Why not just print dollars?

[Rostadom]

What has the bigger value? Something that's common everywhere or something rare found in a very few places? I think you see where I'm going with this. Also, that's how inflation works, you just print out money and it becomes worthless.

Depends. If bitcoin has become common everywhere, then the price will surely shoot up since that's how demand and supply works. If only a couple of people knew about bitcoins, then the price will just be a couple of cents/dollars. I mean, fiat is common everywhere but it surely has a decent value. Rarity is not the only thing that people are considering. Something can be so rare but if it doesn't have a use or it's not attractive at all, then people wouldn't give it that much attention.

Not sure how does "how common" something is (or simply popularity) make something inflated. It's the quantity and not the popularity that causes inflation. You were basically referring to two different things.

[frowsiter]

It's like very common stuff to do really. It has regulations by government and it costs you money to print money. Bitcoin is rare and has value way lot than any other currency.

[deisik]

If this is true, its impossible for a nation to "print" its way out of deficit or debt as its currency will devalue off supply increasing

This is not quite so

If this debt is denominated in the same currency that you happen to issue, you can easily "return" this debt by printing as much money as needed. In fact, outright printing money is one of the ways of deficit financing, though in normal (more or less) situations normal governments rarely stick to it (Zimbabwean dollar is a glaring example what such monetary policy is set to eventually end in). On the other hand, in extreme cases such as all-out wars, the policy of printing money for financing military as well as other expenses is universal across the world. From Roman Empire to Weimar Republic authorities had been doing that

[Hydrogen]

Actually, that's not true.

When a debt is issued, it is issued for that amount of money and it cannot really be modified, unless stated, aside from interest accumulating. As such, if you have the ability to print your own money and take out a loan, and you take out a $10 loan in "funnymoney" but you lose those $10, you can print $10 and pay it back, but there are $20 of "funnymoney" in circulation. They just lose a lot of their value. The debt can't change itself to match the exchange rate and you can print yourself out of debt, it just really damages your economy if you have to do that.

Would you go so far as to say the united states being $20 trillion in debt is irrelevent?

"The american treasury can print a single $20 trillion dollar bill to take care of it?"

The reason I say its impossible for a nation to print its way out of deficit and debt is: I can't remember a single instance of it happening throughout history.

Its easy to create anecdotal examples of how a country might print its way out of debt.

But in the real world, things never happen that way.

This is not quite so

If this debt is denominated in the same currency that you happen to issue, you can easily "return" this debt by printing as much money as needed. In fact, outright printing money is one of the ways of deficit financing, though in normal (more or less) situations normal governments rarely stick to it (Zimbabwean dollar is a glaring example what such monetary policy is set to eventually end in). On the other hand, in extreme cases such as all-out wars, the policy of printing money for financing military as well as other expenses is universal across the world. From Roman Empire to Weimar Republic authorities had been doing that

How does a nation print debt away without incurring hyperinflation, and when has this happened in history?

 

[MingLee]

Actually, that's not true.

When a debt is issued, it is issued for that amount of money and it cannot really be modified, unless stated, aside from interest accumulating. As such, if you have the ability to print your own money and take out a loan, and you take out a $10 loan in "funnymoney" but you lose those $10, you can print $10 and pay it back, but there are $20 of "funnymoney" in circulation. They just lose a lot of their value. The debt can't change itself to match the exchange rate and you can print yourself out of debt, it just really damages your economy if you have to do that.

Would you go so far as to say the united states being $20 trillion in debt is irrelevent?

"The american treasury can print a single $20 trillion dollar bill to take care of it?"

The reason I say its impossible for a nation to print its way out of deficit and debt is: I can't remember a single instance of it happening throughout history.

Its easy to create anecdotal examples of how a country might print its way out of debt.

But in the real world, things never happen that way.

This is not quite so

If this debt is denominated in the same currency that you happen to issue, you can easily "return" this debt by printing as much money as needed. In fact, outright printing money is one of the ways of deficit financing, though in normal (more or less) situations normal governments rarely stick to it (Zimbabwean dollar is a glaring example what such monetary policy is set to eventually end in). On the other hand, in extreme cases such as all-out wars, the policy of printing money for financing military as well as other expenses is universal across the world. From Roman Empire to Weimar Republic authorities had been doing that

How does a nation print debt away without incurring hyperinflation, and when has this happened in history?

 

Weimar Germany, just after WW1, is the most recent reference for history where a country was literally printing itself out of debt. It didn't work out completely in the end, but they got rid of a decent portion out of debt before the political game caught up to them and they had to re-evaluate their currency and change their behavior.
And yes, the Americans can print $20T, it's just they won't because it brings other issues.

[deisik]

This is not quite so

If this debt is denominated in the same currency that you happen to issue, you can easily "return" this debt by printing as much money as needed. In fact, outright printing money is one of the ways of deficit financing, though in normal (more or less) situations normal governments rarely stick to it (Zimbabwean dollar is a glaring example what such monetary policy is set to eventually end in). On the other hand, in extreme cases such as all-out wars, the policy of printing money for financing military as well as other expenses is universal across the world. From Roman Empire to Weimar Republic authorities had been doing that

How does a nation print debt away without incurring hyperinflation, and when has this happened in history?

