# If and when will the money printing stop?



## FlyingFox (17 January 2013)

The US and Europe have a pretty big debt problem, not only in the public sector but private sector too. Whether you believe in the theory of cycles and debt deflation or not it is becoming increasingly obvious that some of this debt will never get paid. Also seems like both the US and Europe have taken different paths to solving their respective crisis.

On the one hand, Europe has chosen austerity to pay down it's debt. This means a lot of hardships for it's citizens, cuts in spending and a real threat of deflation (if it is not happening already). If deflation does happen it also means an increase in the debt burden of public and private debt. The need for austerity is being championed by the likes of Ron Paul.

US has been essentially printing its way out of the GFC. The easier solution one might argue. The debt burden decreases but you get inflation and your currency goes down (the drain....). So far this has not caused any major bubbles or inflation (debatable, see some of Peter Schiff's comments on this). This is being championed by the likes of Paul  Krugman and even Steve Keen (although to be correct he is against austerity as a means of getting out of this). 

Given that Europe is finding austerity very hard and the demographic models of old public debt system are no longer valid in many places, if and when will the money printing stop in the US? Will Europe start printing?


----------



## young-gun (17 January 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> The US and Europe have a pretty big debt problem, not only in the public sector but private sector too. Whether you believe in the theory of cycles and debt deflation or not it is becoming increasingly obvious that some of this debt will never get paid. Also seems like both the US and Europe have taken different paths to solving their respective crisis.
> 
> On the one hand, Europe has chosen austerity to pay down it's debt. This means a lot of hardships for it's citizens, cuts in spending and a real threat of deflation (if it is not happening already). If deflation does happen it also means an increase in the debt burden of public and private debt. The need for austerity is being championed by the likes of Ron Paul.
> 
> ...





No bubbles? have you seen the US bond yields??

It's hard to say where it's going to end. I personally don't think it will until we have a black swan event. The whole idea of the Fed is to expand the money supply when times are tough, and then contract it when times are good(bring in inflation). Problem is they are trying to expand the money supply heavily, and not seeing the desired effects, unless barely keeping their heads above water was what they were going for. Hence the reason for low rates for another 5 years, and indefinite printing.

imo there shouldn't be austerity, or printing, everyone should just default, plunge into a huge depression, rid the system of all these in-inefficiencies, and we would be onto a path of prosperity much faster. Instead the entire world is going to follow Japan, and we'll wind up with 1,2 maybe even 3 lost decades at this rate. Hopefully we can develop a better model while that plays out.

Governments need to be made smaller, much smaller, free markets allowed to flourish, and not so much god dam spending.


----------



## FlyingFox (17 January 2013)

young-gun said:


> No bubbles? have you seen the US bond yields??




Quoting the general media / lay persons / governments viewpoint. Completely agree with you and Peter Schiff.


----------



## sydboy007 (17 January 2013)

Financial repression will occur for many more years.  The debt boom was unprecedented over so many countries for such an extended period.

Debt will be devalued through a combination of low yields and inflation.  Savers are to bear the brunt of the profligacy of the 20-30 years.

The Romans shaved coins, modern Govts QE to infiniteeeeeeeeeee.

Best to buy shares in companies paying reliable dividends that increase at least with inflation, or be lucky enough to be a wholesale bond investor able to access those tasty 7 to 8% tier 1 or 2 bonds.  Peeves me no end to not be able to get access to these great yields.

nb: as Mr Buffet says, buy shares that you wouldn't care if the sharemarket closed down for 10 years.  The daily and monthly share price fluctuations aint terribly important if the income holds up and increases year to year.  That's how I invest anyways.


----------



## FlyingFox (17 January 2013)

young-gun said:


> No bubbles? have you seen the US bond yields??
> 
> It's hard to say where it's going to end. I personally don't think it will until we have a black swan event. The whole idea of the Fed is to expand the money supply when times are tough, and then contract it when times are good(bring in inflation). Problem is they are trying to expand the money supply heavily, and not seeing the desired effects, unless barely keeping their heads above water was what they were going for. Hence the reason for low rates for another 5 years, and indefinite printing.
> 
> imo there shouldn't be austerity, or printing, everyone should just default, plunge into a huge depression, rid the system of all these in-inefficiencies, and we would be onto a path of prosperity much faster. Instead the entire world is going to follow Japan, and we'll wind up with 1,2 maybe even 3 lost decades at this rate. Hopefully we can develop a better model while that plays out.





