moonguh t1_jdy67xj wrote
Money is a zero sum game. It's impossible for everyone to lose money.
Gandalftron t1_jdy9w8y wrote
Well.....the rich are still getting much richer. Oddly enough, I never see the most obvious "tax the wealthy and close tax loopholes" solution thrown around. I guess being distracted by bread and circus tactics like the wokeness of gay frogs using a unisex bathroom has worked thus far.
legbreaker t1_jdy8yx2 wrote
It is if you count in the Fed assets.
But when the Fed starts reducing money supply it can feel like everyone in the market is losing.
During QT the Fed is basically removing money and reducing the circulating supply.
cbryantm t1_jdyh32w wrote
If the government did not step in to insure bank deposits then all deposits above 250,000 are essentially eliminated. Meaning the depositors lost money and no one gained any money on the other side. Bankruptcy is another example of it not being zero sum. It supposed to be zero sum, but market dysfunction creates scenarios where that isn’t always the case.
moonguh t1_jdyiaxv wrote
No, still the money had not lost. All the money are locked in bonds during the low rate, so the creditors would buy these at a huge discount, then sit on them until maturity and make banks.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments