Unsurprisingly Surprised

in LeoFinance2 years ago

The belief that printing and adding massive amounts of money to the supply is going to cause inflation, is old economic thinking.

Do you remember the economists over the last two years who were very keen to pour money into the economy as a response to Covid-19 saying this? And people were saying, you can't put a price on life?

Do you notice how the same economists are now saying quite different, complaining about rampant inflation and the effect climbing prices are having on lives?

image.png

In a bid to slow down the inflation rate, the US Federal Reserve increased interest rates by 0.75% yesterday, with the current inflation rate numbers sitting at 8.6% and climbing as we speak. They are saying it is a "surprise" that inflation is so aggressive, when all of those "old economic thinkers" predicted and warned about it back in early days of Covid - but were ignored and belittled for their backward thinking.

Life is priceless.

What people don't seem to get is that while they say, "you can't put a price on life" when it comes to how much one is willing to spend on care for a loved one, that opens up the downside of the price on life too, meaning that life becomes "priceless" - ZERO. The value of something depends on what someone is willing to pay and as we have seen in the last couple years, people heavily overweigh the present moment fears, at the cost of future positions. By pumping money into the economy over the last two years they inflated the "price of life" but now that is coming crashing down, so the current value of life is far, far lower - as the cost of living spirals out of control.

All-in spending was approaching $13 trillion as of mid-2021. That’s more than the US spent in it’s 13 most expensive wars combined. Nasdaq Article

That article from late last year is a decent read, by the way.

As said, the current inflation in the economy is not a surprise, it is just that for the last decade, the inflation indicators has been in other areas, namely the stock markets that aren't monitored, rather than in the CPI goods - but once that money started getting pumped into consumer pockets, that all changes. Quantitative easing has pushed trillions into the US economy and now, trillions more have been pushed in - not to mention the trillions more globally. The "missed" indicators are like someone sitting in a well-airconditioned house, predicting what the outside temperature is by looking out the window.

However, once all this "extra" money pours into the consumer pocket, the consumer starts to demand with it, and when demand outstrips supply, prices are going to increase, as we have seen in the housing markets, with many being overheated. On top of this free money being directly injected, interest rates have been at all time lows and even in minuses, so borrowing more money is very cheap, and people have been "taking advantage". Throw in the lockdowns, supply chain disruptions and now wars on top - prices are only heading one way.

There is no surprise in this.

Well, other than the surprise that so many people believed what the governments and media were spouting, that all of this extra money was not going to lead to inflation. While the various narratives can keep getting twisted, at the end of the day, laws of economics will win, because, that is the law of the economy. There is no beating them or changing them, there is only working with them, and that "work" has been grossly mismanaged and the mismanagement grossly accepted by the majority of people, because they had "free money" pouring into their pockets.

How free does the money feel now?

It seems that while an individual can say "you can't put a price on life", what they really mean is, as long as someone else is paying, there is no roof. However, once that cost becomes personal, there really is a price, which might be everything one has. We are now seeing the realization that the "someone else paying" was us all along. But, while this may come as a surprise to many people, governments only ever use our money.

However, that flow of money has been outside of our attention, because it has been pushed into the finance markets, where most people don't spend much time, as they have no direct investment there that they manage themselves. It is only a minority that have their eye on those markets and even them, the majority of the value is in the hands of the few. It is only when the price of lettuce goes up 400% and people are having to tighten their belts at a personal level that the "roof price" on life is felt.

It is easy to spend someone else's money and that is what people have been doing, without realizing that they are actually diving into their own pockets from future resources. At some point, that debt has to be repaid and that is where we are now, a hole burned in the wallet, filled by a huge stack of IOUs - and the collectors are here.

Little of this is surprising to anyone, and should be of no surprise to the people who are managing the cash flow. However, perhaps their public-facing narrative was that convincing, that they started to believe their own fantasy, thinking that they could indeed break the laws of economics.

So far, the laws are holding firm.

Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

Sort:  

I think we had this discussion at the time. How can it not be inflationary?

I love the emoji selection here and now because it lets me show my surprised face pretty accurately. 😱

Inflationary?? That's crazy talk!!

:D

Sigh :(
Those who are ignorant of history, or choose to ignore it, are often forced to relive it, sometimes painfully.
As the old atage goes; "I can tell you the stove is hot, or you can touch it, and learn by getting burned."
We are old enough to choose, but not always accepting of the consequences.

We get burned over and over, by the same brat lighting matches.

