Showing posts with label printing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label printing. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 23, 2013

Is It Different This Time?



by Brian Pretti, Financial Sense:


One of the apparent conundrums of US Fed money printing in the current cycle is lack of headline inflation, at least as measured by the CPI. Certainly the CPI calculation itself is open to debate in terms of whether it is accurately depicting the cost of living in the US. But in bigger picture context, alongside quiescent headline CPI, the US credit markets have likewise not priced in meaningfully accelerating inflationary pressures. Although the very act of currency debasement academically connotes rising inflationary pressures, the US Fed has received a free pass in the current cycle so far as prior period predictions of a hyperinflationary fireball have fallen well short of the mark.


Meaningful to global economic and financial market outcomes ahead will be the Bank of Japan monetary extravaganza of a generation that lies directly in front of us. Will Japan be so lucky as to have little to no headline inflationary impact while printing historic amounts of money? Or could it be different this time relative to the US monetary and inflationary experience of the last four to five years? Although not given much recognition amongst the high fiving over recent Japanese equity market levitation, there is one critical difference between the backdrop against which the Fed has operated compared to the landscape the BOJ faces.


Read More



Did you already share this? No? Share it now:

















InvestmentWatch




Is It Different This Time?

Is the Fed Printing Money?

Here’s a seemingly simple question for you: “Is the Fed Printing Money?”

I suspect most of you will reply an emphatic yes, but some of you will say no. Before I give you my take, please ponder a similar question: “Is inflation or deflation coming?”


I posed the inflation question to the audience in my presentation at the Wine Country Conference. My answer was “It depends”.


When I asked the audience “On what does it depend?”, one person answered that it depended on what the Fed did. That answer is incorrect.


Whether the state of affairs is inflation or deflation has precisely the same answer as the question “Is the Fed Printing Money?”: It all depends on the definition.


I started thinking more about definitions while reading the Hoisington Quarterly Review and Outlook for First Quarter 2013 by Lacy H. Hunt and Van R. Hoisington.

“The Federal Reserve is printing money”. No statement could be less truthful. The Federal Reserve (Fed) is not, and has not been, “printing money” as defined as an acceleration in M2 or money supply. Just check the facts. For the first quarter of 2013 the Fed purchased $ 277.5 billion in securities (net) as their security portfolio expanded from $ 2.660 trillion to $ 2.937 trillion. A review of post-war economic history would lead to a logical assumption that the money supply (M2) would respond upward to this massive infusion of reserves into the banking system. The reality is just the opposite. The last week of December, 2012 showed M2 at $ 10.505 trillion, but at the end of March, 2013 it totaled only $ 10.450 trillion which was an unexpected decline of $ 55 billion. Printing money? No.

My Opinion


Personally, I think the Fed is printing. Indeed Bernanke is on record stating that he is printing.


For an extremely humorous look at the question of printing as captured on the Daily Show, please consider Caught in a Massive Lie: Daily Show Comments on Bernanke’s Lies Regarding “Printing Money”


The pertinent point is not whether or not the “Fed is Printing” but rather the consequences of alleged printing and the effect that is having on the credit markets and the Fed’s ability to stimulate loans.


Rather than debate the meaning of “printing” let’s look at the facts Lacy Hunt points out.


  • M2 is falling

  • Velocity is at a six decade low

  • No signs suggest credit creation is turning more productive

  • Debt Constrains Growth

  • Commodities are down 20% in the last two years

By Lacy’s definition, the Fed is “not printing”. By mine, the Fed is. Bernanke says one thing on one occasion and humorously denies it the next. Can all of us be correct? Yes, if Bernanke gets to change his definition mid-stream. Neither Lacy nor I have to.


Note that the unemployment rate is allegedly 7.6%. By a more reasonable measure, the unemployment rate would be over 10%. Of course that starts a debate as to the definition of unemployment.


Similarly, I contend this environment is extremely deflationary. Others mock the deflation assertion pointing out the massive increase in base money supply. They also have to ignore everything else under the sun generally typically equated with deflation.


