QA：為什么印更多的錢會(huì)導(dǎo)致經(jīng)濟(jì)下滑？

Jonathan Lloyd
Printing more money (which is actually done by crediting accounts, not by “printing money”) injects dollars into the private sector which generally will cause the economy to rise, not drop. It does matter, however, how that money is spent out into the economy.
Let’s say the federal government allowed for a big tax cut to the uber-wealthy (like Trump did) or it allowed for subsidies to the uber-wealthy. Would that greatly affect the entire private economy? No. That money would sit in a few bank accounts and while it would make a few people even more wealthy than they already are it would not change things enough for the average Joe and Jane to notice.
However, if the government targeted huge subsidies to certain Green New Deal industries that then created a few million jobs and allowed us to get off our oil addiction and that then allowed us to save the nation we could then say that our spending injection was pretty well spent.
So to sum up, spending stimuluses will on average raise the economy but it is important to target them wisely to offer the biggest bang for the buck. To those who simply say that money injections are inflationary, I would point them to the resources that may or may not be brought to bear within the economy. Money that does not bring resources to bear will be inflationary (unless it sits in accounts unused). This is akin to saying that building a lot of bridges to nowhere will inflate the currency. But money spent bringing a lot of unused bulldozers back into play, or employing people no longer working, or retrofitting buildings so that they now contribute to economic largess, then we are back in business and this will not be inflationary.

印更多的錢(實(shí)際上是通過賒賬，而不是“印錢”)向私營經(jīng)濟(jì)注入美元，這通常會(huì)導(dǎo)致經(jīng)濟(jì)增長，而不是下降。然而，這些錢是如何花在經(jīng)濟(jì)上的，這確實(shí)很重要。
假設(shè)聯(lián)邦政府允許對(duì)超級(jí)富豪大幅減稅(就像特朗普做的那樣)，或者允許對(duì)超級(jí)富豪提供補(bǔ)貼。這會(huì)對(duì)整個(gè)私營經(jīng)濟(jì)產(chǎn)生很大影響嗎？不會(huì)。這些錢會(huì)存在幾個(gè)銀行賬戶里，雖然會(huì)讓一些人變得比現(xiàn)在更富有，但普通人不會(huì)發(fā)生任何的改變。
然而，如果政府針對(duì)特定的綠色新政產(chǎn)業(yè)提供巨額補(bǔ)貼，然后創(chuàng)造數(shù)百萬個(gè)工作崗位， 讓我們擺脫了對(duì)石油的依賴，從而拯救了我們的國家，然后我們就可以說，我們的支出投入花得很值。
因此，總而言之，消費(fèi)刺激計(jì)劃平均而言將提高經(jīng)濟(jì)水平，但明智地制定消費(fèi)刺激計(jì)劃是很重要的，這樣才能產(chǎn)生最大的效果。對(duì)于那些簡單地說資金注入會(huì)導(dǎo)致通貨膨脹的人，我要向他們指出，這些資金可能會(huì)，也可能不會(huì)在經(jīng)濟(jì)中發(fā)揮作用。那些不能帶來資源的資金將會(huì)引起通貨膨脹(除非它閑置在賬戶中)。這就好比說，建很多不通向任何地方的橋會(huì)導(dǎo)致貨幣膨脹。但是，如果把錢花在讓大量閑置的推土機(jī)重新投入使用，或者雇傭不再工作的人，或者改造建筑，讓他們?yōu)榻?jīng)濟(jì)做出貢獻(xiàn)，那么我們的經(jīng)濟(jì)商業(yè)就會(huì)恢復(fù)正常，也不會(huì)引發(fā)通貨膨脹。

