14/03/2026
Balance Sheet Economics – Part 5: The “Money Printing” Myth
One of the most repeated claims in modern economic debate is the statement that “printing money causes inflation.”
It is repeated in television debates, policy discussions, and even in university classrooms as if it were an unquestionable law of economics. But when we examine how real economies and real production systems actually work, this claim begins to collapse.
The first step is to understand what money actually is.
💰 is not a commodity like oil, copper, wheat, or steel. It is not a product that is consumed in the production process.
💰 is simply a unit of measurement and exchange. It allows goods and services to be priced and traded efficiently within an economy.
Just as a meter measures distance and a kilogram measures weight, money measures value in exchange.
Printing more measuring tapes does not make objects longer. Likewise, increasing the supply of money does not automatically make prices rise.
Inflation occurs when something much more fundamental happens: the supply of real goods becomes constrained. When supply chains for essential commodities are disrupted energy, food, transport, industrial input, the physical availability of goods declines while demand continues. When this occurs, prices rise.
In other words, inflation is fundamentally a supply-side problem, not a monetary or money supply one.
To understand this more clearly, we need to examine how modern manufacturing actually works. Today’s global manufacturing system operates on scale.
Factories are designed to run continuously, often 360 days per year, and typically operate between 70% and 80% of total capacity. This is not accidental. It is the result of a simple economic reality: large fixed costs must be spread across as many units of production as possible.
The mathematics of manufacturing makes this very clear.
Let us consider a simplified example of a manufacturing company producing electric fans.
Assume the factory has the following annual fixed costs:
Factory building lease: $2,000,000
Machinery depreciation: $1,000,000
Management and administrative salaries: $1,000,000
Total annual fixed costs therefore equal $4,000,000.
In addition to these fixed costs, the factory incurs variable costs for each fan produced—materials, labour, and electricity.
Assume the variable cost per unit is $8 per fan.
Now let us examine what happens when production changes.
🚩Scenario 1: Lower Production
Suppose the factory produces 500,000 fans per year.
Variable costs would be:
500,000 × $8 = $4,000,000
Total production cost becomes:
Fixed costs $4,000,000
Variable costs $4,000,000
= $8,000,000
The unit cost of each fan would therefore be:
$8,000,000 ÷ 500,000 = $16 per fan
🚩Scenario 2: Higher Production
Now assume production increases to 1,000,000 fans per year.
Variable costs would become:
1,000,000 × $8 = $8,000,000
Total cost would now be:
Fixed costs $4,000,000
Variable costs $8,000,000
= $12,000,000
The unit cost would therefore fall to:
$12,000,000 ÷ 1,000,000 = $12 per fan
🚩Scenario 3: Near Full Capacity
Now suppose the factory increases output further to 2,000,000 fans per year, approaching its efficient operating capacity.
Variable costs become:
2,000,000 × $8 = $16,000,000
Total cost becomes:
Fixed costs $4,000,000
Variable costs $16,000,000
= $20,000,000
The unit cost now falls even further:
$20,000,000 ÷ 2,000,000 = $10 per fan
What the Mathematics Reveals: Look at what happened to the unit cost as production increased:
💰500,000 units → $16 per fan
💰1,000,000 units → $12 per fan
💰2,000,000 units → $10 per fan
The mathematics reveals a powerful reality of industrial production: The more units produced, the lower the cost per unit. This is the foundation of modern manufacturing/production economics. And corporate finance 101.
Large global manufacturing companies constantly pursue higher production volumes and larger markets precisely because scale reduces costs and increases revenues.
At large production levels, the traditional textbook idea of an upward-sloping supply curve begins to break down.As both demand and supply curve are one. In real world economic thinking too it's visible. From TVs, Fridges, strawberries, clothes to solar panels and now EV cars.
In reality, industrial production often produces a downward-sloping supply relationship, because increasing output lowers average costs and allows firms to offer lower prices while maintaining profitability.
This is why global manufacturing systems constantly seek bigger markets i.e. Market share, and higher output levels because inventory must be disposed of and cash conversions happens from goods. Only then can debt be settled and credit working capital settled.
However, this entire system depends on one crucial condition.
Manufacturers must have reliable access to stable, predictable or fixes costs of production of inputs, including:
• energy
• raw materials
• labour
• transportation
• global supply chains
As long as these inputs remain stable, predictable and accessible, production can expand, costs can fall, and prices remain stable or even decline. But when those supply chains are disrupted when energy prices surge, when shipping routes break down, when key commodities become scarce, production costs rise.
And that is when inflation appears.
Not because "money" exists.
But because the physical production system of the economy has been disrupted.
History repeatedly shows that inflationary episodes are closely tied to commodity shocks and supply chain disruptions. Energy crises, food shortages, war disruptions, and logistical breakdowns create inflationary pressure, not the mere existence of money.
This is why the simplistic claim that “money printing causes inflation” fails to explain how modern industrial economies actually function with such large amounts of money creation. In many advanced economies, broad money supply (M2) is already extremely large compared to GDP.
For example:
🚩United States: ~ 67% of GDP
🚩United Kingdom: ~ 91% of GDP
🚩Japan: ~ 212% of GDP
🚩France: ~ 147% of GDP
🚩Canada: ~ 140% of GDP
Therefore, Money Printing itself does not create inflation and Central Bank is impotent in this environment.
Supply disruptions do.
Until policymakers begin analysing inflation through the lens of production systems, manufacturing scale, and supply chains, economic policy will continue to misdiagnose the true drivers of price instability. And when the diagnosis is wrong, the policy response will inevitably be wrong as well.
Balance Sheet Economics therefore asks a different question. Instead of fearing the expansion of money or balance sheets, policymakers should ask:
Is the economy expanding its productive capacity and strengthening its supply chains? Because in the end, it is production "not money" that determines the real price structure of an economy.