Is there any way to know how much new money the US is printing?
"The Fed doesn't exactly have a specific schedule when they decide to create a new dollar. Instead, they engage in open market operations, creating and destroying money as is necessary to preserve a certain interest rate for lending and borrowing. It's an ongoing process. When the Fed meets periodically and they see that inflation is getting out of hand, they will raise that rate; when they see that the economy is weak, they will lower it. They change the target rate from time to time, but they seldom tell people exactly what they'll do in advance, aside from them recently saying that rates will remain incredibly low ""for an extended period of time"". There are people who trade futures contracts based on what they think these rates will be, and the Fed does publish information on what the market thinks the probabilities are. That's probably the closest thing to telling you ""how much and when"". If you want to know about the size of the money supply, ask the Federal Reserve; you probably want series H.6, Money Stock Measures. For an explanation of what the data series there means, ask Wikipedia: you're probably interested in M2, because that's what actually affects the economy, though M0 is closer to what they actually ""print"" (currency, bills and coins, and deposits at the central bank). If you're concerned about the actual real value of your dollar dropping, the actual value drop is better understood by looking at either the inflation rate, or an exchange rate against a foreign currency (and depending on what you were hoping to use that dollar for, there are a couple of different inflation rates). The standard inflation rate which measures what happens in your day to day life is the consumer price index, published by the BLS. There are a variety of forecasts of this, but I'm not aware of any official government-agency forecasts." "The Federal Reserve is not the only way that money can be ""printed."" Every bank does fractional reserve banking, thereby increasing the money supply every time they make a new loan. There's a number called the reserve requirement which limits how much money each bank can create. Lowering the reserve requirement allows banks to create more money. Raising it will destroy money. But banks can also destroy money by calling in loans or being less willing to make new loans.  So when you look at the number of banks in the US, and the number of loans they all have, it's impossible to figure out exactly how much the money supply is expanding or contracting." "This chart summarizes the FED's balance sheet (things the FED has purchased - US treasuries, mortgage backed securities, etc.) nicely.  It shows the massive level of ""printing"" the FED has done in the past two years.  The FED ""prints"" new money to buy these assets. As lucius has pointed out the fractional reserve banking process also expands the money supply.  When the FED buys something from Bank A, then Bank A can take the money and start lending it out.  This process continues as the recipients of the money deposit the newly printed money in other fractional reserve banks. FYI....it took 95 years for the FED to print the first $900 billion.  It took one year to print the next $900 billion."
"On contrary of what Mike Scott suggested, I think in case of EURO DOOM it's a lot safer if your savings were changed into another currency in advance. Beware that bringing your money into an EURO CORE country (like Finland, Austria, Germany, Nethereland) it's useful if you think those banks are safer, but totally useless to avoid the conversion of your saving from Euro into your national currency. In case of EURO CRASH, only the Central Bank will decide what happens to ALL the Euro deposited wherever, single banks, even if they are Deutsche Bank or BNP or ING, can not decide what to do on their own. ECB (European Central Bank) might decide to convert EURO into local currencies based on the account's owner nationality. Therefor if you are Greek and you moved your saving in a German bank, the ECB might decide that your Euro are converted into New Dracma even if they sit in a German bank account. The funniest thing is that if you ask to a Finland bank: ""In case of Euro crash, would you convert my Euro into New Dracma?"", they sure would answer ""No, we can't!"", which is true, they can not because it's only the ECB (Europe Central Bank) the one that decides how an ordered Euro crash has to be manged, and the ECB might decide as I explained you above. Other Central Banks (Swiss, FED, etc.) would only follow the decisions of the ECB. Moreover in case of EURO DOOM, it's highly probable that the Euro currency looses a tremendous value compared to other currencies, the loss would be huge in case the Euro Crash happens in a disordered way (i.e. a strong country like Germany and their banks decides to get out and they start printing their own money w/o listening to the ECB anymore). So even if your saving are in Euro in Germany they would loose so much value (compared to other currencies) that you will regreat forever not to have converted them into another currency when you had the time to do it. Couple of advises: 1) If you want to change you savings into another currency you don't need to bring them into another bank/country (like US), you could simply buy US Shares/Bonds at your local bank. Shares/Bonds of a US company/US gov will always be worth their value in dollars no matter in what new pathetic currency your account will be converted. 2) But is there a drawback in converting my saving into another currency (i.e. buying dollars in the form of US treasury bonds)? Unfortunately yes, the drawback is that in case this Euro drama comes finally to an happy ending and Germans decide to open their wallets for the nth time to save the currency, the Euro might suddenly increase its value compared to other currencies, therefor if you changed your saving into another currency you might loose money (i.e. US dollars looses value against the Euro)." "Your mortgage terms are locked in; the servicer/new owner cannot  change the terms without your consent, but the servicer can be more aggressive in taking action  (as specified in your mortgage contract) against you. For example, if the mortgage agreement calls for penalties for missing a payment or making it late, your friendly neighborhood banker might waive the penalty if the payment is received a day late once (but perhaps not the second or the third time), but the servicer doesn't know you personally and does not care; you are hit with the penalty right  away. If the payment was received a day late because of delays in the post office, too bad. If you used a bank bill payment service that ""guarantees"" on-time arrival, talk to the bank. All  perfectly legal, and what you agreed to when you signed the contract. If you can set up electronic payments of your mortgage payments, you can avoid many of these hassles. If you are sending in more money than what is due each month, you should make sure that the extra money reduces the principal amount owed; easy enough if you are sending a physical check with a coupon that has an entry line for ""Extra payment applied to principal"" on it. But, the best mortgage contracts (from the bank's point of view) are those that say that extra money sent in applies to future monthly installments. That is, if you send in more than the monthly payment one month, you can send in a reduced payment next month; the bank will gladly hold the extra amount sent in this month and apply it towards next month's payment. So, read your mortgage document (I know, I know, the fine print is incomprehensible) to see how extra money is applied. Finally, re-financing your mortgage because you don't like the servicer is a losing proposition unless you can, somehow,  ensure that your new bank will not sell your new mortgage to the same servicer or someone even worse." borrow money from the Central Bank Wrong premise. They cannot borrow as much as they want and they cannot borrow without collateral i.e. government debt instruments they hold or any other instrument with value.  And banks don’t have unlimited collateral to borrow against.  Secondly central banks aren’t in the business of lending unlimited money. The more money they lend out, the more is the money supply which stokes inflation which will eventually lead them to stop lending. At any point of time they want a certain amount of money movement, so they can control inflation and interest rates within an agreed limit and as limited by their economy. No sane central bank would want to stoke hyperflation by printing money at will e,g, Helicopter money. So the only other way for banks is to accept deposits from private individuals. You can also argue that banks make money by connecting lenders and borrowers and make their profit by being the middleman without using their assets. So you can say they are making a profit with the minimum usage of their capital. Albeit they have the central bank looking over their shoulder to police their behaviour. While some banks do charge fees for keeping deposits Yes but many provide certain extra services for which they charge. That is how they differentiate between no fee accounts and fee paying accounts. I respectfully disagree with @JohnFX's comment regarding new vs used.  (John knows what is talking about though; he gave an awesome answer on buying a car:  What are some tips for getting the upper hand in car price negotiations?) The answer to your question is based on whether or you not you can stand to have a small, loud, cheap but reliable car for the next 10 or 15 years. If you plan to keep your new car until it dies 20 years from now, then a new car can be a fine choice.  I just bought a car and the difference between my 2013 Hyundai and a comparable 2012 Hyundai wasn't much.  Furthermore, it was hard to even find a 2012 (which justifies the higher price from dealerships and the private market).  Doing math in my head told me the reduced usage I will get out of the car wasn't offset by the slightly lower price. Depending on the specific age, insurance on newer cars can be cheaper than insurance on older cars. (But you have to have carry more insurance, so consider that as well.)  There might not be a different between a 2010 and a 2012, but there will likely be for a 2005 and the 2013. New cars can be cheaper to operate.  Lower fuel costs, better safety and possibly pollution costs.  They are tuned up and you know everything about their history. Repairs and factory warranties might not be available on a used car, so if you car turns out to be a problem, your out of pocket is limited. These programs don't mean anything.  Get an independent certified mechanic to check out any used car you buy.  If the dealer won't let you get the car checked out, then they aren't worth your business.  Certified cars don't justify their cost according to consumer reports, they are more for marketing than reliability. Don't waste money on a third party warranty.  Either the car is good and doesn't need it, or it needs a warranty and you shouldn't buy it.  If you new car comes with a factory warranty, that is fine.  Radio host Clark Howard is indifferent if you want to purchase a factory warranty separately, but never a third party. Just out of college, you probably will be better off spending the least amount of money you can for a good used car. If for no other reason, this likely isn't going to be your car in the near future.  (Only you can answer that) If you have a feeling you won't keep your tiny car well into your 30s, then definitely don't buy a new car.   Also, my experience only applies to my make and model.  Certain models of cars keep their value and the difference between new and used isn't much for the most recent model years. But there are many more makes and models that don't pan out that way. The Federal Reserve Bank publishes exchange rate data in their H.10 release. It is daily, not minute by minute. The Fed says this about their data: About the Release The H.10 weekly release contains daily rates of   exchange of major currencies against the U.S. dollar. The data are   noon buying rates in New York for cable transfers payable in the   listed currencies. The rates have been certified by the Federal   Reserve Bank of New York for customs purposes as required by section   522 of the amended Tariff Act of 1930. The historical EURUSD rates for the value of 1 EURO in US$ are at: http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h10/hist/dat00_eu.htm If you need to know USDEUR the value of 1 US$ in EUROS use division 1.0/EURUSD. Silly poppets, still don't know how the US economy works.  1. US $1 Trillion: from mining operation in Afghan President Ghani's ass 2. US $1.5 Trillion: from assets captured during war with Canada 3. US $2 Trillion: from Profits made from Feds Successful Sale of Aaa Toxic assets to the American people 4. US $0.5 Trillion: selling Dud F-35s to Nato partners 5. US $ Small change and then some:  from Tips given during Presidential Lap dances for AIPAC and Knesset members on their semi stiff members   This bill has been designated  #FNIC  Final nail in coffin I don't understand your question. What the article is talking about is a bit more than circulating money indiscriminately. It is saying that by circulating more of it to rich and less to the poor will result in less growth overall, which I think we can all agree is a bad thing. "One option would be to physically ship the money from Israel to the US. I quickly ran the numbers for shipping different amounts of $100 bills (One pound equals 454 bills) using a popular shipping company. Here are the results:  The ""sweet"" spot is $100,000.  That would only cost you $76 to ship which is just 0.08% of the amount being transferred. Of course, the shipping company's website says international shipments of money are prohibited.  Their website, however, let me categorize the shipment as ""money"".  Strange."