Gregory Norton
At first, injecting money into an economy causes the economy to boom. Those receiving the new money spend it, increasing economic activity as the money spreads out. But the injected money (these days in the form of inexpensive credit) lowers interest rates, changing the planning horizon of investors. If money to build a new factory costs 10% per year (10% interest) the factory must be finished and become profitable more quickly than if the money costs 2% per year.
But at 2% per year less money is saved than at 10% per year. Rather than saving for future purchases consumers want to buy things NOW. Saving is just not worthwhile.
But long-term projects do not produce consumer goods in the short term when consumers want to buy them.
Just to give some idea: Consumers want to buy boats, RVs, wines, and houses this year but producers will not be able to expand production of boats, RVs, wines, and houses until their investment projects are completed in several years. Eventually this time mismatch builds up as existing inventories (goods in warehouses, stores, and new subdivisions) are depleted because consumers buying rather than saving. This leads to a crash, and many investment projects are halted and the money spent wasted. Boom and Bust, the business cycle that has befuddled governments since the late 18th century when it became common for banks and governments to “print” (actually create) new money rather than depend on savings. Late in the crash (bust) creating new money once again creates new economic activity and the appearance of growth, so the cycle begins again.
In the 1880s the explanation imperfectly summarized above became understood but the creation of money had become so politically popular, profitable for banks, and useful to governments that few economists (and almost no policy makers) accepted the explanation. Presidents and Congressional leaders still believe in the efficacy of stimulus checks and quantitative easing (creation of money out of thin air) with the conviction that this time it will not lead to a crash.

首先，向一個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)體注入資金會(huì)導(dǎo)致經(jīng)濟(jì)繁榮。那些得到錢的人把錢花掉，隨著錢的擴(kuò)散增加了經(jīng)濟(jì)活力。但注入的資金(目前是以廉價(jià)信貸的形式)降低了利率，改變了投資者的規(guī)劃。如果建造新工廠的成本是每年10%(10%的利息)，那么如果成本是2％，工廠必須更快地建成并盈利。但是每年節(jié)省2%的錢比每年10%的少。消費(fèi)者現(xiàn)在就想買東西，而不是為將來的購買儲(chǔ)蓄。節(jié)約是不值得的。
但是，長期項(xiàng)目在短期內(nèi)并不能生產(chǎn)出消費(fèi)者想要購買的消費(fèi)品。
舉例來說，今年消費(fèi)者想要購買游艇、房車、葡萄酒和房屋，但在幾年的投資項(xiàng)目完成之前，生產(chǎn)商將無法擴(kuò)大游艇、房車、葡萄酒和房屋的生產(chǎn)。最終，這種時(shí)間錯(cuò)配會(huì)隨著現(xiàn)有庫存(倉庫、商店和新的細(xì)分市場中的商品)的消耗而加劇，因?yàn)橄M(fèi)者是為了購買而不是儲(chǔ)蓄。這導(dǎo)致了經(jīng)濟(jì)崩潰，許多投資項(xiàng)目被叫停，資金被浪費(fèi)。繁榮與蕭條，這一商業(yè)周期自18世紀(jì)末以來一直困擾著各國政府，當(dāng)時(shí)銀行和政府普遍“印刷”(實(shí)際上是創(chuàng)造)新貨幣，而不是依賴儲(chǔ)蓄。在危機(jī)后期，創(chuàng)造新的貨幣再次創(chuàng)造新的經(jīng)濟(jì)活動(dòng)和增長的表象，所以循環(huán)又開始了。
在19世紀(jì)80年代，上述不完善的解釋得到了理解，但貨幣創(chuàng)造在政治上非常受歡迎，對(duì)銀行有利，對(duì)政府有用，以至于幾乎沒有經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家(幾乎沒有政策制定者)接受這種解釋?？偨y(tǒng)和國會(huì)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人仍然相信刺激措施和量化寬松(憑空創(chuàng)造貨幣)的有效性，堅(jiān)信這一次不會(huì)導(dǎo)致崩潰。

Paul Sutton
Back in the old days, pre-1933, when the US was still on the gold standard, the implications were that every dollar in circulation in the form of currency was backed by gold and you could demand gold from your local bank in lieu of currency. Obviously, a $50 bill (or $100, or $1,000, $5,000, or $10,000 bills) are much smaller and lighter than their equivalent in gold. Currency was usually used instead. The official price of gold was “fixed” though it had changed over time.
In theory, if all presented for gold at the same time could not be fulfilled if more currency existed than the necessary gold to back them; that would be inflationary (but would require a gold standard). In effect, the US went on a “silver standard” after 1933, and finally, off the international gold standard in 1971 when Nixon realized that French demands to be paid in gold for trade imbalances would, or could drain the treasury of the gold at hand.
There are a lot of ‘economic theories’ left over from the 1930s that make predictions like “printing money will cause inflation” because they rely on theories of how money actually worked under a gold standard. It doesn’t work that way when you don’t have a gold standard.
In point of fact, a robust economy is always “printing money.” Every time a manufacturer produces a product cost $xxx and then sells it for more they are, in effect, creating ‘new money’ that didn’t exist until then - but it’s all ledgers and account balances, and so on rather than actually printing currency.
Likewise when the Fed is buying treasuries on the open market the popular colloquialism is “printing money” whereas in point of fact the fed is simply exchanging one type of equity for another, “money” such as it exists in the Fed system for exchangeable Treasuries which can be sold right back into the same markets from which it was purchased (known as QT). They are not “really” “printing money” as many seem to think, and no, it won’t cause “hyperinflation” or that would have happened in 2009.

