Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
DM to Financial Market Guru guy
doogie
Member Posts: 15,072
Looks like things are looking up!
Comments
-
-
But there won’t be inflation.
Everybody says so. -
Have you seen it in the last decade?Kaepsknee said:But there won’t be inflation.
Everybody says so. -
It's almost as if something unprecedented took place.
-
We are living it right now, should be interesting how it plays outKaepsknee said: -
Yes. The idea house prices have, what doubled or tripled in the last 10 years but inflation is 1% makes zero sense when you step back and look at it. The fact the govt changed the calculation to try and pay less SS doesn't mean it doesn't exist...FireCohen said:
Have you seen it in the last decade?Kaepsknee said:But there won’t be inflation.
Everybody says so.
-
Stick to sports.Kaepsknee said:But there won’t be inflation.
Everybody says so. -
@HoustonHusky , we've written much here, and we are on the same page, about what we should be seeing. I don't get it. I think your position is more intellectually-based, mine is more gut-level, "how can that be?" based.HoustonHusky said:
Yes. The idea house prices have, what doubled or tripled in the last 10 years but inflation is 1% makes zero sense when you step back and look at it. The fact the govt changed the calculation to try and pay less SS doesn't mean it doesn't exist...FireCohen said:
Have you seen it in the last decade?Kaepsknee said:But there won’t be inflation.
Everybody says so.
But, fuck, the one thing on which I do not think we (the royal we) have settled is, what is the "right" inflation test analysis? Even if we settle on the right bundle of goods, it doesn't feel inflationary to me if there is a reasonable, or at least rational, economic explanation for price increase other than monetary inflation and pure loss of buying power. That is, if the currency is still a proxy for a robust economy, or the expectation / speculation of it, then do we have real inflation? So stories about supply chains and actual robust demand need not apply to our conversation.
One example is the stock market. Earnings, real value stories and other normal measures of the pie getting larger are disconnected from prevailing prices. There has to be some speculation built in there for post-COVID economis parties. But still, major disconnect. Not inflation in the Germany post WWI sense; but inflationary nonetheless.
For monetary policy inflation, I'm still waiting for the $15 loaf of bread. Am I wrong here? -
We’ve hidden a lot of it through banking/finance...it used to be 20% down on a mortgage with 7% interest. Now it’s 0% down on a house with 3% 30-yr mortgage...keeps the “payments” from ramping up even though the underlying asset’s prices do. For cars you can get, what a 6 or 8 year note now at 2% rate? Unheard of 20 years ago. IPhones are $1,300, but they roll into a monthly fee on the cell plan so nobody knows or cares. College tuition is up 500%, but the govt let’s you finance more $$$ for longer periods of time at artificially low interest rates. It’s why people have so much shite and are still up to their ears in debt.
A lot of this changed with the budget deals with Clinton and Gingrich and even Greenspan way back when...they were looking for ways to limit the SS spending going forward and juice the GDP numbers. It some ways it works, but long-term it helps further divide the haves from the have-nots. And the unforeseen consequence has been that it let the Federal Govt spend itself silly racking up debt. -
Costco hotdog still cost $1.5.....lol. But in all honesty if the old economic theories worked in real life the the gas I am pumping (pump my gas ducks) would be over $10 dollars a gallons based how much money was printed over the years
-
Buckle up buttercup.FireCohen said:Costco hotdog still cost $1.5.....lol. But in all honesty if the old economic theories worked in real life the the gas I am pumping (pump my gas ducks) would be over $10 dollars a gallons based how much money was printed over the years
https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/mysterious-111-billion-payment-gap-talk-town -
Interesting. I did not understand the first third of the article. Typical esoteric finance speak ... and you guys complain about the lawyers invoking latin phrases into our work.doogie said:
Buckle up buttercup.FireCohen said:Costco hotdog still cost $1.5.....lol. But in all honesty if the old economic theories worked in real life the the gas I am pumping (pump my gas ducks) would be over $10 dollars a gallons based how much money was printed over the years
https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/mysterious-111-billion-payment-gap-talk-town
But as I pressed on through the article, I started to get the punchline, which I think is this:
... As in the 1930s, no country wants to see a stronger currency and become a larger net importer of goods (and exporter of jobs). That includes China. To avoid excess FX appreciation on the back of its huge trade surpluses and the rising capital inflows from global markets happily shrugging off any Biden appeals to trans-Atlantic values, Beijing may not only allow easy access to the promised USD50,000 in per capita annual FX outflows, but permit this for buying foreign financial assets or property! Let’s see if this is actually delivered, but if it is, more levitation for all assets outside China seems assured. Ta-dah! Let’s just try not to think of the risks involved from the asset-liability imbalances as foreign capital flows into China, and those FX flow back out again rather than boosting its FX reserves – especially if that FX flows into US assets, helping to push up US real yields even faster
This point of no home team wanting its currency to be over-valued is for most people not an obvious one, but this article is a good explanation for why that is.