Personally I think Japan's problem's are deeper than printing money/asset bubbles. Japan will probably never recover because they won't a have demographics base to push a recovery. There might be similar issues with parts of Europe as well.




young-gun said:


> Governments need to be made smaller, much smaller, free markets allowed to flourish, and not so much god dam spending.




Some of the leading economists (Paul Krugman for example) are arguing exactly the opposite (and getting their way from the looks of it).


----------



## young-gun (18 January 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> Personally I think Japan's problem's are deeper than printing money/asset bubbles. Japan will probably never recover because they won't a have demographics base to push a recovery. There might be similar issues with parts of Europe as well.
> 
> Some of the leading economists (Paul Krugman for example) are arguing exactly the opposite (and getting their way from the looks of it).




Agreem on Japan, never heard of krugman but obviously a keynesian.


----------



## white_goodman (22 January 2013)

young-gun said:


> Agreem on Japan, never heard of krugman but obviously a keynesian.




Krugman is a nobel laureate for his work in trade economics but is heavily tainted by his leftist leanings and looks highly stupid when arguing for broken window fallacy like ideas... digging ditches etc... he is becoming more ideologue than economist

if people want a good idea of how things will play out with regard to debt, inflation, deflation... read Cochranes' paper on "Inflation and Debt (2011)"

also Ron Paul isnt calling for austerity* he is arguing for a reduction in taxation but a higher reduction in spending, which could be stimulative based on history. It would appear to be dependent on type of tax reform and spending cuts


*austerity isnt meant to 'work' its a purge of bad debts, and a do-over of sorts. Its isnt an attempt at reverse Riccardian equivalence or anything of the sort. Also Europe hasnt got the inflation option, Greece, Spain etc are 'trapped' in the Euro, a gold standard of sorts and the only way to get competitive is for reduction in wages/prices.


----------



## white_goodman (22 January 2013)

also on Fed policy from one of the greats..


----------



## Gringotts Bank (13 February 2013)

If the following is correct, what will be the implications?

"Let's see, what is really going on? What kind of game are central bankers playing?

Central banks give their friends and favourites access to almost unlimited amounts of money at nearly zero rate of interest. What do they do with the money? They buy valuable assets - houses, office buildings, companies, gold and silver.

Ordinary households aren't getting the money; it's locked up in the hands of the 1%... or even the one tenth of 1%. And there aren't enough of these rich insiders to move consumer markets. Toilet paper and gasoline move up slowly. But prices for stocks, bonds, Manhattan real estate and expensive works of art go up fast.

Meanwhile, home ownership, by the people who live in them, is going down.

Stock ownership, by the middle class, is also on the decline.

Powerful, well-financed groups are buying. Middle America - short of funds - is not.

The elegance of this scam is breathtaking. Central banks print money to 'stimulate the economy'. It doesn't stimulate the real economy. It just makes it look as though there is real growth. Asset prices go up... just as they would in a real boom.

But in a real boom, most people would become wealthier and better off. In a phoney boom, only a few become wealthier. A phoney boom does not create wealth, it just transfers existing wealth. Central bankers give new money to their friends. The friends use it to capture a larger share of the real wealth in the nation".

Regards,

Bill Bonner
for The Daily Reckoning Australia


----------



## Aussiejeff (13 February 2013)

Gringotts Bank said:


> *snip*.... *Central bankers give new money to their friends. The friends use it to capture a larger share of the real wealth in the nation*".
> 
> Regards,
> 
> ...




This in spades. Those with unlimited control of the money presses are on a roll. Double or nothing. Winner takes all. They will play this game until the Big Bust. There is no-one apparently who can stop this end-scenario from happening.

The power of money obviously over-rules all other considerations.

Have fun while it lasts.


----------



## tech/a (13 February 2013)

There is just so much to this topic.
The complexity of the topic is such that the consequences of
Continually printing money to ponzie debt,requires books to
Adequately paint a picture of where we are at and where we are
Highly likely to go.

