3 ms·

https://xkcd.com/1321/ https://xkcd.com/1321/

by TekMol 4y ago

JumpCrisscross 4y ago
Comparing the monetary base to average temperatures makes no sense. We expect the latter to be stable long term (human-wise). We want the former to track GDP, more or less [1]. In that metric, too, the anomalous period was 2008 - 2020, with a phase change towards less money per unit of GDP since. There are many reasonable issues with this purchase and sale. But “money printer go brr” isn’t a particularly insightful nor relevant one. [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=lJS https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=lJS
- TekMol 4y ago
  "We want" ... not sure if a vote would really turn out that way. I think for most people having something like the gold standard seems much more plausible. Having a flexible supply of the settlement currency is a pretty new experiment. Not even 100 years old. And it has ended in desasters around the world multiple times already.
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > not sure if a vote would really turn out that way We don’t vote on individual drug approvals, either. Some people have a broad vendetta against the Fed and fiat currency. That is fine. But shoehorning it into every discussion, even when it isn’t relevant, doesn’t advance anything. This is a bank failure being resolved with public-private participation within the FDIC’s framework with support from the OCC. There are smart things one can say about the FHLBs, TBTF and liquidity ratios. (You pointed out centralisation. That’s a smart thing to discuss!) There isn’t much relevance to the monetary base, however, unless we’re speculating on the next rate rise.
  - pjc50 4y ago
    The man in the street might find it plausible that asbestos and cigarettes are safe and that global warming isn't real. "Plausible" is not the same as "true", a problem which the AI people are grappling with. Not having a flexible currency supply causes separate problems as people run out of specie. Furthermore the counterfactuals for 2008 and 2020 look .. bad.
  - qwytw 4y ago
    > And it has ended in desasters around the world multiple times already. Well the global economy and most national ones were in a permanent boom and bust cycle between at least the mid to late 18th century and the Great Depression. The gold standard was never stable, just look at: https://www.officialdata.org/us/inflation/1800?amount=1#:~:text=Value%20of%20%241%20from%201800,cumulative%20price%20increase%20of%202%2C295.52%25 https://www.officialdata.org/us/inflation/1800?amount=1#:~:t.... Just instead of steadily (well prior to 2020 anyway) going up all the time like now the worth of currencies was swinging up and down in a wildly volatile and unpredictable manner every few years..

https://xkcd.com/1321/ https://xkcd.com/1321/

by TekMol 4y ago

https://xkcd.com/1321/ https://xkcd.com/1321/

Comparing the monetary base to average temperatures makes no sense. We expect the latter to be stable long term (human-wise). We want the former to track GDP, more or less [1]. In that metric, too, the anomalous period was 2008 - 2020, with a phase change towards less money per unit of GDP since. There are many reasonable issues with this purchase and sale. But “money printer go brr” isn’t a particularly insightful nor relevant one. [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=lJS https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=lJS

TekMol 4y ago
"We want" ... not sure if a vote would really turn out that way. I think for most people having something like the gold standard seems much more plausible. Having a flexible supply of the settlement currency is a pretty new experiment. Not even 100 years old. And it has ended in desasters around the world multiple times already.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > not sure if a vote would really turn out that way We don’t vote on individual drug approvals, either. Some people have a broad vendetta against the Fed and fiat currency. That is fine. But shoehorning it into every discussion, even when it isn’t relevant, doesn’t advance anything. This is a bank failure being resolved with public-private participation within the FDIC’s framework with support from the OCC. There are smart things one can say about the FHLBs, TBTF and liquidity ratios. (You pointed out centralisation. That’s a smart thing to discuss!) There isn’t much relevance to the monetary base, however, unless we’re speculating on the next rate rise.
- pjc50 4y ago
  The man in the street might find it plausible that asbestos and cigarettes are safe and that global warming isn't real. "Plausible" is not the same as "true", a problem which the AI people are grappling with. Not having a flexible currency supply causes separate problems as people run out of specie. Furthermore the counterfactuals for 2008 and 2020 look .. bad.
- qwytw 4y ago
  > And it has ended in desasters around the world multiple times already. Well the global economy and most national ones were in a permanent boom and bust cycle between at least the mid to late 18th century and the Great Depression. The gold standard was never stable, just look at: https://www.officialdata.org/us/inflation/1800?amount=1#:~:text=Value%20of%20%241%20from%201800,cumulative%20price%20increase%20of%202%2C295.52%25 https://www.officialdata.org/us/inflation/1800?amount=1#:~:t.... Just instead of steadily (well prior to 2020 anyway) going up all the time like now the worth of currencies was swinging up and down in a wildly volatile and unpredictable manner every few years..