Trump wants to add 2.6trill to the money supply. Is he retarded? Ever hear of Weimar?

Trump wants to add 2.6trill to the money supply. Is he retarded? Ever hear of Weimar?

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.is/bNTk8
businessinsider.com/trump-tax-reform-could-lead-to-more-buybacks-not-pro-growth-spending-2016-11
twitter.com/AnonBabble

German Walmart?

Nah dawd. Weimarshnitzel. Like in the chilli dogs.

No, that money already exists and affects or money. If it were added back into the domestic market instead of sitting in and enriching other countries, it would have a massively positive effect on our economic health.

This, OP is a faggot

The majority of American voters never heard of Germany 1933 which is why Trump is President.

Money scares me

I can dispose of it for you, for a fee of course.

He's not printing new money into existence retard, he's bringing money that already exists overseas back here.

confusing adding 3T to the money supply with bringing home 3T.

kek

Are you retarded? Obama literally printed more money than that. Printed it out of thin air and used it to bail out banks

The Weimar Repubik experienced hyperinflation because the government printed more money.
Bringing American dollars back to the country from abroad is different from that.

the money exists, but it is being hoarded. If it enters the domestic markets, it will disperse to more and more people, who will become richer therefore increasing inflation.

If the population has more money, price of goods goes up. Right now, the population doesn't have access to this money. Only a few select people have it stashed away.

are you completely retarded? the money doesn't go to the "population"

This. Obama was the retard (with the aid of Yellen) who printed more money. We went from 1 and change Ts to over 4T during his presidency. We're in for some fun times.

>trump could

but he won't do anything except keep the status quo going

you fail econ 101

kys

except he's exactly correct

if years of quantitative easing didn't cause inflation I don't see how this could

t. expert on inflationary policies

its spreads to more and more people instead of one person not using it.
you are literally retarded

It's sad that you believe something as intellectually devoid as this.

This isn't the same as printing money you dumb faggot

wooooop woooooop
Idiot alert. Idiot alert.

Can somebody who has a degree in econ explain how it is bad to bring bad money? Btw, stop larping when you hit that reply button

*bring BACK money

It's not.

>I slept through macro the post

Are you retarded?

There is no way it is bad, for America, for that money to exist inside of America instead of outside.

He what?
Okay, guess we'll be paying $1,000 for a bag of chips soon

Nice!

our system preys on those with little money, when a new influx of money comes into play, the powers at work basically panic if they aren't in control of the new money supply and raise rates

If it's owned by a handful of people and corporations, how is it going to be distributed?

>Instead of bringing existing money back into our economy, we'll just print more!

Good work. You think economics works in the exact opposite way it really works!!

what do you mean distributed

For a country to run, money has to flow. A person earns money, he spends it on stuff, company makes money, spends it on paying person.

Countries in which money from other countries come in see a huge benefit for that cycle. Countries in which money flows out to other countries see that cycle become weaker.

Bringing 3T of money back into the system is a huge benefit to the US.

It's sad that you still take Leaf posters seriously

By that logic, printing $12 trillion in Quantitative Easing should have made chips about $6,000

>The numbers are daunting if not shocking: $12.3 trillion of money printing, nearly $10 trillion in negative-yielding global bonds, 654 interest rate cuts since Lehman Brothers collapsed in 2008.

archive.is/bNTk8

see

He claims "it will disperse to more and more people"

Wouldn't the repatriated money go to his infrastructure plan anyway?

...

then assume it doesn't

what does it matter where its located

>1933 Germany
or
>Soviet Union
the choice is easy. The American Miracle is upon us

To the government it matters because they can't tax it.

If American wages go up you can go on vacation cheaper and import things cheaper.

>TRUMP IS A POPULIST
>CLINTON WON THE POPULAR VOTE, SHE HAD THE VOTE OF THE PEOPLE

People will still mostly stash it away, trickle-down economics doesn't work as advertised. But it will make corporations more economically healthy by giving them massive capital injections, thus stabilizing the economy.

>suddenly republicans are for taxation

make up your minds

I really hope he doesn't try to pay off the fed debt. would get ugly.

Idiot fuck! He is not printing new money. Just shut the fuck up

Not a Jew. Confirmed.

Why do Canadians make some stupid fucking posts

When it's for supposedly American countries that don't even produce anything in the US, yeah, tax the fuck out of them.

It caused particular prices to rise rapidly: housing and stock prices.

Increasing of the supply of a good diminishes the price of a good. If this good is money, the phenomenon is called inflation. Albeit it is highly debatable how much.

The FED has literally been injecting trillions of dollars over the past 8 years with a very aggressive monetary policy.

Inflation didn't happen and it won't happen if corporations bring back their money because there is such a thing as money velocity which also matters.