I've just finished 2 great reads

(1) The Great Crash Ahead Harry Dent. 

This will give you a broad idea of where we are at and where we are going. What many fail to include in their debt discussion is *UNFUNDED liabilities* Social security/Health Care/Pensions.

(2) The Crisis of Crowding.Ludwig Chincarini

This is a must read in * culmination * with (1) as it will describe why they keep printing money.
The unwinding of manufactured derivatives with no physical is frightening.
You can bet this current bull run before May when it is likely there will be no further Q/E is about unwinding.
Smart money selling into Dumb Money.


This is an fantastic topic and one which I'm glad I will live to see.
As hard as it is it won't happen again for another lifetime.


----------



## McLovin (13 February 2013)

tech/a said:


> (1) The Great Crash Ahead Harry Dent.
> 
> This will give you a broad idea of where we are at and where we are going. What many fail to include in their debt discussion is *UNFUNDED liabilities* Social security/Health Care/Pensions.




I never understood this unfunded liability hysteria. It's such a long dated liability (75 years or infinite depending on which measure you take), it's not going to go bang overnight. The tax system will adjust sometime between now and 2087.

It's just another way for Harry to sell his rubbish.


----------



## tech/a (13 February 2013)

McLovin said:


> I never understood this unfunded liability hysteria. It's such a long dated liability (75 years or infinite depending on which measure you take), it's not going to go bang overnight. The tax system will adjust sometime between now and 2087.
> 
> It's just another way for Harry to sell his rubbish.




There are more baby boomers than ever retiring or un able to continue to work
As it gets more difficult they are likely to be the ones retrenched.
*The liability is NOW*. Dont know where you get the 75 yrs from?? They will be retiring En mass over the next 10 yrs.
Only about 3% are self funded. So they go from TAX PAYERS to SOCIAL SECURITY TAKERS/ PENSIONERS.
Same goes for Medicare. This *isnt* some fictitious amount--this* IS the liability* which* ISNT FUNDED*.
In the USA its is trillions and it just *isnt* there!

Print more money eh!!

*Seriously you think Dent is writing Rubbish?
Have you read it?*


----------



## waza1960 (13 February 2013)

I have read Harry's book and it is hard to argue against his logic......


----------



## sptrawler (13 February 2013)

On the news today, there is a push to raise the minimum wage in the U.S by $2/hr.
Obviously we are moving into stage 2, inflation on the way to a house near you.


----------



## DB008 (13 February 2013)

sptrawler said:


> On the news today, there is a push to raise the minimum wage in the U.S by $2/hr.
> Obviously we are moving into stage 2, inflation on the way to a house near you.




sp, people have been talking about inflation (and hyper inflation) since the GFC.....


----------



## tech/a (13 February 2013)

sptrawler said:


> On the news today, there is a push to raise the minimum wage in the U.S by $2/hr.
> Obviously we are moving into stage 2, inflation on the way to a house near you.




That's ok their $2 represents less that 1% increase
The jump in commodity prices is on average around 30 %
Page 137 Dents book.

So no inflation here.


----------



## tech/a (13 February 2013)

So let's think about this
The fed prints trillions knowing that will flood the market with money
Interest rates fall great so does the dollar.
So US goods look more attractive so increase in demand.--- all good.
But wait imports like fuel,oil,clothes toyotas --- the list is endless --- now cost more---not good.
But worse Chinas currency is based on USD so when the UDS falls so does Chineese currency
Making them even more competitive in a market the US want to increase market share---- Good?

So just with this evidence what do you think? Working?


----------



## banco (13 February 2013)

white_goodman said:


> Krugman is a nobel laureate for his work in trade economics but is heavily tainted by his leftist leanings and looks highly stupid when arguing for broken window fallacy like ideas... digging ditches etc... he is becoming more ideologue than economist




Seems like Krugman has a better record than his detractors. According to many of them the US should already be experiencing high inflation and interest rates on US bonds should have spiked.


----------



## FxTrader (13 February 2013)

tech/a said:


> There are more baby boomers than ever retiring or unable to continue to work
> As it gets more difficult they are likely to be the ones retrenched.



And, I might add, the ones least likely to get re-employed.  Agism is rife in most industries and this employer mindset seems unlikely to change much in the future. 



