Showing posts with label Deflation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Deflation. Show all posts
Thursday, October 13, 2011
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Understanding Inflation Advocates
Understanding Inflation Advocates by Alex Merced
There are two fundamental questions that come up people discuss monetary policy, and peoples views on these two questions which shape what they think policy should be. These questions are:
- Do you expect inflation or deflation as tomorrows problem?
- Do you prefer inflation or deflation?
In terms of these two questions I expect price inflation down the line from the inflation of the money supply which we've seen primarily in bank reserves which I believe has grown beyond the ability for the fed to absorb later on so it's essentially racecar that's revving it's engine before a big race. While I think all manipulations of the money supply have an effect of causing mal-investments in the economy by creating shortages and surpluses of money, if I had to say which is the lesser of two evils I would say deflation. Jorg Guido Hulsmann makes a great case for deflation in his book, Deflation and Liberty.
Although how about the people who prefer inflation, to Austrians such as myself it may seem bizzarre that someone may genuinely think that devaluing peoples savings, and destroying the purchasing power of people on fixed incomes can somehow be good policy. So I thought I'd take a moment to explain some of the inflationists thought process as I understand it.
Why does Price Stability really mean predictable inflation?
Last I checked stability meant constant, so price stability to me would initially mean constant nominal prices but in the world of monetary policy it really means low predictable inflation, generally from 2-4%. Why someone would think this is good policy is primarily psycological. The idea is to create an environment where people feel wealthy cause they think their assets are constantly increasing in value, but really the value generally is constant but it just appears different priced relative to a larger money supply. This approach has some merit to it, but it's based on manipulating the misinformation of peoples views on price increases. As people learn and understand inflation on a larger scale, this should quickly lose any effectiveness as we've seen as people have become more knowledgable in economics the last few years.
This psycological factor is really just a function of the accuracy of peoples education, the 1870s were arguably the most robust period of growth in US history yet it was a period of deflation and generally referred to as the Long Depression. The problem is if people see their assets dropping in nominal prices but don't equate that with increasing purchasing power this can have negative psycological effect, but this only makes the argument for better economic education because growth occured in the 1870s even though people felt negative about their asset values in this era.
There are different ways for deflation and inflation of prices or money supply to occur (depending on which definition your using) which lead to different phenomena. Although the best way to refute someones views on an issue and open them up to yours is to show you understand and empathize with their view more than they do. Knowledge is power, Creativity is power manifest.
There are two fundamental questions that come up people discuss monetary policy, and peoples views on these two questions which shape what they think policy should be. These questions are:
- Do you expect inflation or deflation as tomorrows problem?
- Do you prefer inflation or deflation?
In terms of these two questions I expect price inflation down the line from the inflation of the money supply which we've seen primarily in bank reserves which I believe has grown beyond the ability for the fed to absorb later on so it's essentially racecar that's revving it's engine before a big race. While I think all manipulations of the money supply have an effect of causing mal-investments in the economy by creating shortages and surpluses of money, if I had to say which is the lesser of two evils I would say deflation. Jorg Guido Hulsmann makes a great case for deflation in his book, Deflation and Liberty.
Although how about the people who prefer inflation, to Austrians such as myself it may seem bizzarre that someone may genuinely think that devaluing peoples savings, and destroying the purchasing power of people on fixed incomes can somehow be good policy. So I thought I'd take a moment to explain some of the inflationists thought process as I understand it.
Why does Price Stability really mean predictable inflation?
Last I checked stability meant constant, so price stability to me would initially mean constant nominal prices but in the world of monetary policy it really means low predictable inflation, generally from 2-4%. Why someone would think this is good policy is primarily psycological. The idea is to create an environment where people feel wealthy cause they think their assets are constantly increasing in value, but really the value generally is constant but it just appears different priced relative to a larger money supply. This approach has some merit to it, but it's based on manipulating the misinformation of peoples views on price increases. As people learn and understand inflation on a larger scale, this should quickly lose any effectiveness as we've seen as people have become more knowledgable in economics the last few years.
This psycological factor is really just a function of the accuracy of peoples education, the 1870s were arguably the most robust period of growth in US history yet it was a period of deflation and generally referred to as the Long Depression. The problem is if people see their assets dropping in nominal prices but don't equate that with increasing purchasing power this can have negative psycological effect, but this only makes the argument for better economic education because growth occured in the 1870s even though people felt negative about their asset values in this era.
