Author Topic: Money/inflation, the Fed, Banking, Monetary Policy, Dollar, BTC, crypto, Gold  (Read 520972 times)

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1548
    • View Profile
"Not your keys, not your coins", Hardware wallets solve that.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18493
    • View Profile
I bonds
« Reply #2151 on: July 20, 2022, 06:03:22 AM »
one of my financial advisors tells me there is an I bond (think Kudlow)

has a annual purchase limit of $10,000


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69372
    • View Profile
So, if Scott Grannis is right and M2 has come back down, what does that mean for BTC from here forward?

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18234
    • View Profile

https://thebitcoinlayer.substack.com/p/is-bitcoin-an-inflation-hedge-yes

It would seem from the article, Bitcoin is not or not yet a hedge against inflation.  It is a risk investment, not a safe haven - at this point. 

From the article:  "bitcoin hedges our exposure to bureaucratic mismanagement."

Inflation, no matter how defined, has ups and downs to it (different than Bitcoin).  Bureaucratic mismanagement is much more of a constant force with accumulating economic carnage.

Bitcoin peaked 11/7/2021 and since then has lost 2/3rds of its then value.  Inflation has only worsened in that time.

Gold lately does not seem to move directly against inflation.

Real estate, except for the government screwing with it and the crash of 2008, has definitely tracked up with money supply inflation.  But now that we have major price level inflation causing drastic Fed actions, the price movement is downward, even while consumer prices go up and up.

Let's not kid ourselves.  Inflation is a tax.  Inflation is a disease.  Inflation is a destructive force.  There isn't some quick fix trick to escape it.

BTW, I've been buying extra gasoline during this runup, all that I can safely store.  Gas has a 3-6 month shelf life and I'm way past that.   Now what?  I can pour this $2 or $3 gas into my vehicles, not as easy as going to a station, and replace it $4.50-$5, no savings at all.  At that price, I'm not as motivated to replace my get out of town supply so I am less likely to be prepared at that level as time goes on...


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18493
    • View Profile
inflation
« Reply #2155 on: July 21, 2022, 08:10:38 AM »
Doug wrote :

"BTW, I've been buying extra gasoline during this runup, all that I can safely store.  Gas has a 3-6 month shelf life and I'm way past that.   Now what?  I can pour this $2 or $3 gas into my vehicles, not as easy as going to a station, and replace it $4.50-$5, no savings at all.  At that price, I'm not as motivated to replace my get out of town supply so I am less likely to be prepared at that level as time goes on..."

the answer is easy -

buy an EV
just as butti says

 :wink:

as for bitcoin
 it has not worked as a hedge against inflation
 but there still is potential and early in the game
 but it needs to be easier to buy sell and do commerce with it I am thinking
 

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: inflation
« Reply #2156 on: July 21, 2022, 09:49:38 AM »
https://knowhow.napaonline.com/which-sta-bil-fuel-additive-is-right-for-you/


Doug wrote :

"BTW, I've been buying extra gasoline during this runup, all that I can safely store.  Gas has a 3-6 month shelf life and I'm way past that.   Now what?  I can pour this $2 or $3 gas into my vehicles, not as easy as going to a station, and replace it $4.50-$5, no savings at all.  At that price, I'm not as motivated to replace my get out of town supply so I am less likely to be prepared at that level as time goes on..."

the answer is easy -

buy an EV
just as butti says

 :wink:

as for bitcoin
 it has not worked as a hedge against inflation
 but there still is potential and early in the game
 but it needs to be easier to buy sell and do commerce with it I am thinking

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18234
    • View Profile
Re: inflation and EVs
« Reply #2157 on: July 21, 2022, 10:08:23 AM »
G M:  "the answer is easy -

buy an EV
just as butti says
"

 :wink:
--------------------------

Great.  I'll take a golf cart to the mountains...  With a solar panel roof.  Reminds me of when my old car started overheating going up the continental divide.  I kept finding little streams along the side of the road, letting the car cool down and putting a little water back in until I could reach the summit and coast to town.  I wonder how long (at night?) it will take to recharge an old EV once I run the lithium battery down to zero.

The next time I had trouble up there I called AAA, had a big gas powered truck haul me, in the car, on the flatbed, over the mountains.

Tow truck call of the future, "you have 3 customers in front of you and he needs a 9 hour charge between each one of them.  Sir, are you okay to wait in your car?"
-------
In fact I used my ebike for transportation yesterday.  My battery range is down to about 10 miles.  I was able to fit my wallet and cell phone in the bag that includes the battery and controller, but now I have to make an extra trip with a gas vehicle to haul my tools and supplies.  Savings equals zero.

