|
Home l Broadcast l WrapUp l Storm Watch l Editorial Archives l About Us l Contact Us |
JW’s qualifications for assuming the prosecutor role are 22 years of experience in practicing statistics in the business world, backed by a Ph.D. in Statistics from a leading university and two years of teaching practice. He has worked in the computer industry, in the retail sector, and in a private consulting firm engaged in marketing research. Contact with academia, work associates, and former government statisticians, has enabled him to acquire a keen second-hand view of inner workings at various federal agencies. His personal practice, as well as discussions with colleagues and managers has allowed him to develop and refine an objective opinion regarding the economist profession based on actual experience. While economist capabilities are generally competent, an acidic vein runs through much of their work. Vibrant statistical lifeblood has been largely displaced by political inspiration. Work might frequently be described as analytically shoddy, deceptive in representation, and clinging to heretical and discredited methods. Overtly misleading aggregate statistics are now routinely disseminated as part of their (witch)craft. Lately, psychological defensive fronts have been opened, which employ “1984-like” group-speak to deceptively redefine economic terms. Has Political Correctness now infected economics? This indictment is not intended as humorous, nor as legally binding. Before citing the 12 counts in detail, I will expand upon three critical background factors which create conditions ripe for exploitation by this bungling and largely inept profession. The scientific method is not an integral weapon in their arsenal. The nature of economics renders deficient policy nearly impossible to disprove. Most challenges degrade into a useless political debate. Illiteracy among the public leads to submission, silence, blind trust, desperation, and surprisingly deep commitment of capital in the form of life savings. The public either accepts the system for what it is, or distrusts it while feeling helpless, commitment notwithstanding. Academia has built an economist ivory tower with the majority of paths more political than analytical. The eyes of Nobel are very much aware, shunning their heretical enclaves. The leading academic economist communities have mutated into political priesthood, hawking ideology every bit as much as Karl Marx. After delineation of the charges, a conclusion is offered as Friends of the Court are cited. Their numbers are few, but their economic forecasting efforts are as significant and expert as they are unwelcome and accurate. THE NATURE OF ECONOMICS The economics field does not lend itself easily to “controlled experiments” in a scientific method framework. One cannot submit contending policies within an experiment in tax rates or federal subsidies, for instance, in order to test which policy produces the desired intended effect for both business encouragement and federal revenue generation. Nor can one submit the population or a given business sector to a formal factorial design, rotating experimental settings on a quarterly basis in order to carefully analyze policy alternatives under examination. Such is too impractical. However, the United States does offer diversity wherein certain states can supply valuable laboratory information on competing policies. State leaders, regulatory officials, and consulting analysts routinely learn from the successes and failures observed within our 50 states. But comparative results are tainted by what are called “confounding factors.” What succeeds in Massachusetts or Ohio might not work in North Carolina or Texas. The people are different, as are educational backgrounds, proximity to labor talent, geography, natural resources, and state laws & taxation. Over the decades, a few more progressive states such as Wisconsin, New York, Oregon, and California have offered themselves for experimental policy. The rest of the nation was quick to observe and learn. A critical requirement within an experiment calls for holding other factors constant. Economics simply cannot enforce such constraints when determining the success of certain policy alternatives. One cannot duplicate the weather, or social trend-making events, let alone policy interference on rules of the game. External events are not controllable, nor can international flare-ups be properly anticipated. Far too many participants are involved in setting policy, such as state legislatures, municipal boards, federal and regulatory agencies, and independent Congressional committees. Most are influenced to some extent by corporate lobby efforts. Competing companies do not stand still either. Typically, experiments devised for statistical analysis are absolutely chock-full of confounded effects. The problem is so pernicious that even experts fight loudly and emotionally over interpretation of results from changed policy, each attempting to discredit the other while pointing a finger at what they consider a deflected confounding effect. The consequence of experimental shortcomings is that bad policy cannot easily be disproved, nor can sound policy be validated.
Most guiding policy bears its fruit often with a lagged time effect, only to breed enormous controversy. The disastrous 1972 Nixon Wage Price Freeze restricted supply, resulting in price inflation from shortages, but only later in the following years. Carter was inappropriately blamed for much of that harmful rising price trend, which was compounded by OPEC’s quadrupling of oil prices. Carter was labeled as the worst economic steward our nation had seen since Hoover. That shameful title emphatically belongs around Richard Nixon’s neck. The prudent trimming of federal government bureaucracy by George Bush Sr. in 1989-1992 cleared the path for his successor, Bill Clinton. Bush was voted out of office during the recession triggered by the Gulf War; while Clinton was given a firm foundation for economic expansion. The hyper-extension of credit during the Clinton years, amplified by Greenspan’s insistence to underwrite all economic and financial accidents with unprecedented monetary liquidity, created the bubble in stocks up to the year 2000. Many unenlightened people, including members of the press & media, incorrectly place some blame for its natural bust on George W. Bush. Federal Reserve tightening aided the termination of the speculative mania. The lag effect is truly remarkable from a political viewpoint, whereby actions bring about responses in 1-3 years. Each president is railed or credited for the decisions made by his predecessor. An entire article would be necessary to treat this topic adequately. ILLITERACY AMONG THE PUBLIC Vast illiteracy exists among the voting public, business sector, and investment community. Until recent years, economics had not been taught at the high school level, and now only in the best high schools. The topics are not easily understood, and worse, considered either too boring or so abstract as to be useless. Theory of the firm (micro economics) typically is the dominant course of formal study, not national aggregate and international study (macro economics). The relevant topics now are often macro econ-based, where comprehension is worse than micro-econ. Some applications of supply & demand do crop up. Most people I speak with personally harbor no illusions about any resident capability whatsoever in the economics field. Their quantitative training has admittedly been surpassed by mounting financial complexity. The public’s minimal comprehension forces them in their ignorance to trust officials, leaders, and corporate analysts to make right decisions. Most ordinary people are totally overwhelmed by the subject. Those who offer dissent are led into opposing political camps, where depth of understanding may be no more enlightened nor less beholden to past history. Their opposing positions tend to have theoretical adversarial stances, which quickly slide into ideological political platforms. It becomes a debate, lacking any credible levels of proof, evidence, or justification, then morphs into a useless jabber match. Economists should afford competent leadership over the unskilled public, providing stewardship over public policy with a minimum of political jockeying, and a maximum of competent analysis, drawing on Europe’s vast history. American economists seem almost never to quote Europeans, nor heed their words of caution, despite several centuries of experience. I believe economists fail miserably, albeit in a tough environment.
The economic talent shortage problem is even more frightening. The formally trained are apparently not so well trained after all. Over the years I have personally come into contact with at least a dozen colleagues with M.S. or Ph.D. degrees in Economics. Few have continued within their native field, as most migrated to related work like sales forecasting, or public policy, or marketing research, or business development. A year ago a certain VP had a conversation with me regarding the US Dollar. I had reminded him of my spring 2002 expectation that our US Dollar currency would suffer significant devaluation. He was intrigued by the description of Gresham’s Law, whereby bad money displaces good money. He actually stated concern that another “wannabee” currency was trying to displace the US Dollar. I claimed that the US Dollar was the wannabee, and had completely supplanted gold and its standard, which had lasted centuries. My claim came with a stern warning of severe consequences to the world monetary system and economic order. He found nothing awry with a monetary system based on a currency whose foundation to be US Treasury debt. He holds a B.S. in Economics, and with a certain satisfaction stated to me that the cheaper dollar will make our vast foreign imports less expensive, thus aiding our economy. The opposite is true, as I pointed out, laying the groundwork for renewed price inflation, imported back from Asia. I claimed that price inflation via imports would reverse 20 years of US exported monetary inflation. He shook his head saying, “this stuff ain't easy.” No, the field of economics is not easy. Many people naturally grasp at notions that, although expedient, are opposite to effective and constructive. Economics seems to be a unique field where people tend to promote precisely the wrong position and policy in an appeal to human nature and a yielding to political pressure (e.g. trade barriers). “The Death of Literacy” by Jim Puplava (March 2002) ACADEMIA’S IVORY TOWER Any serious discussion of economics must begin with academia, since it produces tomorrow’s analysts and is tapped by politicians for public service. The university economics community has unfortunately become the province of the abstruse, arcane, and irrelevant during the last few decades. Much research tends to be inordinately focused, far too advanced in theory, or remote in relevance. Certainly, many bright and dedicated people make worthwhile contributions. Some are actual critics of the growing trend toward central planning. Where has the leadership been during one tumultuous decade after another since the 1970s? It has been notably absent. Instead, economists have become apologists and ideologues, teaching mainly Keynesian principles, which defend the system. Their espoused principles support, if not plead for, greater state power and control.
Lastly, the Economics curriculum is incomplete; course offerings bypass both governing cycles and waves of mass behavior. I refer to the Kondratiev Cycle, which stipulates super-cycles lasting roughly one human lifetime. Past K-Winters have climaxed following the 1870 railroad (over)expansion and following the 1920 car/radio (over)expansion, killing the monetary standard in each case. What lies ahead for the US Dollar standard as we contend with the latest K-Winter? The world now struggles with the resolution of 1990s information technology and telecom (over)expansion. Note the common theme of overbuilt transportation behind each speculative peak. Behind each climax was a credit explosion, followed by a contraction. I know of no graduate programs covering this super-cycle topic. Also, I refer to the Elliott Wave theory, which provides surprisingly effective models for both the occurrence and extent of climax tops in the stock markets worldwide. I know of no graduate programs covering this topic. Universities typically are a hotbed of intellectual curiosity and challenge to the system. But with economics, the structural status quo seems to be uncontested. It is deeply entrenched. The foundation to our entire system is assumed sound and firm. A few of my pet peeves are worthy of mention. Instead of leading the Federal Reserve with guidance and analysis, some in academia see fit to form a Shadow Open Market Committee to handicap and second-guess monetary policy. Why not question such central planning instead of watchdogging it? Why not offer competent critique of the Fed’s abysmal track record? Where is their concern on an incredible explosion in national debts at all levels? If the Fed has run amok, who but economists are to lead it away from reckless ways? The trend with each passing decade is for more federal control and less free market. In fact, efforts should be directed at simplifying their formal analytical methods. A special name is given to their brand of arcane analysis; they call their field Econometrics. Their extensions to well-grounded established statistical theory include such intractable methods as “structural equations”, which offer unstable solutions. How ironic, unstable solutions accompany unstable economies! Many certainly fine men and women labor in academia as economists. Far too few are competent statisticians. Much supposed analysis is shallow and superficial, as if part of a promotional catch phrase or marketing byline. Their soft research is laced with politics; while their hard research depends upon unreliable methodology. Shortcomings of their analytics are outlined in greater detail in what follows. Nobel prizes in Economics have steadily been awarded in recent years. One might find it curious that the award winners hail from related fields such as mathematics and psychology. Princeton Psychology professor Daniel Kahneman shared a recent Economics Nobel prize for extending the work of Amos Tversky on the asymmetric bias of spending patterns following principal loss. Over ten years ago, Herbert Simon (from my alma mater Carnegie Mellon University) won an Economics Nobel prize for his mathematical model for interactive brain function. The recent hit movie “A Beautiful Mind” featured the life of John Nash, who received an Economics Nobel prize as a mathematician advancing Adam Smith’s theory on maximizing collective utility. The prizes for economist researchers are loudly absent. Are they largely political promoters and frontmen? I believe worse. I believe their community has succumbed to the temptation of promoting political party agendas, with its principal spokesmen soaking up adulation and enjoying icon status. Institutional economists have fast become a political priesthood, which has sold out solid defensible analysis methodology in favor of adaptive malleable political ideology. Their central function is in the promotion and justification of federal budgets, support of brokerage house strategic calls, and upholding the imperial dollar currency. “The Kondratiev Winter” an interview of Ian Gordon (July 2002)
1) Ignorance and Revision of History
“Revisionist
View of the Great Depression” by
Antal Fekete (March 2002) 2) Intellectual Support of an Intervention Policy
“Capitalism’s
Paradox, the Fed” by Ed
Bugos (March 2002) 3) Disputable Assumptions used as Policy Foundation
4) Myopic Statistical Analysis Methods
5) Incomplete Statistical Analysis System
6) Legislative Divisions to Promote Political Agendas
7) Institutional Conflict of Interest
8) Distortion in Economic Reporting
“Statistical
Revisionism and Wizardry” by
Michael Hodges (updated June 2002) 9) Pursuit of Public Adulation by Fed Chairman (Pied Piper)
“The
Economic Consequences of Mr. Greenspan” by Antal Fekete (Dec 2001) 10) Collusion with Corrupt Financial Power Elite
11) Deceptive Indoctrination of Economic Definitions
12) Benign Negligence during Pillage of National Gold Treasure
FRIENDS OF THE COURT The venerable John K. Galbraith stands as the dominant elder statesman for the dismal science of economics. He provides a refreshingly candid perspective toward our nation’s economists. It is not flattering. In his 1975 book entitled Money: Whence it came, Where it Went, he wrote: “The study of money, above all other fields in economics, is one in which complexity is used to disguise truth or to evade truth, not to reveal it.” Of those who practice this craft, he claims… In the status hierarchy of my profession, the Wall Street economist holds a strangely prominent role. Typically, though not always, he lacks academic standing, analytical achievement, or significant publication. Research is foreign to him; independent thought unknown. “Incurable Optimists: Wall Street Economists don’t have Recession in their vocabulary” I offer several friends of the court, beginning with Stephen Roach of Morgan Stanley, and Jim Grant of the Grant Interest Rate Observer periodical. Each is tremendously talented, verified by the visceral and hostile objections, disputes, and animosity they generate from the financial community. I am surprised that Roach’s employment is secure at this Wall Street firm, since his consistently correct views and forecasts over the past three years must have been detrimental to their trading and investment banking business. Grant’s independence renders him a constant thorn in the sides of both Fed Chairmen and presidential Councils of Economic Advisors. Bush’s current Economic Council is perhaps the most inept in decades. Obtaining the work of Jim Grant is much more difficult and expensive. These two economists have no political agenda, little affiliation with corporate interests, and thus are considered maverick outsiders. Some regard them as troublemaker gadflies, if not antagonists, especially Grant. He is harshly critical of Chairman Greenspan. As far back as March 2000, in his monthly publication he criticized claims of either a New Economy or vastly increased productivity. He debunked the “hedonic adjustments” behind government statistical fraud when he wrote… The reported boom in manufacturing efficiency in the last half of 1999 was the result of not one, but two misapprehensions, relate Medoff and Harless. Not only did the government statistics exaggerate the output of the computer industry over those six Y2K-obsessed months (for reasons having to do with the way in which computer prices are calculated). They also grossly underestimated the number of hours worked to achieve those results. It was this twin error that, in no small part, enlarged the legend of the productivity boom and uncorked the newest bottle of speculative moonshine. Rarely has a botched calculation delighted and enriched so many guileless people. - Jim Grant (March 2000) In summer 2002 after the asset bubble disclaimer speech made by Chairman Greenspan at the Jackson Hole Conference, Grant had more to say. He [Greenspan] was a very poor central bank chairman. He was passive in the face of what will go down as a very destructive bubble… Don’t put too much stock in this bureaucracy called the Fed. When I am asked what I would do if I were the Fed Chairman, my invariable answer is ’Resign.’ - Jim Grant (August 2002) Although not economists, David Tice of Prudent Bear and Bill Gross of PIMCO, display uncanny skill in analyzing and interpreting many aspects of the economy as it relates to the financial industry (economy, stocks, bonds, currencies). Tice and his partner Doug Noland direct constant urgent warnings about the unprecedented levels of debt obligations weighing down our entire economy. They provide a regular flurry of debt data that is frightening. Gross and his partner Paul McCulley are simply brilliant and thorough, unequivocally willing to label many standing policies as bungling. They ably identify the dangers of the current bond bubbles, and their architect, Chairman Greenspan. John Mauldin of Millennium Wave produces an altruistic weekly letter with great depth and strong analysis. But he tends to be very conventionally positioned, conservatively aligned, careful not to insult or go counter to the establishment. Besides the aforementioned, I have not observed many prominent economists with a track record rivaling theirs. Several show solid capability, such as Krugman of The New York Times, Wyss of Standard & Poor, Sohn of Wells Fargo, and Kasriel of Northern Trust. Even these bright economists are beset by mental impediments, a certain servitude to the debt gods, and loyalty to the debt-based foundation to our system. Krugman remained far too loyal to Greenspan, expressing faith into the new decade that the Fed could repair the damage with easier monetary policy. In autumn 2001, I wrote him a letter to the editor questioning that fidelity, only to have it fall on deaf ears. Wyss claims to observe an economic recovery without