Is the way central banks view inflation simply wrong?

morganist · Oct 16, 2012

Quote from CT10Gov:

Hum.... Japan called their monetary action "Quantitative Easing". The Fed called their monetary action "QE".... eeecckk.... the Fed is DEFINITELY trying to hide their doing from us.

I think the argument was more made about Qualitative Easing and the difference between that and Quantitative Easing, you can check the previous posts if you don't believe me.

You're not going to make friends here. At first I thought you were someone with a genuine argument against me. Now I just think you are a miserable person who attacks anyone.

One more note if you attack me I ignore it. If you however start upsetting other people I will as a moderator start prohibiting your posts.

StarDust9182 · Oct 16, 2012

Quote from morganist:

He's just trying to take the piss out of that guy who is a crank who says I am. I think?

Yet, credentials say nothing about the quality of thinking or of ideas. Otherwise every university graduate with lots of credentials would be a millionaire trader.

I am not saying I am right, I am challenging others to pick apart my ideas. I win either way (right or wrong). I value morganist's input and ideas. They make me think.

Shell used to tell their beginning graduate engineers something like - "you think you are really something hot don't you? Well forget all that crap they taught you and go out into the field and learn what reality is like."

morganist · Oct 16, 2012

Quote from StarDust9182:

Yet, credentials say nothing about the quality of thinking or of ideas. Otherwise every university graduate with lots of credentials would be a millionaire trader.

I am not saying I am right, I am challenging others to pick apart my ideas. I win either way (right or wrong). I value morganist's input and ideas. They make me think.

Shell used to tell their beginning graduate engineers something like - "you think you are really something hot don't you? Well forget all that crap they taught you and go out into the field and learn what reality is like."

Seriously I have loads of credentials. Also Morganist Economics, J P Morgan, Morgan Stanley, Morgan Grenfell.

You would think he would be smart enough to come to that conclusion.

morganist · Oct 16, 2012

Quote from StarDust9182:

Yet, credentials say nothing about the quality of thinking or of ideas. Otherwise every university graduate with lots of credentials would be a millionaire trader.

I am not saying I am right, I am challenging others to pick apart my ideas. I win either way (right or wrong). I value morganist's input and ideas. They make me think.

Shell used to tell their beginning graduate engineers something like - "you think you are really something hot don't you? Well forget all that crap they taught you and go out into the field and learn what reality is like."

No there is nothing wrong with you. Your arguments are good and you can debate. Economics is called the dismal science because it is not considered a pure science. You have Classical, Keynesians, Monetarists and Austrians to name a few.

They are all different but they are all interesting.

CT10Gov · Oct 16, 2012

(1) I'm not sure what you are talking about in terms of qualitative easing. BoJ called it "Quantitative Easing" - don't believe me? See BoJ's own one-year retrospective in 2002: http://www.imes.boj.or.jp/english/publication/edps/2002/02-E-03.pdf ; the other guy was talking about bond purchasing - 'quantitative' easing. If he disagrees, then let me point out how I'm misinterpreting what he says. If I am, I'll apologize for the confusion.

(2) Is 'upsetting people' pointing out that there's no factual basis for their view? I thought this is a discussion forum - or are we just here for group hugs.

(3) Admit it, you are just trying to silence me because I bring up uncomfortable facts - that you are hiding behind some vague 'qualifications' that you refuse to name. As for as the 'upsetting' other users, see (1).

Let's let the facts speak, no? Or do you prefer to use your moderator power rather than debating facts?

Quote from morganist:

I think the argument was more made about Qualitative Easing and the difference between that and Quantitative Easing, you can check the previous posts if you don't believe me.

You're not going to make friends here. At first I thought you were someone with a genuine argument against me. Now I just think you are a miserable person who attacks anyone.

One more note if you attack me I ignore it. If you however start upsetting other people I will as a moderator start prohibiting your posts.

morganist · Oct 16, 2012

Quote from CT10Gov:

(1) I'm not sure what you are talking about in terms of qualitative easing. BoJ called it "Quantitative Easing" - don't believe me? See BoJ's own one-year retrospective in 2002: http://www.imes.boj.or.jp/english/publication/edps/2002/02-E-03.pdf ; the other guy was talking about bond purchasing - 'quantitative' easing. If he disagrees, then let me point out how I'm misinterpreting what he says. If I am, I'll apologize for the confusion.