There are different ways for deflation and inflation of prices or money supply to occur (depending on which definition your using) which lead to different phenomena. Although the best way to refute someones views on an issue and open them up to yours is to show you understand and empathize with their view more than they do. Knowledge is power, Creativity is power manifest.
Friday, August 13, 2010
Labor Economics #1 - Sticky Wages
Labor Economics #1 - Sticky Wages
by Alex Merced
The next few posts I'll be writing will be a series on some aspects of labor economics which will mainly center around wages and upward mobility. In this initial part of the series I'm going to address one of the main Keynesian buzzwords, "Sticky Wages".
John Maynard Keyes (read "Where Keynes went Wrong") makes the admission that it's plausible that an economy can self correct by allowing all prices to adjust downwards if the money supply is reduced for whatever reasons, but contends that there is a problem cause wages are "sticky" so this would make it difficult for businesses to adjust their inventories and prices to maintain the current labor supply since wages won't fall in line with everything else so unemployment ensues. This unemployment will then cause further contraction of the monetary supply causing the economy to just spiral downwards as Keyenes expounds on ideas first proposed by Irving Fisher which really are just echoes of antiquated mercantilist thinking.
What I contend is not to deny that wages move slower than the prices of consumer goods, but if anything this should be a reason to want deflation not inflation. First let's look at the structure of production to explore why wages would move slower in either direction.
Let's say my structure of production looks like so...
Labor+Materials+Tools = Consumer Good
Deflation Scenario
So if the Demand for the consumer good increases I have three choices on where I can costs in this simplified scenario. For many reasons I may try to cut costs as much as possible in Materials and Tools since they are homogenous instead of giving up my trained skilled labor which is heterogenous. I may still have to ask my labor to take some level of a cut in pay but only after I exausted my ability to lower the other prices. So essentially I may have been able to cut my costs enough to get a drop in price in the good of 10% yet from cutting costs elsewhere only had to cut labor costs by 5%.
So if this is going on across the economy essentially laborers will have gotten an effective pay raise cause goods have dropped in price more than their wages did. Given if you look at editorials in times like 1870's or late 1830's when you had this sort deflation without massive unemployment (actual growth in the 1870's) going on, yet psycoligically many people felt things were bad cause they saw the nominal numbers going down so there is something to be said for the psycological state of people.
Inflation Scenario
So let's say the demand for my goods has increased cause the money supply has grown for whatever reasons. Since demand is increasing all over the economy, the demand for the same materials and tools I use will increase over different industries and firms that use those same tools. This widespread demand increase will cause an increase in the price of my materials and tools which I'll have to pass on to the consumer yet this increase will be larger than any raise I may give to my laborers in a attempt to prevent too much of an increase in the final goods price that would effect it's demand.
So basically due to increases in costs primarily in capital goods the price of the good has gone up 10% and wages went up 5% which if this is a widepread phenomena results a pay cut for the laborer. Again, psycologically they feel good cause they see their nominal wages going up without realizing their real wages are going down. This is essentially the story in any bubble or boom, except due to problems with CPI calculations inflation is usually understated.
Conclusion
If sticky wages are a real phenomena then deflation would be the much better environment for real wages and for the laborer. Although what is usally proposed by Keynesians and other types of leftist is to push for more inflation which actually hurts real wages yet psycologically breeds consent of the labor class since they only think in nominal terms. In order to have the benefits of deflation yet without the psycological pessimism, it would be a proper use of an economic figurehead such as a president to explain this phenomena to manage expectations and sentiment.
by Alex Merced
The next few posts I'll be writing will be a series on some aspects of labor economics which will mainly center around wages and upward mobility. In this initial part of the series I'm going to address one of the main Keynesian buzzwords, "Sticky Wages".
John Maynard Keyes (read "Where Keynes went Wrong") makes the admission that it's plausible that an economy can self correct by allowing all prices to adjust downwards if the money supply is reduced for whatever reasons, but contends that there is a problem cause wages are "sticky" so this would make it difficult for businesses to adjust their inventories and prices to maintain the current labor supply since wages won't fall in line with everything else so unemployment ensues. This unemployment will then cause further contraction of the monetary supply causing the economy to just spiral downwards as Keyenes expounds on ideas first proposed by Irving Fisher which really are just echoes of antiquated mercantilist thinking.
What I contend is not to deny that wages move slower than the prices of consumer goods, but if anything this should be a reason to want deflation not inflation. First let's look at the structure of production to explore why wages would move slower in either direction.
