[Diego Mamani]

one burger contains as much as 3-5c worth of flour (up from 1-2c in 2006!) 5c of cheese, 5c of beef, some lettuce and mustard, etc. The bulk is LABOR.

–You're considering only variable costs, my friend. There are fixed costs too: store's rent (or the opportunity cost if you own), insurance, etc. Anyways, thanks for the entertainment and going into the minutiae of burger selling. I could have said "$300 airfare" or "$0.75 pen", etc.

Average nominal incomes can't go up unless either the money supply goes up (printing) or the rate at which people trade (velocity of money) goes up. Money you're paid with has to come from somewhere. If the amount of money in the economy is constant (…)

–Aha! You assume that the money supply is constant. Now your burger example starts to make more sense. But that's an enormous IF you use. The metaphorical printing presses are working at full steam! Haven't you read the news this week? For instance, see:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0313/p01s06-usec.html

 

[Diego Mamani]

one burger contains as much as 3-5c worth of flour (up from 1-2c in 2006!) 5c of cheese, 5c of beef, some lettuce and mustard, etc. The bulk is LABOR.

–You're considering only variable costs, my friend. There are fixed costs too: store's rent (or the opportunity cost if you own), insurance, etc. Anyways, thanks for the entertainment and going into the minutiae of burger selling. I could have said "$300 airfare" or "$0.75 pen", etc.

Average nominal incomes can't go up unless either the money supply goes up (printing) or the rate at which people trade (velocity of money) goes up. Money you're paid with has to come from somewhere. If the amount of money in the economy is constant (…)

–Aha! You assume that the money supply is constant. Now your burger example starts to make more sense. But that's an enormous IF you use. The metaphorical printing presses are working at full steam! Haven't you read the news this week? For instance, see:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0313/p01s06-usec.html

 

[Diego Mamani]

one burger contains as much as 3-5c worth of flour (up from 1-2c in 2006!) 5c of cheese, 5c of beef, some lettuce and mustard, etc. The bulk is LABOR.

–You're considering only variable costs, my friend. There are fixed costs too: store's rent (or the opportunity cost if you own), insurance, etc. Anyways, thanks for the entertainment and going into the minutiae of burger selling. I could have said "$300 airfare" or "$0.75 pen", etc.

Average nominal incomes can't go up unless either the money supply goes up (printing) or the rate at which people trade (velocity of money) goes up. Money you're paid with has to come from somewhere. If the amount of money in the economy is constant (…)

–Aha! You assume that the money supply is constant. Now your burger example starts to make more sense. But that's an enormous IF you use. The metaphorical printing presses are working at full steam! Haven't you read the news this week? For instance, see:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0313/p01s06-usec.html

 

[Diego Mamani]

one burger contains as much as 3-5c worth of flour (up from 1-2c in 2006!) 5c of cheese, 5c of beef, some lettuce and mustard, etc. The bulk is LABOR.

–You're considering only variable costs, my friend. There are fixed costs too: store's rent (or the opportunity cost if you own), insurance, etc. Anyways, thanks for the entertainment and going into the minutiae of burger selling. I could have said "$300 airfare" or "$0.75 pen", etc.

Average nominal incomes can't go up unless either the money supply goes up (printing) or the rate at which people trade (velocity of money) goes up. Money you're paid with has to come from somewhere. If the amount of money in the economy is constant (…)

–Aha! You assume that the money supply is constant. Now your burger example starts to make more sense. But that's an enormous IF you use. The metaphorical printing presses are working at full steam! Haven't you read the news this week? For instance, see:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0313/p01s06-usec.html

 

[Diego Mamani]

one burger contains as much as 3-5c worth of flour (up from 1-2c in 2006!) 5c of cheese, 5c of beef, some lettuce and mustard, etc. The bulk is LABOR.

