ipl-logo

Why Quantitative Easing Is Bad For The US

476 Words2 Pages

Nearly every advanced economy in the world has discussed applying some form of quantitative easing. Quantitative easing was first used by Bank of Japan in the early 2000s. When it was introduced, it was considered not effective and was rejected because the short term interest rates were near zero, commercial banks were flooded with a lot of liquidity to promote private lending, resulting in little risk of liquidity storage. Quantitative easing was a different type of financial policy, where a central bank, a bank that manages the financial system for a nation or group of nations with several different responsibilities, purchases government securities or other securities from the market to lower interest rates and increase money supply. If quantitative …show more content…

For example, in the past, the Fed spend more than $4 trillion in various ways to buy bonds, where the first part of printing money was a success; because the amount of money was large enough, lasted a long time and prevented a terrible economic situation. In addition, rates may have lowered not helping individuals and Wall Street was pocketing most of the extra cash. In my opinion, I agree that quantitative easing has changed and instead of helping the economy will only hurt it. As stated on Business Insider: “The 9 Reasons Why Quantitative Easing Is Bad For The U.S. Economy” by Michael Synder, quantitative easing will in the long run only damage the value of the U.S. dollar, inflation will hit the already struggling U.S. consumers really hard, once an price increases spiral begins it is hard to stop, inflation is a hidden tax, more quantitative easing threatens to weaken and threaten the global financial system, the status of the dollar will become threatened, and it is going to become more expensive for the U.S. government to borrow money. With that being said, in my opinion, if quantitative easing still exists, over time, it will only hurt and harm our

Open Document