As in laws of nature, laws of economics cannot be made or legislated; they can only be discovered, and this requires a keen sense of observation, study, and logic.

"Old economic thinking" is old for a reason: it's been proven over and over to be true. New economic thinking won't necessarily replace the old, but rather present a paradigm shift which still needs to he proven true. "New economic thinking" which can't do that is equivalent to outdated forms of thinking such as Earth being the center of the solar system.

One example is the movement to "cacnel student loan debt" incurred by today's holders of student loans. Student loan debt will be paid one way or another; left unsaid is who will assume that debt burden. The student only hears that he/she won't have to pay for it out of pocket anymore. Sadly, many student loans originate as funding by taxpayers, and taxpayers will remain on the hook to pay down the student loan debt. As a result, "student loan debt" doesn't get cancelled but rather shifted or redistributed. Then it's revealed to be the Ponzi scheme it always was.

The Law of Supply and Demand is one of the most basic laws of economics. Another is known by the letters TINSTAAFL: There is no such thing as a free lunch. Any "new economic thinking" which ignores these laws of economics is suspect.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

There is definitely space for changing economic policy and it is well needed. For example, when most of the policies were created, there weren't globalized companies that can generate massive volumes on service and products that don't require a large workforce and then, pay their taxes in a different location than it was earned. It is a massive issue, but none seem interested in shifting the policies required to counter it.

Debt is another one obviously, where "forgiving the debt" doesn't magically make it go away. That money has to still be found from somewhere, and they always find it, no matter the cost to those who have to pay.

The inflation at %2 or %3 for this kind of economic model is always good. However, they exaggerated the printing money during the pandemic. Since the beginnning of the pandemic, I thought that it might be created to change the economic situations and conditions in the world, like changing the flow of money. Just before the pandemic, there was trade war between Trump and China.

If you read the article, the total cash volume increased by 37% ....

Last time I checked, laws don't change just because we wish it. But honestly, could those who were laid off afford to refuse the money? I can't blame anyone with a bare pantry for accepting much needed income.

But honestly, could those who were laid off afford to refuse the money?

No, they couldn't. This isn't about blaming them, it is normal nature for humans. But, it is very flawed from the perspective of the decision makers in the way it was done, because they should know the actual condition of the economy, meaning that all of these factors should have been managed better far earlier.

Agreed. But at the time, they were just looking at being reelected. For most of them, this crash came afterwards. Meaning that in some cases, they got exactly what they wanted :( ...

!LUV

Yep. Timing is everything...

It is easy to spend someone else's money and that is what people have been doing, without realizing that they are actually diving into their own pockets from future resource

Most individuals don't actually realise this and believe they are doing the right thing but not knowing it has effect in future.

It is an isolation problem, they don't see their role in the big picture.

The chicken always comes home to roost. We got no free money yet we will still suffer along with the rest of the world. When America sneezes the rest catch a cold and unfortunately the ones running the States don't care about consequences.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

Yep. I feel that this is part of the plan of it. Get into heavy debt in the US, drain the repayments from the RoW.

I will be the first to admit I wasn't really thinking about the future implications of the stimulus checks that we got in the US. On the other hand, I wasn't eager to get mine either. I would have been just as happy if they had skipped us or we had not qualified.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

I think that there is little point in turning it down, but I also think that many people used it poorly. For example in Australia, many people bought new TVs - instead of putting it into very low stocks. BTC was sitting around 7k at that point.

I didn't get anything at all and when laid off from my work, I didn't get anything either, because I have a business. It didn't matter that my business couldn't operate because of Covid laws.

I am pretty sure mine just went into savings. Nothing super smart or exciting about that, but I didn't spend it on frivolous stuff either.

That is fair enough.

This post has been manually curated by @bhattg from Indiaunited community. Join us on our Discord Server.

Do you know that you can earn a passive income by delegating your Leo power to @india-leo account? We share 100 % of the curation rewards with the delegators.

Please contribute to the community by upvoting this comment and posts made by @indiaunited.

Well... I dunno exactly why. But I find this photo of Mrs @momone very very sexy!! Hahahaha

I am not really sure the helicopter money will really help much. Especially when most of it doesn't reach the citizen. At the same time, it's just a temporary reprieve but it does not solve any of the underlying issues. So I have given up on the government fixing anything.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

Even the medical science - discipline that is supposed to be the most important - got compromised during the pandemic due to medical experts being proven to be "experts". I can only imagine what would happen to experts in the area of economics.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta