• Welcome to our new home!

    Please share any thoughts or issues here.


A paralyzing rise in money supply

rapidtrends

Member
Joined
May 25, 2008
Messages
312
A paralyzing rise in money supply
By The Mogambo Guru

Adam Hamilton of ZealLLC.com reminds us that "Inflation is purely and exclusively a monetary phenomenon", which doesn't mean all that much by itself, but becomes much more horrifying when he adds that Money of Zero Maturity has been zooming. In case you were wondering, Money of Zero Maturity (MZM) is considered to be a reasonable proxy for watching the movement of M3, which is the broadest measure of the money supply, which is important because inflation in the money supply means that inflation in consumer prices is coming.

Now that we have the academic stuff out of the way, the truly horrifying part of it all is when Mr Hamilton says, "Absolute annual MZM growth peaked at a staggering 16.7% in March 2008", and


that "Bernanke's Fed has been ramping money-supply growth so fast that actual MZM is starting to look parabolic even on a short-term chart. In just over two years under him, MZM has ballooned 25.1% unchecked!"

Apparently, he mistook the look of sheer, paralyzing horror on my face at this revelation of such a massive expansion of the money supply (because it will lead directly to inflation in consumer prices), to be mere confusion on my part. Helpfully, he reiterated for my benefit, "You read that right. There were 16.7% more US dollars available for spending this March than last! Sooner or later all this excess money will eventually bid up prices. Some of this inflation will be perceived as good, primarily the part that flows into stocks. But the part bidding up scarce food and energy is not going to make Americans very happy."

He goes on to say that these rates of growth in the money supply "defy the imagination. At 12% growth compounded annually, it only takes six years for something to double. At 16%, this drops to well under five years. If the Fed doesn't stop this madness, there could be twice as many dollars floating around in five or six years as there are today. Even with modest economic growth, this means general price levels would probably almost double."

Prices that are doubled in five years? Yow! "And," he adds, "this inflation is totally above and beyond all the supply-and-demand-driven global commodities bulls' increases!"

And it is all because (as I never seem to tire of saying) of the over-creation of money by the Federal Reserve. Martin Hutchinson of The Bear's Lair figures that I am too narrow and provincial, and writes that apparently I am too stupid to realize that there is monetary insanity everywhere, and that "other countries have also been expanding their money supplies excessively. The European Central bank has allowed euro M3 to expand by 11.1% in the three months to March 2008, following an increase of 11.5% during 2007."

He goes on, "As in the United States, this increase is much faster than that of nominal GDP, and it had been continuing for several years, with annual growth rates of 7.4% in 2005 and 10.0% in 2006. Of the major emerging markets, China and India have both been operating expansionary monetary policies and now have considerable inflation problems. Vietnam, too, has been surprised in spite of its rapid growth by inflation surging towards 25%." Yikes!

Even more bad news is that "the Reuters CRB commodity price index is up 24% since September 18 last year", which means that prices are rising alarmingly, while this is at the same time as incomes are falling, as evidenced by "earnings in the financial sector, representing more than 40% of total US earnings before the crisis hit, have essentially disappeared in the last two quarters." Yikes!

I know firsthand what it means to have income disappear, mostly as a result of my pathetic "cry for help" of stupidly cashing my paycheck and somehow spending it all on drinking and gambling during one short weekend that is now mostly a big blank in my mind. When I got home and discovered that we had no food or money to buy any, the crap I had to take from my family over the next few months - and occasionally reminisced about to this day - was memorable, to say the least, and so I can only imagine the screaming and yelling and crying when "40% of total US earnings" disappears! Yow!

And I can only imagine the screaming, yelling and crying in the retirement sector, as all retirement funds take huge, huge freaking whacks and people learn, once again for the zillionth time in history, that investing in the stock market over the long-term is, at best, a loser for the majority of investors, and a loser for everybody at the worst, and all because of inflation in the money supply and the inflation in prices, which is the reason for my crying.

Mr Hutchinson ignores my crying and blubbering about the horror of inflation that is starting to devour us, and callously increases my horror by saying, "In the United States, the producer price index increased 6.9% in the year to March, while that for crude goods increased more than 30%. Like a bowling ball swallowed by a python, that inflation will move through the economic system and eventually be reflected in consumer prices. Indeed, it may already be showing up there; the seasonally unadjusted consumer price index for March was up 0.9% (an annual rate of around 11%) and only a heroic seasonal adjustment of 0.6%, double the next largest seasonal adjustment for any month in the last 10 years, brought the figure down to an acceptable 0.3%."

The biggest "seasonal adjustment" in the last 10 years? And the best it can do is bring March's annualized inflation to almost 4%? We're freaking doomed!

Except, as I will add for the zillionth time, for the people who buy gold and silver ... (hint, hint, hint).