@godawgst
@Houhusky
thoughts? -
Why not @oregonblitzkrieg ?creepycoug said:
Interesting. I did not understand the first third of the article. Typical esoteric finance speak ... and you guys complain about the lawyers invoking latin phrases into our work.doogie said:
Buckle up buttercup.FireCohen said:Costco hotdog still cost $1.5.....lol. But in all honesty if the old economic theories worked in real life the the gas I am pumping (pump my gas ducks) would be over $10 dollars a gallons based how much money was printed over the years
https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/mysterious-111-billion-payment-gap-talk-town
But as I pressed on through the article, I started to get the punchline, which I think is this:
... As in the 1930s, no country wants to see a stronger currency and become a larger net importer of goods (and exporter of jobs). That includes China. To avoid excess FX appreciation on the back of its huge trade surpluses and the rising capital inflows from global markets happily shrugging off any Biden appeals to trans-Atlantic values, Beijing may not only allow easy access to the promised USD50,000 in per capita annual FX outflows, but permit this for buying foreign financial assets or property! Let’s see if this is actually delivered, but if it is, more levitation for all assets outside China seems assured. Ta-dah! Let’s just try not to think of the risks involved from the asset-liability imbalances as foreign capital flows into China, and those FX flow back out again rather than boosting its FX reserves – especially if that FX flows into US assets, helping to push up US real yields even faster
This point of no home team wanting its currency to be over-valued is for most people not an obvious one, but this article is a good explanation for why that is.
@godawgst
@Houhusky
thoughts?
-
You know this well as a veteran of the Tug wars. I automatically don't like people who don't like me a split second before they articulate their feelings. It's a gift.PurpleThrobber said:
Why not @oregonblitzkrieg ?creepycoug said:
Interesting. I did not understand the first third of the article. Typical esoteric finance speak ... and you guys complain about the lawyers invoking latin phrases into our work.doogie said:
Buckle up buttercup.FireCohen said:Costco hotdog still cost $1.5.....lol. But in all honesty if the old economic theories worked in real life the the gas I am pumping (pump my gas ducks) would be over $10 dollars a gallons based how much money was printed over the years
https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/mysterious-111-billion-payment-gap-talk-town
But as I pressed on through the article, I started to get the punchline, which I think is this:
... As in the 1930s, no country wants to see a stronger currency and become a larger net importer of goods (and exporter of jobs). That includes China. To avoid excess FX appreciation on the back of its huge trade surpluses and the rising capital inflows from global markets happily shrugging off any Biden appeals to trans-Atlantic values, Beijing may not only allow easy access to the promised USD50,000 in per capita annual FX outflows, but permit this for buying foreign financial assets or property! Let’s see if this is actually delivered, but if it is, more levitation for all assets outside China seems assured. Ta-dah! Let’s just try not to think of the risks involved from the asset-liability imbalances as foreign capital flows into China, and those FX flow back out again rather than boosting its FX reserves – especially if that FX flows into US assets, helping to push up US real yields even faster
This point of no home team wanting its currency to be over-valued is for most people not an obvious one, but this article is a good explanation for why that is.
@godawgst
@Houhusky
thoughts?
