> I've yet to understand where you got that idea from, or what it has to do with all of your nonsensical followup comments.
Which of my comments do you find non-sensical, specifically?
> original claim was “If it were not for central bankers printing money into existence, a person could work their life, save a portion for retirement in a bank account or other fixed income product, while enjoying a positive return on their investment, without taking on market risk of loss of funds.”
Let me lay out my logic:
- If not for central bankers, artificially printing money and putting it in circulation, there would be no inflation. No printing by central bankers = No dilution of the purchasing power of everyone's money -> therefore no inflation.
- In a no inflation environment, any nominal gains are real-gains because there is no inflation to worry about
- In a no inflation environment, for a banker to attract deposits from savers, they would have to offer savers a nominal rate of savings in order to attract those deposits
- In a no inflation environment, any nominal rate paid on savings is a real return, since there is no inflation
- In an FDIC insured savings account savings are insured, therefore not risk
- Unfortunately in our current environment where the Fed is printing money at 25-40% increases in M2 y/y, and CPI reaching 6.8% at last reading, and bank savings accounts paying 0.1%, it is hard to appreciate that a bank account could ever pay a real rate on savings, net of inflation. However, in a world without central bank money printers this is exactly what we would enjoy.