A debt that the consumers will exclusively pay

Yep, that's an important point. The wealth is hoarded not among the richest 1% of the world, it's hoarded among the richest 0.00000001%.

User 0.2%

I dun think it's actually possible to pay back the debt.. U should take a look at the balance sheet..:/

What debt? The banks were bailed out, not given a loan. The Federal reserve bought their toxic assets a few years ago. Now the federal reserve has found out these toxic assets aren't as toxic as people thought and are making most of their money back. If they make their money back then they are extracting the money they put into the system when they bailed out the banks, thus keeping inflation in check. Had they simply printed money and given it to the banks they would've had no control over the rate of inflation.

+agun17 Well in all its history it has NEVER done that

Not true.

Not exactly, but getting there. The money wouldn't become less valuable if we actually spent the money and contributed to the economy, it's like recycling, you give money back into the masses and the money should pay for itself, if not more as people start businesses, have money to invent things/ideas, and spend their money consuming products. The real problem here is that the most of the money is going to majority stock holders who prop up the stock market by trading. So the rich are trading stocks back and forth using free money making it look like the actual economy is thriving, when really it's just a few hundred rich guys making some deals, while everyone else has to work tooth and nail to make a living, meanwhile the money they earn is worth less because the banks just gave the rich free money to spend, but they don't really spend it, they hoard the money and keep it liquid instead of actually spending it on groceries or whatever. The money they get is more likely to be spent on things like investments, which eventually they say, "Trickles down." We all know that is bullshit now. The reason why the money ALWAYS benefits the rich is to maintain their power, if the central banks didn't use QE, then many of the current biggest corporations would have gone out of business causing massive fluctuations and possibly economic collapse. That is exactly the problem though, the rich have basically trapped us into, "Obey us, or the economy will fail." The huge problem with this that we are essentially creating a bubble where most of the wealth is disproportionately falling into the hands of rich people who can't spend it fast enough in the right areas, governments and citizens alike become cash strapped and those cuts mainly only affect the poor and working class through cuts on social services, education, and healthcare, all things that regular people depend on. Basically, unless the rich somehow stop loving money we are all screwed, and we will have to assassinate all of the rich cocksuckers who caused this situation, sucks, but it is the only way now, voting can only get you so far, sometimes violence is necessary, like the French Revolution.

+Led Zed No voting can get you very far....the problem is, working class voters read Murdoch-newspapera and watch Murdoch-owned Fox and Sky news, and as a result, they blame immigration and foreigners for their wages remaining stagnant for 35 years. For example, in the Brexit referendum, Voter turnout of those aged 18-25 was 34%....the problem is apathy and disengagement.

+Led Zed And QE isn't exactly free money that can be traded....it's an asset swap mostly involving government bonds, although there have also been some Mortgage-backed securities swapped aswell. Fundamentally, it's an injection of liquidity into banks, not an injection of capital. I agree with your overall point though.

NeptuneNexus Huh? I said it was "liquid", maybe you missed the edit I made, also, don't government bonds/debt still mean they hold overall power? To me power and money are synonymous.