|
|
|
|
|
by rogersnm
1332 days ago
|
|
I think you can decompose stock into 'money that is in circulation', and 'money that is not'. In some sense, the only relevant partition is the quantity of money that is actually in circulation. If I take $100bn of cash and bury it and hide the map, I haven't actually decreased the quantity of money (the total amount that exists), but I have effectively decreased the quantity of money (the amount that is in circulation). > i take a loan at 2% to save in my bank’s savings offer of 5.25% then flow stays the same (i still spend on the same things each month) but money supply went up Arguably the quantity of money the bank has created for you depends on the bank's net lending to you, so if you borrow money but hold it at the same institution, you haven't really increased the money supply at all. |
|
Yeah thats the bit i’m trying to get my ahead around. Specifically:
>> It's arguably both a stock problem and a flow problem
I’m thinking the key variable here is flow
>>> it's a flow problem
You cant have inflation without increased flow, but i’m still wondering about stock because it’s not as simple as just excess money.
Perhaps it is correct enough to just frame it as a flow problem, since that variable is always dominant in every inflation scenario.
> depends on the bank's net lending to you
Yeah that makes sense, so my example should have been a loan from one bank and a savings account at another