OBK is on the Creepycoug no-fly list. Will always be. You can roll around in the dirt with him in the Tug. But you damned-well better clean yourself up and put on a jacket when you come back to the Club. -
Live look at this placecreepycoug said:
You know this well as a veteran of the Tug wars. I automatically don't like people who don't like me a split second before they articulate their feelings. It's a gift.PurpleThrobber said:
Why not @oregonblitzkrieg ?creepycoug said:
Interesting. I did not understand the first third of the article. Typical esoteric finance speak ... and you guys complain about the lawyers invoking latin phrases into our work.doogie said:
Buckle up buttercup.FireCohen said:Costco hotdog still cost $1.5.....lol. But in all honesty if the old economic theories worked in real life the the gas I am pumping (pump my gas ducks) would be over $10 dollars a gallons based how much money was printed over the years
https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/mysterious-111-billion-payment-gap-talk-town
But as I pressed on through the article, I started to get the punchline, which I think is this:
... As in the 1930s, no country wants to see a stronger currency and become a larger net importer of goods (and exporter of jobs). That includes China. To avoid excess FX appreciation on the back of its huge trade surpluses and the rising capital inflows from global markets happily shrugging off any Biden appeals to trans-Atlantic values, Beijing may not only allow easy access to the promised USD50,000 in per capita annual FX outflows, but permit this for buying foreign financial assets or property! Let’s see if this is actually delivered, but if it is, more levitation for all assets outside China seems assured. Ta-dah! Let’s just try not to think of the risks involved from the asset-liability imbalances as foreign capital flows into China, and those FX flow back out again rather than boosting its FX reserves – especially if that FX flows into US assets, helping to push up US real yields even faster
This point of no home team wanting its currency to be over-valued is for most people not an obvious one, but this article is a good explanation for why that is.
@godawgst
@Houhusky
thoughts?
OBK is on the Creepycoug no-fly list. Will always be. You can roll around in the dirt with him in the Tug. But you damned-well better clean yourself up and put on a jacket when you come back to the Club.
-
Thud.RaceBannon said:
Live look at this placecreepycoug said:
You know this well as a veteran of the Tug wars. I automatically don't like people who don't like me a split second before they articulate their feelings. It's a gift.PurpleThrobber said:
Why not @oregonblitzkrieg ?creepycoug said:
Interesting. I did not understand the first third of the article. Typical esoteric finance speak ... and you guys complain about the lawyers invoking latin phrases into our work.doogie said:
Buckle up buttercup.FireCohen said:Costco hotdog still cost $1.5.....lol. But in all honesty if the old economic theories worked in real life the the gas I am pumping (pump my gas ducks) would be over $10 dollars a gallons based how much money was printed over the years
https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/mysterious-111-billion-payment-gap-talk-town
But as I pressed on through the article, I started to get the punchline, which I think is this:
... As in the 1930s, no country wants to see a stronger currency and become a larger net importer of goods (and exporter of jobs). That includes China. To avoid excess FX appreciation on the back of its huge trade surpluses and the rising capital inflows from global markets happily shrugging off any Biden appeals to trans-Atlantic values, Beijing may not only allow easy access to the promised USD50,000 in per capita annual FX outflows, but permit this for buying foreign financial assets or property! Let’s see if this is actually delivered, but if it is, more levitation for all assets outside China seems assured. Ta-dah! Let’s just try not to think of the risks involved from the asset-liability imbalances as foreign capital flows into China, and those FX flow back out again rather than boosting its FX reserves – especially if that FX flows into US assets, helping to push up US real yields even faster
This point of no home team wanting its currency to be over-valued is for most people not an obvious one, but this article is a good explanation for why that is.
@godawgst
@Houhusky
thoughts?
OBK is on the Creepycoug no-fly list. Will always be. You can roll around in the dirt with him in the Tug. But you damned-well better clean yourself up and put on a jacket when you come back to the Club. -
Just keep your sheep herders out of town
-
@creepycoug highlights" But as I pressed on through the article, I started to get the punchline, which I think is this:
... As in the 1930s, no country wants to see a stronger currency and become a larger net importer of goods (and exporter of jobs). That includes China. To avoid excess FX appreciation on the back of its huge trade surpluses and the rising capital inflows from global markets happily shrugging off any Biden appeals to trans-Atlantic values, Beijing may not only allow easy access to the promised USD50,000 in per capita annual FX outflows, but permit this for buying foreign financial assets or property! Let’s see if this is actually delivered, but if it is, more levitation for all assets outside China seems assured. Ta-dah! Let’s just try not to think of the risks involved from the asset-liability imbalances as foreign capital flows into China, and those FX flow back out again rather than boosting its FX reserves – especially if that FX flows into US assets, helping to push up US real yields even faster"
Comments:
Here are interesting stats with the understanding that this is an Cheetas to Lambchops comparison in the sense that who knows what is being included and excluded in the comparison ~ a sardonic but relatable chestnut saying that I love as a stats guy which I always keep in mind when I look at stuff like this is:"figures lie and liars figure".
The obvious point of comparison is about comparing the trajectory of the growth rate... yow, china is off the charts in the trajectory comparison.
The global comparison shows that #3 eventually is India which brings up my main point... the most relevant measure of economic growth over time is measured as a function of new economic household formation.
