michael perelman wrote:

> Wasn't another goal the devaluation of the dollar?

I don't think so. The US is a net importer, and the US commanding
height's know that. Why would they want to devalue the dollar?
Furthermore, these QEs and all did not lead to a significant
devaluation of the dollar, did it? Yes, renminbi is appreciating, but
look at this:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/TWEXB

After all of these QEs, the dollar did not depreciate that much and in
these days it is appreciating. I bet, it is going to appreciate in the
next few years to come. You see, I am putting my neck under the axe by
making statements like this. How do I know the future?

By the way, neither Keen nor Krugman is totally or right. Or both are wrong:

Yes, banks can create money "out of tin air" but they also borrow and
lend these borrow funds.

When they lend the borrowed funds, they are not creating money
(Krugman), when they enter two equal numbers on the opposite sides of
the balance sheet (Keen) and they do, they are creating money.

Nevertheless, Keen is right in that money is endogenous.

Best,
Sabri
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to