Donald Trump: US government will never have to default because it prints money

ericgtr12

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Mar 19, 2015
1,237
7,291
No, this is not an SNL skit or an article from The Onion. It's a statement from a man who's gone bankrupt 4 times and wants to run the largest economy on the planet.

Trump insisted that there is no way the U.S. government could default because it prints money.

"This is the United States government. First of all, you never have to default because you print the money. I hate to tell you, OK? So there's never a default," he said.

Source: CNBC
 

NT1440

macrumors G5
May 18, 2008
12,141
13,987
*waits patiently for the previously libertarian-streaked posters who always rail against the fed to show up with "well he has a point....*

3...2...1...
 
  • Like
Reactions: jkcerda

ericgtr12

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Mar 19, 2015
1,237
7,291
*waits patiently for the previously libertarian-streaked posters who always rail against the fed to show up with "well he has a point....*

3...2...1...
Trump supporters without even the most basic knowledge of economics: "just print more money? Hell, why didn't I think of that!"
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
38,996
Criminal Mexi Midget
Obama never printed more money to keep the economy afloat.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/charleskadlec/2012/09/14/the-feds-futile-effort-to-bail-out-obamanomics/#6e272e126e95
Although the risks of inflation are all too real, the supposed benefits of the Fed printing money and keeping interest rates low are highly questionable. A just published Federal Reserve Bank ofDallas working paper by William R. White, entitled: “Ultra Easy Monetary Policy and the Law of Unintended Consequences” concludes the negative consequences of the sort of quantitative easing the Fed has just embraced will likely outweigh any short term benefits:
not "personally" :p
 

ericgtr12

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Mar 19, 2015
1,237
7,291
  • Like
Reactions: Renzatic

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
38,996
Criminal Mexi Midget
In a figurative sense, not a literal one. Though something must've worked, because The economy is growing again, and the dollar is plenty strong right now.
OF course it's strong, we had to kill Kadaffy duck to keep the petrodollar going . http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/03/forget-treasuries-russias-real-leverage-u-s.html
[doublepost=1462816072][/doublepost]
No, it's worse than it's ever been.. everyone is broke and we're facing another recession. Oh wait, that is absolutely untrue in every way, sorry I forgot for a moment that I wasn't a hyperbolic misinformed Trump supporter. My bad.
deflection duly noted. printing dollars worked for Obama, God forbid someone else gets to do it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meister

ericgtr12

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Mar 19, 2015
1,237
7,291
deflection duly noted. printing dollars worked for Obama, God forbid someone else gets to do it.
Every one of your posts defending Trump "Obama did it". If that's your standard for everything, which apparently you hate about Obama, then why do you find it acceptable now when Trump does it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0007776

vrDrew

macrumors 65816
Jan 31, 2010
1,317
11,835
Midlife, Midwest
This may surprise some people; but Trump is (for once) to a certain extent sort-of correct about this:

The US Government; through the operations of the Treasury and the Federal Reserve System really does have the ability the create near-infinite amounts of money.

Most of the time, however, there is little reason to go through the hassle of physically printing currency. The amount of physical currency the Treasury produces is actually determined by the demand for bills from the banking system. Most of the time investors wishing to redeem US Government debt instruments don't want a stack of bills. They want a credit to their bank account. And the same goes for US Federal Government employees; retirees receiving their monthly pensions; and vendors selling products to the Army.

Its inaccurate, however, to say that the US Federal Government staves off bankruptcy via the simple expedient of running the Treasury printing presses. In actual fact, the Treasury raises money to pay Government obligations from a variety of sources: The majority comes from tax receipts. Some comes from the sale of Government assets - everything from oil and gas leases; sale of Government-owned land and real estate; to sales of surplus military equipment. But it also has the ability to cover any shortfalls through the sale of short- and long-term Government debt instruments.

The amount of Government-issued debt the Treasury can issue is limited, to a certain degree, by the Congressionally-imposed debt limit. But even there, Constitutional scholars and financial experts question the ultimate legality of that process.

The disastrous hyperinflation, experienced in Weimar-era Germany and Mugabe-era Zimbabwe, was the result of a completely different process. The Governments of those countries had lost the ability to access Global credit markets. Nobody would lend to Weimar Germany or Zimbabwe because they believed, with some justification, that those Governments could not reasonably pay them back. The German and Zimbabwe Governments responded by actually running the printing presses; and paying their employees and vendors with wads of newly printed cash. Cash which, predictably, rapidly became worthless.

That is vastly different from what the US Treasury does.
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
38,996
Criminal Mexi Midget
Every one of your posts defending Trump "Obama did it". If that's your standard for everything, which apparently you hate about Obama, then why do you find it acceptable now when Trump does it?
NICE hyperbole you have there, pointing out it worked for Obama is not defending Trump. Trump is NOT the POTUS, YET anyways so he has no way of "doing" any printing. if you want to yap about standards why is it ok for Obama to have done it but not for Trump to do the same?
it's funny how worked up you guys get when it gets pointed out Obama did the very thing you guys are complaining about. Obama was the first president to get our score from AAA to AA.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/standard-poors-downgrades-us-credit-rating-aaa-aa/story?id=14220820
 

ericgtr12

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Mar 19, 2015
1,237
7,291
NICE hyperbole you have there, pointing out it worked for Obama is not defending Trump. Trump is NOT the POTUS, YET anyways so he has no way of "doing" any printing. if you want to yap about standards why is it ok for Obama to have done it but not for Trump to do the same?
it's funny how worked up you guys get when it gets pointed out Obama did the very thing you guys are complaining about.
Fair enough, let's concede the point. Do you have an opinion on printing money to avoid debt?
 

ericgtr12

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Mar 19, 2015
1,237
7,291
I was completely against it, but then it worked for Obama so here we are :p

BTW, printing money does NOT mean we "avoid" debt , it means our dollar is worth LESS .
It's feeding time and I should've avoided giving you a taste. My bad.
 

Limey77

macrumors regular
Apr 22, 2010
103
974
Fair enough, let's concede the point. Do you have an opinion on printing money to avoid debt?
No,mit's not fair enough. The QE that Obama did is vastly different to simply printing more money to pay off debt.

If you simply print more money to pay off your already outstanding debt then other countries lose faith in your currency. The amount of debt increases AND the interest rate you pay on any future borrowing increases.

It is Trump's complete lack of knowledge that is so very, very dangerous. Right now the US dollar is still respected but given everything that Trump is saying, that won't last long.

I actually suspect that Trump is now trying to induce a recession to bolster his chances of winning. The only thing that can derail Hilary now is a further recession and Trump's language is almost ensuring that the US economy will recede, there will be falls on Wall Street and then he'll try and blame it on Obama/Clinton.

He is playing a very dangerous game and the losers will be the US population.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DesterWallaboo

zin

macrumors 6502
May 5, 2010
488
6,441
United Kingdom
From the article, it doesn't sound like he was advocating such a policy in the slightest. He was just stating that the U.S. Government cannot unintentionally default because it controls its own currency. That is a fact. It sounds as if he was just dispelling the commonly held view that there is some huge lingering risk of default surrounding the national debt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meister and jkcerda