–You're considering only variable costs, my friend. There are fixed costs too: store's rent (or the opportunity cost if you own), insurance, etc. Anyways, thanks for the entertainment and going into the minutiae of burger selling. I could have said "$300 airfare" or "$0.75 pen", etc.

Average nominal incomes can't go up unless either the money supply goes up (printing) or the rate at which people trade (velocity of money) goes up. Money you're paid with has to come from somewhere. If the amount of money in the economy is constant (…)

–Aha! You assume that the money supply is constant. Now your burger example starts to make more sense. But that's an enormous IF you use. The metaphorical printing presses are working at full steam! Haven't you read the news this week? For instance, see:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0313/p01s06-usec.html

 

[Diego Mamani]

Houses are immovable objects and they should be valued with respect to local incomes.
–You say incomes, I say gold/silver/oil/commodities. It doesn’t matter which. Nominal incomes will have to go up sooner or later; you can’t dissociate incomes from commodity prices or consumer prices. I’m not saying that higher nominal incomes will make us better off: inflation will more than offset nominal income gains (because of the weak dollar).

Popular but false sentiment. There has been very little money-printing since 2005.
–By ‘printing presses’ I was using a metaphor. The Fed increases the money supply by lowering the discount rate, the federal funds rate, making the discount window more attractive, or by offering to swap hundred of billions of US Treasury securities for other toxic debt, ad announced this week.

Who’s being robbed? I’m not being robbed. Most of my money is in things like FXE. There’s no monetary inflation. There’s just flight from the dollar.
–You haven’t been to a grocery store or a gas station lately. Most prices are going up at a faster rate than any time since the late 80s, the 90s, or early 2000s. Savers who have saved dollars are being robbed (again, metaphorically!) every time their dollars buy less at the supermarket, the department store, and the gas station, to mention a few places. And you still say there’s no inflation??

The US dollar is extremely overvalued. Trade deficit of 6% of GDP is proof. Sooner or later it had to devalue on its own.
–So, you agree that the dollar has even more pressure to go down, that is, to devalue. That’s what I’ve been saying all along: a weaker, and rapidly weakening dollar, will reduce the housing price/rent and price/income ratios faster than many had anticipated. House prices will still drop some more, but I think we have the end of the correction around the corner. Which is bad news to me because it’s being achieved at the expense of the dollar.

[Diego Mamani]

Houses are immovable objects and they should be valued with respect to local incomes.
–You say incomes, I say gold/silver/oil/commodities. It doesn’t matter which. Nominal incomes will have to go up sooner or later; you can’t dissociate incomes from commodity prices or consumer prices. I’m not saying that higher nominal incomes will make us better off: inflation will more than offset nominal income gains (because of the weak dollar).

Popular but false sentiment. There has been very little money-printing since 2005.
–By ‘printing presses’ I was using a metaphor. The Fed increases the money supply by lowering the discount rate, the federal funds rate, making the discount window more attractive, or by offering to swap hundred of billions of US Treasury securities for other toxic debt, ad announced this week.

Who’s being robbed? I’m not being robbed. Most of my money is in things like FXE. There’s no monetary inflation. There’s just flight from the dollar.
–You haven’t been to a grocery store or a gas station lately. Most prices are going up at a faster rate than any time since the late 80s, the 90s, or early 2000s. Savers who have saved dollars are being robbed (again, metaphorically!) every time their dollars buy less at the supermarket, the department store, and the gas station, to mention a few places. And you still say there’s no inflation??

The US dollar is extremely overvalued. Trade deficit of 6% of GDP is proof. Sooner or later it had to devalue on its own.
–So, you agree that the dollar has even more pressure to go down, that is, to devalue. That’s what I’ve been saying all along: a weaker, and rapidly weakening dollar, will reduce the housing price/rent and price/income ratios faster than many had anticipated. House prices will still drop some more, but I think we have the end of the correction around the corner. Which is bad news to me because it’s being achieved at the expense of the dollar.