I'm defining "new economic household formation" as the combination of two factors:
1. The demographic of under 30 youth that as they mature, they enter the work force and set up an independent "economic household" and
2. The hidden factor of those that were living below the average consumption standards of the local economy as measured in a country and regions around the world that are now beginning to grow equity, and are consequently increasing their consumption patterns of raw materials, products and services from previously low 3rd world standards to the average consumption levels of the established economic households in their region [another source of forming a new "economic household".
Simply put, the highest growth rate countries are China and India because the industrialization and build out of infrastructure has created enough critical mass over time to change the consumption patterns from a largely decentralized rural society into the growth patterns associated with industrialization and "modern" urban styles of consumption ~ the very same phenomenon we witnessed in the United States between 1860-1960.
The above breathlessly states an essential underlying difference between emerging economies when compared with those of the mature major markets of the US, Japan, the EU [with the exception of the eastern states] and Germany.
What we are now witnessing in China is amazing when viewed from a historical perspective ~ the trajectory of the accumulation of capital, coupled with the continuing build out of infrastructure which will continue to be supported by way above average new household formation, and way below average cost of manufacturing due to the still way below cost basis of labor and materials is launching them into the strongest economic position we have seen since the American industrial revolution.
Within that context, the government of China is happy to see the inflow of balance of trade excess capital and their existing Government policy to prohibit / limit foreign investment of the accumulated capital of Chinese individuals and corporations is likely to continue indefinitely as it serves to force reinvestment and consumption within the Chinese economy [which only makes it stronger].
-
That is a fanastic post. Bump diggitty. People should read this.
I froze on this piece:
What we are now witnessing in China is amazing when viewed from a historical perspective ~ the trajectory of the accumulation of capital, coupled with the continuing build out of infrastructure which will continue to be supported by way above average new household formation, and way below average cost of manufacturing due to the still way below cost basis of labor and materials is launching them into the strongest economic position we have seen since the American industrial revolution.
What this seems to tell me is that the good times for which everyone pines is when you're in the high-growth trajectory part of the cycle. Capital and wages are at the right point of equilibrium, you have few externalities screwing it up, and you have real, organic growth measured by something real - incremental household establishment. You're right ... what better way to measure how well you're doing than incremental household formation? It factors in so many things in one, clean, easy-to-understand variable.
I wonder ... does that mean we are past our heyday? Do we just need fewer people in the US who have higher levels of education for high-level service and technology jobs? Export that and import the stuff that comes out of manufacturing economies? In other words, truly laissez faire capitalism (will be hard to sell these days ... take a spin in the Tug to see what I mean). Or said another way, is it just more fun to be in an emerging economy than a mature economy?
Your comment about China and India also resonates with me relative to a post @godawgst made in response to my dogmatic "where else you gonna go" routine when responding to arguments that the US economy is fundamentally a house of cards that will collapse. @godawgst posited, "China and India". Perhaps time to consider that as a reality. Does this threaten our perch as world leaders with the chosen reserve currency?
Anyway, this was brilliant @DawgsCanDance .
@DerekJohnson are you paying attention? Quality stuff Stalin. -
Although I agree with most of this thread the one thing to remember about China though is that they lie and cheat. When it comes to banking, that entails a huge number of non-performing loans that the state or corrupt officials ordered done and are sitting there doing nothing and never will.
An example...a company is ordered/incentivized by the state to build a skyscraper...they borrow the money (in many cases from the state), employ a bunch of people, wrack up a boatload of debt and wallah...a skyscraper is born. In normal times they would sell it to a real estate company or lease space out themselves and generate income from it. In China's case however, nobody in a million years will ever enter the building, much less spend any money leasing from it. Its useless. But it shows up as GDP...bank loans...cement used...all sorts of "good" things.
China doesn't disclose real estate occupancy rates...bank nonperforming loans...etc...etc... Its all a black box and a 'trust us'. In some cases they get away with it (like building coal plants to generate electricity to mine bitcoin and sell them to westerners...or print more NIO stock and sell it to westerners), but there is a LOT of useless shite over there that will never in a million years generate economic value.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/fancy-meals-and-loans-for-friends-chinas-banks-face-costly-cleanup-11579627734
Small to mid sized banks are ~1/2 of China's banking now...
-
Alas, that is always the problem with China: transparency. You don't really know what you're looking at for sure.HoustonHusky said:Although I agree with most of this thread the one thing to remember about China though is that they lie and cheat. When it comes to banking, that entails a huge number of non-performing loans that the state or corrupt officials ordered done and are sitting there doing nothing and never will.