早在1933年之前，當(dāng)美國還在實(shí)行金本位制時(shí)，其含義是流通中的每一美元都以貨幣的形式得到黃金的支撐，你可以向當(dāng)?shù)劂y行要求黃金來代替貨幣。顯然，一張50美元的鈔票(或100美元、1000美元、5000美元或10000美元的鈔票)比等值的黃金要小得多，也要輕得多。通常用貨幣代替。黃金的官方價(jià)格是“固定的”，盡管它隨時(shí)間而變化。
從理論上講，如果現(xiàn)有的貨幣比支撐它們的必要的黃金還多，那么所有的貨幣在同一時(shí)間都無法兌現(xiàn)；這將導(dǎo)致通貨膨脹(但需要金本位制)。實(shí)際上，美國在1933年之后實(shí)行了“銀本位制”，最終在1971年放棄了國際金本位制。當(dāng)時(shí)，尼克松意識(shí)到，法國要求以黃金作為貿(mào)易失衡的補(bǔ)償，或?qū)⒖赡芎谋M手頭的黃金儲(chǔ)備。
上世紀(jì)30年代遺留下來的許多“經(jīng)濟(jì)理論”做出了“印鈔將導(dǎo)致通脹”的預(yù)測，因?yàn)樗鼈円蕾囉诮鸨疚幌仑泿艑?shí)際運(yùn)作的理論。當(dāng)你沒有金本位時(shí)，它就不會(huì)這樣運(yùn)作。
事實(shí)上，一個(gè)強(qiáng)勁的經(jīng)濟(jì)總是在“印錢”。每當(dāng)一個(gè)制造商生產(chǎn)一件產(chǎn)品的成本是xxx美元，然后以更高的價(jià)格出售它，實(shí)際上，他們是在創(chuàng)造之前并不存在“新貨幣”——但這些都是賬本和賬戶余額等等，而不是印刷貨幣。
同樣地，當(dāng)美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)在公開市場上購買國債時(shí)，通俗的說法是“印鈔”，而事實(shí)上，美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)只是簡單地將一種權(quán)益換成另一種權(quán)益，美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)體系中存在的可交換國債的“貨幣”，可以直接在購買國債的市場上出售(即QT)。他們并沒有像許多人認(rèn)為的那樣“真的”“印錢”，而且不會(huì)導(dǎo)致“惡性通脹”，否則2009年就會(huì)發(fā)生這種情況。

Bill Terrell
Printing money amounts to an involuntary and unearned transfer of wealth. To understand why, imagine you have a printing press in your basement. And you could print up ones, fives, tens, twenties and hundreds without limit. You could acquire all the money you liked without having to provide useful goods and services for it.
You could go out and buy anything you wanted. You could go to the car dealer and buy up their inventory at whatever price they wanted. All the best goods and services could be yours.
But remember you acquired this new money without having to create any goods and services. So your gain is your neighbor’s loss. Your neighbor’s dollars are now worth less than they were before. Your neighbors will either have to pay more dollars for goods and services or go without.
This is inflation. And this is why it’s illegal for you to do it.
But the net loss to your neighbors isn’t limited to your gain … the economy loses as a whole. Because the reward for producing goods and services is diminished, people produce less or give up altogether. So printing money causes the economy to drop.

