$3,320 this morning…
What I can’t figure out is that the long term and short term TIPS ETFs are underperforming relative to their regular Treasury versions… STIP vs SHY, TIP vs IEF
That’s why I don’t know if inflation is really incoming. If it was, the market would price it in.
The MSM screaming about it doesn’t make it true, obviously.
Just a reminder, here’s the recipe for stagflation:
" Stagflation… occurs when high inflation coincides with stagnant economic growth and rising unemployment.
2 Likes
We don’t have high inflation and none is in sight. Politicians are serious (for the moment) about reducing the deficit.
And I scoffed at buying more from my sister at $2300.
3 days ago: " Fed’s Powell says inflation likely to go up as cost of US tariffs makes its way to consumers."
and 2 days ago, from the European Central Bank:
“The euro area economy has been building up some resilience against global shocks, but the outlook for growth has deteriorated owing to rising trade tensions. Increased uncertainty is likely to reduce confidence among households and firms, and the adverse and volatile market response to the trade tensions is likely to have a tightening impact on financing conditions.”
1 Like
See your Optometrist. This appears to be a medical emergency.
“Inflation is anywhere and everywhere a MONETARY phenomenon.”
Is the FED monetizing more debt? Are US deficits increasing or decreasing?
Of course it is, what’s your point?
Yes, the FED is monetizing more debt. US deficits are growing… why?
Has the need for more dollars been created by the FED? What would happen if they stopped creating more dollars?
What would happen if the Fed stopped expanding the money supply in a growing economy? Deflation, which is what improved the average US worker’s standard of living from 1870 on.
If printing more money made economies richer, Zimbabwe would be the richest country on earth.
We had an extremely long period of stable prices coupled with very high growth rates, that is what made America prosperous. Not just one thing… BOTH things.
We had lots of immigration, and pretty informal policies… you showed up at Ellis Island, got a physical, got registered, BOOM, you were in.
Gold standard.
A young demographic.
No debts.
Pining away for what we used to have doesn’t make those old factors reappear. We have to undergo a decades long and very tough “work out” based on where we are if we want to get back there.
That’s an easy question to answer; the economy would stop growing. 
It is also what caused the Great Depression.
Again, if you think money supply creation is the key to prosperity, Zimbabwe should have been the most prosperous nation on earth. At least we now know you are a Monetarist at heart.
Deflation did not cause the Great Depression. It was a symptom of it, as fractional reserve lending collapsed. Many loans were callable at that time. When loans were called, many companies had to liquidate assets, and thus quit business.
Love how Herbert Hoover was portrayed as “Laissez-Faire,” when the opposite was true. Even under Harding Hoover liked meddling with business. When prices deflated and companies had to reduce wages or lose money, Hoover threatened them. The corporate alternative was lay workers off, which they did in droves.
Many were the causes of the Great Depression, but one was NOT lack of creation of money. Study the severe depression of 1921 under Harding and see how fast the US recovered.
Yes. It’s hard to see inflation being an issue. I doubt it will be possible for relatively small tariff or otherwise cost increases to come anywhere near the huge momentum of falling energy costs.
It seems the trends and economic “predictions” are driven more by left disinformation/undermining/ than reality.
Is there a word for “looking/hoping for the worst”? Sadly, that describes a lot of people these days.
Outright deflation and inflation are both bad in their own ways. We should hope for neither.
1 Like
Your’s is a chicken or egg argument.
Loans were called because the *lender’s money gained in value and they had a higher and better use for it. Money gained in value because it became less available. That phenomena is called monetary deflation.
*banks and depositors
Oh, so banks called in loans and thus decimated borrowers only because “they had a higher and better use for it.” [the money] In other words, banks shot themselves in the foot and pushed companies they lent into insolvency just to redeploy their capital for “better” uses. This actually makes sense to you?
Actually the crisis confidence in banks started in an Austrian bank, if I remember correctly. Story I heard is the bank was Jewish owned, and the Austrian government did not want to bail it out.
Fractional reserve lending is in itself inflationary. When loans go bad, the money supply contracts. When loans are called, companies undergo a cash flow crisis, which often results in loan defaults. When loans go bad, bank reserves evaporate, and banks go under.
Again you confuse the cause and effect. You would best read Murray Rothbard’s epic book on the Great Depression.
Slow and steady deflation is the way that standard of living was raised for workers. As means of production are improved, prices of goods drop. Provided that a boneheaded government does not inflate the money supply.
We are so accustomed to inflation via monetary debasement we think it is “normal,” but it really is not.
You Said:
I say: Recalling loans which were originated as recallable because they were backed in part by depositors’ money and using those funds to pay back depositor’s money on demand is a higher and better use of funds because meeting the demand by depositors is a contractual obligation for the bank.
We seem to be inching closer every day: