Based on Japan, this does not appear to be the case (Bank of Japan holdings are ~110% of GDP). We can print until we can't, and from economic indicators, we have a ways to go before inflation (hyper or otherwise) is going to be cause for concern (education and healthcare aren't inflating because of currency devaluation, but because of regulatory capture).
The economy isn't actually money. The economy is really stuff; money is just a mechanism for moving the stuff around.
The problem is, if we want stuff (food and cars and electricity and software), someone has to make the stuff. We can print money until the cows come home, but that still fails if there aren't any cows.
Japan has managed to keep producing enough to run the actual economy, and has shuffled paper around to keep the books from breaking. The US can do that, too, for a while. But the economy that produces stuff has to come back before too long, or we're going to have actual shortages in a way that printing more money cannot solve.
Those indicators are provided by the government itself. And even if you believe those clearly doctored numbers, there is a cause for concern. Particularly with the amount that’s being added to the money supply daily. It’s not sustainable.
Let's pretend that government statistics are wildly manipulated, and that your thesis is sound. I ask the following:
1. Reliable rebuttal data sources to government inflation statistics.
2. Proof that it isn't sustainable besides conjecture (as I mentioned, Japan is economically stable and a first world country with an enormous amount of debt that will never get paid back, while parts of Europe have negative interest rates and still have a relatively high standard of living).
Yes, if you’re not first world (Venezuela, Zimbabwe) this doesn’t work. But the US dollar is a reserve currency and US treasuries are the safest asset in the world. When you need to spend good will in currency value form, you spend it.
