we're in need of now, again, in my opinion, is a return to real market value. Real market value is not what we have now. What we have now is the result of roughly 30 years of Wall St. gaming the stock market via speculation, shady investment vehicles (CDO's, CDS's and so on), and voodoo economics.

If the US were sitting on massive reserves of capital, I would have no problem with release more cash into the market (although I believe it's effects only help large corps, not so much the working folks), but as it is, we don't have said reserves, so we're just printing more money 'cause we can. It's a basic macro-economic tenant that the more cash you have in the marketplace, the more devalued the currency becomes (because it's more diluted), so while this 'easing' may make the banks happy, it's long term effect is to increase our debt, which is bad. I AM opposed to increasing debt, because I believe we spend too much on the military, MIC and related verticals, and that if our government managed it's money better, we wouldn't have to borrow.

Again, that is not the case.

As for 'targets', I believe this is an artificial concept that doesn't really apply to a truly organic economy, and I'm sure you'll disagree with that. ;)