[autoexec]

The problem is that people don't have "extra" money, they have record amounts of debit and rising homelessness. The depressingly small amount of money people got in aid from the government kept their lights on, kept food on the table, and helped them transition to working/schooling at home at a time when they couldn't go to work and had no income at all.

What little "extra" money made it into the hands of regular Americans isn't and never was the problem and while most people here are well insulated from the hardships, Americans are seeing their quality of life decline and are having to struggle in ways they never had to before. The American people are not sitting on huge piles of free government money while bitching about the price of eggs. The middle class is struggling (and sliding into poverty) and poorer Americans are even worse off.

[Rury]

You're right in that (some) people don't have "extra" money. Most people can't print themselves money.

However, some people do have "extra" money, particularly people who have access to the money printer, or who are bailed out by the people with the money printer. Guess who buys most of the government debt, allowing the government to overspend? The Fed.

Government spending isn't in a vacuum either. Every dollar the government spends goes into someone else's pocket, who they go on to further spend it. And the government doesn't spend it's money equally, meaning not everyone gets that "free money" equally, which means, some people are getting the short end of the stick, as others are getting richer because of it.

If you want to know how the rich get richer, while the poor get poorer, this is how.

[autoexec]

I can't argue that government spending isn't a problem. It really is. In particular it's where the money is going, how it's being accounted for, and how much benefit the average American sees from that which is way out of whack.

The pandemic had the government printing a ton of money and handing it out to some very rich people, but does giving more money to a person who already had enough money to afford whatever they want really drive up the prices on a gallon of milk?

[Rury]

It does. Think for example, if you had worked hard 30 years to acquire a $250,000 house, and the government just gave everyone $500k overnight. Would you think it's fair they could pay $250k for your house for not having worked for 30 years, while you had to? Probably not. Instead you'd likely raise the selling price of your house to protect the value of your hard work. Same goes for companies that produce milk.

Obviously an oversimplified example, as again not everyone is benefitting the same amongst other reasons, but that's basically the principle behind it.

[arcticbull]

People don't save money, they save value. I don't know anyone who would recommend saving up $250K to make a down payment entirely as cash, because of course you're losing money to inflation. Given the huge run-up in equities over the last 30 years chances are you'd only have had to save up a small fraction of that had you invested it. And the more fiscal stimulus that went out, the more stocks went up.

[Rury]

I never mentioned about saving up $250k to buy a house entirely in cash. I said working 30 years to acquire a $250k house. It's about protecting value of your hard work - your equity. And regardless, it was hyperbole to show why prices rise when money is freely given out.