job growth, unable to discern the contradiction. The steady Kasriel has been critical of Humphrey Hawkins testimony before Congress, where discussions regularly pertain to everything but monetary policy. He places much responsibility for creating the stock bubble at the Fed’s doorstep. The Fed is a price fixer; it fixes the price of short-term credit. If there is an increase in demand for credit, interest rates want to rise. But because the Fed is fixing the price of credit to keep rates from rising, it has to create more reserves or allow banks to create more money, and that is what leads to bubbles. - Paul Kasriel (Aug 2002) Various brokerage economists like Bernstein and Sullivan offer sound opinions, but in time their optimistic outlook dissolves to make visible clear vested interest. They each have consistently pointed out threats to the nascent recovery, in fairness. It must be tough working for Wall Street. A brokerage house economist who remains negative about the economic recovery might be selling computer hardware at retail outlets in the next quarter. I hold Roach in ultimate high regard for independence, competence, and integrity. A sample of Roach’s work follows. His November 2002 essay offers a critique of the climax 50-bpt Fed rate cut last autumn, hardly the stuff to earn a thank you note from anyone but an investor. His more recent essays point out the weakness and clear risk to this recovery, identify the poor quality of its fundamentals, if it is indeed a recovery at all. And yet the Fed is trying to persuade us that it has now done enough to arrest this deflationary dynamic. Of course, that is the same argument that has been made repeatedly since this monetary easing cycle began now some 525 bpt ago back in early 2001. The place where I always get stuck in this argument is on the issue of traction -- which sectors of the US economy can now be expected to respond to the Fed’s monetary stimulus. There are three obvious candidates -- the interest-rate-sensitive sectors of consumer durables, homebuilding activity, and business capital spending. In my opinion, the response of each of these sectors to Fed easing is likely to prove most disappointing. Here’s why. Normally, at this stage in a business cycle, there is a good deal of pent-up demand for items like cars and homes; as such, lower interest rates typically are quite effective in unleashing that demand and spurring vigorous recovery. That’s unlikely to be the case in the current cycle. Demand in these two sectors never fell in the recession of 2001 and they have remained resilient in the subsequent recovery. That means there is no pent-up demand that can now be unleashed by Fed easing. Just ask Detroit, where car buyers are now suffering from zero-interest-rate fatigue. The same is true of capital spending -- a sector that remains constrained by the twin pressures of the capacity overhang of the late 1990s and the ongoing imperatives of corporate cost cutting. In a deflationary climate, why would businesses compound their lack of pricing leverage by adding to aggregate supply? Fed easing is unlikely to change the capex calculus in the current climate. Archive of Stephen Roach
Editorials A maverick with keen insight is Jim Puplava of Financial Sense Online. Like Mauldin, he is a fund manager. By the spring of 2001, Puplava outlined in prescient detail a pathogenesis of the Perfect Storm Scenario. He carefully notes how debt collapse keeps the liquidation process continuing, thus more depleted pricing power and pockets of deflation. He stresses how low rates slow the economy, only to threaten debt service further. He carefully warns that government regulation and environmental obstacles inhibit commodity supply of necessities, which are tied less to debts typically. Derivatives hold down material prices artificially, through leveraged gearing, all within a cash system. As the overvalued US Dollar adjusts downward in correction, momentum should gain as jetstream FOREX winds collide with these massive fronts identified by the low-pressure product zone and the high-pressure commodity zone. The result could produce a rare Perfect Storm. We are well along the carefully described ominous frightening path. Eventually, bonds and the US Dollar will head downhill together in unison, in departure from the current pattern. Puplava’s periodic updates are fortified with arguments and stern warnings, as the storm slowly develops and feeds upon itself. He maintains that government intervention actions, although implored by the public and politicians, only serve to increase the intensity of the low-high pressure storm gradient, and to delay the inevitable storm. The primary beneficiary of the storm will be commodities in short supply, given the huge inventory overhang and crushing debt load inherent to the finished product arena. Gov't response will be more liquidity, the widely perceived panacea. As newly extended credit (margin money) seeks the best investment opportunity, commodities will offer the most viable “path of least resistance.” Puplava Perfect Storm
