"And I think the more money you put in people's hands, the more they will spend. And if they don't spend it, they invest it. And investing it is another way of creating jobs. It puts money into mutual funds or other kinds of banks that can go out and make loans, and we need to do that"
About this Quote
Bloomberg’s logic here is meant to feel like gravity: give people money and the economy rises, one way or another. Spend it and you goose demand; don’t spend it and you “responsibly” invest, which supposedly funnels cash into the financial system, which then becomes loans, which then becomes jobs. It’s a neat closed loop that makes redistribution sound less like ideology and more like plumbing.
The subtext is class-coded reassurance. The first half flatters ordinary consumers as engines of growth; the second half pivots quickly to investors and institutions, implicitly calming anyone worried that cash transfers or tax cuts might sit idle. Even “mutual funds or other kinds of banks” works as rhetorical bridge-building: he’s translating Wall Street mechanics into a common-sense story of circulation. The phrase “we need to do that” is the quiet tell. This isn’t descriptive economics; it’s a justification for policy that prioritizes liquidity and credit as moral goods.
Context matters because Bloomberg is a technocratic billionaire-politician whose brand is managerial competence. He’s selling an economy-as-machine worldview where the main risk isn’t inequality or bargaining power, but insufficient flow. What gets elided is where money concentrates, who qualifies for loans, and whether investment actually becomes productive capacity rather than asset inflation. The argument’s strength is its simplicity; its vulnerability is that it treats the financial sector as a faithful job-creation relay instead of a system with its own incentives and leakages.
The subtext is class-coded reassurance. The first half flatters ordinary consumers as engines of growth; the second half pivots quickly to investors and institutions, implicitly calming anyone worried that cash transfers or tax cuts might sit idle. Even “mutual funds or other kinds of banks” works as rhetorical bridge-building: he’s translating Wall Street mechanics into a common-sense story of circulation. The phrase “we need to do that” is the quiet tell. This isn’t descriptive economics; it’s a justification for policy that prioritizes liquidity and credit as moral goods.
Context matters because Bloomberg is a technocratic billionaire-politician whose brand is managerial competence. He’s selling an economy-as-machine worldview where the main risk isn’t inequality or bargaining power, but insufficient flow. What gets elided is where money concentrates, who qualifies for loans, and whether investment actually becomes productive capacity rather than asset inflation. The argument’s strength is its simplicity; its vulnerability is that it treats the financial sector as a faithful job-creation relay instead of a system with its own incentives and leakages.
Quote Details
| Topic | Investment |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Michael
Add to List




