Wait a second I thought BUBBLE ben bernanke said there wasnt inflation!!!!!

[Kassz007]

Quote from denner:

How can you seriously not comprehend your own contradictions? And you ask if I have no brain. LOL

Deflation is the natural chain of events following a Fed induced credit bubble. So the artificial reflation needed to create inflation is completely at odds with your "I'm in favor of small government". A smaller government = less spending, less bureaucracy and yes, deflation.

Get a clue already.

Ugh, lies and misinformation. You are the total package.

1. There has been periods of inflation and deflation before the Fed was even created. What does that tell you?

2. You are confused as to what the Fed really does. The Fed does not control government spending. Arguing for less government spending is NOT the same as arguing against the Fed.


Step your game up. Learn your facts before showing up at the debate.

 

[denner]

Quote from Martinghoul:

Yes, so you're saying that in a theoretical, fully deregulated mkt that is completely free of all govt intervention (that includes taxes, tariffs, exchange rate controls, etc), the mkt is always right. To be sure, barter won't necessarily be fully free, according to your definition, and neither will E-Bay auctions. I have two issues with this: 1) the mkt you describe is a theoretical construct that doesn't exist in reality; this is the case even if you remove your central bank, as long as your trading partner can screw with the exchange rate; 2) bubbles and other such distortions have been shown to occur naturally, under "laboratory conditions", which would suggest that even free mkts aren't always right.

True enough, but I refuse to ignore the overwhelming influence of central banks and their role in distorting asset prices. In my opinion, they collude when necessary and otherwise provide the fuel necessary for the speculative community to bid up prices to illogical distortions due to the implied moral hazard.

Of course, the issue of barter and e-bay auctions would be theoretical to an extent. My point is that a marketplace outside of the concentrated interest of a central bank is going to MORE CLOSELY resemble a free market where two interested parties determine the fair value.

 

[denner]

Quote from Kassz007:

Ugh, lies and misinformation. You are the total package.

1. There has been periods of inflation and deflation before the Fed was even created. What does that tell you?

2. You are confused as to what the Fed really does. The Fed does not control government spending. Arguing for less government spending is NOT the same as arguing against the Fed.


Step your game up. Learn your facts before showing up at the debate.

Full of shit as usual.

1. Of course there were periods of inflation and deflation prior to the Fed, what is your point?

As it currently exists, the Fed essentially picks favorites with regards to whom continues to survive and who will fail. That is a significant difference from prior periods. If they can selectively purchase the troubled assets of one bank while letting the other fail, it's a crony institution.

2. Yeah, I hear that argument all the time. They are two sides of the same coin. The Fed's ZIRP policies and intervention in the treasury markets ONLY ENCOURAGES more government spending, as they can continue to spend with reckless abandon as the borrowing costs are nil. If they truly were abhorrent of government spending, then they would not facilitate the favorable rates at all of these auctions.

So now we have what 60-70% off that debt rolling over in the next 2 years. Without a complicit Fed fucking with rates and intervening in the market, that borrowing would not have been possible, the fact that this will have to be rolled over again in the not to distant future just ensures they have a greater role in this fleecing.

Go back to the drawing board.

 

[Kassz007]

Quote from denner:


1. Of course there were periods of inflation and deflation prior to the Fed, what is your point?

You said:

"You must be too dumb to realize that ALL YOU EVER DO is argue in favor of continued intervention. What else would you call your incessant arguments in favor of "fighting deflation"."

You said my arguments in favor of fighting deflation were equal to arguing in favor of continued intervention. I then proved to you that deflation and intervention are mutually exclusive by pointing out the fact that there was deflation before the Fed even existed. What is so hard to understand here?

2. Yeah, I hear that argument all the time. They are two sides of the same coin. The Fed's ZIRP policies and intervention in the treasury markets ONLY ENCOURAGES more government spending, as they can continue to spend with reckless abandon as the borrowing costs are nil. If they truly were abhorrent of government spending, then they would not facilitate the favorable rates at all of these auctions.

So now we have what 60-70% off that debt rolling over in the next 2 years. Without a complicit Fed fucking with rates and intervening in the market, that borrowing would not have been possible, the fact that this will have to be rolled over again in the not to distant future just ensures they have a greater role in this fleecing.

So you are blaming the Fed for congress' spending problems because the Fed encouraged spending? That's akin to blaming someone who went bankrupt on the people who lent that person money in the first place. Accept some responsibility for your own actions.

 

[denner]

Quote from Kassz007:


You said:

"You must be too dumb to realize that ALL YOU EVER DO is argue in favor of continued intervention. What else would you call your incessant arguments in favor of "fighting deflation"."

You said my arguments in favor of fighting deflation were equal to arguing in favor of continued intervention. I then proved to you that deflation and intervention are mutually exclusive by pointing out the fact that there was deflation before the Fed even existed. What is so hard to understand here?




So you are blaming the Fed for congress' spending problems because the Fed encouraged spending? That's akin to blaming someone who went bankrupt on the people who lent that person money in the first place. Accept some responsibility for your own actions. [/B]

I'm not blaming the Fed for congress' spending problems, I am suggesting that you are myopic if you believe that the Fed simply sits idly while congress continues to ratchet up spending. There is a great deal of money to be made with the government continuing to expand their budget, hence they benefit greatly from a continued reliance on the Fed's purchasing of treasuries and/or the BD's taking down these auctions and then the Fed coming and buying the treasuries.

 

[Martinghoul]

Quote from denner:
True enough, but I refuse to ignore the overwhelming influence of central banks and their role in distorting asset prices. In my opinion, they collude when necessary and otherwise provide the fuel necessary for the speculative community to bid up prices to illogical distortions due to the implied moral hazard.

Of course, the issue of barter and e-bay auctions would be theoretical to an extent. My point is that a marketplace outside of the concentrated interest of a central bank is going to MORE CLOSELY resemble a free market where two interested parties determine the fair value.

Well, this is my problem, you see... As long as we're talking counterfactuals, why do you presume that the CB influence is overwhelming? In the presence of other factors, how can you be sure that it's mostly the CBs that are causing these distortions? How can we be sure that it's not the global imbalances caused by exchange rate policies, which are political decisions, in the end? My point is that a "free mkt" is a fantasy and, IMO, removing the CB as you suggest isn't gonna get the reality any closer to the holy grail, really. In fact, it's likely to do the opposite, as it will put even more power into the hands of elected officials, who are, unfortunately, the cause of pretty much all the problems in the first place.

 

[piezoe]

Quote from denner:

... The market does not exist in a vacuum, most of the distortions are the direct result of central bank intervention.

Or, alternatively, the result of central bank non-intervention, as is the case in the recent and disastrous distortion.

 

[MarketMasher]

"Wait a second I thought BUBBLE ben bernanke said there wasnt inflation!!!!!"

Maybe he was only speaking personally....

Politicians are only middlemen stooges - cuz when you can print money, what (or whom) can't you buy....?

 

[piezoe]

Quote from MarketMasher:

"Wait a second I thought BUBBLE ben bernanke said there wasnt inflation!!!!!"

Maybe he was only speaking personally....

Politicians are only middlemen stooges - cuz when you can print money, what (or whom) can't you buy....?

"What unemployment? All my friends are working!" -- Richard Milhouse Nixon

(Apocryphal, of course.)

 

[piezoe]

Quote from piezoe:

"What unemployment? All my friends are working!" -- Richard Milhouse Nixon

(Apocryphal, of course.)

My heartfelt apology to our late departed Pres. It should be "Milhous", not "Milhouse". Shame on me for insisting on that superfluous vowel. And I'm not even Italian, so far as I know.