2021 - Is inflation finally back in the conversation?

[Cheeseweasel 26437]

17 hours ago, washparkhorn said:

The remedy, I believe, is for business, government, and education to focus more strongly on a less immediate source of competitive advantage: resilience.

I could write a book on this and how poorly it is done in the US. Most times "root cause" analysis in the US becomes "find out who screwed up so we can write them up" instead of improvement.

 

 

 

[52-80 19087]

40 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

"find out who screwed up so we can write them up" instead of improvement.

The gas stations, and Krogers

[Ag with kids 581]

On 7/14/2022 at 10:06 PM, Bozo_Casanova said:

You mean, during a fiscal crisis? And  I’m not even defending that, I’m agnostic but let me get this straight: you supported tax cuts that were 100% financed by debt , ie, stimulative deficit spending during periods of already expanding GDP but  you’ve got a problem with stimulus when the economy is contracting? And you’re complaining about inflation? 
you, sir, are truly an ag with kids.

Yes...during a fiscal crisis.  This is the money supply.  It's 50% higher than 2.5 years ago.  The fucking slope should have normalized a LONG time ago, but the government just keeps pumping cash into the economy.  As my point from MF said...inflation is always and everywhere a MONETARY phenomenon.  There's an extra $3 Trillion dollars more in the economy in the past several years than there should be...

BTW, tax cuts were financed?  Ummm, no...it was the SPENDING that was financed.  The money that comes in as tax revenue isn't the government's in the first place.

Why don't we ever look at THAT side of the ledger?  Of course, over 50% of the spending is welfare/social spending, so I actually know why...Bur, I will say I blame BOTH sides of the aisle for this.  NO ONE will make the hard choices that need to be made regarding any kind of spending the government does.

 

And I take the Ag with kids comment with pride.  I'm an extremely lucky man in life to have these kids.  Kind of sad that you're taking to insults now, though.  You used to be better than that.  But, maybe the tack this site has taken has changed you.  Hope you get back to being the guy I remember from, holy fuck, about 20 years ago...

[Neonmoon 38127]

We need to raise taxes and cut spending 

[Bozo_Casanova 26279]

3 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

 

 

BTW, tax cuts were financed?  Ummm, no...it was the SPENDING that was financed.  The money that comes in as tax revenue isn't the government's in the first place.

Why don't we ever look at THAT side of the ledger?  Of course, over 50% of the spending is welfare/social spending, so I actually know why...Bur, I will say I blame BOTH sides of the aisle for this.  NO ONE will make the hard choices that need to be made regarding any kind of spending the government does.

 

And I take the Ag with kids comment with pride.  I'm an extremely lucky man in life to have these kids.  Kind of sad that you're taking to insults now, though.  You used to be better than that.  But, maybe the tack this site has taken has changed you.  Hope you get back to being the guy I remember from, holy fuck, about 20 years ago...

First, it’s the same thing. Deficit spending is deficits spending and thus an expansion of the money supply. When you root for tax cutting without offsetting them, you’re rooting for deficit spending. Over the last 20 years I’ve made that point, centrally, on virtually everything I’ve posted about econ. That’s why I mostly gave up- I got tired of hearing these self-styled conservative monetarists who were actually no such thing root for uninterrupted stimulus, except when it was required to avert catastrophe or might help someone who needed it.

Second, lighten up Francis. I think you are probably a pretty great human being. But you make me sad because you’ve spent the last 20 years cheering for disaster.

[Ag with kids 581]

1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

First, it’s the same thing. Deficit spending is deficits spending and thus an expansion of the money supply. When you root for tax cutting without offsetting them, you’re rooting for deficit spending. Over the last 20 years I’ve made that point, centrally, on virtually everything I’ve posted about econ. That’s why I mostly gave up- I got tired of hearing these self-styled conservative monetarists who were actually no such thing root for uninterrupted stimulus, except when it was required to avert catastrophe or might help someone who needed it.

Second, lighten up Francis. I think you are probably a pretty great human being. But you make me sad because you’ve spent the last 20 years cheering for disaster.

