The New Monetary Economics | The Marginal Revolution Podcast

[@KylaScanlon]

Great episode

[@randomguypolololas]

Love the entire series! Thank you!

[@manoelarruda3711]

Congratulations guys!! Great job

[@justintindall9515]

Verydy verdy good man!

[@work1649]

would enjoy hearing you speak with Silvio Micali (Turing Award co-winner) about power of cryptography

[@dalejames486]

Okat Tyler, I don't totally understand the inflation from the past several years. Please explain.

[@diegotomasarene-morley7249]

What would the Fed buy T bills with in this world?

[@mikhailfranco]

Fed paying interest on reserves from ~2008-9 was a barefaced bailout of the banks! It also had (has) the effect of reducing bank lending, which should mean a credit contraction. That only 'worked' (was possible, maybe) because of huuuuge federal deficits giving money to bank customers. plus exceptional later gov/private funding measures for COVID, like rent/student loan suspensions ...

[@splitrockcap]

In your example, qty theory still applies even if we just trade treasuries. Of course Fed wouldn't matter (or even exist) but qty of treasuries still dictates long term nominal price trends over the long run. If treasury supply increases at 10% a year vs 1% a year, then grocery prices would be very different under those two scenarios. So the question is not "Does the Fed matter?" but does the "qty theory matter?"

[@splitrockcap]

And Sumner has addressed the "private sector plays the lead role in producing it (money)". Private sector driving this is a misnomer. Yes, most of M2 is produced by private sector, but the monetary base is still the driver there. Over 100 years, its the growth rate of the monetary base that will drive the order of magnitude for M2, not the other way around. Fed leads the private sector here, not vice versa. If you elimate dollars and just use treasuries, then it would be the Treasury, not Fed, that is determining long run path of M2 (still not private sector making this determination). This holds true even if MB is 0.0001% of M2 (its growth rate path that matters).

[@justintindall9515]

At the 28ish mark your Yogi statement is close to what Bitcoin is doing, but although the whole pie size stays the same the pieces of the pieces get smaller therefore allowing more sucker's in so that the Whales have more foolish fish (crim) to swallow when the schools get big enough. 😢

[@salex5412]

Quantum economics? Schrodinger's Du-cat?

[@roc7880]

an AI is more likely to lose all the money not make more, sorry.

[@simrans3675]

Buy Bitcoin Buy Solana DONT FADE CRYPTO

[@mikhailfranco]

You are 50% right

[@simrans3675]

@@mikhailfranco Bitcoin for the long term, Solana for this cycle :-) (may be they keep doing well in future but we can revisit that later in future cycles too)