How about lithium power tools?  They're great, but is anyone getting more than a two year life from the battery?  How does $13k sound?  https://www.way.com/blog/tesla-battery-replacement-cost/
Wait.  I have more than one car...

Do you remember the job Butti worked at before entering government?  I don't either.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2022, 10:10:41 AM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18234
    • View Profile
Re: inflation
« Reply #2158 on: July 21, 2022, 10:49:16 AM »
quote author=G M
https://knowhow.napaonline.com/which-sta-bil-fuel-additive-is-right-for-you/
-----------------
Good point.  My relatives who do this also buy the 'non-oxy' fuel.  Everything adds to the cost and trouble - to save cost and trouble.  My main point is, all this over a 7 day supply?  What if I need a two year supply, or forever supply?  Screwed.  But I didn't mention my wind powered boat yet..

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1548
    • View Profile
Nice write up by Arthur Hayes on the European situation
https://cryptohayes.medium.com/excalibur-44b2822dc4e6

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1548
    • View Profile
Might be interesting. We have used the USD as a weapon, and thus forfeited our standing as the world's reserve currency. Locking Russia out of SWIFt was a monumental mistake. In the past, the US could punish Saddam and Gaddafi for pricing oil in Euros, we are now trying to do that with Russia. So far Russia has a better balance sheet than the US from what I understand.

- https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/currencies/dollar-dominance-russia-china-rouble-yuan-brics-reserve-currency-imf-2022-6
- The high USD is causing havoc all over the world.

Luke Gromen has written a lot about this, infact his website has a free pdf (email reqd) that reads almost like a thriller, written several years ago, but explains the current Ukr-Russia war quite well.

The US thinking so far has been that dollar=oil and we can print dollars as much as we want. Gromen's thinking is that all the power is in the hands of the guy with the commodity. Gromen says, the world will pay for oil in their own currencies which will not be backed by a fixed price gold, but a floating gold rate. Apparently, China already does this for Yuan transactions.

He also thinks, the US will have to devalue the currency, significantly to deal with our deficits and solve the Triffin dilemma. Please do read this...I loved it
https://fftt-llc.com/

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69372
    • View Profile
IIRC Scott Grannis is saying that now that the China Cooties' largess is over M2 has returned to suitable levels.

I would also note that given how much higher inflation is than interest rates on T-Bills, by my SWAG calculations the Treasury is profiting over $2T a year in real terms.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69372
    • View Profile


1) Why Inflation Numbers Will Get Worse Before They Get Better

As regular HOTLINE readers know, our bet is that inflation will come down over the next six months to the still high 4 to 6% range. The fall in commodity prices and low market interest rates are signaling a fall in inflation.

BUT: Laffer Associates has a fascinating analysis of the month-by-month inflation rates. The table below shows that for the next three months the inflation numbers that drop out of the year-over-year price calculator were low. Those numbers from a year ago are 5.6% for July 2021, 4.1% for August, and 5% for September.

Monthly Consumer Price Index
 



As Laffer puts it:

“If the next three month’s numbers being added exceed 5.58% (next month), 4.08% (month after next), and 5.04% respectively, the CPI measured inflation will be larger than 9.1% for the months of July, August, and September. Does anyone believe that any one of, let alone all, the numbers for the next three months will be lower than these?”

We don’t.

So it won’t be until October before we see an improvement in the official inflation numbers. That’s REALLY bad news for the Democrats in November.
 
==================


True enough, but I'm thinking the Biden folks and the Pravdas will be pointing this out , , ,


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69372
    • View Profile
Yet with all the inflaion somehow gold is down from approx peak of $2000 to low $1700s , , ,

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69372
    • View Profile
WSJ: Why the Fed may soon need Treasury help
« Reply #2166 on: July 27, 2022, 12:11:25 PM »
Why the Fed May Soon Need Treasury Help
The central bank will be paying much more in interest on reserves to control inflation.
By Judy Shelton
July 26, 2022 12:26 pm ET


Here we go again. Another meeting of the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy committee, and another press conference at which Chairman Jerome Powell will attempt “to explain our actions and answer your questions.” One question financial journalists should ask: Why is the Treasury about to start underwriting the Fed’s operating expenses?