I root for spending cuts.  Tax cuts are nice, too.  In 2021, the government collected $4.05 trillion in revenue.  I'm going to guess that the government collecting 17.6% of GDP means they're not fucking starving.

You root for tax increases AND spending increases.  So, please don't talk about ME cheering for disaster.

BTW...tax cuts by themselves do not increase the money supply.  Which is the only thing that causes inflation.

I assume you're a good guy too.  But, please don't try to tell me that you're smarter than Milton Friedman.

And I did note you ignored the part of my post which showed that M2 has increased by shitloads over the past 2+ years.  And should have stopped increasing about 1.5 years ago.  Except the federal government AND the Fed Bank kept dumping money into it.  Call it QE69420 or whatever.

 

BTW...I'm going to guess that the other folks you tagged earlier won't respond because they've abandoned this site.  It's become a Burnt Orange DemocraticUnderground here.  I got negged into purgatory (lost 500 rep points in 1 day) because I "dared" to have a contrary opinion in the CR.  So...I don't post there anymore.

Edited July 17, 2022 by Ag with kids

[Bozo_Casanova 26279]

3 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

I assume you're a good guy too.  But, please don't try to tell me that you're smarter than Milton Friedman.

You don’t subscribe to the work of Milton Friedman and neither does the party you think should be directly represented in congress. You are one of the marks in a a highly inflationary, brazen long con that used his work as cover.  The shocking part is that you are a smart guy who still hasn’t wised up. 
You should actually read some Friedman and see if what your party has done is actually in line with his ideas in their proper context and not cherry picked the way some pastors cherry pick scripture to justify hatred and violence. 

Edited July 17, 2022 by Bozo_Casanova

[Brisketexan 104603]

I root for spending cuts.  Tax cuts are nice, too.  In 2021, the government collected $4.05 trillion in revenue.  I'm going to guess that the government collecting 17.6% of GDP means they're not fucking starving.
You root for tax increases AND spending increases.  So, please don't talk about ME cheering for disaster.
BTW...tax cuts by themselves do not increase the money supply.  Which is the only thing that causes inflation.
I assume you're a good guy too.  But, please don't try to tell me that you're smarter than Milton Friedman.
And I did note you ignored the part of my post which showed that M2 has increased by shitloads over the past 2+ years.  And should have stopped increasing about 1.5 years ago.  Except the federal government AND the Fed Bank kept dumping money into it.  Call it QE69420 or whatever.

Milton Friedman was brilliant.
And wrong.
Lots of really brilliant people have had brilliant-sounding hypotheses that turned out to be dead fucking wrong. Milton is one of them. It’s ok to be wrong - I used to think he was dead-on (and I was wrong). What’s not ok is to stay wrong, in spite of decades of evidence debunking your hypothesis.
When you realize that you’re still stanning for a hypothesis that turned to shit in the real world - and you sound EXACTLY like some beret-wearing college sophomore dipshit saying “communism is brilliant, and is the right path - it’s just that true communism hasn’t been tried yet!” - well, that’s probably when you should reassess your position.

[Bozo_Casanova 26279]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Milton Friedman was brilliant.
And wrong.
Lots of really brilliant people have had brilliant-sounding hypotheses that turned out to be dead fucking wrong. Milton is one of them. It’s ok to be wrong - I used to think he was dead-on (and I was wrong). What’s not ok is to stay wrong, in spite of decades of evidence debunking your hypothesis.
When you realize that you’re still stanning for a hypothesis that turned to shit in the real world - and you sound EXACTLY like some beret-wearing college sophomore dipshit saying “communism is brilliant, and is the right path - it’s just that true communism hasn’t been tried yet!” - well, that’s probably when you should reassess your position.

This too.

[jimmyjazz 45557]

Man, when I see someone saying that the M2 slope should have normalized, and then I look at the right side of the graph where it's clear that RECENTLY it has not only "normalized" but FLATTENED OUT, I wonder how intellectually honest they are trying to be.

Could it be a short term wobble?  Absolutely.  Is the budget deficit coming down?  Yes it is.  Where does that put us?

