Ok, here's another neat trick about the GDP. We do not measure growth of the GDP in nominal values, but real values, aka, we adjust for inflation (yes, this is the _only_ case where you can actually "adjust for inflation" and will be valid). We use something called deflator which allows us to ignore the variances of value in the currency due changes in monetary policy.
So, the government can "print money" (that's not how it works), which would cause inflation (aka, the currency loses value), so the effect on the real GDP is muted. There's another thing that happens when the government goes into a spending spree which is "crowding out", basically the government buys what households and business would have bought and therefore they don't buy anymore, so the effect of the GDP is muted. There are many other things that happen also due such actions that would actually make the GDP to contract!
Anyways, reckless fiscal policy alone doesn't "manipulate the GPD values". Economies do not work in a vacuum. There's tons of interactions that are not explained because it's too complex to do so without the previous knowledge, to do so in a short amount of hours would be very dangerous because you would think you understand things that you really don't understand. Take a course of macroeconomics, of about 100 hours, and it would only be the start. Then industrial economics, economic policy, taxation, international economics, monetary policy, monetary economics, you get it?
Using a very debatable inflation metric (e.g. should deflationary technological advancements in electronics manufacturing boost the "real GDP" metric?), which is quite muted (even with the post-COVID spike!) on top of that because of the "exorbitant privilege".
>that's not how it works
Suuuure. The recent examples of collusion between banks, the government, and the central bank to quickly increase amount of base money is not outright "money printing", just benign "quantitative easing", nothing to see here.
>crowding out
This works only when government engages in "fair" and competitive debt issuance. But we see a different picture, government bonds are counted as bank reserves and even worse banks do not even have to apply the mark-to-market accounting rules for them in some cases. And everyone knows that the Fed immediately will ride to the rescue on the first sign of trouble in the bond market as was done during not-QE.
>reckless fiscal policy alone doesn't "manipulate the GPD values"
Alone? No. But it certainly boosts GDP (both real and nominal) in the near term and makes the economy look better than it really is. It's the same story as in China where they had massive "infrastructure investments" to artificially stimulate the economy and make GDP numbers look good. We can see in the real time how it unravels.
No, there's no debate in using a deflator. The deflator only takes into account monetary effects on the currency. Why there isn't one? Because nobody knows that thing exists! GDP deflators are calculated and used around the world by non-partisan. And even when partisanship is involved, the people discussing it [0] have the knowledge to be able to discuss it.
> The recent examples of collusion between banks, the government, and the central bank to quickly increase amount of base money is not outright "money printing", just benign "quantitative easing", nothing to see here.
Ok dude, you have an obvious ax to grind. I guess expecting actual constructive economic debate was my misinterpretation.
So, the government can "print money" (that's not how it works), which would cause inflation (aka, the currency loses value), so the effect on the real GDP is muted. There's another thing that happens when the government goes into a spending spree which is "crowding out", basically the government buys what households and business would have bought and therefore they don't buy anymore, so the effect of the GDP is muted. There are many other things that happen also due such actions that would actually make the GDP to contract!
Anyways, reckless fiscal policy alone doesn't "manipulate the GPD values". Economies do not work in a vacuum. There's tons of interactions that are not explained because it's too complex to do so without the previous knowledge, to do so in a short amount of hours would be very dangerous because you would think you understand things that you really don't understand. Take a course of macroeconomics, of about 100 hours, and it would only be the start. Then industrial economics, economic policy, taxation, international economics, monetary policy, monetary economics, you get it?