The public may not be aware that when the Fed raises rates, it does so primarily by raising what it pays to commercial banks and other depository institutions on the reserves they hold at the Fed—which are interchangeable with cash and effectively serve as checking accounts. These funds currently total $3.3 trillion. Since December 2008, they reflect accumulated purchases by the Fed of Treasury debt obligations and mortgage-backed securities. The Fed paid for its purchases by crediting the reserve accounts of the sellers.

Another $2.5 trillion in cash is held at the Fed through reverse repurchase agreements that the Fed conducts with a broad set of eligible counterparties, including money market-mutual funds and government-sponsored enterprises as well as commercial banks.

When the Fed announces a higher target range for the federal-funds rate (currently 1.5% to 1.75%), it implements its decision by raising what it pays both on reserve balances (currently 1.65%) and on reverse repurchase agreements (currently 1.55%). Money to pay for these interest expenses comes out of the Fed’s interest earnings on its own portfolio.


The tricky situation the Fed now faces is that its own net interest income—$116.8 billion in 2021, of which 93% was remitted to the Treasury—will soon be exhausted by the higher interest rates it intends to pay on those combined cash funds. A target federal-funds range of 3.25% to 3.5% by year-end would have the Fed shelling out more than $195 billion annually to maintain both reserves and reverse repurchase agreements at current levels. The Treasury will have to advance funds to cover the gap.

Here’s another good question to ask Mr. Powell, since taxpayers might be wondering exactly who is entitled to receive such generous returns from the Fed on their cash holdings: Are these interest payments distributed broadly among financial institutions, or do they mostly go to a handful of very large commercial banks? What percentage of the interest paid by the Fed goes to foreign-owned institutions?

It would be useful to have Mr. Powell walk through the logic of paying banks and money-market funds, foreign and domestic, higher interest rates on risk-free cash accounts and on reverse repurchase agreements as the key to fighting inflation. The Fed explains on its website how paying interest on reserve balances helps to implement monetary policy decisions: “Banks should be unwilling to lend to any private counterparty at a rate lower than the rate they can earn on balances maintained at the Federal Reserve.” So is that the goal? To corral funds that might otherwise finance private lending?

The European Central Bank pays zero interest on deposits, so it’s understandable that U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks would hold large reserve balances at the Fed—some $1.03 trillion as of March 31. Japanese banks figure prominently on the list of counterparties for conducting reverse repo transactions with the Fed; the Bank of Japan’s short-term interest rate target is minus 0.1%.

But Americans might ask why their Treasury will soon provide funds to pay interest on non-U.S. banks’ cash parked at the Fed. This matters because American exporters are bearing the cost of a rising dollar while other major central banks continue to maintain ultralow interest rates to support their domestic economies.

Another pertinent inquiry would press for details on the Fed’s network of currency-swap lines with other central banks, through which the Fed lends dollars in exchange for foreign currencies. Foreign central banks then lend these dollars to their own banking institutions. Use of the swap lines peaked in May 2020 with $449 billion extended to 14 central banks. Does the availability of swap lines with the Fed reduce pressure on other central banks to fight inflation by raising their own interest rates?

Mr. Powell might suggest these are monetary-policy decisions that should be kept separate from fiscal-policy considerations. But this line of separation has already been compromised by the Fed’s practice of remitting its interest earnings back to the Treasury.


The Fed has long boasted of its status as an “independent government agency” that “doesn’t receive funding through the congressional budgetary process.” It seems ironic, then, that the Fed will find it challenging to cover its own operating expenses starting as soon as next week’s interest rate decision.

It would be good to hear some plain-English answers on these matters from Mr. Powell—who earnestly vowed to foster a public conversation about what the Fed is doing—at Wednesday’s press conference.

Ms. Shelton, a monetary economist, is a senior fellow at the Independent Institute and author of “Money Meltdown.”

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18234
    • View Profile
The Problem with the Persistently Late (wrong) Fed
« Reply #2167 on: July 28, 2022, 08:19:01 AM »
Speaking of Deep State, there is "The Fed":

(Mohamed A. El-Erian is president of Queens’ College, Cambridge University. He is an advisor to Allianz, Professor of Practice at The Wharton School, and a senior fellow at  University of Pennsylvania.)

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/3573974-the-problem-with-a-persistently-late-federal-reserve/

...
What started out as inflation driven by a readily identifiable set of exogenous drives — namely, energy and food prices — has been allowed to become more entrenched and broad-based. Depending on who you ask, the blame game for why this has happened involves several actors with a recurrent one: A Fed that mis-analyzed, badly forecasted, poorly communicated, and inadequately responded to a phenomenon that is consequential for our society in a number of ways.