[Ag with kids 581]

17 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

You don’t subscribe to the work of Milton Friedman and neither does the party you think should be directly represented in congress. You are one of the marks in a a highly inflationary, brazen long con that used his work as cover.  The shocking part is that you are a smart guy who still hasn’t wised up. 
You should actually read some Friedman and see if what your party has done is actually in line with his ideas in their proper context and not cherry picked the way some pastors cherry pick scripture to justify hatred and violence. 

I have read a lot of Friedman.  I can agree with Friedman and disagree with a lot of the actions the Republicans have done.  They're mutually exclusive.

If I disagree with the Republican actions that doesn't mean that I think the Democrats are any better, though.  I think they're fucking up WAY worse than the Republicans have.

And drop the "hatred and violence" schtick.  Just because you accuse everyone that disagrees with you a racist doesn't mean it's true.  And if you ever wanted to convince someone of your point, using that line of reasoning is NEVER going to get them to consider your view.  hth

[Ag with kids 581]

17 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Milton Friedman was brilliant.
And wrong.
Lots of really brilliant people have had brilliant-sounding hypotheses that turned out to be dead fucking wrong. Milton is one of them. It’s ok to be wrong - I used to think he was dead-on (and I was wrong). What’s not ok is to stay wrong, in spite of decades of evidence debunking your hypothesis.
When you realize that you’re still stanning for a hypothesis that turned to shit in the real world - and you sound EXACTLY like some beret-wearing college sophomore dipshit saying “communism is brilliant, and is the right path - it’s just that true communism hasn’t been tried yet!” - well, that’s probably when you should reassess your position.

How was Friedman wrong?

What is "right"?

[Ag with kids 581]

3 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

Man, when I see someone saying that the M2 slope should have normalized, and then I look at the right side of the graph where it's clear that RECENTLY it has not only "normalized" but FLATTENED OUT, I wonder how intellectually honest they are trying to be.

Could it be a short term wobble?  Absolutely.  Is the budget deficit coming down?  Yes it is.  Where does that put us?

You do realize that $6 TRILLION has been injected into the money supply in 2 years, right?  It went from $15.5 Trillion to almost $22Trillion.  That's a 41% increase in the money supply in 2.5 years.  NOBODY should be surprised we're seeing inflation.

[jimmyjazz 45557]

3 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

You do realize that $6 TRILLION has been injected into the money supply in 2 years, right?  It went from $15.5 Trillion to almost $22Trillion.  That's a 41% increase in the money supply in 2.5 years.  NOBODY should be surprised we're seeing inflation.

I do not realize that.  When I access the FRED M2 chart, it shows that from June 8 2020 to June 6 2022 the M2 money supply jumped from $18.0T to $21.7T, or $3.7T (a 20.6% jump in 2 years, or 9.8% per year).

Is it a steep climb?  Yes.  For reference, between 2012 and 2019 (July #s) it averaged 5.7% increase per year.

We should at least be honest with the numbers we use.  If you want to use a 2.5 year period, then fine, but you know as well as I do it includes a MASSIVE injection between February 2020 and July 2020.  Blame inflation on that if you must, but don't imply it's a "both sides" issue.

 

[Ag with kids 581]

14 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I do not realize that.  When I access the FRED M2 chart, it shows that from June 8 2020 to June 6 2022 the M2 money supply jumped from $18.0T to $21.7T, or $3.7T (a 20.6% jump in 2 years, or 9.8% per year).

Is it a steep climb?  Yes.  For reference, between 2012 and 2019 (July #s) it averaged 5.7% increase per year.

We should at least be honest with the numbers we use.  If you want to use a 2.5 year period, then fine, but you know as well as I do it includes a MASSIVE injection between February 2020 and July 2020.  Blame inflation on that if you must, but don't imply it's a "both sides" issue.

 

I included huge initial injection that so all you Trump haters wouldn't accuse me of letting him off the hook.  How was I not honest (I FUCKING stated the time period)?

And it IS a "both sides" issue.  The injections of money should have slowed down much earlier.  But, it didn't.

BTW, the rate of increase has been MUCH higher over the past TWO years, too...And it would have been even higher if several of the spending bills proposed in congress hadn't been killed - something like $3 trillion more...