Let's say my structure of production looks like so...
Labor+Materials+Tools = Consumer Good
Deflation Scenario
So if the Demand for the consumer good increases I have three choices on where I can costs in this simplified scenario. For many reasons I may try to cut costs as much as possible in Materials and Tools since they are homogenous instead of giving up my trained skilled labor which is heterogenous. I may still have to ask my labor to take some level of a cut in pay but only after I exausted my ability to lower the other prices. So essentially I may have been able to cut my costs enough to get a drop in price in the good of 10% yet from cutting costs elsewhere only had to cut labor costs by 5%.
So if this is going on across the economy essentially laborers will have gotten an effective pay raise cause goods have dropped in price more than their wages did. Given if you look at editorials in times like 1870's or late 1830's when you had this sort deflation without massive unemployment (actual growth in the 1870's) going on, yet psycoligically many people felt things were bad cause they saw the nominal numbers going down so there is something to be said for the psycological state of people.
Inflation Scenario
So let's say the demand for my goods has increased cause the money supply has grown for whatever reasons. Since demand is increasing all over the economy, the demand for the same materials and tools I use will increase over different industries and firms that use those same tools. This widespread demand increase will cause an increase in the price of my materials and tools which I'll have to pass on to the consumer yet this increase will be larger than any raise I may give to my laborers in a attempt to prevent too much of an increase in the final goods price that would effect it's demand.
So basically due to increases in costs primarily in capital goods the price of the good has gone up 10% and wages went up 5% which if this is a widepread phenomena results a pay cut for the laborer. Again, psycologically they feel good cause they see their nominal wages going up without realizing their real wages are going down. This is essentially the story in any bubble or boom, except due to problems with CPI calculations inflation is usually understated.
Conclusion
If sticky wages are a real phenomena then deflation would be the much better environment for real wages and for the laborer. Although what is usally proposed by Keynesians and other types of leftist is to push for more inflation which actually hurts real wages yet psycologically breeds consent of the labor class since they only think in nominal terms. In order to have the benefits of deflation yet without the psycological pessimism, it would be a proper use of an economic figurehead such as a president to explain this phenomena to manage expectations and sentiment.
Saturday, August 7, 2010
Summarizing Jorg Guido Hulsmann's Lecture on Deflation
Summarizing Jorg Guido Hulsmann's Lecture on Deflation
by Alex Merced
Listen to his Mises U Lecture on Deflation
One of my favorite topics and debates is the Inflation/Deflation debate, of Hulsmann has written extensively about putting him in my top 5 misesians (Murphy, Block, Woods, Hulsmann, and Salerno). This year his lecture was recorded much better than last years, so I was able to gleem much more of the finer points. Ok so let's sum up his argument about why growth can occur during deflation...
Three Examples Of This Good Deflation in the US:
1839-1843: Had Deflation in which unemployment remained near full employment
1870's: Where you had sustained deflation, and the most steady and robust growth in American History
1920's: Where the country went into recession, and allowing it deflate led to a speedy recovery unlike 1929.
(NOTE: In his lecture Hulsmann consciously decided to stick to the current mainstream definition of deflation as drops in the price level, not the typical austrian definition as a drop in the money supply, there is a difference.)
How do Prices Drop from Productivity Gains:
A pully system makes accomplishing a task easier by extending the distance of which I must exert force. So for example to pick something up 3ft I may have to use a force of 10, but if I use a pully and pull 10ft worth of string and only need to use a force of 3, so now with a force of 10 I can pull the block up 9.3ft. As you can see, by extending the distance the productivity has increases, and the structure of production works the same.
For Example Let's Use Hulsmanns Example of the Farmer
Structure One - The Farmer Plows the Field by Hand
Structure Two - Someone Raises the Horse -> The Farmer Uses the Horse to Plow the Field
Structure Three - Someone Mines Steel -> Someone Assembles Parts from Steel -> Someone Assembles the Parts into a Tractor -> The Farmer Uses the Tractor to Plow the Field
So looking at these three it should be obvious structure one would be the most expensive structure of production. In this scenario the farmer would either lose a lot of time plowing the fields himself, or money having to hire many worker to plow for him, so the end good would be more expensive. Although, in structure three, the farmer may be able to plow the whole field by himself in little time with the tractor so his goods would be cheaper. So as the structure of production grows, production becomes more productive, which means the goods can be cheaper, this is the kinda of productivity based price deflation we see in technology all the time.