(2) Is 'upsetting people' pointing out that there's no factual basis for their view? I thought this is a discussion forum - or are we just here for group hugs.

(3) Admit it, you are just trying to silence me because I bring up uncomfortable facts - that you are hiding behind some vague 'qualifications' that you refuse to name. As for as the 'upsetting' other users, see (1).

Let's let the facts speak, no? Or do you prefer to use your moderator power rather than debating facts?

I think you are confusing the discussion we were having earlier, which does not pertain to what you are commenting on.

CT10Gov · Oct 16, 2012

I quoted exactly what was said.

"Currently it appears that the FED is directly trying to copy the Japan model (while denying it) of buying every bond produced by government. As the canary in the coal mine, Japan soon may give one clue as to the ultimate endgame. "

It doesn't have to be what you two were talking about earlier. I disagree with a part of something he said.

Maybe you just realized that you once again blew up at me for no good reason, and threatened to use your moderator power in somewhat of an unseemly way?

I'll take an apology.

Quote from morganist:

I think you are confusing the discussion we were having earlier, which does not pertain to what you are commenting on.

morganist · Oct 16, 2012

Quote from CT10Gov:

I quoted exactly what was said.

"Currently it appears that the FED is directly trying to copy the Japan model (while denying it) of buying every bond produced by government. As the canary in the coal mine, Japan soon may give one clue as to the ultimate endgame. "

It doesn't have to be what you two were talking about earlier. I disagree with a part of something he said.

Maybe you just realized that you once again blew up at me for no good reason, and threatened to use your moderator power in somewhat of an unseemly way?

I'll take an apology.

No you misunderstood what I am saying again. The discussion I am talking about is the one we had that explained how your conduct was not within the boundaries of acceptable debate.

This is what I am talking about. If you insult people and attack people here as a moderator I will intervene. I might not do that when it is me but I will if you do it to other people. The way you conduct conversation with other people is not productive and insulting. If people complain I will act.

Your final warning from me goodbye.

CT10Gov · Oct 16, 2012

How have I insulted the other user? Please quote where I insulted the other user. For that matter, how have I insulted you?

I disagreed with another user as a matter of fact. In fact, I can back up my position, as I have with the link. I have been nothing but civil.

Can you show me where I have insulted StarDust9182? Quote me, please.

My only exchange with StarDust9182 is where I pointed out that's absurd to say the Fed is denying the nature of their bond purchasing program. Please tell me how that's not within the boundary of accepted debate?

My man - you are sounding progressively more vindictive. Again, please show me where I have insulted StarDust9182. Please show me where I have insulted you.

Quote from morganist:

No you misunderstood what I am saying again. The discussion I am talking about is the one we had that explained how your conduct was not within the boundaries of acceptable debate.

This is what I am talking about. If you insult people and attack people here as a moderator I will intervene. I might not do that when it is me but I will if you do it to other people. The way you conduct conversation with other people is not productive and insulting. If people complain I will act.

Your final warning from me goodbye.

morganist · Oct 16, 2012

Quote from CT10Gov:

How have I insulted the other user? Please quote where I insulted the other user. For that matter, how have I insulted you?

I disagreed with another user as a matter of fact. In fact, I can back up my position, as I have with the link. I have been nothing but civil.

Can you show me where I have insulted StarDust9182? Quote me, please.

My only exchange with StarDust9182 is where I pointed out that's absurd to say the Fed is denying the nature of their bond purchasing program. Please tell me how that's not within the boundary of accepted debate?

My man - you are sounding progressively more vindictive. Again, please show me where I have insulted StarDust9182. Please show me where I have insulted you.

You have called me a crank!

Is that not an insult?

In relation to StarDust you took on a debate on something we were discussing partly on this forum and partly privately which you did not have all the detail of to try and belittle him.

Like I said goodbye.