 

[jimmyjazz 45557]

9 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

I included huge initial injection that so all you Trump haters wouldn't accuse me of letting him off the hook.  How was I not honest (I FUCKING stated the time period)?

And it IS a "both sides" issue.  The injections of money should have slowed down much earlier.  But, it didn't.

BTW, the rate of increase has been MUCH higher over the past TWO years, too...And it would have been even higher if several of the spending bills proposed in congress hadn't been killed - something like $3 trillion more...

 

You said $6T in 2 years.  That's false.  I'm done with this stupid argument -- do it in good faith or don't do it at all.

[Ag with kids 581]

7 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

You said $6T in 2 years.  That's false.  I'm done with this stupid argument -- do it in good faith or don't do it at all.

Sorry...I corrected it later in the post...

Quote

You do realize that $6 TRILLION has been injected into the money supply in 2 years, right?  It went from $15.5 Trillion to almost $22Trillion.  That's a 41% increase in the money supply in 2.5 years.  NOBODY should be surprised we're seeing inflation.

I meant the latter...sorry for the confusion.

BTW...rather than being shitty like you were, could you next time ask for some clarification as to which timeline I was referring to?

Edited July 17, 2022 by Ag with kids

[jimmyjazz 45557]

4 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

Sorry...I corrected it later in the post...

I meant the latter...sorry for the confusion.

BTW...rather than being shitty like you were, could you next time ask for some clarification as to which timeline I was referring to?

I prefer to be shitty, particularly when I think someone is dicking with the numbers.

I'm not saying they're good, I'm saying that they are largely the byproduct (in terms of historical excess) of a really unusual set of circumstances.  And that, my friend, is as close as you will ever see me get to defending the Trump administration.

[Ag with kids 581]

18 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I prefer to be shitty, particularly when I think someone is dicking with the numbers.

I'm not saying they're good, I'm saying that they are largely the byproduct (in terms of historical excess) of a really unusual set of circumstances.  And that, my friend, is as close as you will ever see me get to defending the Trump administration.

I wasn't.  I clarified myself.  Congratulations on being a dick.

I have defended nobody except for Milton Friedman.

[UTGrad98 2258]

The fed should have a third mandate and set the amount of the yearly federal  budget. It is impossible for either party to correct our deficit spending now. It is not in their best interest as politicians to do so. I would think congress would jump all over that. Someone explain to me why that is a bad idea. 

[LCHorn 2585]

6 minutes ago, UTGrad98 said:

The fed should have a third mandate and set the amount of the yearly federal  budget. It is impossible for either party to correct our deficit spending now. It is not in their best interest as politicians to do so. I would think congress would jump all over that. Someone explain to me why that is a bad idea. 

Did you take macro at UT?  Deficit spending isn’t inherently bad and the presumption that Congress should be passing the buck on yet another of their constitutionally granted responsibilities is largely why our government is seen as dysfunctional in the first place.   

[52-80 19087]

7 minutes ago, UTGrad98 said:

The fed should have a third mandate and set the amount of the yearly federal  budget. It is impossible for either party to correct our deficit spending now. It is not in their best interest as politicians to do so. I would think congress would jump all over that. Someone explain to me why that is a bad idea. 

The Treasury should be headed by a really strict jewish woman as secretary, and when the president proposes a budget that overspends its revenue, the treasurer can slap him on the hand and admonish “oy vey, where do you get the chutzpah to ask for this? you get bupkis, and i better not hear any kvetching about it, ya goy schmuck”

[UTGrad98 2258]

17 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

Did you take macro at UT?  Deficit spending isn’t inherently bad and the presumption that Congress should be passing the buck on yet another of their constitutionally granted responsibilities is largely why our government is seen as dysfunctional in the first place.   

Just as good, acc. Summer session. 

[Royalfan5 2348]

26 minutes ago, UTGrad98 said:

The fed should have a third mandate and set the amount of the yearly federal  budget. It is impossible for either party to correct our deficit spending now. It is not in their best interest as politicians to do so. I would think congress would jump all over that. Someone explain to me why that is a bad idea. 

Who would they be accountable to? Because if you say no one, I’m going start asking a lot more questions. Who sets the spending priorities?

