Category: Economics, Finance, and Political Economy

  • “One of the more striking recent developments in economics has been economists’

    —“One of the more striking recent developments in economics has been economists’ growing acceptance of the idea that globalization has held down pay for a large swath of workers.”

    Automation: “Workers whose labor can be replaced by computers, be they in factories or stores, have paid a particularly steep price.”—


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-19 17:08:00 UTC

  • A SHORT TIMELINE OF PURCHASING POWER (from visual capitalist) 1900s After the Pa

    A SHORT TIMELINE OF PURCHASING POWER

    (from visual capitalist)

    1900s

    After the Panic of 1907, the National Monetary Commission is established to propose legislation to regulate banking.

    U.S. Money Supply: $7 billion

    What $1 Could Buy: A pair of patent leather shoes.

    1910s

    The Federal Reserve Act is signed in 1913 by President Woodrow Wilson.

    U.S. Money Supply: $13 billion

    What $1 Could Buy: A woman’s house dress.

    1920s

    U.S. dollar bills were reduced in size by 25%, and standardized in terms of design.

    The Fed starts using open market operations as a tool for monetary policy.

    U.S. Money Supply: $35 billion

    What $1 Could Buy: Five pounds of sugar.

    1930s

    To deal with deflation during the Great Depression, the United States suspends the gold standard. President Franklin D. Roosevelt signs Executive Order 6102, which criminalizes the possession of gold.

    By no longer allowing gold to be legally redeemed, this removes a major constraint on the Fed, which can now control the money supply.

    U.S. Money Supply: $46 billion

    What $1 Could Buy: 16 cans of Campbell’s Soup

    1940s

    The massive deficits of World War II are almost financed entirely by the creation of new money by the Federal Reserve.

    Interest rates are pegged low at the request of the Treasury.

    Under Bretton-Woods, the “gold-exchange standard” is adopted.

    U.S. Money Supply: $55 billion

    What $1 Could Buy: 20 bottles of Coca-Cola

    1950s

    The Korean War starts in 1950, and inflation is at an annualized rate of 21%.

    The Fed can no longer manage such low interest rates, and tells the Treasury that it can “no longer maintain the existing situation”.

    U.S. Money Supply: $151 billion

    What $1 Could Buy: One Mr. Potato Head

    1960s

    An agreement, called the Treasury-Federal Reserve Accord, is reached to establish the central bank’s independence.

    By this time, U.S. dollars in circulation around the world exceeded U.S. gold reserves. Unless the situation was rectified, the country would be vulnerable to the currency equivalent of a “bank run”.

    U.S. Money Supply: $211 billion

    What $1 Could Buy: Two movie tickets.

    1970s

    In 1971, President Richard Nixon ends direct convertibility of the United States dollar to gold.

    The period following the Nixon Shock is uncertain. The federal deficit doubles, stagflation hits, and the oil price skyrockets – all during the Vietnam War.

    Over the decade, the dollar loses 1/3 of its value.

    U.S. Money Supply: $401 billion

    What $1 Could Buy: Three Morton TV dinners.

    1980s

    The stock market crashes in 1987 on Black Monday.

    The Federal Reserve, under newly-appointed Alan Greenspan, issues the following statement:

    “The Federal Reserve, consistent with its responsibilities as the nation’s central bank, affirmed today its readiness to serve as a source of liquidity to support the economic and financial system.”

    The Dow would recover by 1989, with no prolonged recession occurring.

    U.S. Money Supply: $1,560 billion

    What $1 Could Buy: One bottle of Heinz Ketchup.

    1990s

    This decade is generally considered to be a time of declining inflation and the longest peacetime economic expansion in U.S. history.

    During this decade, many improvements are made to U.S. paper currency to prevent counterfeiting. Microprinting, security thread, and other features are used.

    U.S. Money Supply: $3,277 billion

    What $1 Could Buy: One gallon of milk.

    2000s

    After the Dotcom crash, the Fed drops interest rates to near all-time lows.

    In 2008, the Financial Crisis hits and the Fed begins “quantitative easing”. Later, this would be known as QE1.

    U.S. Money Supply: $4,917 billion

    What $1 Could Buy: One Wendy’s hamburger.

    2010-

    After QE1, the Fed holds $2.1 trillion of bank debt, mortgage-backed securities, and Treasury notes. Shortly after, QE2 starts.

    In 2012, it’s time for QE3.

    Purchases were halted in October 2014 after accumulating $4.5 trillion in assets.

    U.S. Money Supply: $13,291 billion

    What $1 Could Buy: One song from iTunes.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-19 16:56:00 UTC

  • FOLLOW THE MONEY: MOST PROFITABLE SECTORS Health the most profitable sector with

    FOLLOW THE MONEY: MOST PROFITABLE SECTORS

    Health the most profitable sector with a 21.6 percent net profit margin. Technology services 17.2 percent net margin were second, narrowly edging past finance 17.1 percent. Electronic technology and consumer nondurables round out the top five.

    Finance and insurance represent 7.4 percent (or $1.5 trillion) of U.S. gross domestic product or 266B.

    Health 3,823, (or 3.8T) 21.6% profit is 826B.