> *The liability is NOW*. Dont know where you get the 75 yrs from?? They will be retiring En mass over the next 10 yrs.



And I will be one of them.  The GFC has briefly delayed this trend somewhat but many will likely be cashing out of super, having a good time for awhile and then counting on that government pension check later on.  I hear this kind of talk frequently enough.



> Only about 3% are self funded. So they go from TAX PAYERS to SOCIAL SECURITY TAKERS/ PENSIONERS.
> Same goes for Medicare. This *isnt* some fictitious amount--this* IS the liability* which* ISNT FUNDED*.



Just a bit harsh but it's true enough to say that the pension budget will be a huge drag on the remaining taxpayers in the near future.



> In the USA its is trillions and it just *isnt* there!  Print more money eh!!



Something like 70 trillion when you look and future state and federal unfunded liabilities.  The money creation experiment will likely go down in history as one of the great, probably the greatest, financial follies of all time.  It can only end in misery.  Enjoy the party while it lasts.


----------



## FlyingFox (13 February 2013)

Gringotts Bank said:


> If the following is correct, what will be the implications?
> 
> ....
> The elegance of this scam is breathtaking. Central banks print money to 'stimulate the economy'. It doesn't stimulate the real economy. It just makes it look as though there is real growth. Asset prices go up... just as they would in a real boom.
> ...




Some very good points. Property and stock markets of late have been some of the greatest vehicles of money transfer.



tech/a said:


> ....
> 
> I've just finished 2 great reads
> 
> ...




Thanks for the books. Will have to look them up. A few points too add.

1) Demographic and population changes. Baby Boomers are not a problem if the population had been increasing a >> 1.5-2%. Not the case and therefore money printing needed to fill the demand gap.
2) Financial Instruments advertently or inadvertently used to keep the price of some real assets down. e.g fractional lending for money and paper precious metals for real precious metals. 
3) Sovereign Debt and the unwillingness to change some flawed models.



McLovin said:


> I never understood this unfunded liability hysteria. It's such a long dated liability (75 years or infinite depending on which measure you take), it's not going to go bang overnight. The tax system will adjust sometime between now and 2087.
> 
> It's just another way for Harry to sell his rubbish.




The severity of this will depend on the demographics of the particular country but for most it's now to next 10 yrs. See tech/a's later comments for a good explanation.




tech/a said:


> There are more baby boomers than ever retiring or un able to continue to work
> As it gets more difficult they are likely to be the ones retrenched.
> *The liability is NOW*. Dont know where you get the 75 yrs from?? They will be retiring En mass over the next 10 yrs.
> Only about 3% are self funded. So they go from TAX PAYERS to SOCIAL SECURITY TAKERS/ PENSIONERS.
> ...




+10. Not just in the US but I believe its the case in parts of Europe such as Italy and Greece as well.


----------



## FxTrader (13 February 2013)

banco said:


> Seems like Krugman has a better record than his detractors. According to many of them the US should already be experiencing high inflation and interest rates on US bonds should have spiked.




Krugman is just one of the better known (and widely followed) Keynesian fanatics who simply have no regard for the consequences of creating debts that can never be repaid (except with truck loads of almost worthless paper currency).  The primary reason that the US is not experiencing the same inflation as Zimbabwe is the reserve status of the USD - this will not be the case forever.  The global currency wars, a race to devalue by massive money creation, must end at some point and I don't believe US citizens will be the winners.

BTW, the fact the minting of a trillion dollar coin to stave off the debt ceiling deadlock was considered by anyone as a viable solution tells you just how perilous the financial position of the US govt is.


----------



## sptrawler (13 February 2013)

tech/a said:


> So let's think about this
> The fed prints trillions knowing that will flood the market with money
> Interest rates fall great so does the dollar.
> So US goods look more attractive so increase in demand.--- all good.
> ...




Americans buy American, it's a consumer society, the minimum wage is $7/hr moving that up $2 is a major stimulus.IMO


----------



## banco (13 February 2013)

FxTrader said:


> Krugman is just one of the better known (and widely followed) Keynesian fanatics who simply have no regard for the consequences of creating debts that can never be repaid (except with truck loads of almost worthless paper currency).  The primary reason that the US is not experiencing the same inflation as Zimbabwe is the reserve status of the USD - this will not be the case forever.  The global currency wars, a race to devalue by massive money creation, must end at some point and I don't believe US citizens will be the winners.
> 
> BTW, the fact the minting of a trillion dollar coin to stave off the debt ceiling deadlock was considered by anyone as a viable solution tells you just how perilous the financial position of the US govt is.