[UTGrad98 2258]

1 minute ago, Royalfan5 said:

Who would they be accountable to? Because if you say no one, I’m going start asking a lot more questions. Who sets the spending priorities?

 No one. Congress spends it where they wish. How is Congress being accountable to the public working since about 1980? And honestly, the public is the same. No one wants to be the generation who has to show some austerity. So all of us, congress, the public, kick the can down the road. We need to try something else now because nothing will get done until something breaks and then it's too late. I read something years ago that said a 50 trillion deficit is when it breaks. Where are we now, 30 trillion? 

[Ag with kids 581]

1 hour ago, UTGrad98 said:

The fed should have a third mandate and set the amount of the yearly federal  budget. It is impossible for either party to correct our deficit spending now. It is not in their best interest as politicians to do so. I would think congress would jump all over that. Someone explain to me why that is a bad idea. 

As bad as both sides of the aisle are at budgeting, I think having an unelected group of people make decisions for the the budget is WAY worse...

[Ag with kids 581]

48 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

The Treasury should be headed by a really strict jewish woman as secretary, and when the president proposes a budget that overspends its revenue, the treasurer can slap him on the hand and admonish “oy vey, where do you get the chutzpah to ask for this? you get bupkis, and i better not hear any kvetching about it, ya goy schmuck”

I think you're onto something here.

[ChiTownDoc 21101]

3 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

I wasn't.  I clarified myself.  Congratulations on being a dick.

I have defended nobody except for Milton Friedman.

You seem to get butthurt way too easily.  I’m 100% sure Milton would agree.  

[Humble Beast 258]

On 7/16/2022 at 5:48 PM, Neonmoon said:

We need to raise taxes and cut spending 

NeonMoon wants to cut spending. Bozo sounds like a Ron Paul acolyte/sound money acolyte. 
 

These are money printing bottom signs. We should get money printer brrrrr soon. 
 

What will cause it? Idk. Emerging market blow up? Something Eu or Japan related? Those are my guesses based on who the strong dollar is hurting most. 

[Ag with kids 581]

1 hour ago, ChiTownDoc said:

You seem to get butthurt way too easily.  I’m 100% sure Milton would agree.  

[Ag with kids 581]

48 minutes ago, Humble Beast said:

NeonMoon wants to cut spending. Bozo sounds like a Ron Paul acolyte/sound money acolyte. 
 

These are money printing bottom signs. We should get money printer brrrrr soon. 
 

What will cause it? Idk. Emerging market blow up? Something Eu or Japan related? Those are my guesses based on who the strong dollar is hurting most. 

 

[jimmyjazz 45557]

2 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

As bad as both sides of the aisle are at budgeting, I think having an unelected group of people make decisions for the the budget is WAY worse...

Are you talking about the FED or some other group?  I don't trust any typical elected official to make a financial decision beyond their own groceries.

[Ag with kids 581]

14 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Are you talking about the FED or some other group?  I don't trust any typical elected official to make a financial decision beyond their own groceries.

Read the post I was replying to...

It was UNELECTED  people making decisions.

[jimmyjazz 45557]

39 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

Read the post I was replying to...

It was UNELECTED  people making decisions.

Read what I was saying.  I don't trust the ELECTED people to make those decisions.  They're largely idiots.

Did you turn stupid overnight?  WTF happened to you?

[ChiTownDoc 21101]

1 hour ago, Ag with kids said:

That’s a new one.  Do you have to meet every aggy stereotype?

[Bozo_Casanova 26279]

16 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

And drop the "hatred and violence" schtick.  Just because you accuse everyone that disagrees with you a racist doesn't mean it's true. 

Everyone, huh? What an interesting assertion. Can you point a single  example?

Just one. 

Edited July 18, 2022 by Bozo_Casanova

[52-80 19087]

The US will continue deficit spending so long as USD is the reserve currency and sovereigns continue to buy US Treasury bonds to receive such dollaroos in the future.

USD and EUR as a share of global reserves have been on a downslide for the last decade.  RMB's been gaining, but has a longgg way to catch up.

If/when China is making all of the global goods, how attractive will having dollars be?

