원문 보기
Peter chef but this plan again is going to be a disaster because the crash is coming have you heard of the depression of 1920 - 21 unless you really hard come for economics geek you probably haven t the most striking aspect of this depression was its duration it lasted just 18 months and how did the u.s.
get itself out of this sharpie economic downturn by essentially doing nothing a collapse in GDP and production led to a sharp spike in unemployment to double-digit numbers modern policymakers would immediately launch economic stimulus consider the 2008 crash on top of government programs such as the 700 billion dollar tarp and 800 billion dollars in fiscal stimulus the Federal Reserve pumped 4 trillion dollars and new money into the system for 165 out of 180 months the Fed pushed interest rates down or held the metric bottom levels the result a tepid recovery at best with 2 million fewer breadwinner jobs than during the 1990 s fo and a whole slew of bubbles waiting to pop Lew Rockwell compares this to the how things played out in 1920 by the time the federal government even began considering intervention the crisis had ended what Commerce secretary Herbert Hoover deferentially called the president s conference on unemployment an idea he himself had cooked up to smooth out the business cycle convened during what turned out to be the second month of the recovery according to the National Bureau of Economic Research and BER indeed according to the nber which announces the beginnings and ends of recessions the depression began in January 1920 and ended in July 1921 in fact monetary policy during this period was actually contractionary Alan Meltzer wrote in a history of the Federal Reserve that principle monetary aggregates fell throughout the recession he calculates a decline in him 1 by 10 point nine percent from March 1920 to January 1922 and in the monetary base by six point four percent from October 1920 to January 1922 quarterly average growth of the base he continues did not become positive until a second quarter 1922 nine months after the NBER trough Rockwell outlines some of the other policies in place during the 1920 to 1921 depression he gleaned from Jim grant s new book The Forgotten depression 1921 the crash that cured itself the Fed raised its discount rate from 4% in 1919 to 7% in 1920 and 6% in 1921 by 1922 after the recovery was long since under way it was reduced to 4% once again meanwhile government spending also fell dramatically as the economy emerged from the 1920 21 downturn the budget was in the process of being reduced from six point three billion dollars in 1920 to 3.2 billion dollars in 1922 so the budget was being cut and the money supply was falling by the lights of Keynesian and monetarist doctrine like writes grant no more primitive or counterproductive policies could be imagined in addition price deflation was more severe during 1920 21 than during any point in the Great Depression from mid 1920 to mid 1921 the Consumer Price Index fell by fifteen point eight percent we can only imagine the panic and the cries for intervention were we to observe such price movements today this is all the exact opposite of what the central planners say must happen during a downturn in fact the government hence central bankers got their acts together and did all the right things during the 1930 s and perpetuated a decade of depression so perhaps we don t need all of the intervention stimulus financial mechanizations and tinkering with interest rates that the central planners claim we have to have to keep the economy afloat maybe markets really can correct themselves I like the way Rockwell put it the example of 1920 21 was largely overlooked except in specialized treatments of American economic history many decades the cynic may be forgiven for suspecting methods incompatibility with today's conventional wisdom which urges demand management by experts and an ever-expanding mandate for the Fed might have had something to do with that whatever the reason it does back now as a rebuke to the planners with their equations and the cronies with their bailouts the House and Senate both passed the GOP tax bill yesterday as of Wednesday morning it needed just one more vote in the house on some technical changes made in the Senate before it heads to Prez Trump s desk the media keeps calling the Republican bill tax reform Peter Schiff called that fake news calling these tax cuts reform is a perfect example of fake news but of course Donald Trump is not going to complain about this fake news see when the fake news works in his favor when he prefers fake news to real news then he asked going to be quiet about it it has only ones he doesn t like the fake news that he calls the media out but this is nothing to do with reform Peter emphasized there are definitely tax cuts in this bill in fact there are substantial tax cuts some people will get even more tax relief and advertised due to the number of loopholes in this bill so at least in the short run passage of this bill as good news for a lot of people but it does not good news in the long term Peter r echoed what he says several weeks ago when he pointed out that the plan is really nothing more than tax cuts masquerading as tax reform again not that tax cuts are a bad thing yeah I want to lower the top rate of tax but I also want to make government smaller I want to reduce government spending so that we no longer need all that tax revenue but of course I ve said that over and over again this bill provides some people with tax relief but no people with government relief government is getting bigger government is getting more expensive so how are we going to pay for it if we re not going to pay for it with taxes well then weari going to pay for it some other way but pay for it we will we ve hammered this point over and over again the Stax plan is going to push the mass of US federal debt even higher debt puts a drag on growth promises of economic expansion due to the tax cuts simply done tear and true we ve talked extensively about the impact of debt on economic growth the u.s.
debt to GDP ratio already stands at 105 percent this puts a significant drag on growth and as Peter pointed out in a previous podcast incentives matter and the incentives in this bill will likely decrease revenue even more than projected that means an even bigger deficit and expected it does not that we oppose tax cuts but people need to understand that as long as the government is spending like a drunken sailor we aren t really getting any relief again as Peter said pay for it we will most likely through money printing and inflation I hate it when we have to send our money to the government the problem is the government is spending the money whether they collect the taxes or not so it s my belief as an economist the debt does more damage to the economy than taxation that paying for big government by printing money and borrowing money does more economic damage and ultimately exacts a greater cost on the economy than paying for government with taxes peter also pointed out that the bill is also going to spell hala tickle trouble for republicans but this plan again is going to be a disaster because the recession that s coming is going to be blamed on these tax cuts this is going to be the perfect campaign issue for 2018 for 2020 the republicans are going to own this recession they regoing to own this bear market that is going to start so the tax bill isn't eerily good news it has fake news but we want to see the negative results until we get further down the road Janet Yellen an company pretty much followed the script during last week s Federal Open Market Committee meeting raising interest rates another 0.25 percent and signaling three rate hikes in 2018 we tend to focus primarily on Federal Reserve actions but it s important to remember the Fed isn't e the only cent Bank game in town while it nudges interest rates slowly upward the European Central Bank is standing pat on economic stimulus and there has no indication that is going to change in the near future with its latest rate hike the Federal Reserve has pushed the federal fund rate to 1.5 percent that s the highest we ve seen since 2008 even at that we re still well below the 5.25% peak hit during the last expansion meanwhile ECB chair Mario Draghi announced back in October that quantitative easing would live on in the u the European Central Bank plans to extend its bond-buying program deep into 2018 continuing the flow of easy money into the European Union last week Draghi stuck to that course saying the inflation outlook remains muted the ECB plans to hold interest rates down for an extended period the Bank of England raised its key interest rate last month but officials say they have no plans to follow-up in the near future so why the reluctance to move away from stimulus if the economy has recovered Ryan Mike McCann at the Mises Institute provides some analysis Draghi repeatedly stressed that what a eurozone is experiencing is no longer a mere recovery but instead an expansion one is left wondering however why don't you see B refuses to let up on the stimulus if the economy is doing so well over the past decade central bankers have gotten into a fairly predictable habit of declaring the economy to be strong or robust while simultaneously refusing to scale back the central bank s stimulus as numerous commentators have pointed up though your app s monetary policy remains in the service of debt-laden governments which rely on rock-bottom rates to keep debt payments low moreover the threat of a banking crisis and usually isn't he exactly exactly motivating central bankers to raise rates from their perspective it s better to just keep rates slow indefinitely and hope for the best this makes one wonder how the Fed can continue to push rates higher the US government continues to spend money like a drunken sailor and if the GOP manages to push its tax reform plan through we can expect even more debt over the next decade the government is going to need to keep interest rates low in order to manage its debt service it won t take much to convince the Fed to reverse course we do you expect normalizing to stall the minute there is the slightest economic wobble it was reduced to 4% once again meanwhile government spending also fell dramatically as the economy emerged from the 1920 21 downturn the budget was in the process of being reduced from six point three billion dollars in 1920 to 3.2 billion dollars in 1922 so the budget was being cut and the money supply was falling by the lights of Keynesian and monetarist doctrine like writes grant no more primitive or counterproductive policies could be imagined in addition price deflation was more severe during 1920 21 than during any point in the Great Depression from mid 1920 to mid 1921 the consumer price and a 6.4 percent from October 1920 to January 1922 quarterly average growth of the base he continues did not become positive until a second quarter 1922 nine months after the NBER trough Rockwell outlined some of the other policies in place during the 1920 to 1921 depression he gleaned from Jim grant s new book the Forgotten depression 1921 the crash that cured itself the Fed raised its discount rate from 4% in 1919 to 7% in 1920 and 6% in 1921 by 1922 after the recovery was long since under way Peter Schiff but this plan again is going to be a disaster because the crash is coming have you heard of the depression of 1920 - 21 unless you really hard come for economics geek you probably haven t the most striking aspect of this depression was its duration it lasted just 18 months and how did the u.s.
get itself out of this sharp economic downturn by essentially doing nothing a collapse in GDP and production led to a sharp spike in unemployment to double-digit numbers modern policymakers would immediately launch economic stimulus consider the 2008 crash on top of government programs such as the 700 billion dollar tarp and 800 billion dollars in fiscal stimulus the Federal Reserve pumped four trillion dollars in new money into the system for 165 out of 180 months the Fed pushed interest rates down or held the metric bottom levels the result a tepid recovery at best with two million fewer breadwinner jobs than during the 1990 s foe and a whole slew of bubbles waiting to pop Lew Rockwell compares this to the how things played out in 1920 by the time the federal government even began considering intervention the crisis had ended what Commerce secretary Herbert Hoover deferentially called the president s conference on unemployment an idea he himself had cooked up to smooth out the business cycle convened during what turned out to be the second month of the recovery according to the National Bureau of Economic Research and BER indeed according to the NBER which announces the beginnings and ends of recessions the depression began in January 1920 and ended in July 1921 in fact monetary policy during this period was actually contractionary Alan Meltzer wrote in a history of the Federal Reserve that principle monetary aggregates fell throughout the recession he calculates a decline in m1 by ten point nine percent from March 1920 to January 1922 and in the monetary base by
Comments 0