Desperate to catch up, the Fed is likely to take the unusual step of announcing on Wednesday another 75-basis-point increase in interest rates (yes they did) wrapped in a notably hawkish narrative. Equally unusual, and again a reflection of it being so late in responding, it will do so despite multiplying signs that the U.S. economy is slowing rapidly.

No wonder so many more people are worried that the Fed will push us into what would have been an otherwise-avoidable recession. This concern is a reflection of a larger issue: The current inflation dynamics are changing in a way that is likely to catch out the Fed yet again.

It would not surprise me if the recent 9.1 percent inflation print proves to be the peak for now. Specifically, the question is no longer the one that has been on so many people’s worry list, and rightly so: How high will inflation go in the next three months? It is now evolving to how fast and how far will inflation come down — and, equally if not more important, the extent of collateral damage for the economy.

I fear that, given how out of sync the Fed has been for so long, the downward trajectory of inflation may prove sticky and accompanied by unnecessary damage to livelihoods and a further worsening of inequality.

This is a scenario in which households, especially those with low income, face the double whammy of eroding purchasing power and growing income insecurity. It also is a scenario that risks fueling economic and financial instability internationally, as well as domestically.
...
« Last Edit: July 28, 2022, 08:38:57 AM by DougMacG »

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1548
    • View Profile

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1548
    • View Profile
Blackrock is 8.5 T assets under management, and hundreds of institutional investor clients.

https://www.coindesk.com/business/2022/08/04/blackrock-to-offer-crypto-for-institutional-investors-through-coinbase-prime/

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18493
    • View Profile
"Blackrock is 8.5 T assets under management, and hundreds of institutional investor clients."

we heard this too yesterday

 :-D :-D :-D

Except I despise it's chairman and CEO who is a die hard Democrat globalist elitist prick:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Fink

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18493
    • View Profile

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1548
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69372
    • View Profile


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18234
    • View Profile
Re: July's rate was zero. PPI up 18%, BLS.gov latest
« Reply #2175 on: August 11, 2022, 06:49:28 AM »
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/aug/10/monthly-price-increases-unchanged-july-annual-infl/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=morning&utm_term=newsletter&utm_content=morning&bt_ee=5wadC7Rsw3hJo8Ki5PML3Ppigh0maF6fZha%2FqlrE%2BPqrW3I0tCqF2pd9gnGooaTp&bt_ts=1660211131060

CPI is measured and reported YOY, year over year, when Republicans are in office.

Their answer to slow rising prices is to trigger a recession, not to incentivize production or alleviate scarcity. 

How is inflation over, the implication of the one month number, if they screwed up the planting season and fertilizer for the year?  What is the demand inelasticity of food?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Producer prices for goods up 17.9 percent from June 2021 to June 2022
https://www.bls.gov/pPI/

None of that will come back to bite the consumer, the people making under 400k...
« Last Edit: August 11, 2022, 07:12:03 AM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69372
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18234
    • View Profile
Re: Scott Grannis, Biden economy underperformed by a trillion
« Reply #2177 on: August 11, 2022, 11:53:27 AM »

https://scottgrannis.blogspot.com/

Note the M2 charts:
https://scottgrannis.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2022-07-28T14:58:00-07:00&max-results=3


I am a big fan of Scott Grannis.  Note his endorsement of CTUP.  Good to see the M2 correction.

In that context, I nitpick.  He is on our side with policy but tends to understate the severity of the damage of Democrat rule, IMHO.

He goes from not a recession, to stagflation, to recession-lite, to saying the terms don't matter.  It's an election year.  The terms matter.  This is called whatever it would be called if a Republican was in office.  That word is recession - pending revisions and corrections.

"Over the course of the first six months of the year, real GDP declined by 0.63%. On an annualized basis, that works out to -1.25%"  ...   "Today the economy is only about 2.2% below its most recent trend"    (my italics on "only")

[Doug] No. It's 2.2 + 1.25 ( >3%) off recent trends and 3.1 +1.25 ( > 4%) off of long term trends, in what should be in a V-shaped recovery coming out of a covid shutdown, see his job chart.