I've yet to hear a good alternative.  Of course Krugman's approach has risks but there aren't any fantastic options left.  UK has tried a mild version of austerity and it hasn't exactly been a roaring success.


----------



## FlyingFox (13 February 2013)

banco said:


> I've yet to hear a good alternative.  Of course Krugman's approach has risks but there aren't any fantastic options left.  UK has tried a mild version of austerity and it hasn't exactly been a roaring success.




I don't know if there is an alternative let alone a good one. I suspect we are so far down the path that there is no way to return.


----------



## FxTrader (13 February 2013)

banco said:


> I've yet to hear a good alternative.  Of course Krugman's approach has risks but there aren't any fantastic options left.  UK has tried a mild version of austerity and it hasn't exactly been a roaring success.




True, in an era where financial prudence, fiscal responsibility and proper economic and central bank management are punished by high relative exchange rates it's easier to capitulate and fire up your own printing press to defend your currency and join the debt binge.  Is this "alternative" really the key to a future of sustained world economic prosperity? Not if history is any guide.


----------



## Smurf1976 (13 February 2013)

The unfunded liabilities thing isn't limited to the US or even to national governments.

I know that some of the Australian state governments have some pretty huge liabilities there. I don't have the figures, but I understand it to be $ billions each for several states and a huge sum in total.


----------



## craft (13 February 2013)

I wish somebody could explain this money printing theory in a way that a simpleton like me can understand.

For the life of me I can’t see any NET money creation occurring. 

I can see plenty of liquidity creation, plenty of balance sheet shuffling and plenty of suppressing interest rates but the net result is still deleveraging. 

There is no government printing without obligation and private debt/GDP is diminishing.   So I just don’t understand the money printing theory.


----------



## FxTrader (13 February 2013)

craft said:


> I wish somebody could explain this money printing theory in a way that a simpleton like me can understand.




I found Dyson's explanation of money creation and it's consequences, from a UK perspective, a good one...


----------



## sptrawler (14 February 2013)

craft said:


> I wish somebody could explain this money printing theory in a way that a simpleton like me can understand.
> 
> For the life of me I can’t see any NET money creation occurring.
> 
> ...




From what you said you had in super, don't worry about it kick back and enjoy life.


----------



## craft (14 February 2013)

FxTrader said:


> I found Dyson's explanation of money creation and it's consequences, from a UK perspective, a good one...





His main proposition is private debt equals money creation. 

Private debt to GDP is shrinking – How does the video explain the money printing everybody is referring too? – Surely it undermines it.


----------



## McLovin (14 February 2013)

tech/a said:


> There are more baby boomers than ever retiring or un able to continue to work
> As it gets more difficult they are likely to be the ones retrenched.
> *The liability is NOW*. Dont know where you get the 75 yrs from?? They will be retiring En mass over the next 10 yrs.
> Only about 3% are self funded. So they go from TAX PAYERS to SOCIAL SECURITY TAKERS/ PENSIONERS.
> ...




Actually I was wrong, the 75 year liability is $8t, the infinite horizon is $20t.

The tax system can and will adjust to meet the shortfall...



> Because $20.5 trillion is equal to 31 percent of the projected taxes, the system is 31 percent underfunded. To pay all promised benefits would require immediately and permanently raising Social Security’s 12.4 percent payroll tax (split evenly between employer and employee) by 31 percent, or 3.9 percentage points.




http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-11/social-security-hole-overwhelms-taxes-cuts.html

The US needs higher taxes, it's waking up to that fact. The problem with doomsday scenarios like Dent's is that they assume a) no one is aware of the problem b) we're on a course the direction of which cannot be altered c) the "liability" actually a liability. There's no contractual obligation to provide Medicaid, Medicare or social security.



tech/a said:


> *Seriously you think Dent is writing Rubbish?
> Have you read it?*




About as much rubbish now as he was in his 2006 book that predicted the Dow would hit 40,000 by 2010. Or his predictions that the S&P would fall by 40% in 2012. I wouldn't waste my time.