印鈔等于財(cái)富的非自愿和非勞動(dòng)轉(zhuǎn)移。為了理解其中的原因，假設(shè)你的地下室里有一臺(tái)印刷機(jī)。你可以打印1元，5元，10元，20元和100元，沒有限制。你想要多少錢都可以，而不必提供有用的商品和服務(wù)。
你可以出去買任何你想買的東西。你可以去汽車經(jīng)銷商那里，以他們想要的任何價(jià)格買下他們的庫存。所有最好的商品和服務(wù)都是你的。
但要記住，你獲得這些新錢時(shí)，并不需要?jiǎng)?chuàng)造任何商品和服務(wù)。所以你的收獲就是你鄰居的損失。你鄰居的美元現(xiàn)在比以前更不值錢了。你的鄰居要么不得不為商品和服務(wù)支付更多的美元，要么就一無所有。這就是通貨膨脹。這就是為什么你這么做是違法的原因。
但你鄰居的凈損失并不僅限于你的收益，而是整體經(jīng)濟(jì)的損失。
由于生產(chǎn)商品和服務(wù)的報(bào)酬減少了，人們生產(chǎn)得更少或干脆放棄了。所以印刷鈔票會(huì)導(dǎo)致經(jīng)濟(jì)下滑。

Arthur Goldstein
It doesn’t. The increase in money comes AFTER the economy has dropped or is dropping noticeably. A good case in point are the stimulus and infrastructure packages that have been passed this past year.
The false economies of deferring maintenance and new construction of the infrastructure by “fiscally responsible” politicians have left much of the country in a shambles.
When the pandemic began shutting down the economy it was easy to see what was going to happen. And instead of letting the economy tank and fend for itself, “printing more money” as you put it, was poured into the economy to save it. This seems to have worked out quite well. Naturally, the “fiscally responsible” politicians began their hue and cry about how this free money was going to cause people making minimum wage or less to become fat and lazy.
The less likely that they are to be touched by a failing economy, the more likely they are to complain that life isn’t fair … for themselves.

不會(huì)導(dǎo)致經(jīng)濟(jì)下滑，貨幣的增加發(fā)生在經(jīng)濟(jì)明顯下降或正在下降之后。一個(gè)很好的例子就是過去一年通過的經(jīng)濟(jì)刺激和基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施建設(shè)計(jì)劃。
“負(fù)責(zé)財(cái)政”的政客們推遲了基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施的維護(hù)和新建，從而造成了虛假的經(jīng)濟(jì)效益，使這個(gè)國家的大部分地區(qū)陷入一片混亂。
當(dāng)大流行開始使經(jīng)濟(jì)停止運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn)時(shí)，很容易就能看到將要發(fā)生的事情。像你所說的“印更多的錢”，注入經(jīng)濟(jì)以拯救它，這似乎效果很好，而不是讓經(jīng)濟(jì)自生自滅。
自然，那些“負(fù)責(zé)財(cái)政”的政客們開始抗議，抱怨這些免費(fèi)的錢將如何導(dǎo)致那些掙最低工資或更低工資的人變得更加肥胖和懶惰。
他們受經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退影響的可能性越小，就越有可能抱怨生活對(duì)自己不公平。

Ryan Howe
Printing more money doesn’t cause the economy to drop. Also, the “economy” is a nebulous term - typically people mean the value of the currency but that’s not the same thing.
We’re constantly printing money BUT … we’re also constantly destroying money as well. It’s more about the money supply and rate at which you do that. In either case they generally wouldn’t cause the economy to drop rather runaway inflation or hyperinflation happen because the money is already dued and they continue printing as the money has lost value.

印更多的鈔票并不會(huì)導(dǎo)致經(jīng)濟(jì)下滑。此外，“經(jīng)濟(jì)”是一個(gè)模糊的術(shù)語——通常人們指的是貨幣的價(jià)值，但這不是一回事。
我們不斷地印鈔票，但是，我們也在不斷地破壞貨幣。更重要的是貨幣供給和利率。在這兩種情況下，它們通常不會(huì)導(dǎo)致經(jīng)濟(jì)下滑，而是會(huì)發(fā)生失控的通脹或惡性通脹，因?yàn)樨泿乓呀?jīng)貶值，他們繼續(xù)印刷，貨幣持續(xù)的貶值。

Gary Tilley
People are the ones who decide the economy. Money does not. People in their capacity to make decisions about where, on what, and when money is either spent, saved, invested, or given away control the largest amounts of money.
What causes the economy to drop? Decisions made by people with the jobs in financial positions affects the outcome of the economy.