Long story short, people are broke and aren't taking out loans as massively as they did years ago. This means most of the money is stuck in the banks and never reaches the real economy which in turn means prices don't rise. Instead, money is thrown into the stock market which is the place where prices have soared.

This is all academic in any case. The FED closely monitors inflation and if they suspect that inflation might get out of hand, they'll raise interest rates and that will be the end of it.

>It caused particular prices to rise rapidly: housing and stock prices.

yeah because the hoarded money is accounted for in the inflation numbers, dumb fuck

if they don't produce anything here then why does it matter if their money needs to be here?

Because their headquarters are based in the US.

kek this is why public teachers' unions need to back off on tenure.

The entire tragedy of the Weimar Republic happened because the 2 biggest established powers, the SPD and Zentrum (renamed to CDU after the war), were losing in the polls and instead of ceding power to a more national oriented moderate party, they decided to use the popularity of a well-beloved war hero of germany by making him president of parliament. This backfired when that president enabled Hitler to move into power.

Had the establishment ceded power to another party instead of desperately clinging to power, the anti-establishment sentiment in the voters could have been safely contained. Instead they escalated it and caused the voters to choose a more radical party: the NSDAP.

Today, the establishment of Germany once again consists of SPD and CDU (formerly Zentrum) and again they have to compromise on their integrity to stay in power by keeping a "popular" chancelor on top (Merkel). And again the voters are voting for more radical parties (AfD).

The american voters, ignorant of history as most people, have used the chance to vote for a moderate anti-establishment candidate in Trump which might have prevented a tragedy in the future that we now will never see become reality.

TL DR: The Republic of Weimar fell because the establishment would not let go of their power, causing the people to vote for radicals. Trump is not a radical.

You upside-down Aussies should try standing on your heads so the blood goes back to your brains, then try reading it again.

Controlled deflation

Screen cap this

>if you have more money, you lose

doubtful, most companies move their headquarters out of the US

even so, there's nothing that says that money has to be here

I wonder if this sum includes money kept offshore to keep them off the books not merely for tax purposes but for criminal purposes that _still_ wouldn't be repatriated?

No, this is fully declared money that american companies made outside of the US but can not bring back under the current laws.

This is making companies like apple and microsoft with billions of dollars on "the books" go to the banks to beg for money. It is retarded to keep it out

It's in one big pile and will be used for business expansion, increasing competition, lowering prices, and increasing wages.

t. not an economics idealogue

Because they're retarded.

It's already in the supply, idiot.

>what is artificial stimulation
>what is the repatriatization of capital

>If it enters the domestic markets, it will disperse to more and more people

hahahahahahhahah

why in the fuck would it disperse to anyone? what are they going to spend it on? you realize the fed has been giving away free money for eight fucking years?

god Sup Forums is so retarded sometimes

>he money exists, but it is being hoarded. If it enters the domestic markets, it will disperse to more and more people, who will become richer therefore increasing inflation.
this is true honestly.

this is how the jews have managed to control inflation.

along with the (((fed)))

>the money exists, but it is being hoarded. If it enters the domestic markets, it will disperse to more and more people, who will become richer therefore increasing inflation.

actually the same people will keep hoarding it, but in America. so very little effect.

>AfD
>radicals

>This is making companies like apple and microsoft with billions of dollars on "the books" go to the banks to beg for money.
Are you sure about that?
>The fact that Goldman says companies are about to spend a ton of money that way next year tells us that they're worried about economic growth and profits.

>And they have plenty of reason to worry too. Earnings have been on the decline for years, and next year's outlook isn't much better. Plus, borrowing costs are going up, not just because the Federal Reserve will likely raise interest rates, but also because markets are anticipating that Trump will throw money at a stimulus package, resulting in inflation. His tough stance on trade is also inflationary, according to analysts at Deutsche Bank.
businessinsider.com/trump-tax-reform-could-lead-to-more-buybacks-not-pro-growth-spending-2016-11

>can not bring back under the current laws.
Oh, and I forgot to note that they have always been able to, ie. they _can_ bring it back, but they choose not to for one reason or another the most obvious to avoid tax.

...and the majority of Canadian voters make retarded posts like this.

I award you 1 moose point for the day. Don't spend it all in one place now, dummy.

Actually they're based in Ireland for tax evasion practices. Most of the stuff that actually matters like research stay in the US though.

We printed 4 trillion in quantitative easing and inflation wasn't that bad.

>Are you sure about that?
yes, pretty sure

Microsoft has to pay 9B to buy a 27B company with money from outside the country. So yes, they can bring it in, but they would be retarded to.

And how is your pic linked to anything Trump has proposed rather than an independent event?

>why in the fuck would it disperse to anyone? what are they going to spend it on?