It happens every time whenever there is a major war

Every nation had been doing essentially the same throughout history in such circumstances. During the American Civil war the Union had been printing the greenbacks just like their opponents, the Confederates, printed the graybacks like there was no tomorrow (and there really hadn't been tomorrow for the latter). In these cases hyperinflation is a postponed effect which may never come at all. If you lose a war your money is gone anyway, if you win you just plunder the other side, thus squashing inflation with the loot and boot. The "worst" case is when there is no winner as well as no loser, and then governments must squeeze the monetary base if they don't want runaway inflation to overrun them

And yes, the Americans can print $20T, it's just they won't because it brings other issues.

They don't need to print 20T dollars (actually, only around 7T) since this is not a debt as we are told or made to believe, this is in fact a payment or contribution of the world (some part thereof) to the US. Japan, the largest holder of the US debt as of now, is an outright dependent state, a vassal and slave of Uncle Sam, they are doing what they are told. China is essentially in the same position since it heavily depends on the US both economically and technologically

[MingLee]

This is not quite so

If this debt is denominated in the same currency that you happen to issue, you can easily "return" this debt by printing as much money as needed. In fact, outright printing money is one of the ways of deficit financing, though in normal (more or less) situations normal governments rarely stick to it (Zimbabwean dollar is a glaring example what such monetary policy is set to eventually end in). On the other hand, in extreme cases such as all-out wars, the policy of printing money for financing military as well as other expenses is universal across the world. From Roman Empire to Weimar Republic authorities had been doing that

How does a nation print debt away without incurring hyperinflation, and when has this happened in history?

It happens every time whenever there is a major war

Every nation had been doing essentially the same throughout history in such circumstances. The Union had been printing greenbacks in the American Civil wat just like their opponents, the Confederates, did the same. In these cases hyperinflation is a postponed effect which may never come. If you lose a war, your money is gone anyway, if you win you just plunder the other side, thus squashing hyperinflation with the loot. The "worst" case is when there is no winner as well as no loser, and then governments must squeeze the monetary base if they don't want hyperinflation

And yes, the Americans can print $20T, it's just they won't because it brings other issues.

They don't need to print 20T dollars since this is not a debt, this is in fact a payment or contribution of the world to the US. Japan, the largest holder of the US debt, is an outright dependent state, a vassal of Uncle Sam. China is in essentially the same position since it heavily depends on the US both economically and technologically

That's actually a good point, I never really thought of it like that but there is so much US money in the world is essentially forces all those countries to become increasingly reliant on the USD since they hold so much of it. Quite the interesting plan when you really think about it.
I'm curious what would happen with a lot of economies if the US simply didn't have their money flowing out to them. Considering China sells a lot to the US, I don't know what their trade would be like otherwise.

[Janation]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpW_KMHlAmo

Why borrow dollars and then pay back by printing them?

Why take the long way around?

I've also been thinking these since I was high school after a history class. But when I tried to ask my teacher, he answered me one word, value. When they print a lot of money, the money that circulates the economy gets higher, the value gets lower, they also want to make their money increase it's value.

[skorupi17]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpW_KMHlAmo

Why borrow dollars and then pay back by printing them?

Why take the long way around?

You can always do that. However, doing so may have impact to the economy of a country. If a country prints so much paper money, their currency may be subjected to inflation. Their currency will lose value. Another effect, the prices of products and services they offer will become expensive. So what is the advantage of having more money if you are going to pay more for what you want/need? Taking the long way is avoiding such scenario.

In terms of bitcoin, you cannot do this scheme. You cannot mine anymore when all 21M BTC are already mined. It is an advantage of bitcoin over fiat. You can make another crypto money though.

[Pab]

Try you need quality print jet,quality paper and colours,many dollars are printed by third partys.Dangerous game,it is already owned by mafia i think so you dont have good chance

[Hazir]

Try you need quality print jet,quality paper and colours,many dollars are printed by third partys.Dangerous game,it is already owned by mafia i think so you dont have good chance

You are talking about counterfeited dollars? What this has to with quantitative easing? You can't really eliminate fake banknotes.
Mafia is probably not the biggest organization counterfeiting money anyway. You ever heard about superdollar? it's counterfeit United States one hundred-dollar bill.
Superdollars were printed by North Korea and Iran. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdollar

[Lancusters]

Try you need quality print jet,quality paper and colours,many dollars are printed by third partys.Dangerous game,it is already owned by mafia i think so you dont have good chance

You are talking about counterfeited dollars? What this has to with quantitative easing? You can't really eliminate fake banknotes.
Mafia is probably not the biggest organization counterfeiting money anyway. You ever heard about superdollar? it's counterfeit United States one hundred-dollar bill.
Superdollars were printed by North Korea and Iran. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdollar

I've seen very high-quality counterfeit 100 dollar bills from Chechnya. Quite a lot of them were in the early 90s. I think that soon the US government under the pretext of a large counterfeit bills propose to move to electronic money. All fakes will end up in the pockets of the owners abroad, and they will get control over all money turnover in the country.