    Tech looks impressive but it doesn’t employ many people. Sort of like electricity., Small market HUGE impact.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-19 16:02:00 UTC

  • WHY GLOBAL CAPITAL HATES SOVEREIGN DEFAULT by Michael Churchill Global capital h

    WHY GLOBAL CAPITAL HATES SOVEREIGN DEFAULT

    by Michael Churchill

    Global capital hates defaults because they puncture the whole perma-debt system that keeps overall interest rates lower than they would be otherwise. It’s socialization of risk taken to the meta-level.

    The most obvious example at present is Argentina, whose debt profile is ludicrously unsustainable. They are a ward of the IMF. Without foreign help Argentine dollar bonds would collapse to zero overnight. But you know with smoke and mirrors you can sort of keep them trading — sometimes at 40 cents on the dollar, sometimes at 75. But either way nothing collapses.

    To give an idea of scale, Argentina’s foreign-owned dollar bonds are about $150 billion face value. So it’s a lot … enough to create a mini tidal wave if they went to zero … but not the end of the world. The knock on effect would be the removal of the safety net. So everybody else’s yields on dollar bonds would go from 3% to 4.5% right quick.

    Other countries in shaky terrain are Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Egypt and Lebanon.

    That said, MOST emerging markets are quite solvent. Basically 97% of the other EMs not mentioned above are fine. Much better than 20 years ago.

    ——–

    CD: I want to point out that it’s in the US’s strategic interest now to NOT generate global stability. And in particular, causing a collapse in Pakistan would be extremely useful for much of the world.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-19 12:09:00 UTC

  • Economics of signaling

    Economics of signaling.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-19 02:55:43 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1207494693333942273

    Reply addressees: @VolkischWeeb @DuchesneRicardo

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1207494492133064704


    IN REPLY TO:

    @gothickagura

    @DuchesneRicardo @curtdoolittle It’s always rich when Indians (usually the women) do this. Why don’t you take a look at your 3 thousand year old Aryan supremacist racial caste system back home before lecturing White countries (most open societies on Earth, hence why you are here) about racism.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1207494492133064704

  • Ezra – What’s your take (or position), on the disruption caused by Amazon? I can

    Ezra – What’s your take (or position), on the disruption caused by Amazon? I can’t make a negative argument other than a) taxation b) Impact on relationship between shopping socialization and manners, c) and strategic fragility. None of which are convincing.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-18 23:24:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1207441581118304257

    Reply addressees: @ezraklein

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1207434207653285888


    IN REPLY TO:

    @ezraklein

    Lots of fascinating charts in here, but this one, showing the sharp rise in public companies calling Amazing a “risk factor,” is particularly striking https://t.co/qnh8l4oRC9 https://t.co/4Viq4c4N2C

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1207434207653285888

  • Few issues going on: 1) It’s a novel combination of the Token, Share in the Exch

    Few issues going on:
    1) It’s a novel combination of the Token, Share in the Exchange, and Divisible Share, on Co-op but proprietary Exchange, a for use as a money substitute.
    2) It’s easily shut down. AND at best it’s free R&D for the state.
    3) Every generation needs to learn.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-17 19:15:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1207016526970269699

    Reply addressees: @CitizenZ_1000 @PeterSchiff

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1207013983984721925


    IN REPLY TO:

    @CitizenZ_1000

    @curtdoolittle @PeterSchiff You think that bitcoin is a silly experiment that will end up being a lesson for everyone who you anticipate will lose money? Why?

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1207013983984721925

  • RT @SchiffSpencer: For the first time since 2017, the size of the #Fed’s balance

    RT @SchiffSpencer: For the first time since 2017, the size of the #Fed’s balance sheet is now positive on a YoY basis. Since early Septembe…


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-17 18:33:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1207005938336575488

  • “Would be sooo great if the Fed would further lower interest rates and quantitat

    —“Would be sooo great if the Fed would further lower interest rates and quantitative ease. The Dollar is very strong against other currencies and there is almost no inflation. This is the… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=531834027413492&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-17 17:37:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1206991767599566849

  • 4) What is the demarcation between productive voluntary transfer and rent seekin

    4) What is the demarcation between productive voluntary transfer and rent seeking? 5) What is the demarcation between profitability, productivity, and privatization of commons, socialization of losses? Libertarianism=private property marxism. Communism=common property marxism.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-12-17 17:22:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1206987959607672833

    Reply addressees: @ChristaylorBrwn @dallas101346 @PeterSchiff @realDonaldTrump

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1206987165898563584


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @ChristaylorBrwn @dallas101346 @PeterSchiff @realDonaldTrump You know, all libertarian tropes are half truths that use the abrahamic technique of deception, to bait you into hazard.
    1) How do you distinguish productive from parasitic transfers? 2) how do you prevent externalities? 3) Can private capital produce returns on 20+ yr horizons?

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1206987165898563584


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @ChristaylorBrwn @dallas101346 @PeterSchiff @realDonaldTrump You know, all libertarian tropes are half truths that use the abrahamic technique of deception, to bait you into hazard.
    1) How do you distinguish productive from parasitic transfers? 2) how do you prevent externalities? 3) Can private capital produce returns on 20+ yr horizons?

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1206987165898563584