The Federal Reserve’s money printing bill reached $666 million in 2016

According to the Federal Reserve they spent $666 million on money printing during the year 2016 – which is $4.4 million, or 0.7 percent, lower than the budgeted amount.

According to the Federal Reserve says that the spent amount is again an estimate and not the precise actual expenditure. Further the budget underrun does not reflect a change in the annual print order or less-than-planned deliveries by the BEP, but rather a shift of deliveries between budget years.

If we take the cost of each at 10 cent, that would be around $20 million, something which might have spoiled the fine number of 666 with a pesky 8. We, of course, do not know if they intentionally tried to get such symbolic number, but for it, or a similar sum, they received 7 billion notes.

The dollar value for those notes, each costing around ten cent to make, is some $233 billion for just one year alone.
Fed says 75% of that $233 billion was to replace old or damaged notes. That leaves around $60 billion, which went to “net payments.”

To who such payments are made remains a mystery within an encrypted enigma, but some banks receive around 6% of Fed’s profits. Which in this case would be around $4 billion for the printing alone.

These sums might still be fairly small compared to the $3 trillion new notes and coins Fed has printed in this decade. With many wondering where did that $3 trillion fiat block reward go.

Few really know, and just how all this works even economists don’t comprehend as shown by textbooks continuing to wrongly teach money is created through a multiple of savings when the Bank of England has stated banks create money from literally thin air and are limited in how much they can create only by “competition.”

Why banks wouldn’t just keep creating such new money no one has really satisfactorily explained. Not least perhaps because they can’t as history has shown they do very much keep creating it with the value of $1 dollar falling to 5 cent in just a couple of decades.