The Mogambo Sez: Each time that gold or silver go down, buy more until you have the stuff stacked all over the house and you are tripping over all the piles of silver and gold, bruising your shins, which hurts like hell.

If you don't, you will spend the rest of your life living in the dirt and wishing you had, begging for money and table scraps from those who did. At least, that is how it has worked out in history! Hahahaha! Hey! This economics stuff is easy!

Richard Daughty is general partner and COO for Smith Consultant Group, serving the financial and medical communities, and the editor of The Mogambo Guru economic newsletter - an avocational exercise to heap disrespect on those who desperately deserve it.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/JF04Dj01.html
 
Money was circulating much faster just a few years ago. A combination of very relaxed lending standards and large demand for loans- mostly in the housing industry- meant that money moved and multiplied much faster than it does today. Lending and borrowing levels have dropped considerably since then. That means less money circulating in the economy. If you want to have the same movement of money in the markets as before, you need a bigger stack since it moves more slowly and to fewer people. I am not saying that I agree with what the Fed is currently doing.
 
Money was circulating much faster just a few years ago. A combination of very relaxed lending standards and large demand for loans- mostly in the housing industry- meant that money moved and multiplied much faster than it does today. Lending and borrowing levels have dropped considerably since then. That means less money circulating in the economy. If you want to have the same movement of money in the markets as before, you need a bigger stack since it moves more slowly and to fewer people. I am not saying that I agree with what the Fed is currently doing.

What about inflation, stagflation?

Wake up bro. Don't be a bunny.
 
I am only point out that the money in circulation is not necessarily rising as fast as the rate the Fed is increasing the money supply. If someone gives you $10 and you go spend it- or loan it out to someone else who spends it- that goes into circulation and increases the supply of money and the demand for goods. If you were given $10 and stuck it under your matress, then the money in circulation does not change or have any economic impact. I am not making any claim that the Fed is not putting too much liquidity into the markets- only that the impact may not be as large as some claim.

Five years ago, financial institutions were lending out every dollar they could get their hands on. They are no longer doing so today. Lending has slowed considerably meaning less money circulates.
 
I am only point out that the money in circulation is not necessarily rising as fast as the rate the Fed is increasing the money supply. If someone gives you $10 and you go spend it- or loan it out to someone else who spends it- that goes into circulation and increases the supply of money and the demand for goods. If you were given $10 and stuck it under your matress, then the money in circulation does not change or have any economic impact. I am not making any claim that the Fed is not putting too much liquidity into the markets- only that the impact may not be as large as some claim.

Five years ago, financial institutions were lending out every dollar they could get their hands on. They are no longer doing so today. Lending has slowed considerably meaning less money circulates.

Are you for real?

If I save $100.00 and the Fed creates 20% more money supply, what does that do to my hard-earned?

Go figure it out...

Then get back to me.
 
If you were given $10 and stuck it under your matress, then the money in circulation does not change or have any economic impact.


Not so. Anything new media that satisfies the demand for money - as a medium of exchange OR as storage of wealth - increases the money supply. If I feel the need to stick $10 in my matress, that is part of dollar demand. If you conjure up $10 and give it to me, that meets the demand even if I stick it under the mattress so it has caused an increase of $10 in the money supply and will impact the exchange value of money.
 
Money under a mattress has no economic value since it is not competing with other dollars for goods. The same would be true if you burned it. It only effects the economy when it is used. If you gave everybody $1000 dollars and there was a certain amount of goods they could buy with it, if everybody tried to spend that money then the demand for the goods would be higher and the sellers of the goods could ask a higher price for them and still sell out everything they had. If nobody spends their extra money the demand for the goods does not change so the prices will not change.

If the Fed is loaning out money to banks so that they can issue loans to people to buy things with but the people are either not willing or not able to borrow this money, then it does not get spent on goods and services. Thus the Fed giving them say ten percent more money to lend out does not necessarily mean that borrowing and spending of money will increase by the same ten percent. Lending is reduced from what it was so one dollar issued via the Fed does not have the same impact as a dollar issued five years ago when money was lent more freely. This is really not that hard to understand. Or maybe it is.

And again, I am not saying that the Fed is not increasing the money supply by too much these days. I definately disagree with a lot of what Bernanke and the board are doing. I am also not saying that they have no impact on the money supply- just less of an impact which is why they seem to feel that they need to add more money now than they did in the past. At least they announced that there will be no more rate cuts for the forseable future. I would like to see them raised back up more. Money is only a medium of exchange- not a store of wealth.
 
Last edited:
Money under a mattress has no economic value since it is not competing with other dollars for goods. The same would be true if you burned it. It only effects the economy when it is used. If you gave everybody $1000 dollars and there was a certain amount of goods they could buy with it, if everybody tried to spend that money then the demand for the goods would be higher and the sellers of the goods could ask a higher price for them and still sell out everything they had. If nobody spends their extra money the demand for the goods does not change so the prices will not change.