In that context, 5 - 7% growth should be possible, even normal or expected:
https://www.bea.gov/news/2022/gross-domestic-product-fourth-quarter-and-year-2021-advance-estimate

4.2% shortfall (in a year) off long term trend for this economy is a trillion dollars lost permanently.  That is real money and opportunities lost with lives affected, hence my quibble with the term "only".
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zero growth (-1.25%/yr) when 2 million more "workers" walked across Joe Biden's border, assuming they all contribute as promised, is a serious contraction for all the rest of us, unless you believe those millions of people live on zero dollars.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/biden-lets-in-1-million-illegal-border-crossers-maybe-2-million
« Last Edit: August 11, 2022, 12:00:36 PM by DougMacG »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Scott Grannis, Biden economy underperformed by a trillion
« Reply #2178 on: August 11, 2022, 08:25:20 PM »

https://scottgrannis.blogspot.com/

Note the M2 charts:
https://scottgrannis.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2022-07-28T14:58:00-07:00&max-results=3


I am a big fan of Scott Grannis.  Note his endorsement of CTUP.  Good to see the M2 correction.

In that context, I nitpick.  He is on our side with policy but tends to understate the severity of the damage of Democrat rule, IMHO.

He goes from not a recession, to stagflation, to recession-lite, to saying the terms don't matter.  It's an election year.  The terms matter.  This is called whatever it would be called if a Republican was in office.  That word is recession - pending revisions and corrections.

"Over the course of the first six months of the year, real GDP declined by 0.63%. On an annualized basis, that works out to -1.25%"  ...   "Today the economy is only about 2.2% below its most recent trend"    (my italics on "only")

[Doug] No. It's 2.2 + 1.25 ( >3%) off recent trends and 3.1 +1.25 ( > 4%) off of long term trends, in what should be in a V-shaped recovery coming out of a covid shutdown, see his job chart.

In that context, 5 - 7% growth should be possible, even normal or expected:
https://www.bea.gov/news/2022/gross-domestic-product-fourth-quarter-and-year-2021-advance-estimate

4.2% shortfall (in a year) off long term trend for this economy is a trillion dollars lost permanently.  That is real money and opportunities lost with lives affected, hence my quibble with the term "only".
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zero growth (-1.25%/yr) when 2 million more "workers" walked across Joe Biden's border, assuming they all contribute as promised, is a serious contraction for all the rest of us, unless you believe those millions of people live on zero dollars.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/biden-lets-in-1-million-illegal-border-crossers-maybe-2-million

Note how many of those border crossers are "military age males". Now I'm sure the vast majority have very high IQs, are fluent in English and have the education and training to fill many high tech jobs that are currently going unfilled, but what of those who aren't?

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18493
    • View Profile
Ethereum 2.0
« Reply #2179 on: August 15, 2022, 07:26:18 AM »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69372
    • View Profile
I am only in BTC at the moment. 

Still worth getting in on ETH or too late in your opinion?

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18493
    • View Profile
FWIW
 my opinion that is

I probably would not be a buyer here
as it is near double off its low.  (Unless you have some spare money and you are ready to hold for yrs ).

presumably on anticipation of 2.0 launch

in comparison BC is only up ~ 30 % from its low

in addition there is risk the launch will not take place as anticipated
which would be shock to price
as happened before

so , like BC I still expect it to do well long term

but of course with all the known risks along the way .....







Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69372
    • View Profile
Thank you.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69372
    • View Profile
BTC/ETH

WTF?

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18493
    • View Profile

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1548
    • View Profile
ETH is undergoing a move from Proof of Work to Proof of Stake, around Sept 15, the so called merge. Looks like BTC has topped at 69K this cycle. This was the first cycle top, when there was no blow-off top, and one could assume the next cycle top is in 2025, per the halving schedule. As more people learn of BTC and buy into it, it is possible that there will no longer be blow-off tops, similarly the pull backs will be less pronounced, previous pullbacks were around 85 %, this time it was around 78%.

ETH is more volatile, dont expect it to ever become money or a store of value. It is a centralized coin, controlled by a few rich people. BTC is completely decentralized and the supply is fixed at 21 million.

I would like to leave an important read, below.

https://lookingglasseducation.com/whats-a-debt-spiral-and-is-the-us-already-in-one/

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1548
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69372
    • View Profile
 :-)

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69372
    • View Profile
WSJ: Two Competing Interest Rate Theories
« Reply #2188 on: August 25, 2022, 06:54:12 AM »
Nobody Knows How Interest Rates Affect Inflation
It depends on a question about which economists disagree: Is the economy fundamentally stable?
By John H. Cochrane
Aug. 24, 2022 6:41 pm ET

SAVE

PRINT

TEXT
103

The Federal Reserve building in Washington, Aug. 23.
PHOTO: GRAEME SLOAN/BLOOMBERG NEWS

A grand economic experiment is under way. Can the Federal Reserve contain inflation without raising interest rates much higher than they are now?

