Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
- mostly. And you may be correct about the "custodian" vs. direct-LLC-ownership question. But - in the marketplace of ideas, I lean toward the Free Market. In other words we will try both approaches in practice and review/compare/contrast/analyze the data as it emerges.

As to inflation - yes, there has been a lot of discussion on ET (which is another reason that this site is so much more useful than so many other sites). The "dump" is aimed at circulating money, but it is another transfer from taxpayers - present and future, assuming non-repudiation - to the financial corporations. And, yes, it will not enhance lending, because the banks, investors, and related financial institutions will just be handing these dollars around among themselves. And, yes, it will take nationalization of the banks to create the possibility (not the certainty) of correction.

Meantime, the proof of the inflationary aspect of the "dump" has emerged almost immediately: the price of oil futures in US$, which then becomes a component increase in the cost of every other aspect of economic life - in the U.S. at least. Why do these markets - and the currency exchanges - downgrade US$? Because they know that the printing presses are running 24/7 with no increase in real value to warrant the money increase. That is inflation.

paul spencer

by paul spencer (paulgspencer@gmail.com) on Thu Mar 13th, 2008 at 05:14:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
paul spencer:
Why do these markets - and the currency exchanges - downgrade US$? Because they know that the printing presses are running 24/7 with no increase in real value to warrant the money increase. That is inflation

That's the $64 billion issue in relation to inflation: the relationship with the world outside the US.

Sure, an increase in the price of oil or other raw materials imported raises "costs" and to a greater or lesser degree gets passed on, thereby causing "Inflation" to the extent that these costs are a component of the end product.

But since the money will increasingly no longer around in the US to buy anything but essentials, I think that many businesses are simply going to be unable to pass on these increased costs, and we'll see profits taking a hit and/or businesses going bust.

ie what we may well see is value = "money's worth" (not dollars, because no-one will take them) draining out of the US (and exports booming, if the US is capable of producing stuff the rest of the world wants, beyond arms and ammo).

But I don't see inflation beyond that because there will not be "too much money chasing too few goods": the problem will be the on going "black hole" of "deleveraging" which was identified (Migeru, I think) in a really interesting thread a while ago which got on to Japanese deflation.

"The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson

by ChrisCook (cojockathotmaildotcom) on Thu Mar 13th, 2008 at 06:46:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]
create their own counter-force. Inflation is the current reality, though, as you would certainly be aware if you were a consumer here.

As to where it's headed - gasoline consumption is already contracting in the U.S., as are jobs and, now, retail sales. Yes, there are still 'market forces' that operate to some degree. The company from which I will soon retire exports a substantial portion of our product (actual, manufactured-right-here product) to Japan. The recent changes in the ratio of the yen to the dollar has resulted in a heavy volume of quotations - with a lot of associated pressure on being prepared for a quick ramp-up. And, yes, we may be the exception, more than the rule, because so much manufacturing capacity in this country is either dilapidated or gone.

As far as reduced profits and business bankruptcies, no doubt whatsoever. USians are headed for big and bigger problems. "Deleveraging" is at hand.

Meantime, there is inflation here. If you want to blame it on the fact that oligarchical capitalists control costs, government, prices, 'markets', media, etc., I agree completely.

If you want to talk in terms of theories of economics, then: 1) military spending cycles money while reducing the production of goods that actually enter the real, recycling economy; 2) printing money in excess of simple replacement causes "more money to chase the same amount of goods"; 3) raising component costs increases price in non-competitive markets (majority of the consolidated U.S. markets nowadays). All of these are inflationary.

paul spencer

by paul spencer (paulgspencer@gmail.com) on Fri Mar 14th, 2008 at 12:01:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
paul spencer:

1) military spending cycles money while reducing the production of goods that actually enter the real, recycling economy;

True. But the US will be obliged to withdraw from Empire because it is simply no longer sustainable either in material (particularly energy) and increasingly exhausted human resouces.

I think we all agree that the redeployment of the military industrial complex into US infrastructure and particularly renewables is the solution here. A War on Carbon if you like.

ie an entire new generation of manufacturing, which I believe the US may still be capable of (but maybe only if they call the baby boomers out of retirement to mentor the generation brought up to serve in Macdonalds.....)


2) printing money in excess of simple replacement causes "more money to chase the same amount of goods";

Firstly, this is not happening. The "replacement" requirement will actually run into the trillions of dollars, such is the extent of the US asset land value bubble. The Fed isn't even scratching the surface.

Secondly, merely providing "liquidity" in this way merely circulates existing money and avoids deflation. New money is needed for any new development, and the mechanism for providing it is fucked, because what the Fed is not doing is rebuilding Banks' balance sheets in terms of their Capital.

The Nordic (and Northern Rock) solution to this is nationalisation - which simply is not going to happen in the US. So, a "Capital rebuild" can only happen from future Bank profits, and if they ain't lending much then that reduces the scope for future profits as well.

This will be a sloooow process, as in Japan, and definitely not in itself an inflationary one.


3) raising component costs increases price in non-competitive markets (majority of the consolidated U.S. markets nowadays). All of these are inflationary

Here you presume pricing power that increasingly no longer exists because - thanks to the Anglo Disease - the poor bloody consumer is only able to keep buying by borrowing, and that option is now over.

So, either they absorb component price increases (and profits dive) or they go out of business. Quite possibly both.

"The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson

by ChrisCook (cojockathotmaildotcom) on Fri Mar 14th, 2008 at 06:07:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
paul spencer:
Meantime, the proof of the inflationary aspect of the "dump" has emerged almost immediately: the price of oil futures in US$, which then becomes a component increase in the cost of every other aspect of economic life - in the U.S. at least. Why do these markets - and the currency exchanges - downgrade US$? Because they know that the printing presses are running 24/7 with no increase in real value to warrant the money increase. That is inflation.
By how much did the oil futures price jump in response to these $200M from Poulson?

It'd be nice if the battle were only against the right wingers, not half of the left on top of that — François in Paris
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Mar 14th, 2008 at 06:21:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series