[somenameforme]

Click the link. It's impossible to have a reasonably educated conversation on this topic if you don't even understand how the US exports its inflation. It's an absolutely fundamental part of modern international economics (which is why you'll also find about a zillion links on it).

[camgunz]

I read the top 10 articles from that link, as well as a study on the magnitude of the effect. None of them provide any evidence that printing money in the US (which is inflationary, i.e. it weakens the USD) creates inflation in other countries. Rather they show the opposite: a strengthening USD causes it. Of course this would also happen under a non-fiat currency (imagine say the US just wins a world war), so I still don't know what your point is.

[ANewFormation]

You're fundamentally misunderstanding in a way akin to arguing that 'I've seen no evidence that destroyed homes cause tornadoes.'

The US printing money doesn't allow it to export its inflation, but rather exporting inflation allows the US to print far more money than other countries without comparable inflation. In fact we even relatively economically weaken other countries in the process of it.

This is why countries with comparable debt to GDP ratios are generally in very poor economic shape while the US is near its economic peak in most typical measurements.

But this superpower is fading in ways you presumably now understand, but the decades of money printer go whrrrr, and the unbelievable debt hole it left, remains.

Trying to handle a debt whose interest alone has now exceeded a trillion dollars a year is not going to be realistically possible without funny money or the emergence of some new economy booming industry akin to the birth of computing/internet.

[camgunz]

> The US printing money doesn't allow it to export its inflation, but rather exporting inflation allows the US to print far more money than other countries without comparable consequences.

I didn't see this dynamic outlined in the link OP provided, can you point it out or explain it? Are you just saying when the USD strengthens we have more ability to print money and thus weaken it? If that's case, from a monetary policy point of view, isn't that just avoiding deflation? Or from a trade policy point of view, don't our trading partners want us to print money to weaken the dollar and thus stop exporting inflation?

This line of argument is untethered from reality. Please explain why the US exported inflation pre-Bretton Woods (we totally did) and what you'd do to stop it (nothing, because this is the natural consequence of a currency strengthening, which occurs with or without a fiat system). Please explain why currencies fluctuate even when pegged to commodities (they totally did, deflation was a huge problem in the Great Depression).

> This is why countries with comparable debt to GDP ratios are generally in relatively poor economic shape while the US is near its economic peak in most typical measurements.

Here's a list of countries around the US' ratio:

- Singapore: 1.75

- Greece: 1.59

- Italy: 1.36

- Bahrain: 1.26

- Maldives: 1.21

- US: 1.21

- Laos: 1.15

- Cape Verde: 1.12

- France: 1.11

- Bhutan: 1.11

- Barbados: 1.07

- Spain: 1.06

- Belgium: 1.05

- Canada: 1.04

- UK: 1.01

Is your argument that France, Canada, the UK, Japan, Belgium, Spain, Italy, Greece, and Singapore are all some of the best places on Earth to live despite some deep economic dysfunction (that--again--has produced absolutely no ill effects)? Or are you gonna argue that Bahrain's major problem is their debt-to-GDP ratio?

> the US is near its economic peak in most typical measurements.

> But this superpower is fading in ways you presumably now understand

You can't have it both ways: either 1971 was the beginning of the end or we're currently at peak because of our unique (to be clear it's not at all unique) ability to export inflation. The only argument you (any anyone else on your side) has left is that an unspecified reckoning will come at an unspecified time.

To be less polemic, Piketty postulates that the kind of GDP growth we've experienced the last couple centuries is wildly unsustainable (he gets into like, galactic terms, pretty entertaining). It's likely that growth levels off, like it is in places like the EU, US, China, and Japan, and we'll need new economic policies that don't assume perpetual >5% annual growth. I would guess that means debt to GDP ratios actually start mattering, but I'm not that convinced economists know anything and I know even less than they do, so yeah.

[ANewFormation]

You need to take a break and actually think about what you've claimed to have read about exporting inflation.

A few hours ago you had no clue what it was, and skimming a few articles has not yet meaningfully improved upon that.

FWIW - I wrote this after starting to respond to the strong USD vs exporting inflation nonsense. Again you're having a 'I don't understand why destroyed homes cause tornadoes' moment.

I enjoy a good debate but this nonsense on loop paired with your somewhat bizarre belief that places like Japan are great to live (for average locals) is too much.

[camgunz]

wtfhappenedin1971 has approximately 17,000 graphs showing wage suppression. I will 100% eat shit on this if you can show real evidence that QE (printing money, whatever) is the main cause of wage suppression.

[somenameforme]

It is exactly what has happened over the past 4 years, spread out over 50 more gradually. Since January 2020 CPI is up 23%. If you received a 5% raise each year the past 4 years, you'd have a real lower wage today than you did 4 years ago. People are not inclined to complain about "gifts" of raises, yet those raises quantifiably do not keep pace with inflation. The problem is that this is invisible for the vast majority of people. How can I be earning less even though I'm now making $xxxx more than last year? Workers' wages stagnate while companies are able to reap the benefits of reduced labor costs.

You can also see this with things like the minimum wage. In 1968 the federal minimum wage was $1.60. Inflation adjusted that's $14.42. Places like California/Washington think they're being progressive with their minimum wage ideas, but it's simply trying to take us back to before 1971, except with all of the problems that the 50 years in between have caused such that the quality of life that money will provids will likely remain dramatically lower than it would have provided in 1971.