The article basically says we need quantitative easing, but we need to be careful as to how we implement it.
In other words, if it works, Mr Bootle will claim that he was right about its philosophical implementation, and if it fails, Mr Bootle will claim that he was right about the dangers of its technical implementation.
Whatever happens, Mr Bootle will be right. Which is nice work if you can get it.
Maturin Towers response:
Jack Maturin on March 09, 2009 at 10:52 AM
Quantitative Easing is nothing but counterfeiting, and just as a small private counterfeiter wrecks a local economy, a large public counterfeiter can wreck an entire economy.
You may remember the classic BBC comedy, Private Schulz. In this excellent portrayal of a real plan, the Germans set out to destroy the British economy through the mass production of 'perfect' British currency.
The Bank of England is about to do exactly the same thing, with exactly the same results, only 60 years later.
This kind of Keynesian-inspired nonsense kept the Japanese economy in recession for many more years than it ought to have been in recession. In Zimbabwe, this Keynesian nonsense has turned the bread basket of Africa into the basket case of Africa.
The creation of credit from thin air does not represent real capital savings, just fictitious ones, as we all recognise when it is done by private people in shadowy basements. Trying to fool people into believing that these new paper tickets represent real savings will no longer work; we have all woken up to how these Keynesians are trying to fool us into behaving how they want to get themselves off a political hook. It won't work.
Just because this wealth-destructive behaviour is executed by a public body rather than a private one does not make it any less wealth-destructive. It is going to fool nobody, and we will pay the price through either stagflation (if we're lucky) or hyperinflation (if we're not).
We ought to rename Mervyn King to Private King.