To: maceng2 who wrote (42195 ) 11/2/2008 6:55:51 PM From: Elroy Jetson 4 Recommendations Respond to of 217869 That would be the St Louis Federal Reserve who suggested requiring periodic Tax Stamps on cash in order to implement a "negative interest rate. == Who was it who suggested putting a time component on cash so that it depreciated over time, to deter hoarding ? == The idea that "the problems caused by excessive debt can be fixed with additional debt ", is a mental disease recently reintroduced by Anna Schwartz and Milton Friedman. This idea has previously occurred to others throughout history such as John Law, and virtually every addict. Addicts believe addiction is best cured with ever more of their favorite drug, a logic so obvious on it's face they can't understand why this is not accepted by all. Friedman & Schwartz did correctly identify that the effective monetary supply (money * monetary velocity) declines in an economic depression. Unfortunately, they also believed the converse is true - that "an economic depression can be cured or prevented by increasing the effective money supply" . The sad truth is, the converse of a true hypothesis is rarely true . Just because my car is red, I cannot assume that all red cars are mine. Any sensible child or adult could tell you why you can't solve the problems caused by excessive debt, relative to income, with additional debt - even though debt declines in an economic depression. I think a lack of belief in this proposition is almost a perfect test of sanity. Monetarists point out you simply need an interest rate which is negative enough, and the monetary police system to back this up. If a 0.0% interest rate is too high for your debt load, you simply need a negative 18% rate, they chirp helpfully.Sadly this pathetic idea has had an obvious appeal to central banks, as it suggests they can control economic cycles . The sort of narcotic which gets one a prize named after Nobel. Their desire so fed their credulity that we now live in a world where otherwise sensible people have a complete belief in total nonsense. But as Schumpeter suggested, and Rist agreed: "Policy does not allow a choice between depression or no depression, but between depression now or a worse depression later . Inflation pushed far enough would undoubtedly turn depression into the sham prosperity so familiar from European postwar (WW-I) experience, and would, in the end, lead to a collapse worse than the one it was called in to remedy. For recovery is sound only if it does come of itself. For any revival which is merely due to artificial stimulus leaves part of the work of depressions undone and adds, to an undigested remnant of maladjustment, new maladjustment of its own which has to be liquidated in turn, thus threatening business with another worse crisis ahead." .