Does the precise definition of printing or inflation really matter? Only in the context of a debate. One cannot have a debate without agreeing on definitions.


What’s really important is not any definition per se, but rather an understanding of credit, the expansion of credit, and the Fed’s futile attempt to stimulate both credit and hiring.


On that score, I am pretty much on the same page as Hunt and not on the same page as inflationists and hyperinflationists who have expected a massive outbreak of price inflation for the last eight years.


Someday the inflationists may be correct, but it sure does not look like that day will be any time soon.


Mike “Mish” Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com


Mish’s Global Economic Trend Analysis




Is the Fed Printing Money?

Thursday, April 18, 2013

Guest Post: How Does This End?


Originally posted at Monty Pelerin"s World blog,


When Suckers Finally Realize


The fleecing of the American public continues.


The theft takes different forms, but it all serves one purpose — to transfer wealth from the average Joe to the crony corporatists and their political lackeys. Here are but a few examples of how this has been accomplished:


  • Bailouts for the wealthy and well-connected are paid for by the unconnected middle class.

  • Subsidies are provided for unworkable schemes submitted by political donors and favorites. These schemes inevitably fail and the tax-payer is left holding an empty bag.

  • Laws are routinely ignored when “friends” need help. In identical circumstances, would you receive the same treatment as Jon Corzine?

  • Despite the biggest theft in world history, no one was prosecuted. The Savings and Loan crisis in the 1980s was trivial in comparison to the recent financial crisis. More than a thousand S&L executives were prosecuted.

  • Ever-increasing sacrifices in the form of higher taxes from the productive sector are demanded to continue the plush living of the ruling class.

Capitalism and free markets depend upon trust, integrity, property rights and the rule of law. Without these, there are no advantages to free markets. Nor are there any incentives to create wealth. Instead, an economy becomes little more than a massive plunder scheme where the powerful exploit the weak. No economic recovery is possible under such circumstances.


french revolution


When Suckers Revolt


As people recognize what is happening, they alter their behavior. Three reactions are to be expected:


1. Some will become discouraged when they realize the game is stacked against them. They will diminish their efforts to succeed, even perhaps dropping out of the game altogether. Given the enhanced returns to not working, it should not be surprising that this alternative has become popular.


2. Others will adopt the same behavior as the ruling class. They will exploit those lower on the food chain than themselves.  Justice Brandeis warned of the implications of government misbehavior:


In a government of laws, the existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipotent teacher. For good or ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. If government becomes a lawbreaker it breeds contempt for law: it invites every man to become a law unto himself. It invites anarchy.



Daniel Patrick Moynihan described the process of declining moral values as “defining deviancy down.”


3. Others may resort to acts of violence. These reactions could be isolated domestic terrorist acts against government and corporations seen as the exploiters. Or the acts might be broader based where the poor see fit to attempt to take from the wealthy. They also could manifest in wide civil unrest against the government if it is seen as the cause of misery or if it is seen as intending to default on promises made. 


All of this behavior is anti-social and it is unproductive. It reduces the output of the economy, further exacerbating the problems. 


How Does This End? 


It is difficult to know how the current condition ends. Here are a few possibilities, with some opinion added: 


  • Will our ruling class alter its behavior? That is very unlikely. History provides no examples where power is willingly relinquished.

  • Will our economy collapse? That is a likely outcome, although the process could take years or decades. 

  • Will social unrest occur? Probably. The government, at some point will be unable to honor its promises. It is broke and left with the printing of money as its primary source of funds. Stopping the printing means dishonoring promises and likely plunges the country into civil unrest.

  • Will hyperinflation occur? If the government continues to print, that seems to be the inevitable result. 

Issues That Need To Be Solved


 

We are too far into this economic disaster to escape without an economic collapse of some sort. Return to normal economic times is impossible without a complete and thorough purging of the economic distortions and capital mis-allocations produced from decades of government interventions.


The following issues prevent a recovery:


  • No economy can prosper without a strong middle class. They are the productive class in society. They are the small businesses and job creators. Without them, society does not produce. Without production, there is only poverty.

