patrick.net

New Renter says

and again with the fear mongering.

Sorry-some things are scary and deflation is one of them. If you look through my posts, I think you'll find I'm a generally optimistic sort, but there's not really anything to celebrate in a depression.

tatupu70 says

there's not really anything to celebrate in a depression.

At a human level, a depression can be a good thing. Less greed, more time talking to your neighbor (in bread lines), and a general refocus on the things that really matter.

Though of course there are jumpers too.

To God, all things are good.

Deflation is nothing to be afraid of unless you are leveraged to the hilt, which is why the government and the banks are afraid of it.

You mutts associate deflation with the great depression but depressions and deflation are two separate things. Inflationary depressions are more common. The reason the great depression was so severe was because of the handiwork of Hoover and FDR, mostly the latter. The recession of 1921 was much more severe and was over in 18 months but again because of the two mutts...

To everyone else it is a good thing.

indigenous says

Deflation is nothing to be afraid of unless you are leveraged to the hilt...

... or you need a job to survive.

Heraclitusstudent says

indigenous says

Deflation is nothing to be afraid of unless you are leveraged to the hilt...

... or you need a job to survive.

Which is why the wealthy would love deflation--they don't need a job and they have available cash that can be used to buy assets at fire sale prices.

Heraclitusstudent says

... or you need a job to survive.

Au contraire, deflation is the natural disposition of the economy, it was the way the US rolled up until 1913.

indigenous says

Heraclitusstudent says

... or you need a job to survive.

Au contraire, deflation is the natural disposition of the economy, it was the way the US rolled up until 1913.

You are talking of a period with large population and productivity growth. And also probably low leverage.

With the current leverage, deflation, left to itself, means the global financial system collapses. A large part of companies would go bankrupt for purely financial reasons, reasons that have nothing to do with the validity of their businesses.

Heraclitusstudent says

You are talking of a period with large population and productivity growth. And also probably low leverage.

Why is leverage good?

Heraclitusstudent says

With the current leverage, deflation, left to itself, means the global financial system collapses. A large part of companies would go bankrupt for purely financial reasons, reasons that have nothing to do with the validity of their businesses.

You don't think that is going to happen anyway? cuz it's gunna. It happened severely in 1921 worse than at any other time in US history yet it was over in 18 months, only because Silent Cal and Harding had the good sense to do nothing other than Raise the interest rate and cut the Fed government in half.

This time would be bad but once it was over we could have honest money and a real economy at least theoretically.

Another thing regarding this is the fat tail, the millennials may surprise everyone and see the wisdom I speak of and dump the asinine D v R thing. And say get the spending under control.

Call it Crazy says

Why is it the most prolific and king of lying on Patnet accuses others of what he does EVERY DAY here?

You see CIC this is text book example of projecting, the cure is to take the red pill, unfortunately the Wogster is addicted to the blue pill

indigenous says

Why is leverage good?

It's not.
It's a way to mask the fact that the US is not producing as much as it buys.

indigenous says

You don't think that is going to happen anyway? cuz it's gunna.

I don't see how it could happen as long as it is backed by a printing press.
indigenous says

It happened severely in 1921 worse than at any other time in US history yet it was over in 18 months

Believe me, if it happened now, 1921 or 1929 would look like a walk in the park.
You are talking of the entire financial system worldwide. And the real economy is much more dependent on credit flows now. There would be blood in the streets.

Heraclitusstudent says

I don't see how it could happen as long as it is backed by a printing press.

Have you heard of Weimar or Zimbabwe?

Heraclitusstudent says

Believe me, if it happened now, 1921 or 1929 would look like a walk in the park.

You are talking of the entire financial system worldwide. And the real economy is much more dependent on credit flows now. There would be blood in the streets.

That is how the story goes and what Paulsen and Co would like you to believe.

Heraclitusstudent says

What about debts of corporations to buy back stocks?

Very productive.

They is to the CEOs

indigenous says

Have you heard of Weimar or Zimbabwe?

Yes and these were not deflationary collapses.

A condition for hyperinflation is that your debt is not in your currency, in which case printing can't help you.

It's not the case here.

indigenous says

That is how the story goes and what Paulsen and Co would like you to believe.

No, it's a logical conclusion of this loop:
1 - deflation makes debt harder to pay
2 - debt defaults cause more deflation

Which of these 2 do you believe is incorrect?
Because if you believe these 2 then you can see that a leveraged system is inherently unstable, and that the amount of debt is fuel for a chain reaction that would propagate through the system and destroy it.

Heraclitusstudent says

It's not the case here.

Tell that to the 70s

Heraclitusstudent says

Because if you believe these 2 then you can see that a leveraged system is inherently unstable, and that the amount of debt is fuel for a chain reaction that would propagate through the system and destroy it.