Next Point: What if deflation occurs cause changes in the supply or demand for money? (IE people want to save more)
In an Equity Based Economy (people + businesses pay cash, little to no debt in the economy) - Producers who do not anticipate the price deflation with lose money when they can't sell their goods at the previous market price. In order not to lose money again the producer will renegotiate the costs up the structure of production making the whole structure nominally cheaper to adjust to the deflation to maintain the same profit margins. If the producer does anticipate, he may stay out of the market to not lose money and wait till some people have in order to negotiate the costs of structure of production. At the end of the day, after adjusting the structure the producer and all the higher stages of production will still have a similar margin of profit after adjusting.
In a Debt Based Economy (people+ businesses incur debt to purchase goods) - This is more painful since the debt's nominal value doesn't automatically go down with prices, so it's difficult to service the debt on the slimmer profits. Although, just like the structures of production, if the lender and borrower both want to continue on they'll renegotiate the principal (original money lent) of the loan probably at a higher rate of interest so it can be serviced in the equilibrium price level. Although not all lenders have the foresight to renegotiate so there will be a period of massive bankruptcy of borrowers and lenders purging the non-sustainable debt leaving the economy with a sustainable foundation. In the end though, new market entrants will surface with the lower costs of business to continue the structure of the production.
Final Point: Why do the elites and powerful fight so hard against deflation?
People need resources to gain power, those who are most powerful and elite in society more than likely have incurred lots of debt in the process of attaining that power. If deflation takes hold, while it doesn't change the overall structure of the economy it does ravage the elites and powerful as they go bankrupt not being able to maintain their large debts, and brings upon a proverbial political power shift to those who saved and acted responsibly under their reign of power.
Conclusion
Not only does deflation not destroy an economy, it actually can make it more robust as seen by historical evidence linked to at the the top. Deflation truly threatens the elite who's policies and reign causes the massive inflation that the deflation corrects, so it plays a very healthy role in making sure young fresh responsible people move up the power ladder while the old corrupt irresponsible power of old is punished for their mis-use of power and leverage.
Listen to his Mises U Lecture on Deflation
One of my favorite topics and debates is the Inflation/Deflation debate, of Hulsmann has written extensively about putting him in my top 5 misesians (Murphy, Block, Woods, Hulsmann, and Salerno). This year his lecture was recorded much better than last years, so I was able to gleem much more of the finer points. Ok so let's sum up his argument about why growth can occur during deflation...
Three Examples Of This Good Deflation in the US:
1839-1843: Had Deflation in which unemployment remained near full employment
1870's: Where you had sustained deflation, and the most steady and robust growth in American History
1920's: Where the country went into recession, and allowing it deflate led to a speedy recovery unlike 1929.
(NOTE: In his lecture Hulsmann consciously decided to stick to the current mainstream definition of deflation as drops in the price level, not the typical austrian definition as a drop in the money supply, there is a difference.)
How do Prices Drop from Productivity Gains:
A pully system makes accomplishing a task easier by extending the distance of which I must exert force. So for example to pick something up 3ft I may have to use a force of 10, but if I use a pully and pull 10ft worth of string and only need to use a force of 3, so now with a force of 10 I can pull the block up 9.3ft. As you can see, by extending the distance the productivity has increases, and the structure of production works the same.
For Example Let's Use Hulsmanns Example of the Farmer
Structure One - The Farmer Plows the Field by Hand
Structure Two - Someone Raises the Horse -> The Farmer Uses the Horse to Plow the Field
Structure Three - Someone Mines Steel -> Someone Assembles Parts from Steel -> Someone Assembles the Parts into a Tractor -> The Farmer Uses the Tractor to Plow the Field
So looking at these three it should be obvious structure one would be the most expensive structure of production. In this scenario the farmer would either lose a lot of time plowing the fields himself, or money having to hire many worker to plow for him, so the end good would be more expensive. Although, in structure three, the farmer may be able to plow the whole field by himself in little time with the tractor so his goods would be cheaper. So as the structure of production grows, production becomes more productive, which means the goods can be cheaper, this is the kinda of productivity based price deflation we see in technology all the time.