[Diego Mamani]

Houses are immovable objects and they should be valued with respect to local incomes.
–You say incomes, I say gold/silver/oil/commodities. It doesn’t matter which. Nominal incomes will have to go up sooner or later; you can’t dissociate incomes from commodity prices or consumer prices. I’m not saying that higher nominal incomes will make us better off: inflation will more than offset nominal income gains (because of the weak dollar).

Popular but false sentiment. There has been very little money-printing since 2005.
–By ‘printing presses’ I was using a metaphor. The Fed increases the money supply by lowering the discount rate, the federal funds rate, making the discount window more attractive, or by offering to swap hundred of billions of US Treasury securities for other toxic debt, ad announced this week.

Who’s being robbed? I’m not being robbed. Most of my money is in things like FXE. There’s no monetary inflation. There’s just flight from the dollar.
–You haven’t been to a grocery store or a gas station lately. Most prices are going up at a faster rate than any time since the late 80s, the 90s, or early 2000s. Savers who have saved dollars are being robbed (again, metaphorically!) every time their dollars buy less at the supermarket, the department store, and the gas station, to mention a few places. And you still say there’s no inflation??

The US dollar is extremely overvalued. Trade deficit of 6% of GDP is proof. Sooner or later it had to devalue on its own.
–So, you agree that the dollar has even more pressure to go down, that is, to devalue. That’s what I’ve been saying all along: a weaker, and rapidly weakening dollar, will reduce the housing price/rent and price/income ratios faster than many had anticipated. House prices will still drop some more, but I think we have the end of the correction around the corner. Which is bad news to me because it’s being achieved at the expense of the dollar.

[Diego Mamani]

Houses are immovable objects and they should be valued with respect to local incomes.
–You say incomes, I say gold/silver/oil/commodities. It doesn’t matter which. Nominal incomes will have to go up sooner or later; you can’t dissociate incomes from commodity prices or consumer prices. I’m not saying that higher nominal incomes will make us better off: inflation will more than offset nominal income gains (because of the weak dollar).

Popular but false sentiment. There has been very little money-printing since 2005.
–By ‘printing presses’ I was using a metaphor. The Fed increases the money supply by lowering the discount rate, the federal funds rate, making the discount window more attractive, or by offering to swap hundred of billions of US Treasury securities for other toxic debt, ad announced this week.

Who’s being robbed? I’m not being robbed. Most of my money is in things like FXE. There’s no monetary inflation. There’s just flight from the dollar.
–You haven’t been to a grocery store or a gas station lately. Most prices are going up at a faster rate than any time since the late 80s, the 90s, or early 2000s. Savers who have saved dollars are being robbed (again, metaphorically!) every time their dollars buy less at the supermarket, the department store, and the gas station, to mention a few places. And you still say there’s no inflation??

The US dollar is extremely overvalued. Trade deficit of 6% of GDP is proof. Sooner or later it had to devalue on its own.
–So, you agree that the dollar has even more pressure to go down, that is, to devalue. That’s what I’ve been saying all along: a weaker, and rapidly weakening dollar, will reduce the housing price/rent and price/income ratios faster than many had anticipated. House prices will still drop some more, but I think we have the end of the correction around the corner. Which is bad news to me because it’s being achieved at the expense of the dollar.

[Diego Mamani]

Houses are immovable objects and they should be valued with respect to local incomes.
–You say incomes, I say gold/silver/oil/commodities. It doesn’t matter which. Nominal incomes will have to go up sooner or later; you can’t dissociate incomes from commodity prices or consumer prices. I’m not saying that higher nominal incomes will make us better off: inflation will more than offset nominal income gains (because of the weak dollar).

Popular but false sentiment. There has been very little money-printing since 2005.
–By ‘printing presses’ I was using a metaphor. The Fed increases the money supply by lowering the discount rate, the federal funds rate, making the discount window more attractive, or by offering to swap hundred of billions of US Treasury securities for other toxic debt, ad announced this week.