He's also predicting the crash of the Australian property market. Do you think that's rubbish or do you pick and choose?


			
				FlyingFox said:
			
		

> The severity of this will depend on the demographics of the particular country but for most it's now to next 10 yrs. See tech/a's later comments for a good explanation.




The liability is created when a child is born in the US, that's why the liability is so long dated. The liability takes into account current taxation and current demographics. Change one or the other, or both and the equation changes. Taxation will increase in the US. They may not like it but they like it more than the alternative.


----------



## CanOz (14 February 2013)

Taxation in the us will improve, they're just about to expand their taxable population by 2-3% and the workforce vs the retiree is expanding as well, unlike most other nations. The US should be in pretty good shape in another 30 years or so...

CanOz


----------



## FlyingFox (14 February 2013)

McLovin said:


> .....Taxation will increase in the US. They may not like it but they like it more than the alternative.






CanOz said:


> Taxation in the us will improve, they're just about to expand their taxable population by 2-3% and the workforce vs the retiree is expanding as well, unlike most other nations. The US should be in pretty good shape in another 30 years or so...
> 
> CanOz




Not disputing this but the question is will it rise enough (taxation) and in a timely manner to meet all (most of) their debt? Moreover will the policy makers decide to take this route vs the inflation one?

Agree with CanOZ that US are relatively ok in terms of population etc. Many other countries unfortunately are not and may never be.


----------



## sptrawler (14 February 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> Not disputing this but the question is will it rise enough (taxation) and in a timely manner to meet all (most of) their debt? Moreover will the policy makers decide to take this route vs the inflation one?




Who do they owe the money to? They are the reserve currency, what a hoot.


----------



## young-gun (14 February 2013)

tech/a said:


> There are more baby boomers than ever retiring or un able to continue to work
> As it gets more difficult they are likely to be the ones retrenched.
> *The liability is NOW*. Dont know where you get the 75 yrs from?? They will be retiring En mass over the next 10 yrs.
> Only about 3% are self funded. So they go from TAX PAYERS to SOCIAL SECURITY TAKERS/ PENSIONERS.
> ...




Are you finally transitioning to the dark side tech?!

The only thing that annoys me about this book, and many like it, is how dam repetitive they are. Harry could have got his point across in 50 pages.

There's no arguing with his logic. I don't like the guy, and he naturally tends to predict extremes to sell books, but his demographic research is great and can't be ignored IMO. The US is done for, there is no way out. In fact it was this book alone that led me to so many others, that have opened my eyes to see that this dodgy **** debt based economy is on its last legs. No fiat currency has ever lasted this long.

The other thing is the fed will never allow deflation to the extent he outlines.


----------



## CanOz (14 February 2013)

> No fiat currency has ever lasted this long.




WTF


PMSL


----------



## craft (14 February 2013)

Harry Dent’s demographics stuff has a reasonably foundation but some of his extrapolations are crazy.

Real GDP growth is made up of Population Growth and Productivity improvement.  Over the last 110 years USA population growth has compounded at 1.3% and productivity at 2%. The projections for population still look to be on trend to me. 

Productivity is the issue not population growth. 

I’m with Mclovin on the unfunded liabilities. A political storm in a tea cup.  USA’s GDP per capita is $50,000 affordability is not the issue – they are just arguing about how to slice the cake.  The only truly relevant question is – will how the cake be sliced impact on productivity.

Real GDP numbers are all well and good but its nominal growth that effects valuations. Nominal GDP is real GDP plus inflation. Its inflation where monetary policy has its biggest impact. I’m still waiting for this money printing theory that’s creating certain inflation (at some point) to be explained to me because I see NET money destruction not printing going on now. 

The time to sing the’ it’s raining money’ song was pre-GFC, we are having a downstream flood now but it’s not still raining.


----------



## craft (14 February 2013)

tech/a said:


> The jump in commodity prices is on average around 30 %
> Page 137 Dents book.
> 
> So no inflation here.




The price of anything that is consistently wanted but not in unlimited supply, should over the very long run imbed nominal growth +/- any efficiency/deficiency gains in finding or producing. 

