Looks like Glenn Beck is right on Inflation

Post Reply New Topic

You sure don't act like it, in fact you've kinda demonstrated that you don't know all that much about economics. I may not be an economics expert, but I've pretty much been flying rings around you on this subject.

Are you going to argue that monatizing the debt is a good thing?

If things remain status quo, it is not a question of if, it is a question of when.

Then what do you get your news from Moveon.org, mediamatters?

Cause you typically recite the far left talking points.

As I said before, I don't make bets,

Now are you going to admit that the facts presented based on historical precident is a cause for concern

or are you going to continue in the dishonest practice of trying to get me to make sweeping predictions so if I get even a minor detail wrong you will say I have no credibility.

You have tried this tactic on me before Orwell. It didn't work before, in fact you got called out about it. It will not work on me now.

That and gold. That's all directly tied to Beck's rhetoric. Same as Alex Jones. Both of them hock end-of-civilization crap that'll bankrupt you before the evil "bankers/globalists/jews" do.

Yeah, sure.


Are you going to argue that someone with only a very tenuous grasp on the English language really is likely to know anything about economics?

Anyways, some amount of inflation would be good for the US export market, and given our current balance of trade our export market could use some help. We are very very far away from anything even remotely like hyperinflation.


No, if things remain status quo it is not a question of either if or when. It simply will not happen if everything remains status quo.


Wrong again.


Inuyasha, you don't even have any idea what the far left looks like or what their talking points are. I assure you, they hate me just as much as you do.


You don't have to put money on it, if that's what has you worried. Just agree that if the prediction does not come true, Beck was wrong.


You don't understand how those historical precedents relate (or don't relate) to the modern situation in America, and neither does Beck. We are not the Weimar Republic.


"Sweeping prediction?" I haven't asked for that. "Will the price of bread this December be greater than or less than $10?" is not asking for a sweeping prediction. Your refusal to provide any testable predictions ahead of time (but delight in reveling in "correct" predictions afterward) is the trademark of the con artist and scammer.


When? I don't recall.

I will cover Inayushas bet.
are subscriptions to the economist a good wager?
you when I get you one.
Ina wins you get him one?
I hate to see play go to waste.

The ironic thing is that investing in silver has a much higher rate of return! However, Beck, Jones et al. are always touting gold.... I wonder why....

Are you going to argue that someone with only a very tenuous grasp on the English language really is likely to know anything about economics?

Anyways, some amount of inflation would be good for the US export market, and given our current balance of trade our export market could use some help. We are very very far away from anything even remotely like hyperinflation.

No, if things remain status quo it is not a question of either if or when. It simply will not happen if everything remains status quo.

You don't have to put money on it, if that's what has you worried. Just agree that if the prediction does not come true, Beck was wrong.

You don't understand how those historical precedents relate (or don't relate) to the modern situation in America, and neither does Beck. We are not the Weimar Republic.

Inuyasha, you don't even have any idea what the far left looks like or what their talking points are. I assure you, they hate me just as much as you do.

"Sweeping prediction?" I haven't asked for that. "Will the price of bread this December be greater than or less than $10?" is not asking for a sweeping prediction. Your refusal to provide any testable predictions ahead of time (but delight in reveling in "correct" predictions afterward) is the trademark of the con artist and scammer.

have the reputation of being a walking encyclopedia.

And if you believe that I've got some land to sell you on Saturn...

If things continue as they are currently, based on Historical Precident (and you claim to study history so you should know this) Beck is correct. He isn't blindly pulling a prediction out of his behind like you are.

Sure whatever, keep telling yourself that and keep behaving like an ostrich. It didn't just happen in the Weimar Republic, it happened in other countries as well throughout history. To say it can't happen here is either the height of arrogance or the height of stupidity or both.

That still doesn't mean you aren't on the far left, you just may have one thing that you don't buy into and thus they hate you for it.

Is this cause I can recognize figures of speech, analogies, etc. better than you can that I'm seeing this and you aren't?

I will cover Inayushas bet.
are subscriptions to the economist a good wager?
you when I get you one.
Ina wins you get him one?
I hate to see play go to waste.

Not around these parts. Other Aspies aren't as likely to be impressed with little memory parlor tricks.

Really? This is intro econ here. A stronger dollar means American-made goods cost more for foreigners to buy in terms of their own currency, so goods from elsewhere (eg China) will be relatively cheaper. A weaker dollar makes American goods cheaper by comparison, helping our export market.

Just give a yes or a no. Beck made a prediction, correct? If this prediction does not come true, it means Beck was wrong. Merely agree to that obvious and basic fact, and then at the end of this year we will see who was right.

What, Hungary and Zimbabwe? We are not either of those countries either. The current situation in the US is absolutely nothing like the situations in nations before they suffered hyperinflation. There is no rational basis for believe it is remotely likely to happen here in the foreseeable future.

I'm actually right of center by the standards of any developed country other than the US. I'm certainly not "far left" even by American standards.

Inuyasha, enough of your condescending "more-NT than thou" BS. I'm decent at recognizing idiomatic expressions. Beck was not using a figure of speech; he was crying wolf, just as you have been. He is full of sh**, just as you are.