Next Point: What if deflation occurs cause changes in the supply or demand for money? (IE people want to save more)
In an Equity Based Economy (people + businesses pay cash, little to no debt in the economy) - Producers who do not anticipate the price deflation with lose money when they can't sell their goods at the previous market price. In order not to lose money again the producer will renegotiate the costs up the structure of production making the whole structure nominally cheaper to adjust to the deflation to maintain the same profit margins. If the producer does anticipate, he may stay out of the market to not lose money and wait till some people have in order to negotiate the costs of structure of production. At the end of the day, after adjusting the structure the producer and all the higher stages of production will still have a similar margin of profit after adjusting.
In a Debt Based Economy (people+ businesses incur debt to purchase goods) - This is more painful since the debt's nominal value doesn't automatically go down with prices, so it's difficult to service the debt on the slimmer profits. Although, just like the structures of production, if the lender and borrower both want to continue on they'll renegotiate the principal (original money lent) of the loan probably at a higher rate of interest so it can be serviced in the equilibrium price level. Although not all lenders have the foresight to renegotiate so there will be a period of massive bankruptcy of borrowers and lenders purging the non-sustainable debt leaving the economy with a sustainable foundation. In the end though, new market entrants will surface with the lower costs of business to continue the structure of the production.
Final Point: Why do the elites and powerful fight so hard against deflation?
People need resources to gain power, those who are most powerful and elite in society more than likely have incurred lots of debt in the process of attaining that power. If deflation takes hold, while it doesn't change the overall structure of the economy it does ravage the elites and powerful as they go bankrupt not being able to maintain their large debts, and brings upon a proverbial political power shift to those who saved and acted responsibly under their reign of power.
Conclusion
Not only does deflation not destroy an economy, it actually can make it more robust as seen by historical evidence linked to at the the top. Deflation truly threatens the elite who's policies and reign causes the massive inflation that the deflation corrects, so it plays a very healthy role in making sure young fresh responsible people move up the power ladder while the old corrupt irresponsible power of old is punished for their mis-use of power and leverage.
Saturday, July 17, 2010
The Difference Between Inflation and Increasing Price Levels
The Difference Between Inflation and Increasing Price Levels
by Alex Merced
One of the biggest debates right now is the inflation versus deflation debate, and much of this debate hinges on the events in consumer goods prices, but can inflation occur even if prices drop? Can prices go up even if inflation hasn't occurred? Yes, and to understand this you need to have a proper definition of inflation As your baseline.
Inflation - Inflation is an increase in the money supply, not the mere act of rising price levels. The Money supply can increase and prices react in all sorts of ways across different sectors of the economy, no matter how they react the fundamental relationship between the demand for goods and the supply of money has changed and it will have it's effects on the economy.
Hyperinflation - Hyperinflation has more nuanced definition, it's not just merely that prices are increasing at super speeds, but that the faith in the money as a medium of exchange has broken. A good money requires people to believe that if they accept it that they can in turn use to trade with someone else, cause the seller usually has no interest in the money itself other than for trading. Although if the supply of money is expected to grow at large rates for the foreseeable future less people will accept the money due to the fear of the loss of purchasing power from the growing supply. If people have believe that the money in itself is stable measure of value they have no reason to stop using no matter what happens to prices due to innovation gains or natural increases in demands.
Cause of Hyperinflation in a Fiat World - So in a sense hyperinflation occurs when people lose faith in the money, not when prices are allowed to merely rise. In todays Fiat money world, if a governments budget gets larger than it's tax base it must participate in deficit spending. If the government can borrow domestically or from other countries the effect on the supply of money is minimal, but if it cannot find the demand for it's debt from willing lenders then it's central bank will create the demand by increasing the money supply, although this punishes the original domestic and foreign lenders by giving their investment purchasing power risk.
Because of this risk, those lenders in future financing will decide to lend less if not at all meaning the central bank will have to further increase the money supply at even larger quantities. Once a governments budget gets to the point that the only way of financing is through these liquidity injections with no end in sight, less people will begin willing to sell their foreign currency for the domestic currency, meaning foreign goods will begin rise in price dramatically. So as the world begins to lose faith in the domestic currency, the amount of the currency needed to exchange for goods cause of the wavering faith in the currency will see it's hyper inflationary crash. Thus it's crisis of faith in a currency, not a crisis in consumer good prices.
