@bswud In other words, why build a capital asset that pays off only over 15 years if CBs and state actions likely wreck the EV in two years?
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness
@Meaningness so I'm broadly with you here, but I don't think that's the point of QE. In my view QE intended to meet spiking demand for money1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bswud
@Meaningness crisis -> uncertainty -> higher demand for money. Central bank should meet this by expanding money supply2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@bswud However, the stated intent of QE is to penalize saving by driving returns negative, in order to incentivize investment instead.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness
@bswud And the CB share of government securities is very high now—Fed QE took off in 2012, after your graph ends, & is much higher in EU&JP1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@bswud The money created by QE has mainly sat on bank balance sheets (NIRP is supposed to deal with that), or used for share buy-backs, or >1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@bswud to the extent invested, mainly malinvested. Most seems to have gone into Chinese construction (due to PBOC distortion, SOEs, etc)1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@bswud and into commodity and energy production, responding to price spikes caused by Chinese construction—now vast stranded assets.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@Meaningness 1. we have good evidence that "the money created by QE" doesn't move in a special way any different from other money2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.