人才是決定經(jīng)濟(jì)的關(guān)鍵因素，而不是錢，人們能夠決定在什么地方、什么時(shí)候花錢、存錢、投資，他們控制著最大數(shù)量的金錢。
是什么導(dǎo)致經(jīng)濟(jì)下滑？從事財(cái)務(wù)工作的人做出的決定會(huì)影響經(jīng)濟(jì)的結(jié)果。

Marlin Pierce
Growth in the money supply is a stimulus to the economy, but it creates inflation. In the extreme case hyperinflation makes the currency unusable.
Why is because as there is more money in circulation people have more money and buy more with it. Because of the circulation it doesn’t matter where you inject the money, the consumer spending increases.
This drives up manufacturing costs to meet the demand. But the demand is fake.

貨幣供應(yīng)的增長對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)是一種刺激，但它會(huì)造成通貨膨脹。在極端情況下，惡性通貨膨脹使貨幣無法使用。
為什么呢？因?yàn)榱魍ㄖ械腻X越多，人們就會(huì)有更多的錢，用它們買更多的東西。因?yàn)榱魍?，無論你把錢投到哪里，消費(fèi)者的支出都會(huì)增加。
這就提高了滿足需求的制造成本。但這種需求是假的。

Andre Gagne
Money doesn’t have any value. You could maybe set it on fire to keep warm and that’s it. Things have actual value. If you created a thousand houses you’d make a serious difference in the world and housing prices would drop. If you printed 300 million dollars you’ve created a bunch of paper that has no value. The value of things that have actual value that already exist are worth less because you’ve created more money. That’s inflation.

錢沒有任何價(jià)值。你可以把它點(diǎn)燃來保暖，僅此而已。事物都有實(shí)際價(jià)值。如果你建造了上千座房子，你會(huì)對(duì)世界產(chǎn)生重大影響，房價(jià)會(huì)下降。如果你印了3億美元你就創(chuàng)造了一堆毫無價(jià)值的紙。已經(jīng)存在的具有實(shí)際價(jià)值的東西的價(jià)值會(huì)因?yàn)槟銊?chuàng)造了更多的錢而貶值。這就是通貨膨脹。

Pratikshya Sahu
Just imagine the scene. The Govt. printed lot of money and then distributed it among all. So everyone is a millionaire. A small business man now do not need to open his shop, because he already has millions. The baker won’t bake & the farmer won’t go to field, why would they if they already have lot of money. A daily wage labourer is also resting at home. No one needs to work. The case is one-sided now. All are buyers with high purchasing power. But there is no one at the seller end. No manufacture because of lack of man power & no production of food & other supplies. This condition is a state of inflation, where demand is much more than the supply, and all the stuffs are overpriced and unavailable. This is not a healthy economy.

想象一下這個(gè)場景。政府印了很多錢，然后分發(fā)給所有人。所以每個(gè)人都是百萬富翁。一個(gè)小商人現(xiàn)在不需要開店了，因?yàn)樗呀?jīng)有幾百萬了。面包師不烤面包，農(nóng)民不種地，如果他們已經(jīng)有很多錢，為什么還要去做呢？日薪工人也在家休息。沒有人需要工作?，F(xiàn)在情況是一邊倒的。都是購買力很強(qiáng)的買家。但是賣家那邊沒有人。沒有生產(chǎn)，因?yàn)槿鄙偃肆?，沒有生產(chǎn)食物和其他物資。這種情況是一種通貨膨脹的狀態(tài)，在這種狀態(tài)下，需求遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過供應(yīng)，所有的東西都定價(jià)過高，無法買到，這不是一個(gè)健康的經(jīng)濟(jì)。

Michael Thompson
I will try to give you my best answer. In order for money to have value it has to be earned. Whether by an hourly wage or the cost of a service provided, economies operate by dollars earned. If $ is printed and made available for everyone to use instead of earned, the earned dollars in the system are worth less bc you don’t have to produce anything by working to get them. Someone might say “what if only a few people print $ and not make it available for everyone?” To which, I say - that is counterfeit, and very illegal.