An example...a company is ordered/incentivized by the state to build a skyscraper...they borrow the money (in many cases from the state), employ a bunch of people, wrack up a boatload of debt and wallah...a skyscraper is born. In normal times they would sell it to a real estate company or lease space out themselves and generate income from it. In China's case however, nobody in a million years will ever enter the building, much less spend any money leasing from it. Its useless. But it shows up as GDP...bank loans...cement used...all sorts of "good" things.
China doesn't disclose real estate occupancy rates...bank nonperforming loans...etc...etc... Its all a black box and a 'trust us'. In some cases they get away with it (like building coal plants to generate electricity to mine bitcoin and sell them to westerners...or print more NIO stock and sell it to westerners), but there is a LOT of useless shite over there that will never in a million years generate economic value.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/fancy-meals-and-loans-for-friends-chinas-banks-face-costly-cleanup-11579627734
Small to mid sized banks are ~1/2 of China's banking now... -
Interesting questions regarding inflation... My observation is that inflation normally occurs only in markets when you have real world limitations which prevent the ability to rapidly increase capacity of production of commodities, real property, proprietary and commoditized tangible products, goods or services either because of reality based barriers of entry such as the required capital needed to achieve the size and scale to successfully compete on a profitability basis for introducing new capacity [marginal cost of production exceeds todays prevailing price band] , or because of artificially applied constraints on capacity either as a result of government regulation, or because of oligopoly and or monopolistic control forces.creepycoug said:
@HoustonHusky , we've written much here, and we are on the same page, about what we should be seeing. I don't get it. I think your position is more intellectually-based, mine is more gut-level, "how can that be?" based.HoustonHusky said:
Yes. The idea house prices have, what doubled or tripled in the last 10 years but inflation is 1% makes zero sense when you step back and look at it. The fact the govt changed the calculation to try and pay less SS doesn't mean it doesn't exist...FireCohen said:
Have you seen it in the last decade?Kaepsknee said:But there won’t be inflation.
Everybody says so.
But, fuck, the one thing on which I do not think we (the royal we) have settled is, what is the "right" inflation test analysis? Even if we settle on the right bundle of goods, it doesn't feel inflationary to me if there is a reasonable, or at least rational, economic explanation for price increase other than monetary inflation and pure loss of buying power. That is, if the currency is still a proxy for a robust economy, or the expectation / speculation of it, then do we have real inflation? So stories about supply chains and actual robust demand need not apply to our conversation.
One example is the stock market. Earnings, real value stories and other normal measures of the pie getting larger are disconnected from prevailing prices. There has to be some speculation built in there for post-COVID economis parties. But still, major disconnect. Not inflation in the Germany post WWI sense; but inflationary nonetheless.
For monetary policy inflation, I'm still waiting for the $15 loaf of bread. Am I wrong here?
The above discussion now includes the availability to also access foreign goods with higher excess capacity and lower costs of production as well.
Another unseen driving force for price increase occurs within industries which are consolidating via buyouts... the increase in debt to finance the acquisition adds to the cost of production which serves to limit production at previously lower cost basis levels.
The other caveat is that inflation will only occur when the above conditions are met and existing capacity utilization is maxed out... in other words, either new capacity can not be manufactured via freely competing local and global marketplace entities to meet existing demand, or because of logistical issues such a shortage of parts required for sub assemblies somewhere in the production line.
The reason that inflation has been low in many to most markets is because of the excess capacity that has existed in so many basic industries, products and services [again, this includes the availability of foreign produced goods]. So, yah, you will not see $15 loafs of bread unless there is either a shortage of the excess capacity required to satisfy demand at incrementally increasing price points, or there is such control of the bread distribution network via artificially imposed monopolistic price control increases.
-
Right. That all makes perfect sense. But am I wrong to not be particularly worried about that kind of inflation? I mean, sure, if it occurs in too many key industries at the same time, we all have a problem.DawgsCanDance said:
Interesting questions regarding inflation... My observation is that inflation normally occurs only in markets when you have real world limitations which prevent the ability to rapidly increase capacity of production of commodities, real property, proprietary and commoditized tangible products, goods or services either because of reality based barriers of entry such as the required capital needed to achieve the size and scale to successfully compete on a profitability basis for introducing new capacity [marginal cost of production exceeds , or because of artificially applied constraints on capacity either as a result of government regulation, or because of oligopoly and or monopolistic control forces.creepycoug said:
@HoustonHusky , we've written much here, and we are on the same page, about what we should be seeing. I don't get it. I think your position is more intellectually-based, mine is more gut-level, "how can that be?" based.HoustonHusky said:
Yes. The idea house prices have, what doubled or tripled in the last 10 years but inflation is 1% makes zero sense when you step back and look at it. The fact the govt changed the calculation to try and pay less SS doesn't mean it doesn't exist...FireCohen said:
Have you seen it in the last decade?Kaepsknee said:But there won’t be inflation.
