A new Finance Round-Up has been posted at TOD:Canada.

As Warren Buffet said, when the tide goes out, we find out who has been skinny dipping. It is becoming increasingly evident that a lot of the financial sector has been a virtual nudist colony.

My forecast for the indefinite future: deflationary trends in the auto/housing/finance sector, with inflationary trends in food & energy prices.

I would guess that we disagree on our respective definitions of inflation/deflation. To me these are monetary phenomena and cannot occur simultaneously, but I interpret you to mean rising or falling prices as inflation or deflation respectively. In that sense, one can have both trends simultaneously in different sectors, but IMO calling it inflation/deflation is misleading.

I would agree with you that food and energy will become less affordable in the future. In other words, I expect their prices to go up in real terms, although they would probably fall in nominal terms during a monetary deflation.

Hi Stoneleigh - what do you call price changes then?

Price changes are simply price changes, and are often the result of underlying changes in the money supply. For instance, if the money supply doubled with nothing else changing, you would expect nominal prices eventually to double as well (keeping prices the same in real terms).

However, nominal prices can fall as the money supply expands, as has been the case with cheap goods from China due to globalization. A larger money supply did not ignite a wage-price spiral as downward pressure was maintained on wages by foreign competition willing to work for less. Cheap labour, cheap energy and foreign competition has meant cheap goods. When prices fall in nominal terms while the money supply expands, then prices are falling very steeply in real terms.

Prices tend to fall in a deflation as the money supply contracts rapidly, but one can envisage circumstances where that would not be the case, or would be the case only temporarily. For instance, the price of oil should fall in nominal terms, at least temporarily, in a deflation, but the resulting disruption could then reduce supply by as much as deflation had reduced demand, or more so. In that case, oil could rise in nominal terms even while the money supply was falling, which would mean oil going through the roof in real terms. This is in fact what I'm expecting to happen over the next few years, in other words except for the terminology I agree with Westexas.

I have often wondered about how a strict money supply based definition of inflation/price increases handles the normally accepted law of supply and demand - that is, price changes to reflect supply and demand.

In other words, I don't think the price of grain is rising merely because of money supply issues - I think even if the money supply had remained completely static, the price of grain would have risen as the amount available on the world market declined - Ukraine's forbidding exports, for example, or Australian drought, or lowest stockpiles for several decades, or increasing imports from nations such as China and India.

I think 'inflation' as a money based concept is an attempt to hide reality, and not reality itself.

I think 'inflation' as a money based concept is an attempt to hide reality, and not reality itself.

Inflation as a money concept is far older than the present 'problems'. The Austrian school of economics and how the US used to run things before the 1970's, if my memory is correct.

I would guess that we disagree on our respective definitions of inflation/deflation. To me these are monetary phenomena and cannot occur simultaneously, but I interpret you to mean rising or falling prices as inflation or deflation respectively.

I believe West Texas assumptions will be proven correct. Its is possible to an asymetric form of inflation/deflation. As the dollar weakens, prices for imports will rise which caused decreased consumption resulting in higher unemployment and declining asset prices. It seems very likely that dollar will continue to decline for a very long period and and assets such asautos, real estate will decline as the credit cycle for american consumers tightens. Its likely that as the US will continue to weak as foriegnors look away from the US for investment growth and perhaps the Fed drives rates lower in order to drive growth.

I think as long as Oil and other strategic commodities and goods are priced in dollars, countries with large dollar reserves will purchase them with their reserves. An example would be China and Japan trading US dollar reserves for oil & gas. As these dollar holding are released into the market it will weaken the dollar. However, since these dollar won't end up in american consumers hands, americans will face deflationary forces.

Consider the collapse of the Argentina dollar a few years ago. Imports became very expensive for Argentinians, as their currency became nearly worthless. During this period the Argentinians suffer deflationary forces, as unemployment soared, and they could not afford maintain their lifestyles.

If the Oil and other strategic commodites are no longer priced in dollars, it likely means the US is officially bankrupt. It seems likely that more exporters will shift away from the dollar. Some are already accepting payments in other currencies. At some point some might refuse payment in US dollars starting a trend which removes the US dollar as the worlds reserve currency. I think the US would have a very rough time if the dollar is no longer the worlds reserve currency.