Because Trump wants to do fiscal policy with it. You know, the Big Beautiful Wall, that kind of shit. Not sure if you noticed but Trump is at odds with his own party. He wants to build infrastructure but the newly elected congress is full of the same fiscal hawk cocksuckers that gridlocked Obama for 8 years. Repatriation of taxes means he won't need to fight his own party over the debt ceiling.

I don't think what he wants to do is even remotely possible though.

Have you been following this thread at all? What do you think are the 2.6T Op is talking about?

Trump is proposing to lower taxes significantly on money companies bring back into the united states from oversees. They estimate companies are going to bring back almost 3Trillion dollars.

That means that companies like Microsoft and Apple will not have to go to the banks to borrow money, they will be able to bring in their money instead

>Have you been following this thread at all? What do you think are the 2.6T Op is talking about?
Yes, I have and thus why I asked you how the two are linked? I ask because I can tell from the pic that they are not.
>Microsoft is now seeking a loan to complete the purchase of LinkedIn, a move that would help the comany avoid a tax of 35 percent when bringing case into the country from overseas accounts.
In other words, they are borrowing money INDEPENDENTLY of Trump's proposed policy that would affect that 35% tax. Microsoft is acting on the basis that the 35% tax is and will still be in effect and thus your reliance on the picture does not support your assertion that companies are going to borrow money due to Trump's policy.

Best ancap

you do realize that Trump's proposal is just that, a proposal right?

Right now there is a 35% tax on repatriating money, so companies like apple and microsoft with billions of dollars on the books have to go to the banks to loan money.

Once Trump passes a law that makes repatriating money cheaper than going to the bank to loan money these companies will not have to go to the banks to loan money.

Does that make more sense now?

>its spreads to more and more people instead of one person not using it.
>trickle down economics works after all

>you do realize that Trump's proposal is just that, a proposal right?
Yes. Do you have a point?

>Right now there is a 35% tax on repatriating money, so companies like apple and microsoft with billions of dollars on the books have to go to the banks to loan money.
And if Trump's proposal becomes actual they will still have to go to the banks to borrow money (I hope you are not confused and saying that they have to go to the banks to loan out money).

>Once Trump passes a law that makes repatriating money cheaper than going to the bank to loan money
Let's get this straight. You are abandoning your previous "evidence" and relying simply on repeating the same assertion?

>Does that make more sense now?
No more than when you asserted the same thing previously and was refuted with evidence to the contrary. Actually makes less sense if you are actually abandoning your evidence as it seems you are rejecting the refutation out of hand, ie. being closed minded.

get the fuck out CTR faggot we love trump here and hes doing smart shit stop twisting libshit headlines

Compared to the current norm, the AfD is, in fact, radical. Thing is, the more the government denies the people the ability to react radically to their actions, the more radical the options are going to become. The AfD is still the "nice" radical option. If the AfD fails and the establishment doesn't correct it's course by themselves, the AfD or another party will become more radical in response and the disgruntled voters will flock to that, just to punish the establishment. Eventually all sense and reason will be abandoned just to fuck the other side over and then the !!!FUN!!! begins.

Oh, and just an FYI, current commercial loans are around the 3-13% rate in the US (depending on security) which is STILL lower than the proposed 15% tax rate, ie. Microsoft, Apple, etc. would STILL go to the banks to "loan" money.

Underrated. I find it hilarious how simple the arguments are against reining in corporate greed. "We're just going to fuck you over one way or another. If you struggle less you'll suffer less."

yeah, you are retarded.

>And if trumps proposal becomes actual they will still have to go to the banks to borrow money.
no they won't, they will bring back money from outside the country instead of borrowing money.

These large companies don't go to the banks to get loans the same way you do. They issue bonds that under the current global economy wield negative, so it's free money for them.

>American education

>These large companies don't go to the banks to get loans the same way you do
You are claiming I am confusing the difference between personal loans and commercial loans EVEN AFTER I EXPRESSLY MADE THE POINT ABOUT COMMERCIAL LOANS?

And you have the effrontery to call other people retarded.

I'm more a fan of Led Zeppelin IV

Uh I didn't call anyone retarded. Just saying that Apple is not going to the banks to borrow money with 13% interest rates. They borrow with negative.

Kek

>The american voters, ignorant of history as most people, have used the chance to vote for a moderate anti-establishment candidate in Trump which might have prevented a tragedy in the future that we now will never see become reality.
>he thinks Trump is going to do anything but forestall the inevitable
If anything it's going to be worse because the immigrants will keep coming and the US will become no longer a white majority. It's going to be bloodier and more violent when this stuff sparks up again in a couple of decades, if that.

Sorry. I got your retardedness confused with the Spanish flagged retard.