Who’s being robbed? I’m not being robbed. Most of my money is in things like FXE. There’s no monetary inflation. There’s just flight from the dollar.
–You haven’t been to a grocery store or a gas station lately. Most prices are going up at a faster rate than any time since the late 80s, the 90s, or early 2000s. Savers who have saved dollars are being robbed (again, metaphorically!) every time their dollars buy less at the supermarket, the department store, and the gas station, to mention a few places. And you still say there’s no inflation??

The US dollar is extremely overvalued. Trade deficit of 6% of GDP is proof. Sooner or later it had to devalue on its own.
–So, you agree that the dollar has even more pressure to go down, that is, to devalue. That’s what I’ve been saying all along: a weaker, and rapidly weakening dollar, will reduce the housing price/rent and price/income ratios faster than many had anticipated. House prices will still drop some more, but I think we have the end of the correction around the corner. Which is bad news to me because it’s being achieved at the expense of the dollar.

[Diego Mamani]

Cooprider,
Thanks for commenting, and I agree that incomes are important. But, please, check your math! A 100% appreciation would result in the house being at $814 today ($407 times 2). But somehow you come up with 175% appreciation??

The house went from $407 to, say, $712.5 in 79 months. That comes to a monthly appreciation of 0.7113% per month. That’s 8.9% per year. That’s still very high, and incomes haven’t increased that fast. But it’s nowhere near the 24% annual apprication in housing that you came up with. That’s what housing shrills like Lereah wanted us to believe!

Us housing bears need to be relatviely proficient in math…

[Diego Mamani]

Cooprider,
Thanks for commenting, and I agree that incomes are important. But, please, check your math! A 100% appreciation would result in the house being at $814 today ($407 times 2). But somehow you come up with 175% appreciation??

The house went from $407 to, say, $712.5 in 79 months. That comes to a monthly appreciation of 0.7113% per month. That’s 8.9% per year. That’s still very high, and incomes haven’t increased that fast. But it’s nowhere near the 24% annual apprication in housing that you came up with. That’s what housing shrills like Lereah wanted us to believe!

Us housing bears need to be relatviely proficient in math…

[Diego Mamani]

Cooprider,
Thanks for commenting, and I agree that incomes are important. But, please, check your math! A 100% appreciation would result in the house being at $814 today ($407 times 2). But somehow you come up with 175% appreciation??

The house went from $407 to, say, $712.5 in 79 months. That comes to a monthly appreciation of 0.7113% per month. That’s 8.9% per year. That’s still very high, and incomes haven’t increased that fast. But it’s nowhere near the 24% annual apprication in housing that you came up with. That’s what housing shrills like Lereah wanted us to believe!

Us housing bears need to be relatviely proficient in math…

[Diego Mamani]

Cooprider,
Thanks for commenting, and I agree that incomes are important. But, please, check your math! A 100% appreciation would result in the house being at $814 today ($407 times 2). But somehow you come up with 175% appreciation??

The house went from $407 to, say, $712.5 in 79 months. That comes to a monthly appreciation of 0.7113% per month. That’s 8.9% per year. That’s still very high, and incomes haven’t increased that fast. But it’s nowhere near the 24% annual apprication in housing that you came up with. That’s what housing shrills like Lereah wanted us to believe!

Us housing bears need to be relatviely proficient in math…

[Diego Mamani]

Cooprider,
Thanks for commenting, and I agree that incomes are important. But, please, check your math! A 100% appreciation would result in the house being at $814 today ($407 times 2). But somehow you come up with 175% appreciation??

The house went from $407 to, say, $712.5 in 79 months. That comes to a monthly appreciation of 0.7113% per month. That’s 8.9% per year. That’s still very high, and incomes haven’t increased that fast. But it’s nowhere near the 24% annual apprication in housing that you came up with. That’s what housing shrills like Lereah wanted us to believe!

Us housing bears need to be relatviely proficient in math…

[Author]

Posts