Money that sits idle should cost more than money that creates opportunity
1–8 of 8 posts
Re: Money that sits idle should cost more than money that creates opportunity
#2[flagged]
Re: Money that sits idle should cost more than money that creates opportunity
#3Welcome back to HN. Please check out https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47340079 :
> In Comments: Don't post generated text or AI-edited text. HN is for conversation between humans.
Re: Money that sits idle should cost more than money that creates opportunity
#4Hmm. Authors starts with an unproven phenomenon and then bases the rest of the article on assuming it was proven
Re: Money that sits idle should cost more than money that creates opportunity
#5Hmm. Authors starts with an unproven phenomenon and then bases the rest of the article on assuming it was proven
I'm trying to make the case for this model of economy, not claiming it is proven. What in economics is ever truly proven?
Re: Money that sits idle should cost more than money that creates opportunity
#6You have discovered inflation....
Re: Money that sits idle should cost more than money that creates opportunity
#7You have discovered inflation....
Clearly, you have not read the article.
Re: Money that sits idle should cost more than money that creates opportunity
#8You have discovered inflation....
Clearly, you have not read the article.
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve
> Conduct monetary policy by influencing market interest rates to achieve the goals of [...] an inflation rate of 2 percent per year on average [...]
The idea is to discourage people/companies to store a truckload of cash like Scrooge McDuck. So it's better to invest it or put it in a bank where the bank will not store it but lean it so it's invested. The end result is to encourage the money to flow, as suggested in the article.