Series
I would be remiss if not to mention Ravi Batra, an Economics professor from Southern Methodist University in Texas. Years ago his extraordinary predictions foresaw the fall of the Shah of Iran and the advent of their ruling clergy, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the gradual demise of the US Dollar from its position of supremacy. He forecasts continued deflationary stress for the US economy, leading potentially to a inflationary depression as our currency undergoes a crisis in devaluation at a time when debts suffer writedowns in default. His work is founded upon the premise that in the United States, spending levels chronically outpace income growth. Each passing month sees consumer spending outstrip personal income, funded by debt, but raises few alarms. On a worldwide basis, he maintains that production has vastly outpaced income growth. The result is a crescendo of excess capacity rolling out excess supply, enabled by plentiful credit, seen now! Ensuing balance sheet repair leads to recession on the world stage, which can easily cause a depression as our overvalued world currency, the US Dollar, must face a steep correction. Our omnipresent debt levels are just too great. By default, since gold does not formally undergird it, and its collateral continues to be depleted, enormous debt implicitly backs the US Dollar currency. The US Dollar has essentially morphed into a junk bond. Conditions lead us on the path to rising prices and rising interest rates, even as the world economy falters. Crash of the Millennium, by Ravi Batra, Harmony Books 1999 CLOSING REMARKS Economists have failed in a magnificent, grand, and truly frightening manner. I mince no words. No topic or concept rings more loudly as “inflation” for its twisted policy and even more twisted understanding, owing in part to the propaganda for public acceptance of a twisted definition. The irony derives from inflation’s role in destroying the financial and monetary system. I sometimes think that economists believe that laws of gravity could be repealed if only they could blow enough of their arrogant hot air under objects containing mass. Their interpretations and dealings with “deflation” should offer a true parallel in twisted thought and policy. In fact, it is already well along, as Chairman Greenspan has duped the nation into believing that the price deflation aftermath stemming from decades of unchecked monetary inflation requires yet more ballooning inflation. The bond market has revolted, and the mortgage finance sector is vulnerable. Soon, mortgage finance companies will drop like flies, and the Gov't Sponsored Enterprises like Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac will face annihilation.
Ned Schmidt cites a better price inflation measure in the Median CPI, developed by the Cleveland Fed, where the best of federal statisticians are located. The Median CPI tends to behave more stably, with fewer false moves, and more reliable measurements. Steve Saville offers the ECRI’s Future Inflation Gauge, which portends short-term interest rates. It acts like a leading indicator for the Fed Funds Rate. No, the Naive CPI represents a governmental attempt to minimize COLA (cost of living adjustments) to federal pensions, and to suppress reported price inflation. It ignores costs of property tax, town/city usage fees, insurance, college tuition, and much more. A lower improperly stated CPI also allows for exaggeration of the chain-weighted gross domestic product figure, compounding the error into an over-stated GDP calculation. Economists prefer to define inflation in terms of what “real inflation” causes, i.e. price increases. Like calling a broken jaw “a roundhouse punch”, or calling a broken back “a ladder fall”, or calling a car crash “a wreckless driving.” If you inflate, you plant the seeds of eventual price rises. We have suffered such pervasive chronic abuse of the monetary inflation mechanism, that the risk might materialize for witnessing both a deep recession and price inflation. The recession could come from widespread liquidation (of debts and inventories) with consequent lost jobs. The price inflation could come from futile continued monetary expansion while battling reduction in money supply and suffering deflation in multiple sectors. Current imbalances have never been this great in modern recorded history, and they are getting worse with each passing year. The Fed may soon find itself stuck in a Japan-like Liquidity Trap, where continued money printing is useless in treating debt-ridden balance sheets. At the same time, Argentine-like shock waves could easily occur, as foreign capital flight inevitably takes place. Such is the cage where economist ineptitude is laid bare for all to see.
