You're looking for "a serious discussion" of the "distorting action" of governments ... doing standard government monetary policy? Unfortunately, that's not a serious framing of of the situation.
It is distortion because the flow money of money is information. It makes the economy aware of where to assign resources. In this information network, the printing of money is adding noise to the signal. Making the economy less efficient.
You make it sound like there is an "undistorted" market yearning to breath free if only government would let go. This is quite ideological, hidden in that one word.
Does the role of government in law enforcement and armed forces that that allows markets to exist in the first place also fall under the category of "distortion" in this absolutist framing?
Comments
You're looking for "a serious discussion" of the "distorting action" of governments ... doing standard government monetary policy? Unfortunately, that's not a serious framing of of the situation.
Your opinion is that the actions of governments like printing money are not distorting the market value of money, aka the interest rates?
"distorting" as opposed to "influencing" or "creating" - of course it has impact, it wouldn't be a thing to do if it had no effect.
But your statement is a bit like "roofs on houses distort the fall of rain". If not categorically wrong, it's an unconventional and loaded framing.
It is distortion because the flow money of money is information. It makes the economy aware of where to assign resources. In this information network, the printing of money is adding noise to the signal. Making the economy less efficient.
You make it sound like there is an "undistorted" market yearning to breath free if only government would let go. This is quite ideological, hidden in that one word.
Does the role of government in law enforcement and armed forces that that allows markets to exist in the first place also fall under the category of "distortion" in this absolutist framing?