Price Increase and Decreases - While increased in the money supply (inflation) will have upward pressure on prices and a decrease in the money supply (deflation) prices can still go down and up in either environment for a variety of different reasons. Prices of technology go down in an inflationary environment cause of innovation in technology allowing to make the same good at lower prices, although inflation can erase much the nominal drop in price. Another you may see a drop in prices is a drop in demand which may be for a variety of reasons such as better alternatives, credit crunches, and more. Prices can increase in a deflationary environment cause demand for new goods is large, or special programs make credit available for certain goods such as housing or college tuition. Although all these price and increases/decreases would affect the consumer price index (CPI) although they have no fundamental bearing on weather the money itself is a stable medium of exchange. So essentially programs like fannie, freddie, and sallie may help create price bubbles it's really the money supply increases from the central bank that will lead to the destruction of the currency.
So how do I assess todays environment? - Well take the true monetary definition of inflation/deflation one must ask which one are we in? It really depend on which measure of the money supply you use, if you use the numbers like M1,M2, M3 which go beyond the base bank reserves and measure the circulating credit then it would appear as we've been spinning towards deflation. Since there's less credit available there is essentially less money available meaning demand will be limited causing price drops which clearly have been seen in goods such as clothing and other luxuries, although this doesn't really paint a picture of what's going on when the government finances it's budget.
If you take a look at the monetary base (bank reserves/dollars), this number has exploded has doubled and tripled at certain points. When the central bank injects liquidity to help finance the governments budget, the entry point is the monetary base and while credit hasn't been created on top of this base yet, it's still a sign to lenders of the future risk of their investments in US Treasuries (government debt). With many of the politically difficult to remove expenditures of the government budget, deficits seem to be perpetual and the amount of willing lenders has decreased to the point where the central bank is the largest holder of that debt. So while you may not see runaway prices increases you are seeing the faith in the dollar as stable medium of exchange eroding with only the fact that it's the reserve currency of the world, which is something that will take some time for the rest of the world to divest from, but it won't take forever.
Bottom Line: While credit contraction will have downward pressure on consumer prices, the increasing monetary base in order finance a growing government deficit will erode the faith in the currency to cause the inevitable hyperinflation.
by Alex Merced
One of the biggest debates right now is the inflation versus deflation debate, and much of this debate hinges on the events in consumer goods prices, but can inflation occur even if prices drop? Can prices go up even if inflation hasn't occurred? Yes, and to understand this you need to have a proper definition of inflation As your baseline.
Inflation - Inflation is an increase in the money supply, not the mere act of rising price levels. The Money supply can increase and prices react in all sorts of ways across different sectors of the economy, no matter how they react the fundamental relationship between the demand for goods and the supply of money has changed and it will have it's effects on the economy.
Hyperinflation - Hyperinflation has more nuanced definition, it's not just merely that prices are increasing at super speeds, but that the faith in the money as a medium of exchange has broken. A good money requires people to believe that if they accept it that they can in turn use to trade with someone else, cause the seller usually has no interest in the money itself other than for trading. Although if the supply of money is expected to grow at large rates for the foreseeable future less people will accept the money due to the fear of the loss of purchasing power from the growing supply. If people have believe that the money in itself is stable measure of value they have no reason to stop using no matter what happens to prices due to innovation gains or natural increases in demands.
Cause of Hyperinflation in a Fiat World - So in a sense hyperinflation occurs when people lose faith in the money, not when prices are allowed to merely rise. In todays Fiat money world, if a governments budget gets larger than it's tax base it must participate in deficit spending. If the government can borrow domestically or from other countries the effect on the supply of money is minimal, but if it cannot find the demand for it's debt from willing lenders then it's central bank will create the demand by increasing the money supply, although this punishes the original domestic and foreign lenders by giving their investment purchasing power risk.
Because of this risk, those lenders in future financing will decide to lend less if not at all meaning the central bank will have to further increase the money supply at even larger quantities. Once a governments budget gets to the point that the only way of financing is through these liquidity injections with no end in sight, less people will begin willing to sell their foreign currency for the domestic currency, meaning foreign goods will begin rise in price dramatically. So as the world begins to lose faith in the domestic currency, the amount of the currency needed to exchange for goods cause of the wavering faith in the currency will see it's hyper inflationary crash. Thus it's crisis of faith in a currency, not a crisis in consumer good prices.