Shostak quotes Murray Rothbard from his famous book America’s Great Depression when he wrote, “The fact that general prices were more or less stable during the 1920’s told most economists that there was no inflationary threat, and therefore the events of the Great Depression caught them completely unaware.” Shostak goes on to say the inflation issue should be viewed in simpler terms. When more money circulates to chase a given level of goods and services, prices will rise. When credit is extended to create inflated asset prices, prices will eventually fall after the process goes too far, and develops downhill momentum founded upon profit taking. Prices more widely will fall when the asset arena price decline joins forces with debt default and product liquidation. So abuse and careless monetary growth can lead to BOTH inflation and deflation!!! Von Mises explains the futility of the Federal Reserve’s mandate in his essay “Inflation: An Unworkable Fiscal Policy.” Inflation, as this term was always used everywhere and especially in this country, means increasing the quantity of money and bank notes in circulation and the quantity of bank deposits subject to check. But people today use the term ‘inflation’ to refer to the phenomenon that is an inevitable consequence of inflation, that is the tendency of all prices and wage rates to rise. The result of this deplorable confusion is that there is no term left to signify the cause of this rise in prices and wages. There is no longer any word available to signify the phenomenon that has been, up to now, called inflation. . . . As you cannot talk about something that has no name, you cannot fight it. Those who pretend to fight inflation are in fact only fighting what is the inevitable consequence of inflation, rising prices. Their ventures are doomed to failure because they do not attack the root of the evil. They try to keep prices low while firmly committed to a policy of increasing the quantity of money that must necessarily make them soar. As long as this terminological confusion is not entirely wiped out, there cannot be any question of stopping inflation. - Ludwig von Mises “Defining Inflation” by Frank Shostak (March 2002) Consider the alternative and controversial Austrian School of Economics, dismissed by the great majority as impractical and infeasible despite its simplicity. Their primary tenets constitute central bank management of a currency backed by hard assets such as gold, and strict limitations placed upon fractional banking lending practices. Obviously, our swelling socialist structures, and freedoms to extend credit (even when unwise) collide with such tenets. The von Mises community serves as principal advocate for the Austrian School of Economics, with Kurt Richebächer their chief living spokesman. How many graduates in advanced Economics programs claim allegiance, let alone awareness, to this School of thought? Probably a small minority, despite its excellent track record in alerting imminent danger and warning of developed crises. Our economic and political systems do not want to hear alerts and warnings!!! “What is Austrian Economics?” (November 2002) Former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker once said that it was the job of the Central Bankers worldwide to prove von Mises and Richebächer wrong. They have not done so. He warned: “The truly unique power of a central bank, after all, is the power to create money, and ultimately the power to create is the power to destroy.” Economists failed to warn the coming of the Great Depression and its destruction. They failed again to prevent or warn the coming of the current economic malaise in the wake of the Great 2000 Stock Bust, whose outcome remains unwritten and still uncertain, but whose destruction is unmistakable. Now we find two-thirds of sectors suffering months of price deflation, despite the denial of economists. As they next wage battle against deflation, their incompetence, deception, and collusion will be seen from the opposite side of the pricing bench. Economists cannot define “deflation.” They don’t know where it came from. They don’t know how to fight it. In this environment, their prescribed low interest rates are slowing the economy, not stimulating it. Demand for money is weak, as 25% of our nation’s mfg capacity lies idle. Twice as much interest income is received, compared to interest cost paid out. So lower rates beget even lower rates. Their new weapon against deflation has been billed as “monetization.” They unwittingly are setting out to feed the low-high pressure storm gradient described by Puplava. They will purchase federal debt, agency debt, major bank debt, S&P stock index futures, especially bank index stock share blocks, all with dollars created from thin air, adding to dollar supply. The resulting effect on the currency markets is exactly what is required to accelerate the Perfect Storm. Dissenters today are mere pilgrims in an unholy land. ©
2003 Jim Willie CB PERSONAL ASIDE: It is my sincere curiosity how many readers are willing to make the commitment to pay a nominal $8-10 per month charge for regularly timed clarification on economic matters, to debunk conventional claims, and to provide guidance through the minefields in today’s confusing financial world. In my mind, the value would far exceed daytime efforts within even the most productive marketing research. By night I work to uncover the financial chicanery and travesty in progress, a larger endeavor to be sure, with far greater implications to the world. Something very ugly this way comes, on the tail end of the dissipating bond market bubble and real estate decline that has begun. The long treacherous ride ahead requires a guide. Hmmm. Professional crossroads lie ahead in my life. For months now, my efforts along the economy, gold and currency front have been given away. I am excited by the prospect of performing a labor of love, as well as receiving compensation. New opportunities must be explored as life’s challenges dictate change and open new doorways. An informal survey would be helpful in gauging interest in an investment letter. If interested in a monthly paid subscription to a newsletter with primary focus on the economy, with direct implications on currencies, gold, and international finance, let me know. Near-term and long-term precious metals investing would be the focus. If you wish, please shoot a quick email to me: Email Jim Willie's archived editorials at FSU
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Home l Broadcast l WrapUp l Storm Watch l Editorial Archives l About Us l Contact Us |
Copyright ©
James J. Puplava Financial Sense™ is a Registered Trademark
P. O. Box 503147 San Diego, CA 92150-3147 USA 858.487.3939
disclaimer