我會(huì)盡量給你最好的回答。為了讓錢有價(jià)值，錢必須是掙來的。無論是按小時(shí)工資計(jì)算，還是按提供服務(wù)的成本計(jì)算，經(jīng)濟(jì)都是按掙得的美元計(jì)算的。如果美元是印刷出來的，可供每個(gè)人使用，而不是掙來的，那么在這個(gè)體制中掙來的美元就不值錢了，因?yàn)槟悴恍枰ㄟ^工作來生產(chǎn)任何東西。有人可能會(huì)說:“如果只有少數(shù)人打印美元，而不是讓每個(gè)人都可以使用會(huì)怎么樣？”我要說的是，這是偽造的，是非常非法的。

Robert Arvanitis
The economy produces a certain amount of goods and services, about $20 trillion a year.
When the government “prints” money and doubles the supply, that does not increase anything real. It merely labels the exact same goods and services as now being “$40 trillion.” Nothing added. A $1.50 loaf of bread simply costs $3,00 now.
People now anticipate even more cheapening of the currency. Behavior changes. Thrifty people are punished - the dollar they saved is now slashed to just 50￠. But those wastrels who over-borrowed are rewarded for their prodigal ways.
Worst of all, the politicians who over-spent so wildly are NOT punished. Instead, they are reelected to do even greater damage to the economy.
Inflation robs the good and rewards the bad. And that’s why printing money is so wrong.

這個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)體每年生產(chǎn)一定數(shù)量的商品和服務(wù)，大約20萬億美元。
當(dāng)政府“印刷”鈔票時(shí)，這并沒有增加任何實(shí)際的東西。它只是把完全相同的商品和服務(wù)變成現(xiàn)在的“40萬億美元”。沒有任何增值，一條1.5美元的面包現(xiàn)在要賣3美元。
人們現(xiàn)在持有的貨幣將進(jìn)一步貶值。行為的變化，節(jié)儉的人受到了懲罰——他們省下的1美元現(xiàn)在被削減到只有50美分。但是那些過度借貸的敗家子卻因?yàn)樗麄儞]霍的方式而得到了回報(bào)。
最糟糕的是，瘋狂超支的政客們沒有受到懲罰。相反，他們?cè)俅萎?dāng)選會(huì)對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)造成更大的損害。
通貨膨脹掠奪了好人，獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)了壞人。這就是為什么印鈔是錯(cuò)誤的原因。

Royanne Boyer
Such a significant question that so many seem to be ignorant about. Printed money is nothing more than fake-made government money that is spendable that they print into the trillions.
It’s little different than the fake money made by thieves. So very many countries have tried and failed: Venezuela, Argentina, etc. PLease spend some time learning about the issue.
Printed money results in inflation that cannot be stopped or maintained. Soon people can have so much money that wheelbarrows of it can’t buy a loaf of bread.
It is phony wealth that leads to massive INFLATION!

這是一個(gè)很重要的問題，以至于很多人似乎都不知道。印出來的錢只不過是假的政府錢，他們印了數(shù)萬億美元。
這和小偷制造的假幣沒什么區(qū)別。所以很多國家都嘗試過，但都失敗了:委內(nèi)瑞拉、阿根廷等。請(qǐng)花點(diǎn)時(shí)間了解一下這個(gè)問題。
印鈔導(dǎo)致的通貨膨脹無法停止或維持生存。不久，人們就會(huì)有很多錢，手推車都買不起一條面包了。
虛假的財(cái)富導(dǎo)致了大規(guī)模的通貨膨脹！

Franz Steinbauer
Printing money is like a drug. At the beginning it have a push up effect. In the long run it acts like a brake. Printing money is basically extending debt and debt becomes counterproductive at some point, which could not be exactly determined. Strogoff/Reinhart have investigated this and found out, that a debt/GDP ratio of 90 % is a critical level. Today MMT theorists think that debt is irrelevant and money can be printed at will by governments. This is a very heterodox frxwork and I personally think that in the long run it will not work.