How much of the 30% is represented by long term imbedding of nominal growth?

How much of the 30% is due to depletion of high grade easily accessible deposits?

How much is simply cyclical price movement to balance off relatively short run supply/demand imbalances? What time period has he referenced to come up with 30%?


----------



## McLovin (14 February 2013)

FlyingFox said:


> Not disputing this but the question is will it rise enough (taxation) and in a timely manner to meet all (most of) their debt? Moreover will the policy makers decide to take this route vs the inflation one?




They've shown zero desire so far to take the inflation route so why would you anticipate they will start now? US debt today is entirely manageable. What needs to be contained is the level of debt to GDP as a %. That can't keep accelerating.


----------



## tech/a (14 February 2013)

craft said:


> The price of anything that is consistently wanted but not in unlimited supply, should over the very long run imbed nominal growth +/- any efficiency/deficiency gains in finding or producing.
> 
> How much of the 30% is represented by long term imbedding of nominal growth?
> 
> ...




30% was an average figure I used across the table.
Some were 80% others 15%
To discuss this in depth I would need the book next to me to reference.
I dont have the time to do this.
Thats why I suggested the two books of reference. I cannot do either book justice writing snippets here.
No can the combination of the connotations of both be adequately explained in bits on a forum.

Im not going to continue answering specifics---as much as I would like to.
Time doesnt allow.
There are those like Mclovin who will champion the opposite view.Thats fine.
Me I have substantial interests which are at risk and I will do what I can to protect or minimise disaster wether it comes or it doesnt. Business and investment wise.

Property is freeholded or cashflow positive to a 10% interest rate.
Ive always had a deep interest in macro economics.
The big picture delievers the Big trends---even if it is negative or stagnant.
No point in fighting the big picture.

As for Dent---Ill listen to a man who got the big picture in JAPAN right.
On Ludwig---Ill also listen to a guy who has studied and recorded what happened in the lead up to 2008
and the aftermath---and now what is STILL sitting there like a time bomb that once lit no amount of money printing will save the financial fraternity.

The choice --- if you chose is personal and you will live by your choices.
All I can do is personally evaluate evidence offered up.
That evidence in its entirety---not snippets---is compelling---to me anyway.


----------



## craft (14 February 2013)

tech/a said:


> 30% was an average figure I used across the table.
> Some were 80% others 15%
> To discuss this in depth I would need the book next to me to reference.
> I dont have the time to do this.
> ...




My big picture is defiantly different to what seems to be the general consensus .

I do like to give the consensus a bit of a prod when I’m seeing things differently – just to see what it’s really got under the hood. 

I hear you on the time aspect of debating it though. –End of the day we position from our big picture perspective and we prosper or not.


----------



## McLovin (14 February 2013)

tech/a said:


> There are those like Mclovin who will champion the opposite view.Thats fine.
> Me I have substantial interests which are at risk and I will do what I can to protect or minimise disaster wether it comes or it doesnt. Business and investment wise.




Last post...

I'm sure there's a few of us with substantial interests that are at risk. I don't think I'm championing the opposite view, just taking the middle of the road as that's where we always end up. Since the GFC, there has been so much extrapolation and from what I've seen extrapolation is almost always wrong and almost always occurs when we are at the top or the bottom of a cycle. Macro forecasting rarely works because there are too many moving parts in an economy, that's why guys like Dent make entertaining reading on long flights but shouldn't be taken too seriously.


----------



## young-gun (14 February 2013)

CanOz said:


> WTF
> 
> 
> PMSL




Sorry, was reading a median figure when i typed that, not longest


----------



## banco (14 February 2013)

CanOz said:


> Taxation in the us will improve, they're just about to expand their taxable population by 2-3% and the workforce vs the retiree is expanding as well, unlike most other nations. The US should be in pretty good shape in another 30 years or so...
> 
> CanOz




You mean the illegals?  In terms of US's fiscal health the US would be better off having them stay illegal.


----------



## noirua (4 May 2021)

Early days where money minting started:


In Sub-Roman Britain and to defend against attacks from the north, some Germanic continentals entered southern and eastern Britain and slowly, over generations, their culture came to dominate, so southern Britain became, over the centuries, England.


----------