 

https://data.imf.org/regular.aspx?key=41175

[Cheeseweasel 26437]

[Bozo_Casanova 26279]

3 hours ago, 52-80 said:

The US will continue deficit spending so long as USD is the reserve currency and sovereigns continue to buy US Treasury bonds to receive such dollaroos in the future.

That’s true, but that’s not really the point. The point in this context is the inflationary impact of the expansion of the money supply point to point. 

 

14 hours ago, Humble Beast said:

Bozo sounds like a Ron Paul acolyte/sound money acolyte. 

Far from it. I’m honestly somewhat agnostic on that point. I just think stimulus should pay for itself and that stimulus during expansions is, to paraphrase Jean-Baptiste Say, “real fucking stupid.”

Edited July 18, 2022 by Bozo_Casanova

[52-80 19087]

29 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

That’s true, but that’s not really the point. The point in this context is the inflationary impact of the expansion of the money supply point to point. 

Just commenting on the budget. Pols dont give a real shit about it except only notionally. Theyll keep spending because they can, and because they dont care about the consequences within their term and lifetime

[Blotto 23432]

18 hours ago, UTGrad98 said:

The fed should have a third mandate and set the amount of the yearly federal  budget. It is impossible for either party to correct our deficit spending now. It is not in their best interest as politicians to do so. I would think congress would jump all over that. Someone explain to me why that is a bad idea. 

I agree spending is a problem Congress seems incapable of fixing. I doubt handing that responsibility to the fed, architects of the endless QE Firehose and 0.25% interest rates, would be any more successful. 

Edited July 18, 2022 by Blotto

[Bozo_Casanova 26279]

3 hours ago, 52-80 said:

Just commenting on the budget. Pols dont give a real shit about it except only notionally. Theyll keep spending because they can, and because they dont care about the consequences within their term and lifetime

Well,  most of the time you -can- keep kicking it down the road provided that productivity keeps pace. But that’s precisely why it’s bad to stimulate growing economies- it “loads the gun.” This was pretty standard thinking until the early 80’s when magic beans came to rule fiscal policy.

Edited July 18, 2022 by Bozo_Casanova

[Trey3216 15325]

[Ag with kids 581]

3 hours ago, Trey3216 said:

To be fair, I have inflation for either one...

[Nice Guy Eddie 13411]

csb alert. Pre-covid, I had a casual restaurant near my office I would hit up for lunch twice per week or so. Basically a deli, bakery, soup place. Not fancy but on the edge of  very nice neighborhood. I want to think that I could get out there for $15 or 16. Now I go about once per month. Yesterday was $20. 

Hitting $20 wasn't a huge jump but something psychological to me about seeing that 2 in front. I admittedly thought about it while enjoying my sandwich.

Edited July 19, 2022 by Nice Guy Eddie

[Cheeseweasel 26437]

Inflation. It's what's for dinner.

[Snake Diggity 4614]

I think it is pretty clear that food and gas are the 2 spots pretty much everybody is seeing inflation most prominently.  It’s $40 for us to order pizza delivered when it used to be $25.  Same for driving thru at Chic Fil A.  A trip to HEB is $200-$300 when it used to be $150-$200.  I don’t know the stats on how much of the overall inflation number food/fuel account for, but I do think those 2 items are very much impacted by the war in Ukraine, and that a breakthrough over there would significantly impact their prices, although I think a big % of restaurant prices are related to worker shortages.

[TwiceHorn 31272]

On 7/17/2022 at 2:14 PM, Ag with kids said:

And drop the "hatred and violence" schtick.  

Bozo's quote was 

Quote

 the way some pastors cherry pick scripture to justify hatred and violence. 

Do you deny that it is currenly de rigeur among conservative pastors to, among other things, advocate the execution of homosexuals?

Bozo's point was not even hyperbolic.  It's not schtick.

GTFO of your right-wing disinformation hole.

[Cheeseweasel 26437]

7 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

GTFO of your right-wing disinformation hole.

[gsoda3 3236]

21 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Do you deny that it is currenly de rigeur among conservative pastors to, among other things, advocate the execution of homosexuals?

are you saying jesus was the original cherry picker?