[deisik]

Try you need quality print jet,quality paper and colours,many dollars are printed by third partys.Dangerous game,it is already owned by mafia i think so you dont have good chance

You are talking about counterfeited dollars? What this has to with quantitative easing? You can't really eliminate fake banknotes.
Mafia is probably not the biggest organization counterfeiting money anyway. You ever heard about superdollar? it's counterfeit United States one hundred-dollar bill.
Superdollars were printed by North Korea and Iran. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdollar

I've seen very high-quality counterfeit 100 dollar bills from Chechnya. Quite a lot of them were in the early 90s. I think that soon the US government under the pretext of a large counterfeit bills propose to move to electronic money. All fakes will end up in the pockets of the owners abroad, and they will get control over all money turnover in the country

I've heard such stories too

Or should I rather call them rumors or fables? I've never seen these bills myself, and I'm curious if you really saw them too and whether they had actually been from that part of the world. Chechnya simply couldn't print high quality bills, they just looted the arsenals of the former USSR but that was all they had (and I doubt that money printing machines were among the weaponry). As the rumor has it, the CIA itself is claimed to have been behind the counterfeit dollars, which they used to finance terrorists there ("freedom fighters" as the West mass media called them). If true, it is pretty much telling how the US government is actually fighting with terrorism in real life

[HarringtonStark]

If you keep printing dollars, the currency will become valueless. The Spanish have done the same thing before and that is what happened.

[Rostadom]

If you keep printing dollars, the currency will become valueless. The Spanish have done the same thing before and that is what happened.

I believe a currency will become valueless only when they printed too much of it or when they print really high denomination of the currency. Just look up Zimbabwean dollars and you'll see a concrete example of this. Constantly printing money will just inflate the currency but it will not become useless. Even when they print nonstop but if the denomination is low, then it will be far from becoming valueless.

As a kid, I also thought of printing out dollars whenever I need it. Funny because it has become the reality of our government. Or maybe it has been the reality long ago? The majority of people don't even understand the concept of inflation. I hope fiat workers wake up soon enough.

[Hydrogen]

It happens every time whenever there is a major war

Every nation had been doing essentially the same throughout history in such circumstances. During the American Civil war the Union had been printing the greenbacks just like their opponents, the Confederates, printed the graybacks like there was no tomorrow (and there really hadn't been tomorrow for the latter). In these cases hyperinflation is a postponed effect which may never come at all. If you lose a war your money is gone anyway, if you win you just plunder the other side, thus squashing inflation with the loot and boot. The "worst" case is when there is no winner as well as no loser, and then governments must squeeze the monetary base if they don't want runaway inflation to overrun them

Banks or foreign countries finance many wars @ interest. Banks funded both sides of the american civil war.

After World War I and II many countries financed loans from foreign powers.

Nations normally don't print their way out of debt anymore than greece printed its way out of debt the last few times their deficit threatened the EU. Its much more common for greece and other countries in debt to be bailed out.

German's needing a wheelbarrow full of currency to buy a single loaf of bread isn't a success, I don't think.

[frowsiter]

It's like very common stuff to do really. It has regulations by government and it costs you money to print money. Bitcoin is rare and has value way lot than any other currency.

[Dimelord]

the good point of bitcoin ... is that you can print paper money if you want : https://www.bitaddress.org

and, it's real value !  

You're right that bitcoin can't be printed when more is needed.

You're wrong that bitcoin has real value. The value is perceived because all of us place value upon it...just as we do fiat currency.

There is no tangible thing that supports the value of bitcoin, that can prove there is value to it.

There's no Gold, no Silver, no other tangible item that exists in the world...just the promise that only so much bitcoin can every be mined and that the validity of transactions and balances are verified by the community that uses it.

bitcoin is opensource. which means anything can be changed. i don't think they will, but at some point the devs can decide to increase the coincap.

Bitcoin is trusted by people and they want to buy it more since its limit is only 21 million coins.The huge increasing demand and limited supply gives more value to bitcoins.If the coincap is increased,then bitcoin will not have the value which it has today.Unlike US dollars,limited supply is its main feature.

[deisik]

German's needing a wheelbarrow full of currency to buy a single loaf of bread isn't a success, I don't think

Indeed, it wasn't a success (at least, not in the sense you mean it)

Primarily because the Antante countries were no fools and demanded payment of reparations under the Versailles peace treaty to be made with natural resources (coal and iron ore, more specifically), not with worthless paper. But this doesn't in the least take anything from my point. Even if Germany couldn't pay out reparations directly with their worthless marks, they did exactly the same indirectly (see inflation tax for more). And, at the end of the day, they still didn't pay out the reparations in full, so it can be said that they did in fact manage to print out of debt, after all

[DrGuns4Hands]

Bitcoin is rare and way more value than other currency out there. Bitcoin is trusted by people and they want to purchase it more. If you just print dollars then, where is the value thing? But it depends to the situation. If the bitcoin/cryptocurrency is common everywhere? Then more value it gets.