  • Inflation, the cruelest tax of all, is driving up prices while wages and salaries do not keep pace. For those without wealth, there is no way to protect against this theft. For those with wealth, they can rearrange investments to take advantage of inflation, particularly if they are privy to what is coming next.

  • The economy is dysfunctional. It no longer functions efficiently as a result of the burdens it is forced to labor under. The price system has been made less efficient as a result of inflation, manipulated interest rates, subsidies, penalties and other impediments. It no longer provides the information needed by economic actors to make proper decisions.

  • Regime uncertainty discourages action. When economic actors are unable to judge the future, they pull back. Money goes to the sidelines or out of the country.

  • US economic policy and the uncertainty of what comes next has been a great job creator for other countries.

  • Economic growth cannot be forced by central diktats. It occurs only in a climate that is receptive and friendly to risk-taking. It is hard to imagine a worse environment than the current one. That is why there is no investment and no hiring.

What Is The Outlook?


There should be no optimism regarding government changing its ways. History suggests it never does.


The recent plunge in the gold market suggests government has gone all in in its attempt to continue exploitation. Chris Martenson commented on this event:








I am very disappointed by, but not surprised at, the latest transfer of weath to the bankers from everyone else. The most recent gold bear raid has vastly enriched the bullion bankers, once again, at the expense of everyone trying to protect their wealth from global central bank money printing.



Gold is considered a safe-haven against government plunder. It is one of the few escapes from fiat currency debauchery that the small investor has. Whether this latest attack on gold was to make the bullion bankers better off or to scare those trying to protect themselves against government exploitation is irrelevant. When government intervenes (assuming it did, and the circumstantial evidence is pretty strong) in markets in such a manner, it is no longer a referee. It has chosen a side and is a participant in the game. There can be no fair competition when one team owns the referee. That is what happens when government participates in markets.


Historians judge that it took Rome almost two hundred years to die. That determination depends very much upon what you mean by “die.” Arguably Rome died much earlier than historians acknowledge. Rome was dead-man walking before the couple of hundred years it took for it to fall down. 


The US is in similar position. Unless you believe in the miracle of sovereign resurrection, the US is over. The coroner-historians have not pronounced death yet, but they, like with Rome, are behind the curve. This dead man too will eventually fall down.





    




Zero Hedge




Guest Post: How Does This End?

Monday, March 18, 2013

The difference between printing money and wealth (05July12)



The difference between printing money and wealth (05July12)

Capital Account guest Reggie Middleton gives an excellent description on the difference between printing money, and wealth. Recorded from RT, Capital Account…





The difference between printing money and wealth (05July12)

Thursday, February 21, 2013

3Doodler: 3D printing with a pen

The latest episode of Diary of an Internet Phenom involves a Boston-based company, Kickstarter, and a new invention the whole family can enjoy.

WobbleWorks, a Boston-area toy company that needed funding, went onto Kickstarter at the beginning of this week with a total goal of raising $ 30,000. As of last evening, people had pledged $ 900,000 and counting. What could be that compelling? How about a two foot, plastic Eiffel Tower drawn with what’s called “3Doodler,” a new pen that’s a 3D printer.

 

Imagine a magic marker with an electric cord. Press the button and out comes, not ink, but a thin stream of melted plastic that solidifies. Ever see people build little models with toothpicks? It’s like that, but no toothpicks, instead you doodle it free-hand in plastic.

“The same way that you use a pen, you can use a 3Doodler, except that when you lift the 3Doodler off the paper, the pen keeps spilling out ink, so you can write in the air,” says Max Bogue, co-founder of the company that invented the 3Doodler.

The 3Doodler uses biodegradable plastic as ink, which instantly cools and hardens as you draw. That may sound neat, but Bogue thinks the real advantage of the 3Doodler is its simplicity.

“There is no software, there is nothing to learn, all you have to do is just draw with it,” says Bogue.

Latest Stories on Marketplace.org


3Doodler: 3D printing with a pen