Everybody says so.
But, fuck, the one thing on which I do not think we (the royal we) have settled is, what is the "right" inflation test analysis? Even if we settle on the right bundle of goods, it doesn't feel inflationary to me if there is a reasonable, or at least rational, economic explanation for price increase other than monetary inflation and pure loss of buying power. That is, if the currency is still a proxy for a robust economy, or the expectation / speculation of it, then do we have real inflation? So stories about supply chains and actual robust demand need not apply to our conversation.
One example is the stock market. Earnings, real value stories and other normal measures of the pie getting larger are disconnected from prevailing prices. There has to be some speculation built in there for post-COVID economis parties. But still, major disconnect. Not inflation in the Germany post WWI sense; but inflationary nonetheless.
For monetary policy inflation, I'm still waiting for the $15 loaf of bread. Am I wrong here?
Another unseen driving force for price increase occurs within industries which are consolidating via buyouts... the increase in debt to finance the acquisition adds to the cost of production which serves to limit production at previously lower cost basis levels.
The other caveat is that inflation will only occur when the above conditions are met and existing capacity utilization is maxed out... in other words, either new capacity can not be manufactured to meet existing demand, or because of logistical issues such a shortage of parts required for sub assemblies somewhere in the production line.
The reason that inflation has been low in many to most markets is because of the excess capacity that has existed in so many basic industries, products and services. So, yah, you will not see $15 loafs of bread unless there is either a shortage of the excess capacity required to satisfy demand, or there is such control of the bread distribution network via artificial monopolistic price control increases.
But the kind of inflation that worries me is more, umm, for lack of a better word (and at the risk of attracting the Tug goons into this fine, clean thread), system inflation. The kind @HoustonHusky writes about so often. You're injecting too much supply of anything into the system, and we know what is supposed to happen if market forces are left to work the way they want to work.
Or, a closely related version of that kind, the sort of inflation that is more generalized and indicative of the overall and general loss of buying power of your currency because it represents a proxy to an economy and related political complex that is just not viewed as desirable, stable, whatever, by economic participants. In other words, when the dollar becomes analogous to a share of common stock in a declining company. That's the kind that scares me. The kind that helped to give rise to Nazi Germany, where literally within (months was it?) your entire live savings was worth less than 1/5th of what it was (I'm making that number up). That, I think, is the kind of inflation that scares the shit out of people.
In our case, it won't be those geopolitical affairs that did Germany in; but could it be a combo of declining fundamentals in the US coupled with a money printing machine that is working overtime at the Treasury? -
@creepycoug
"The kind @HoustonHusky writes about so often. You're injecting too much supply of anything into the system, and we know what is supposed to happen if market forces are left to work the way they want to work.
Or, a closely related version of that kind, the sort of inflation that is more generalized and indicative of the overall and general loss of buying power of your currency because it represents a proxy to an economy and related political complex that is just not viewed as desirable, stable, whatever, by economic participants. In other words, when the dollar becomes analogous to a share of common stock in a declining company. That's the kind that scares me."
Yep, scares me too... the obvious issue that others are talking about and that I see as well is the eventual cost of servicing ever increasing cost of debt. I mean if you triple the amount of new short term debt at the government AND corporate level, and interest rates double from historically unsustainably low levels as seems overwhelmingly probable, you create the same kind of debt bomb that doomed the mortgage backed market in 2008 and created the liquidity crash which sunk the market... seems like a series of insanely stupid moves by central banks around the world as to be incomprehensible in design.
Your comments regarding the dollar ring true as well... affordability of lower priced foreign good disappears geometrically as the dollar sinks in value. LSD trips as a kid was helpful to understand this at the cellular level. -
Sounds as if I’m at the no warning just gone stage ofcreepycoug said:
Stick to sports.Kaepsknee said:But there won’t be inflation.
Everybody says so.
Damn.creepycoug said:
Stick to sports.Kaepsknee said:But there won’t be inflation.
Everybody says so.