If the Oil and other strategic commodites are no longer priced in dollars, it likely means the US is officially bankrupt. It seems likely that more exporters will shift away from the dollar. Some are already accepting payments in other currencies. At some point some might refuse payment in US dollars starting a trend which removes the US dollar as the worlds reserve currency. I think the US would have a very rough time if the dollar is no longer the worlds reserve currency.

And thus the real problem with "peak oil" which will bite quite hard.

Stagflation ??

Stoneleigh, thanks for providing this forum and the interesting posts. The following is from ATOL and is an interesting analysis (imo) of what Bernanke said to the CATO Institute last Wednesday. It appears that Ben wants to steer the Fed away from the Greenspan tradition of proping up securities markets by interest rate cuts...But at what costs to Ben and equities values? Why do I have the feeling that Ben left out more than he said? Perhaps Bernanke has figured out a way to pawn off the worthless sub-prime mortgage bundles to the elderly on pensions and Social Security, in lieu of cost of living increases? At this point nothing would surprise me.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/IK17Dj03.html

...snip...'The first major change elucidated by Bernanke refers to a new emphasis on what is called “overall” inflation, in the place of a previously greater focus on what is called “ core” inflation.

The distinction between core and overall inflation is simple to understand. Overall inflation is a measure of price increases in that place economists are rarely concerned about, the real world. It’s what you feel when you get a haircut, go out to dinner, and especially these days, fill your car with gas.

But, traditionally, overall inflation has not been the preferred inflation gauge for economists. In its stead, they have favored looking at something called “core” inflation, defined as price changes for retail goods excluding food and energy.'...snip...

'But the drawback of core inflation is that, in times such as these, with food and energy prices rising rapidly, the Fed loses credibility when it says that core inflation only rose 0.2% in October, and consumers then compare what they hear from their leaders with what they see on their supermarket check out tape and on the price signboards of gasoline stations, which are currently now America’s real inflation index.

Therefore, Bernanke is now saying that the Fed is going to tip the scales a bit back towards reality.

"Ultimately, households and businesses care about the overall, or 'headline' rate of inflation; therefore, the FOMC [Federal Open Market Committee] should refer to an overall inflation rate when evaluating whether the committee has met its mandated objectives over the long run. For that reason, the committee has decided to publish projections for overall inflation as well as core inflation. In its policy statements and elsewhere, the committee makes frequent reference to core inflation because, in light of the volatility of food and energy prices, core inflation can be a useful short-run indicator of the underlying trend in inflation. However, at longer horizons, where monetary policy has the greatest control over inflation, the overall inflation rate is the appropriate gauge of whether inflation is at a rate consistent with the dual mandate.”'...snip...

BenDover and his masters are never going to do the right thing unless forced.

I thought the top article funny. A technical malfunction that allowed the media to hear of the intent of the Saudi's to defend the U$S and immediately after they find the problem.
Bwahahahahahahahaaaaaaa!!!!!

We see what comes out of the OPEC meeting, eh?
Maybe the week when everyone is on vacation is good to crash the market? Maybe the stock market is open on friday when everyone is gone on purpose?

News at 11.

A black hole - to be or not to be?

Yes!:

'The mortgage black hole is, I think, worse than anyone saw,' said Tony James, president of Blackstone, the big private equity firm. 'Deeper, darker, scarier. [The banks] are now looking at new reserves and my sense…is they don't have a clear picture of how this will play out and confidence is low.'"

No!:

The subprime market, parts of it will get worse before it gets better," he said. This reflects the fact that some of the most lax underwriting for mortgages occurred in 2005 and 2006, and many of these loans are still operating under low introductory rates, he said. As they reset, more defaults are likely.

Still, Paulson said the mortgage problems aren't a "black hole" and the U.S. economy will weather the turbulence and continue to grow.

Yep. No one foresaw this (with the notable exception of the hundreds of investment sites/newsletters on the Net).

I've been posting about the risk here on TOD for 2 years - in fact it's what I originally joined to say.

IMO, Paulson has even less credibility than the Bush administration in general. His job is to keep the economy from collapsing, and the only tool he has at his disposal is his jawbone.

Sampson may have found the jawbone of an ass to be useful, but I'm skeptical about Paulson's.

His real job is to make a profit for Goldman. No one ever really leaves there, they go on TDY.

Head on into the liquidity trap.

And so few see it coming.

The Economist ponders the odds of a US recession: America's vulnerable economy.