Skip to main content

Death by Inflation

Josh Barro, opinion journalist and editor for Business Insider, is one of many academics who have become infatuated with the neoclassical traditions of Keynesian economic theory, or its largely-confounded offshoots which purport to offer vastly different conclusions while somehow remaining rooted in the greatly misunderstood nature of money, or its commonly accepted impostor known as fiat currency.

In a recent interview with Peter Schiff, author, CEO, and chief global strategist of Euro Pacific Capital, Barro defended the notion that oil prices are largely immune to fluctuations in the monetary base, and that it is rather geo-political dynamics which are responsible for the increase in crude oil prices. Barro even claims that, absent measures of quantitative easing, fuel prices would remain largely unchanged. This view is simply one which fails to recognize the false sense of wealth -- often called the wealth effect -- engineered by the immense scale of bond-buying and purchases of mortgage-backed securities performed monthly by the Federal Reserve. Absent this artificial sense of wealth, and in an environment of nominal credit contraction, oil prices would naturally correct downward to a level of equilibrium at which a lesser supply of cash chases a set supply of fuel. This is the natural propensity of supply and demand.

In this interview, Barro also claims that fuel prices are accelerating at a rate unmatched by any other commodity. This is surely false, as the prices of precious metals and agricultural goods, such as beef, coffee, corn, and sugar, and others, including rubber, have illustratively sustained an equivalent degree of increased prices. Barro's tacit support of the fiat monetary system is easily dismissible as foolish not only by purchasing power comparisons to real and traditional stores of value, but by the demonstrable correlation between the monetary base and the cost of oil as denominated in that currency. In their 1998 Quarterly Review, the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis investigated the correlation between monetary expansion and prices, concluding the following:


"Under fiat standards, we find the same extremely high correlation between money growth and inflation that has been found by other researchers who have studied this relationship. In addition, we find that the strength of the relationship does not vary with the measure of money used: The correlation between money growth—measured by primary money, secondary money, or M2—and inflation is always 0.99."


Barro is conspicuously committed to measuring "recovery" and economic "well-being" by the increase in asset prices and aggregate consumption, all of which are priced in dollars. These figures are nothing short of a representation of an increased overall cost of living and a reduced standard of living. When one's economic measuring stick ignores the value of time not working -- as well as retained value and protracted returns consistent with expectations, and the efficacious value of goods and services -- to instead utilize dollar-based benchmarks and values based on spending and the velocity of money, this is the academic conclusion which is to be inaccurately drawn. Moreover, when Barro claims that there is no ironclad link between monetary base and prices, he is empirically proven false by a 1995 report by the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, which found a 90 percent correlation between money printing -- inflation -- and general price increases. In 1998, their Quarterly Review also revealed the following: 

"The other point is that, on average, inflation rates are also higher under fiat standards. The average inflation rate for the fiat standard observations is 9.17 percent per year; the average inflation rate for the commodity standard observations is 1.75 percent per year. And, once again, every country in our sample experienced a higher rate of inflation in the period during which it was operating under a fiat standard than in the period during which it was operating under a commodity standard."

Inflation is evincibly the expansion of the monetary base. Prices can, of course, rise and fall because of myriad exogenous forces. The supply of money is merely the most ubiquitous force driving general prices. In the end, inflation is first and everywhere a monetary phenomenon.

Comments

  1. Nice blog thanks for shareing instersting information about commodity trading.

    commodity trading tips

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Into the Wild: An Economics Lesson

The Keynesian mantra, in its implications, has its roots in destruction rather than truth: “In the long run, we’re all dead.” If this is your guiding principle, we are destined to differ on matters of principle and timeline. While it is true that our fates intersect in death, that does not mean that we ought to condemn our heirs to that view: the view that our work on this planet ought only to serve ourselves, and that we ought only to bear in mind the consequences within our own lifetimes.  The Keynesians, of course, prefer their outlook, as it serves their interests; it has the further benefit of appealing to other selfish people who have little interest in the future to which they'll ultimately condemn their heirs. After all, they'll be long gone by then. So, in the Keynesian view, the longterm prospects for the common currency, social stability, and personal liberty are not just irrelevant but inconvenient. In their view, regardless of the consequences, those in charge tod

America's Civil War: Not "Civil" and Not About Slavery

Virtually the entirety of South and Central America, as well as European powers Britain, Spain and France, peacefully abolished slavery — without war — in the first sixty years of the nineteenth century.  Why, then, did the United States enter into a bloody war that cost over half of the nation’s wealth, at least 800,000 lives and many hundreds of thousands more in casualties?  The answer: the War Between the States was not about slavery.  It was a war of invasion to further empower the central government and to reject state sovereignty, nullification of unconstitutional laws, and the states’ rights to secession.  It was a war that would cripple the South and witness the federal debt skyrocket from $65 million in 1860 to $2.7 billion in 1865, whose annual interest alone would prove twice as expensive as the entire federal budget from 1860. It was a war whose total cost, including pensions and the burial of veterans, was an estimated $12 billion. Likewise, it was a war that would

There's Always Another Tax: The Tragedy of the Public Park

In the San Francisco Bay Area, many residents work tirelessly throughout the year to pay tens of thousands of dollars in annual property taxes. In addition to this, they are charged an extra 10 percent on all expenses through local sales taxes. It doesn't stop there. In addition to their massive federal tax bill, the busy state of California capitalizes on the opportunity to seize another 10 percent through their own sizable state income taxes. But guess what! It doesn't stop there. No, no, no, no.  In California, there's always another tax. After all of these taxes, which have all the while been reported to cover every nook and cranny of the utopian vision, the Bay Area resident is left to face yet an additional tax at the grocery store, this time on soda. The visionaries within government, and those who champion its warmhearted intentions, label this one the "soda tax," which unbelievably includes Gatorade, the preferred beverage of athletes