How is printing money stealing? Who exactly is being stolen from? (Not endorsing altcoins by the way)
Discussion
Agreed printing money is only stealing if you can force people to use it
This is an oversimplification, but basically money printing decreases the value of your money because it increases the supply of money. Your $100 can't by the same amount of stuff that it could before.
The government wants to spend money on something, but instead of increasing taxes to pay for it (which the citizenry would presumably know about), they print money. Suppose it's 2% inflation rate. your $100 can now only buy $98 of goods and services. They've taken $2 in buying power from you, without your consent. They've stolen $2 from you. (Had they proposed a 2% tax, you would've been more likely to say no, so they fund projects in this way instead.)
Again, this is an oversimplification. But that's the basic idea.
You’re making 2 big assumptions here:
1. That price inflation is caused only by an increase in the money supply vs. supply-demand imbalances
2. That there’s no benefit to you and me from government spending
Even if we were on a #Bitcoin standard, what would stop the egg producer from charging you 250 sats for a carton of eggs to 500 sats? Would the egg producer be “stealing” from you too?
I said it was an oversimplification. Maybe to the point that it’s not a useful analogy (?) - but you asked what they meant. I think that’s what they mean when they say that.
I understand that you can price inflation under any monetary system.
I’m not seeing how (2) is relevant though. If there’s benefit to theft, it doesn’t take it not theft. If you steal five dollars from everyone and put in a park, it doesn’t mean you didn’t steal five dollars.
Maybe the best good-faith way to put it is this: The “theft” is the extent to which monetary inflation causes the non-consensual decrease in buying power of the monetary energy a citizenry has accumulated.
My point 2 was because you said “they’ve taken $2 in buying power from you.” That implies government spending is a zero-sum game where some mysterious “they” is feeding off our hard-earned money, while I would argue it’s not.
"They" are the government. And they are not that mysterious. Or would you disagree? Are you trying to make #[5] look like a conspiracy theorist, because your arguments lack common sense?
I was just objecting to the implication that taxation for the purpose of govt spending is zero-sum. Fortunately we don’t live in a society where government officials simply pocket our tax dollars for their own personal benefit. And if they do, they go to jail.
He never implied that. You just assumed the implication and you still do after he refuted it plainly:
"I’m not seeing how (2) is relevant though. If there’s benefit to theft, it doesn’t take it not theft. If you steal five dollars from everyone and put in a park, it doesn’t mean you didn’t steal five dollars. "
If you guys wanna call taxation “theft,” be my guest. I’d call it part of a social compact
Lol a social compact that you get thrown in prison for breaking if you disagree with.
And there’s no opt out.
Kinda like slavery was a social compact yeah? Lmao
Yes. Taxation is just like slavery. How ignorant of me to not realize that. Thanks for enlightening me
I’m confused, friend. I never said taxation was theft. I don’t think it is. In fact, I used taxation as the case in which government collecting money from its citizenry is explicitly *not* theft. It’s based, in principle, on the consent of the governed.
Happy to give you the last word here. 🍻
Ok. But I still don’t see how expansion of the money supply is “theft.” For example, the money supply increased dramatically after the pandemic. But was that “theft” or a necessary step to rescue the economy?
Right. I don’t think I implied that. If i did, then I certainly didn’t mean to.
The first assumption is not necessary.
Money printing always dilutes the value of the money that is already in existence. It does not matter what the CPI says. Even if CPI is negative and we experience an overall price decrease, printing money is still diluting the value of the existing money. Preventing an even more pronounced price decrease.
#[5] does not make the second assumption at all. He's just saying that money printing is stealing. Arguing "but what if I sometimes benefit from being stolen from" is not arguing against that fact that you are being stolen from. It just says you like to be stolen from by the government, because you think they make better use of your money than you can yourself. That's a personal choice. And btw. inflation comes on top of the already existing taxes.
Your comparison with the egg producer is nonsensical. Luckily it highlights the importance of bitcoin though.
The egg producer can charge whatever he wants. If he charges more than his competition, I'll buy at the competition and he'll change his mind or goes broke.
There is no competition in FIAT Money though. The government forces you to use their currency. If you don't, you go to jail. That is why bitcoin is important as competition to keep them honest.
Should they, like the egg producer ramp up the money supply by 50%, I have the option to use the competing currency called bitcoin instead of being fucked over by their decision.
My second point is in fact very sensical. Many Bitcoiners claim that with a Bitcoin standard there won’t be inflation. That is the non-sensical claim. Prices can still go up on a Bitcoin standard because of supply-demand imbalances. Look at what the avian flu outbreak is doing to the price of eggs now. That’s not a result of one egg producer being greedy. It’s the result of not enough eggs for all the people who want eggs at any given moment.
Of course price increases and decreases can happen due to events like these. Bitcoiners have a problem with money printing. Not with temporary supply-demand imbalances.
Not my convo but there are several types of inflation. Your egg example is price inflation which has nothing to do with monetary inflation, ie. money printing.
Yes, exactly. Many Bitcoiners erroneously blame price inflation on an increase in the money supply.
An increase in the money supply can cause price inflation, however your example was the price of eggs do to supply disruption which is different.
The more money printed, the more it will cost generally for everything and the harder you will have to work to get products.
The difference between endless fiat money printing and the bitcoin standard is the fixed supply. The price of eggs can go up or down based on their supply but not up or down based on bitcoins supply which is fixed.
I don't know your level of understanding so I explained it like I would to a 5th grader. No offense.
I run a full node and majored in Econ. But thanks anyway. My point is many Bitcoiners erroneously think price increases won’t happen on a Bitcoin standard precisely because they think that an increase in the money supply causes all price increases. That’s what I was originally objecting to in the initial post as the first flawed assumption
Increasing Money supply is the reason why everything gets expensive over time.
Everyone using it, I guess. If there is $100 on earth and I own $10 because I invested my lifetime to earn it, so I own 10% of the whole money supply.
If someone prints $100 more. The money supply is $200. Now I have only 5% of it.
While your Stack becomes less in percentage, goods become more expensive because of the expansion of the money supply.
One way is through inflation.