pull down to refresh

So, I am not an economist, but bear with me.
The money multiplier is defined as the money in circulation (being actively used as medium of exchange) vs the base money quantity. In a floating exchange rate regime, is it the money in circulation that determines the supply (as in, how abundant a specific currency is)?
So Tether stable coins (if used extensively for buying/selling goods) seem to add to the USD M2, especially if they get widespread acceptance so that you can buy a house or car around with them. Does it mean, by virtue of those stablecoins, the USD will have a much larger multiplier than, let's say, GBP?
Thus, will the effect be to reduce the dollar index on the margin?
If I remember correctly my econ classes, the multiplier exists because of fractional reserves in banks. Your $100 on deposit creates $90 in loans, those are deposited to create $81 in loans, etc etc. So $100 of initial deposit becomes $1000 (x10) moving through the economy. 100 USDT locked $100 on deposits, and those can only be lended to the US government. So the multiplier is x1.
reply
5 sats \ 0 replies \ @freetx 14h
Well its a good question to ask, but remember that new laws governing stablecoins (ie. GENIUS act) mandates a 1:1 backing with US Treasuries.
So the USDT that are coming into creation are ultimately flowing into treasury purchases. In theory this isn't representing a new creation of money, but instead its just swapping hands something like: Existing USD -> Tether -> US Gov.
The interest portion of the US Treasuries created "in theory" has a deflationary effect.
Really this entire question revolves around Full-Reserve vs Fractional Reserve banking.....we have been under a regime of Frac Reserve for the past 100 or so years. Clearly Frac Reserve is inflationary (ie. money multiplier effect from relatively low reserve ratios). In "theory" Full Reserve banking should not be inflationary.
reply