It would be bad but it is going to happen either way...

indigenous says

Tell that to the 70s

The 70's got hyperinflation????
You've seen that in that show?

indigenous says

It would be bad but it is going to happen either way...

Explain what is going to prevent the central bank for putting guaranties on everything assets Wall Street touches.

We saw that movie before.

Heraclitusstudent says

The 70's got hyperinflation????

How about double digit mortgages? The debt was in dollars. Your assertion does
not hold water.

Heraclitusstudent says

Explain what is going to prevent the central bank for putting guaranties on everything assets Wall Street touches.

Inflation

indigenous says

How about double digit mortgages? The debt was in dollars. Your assertion does

not hold water.

Double digit mortgages is not hyperinflation.

indigenous says

Inflation

You're losing context so fast....
We were talking about how deflation would destroy the financial system, and you were saying that's not true... because of inflation?
Uh... What???

Heraclitusstudent says

Explain what is going to prevent the central bank for putting guaranties on everything assets Wall Street touches.

The answer is inflation. If the interest rate returns to historic norms, debt service becomes 1/3 to 1/2 of the budget right quick. This means either default of cut the 1 trillion dollar defense budget and entitlements and any superfluousness like what you describe.

Once USD (DXY) closes above 90 real deflation is on it's way and just the beginning of what I would consider a long term deflationary cycle.

My question is @ what "price point" is deflation @ critical mass and the collapse/destruction of the USA or global financial systems taking place? Is it DXY 95, 110, 120?

I have notion that at the brink of destruction what ever that might look like, the USD will lose as stand alone standard currency.

Heraclitusstudent says

What about debts of corporations to buy back stocks?

Very productive.

1. Debt for consumption = mostly stupid, but manageable in moderation. Brings demand forward so eventually the reverse has to hold true when consumer debt stops expanding.

2. Debt for speculation = inflates asset prices, so profitable until it blows up (bubbles....)

3. Debt for real investment (expanding a business) = good idea, unless it proves to be mal investment.

Overall I think deflation is ugly but necessary to clean up the bad debts, especially from category 2.

Graybox says

I have notion that at the brink of destruction what ever that might look like, the USD will lose as stand alone standard currency.

Most likely, as the BRICS gains momentum. The fat tail...

indigenous says

Heraclitusstudent says

Explain what is going to prevent the central bank for putting guaranties on everything assets Wall Street touches.

The answer is inflation.\

Again we were talking of deflation. Please try to keep track.

indigenous says

If the interest rate returns to historic norms, debt service becomes 1/3 to 1/2 of the budget right quick. This means either default of cut the 1 trillion dollar defense budget and entitlements and any superfluousness like what you describe.

This won't happen without strong nominal growth in which case the fiscal deficit can easily be closed.

Heraclitusstudent says

Please try to keep track.

Back at ya

bgamall4 says

I realize that inflation is necessary to compete with some other nations but it is mainly a rip off of the frugal and of the guy on fixed income. It is a rip off of the working people as well. It is a tax. Add to it the commodity tax of cornering the markets in so many ways, and you have a lot of theft from the people

The only correct statement in there is that inflation hurts people on fixed incomes.

Working people are only hurt if their income doesn't keep pace with inflation--and that has nothing to do with inflation, but rather their leverage in the labor market.

bgamall4 says

indigenous says

Heraclitusstudent says

Please try to keep track.

Back at ya

No, we have had massive inflation over the years. This allows wealthy and governments to rack up debt and pay it off. Frugal people are washed out and that is wrong over the long term. I realize that inflation is necessary to compete with some other nations but it is mainly a rip off of the frugal and of the guy on fixed income. It is a rip off of the working people as well. It is a tax. Add to it the commodity tax of cornering the markets in so many ways, and you have a lot of theft from the people.

Inflation is always bad when not naturally occurring as result of an organic boom. In fact countries don't need it to be economic powerhouses and stable, take Germany or even better Switzerland since the 90s with very tame inflation since then, yet their economies rock. There's nothing to fear about deflation as a symptom, only the Fed and the wealthy they protect are fighting it with tooth and nail.

Graybox says

Once USD (DXY) closes above 90 real deflation is on it's way and just the beginning of what I would consider a long term deflationary cycle.

My question is @ what "price point" is deflation @ critical mass and the collapse/destruction of the USA or global financial systems taking place? Is it DXY 95, 110, 120?

I have notion that at the brink of destruction what ever that might look like, the USD will lose as stand alone standard currency.

