We are largely talking past one another. Of course, excessive printing of money, or even the perception of such, can via a reflexive process, fuel inflation. Productivity fundamentally underpins fiat currencies. So ideally, productivity relative to money in circulation should be the basis for deciding whether printing is excessive or not.
What I wrote in my post explains the process by which new, outside money is inserted into an economy. This necessarily involves deficit spending, thus we can recognize that deficits are essential to any economy that is growing if deflation is to be avoided. The only question then is how much deficit is needed at any particular time. This is a subject of Abba Lerner's "Rules of Functional Finance" (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_finance).
Your concern should be, whether you realize it or not, with too much money printing; not with money printing per se, which is absolutely essential to a growing modern economy.
It's plain that you understand the fundamental issue when you write,
Though this is not incorrect, it leads to an oversimplified view of inflation that is only a slight improvement on Friedman's dictum that “Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon in the sense that it is and can be produced only by a more rapid increase in the quantity of money than in output,” which is faulty in the same way. (see https://www.frbsf.org/our-district/...8/may/future-fortunes-r-star-are-they-rising/
Your thinking, it seems to me, is very much along the lines of amateur Austrian School economists who hold to their views despite being buried by evidence that their views must somehow be very wrong. We are surrounded by rampant money printing and yet the problem so far has been too little inflation rather than to much. Now we are seeing the first signs of a significant pick up in inflation, and we understand well the cause. You will see in the coming months that central banks respond accordingly and there will be no "hyperinflation", as you predict. (I am taking a chance here because I don't have your definition of "hyperinflation.") The real question is at what rate should money be printed to keep it in reasonable balance with growth in productivity? An important auxiliary question is "to what degree is deficit spending and productivity reflexive?
What I wrote in my post explains the process by which new, outside money is inserted into an economy. This necessarily involves deficit spending, thus we can recognize that deficits are essential to any economy that is growing if deflation is to be avoided. The only question then is how much deficit is needed at any particular time. This is a subject of Abba Lerner's "Rules of Functional Finance" (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_finance).
Your concern should be, whether you realize it or not, with too much money printing; not with money printing per se, which is absolutely essential to a growing modern economy.
It's plain that you understand the fundamental issue when you write,
Unless more output is generated through the money printing process or the goods are somehow obtainable at the same prices regardless of the money supply or currency value then you will have inflation.
Though this is not incorrect, it leads to an oversimplified view of inflation that is only a slight improvement on Friedman's dictum that “Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon in the sense that it is and can be produced only by a more rapid increase in the quantity of money than in output,” which is faulty in the same way. (see https://www.frbsf.org/our-district/...8/may/future-fortunes-r-star-are-they-rising/
Your thinking, it seems to me, is very much along the lines of amateur Austrian School economists who hold to their views despite being buried by evidence that their views must somehow be very wrong. We are surrounded by rampant money printing and yet the problem so far has been too little inflation rather than to much. Now we are seeing the first signs of a significant pick up in inflation, and we understand well the cause. You will see in the coming months that central banks respond accordingly and there will be no "hyperinflation", as you predict. (I am taking a chance here because I don't have your definition of "hyperinflation.") The real question is at what rate should money be printed to keep it in reasonable balance with growth in productivity? An important auxiliary question is "to what degree is deficit spending and productivity reflexive?
