0 votes

Inflation is good

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=auyuQlA1...

Come on everybody, repeat after me. Inflation is good!



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

that Idiot Nadler over at

that Idiot Nadler over at kitco was saying the same thing and pointing to this article.. isn't it amazing how before the fed inflation was nil and if there was inflation it was very low.. these people do not understand what is going on.

"When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny."
-Thomas Jefferson

I am more concerned about the return of my money than the return on my money. --Mark Twain

Inflation is just another

Inflation is just another means to control the individual(s).
With the concentration of unlimited,powers and money emitting from the federal government,and the peoples acknowledgment of it,the people will begin to see their insignificance.

------------------------------------------
"All human constitutions are subject to corruption and must perish unless they are timely renewed and reduced to their first principles.'" --Thomas Jefferson

13 No servant can serve two masters; for either he shall hate the one, and love the other, or else he shall lean to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and riches. - Luke 16

That would be correct assuming we were locked in a

deflationary death spiral.

But since inflation/deflation are merely references to the supply of money (prices being an EFFECT of this fluctuation) and the FED is increasing the available money supply by the trillions, (and prices are still reflecting an increasing, not a decreasing money supply) then I'd say what we have here is a prelude to HYPER-inflation, not a deflationary spiral.

Sure, some prices are falling, like stocks, houses, um..... That's all I can notice in my everyday life. EVERY thing ELSE is going up: medical care, fuel, cars, FOOD, clothing, WATER, ELECTRICITY, and yes, even, and most especially BEER. When a six pack of decent beer costs $9-$10 - that is NOT deflation folks. (and no, I do not drink that yellow near frozen gnat urine excuse for beer that the major breweries crank out - hence my user name)

Thanks but no thanks. In an economic downturn I'd rather prices were falling, NOT RISING. Anyone who argues for inflation during such a time is someone most likely CAUSING the crisis and is in some way profiting from it.

And yes, I am well aware of the debt destruction = currency destruction issue. I say bring it on. Eliminating debt is a good thing. Once it's mostly gone, we can go back to a market driven hard money system.

A real gem

"If you were going to turn to only one economist to understand the problems facing the economy, there is little doubt that the economist would be John Maynard Keynes. Although Keynes died more than a half-century ago, his diagnosis of recessions and depressions remains the foundation of modern macroeconomics. His insights go a long way toward explaining the challenges we now confront."
- Gregory Mankiw

If people would simply drop

If people would simply drop the misguided belief that 'macroeconomics' has anything to do with economics, maybe economists could once again be taken seriously.

While Keynes may well be the high priest of macroeconomics, macroeconomics itself is just a bunch of internally incoherent babble, with little or no utility whatsoever when it comes to explaining of predicting actual economic events and trends. That's why economists practicing macroeconomics have pretty much been dead wrong at everything they've spouted over the years. I mean, these guys actually went around believing the Phillips curve. For decades! And even now, guys like Mankiw is essentially just rehashing by now universally ridiculed arguments from that era, while avoiding explicitly using the most discredited terms. It's absolutely unbelievable.

Because economics and macroeconomics does sound a lot alike, it's very common for economists to do good work in economics and get famous for it (Read Paul Krugman and Robert Shiller, and for all I know even Mankiw), only to then get lazy and start practicing macroeconomics/voodoo babble economics/graph masturbation, as the issues macroeconomics ostensibly deal with are of more immediate popular public interest. Besides, macroeconomics doesn't require much in the way of hard thinking. Just go off about how animal spirits and other children's fairytales justify government intervention in everything, and some star struck administration official is bound to hire you for a high ranking advisory post.

The whole idea that actual economics (now often called microeconomics), somehow magically and unexplainably fails once the number of economic actors reaches a certain (more like uncertain) number, is simply preposterous. Economics is economics. And macroeconomics is just jargon masturbation.

Econ 101

I took economics at a liberal arts college, so we studied both Keynesian and Austrian theories. My 2 textbooks were written by Paul Samuelson and Milton Friedman.

There was no doubt in my mind that Friedman was the wise one. The one who really understands how it all works. Plus, he had a happy face in his photo. It would be twenty years before I found out he was a libertarian.

At any rate, you can work in harmony with nature or you can fight it. The laws of money are like the laws of physics, and the results of actions predictable. The Keynesians build dams and stop salmon spawning and then make us pay for more fish, meanwhile risking a dam-break, while the free-marketers say, let money flow where it will - it will seek its own level, so let it. It's just a wiser way of seeing the problem.

IMissLiberty

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/