Last I checked, China wasn't monatizing their own debt and China is a net lender not a net borrower. You are making false equivalencies.

not nitpicking

[What, Hungary and Zimbabwe? We are not either of those countries either. The current situation in the US is absolutely nothing like the situations in nations before they suffered hyperinflation. There is no rational basis for believe it is remotely likely to happen here in the foreseeable future.

China has been artificially keeping the value of the yuan low for years and years now. They know that it benefits their balance of trade to keep the yuan low and the dollar high. But when I mentioned China, it was just an example (hence the "eg") so no equivalency, false or otherwise. The claim that inflation benefits exporters is a basic fact from into econ.

Nitpicking? This is not nitpicking, you little turd. Beck is predicting catastrophic levels of inflation. I propose to check back at the end of the year to see if he was right or not. You literally refuse to commit to anything that would allow even a hypothetical chance that Beck might be proven wrong on anything. You are suffering from a severe case of True Believer Syndrome and insist on your ridiculous unfalsifiable faith in Beck. It's like you're in a cult.

TURN off the alarms. After several weeks when the data pointed to a recovery still struggling to achieve escape velocity, the March employment report provided reassuring evidence that, at a minimum, it is still gaining altitude.

.....

There may be a case for the Fed to back away from its ultra-easy monetary stance sometime this year; however, it will take many more months of good economic news like today’s. The more dovish, and influential, William Dudley, president of the New York Fed, said as much today. “This is welcome and not a reason to reverse course,” he said. The economy, he noted, is performing much as the Fed expected. “We must not be overly optimistic about the growth outlook.” This recovery’s serial disappointments suggest he’s right.

Why use core inflation?
Mar 30th 2011, 15:30 by R.A. | WASHINGTON

THERE is a bit of split among the central banks of the rich world over whether it is better to focus policy choices on headline inflation or "core", that is, broad inflation stripped of volatile components like energy and food prices. It seems intuitively right to use headline inflation; after all, people spend money on petrol and bread just as they do on computers and tax preparation services. The use of the core measure may seem opportunistic to laypeople—like playing games with the numbers to get the figures that justify preferred policy choices.

But that's not the reason central banks like the Federal Reserve tend to focus on core inflation. Larry Meyer comments:

Why do we, as forecasters, and the FOMC in its own forecasts, focus on core inflation? The question should not be whether I buy groceries and gas, but whether headline or core inflation is a better measure of where headline inflation is likely to settle once overall prices have adjusted to the higher prices of energy and food. As forecasters, we want to know not only what (headline) inflation is today, but also, and much more importantly, where headline inflation is likely to be tomorrow (the medium term). Identifying a measure of underlying inflation gives us a good head start...Our thesis, and the FOMC’s position, is that headline inflation converges to core, that is, headline inflation tomorrow will fall towards core inflation today. Whether or not this is a valid thesis is an empirical question...If you test whether higher oil prices raised core inflation over the 1970s and early 1980s (or in samples that include this period), the answer is a definitive “Yes” (higher oil prices pass through to core inflation). In this case, core inflation tomorrow will converge to headline today. However, if you test this hypothesis over the subsequent period, from the mid-1980s to today, the answer is “No” (no pass-through). In this case, headline tomorrow will converge to core today. This is the basis for our forecasts...
The Fed has built credibility over the last two decades: Long-term inflation expectations are stable, have been stable for more than a decade, and are likely to remain so. This means that spikes in food and energy prices do not get translated into expectations of higher inflation down the road and, thus, do not lead to a generalized increase in prices, today or tomorrow. So the critical question is whether inflation expectations are well anchored today—we believe that they are—and, more importantly, whether they are likely to remain so...
One interesting thing to point out is that in the 1970s real GDP growth was often very high, and likely above potential. Real output grew by more than 5% in 1972, 1973, 1976, and 1978. Labour markets were often tight in this period, especially in the early 1970s, and core consumer price inflation was quite high even before the oil price shock in 1973. Conditions now are obviously quite different, and so it's not necessarily a good idea to think that rising oil and food prices will deliver the stagflation we observed in the 1970s.

But an interesting question does arise: what if rising food and fuel prices aren't transitory? What if emerging market growth, for example, will produce a steady, structural shift in the relative prices of scarce commodities? It's pretty clear how a credible monetary policymaker should handle a temporary shock; it's much harder to know what to do in this case. It's possible that headline inflation would persistently overshoot the desired level, even as the central bank held policy tighter than it preferred while growth lagged. In a Sumnerian, nominal GDP-targeting regime in this case, you might end up taking your 5% NGDP target in the form of 1% real GDP growth and 4% inflation for some time, while the economy adjusts.

That scenario, should it emerge, will prove challenging. But it does not appear to be what most of today's inflation hawks are worried about; rather, they seem to be concerned that, as in the early 1970s, a reckless Fed is simply failing to take the necessary steps to manage garden variety inflation. This seems wrong to me, because core inflation is well in hand and because long-term inflation expectations remain quite low. And mistakenly tightening in these circumstances is likely to reduce macroeconomic stability—to knock growth off its present, near-trend (and, many would say, insufficient) rate and to send inflation expectations falling, just as they did last summer.

Hungary and Zimbabwe printed physical currency, while the Fed has added electronic credits to its balance sheet which could easily be eliminated. If inflation picks up, it will be caused by open market activities.

Fed has been printing physical currency too.