The USD in relatively strong compare to other shit fiat currencies since the race to global debasement has commenced - so you may have something here though the dollar long train is getting awfully crowded. Wrt to gold though I don't thinl its predicted demise is going to happen, it's putting a reversal in once again and will not reach the gold-doomers predictions imo. The demand for physical has been and is simply too high. There's a reason many countries have been stocking up on gold.

tatupu70 says

bgamall4 says

I realize that inflation is necessary to compete with some other nations but it is mainly a rip off of the frugal and of the guy on fixed income. It is a rip off of the working people as well. It is a tax. Add to it the commodity tax of cornering the markets in so many ways, and you have a lot of theft from the people

The only correct statement in there is that inflation hurts people on fixed incomes.

Working people are only hurt if their income doesn't keep pace with inflation--and that has nothing to do with inflation, but rather their leverage in the labor market.

- It doesn't hurt people on fixed income since interest rates are higher by the inflation rate.
- frugal people are free to invest their savings in assets that keep up with inflation, so they're not hurt.
- on the other hand inflation IS a tax: since we pay capital gain taxes on increased nominal values rather than real values.
- real incomes going down indeed has little to do with inflation.

Heraclitusstudent says

It doesn't hurt people on fixed income since interest rates are higher by the inflation rate.

- frugal people are free to invest their savings in assets that keep up with inflation, so they're not hurt.

- on the other hand inflation IS a tax: since we pay capital gain taxes on increased nominal values rather than real values.

Good points.

Heraclitusstudent says

- It doesn't hurt people on fixed income since interest rates are higher by the inflation rate.

But they aren't higher wrt artifically created inflation which leads to stagflation as we see now. Inflation due to economic boom raises wages and rates. this QE shit doesn't. It inflates asset prices while keeping wages and interest rates down. Very very bad for the middle-class, very good for the uber-wealthy.

mell says

countries don't need it to be economic powerhouses and stable, take Germany or even better Switzerland since the 90s with very tame inflation since then, yet their economies rock.

If you don't discourage savers, you get less internal consumption and more investments. This is the secret of running a trade surplus.

If you keep discouraging savers, you consume a lot, produce little, run a perpetual large trade deficit, and you need a large financial sector to make up the difference. Perhaps bubbles will help you maintain the illusion that all is well.

Can you tell which countries are in which category?

mell says

Inflation due to economic boom raises wages and rates. this QE shit doesn't.

You're exactly right: now they suppress rates so they don't go up as much as the increase in money supply. That's financial repression, punishing savers.

Which is why it matters how money is created and whether it circulates or not. If it is given to rich people to chase assets and push yields down, then indeed it punishes savers.

If it was spent and circulating in the economy, then we would get more growth, more inflation, higher wages and higher rates.

This is why I think all this deflation fear is phony. Governments and central banks can create inflation easily if they choose to.
They just choose not to.

Heraclitusstudent says

This is why I think all this deflation fear is phony. Governments and central banks can create inflation easily if they choose to.

Not really. Even with the record QE printing of 4 trillion, it is 5% of the money supply if you include the bond market. If they pull a Japan then they might get inflation but then there would be a fine line between runaway and the 2% they are after. If it did take off the only way to reign it in would be higher interest rates which would lead to debt service consuming a huge chunk of the budget. Which would lead to Al Sharpton leading the charge...

indigenous says

Not really. Even with the record QE printing of 4 trillion, it is 5% of the money supply if you include the bond market.

Instead of printing $4 trillions and putting it in an account where it just sits doing nothing, try giving $10,000 (free of any debt) to every man woman and children in the US and see if there is still no inflation.

Heraclitusstudent says

Instead of printing $4 trillions and putting it in an account where it just sits doing nothing, try giving $10,000 (free of any debt) to every man woman and children in the US and see if there is still no inflation.

That is the difference between investment and consumption, but they did not do that...

bgamall4 says

It has never kept pace with inflation, however, now they don't even try. It is a myth to think purchasing power has remained constant.

Of course it has. It's only since the late 1970s that it hasn't.

Call it Crazy says

I doubt there would be inflation, since that $10K would be spread through many parts of the economy and not focused in one area.

You think Joe 6-pack, who lives pay-check to pay check, would not go out and splurge given the opportunity, buy a vacation, a new car or an iphone?

http://www.youtube.com/embed/UW5RxOjpR8E

You are talking of people who have been programmed from a young age to BUY BUY BUY

http://www.youtube.com/embed/PRkOBgVx9Dg

The point is that they gave the money to the cronies. No inflation because the money never made it to the market place.

New Renter says

The wealthy don't need a job regardless. During inflation they can just have their people invest their cash and live off the dividends, in a deflation just eh wealthy can just bank the cash.

No work required either way.

Obviously. Inflation hurts those that need a job, however.

New Renter says

As I understand it "full employment" simply means employers don't have a problem filling job openings.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_employment

I doubt most employers had any problem filling openings in the great depression.

I don't think you understand correctly. Do a bit more research on full employment.

Call it Crazy says

So, how do you get inflation from that?

You need to actually understand how an economy works. It's called demand/pull inflation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand-pull_inflation