Conventional wisdom says that as long as interest rates are below the rate of inflation, inflation will rise. Inflation in July was 8.5%, measured as the one-year change in the consumer price index. The Fed has raised the federal funds rate only from 0.08% in March to 2.33% in August. According to the conventional view, that isn’t nearly enough. Higher rates are needed, now.

This conventional view holds that the economy is inherently unstable. The Fed is like a seal, balancing a ball (inflation) on its nose (interest rates). To keep the ball from falling, the seal must quickly move its nose.

In a newer view, the economy is stable, like a pendulum. Even if the Fed does nothing, so long as there are no more shocks, inflation will eventually peter out. The Fed can reduce inflation by raising interest rates, but interest rates need not exceed inflation to prevent an inflationary spiral. This newer view is reflected in most economic models of recent decades. It accounts for the Fed’s projections and explains the Fed’s sluggish response. Stock and bond markets also foresee inflation fading away without large interest-rate rises.

NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP

Morning Editorial Report

All the day's Opinion headlines.


Preview

Subscribed
So which view is correct? In normal times, it’s hard to tell. Whether seal or pendulum, inflation and interest rates move up or down together in the long run, and they jiggle around each other in the short run.

Advocates for the conventional view argue that the Fed raised interest rates too little in response to inflationary shocks in the 1970s. Only when the Fed raised interest rates substantially above inflation for several years in the early 1980s, provoking two deep recessions, did inflation finally subside. The sooner we get to it, they say, the better.

Advocates for the stable view point to recent decades of steady inflation at zero interest rates in the U.S., Europe and Japan. When deflation appeared and central banks couldn’t move rates much below zero, conventional analysts warned of a “deflation spiral.” It never happened. Why should an inflation spiral break out now?


In both theories, expected inflation matters: If people expect higher inflation next year, they buy or raise prices today. The central assumption behind the unstable inflation-spiral theory is that people expect next year’s inflation to be pretty much the same as last year’s inflation—what economists call “adaptive expectations.” A driver who looks in the rearview mirror to judge where the road is will quickly veer off to one side or another.

The central assumption behind the stable theory is that people think more broadly about future inflation. They’re not clairvoyant, but they don’t ignore useful information and aren’t much worse at forecasting inflation than, say, Fed economists are. If a driver looks forward through the windshield, even a dirty windshield, the car tends to get back on the road.

Economists don’t know for sure whether the economy is stable or unstable, whether inflation can fade away without interest rates substantially above inflation. In that light, the Fed’s actions make some sense. If you really don’t know how interest rates affect inflation, it’s natural to raise rates slowly. Inflation may subside on its own. If not, you can keep raising rates.

If inflation fades, the conventional view will be seriously undermined. If it spirals, absent other shocks, the new view is in trouble. But a good experiment requires everyone to leave the test tube alone. Unfortunately, we are likely to see some new shock: a virus, a war, a financial crisis or a fiscal blowout. Inflation will then rise or fall for reasons having nothing to do with spirals, stability and interest rates.

Mr. Cochrane is a senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution and an adjunct scholar of the Cato Institute. His book “The Fiscal Theory of the Price Level” is out in January.

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1548
    • View Profile
Zoltan- serious read
« Reply #2189 on: August 25, 2022, 05:32:51 PM »
« Last Edit: August 25, 2022, 06:41:23 PM by Crafty_Dog »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69372
    • View Profile
Very important indeed!!!

Much to mull over deeply there.

I note the final words:

"…which is why Bretton Woods III is destined to happen. It’s already happening,
and we will explore the Bretton Woods III topic in detail in our upcoming dispatch:
War and Currency Statecraft."

Hope you will be able to share that with us as soon as it comes out!

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69372
    • View Profile

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1548
    • View Profile
In case anyone is interested..BTC seed storage comparison
https://blog.lopp.net/metal-bitcoin-seed-storage-stress-tests-round-vi/

BTC will likely not rise for a while to all time high's, but it will start its rise in the next few months and  peak in the next cycle by 2025. Usually, BTC correlates inversely to the US dollar. The rising $ is causing havoc in emerging markets/developing countries. The US ofcourse does not care too much about developing countries, but American support for Ukraine has caused a crisis in Europe. EU gas prices have gone ballistic, at some point they will cry UNCLE and unity will break down. The debt levels of many EU countries, especially, Italy, Greece etc are very high. If the FED has to bail out the EU in a crisis, money printing will begin again, rates will ease and we will be off to the races.

