No hyperinflation pending, TIPS are retreating

[Fear No Evil]

He didn't fix it, people fix it by driving ahead and taking risk against pessimism and the odds. What Obama did was follow the advise of the recognized experts in the economic field and stimulate stimulate, to advert a depression. No depression occurred so we can assume one was not on the way or one was actually averted. What he gets credit for is that there wasn't one and he did what the experts said as any intelligent leader would have to.

You are simply an asshole who doesn't want to give credit where credit is due. Bush was doing and would have continued to do the same thing had he the opportunity for and succeeded in a third term.

Oh I get it.. when good economic news comes out, Obama is responsible. When bad news comes out, Bush is still responsible. When Obama is talking about stopping the depression, its GOOD that he's going trillions into debt, when people are tired of trillions going to Citibank, it was BUSH's fault we spent all that. Since half the stimulus money is not spent, and the economy is fixed, shouldn't we immediately use it to lower the debt? Or is it better we continue to funnel it to AIG and Citibank so Obama can be re-elected?

 

[Munky]

TIP: don't post a wall of text in italics if you actually expect people to read it.

I thought people knew that the Fed's job is to say what the people wanted to hear.... So when the "good news" comes out, I'm supposed to believe them? Based on cherry-picked statistics, no less? Yeah... sure.

 

[Fear No Evil]

TIP: don't post a wall of text in italics if you actually expect people to read it.

I thought people knew that the Fed's job is to say what the people wanted to hear.... So when the "good news" comes out, I'm supposed to believe them? Based on cherry-picked statistics, no less? Yeah... sure.

I don't think you understand.. Its OVER.. its FIXED.. Obama saved us. The debate is over. The only thing left to decide is if we make Obama supreme leader and abolish Presidential Term Limits.

 

[JS80]

There will be a high rate of inflation once we start spending the bazillion trillions Americans are hoarding in savings right now. Unless you think the savings dynamics of Americans was a permanent shift.

 

[StageLeft]

Bush was doing and would have continued to do the same thing had he the opportunity for and succeeded in a third term.

Looks, smells like a duck...Bush was stimulating, too if we're going to be fair.

Given where we are now it seems the US will more or less follow down Japan's path and so will the rest of the wealthy world. Endless prop-ups and deficits to try and delay the catastrophe for as long as possible. If it goes on long enough it will become hard to tell if any future catastrophe was this one delayed or this one really was solved and the future one is fresh.

 

[dullard]

Oh I have no doubt they have slowed it. But have they done more damage in doing so than the recession itself? He could obviously spend another couple trillion and drive unemployment to 0. But is having a 4 trillion dollar deficit a proper way of handling this? Is racking up massive amounts of debt going to be good for us long term?

The stimulus package was a minor dent in the overall deficit. Sure, it contributed to the deficit, but the war on terror and Bush tax cuts contributed FAR more. In that context, it probably did NOT do much damage compared to the recession.

But, your hidden point is correct. If Obama doesn't fix the long-term deficit problem, he'll be a dismal failure as a president. I've been saying the same thing.

We needed a short-term spending stimulus AND we need a long-term spending cut. Those aren't incompatible. It may be political suicide, but it is what we MUST do. We must have that stumulus and we must curtail the entitlement programs. Even Obama hinted at that fact during his campaign. Only time will tell if he has the balls to do it though. No president yet has had that ability (and thus all are failures).

 

[StageLeft]

We needed a short-term spending stimulus AND we need a long-term spending cut. Those aren't incompatible. It may be political suicide, but it is what we MUST do. We must have that stumulus and we must curtail the entitlement programs. Even Obama hinted at that fact during his campaign. Only time will tell if he has the balls to do it though. No president yet has had that ability (and thus all are failures).

I am drawing a big blank on how many politicians ever commit political suicide to actually do what is best for their constituents. Are there any; has a president ever gone and knowingly screwed his chances of a second term by doing an unpopular but right (and subsequently proven right) thing in his first?

 

[Jaskalas]

Just wanted to dispel any remaining Wiemar republic nuttery...

Wait until we print money to settle our debts.

 

[yllus]

I am drawing a big blank on how many politicians ever commit political suicide to actually do what is best for their constituents. Are there any; has a president ever gone and knowingly screwed his chances of a second term by doing an unpopular but right (and subsequently proven right) thing in his first?

Back in 2006, I made a thread about comments Prime Minister Harper made about Canada's combat mission in Afghanistan...

PM won't be swayed on mission

OTTAWA - Stephen Harper says he could not live with himself if he reduced Canada's military mission in Afghanistan to further his own political self-interest and that he is prepared to lose the next election if it means standing by the military.

The Prime Minister's remarks, which came yesterday as Canadian troops led an assault on a Taliban position to begin a new offensive in southern Afghanistan, stand out as his strongest defence of his Conservative government's military policy since he came to office nearly a year ago.

Dozens of soldiers have died in combat in Afghanistan, and the opposition parties have insisted the government put less emphasis on the military's combat mission in that country -- with the Bloc Quebecois hinting it might try to topple the government over the issue in Parliament this winter.

But Mr. Harper told CanWest News Service in an interview such political pressure will have no influence on his decisions.

"I don't feel pressure by threats from the Liberals or NDP or Bloc to bring me down [on Afghanistan]," he said.

"If ultimately I were brought down on that, and even defeated on that, I can live with myself. I could not live with myself making a decision on Canada's role in the world and our strategic and defence interests if I knew I had done that for political reasons that were the wrong reasons. That I could not live with."

Of course, you could now argue that we are ending our combat mission in 2011 because he is playing politics (another opinion is that we've now realized nothing good will ever come of the place).

 

[StageLeft]

Of course, you could now argue that we are ending our combat mission in 2011 because he is playing politics (another opinion is that we've now realized nothing good will ever come of the place).

Yeah that's the thing. I want to see a memoir written by a prime minister or president in which he confesses that at the time he was making a given decision he knew it would be the end of his political career. That I would respect.

 

[sandorski]

Yeah that's the thing. I want to see a memoir written by a prime minister or president in which he confesses that at the time he was making a given decision he knew it would be the end of his political career. That I would respect.

There are indeed decisions made that could be Political Suicide. One really has to make a convincing case to turn an unpopular action into an acceptable action. Back on Canadian Politics, Finance Minister Paul Martin's elimination of the Deficit is another example of potential Political Suicide that was not only averted, but eventually supported. Services were Cut and Taxes increased, but in the end the People supported the action, because they were sufficiently convinced it was necessary.

 

[theeedude]

GOP is going to do its best to sink this economy by blocking more stimulus, so I don't think inflation is in the cards in the near term.

 

[ElFenix]

the first bush signed a tax increase.

 

[Fear No Evil]

the first bush signed a tax increase.

And was promptly MURDERED by the democrats for doing so.

 

[totalnoob]

Of course we have no inflation because the economy is still shit. All those trillions printed are just sitting on bank balance sheets and not being put to use..but once things recover and the money starts circulating and multiplying through the fractional reserve process, look out.

 

[halik]

The stimulus package was a minor dent in the overall deficit. Sure, it contributed to the deficit, but the war on terror and Bush tax cuts contributed FAR more. In that context, it probably did NOT do much damage compared to the recession.

But, your hidden point is correct. If Obama doesn't fix the long-term deficit problem, he'll be a dismal failure as a president. I've been saying the same thing.

We needed a short-term spending stimulus AND we need a long-term spending cut. Those aren't incompatible. It may be political suicide, but it is what we MUST do. We must have that stumulus and we must curtail the entitlement programs. Even Obama hinted at that fact during his campaign. Only time will tell if he has the balls to do it though. No president yet has had that ability (and thus all are failures).

Who said you can bring rational though in here. Hyperboles only, dammit!

 

[halik]

Wait until we print money to settle our debts.

You don't think there's a bubble in gold?

 

[PingSpike]

And was promptly MURDERED by the democrats for doing so.

I think he was mentioning that as an example of political suicide that had to be done. I don't really remember the details so I don't know if its a good example, but it was one item that immediately sprung to mind for me as well. IIRC he was left the unenviable task of cleaning up after Reagan's stimulus efforts or something?

That said, regardless I'm not sure if he knowingly commited political suicide or not. He probably just thought he had more political capital to burn than he actually did.

 

[bamacre]

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=219794&highlight=hyperinflation

Aptly titled "Hyperinflation by 2010"

Here's BansheeX claiming we're in early stages of hyperinflation:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=25466180&postcount=89

As for your first link, you misquoted what the title said, "Hyperinflationary Depression Remains Likely As Early As 2010." You missed the word "likely," and the words "as early as 2010." Regardless, that is an irresponsible, or just inaccurate claim, so I'll give you partial credit.

As for the 2nd link, Banshee's post, I give you no credit. I don't see him making any kind of predictions for hyperinflation coming soon. Whether or not we are in the "early stages" of hyperinflation is relative, depending on what he meant by that. Certainly, he didn't seem to make any claims about hyperinflation coming "soon," or at least by Feb 2010.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

You want to know why I knew there wouldn't be hyper inflation? because everyone is still broke.

 

[bamacre]

06-03-2009: Northwestern Mutual Makes First Gold Buy in 152 Years

Originally Posted by bamacre
In times of coming inflation, no matter to what degree, it's always better to have gold under your mattress than cash.

Hyperinflation seems to be a worse-case scenario, but high inflation looks to be around the corner.

That doesn't count either, right? How large is that corner?

Of course it doesn't count, obviously I wasn't making any kind of prediction concerning hyperinflation. As for "high inflation" "around the corner," I don't see how it's not inevitable. The degree of inflation is certainly up for debate, but even Buffett was warning about this around the same time...
http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/02/news/newsmakers/warren_buffett.fortune/?postversion=2009050213

 

[Craig234]

And was promptly MURDERED by the democrats for doing so.

No, he was murdered by the Democrats for running on a lie in his campaign to get elected; and he was murdered by the Republicans for doing the right thing.

 

[soccerballtux]

06-03-2009: Northwestern Mutual Makes First Gold Buy in 152 Years



That doesn't count either, right? How large is that corner?

Of course it doesn't count, obviously I wasn't making any kind of prediction concerning hyperinflation. As for "high inflation" "around the corner," I don't see how it's not inevitable. The degree of inflation is certainly up for debate, but even Buffett was warning about this around the same time...
http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/02/news/newsmakers/warren_buffett.fortune/?postversion=2009050213

How would we have hyperinflation? If too much money enters the system. How does that happen? Debt? No, because when you purchase a Treasury, you give the government $1000 that would have been invested somewhere else and lent out.

So then how does it happen? The banks lend out all the cash they've got thanks to the Fed's MBS purchase program and Quantitative Easing plan? No, because the Fed will be using the interest rate banks earn with their deposits at the Fed (risk free interest) to control the amount of loans that are made on any recovery cycle we enter.

So then how does it happen?

It doesn't.
I've been reading reading reading about this and the hyperinflation stuff just doesn't add up. You guys don't need to worry. The only way it would happen is if the Fed purchases more Treasuries from the market and that money is used to purchase more treasuries, so on and so forth. This _COULD_ happen if the Treasury interest rates rise too high and they don't want any crowding out-- the best solution would be to let the rates rise until the gov't has to stop spending so much, then we could return to efficiency and shake off some of the deadweight (in government-- we got by just fine with what we spent in 1980, why not now???)

Further, 5m unemployed worker's unemployment checks are going to stop coming by May, and the Fed's MBS purchase program is ending in the next month. What this means: get ready for a second dip. In my opinion.

 

[JS80]

(in government-- we got by just fine with what we spent in 1980, why not now???)

Are you kidding? The tech innovation of the 90s bailed out the 80s spending. I don't think the wireless social media innovation of this decade will generate enough wealth to bail out Obama spending.

 

[Ozoned]

consumer prices for everything except energy have skyrocketed in the last 12 months where I live. A lot of stuff 30%



Profit taking???