Originally posted by: vman
Originally posted by: Dissipate
Originally posted by: vman
The Federal Reserve of course, and therefore the Federal Reserve deliberately causes inflation every single year. Why? Simple, to insure that the banking industry makes billions of dollars a year off of money that they create from nothing.
That line is just false. The federal reserve changes the money supply to either stimulate or slow down the economy. Inflation over the past decade has actually been quite modest, due mainly to efforts by the federal reserve to stabilize inflation. This focus on inflation was initiated by Fed Chairman Volcker and the cause has now been taken up by Greenspan. In fact the federal reserve raised rates in 2000 (i.e. lowered the money supply) after the economic figures were pointing to increased inflation. That put the brakes on the economy and sent us into the recession (along with 9/11 of course) that we're only now starting to come out of. If the federal reserve loved inflation so much they could have easily just let the bubble keep growing and would always leave interest rates low.
You are confusing short term inflation with long term inflation. Did you not read the quote I put in my original post? Short term inflation is caused by market forces, granted this is what the Fed staves off. But like Dr. Ball said, long term inflation is caused by only one thing, consistent increases in the money supply beyond the growth of the GDP.
The Fed enjoys keeping the economy "healthy" while it bleeds off a chunk of the economy every year right under our noses. Look at the hyper inflation of the '70s. During the '70s inflation was so bad that people started exploring alternative currencies. The Fed could not let that go on because use of alternative currencies would shatter the Feds grip on the economy. Therefore, the Fed keeps inflation "low" but steady so that it can continue to leech.
If the Fed kept up their current policies, then long term inflation would be minimal, no? Sure there has been crazy inflation in the past, like in the 70s as you point out, but that's why I said the current focus on minimizing inflation was only started after the 70s. The reason why monetary policy was so loose before 1980 and why inflation was so rampant is because economists at one point thought that inflation and unemployment were linked (the Phillips Curve). They thought that if they increased inflation, they could reduce unemployment. The stagflation of the 70s proved them wrong, and we learned our lesson, so to speak. Now we realize that a stable inflation rate is key to a healthy economy, and target low single digit inflation numbers that are in line with long term GDP growth.
And BTW Japan has a fractional reserve banking system, and they have had numerous bouts of deflation over the past decade.
It sounds like a lot of you are mad because somehow the bankers make a lot of money from all of this. But let's not forget that bankers provide a useful function - because borrowers and savers now have an intermediary they can trust, a lot of capital is directed towards socially beneficial projects that would not otherwise take place. Sure they may be monopolists, but this may be more a function of them being a natural monopoly rather than them employing anticompetitive practices. People trust banks with reputations - banks that have been around for a long time. Obviously if you have a whole mess of banks it'll be hard to tell which ones are trustworthy and which ones are not.
And what's so bad about a little inflation over the long run? Would you rather have a pure asset-backed money system? Show me one country with a different system that has a better track record of economic growth that the United States.