"The true irony in all of this discussion is that everybody concedes as a matter of course that the government benefits from having the printing press, i.e. from being the first person in line to get the newly created money. But gee Sheldon Richman and you other Austrians, that doesn’t count as an injection effect mattering! That’s what we call “seignoriage.” So I guess the term for what the monetary authority earns, by creating new money, is actually “fiscal policy”?"
- Bob Murphy
The context of this is that Rowe and Sumner have been doing an admittedly odd move in the Cantillon effects debate where anyone that gets any benefit differentiated from anyone else is really "fiscal policy", not "monetary policy".
That close to assuming your conclusions, if not exactly assuming your own conclusions.
I always had this funny idea that "monetary policy" was either what the central bank did sans its regulatory role, or what the Treasury did when it acted like a central bank (like minting coins). We can of course argue over what's worth labeling "conventional" and "unconventional" monetary policy.