If the Fed is loaning out money to banks so that they can issue loans to people to buy things with but the people are either not willing or not able to borrow this money, then it does not get spent on goods and services. Thus the Fed giving them say ten percent more money to lend out does not necessarily mean that borrowing and spending of money will increase by the same ten percent. Lending is reduced from what it was so one dollar issued via the Fed does not have the same impact as a dollar issued five years ago when money was lent more freely. This is really not that hard to understand. Or maybe it is.

And again, I am not saying that the Fed is not increasing the money supply by too much these days. I definately disagree with a lot of what Bernanke and the board are doing.
You are a well-meaning virgin.

:)
 
Hehe, I love the Mogambo Guru!

What is money velocity, though? Is it increasing or decreasing? This is also an important part of the money supply equation.
 
Demonstrate my errors.

You are playing marbles.

You have the only"steelie," and everyone else has "cats eyes."

Everyone wants your "steelie."

Then the Fed dumps 50 "steelies" into the sand.

Is your "steelie" worth diddly squat?
 
Your error

Demonstrate my errors.

The exchange value of money, like the exchange value of all other goods, is a function of supply and demand. Supply can be defined as anything that meets demand. A desire by the public to save their cash in their mattress is every bit as much a demand for money as a desire by the public to buy cars. Therefore, since the desire to use money to store wealth is a demand for money, it will play a role in the value of money. If, for example, the public suddenly realizes that it is time to save money again and wants to put $100 billion in the mattress, that demand on the money supply will impact the value of money, bidding it up.

You are suffering from the consumer-centric monetarist/keynsian view of economics that has put this country in the position of thinking that it can borrow and spend its way to prosperity.

But I believe you are right that the Fed offering loans does not impact the money supply if nobody takes the loans. But people ARE taking the loans. Banks are taking the loans. Banks have now essentially converted ALL their reserves to Fed credit.

And the bailouts have just begun.
 
The exchange value of money, like the exchange value of all other goods, is a function of supply and demand. Supply can be defined as anything that meets demand. A desire by the public to save their cash in their mattress is every bit as much a demand for money as a desire by the public to buy cars. Therefore, since the desire to use money to store wealth is a demand for money, it will play a role in the value of money. If, for example, the public suddenly realizes that it is time to save money again and wants to put $100 billion in the mattress, that demand on the money supply will impact the value of money, bidding it up.

You are suffering from the consumer-centric monetarist/keynsian view of economics that has put this country in the position of thinking that it can borrow and spend its way to prosperity.

But I believe you are right that the Fed offering loans does not impact the money supply if nobody takes the loans. But people ARE taking the loans. Banks are taking the loans. Banks have now essentially converted ALL their reserves to Fed credit.

And the bailouts have just begun.

Are you forgetting that money is being printed helter skelter?

Banana Republic economics will only work in the short term.
 
Every time Congress wants more money, or Wall street needs bailing out, more money gets printed.

This causes rampant inflation.

The world realizes this.

Had a look at the exchange rates lately?
 
I can't afford gold but lets see my preparation package.

30+ buckets of grain, beans, rice for long term food

1 brand new M1A scout + Ammo

1 Crossbow + bolts

1 slingshot + shot

Camping gear

wood burning camping stove

cots, blankets

clothing

eye glasses instead of contacts

50 gallons of gas to escape

trade my sports car in for a truck

60 gallon barrels filled with water

water purifier + still

Escape plan to get out of the city and camp in the country

get my heart right with GOD

I have a feeling when the SHTF scenario plays out i'll be alot better off than the guy that bought gold... Look at the inflation the prices of food will soon out strip everyones income and then life will get more simple because the only thing you will worry about is eating... if the economy crashes the crime rate will rise 10000000000000000000% and naturaly good law abiding people will resort to stealing to feed their children. I am no psychic but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that our society has changed since the great depression and the out come will be horrible.
 
Totally agree

Every time Congress wants more money, or Wall street needs bailing out, more money gets printed.

This causes rampant inflation.

The world realizes this.

Had a look at the exchange rates lately?

I totally agree with you. I believe that if the Fed is unable to keep money flowing into the market and interest rates start to rise, they will pour money into the market in other ways. And as government revenue falls, demands on government programs rise and our foreign lenders shut the loan windows, the government will have only two choices: abandon the empire and shut down the welfare state or create money. I believe they will create money.

My only point was that demand for money as savings is the same - from a supply/demand perspective - as demand for money to buy stuff.
 
Acala,

It is unfortunate that this cycle will continue.

Better to "bite the bullet" now, rather than later...
 
Back
Top