Pl. also see this tweet by Greg Foss https://twitter.com/FossGregfoss/status/1559875688051757057 why rates cannot go very high, as around 3.2 % FED rate the interest on on a 30 T$ debt is 1T$ and becomes unpayable, unless they print money. This may be the reason Biden and politicians dont care, the only way out is to print more, give free stuff, devalue the $ and pay of interest in devalued $.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69372
    • View Profile
ETH
« Reply #2193 on: August 28, 2022, 04:44:21 PM »

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1548
    • View Profile
Podcast on dollar
« Reply #2194 on: August 28, 2022, 06:47:20 PM »
This is an amazing podcast, around 70 min gets better over time. Worth a listen as to what's happening to the US $.

https://youtu.be/hDwdximds_0
« Last Edit: August 29, 2022, 02:52:06 AM by Crafty_Dog »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69372
    • View Profile
No opinion on this:

Three Things That Could Kill Crypto
BY MICHAEL WILKERSON TIMEAUGUST 26, 2022 PRINT

0:00
9:45



1

Following the drubbing of the crypto markets in June 2022, with Bitcoin and Ethereum prices down nearly 75 percent and 82 percent, respectively, from their all-time highs, many market observers predicted the early death of the crypto industry. Crypto detractors, including regulators and vested interests in the legacy financial system, each used the rout as evidence that crypto is a dangerous scam that needs to be more heavily regulated, if not completely outlawed. The predictions of imminent doom were premature. Bitcoin is up 37 percent and the price of Ether has doubled since the June lows. Prices will go up and prices will go down. Volatility will persist. This isn’t the point.

While highly correlated with the simultaneous decline and recovery of the equity markets, the crypto market had some notable frauds and failures in the quarter among previously large crypto funds and lenders that caused a domino effect across the industry, much like the collateral damage caused by the collapse of large hedge funds or banks in traditional financial markets.

Notwithstanding the turbulence, sentiment in the industry has remained remarkably strong, buoyed by an evangelical zeal among “cryptonauts” in the underlying mission, utility, and potential of the crypto revolution to address real-world issues, such as financial inclusion for the poor and unbanked, inflation caused by runaway deficit spending and debt issuance, government surveillance and the potential for illegal asset seizures, and the oligopolistic dominance of the big banks in traditional financial markets.

Like any disruptive innovation, crypto is bound to have some ups and downs, false starts, and dead ends. When newly invented bicycles, for example, became a popular and efficient alternative to either walking or traveling by horseback, government officials and the era’s media influencers sought to outlaw them as dangerous nuisances to public safely. Eventually, and despite many crashes and broken bones along the way, the obvious mobility benefits overcame such resistance.


Bitcoin, Ethereum, and some other cryptocurrencies represent a transformative innovation that has potential to radically alter the worlds of money, finance, and much more. These opportunities have been detailed elsewhere. Crypto deserves the chance to develop and succeed, just as enlightened U.S. policy enabled innovation in the Internet era. However, there are at least three major, long-term risks that could leave this potential unrealized: the lack of consumer adoption, regulatory interference, and unforeseen technological innovation.

Lack of Consumer Adoption
What made the last technology revolution successful was the vast consumer applicability of useful (if now annoying and sometimes baneful) applications such as email, web browsers, social media platforms, and multifunction smartphones. Some legislators proposed taxing emails to make up for lost postal service revenue, but wiser heads prevailed. Through the development of TCP/IP—an Internet protocol suite, or the “handshake” between otherwise unconnected computers around the world—what we now call the Internet migrated from an arcane military, then university, research tool to a universal application that today is used by an estimated five billion people around the world. Similarly, 6.8 billion people now have access to smartphones of one kind or another.



However, as of today, crypto remains largely in the playpen of tech bros (and they’re mostly bros). Only an estimated 300 million people (3.75 percent of the world’s population of eight billion) have used crypto. For crypto to thrive, it must be made easier to use by the rank and file of individuals who don’t know how to navigate a command line prompt or care about the math behind a cryptographic hash.

To this end, many of the products and innovations now coming out of the industry are targeted at demystifying crypto and making it more accessible to the “normies” outside the highly technical world it has represented heretofore. Just as AOL moved access to the Internet from UNIX-programmers to grandma and grandpa, so too must crypto, DeFi (decentralized finance), and Web 3.0 make their inevitable migration to simple and widespread consumer use in order to succeed.

