> what's the difference between a pile of magically printed money and a bigger pile of magical printed money?


same as between one pile of sand and another!

denlillaapan

Maybe this was true 50 years ago. But we haven't seen a balanced budget in 25 years. People don't even argue about balancing the budget anymore. It's just arguing about what we're going to take on more debt to do. And if we are just going to take on more debt, are there actually any trade offs worth discussing?

I don't believe that adding $1.5 trillion to US debt is materially different from adding $3 trillion. Neither is sustainable if the fed isn't gonna cover the hole, and if it 

 going to cover the hole, what's the difference between a pile of magically printed money and a bigger pile of magical printed money?

econ

No Easy End to Easy Money (FT, Rana Foroohar)

> > To do that would require serious “guns and butter” conversations about budgetary trade-offs, as well as a Congress and a White House willing and able to have them.

Maybe this was true 50 years ago. But we haven't seen a balanced budget in 25 years. People don't even argue about balancing the budget anymore. It's just arguing about what we're going to take on more debt to do. And if we are just going to take on more debt, are there actually any trade offs worth discussing? 

I don't believe that adding $1.5 trillion to US debt is materially different from adding $3 trillion. Neither is sustainable if the fed isn't gonna cover the hole, and if it *is* going to cover the hole, what's the difference between a pile of magically printed money and a bigger pile of magical printed money?