While there is no such thing as a free lunch, the question arises as to who buys when money is created by government or by banks and not then extinguished by tax collections or repayments of loans. The previous sentence delivers a major educational thrust and asks a question to bring the point home. It will probably meet the same fate as any other diary here on Kos that is not aimed at "he said, she said" or some new way to criticize Republicans. For the emotional touchy feelies it is not worthy of consideration in that it does not directly address the eeeeeeeevil Republicans. Yet it lies at the heart of the current lying crap we see in every Republican initiative and the base Republican position. Unfortunately, it is also being embraced by Democrats as well.
Let us put the matter more blatantly: What if stimulus costs were paid by money created from thin air while middle class taxes are not increased and bonds are not sold? The answer from every indoctrinated person in the nation is "inflation", and for sake of argument I will say this is true. So now we return to the real question and ask who pays. The most simple observation is that people who own large piles of money will see a deterioration in the VALUE of that stock of money. This observation is easily clarified by seeing that workers will be paid with dollars that are NOT directly controlled by the people who hold all the money. The term "wealthy" refers to the capacity of one individual to command the labor of others. If government is allowed to reward workers and the jobless as opposed to those persons being totally dependent upon the private holders of money, then the power of the rich (wealth of the rich) is decreased. It matters as to how the money enters the economy. Creating money and giving it to bankers is not inflationary and will not help the vast majority of the citizenry as it serves only to make the rich richer. But such monetary creation when employed as stimulus WILL help the citizens.