Price Increase and Decreases - While increased in the money supply (inflation) will have upward pressure on prices and a decrease in the money supply (deflation) prices can still go down and up in either environment for a variety of different reasons. Prices of technology go down in an inflationary environment cause of innovation in technology allowing to make the same good at lower prices, although inflation can erase much the nominal drop in price. Another you may see a drop in prices is a drop in demand which may be for a variety of reasons such as better alternatives, credit crunches, and more. Prices can increase in a deflationary environment cause demand for new goods is large, or special programs make credit available for certain goods such as housing or college tuition. Although all these price and increases/decreases would affect the consumer price index (CPI) although they have no fundamental bearing on weather the money itself is a stable medium of exchange. So essentially programs like fannie, freddie, and sallie may help create price bubbles it's really the money supply increases from the central bank that will lead to the destruction of the currency.
So how do I assess todays environment? - Well take the true monetary definition of inflation/deflation one must ask which one are we in? It really depend on which measure of the money supply you use, if you use the numbers like M1,M2, M3 which go beyond the base bank reserves and measure the circulating credit then it would appear as we've been spinning towards deflation. Since there's less credit available there is essentially less money available meaning demand will be limited causing price drops which clearly have been seen in goods such as clothing and other luxuries, although this doesn't really paint a picture of what's going on when the government finances it's budget.
If you take a look at the monetary base (bank reserves/dollars), this number has exploded has doubled and tripled at certain points. When the central bank injects liquidity to help finance the governments budget, the entry point is the monetary base and while credit hasn't been created on top of this base yet, it's still a sign to lenders of the future risk of their investments in US Treasuries (government debt). With many of the politically difficult to remove expenditures of the government budget, deficits seem to be perpetual and the amount of willing lenders has decreased to the point where the central bank is the largest holder of that debt. So while you may not see runaway prices increases you are seeing the faith in the dollar as stable medium of exchange eroding with only the fact that it's the reserve currency of the world, which is something that will take some time for the rest of the world to divest from, but it won't take forever.
Bottom Line: While credit contraction will have downward pressure on consumer prices, the increasing monetary base in order finance a growing government deficit will erode the faith in the currency to cause the inevitable hyperinflation.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Is Deflation Better?
I constantly speak about the dangers of inflation (increase in the money supply), and inflationary pressures of a growing government. Inflation destroys our purchasing power, causes malinvestment, and encourages risker investing. Inflation is primarily on my mind cause it's more imminent, government is naturally incentivised to inflate, so inflation and it's danger are practical concern although some take this to mean deflation (a decrease in the money supply) is the desired alternative.
They paint this utopian image that in a world of deflation that purchasing power increases, savings will increase meaning more capital for investment and it'll breed a more prudent and moral society. In reality, deflation or any manipulation of the money supply will cause distortions in the economic calculation of market participants, just in different ways.
With deflation artificially increasing the value of money, and what is the story whenever we artificially the price of any good? When prices are fixed above the market price less people will be willing to consume that good so you end up with a surplus. This would be the result of a deflationary environment that even though savings will be available for lending for projects, lenders will not want to pay the higher price of money and will choose not to lend it. So now you have underutilization of resources, and while I would prefer under spending than over spending this is still not ideal.
So does this mean a constant money supply is wanted, not neccessarily because of the downward price level adjustments that will constantly occur to a fixed supply. The only solution to the money supply issue is have a supply free from human influence, meaning no FIAT or paper money. In a world with a commodity backed money, the supply will fluctuate based the demand for the money for industrial use and new money mined through labor.
It's in this world, absent from taxation, regulation, and FIAT money can individuals begin to more accuratly begin economic calculation.
They paint this utopian image that in a world of deflation that purchasing power increases, savings will increase meaning more capital for investment and it'll breed a more prudent and moral society. In reality, deflation or any manipulation of the money supply will cause distortions in the economic calculation of market participants, just in different ways.
With deflation artificially increasing the value of money, and what is the story whenever we artificially the price of any good? When prices are fixed above the market price less people will be willing to consume that good so you end up with a surplus. This would be the result of a deflationary environment that even though savings will be available for lending for projects, lenders will not want to pay the higher price of money and will choose not to lend it. So now you have underutilization of resources, and while I would prefer under spending than over spending this is still not ideal.
So does this mean a constant money supply is wanted, not neccessarily because of the downward price level adjustments that will constantly occur to a fixed supply. The only solution to the money supply issue is have a supply free from human influence, meaning no FIAT or paper money. In a world with a commodity backed money, the supply will fluctuate based the demand for the money for industrial use and new money mined through labor.
It's in this world, absent from taxation, regulation, and FIAT money can individuals begin to more accuratly begin economic calculation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)