Regulatory Interference
Government leaders as diverse and otherwise opposed to one another as U.S. SEC Chairman Gary Gensler, European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, and former U.S. President Donald Trump each have denounced crypto as a scam that needs substantial regulation and governmental oversight, if not outright prohibition on use. These criticisms always fail to mention that the amount of fraudulent and criminal transactions that occur with cash or across bank wires dwarfs any such illicit use in crypto.

China has notoriously taken the lead here, banning for all practical purposes the use of Bitcoin in the formal economy, while, via the People’s Bank of china, simultaneously issuing a digital yuan that is, ultimately, controlled and monitored by the Chinese Communist Party. Whether issued by China, the United States, or the European Union, government-sponsored, central bank-issued digital currencies (CBDCs), while having many viable use cases, are also a potential tool of the surveillance state. If not checked, regulation will facilitate governments’ total informational awareness (and ultimate control) of CBDCs and, thus, every aspect of their citizens’ lives. Bitcoin and Ethereum provide alternatives to enable financial privacy and autonomy.

In the United States, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) recently sanctioned use of Tornado Cash, “a decentralized and non-custodial privacy solution built on Ethereum” that allows users to anonymize transactions that they don’t want made visible to anyone who looks at the details publicly available on the transparent blockchain. There are many legitimate reasons for individuals and business users to keep the details of their financial transactions private. No one wants their medical expenses, political or charitable contributions, supplier or customer data, and other spending visible to the entire world. Notably, this is the first time that OFAC’s financial crimes sanctions (normally targeting terrorists, traffickers, criminal networks, and the like) have been deployed against lines of computer code rather than individuals or legal entities, and its legality will almost certainly be challenged.

A wide-ranging regulatory confrontation is imminent in the United States, and it is entirely possible that regulations are eventually issued that renders use of non-CBDC coins illegal or so burdened by regulation as to make them of little practical use.

Unforeseen Innovation
Lack of adoption and regulatory interference are well-known and oft-discussed risks for crypto. What is less frequently considered is pure technology risk. This is to say, the same relentless advances in technology that enabled secure distributed networks, applications for blockchain technology, and cryptographic keys may be their undoing. For example, advances in quantum computing may one day make the “unbreakable” cryptographic private keys that secure digital wallets vulnerable and thus obsolete. Unlike normal computer code, qubits—quantum bits—are nonbinary (no, not that kind) and can be both 0 and 1 at the same time or oscillate between them. This may eventually allow computations at a speed and complexity impossible today.

It’s not for me to predict what these unforeseen innovations will be—I write as a strategist not as a technologist—but to remind us that technology advances and materializes in unpredictable, unexpected, and seemingly sudden ways. Anyone remember Nokia and Blackberry?

We are in the middle of a revolution that has potential to transform everything from finance and economics to government and politics, and even democracy itself. What advocates see as potential benefits are the very things viewed as threats and dangers by government regimes. Many revolutions launched with great zeal and enthusiasm are not ultimately successful and end up in the dustbin of history. The crypto revolution should be supported by anyone who cares about things like financial decentralization and wresting control from “too big to fail” banks, transaction anonymity and immutability, the right to ownership of one’s data, online privacy, and individual sovereignty.

Only time will tell whether crypto survives these inevitable challenges.

The Epoch Times Copyright © 2022 The views and opinions expressed are those of the authors. They are meant for general informational purposes only and should not be construed or interpreted as a recommendation or solicitation. The Epoch Times does not provide investment, tax, legal, financial planning, estate planning, or any other personal finance advice. The Epoch Times holds no liability for the accuracy or timeliness of the information provided.


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18493
    • View Profile
banned chip sales to China
« Reply #2197 on: September 01, 2022, 10:31:33 AM »
no tariffs on those coming here  :-o

I am very concerned crypto next

they need to control digital currency

these are Democrats

CONTROL

us the key

thoughts ?

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1548
    • View Profile
Re: Money, the Fed, Banking, Monetary Policy, Dollar, bitcoin, crypto, Gold/Silver
« Reply #2198 on: September 01, 2022, 06:14:47 PM »
In the last few decades, the curves have become steeper, takes about 10 yrs for full saturation. BTC is ready for adoption.

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1548
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: September 04, 2022, 12:38:20 PM by Crafty_Dog »