I agree with your findings and would add that the purpose of public spending has to be monitored: if it will stimulate any kind of activity that results in labour, we should not worry too much. However, we should restrict public spending as soon as inflation is caused by declining productivity. I understand that most of the COVID-related spending programs so far are intended to result in preserving productivity levels. In my opinion crypto is more likely to play a role in terms of fair distribution of wealth rather than as an alternative to inflation-prone fiat money.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I think it's misleading to call the corona relief money stimulus money. The idea is not to actually stimulate the economy but to keep all the tens of millions (in the US context) people laid off because of the lockdown orders from going bankrupt or starving. To oppose such relief money being paid directly to citizens who have lost their jobs and who have no hope of finding new jobs under the current situation, you'd have to be evil or stupid. And I don't see any reason why such small sums of money would cause consumer price inflation. What I do believe, however, is that the Fed's buying of corporate debt will worsen the already existing disconnect between the real economy and financial asset valuations. That is unavoidable to a degree but anyone in crypto should feel happy about it because it makes stocks equally speculative to crypto, crypto being the superior speculative asset, of course.