“Throw it into an index fund. Let it compound.”
These people don’t understand the underlying problem.
They have no idea why index funds have been compounding, what that looks like compared to real inflation, and how such solutions will solve NOTHING.
I disagree, even if assets prices are increased by Quantive Easing the fact that the money is put into some assets that pay dividends it allows more money to be reinvested.
Personally, I think something like this would be preferable over social security, or other public pension schemes that have or are failing.
Calpers, UK Pension, Japan Pension systems are failing.
You can disagree, I’ll counter you with this: nostr:note1qhwup26v95aqg75m6pkgtksls7rx3k8u0xef3zt78twc38un3phswgp0w9
You can’t taper a Ponzi.
You sure as shit can’t taper a Ponzi, measured in Ponzi units.
Money has to be dispersed through the economy or else economic activity would slow down to a standstill.
Unfortunately, The People in charge of Monetary, and Fiscal policy have made poor decisions.
I of course favor a return to more sound currencies like Gold, Bitcoin, and Monero however.
Stocks will still play a role in the new crypto economy, and Kraken is building that.
Money is at all times dispersed throughout the economy - there is no such thing as circulation. Whether people decide to hold or spend that money is an individual decision at all times.
And at all times some people desire some of the goods and services that money can buy more than the representation of those goods and services (the money itself).
This idea you’re spouting is Keynesian nonsense. It has been debunked a million times.
That stocks will continue to exist is nothing to do with the point under discussion.
The reason people criticize inflation is because they don't realize it's necessary to encourage spending.
Excess inflation is of course bad because it devalues the currency.
That being said some monetary inflation is better than monetary deflation overall.
To clarify prices going down is good but it's beneficial when it's productivity based deflation as seen in technology sectors.
None of this should be handled by government.
Up until around the late 19th century, it was charity - largely through churches - that took care of those who could not support themselves, for all the various reasons universal to fallen mankind.
And, no, I’m not suggesting we shift funding from XYZ program to churches and not-for-profits. (And I applaud VP Vance for calling our own bishops out of running this game for the last 50+ years).
We - each, individually - need to put our money where our mouths and hearts are.
It was primarily taken care of by families, charities stepped in to fill the void where needed. In Australia for example we had “granny flats” where a small detached unit was put on the block so the oldies could live with the working age family unit.
This is still the case in Asia where parents don’t kick the kids out of home at 18 and their houses are designed for multi level living.
It needs to return to the family rather than the Government being ersatz parents for people who depend on them their entire lives and thus effectively never grow up.
Yes. Family first is exactly what is needed. Would take care of most.
Just print more sterlingdoos and throw them into an index fund! 😆😆😆 The government could pay all the debt that way!
Why bother when we can just "let it compound"? We can all be trillionaires, like in Zimbabwe!