印鈔票就像吸毒一樣。在開始的時(shí)候，它有一個(gè)向上推的效果。從長遠(yuǎn)來看，它的作用就像剎車。印鈔基本上是在延長債務(wù)，而債務(wù)在某些時(shí)候會(huì)產(chǎn)生反作用，這一點(diǎn)無法確定。Strogoff/Reinhart對(duì)此進(jìn)行了調(diào)查，發(fā)現(xiàn)債務(wù)/GDP為90%的比率是一個(gè)臨界水平。今天，MMT理論家認(rèn)為債務(wù)無關(guān)緊要，政府可以隨意印制鈔票。這是一個(gè)非常異端的框架，我個(gè)人認(rèn)為，從長遠(yuǎn)來看，它不會(huì)起作用。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

Stephen Carleton
Because printing too muchoney causes inflation which reduces the buying power of every unit of currency in circulation. Savings in particular are dued but as the value of the currency drops prices will rise so that every participants in the supply chain can maintain a satisfactory profit level
Whole all this is happening wages suffer as well since the buying power of the income is also reduced. The overall effect of rising inflation is the general reduction in transactions everywhere.

因?yàn)橛√嗟腻X會(huì)導(dǎo)致通貨膨脹，這會(huì)降低流通中每一單位貨幣的購買力。特別是儲(chǔ)蓄會(huì)貶值，但隨著貨幣價(jià)值的下降，物品價(jià)格會(huì)上升，因此供應(yīng)鏈中的每個(gè)參與者都能保持一個(gè)令人滿意的利潤水平
總的來說，這一切都發(fā)生了改變，工資也受到了影響，因?yàn)槭杖氲馁徺I力也降低了。通脹上升的總體影響是世界各地的交易普遍減少。

Michael Munson
“Why does printing more money cause the economy to drop?”
It doesn’t.
Printing fresh cash goes on all the time. What affects the economy, or not, is how and why that cash is distributed, and to whom.

“為什么印更多的錢會(huì)導(dǎo)致經(jīng)濟(jì)下滑?”
不會(huì)導(dǎo)致經(jīng)濟(jì)下滑
印鈔一直在進(jìn)行。影響經(jīng)濟(jì)的是，現(xiàn)金如何分配，為什么分配，以及分配給誰。

Rui Duarte
It doesn't.
Money is used to command production. If you have a (partially) idle plant or land, money can activate it. That will increase production, not “cause a drop”
Printing money is only a problem (1) IF the economy is already running at capacity or (2) if you are incapable of directing the new money to the unsused capacity

不會(huì)影響經(jīng)濟(jì)
貨幣是用來控制生產(chǎn)的。如果你有(部分)閑置的工廠或土地，錢可以激活它。這將增加產(chǎn)量，而不是“導(dǎo)致產(chǎn)量下降”
印鈔只是一個(gè)問題(1)如果經(jīng)濟(jì)已經(jīng)滿負(fù)荷運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn)，或者(2)如果你沒有能力將新錢投入到未使用的產(chǎn)能上

Kevin Hurst
It's an economic fact that as the money supply increases, more money is chasing a limited supply of goods and services. Prices begin to inflate. As prices increase less people choose to buy goods or services at an inflated price, which eventually causes less production. Less production eventually will cause layoffs , taking those laborers out of non-discretionary spending.

這是一個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)事實(shí)，隨著貨幣供應(yīng)的增加，更多的貨幣會(huì)爭逐有限的商品和服務(wù)供應(yīng)。隨著價(jià)格上漲，越來越少的人選擇以虛高的價(jià)格購買商品或服務(wù)，這最終會(huì)導(dǎo)致生產(chǎn)減少。減產(chǎn)最終將導(dǎo)致裁員，使這些勞動(dòng)者失去非可自由支配的支出。

Bob MacKenzie
That depends on why the money is being printed. If the money is being printed to add more liquidity to the system to accommodate a rise in production and available goods and services then that will increase the standard of living.
If the money is being printed to maintain a sagging economy due to the lack of production and employment, then the economy will continue to sag until the demand for goods and services increases.

這取決于印錢的原因。如果印錢是為了增加體系的流動(dòng)性，以適應(yīng)生產(chǎn)和可用商品和服務(wù)的增長，那么這將提高生活水平。
如果印錢是為了維持因缺乏生產(chǎn)和就業(yè)而低迷的經(jīng)濟(jì)，那么經(jīng)濟(jì)將繼續(xù)低迷，直到對(duì)商品和服務(wù)的需求增加。