Was the risk transformation in OECD countries a good idea?

The starting point was a risk of a public debt crisis and government insolvency, due to the surge in public debt ratios. To eliminate this risk, public debt ratios had to be reduced, and this can be done in two ways: Through a public debt restructuring. Through government bond purchases by central banks in exchange for monetary creation, which, as we will show, is equivalent to a cancellation of the public debt purchased and its replacement by money. In the first case (restructuring) the public debt is reduced without money creation, in the second case (quantitative easing) the public debt is reduced with money creation. It is the second method that has been chosen since it does not reduce savers’ wealth and is not considered a default. But while this choice has eliminated the risk of a public debt crisis, it has given rise to the risks associated with strong money creation: asset price bubbles, due to investors switching into real assets, abnormal squeezing of risk premia, taxation of savers. Was it preferable to give rise to these new risks rather than to choos e a restructuring of excessive public debt?