Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
EconProf
ParticipantYep, “velocity” of the money supply, or the rate at which it changes hands, has slowed considerably, thus offsetting the growth in money supply, however measured.
The original monetarist, Milton Friedman, claimed velocity was fairly constant over time, which led him to state that money supply growth over a certain range of 2 to 4 percent or so each year, would lead directly to inflation. As Mish has so abundantly shown, this has not happened and is not about to happen. Too bad Milton is no longer around to defend, or explain, his thesis.ParticipantYep, “velocity” of the money supply, or the rate at which it changes hands, has slowed considerably, thus offsetting the growth in money supply, however measured.
The original monetarist, Milton Friedman, claimed velocity was fairly constant over time, which led him to state that money supply growth over a certain range of 2 to 4 percent or so each year, would lead directly to inflation. As Mish has so abundantly shown, this has not happened and is not about to happen. Too bad Milton is no longer around to defend, or explain, his thesis.ParticipantYep, “velocity” of the money supply, or the rate at which it changes hands, has slowed considerably, thus offsetting the growth in money supply, however measured.
The original monetarist, Milton Friedman, claimed velocity was fairly constant over time, which led him to state that money supply growth over a certain range of 2 to 4 percent or so each year, would lead directly to inflation. As Mish has so abundantly shown, this has not happened and is not about to happen. Too bad Milton is no longer around to defend, or explain, his thesis.ParticipantThere are some good points in this article by Robert Schiller of Case-Shiller fame.
We are now waking up to the fact that the stimulus money was mainly a way to permanently ratchet up the size of our government sector at the expense of the private sector. Many of the projects are turning out to be boondogles, or have created/saved government or union jobs at a great cost per job. A stimulus via tax cuts would have put money directly and immediately into consumers’ and businesses’ (read: job creators) hands, and the economy would have been well on its way to recovery by now.
It appears politicians and their economists greatly overestimated the multiplier effect of government spending, and underestimated the dampening effects on businesses and consumers of big deficits, looming regulations and a permanently larger government. Had tax cuts been used to stimulate consumers and job-creaters, especially small businesses, more lower-level new jobs would have been created in the private sector. Government workers and union jobs tend to make above average wages. New hires, the young, minorities tend to make below-average wages. If our goal is to lower unemployment rates and get these workers onto the job ladder so they can prove themselves and advance, the stimulus program is not working.ParticipantThere are some good points in this article by Robert Schiller of Case-Shiller fame.
We are now waking up to the fact that the stimulus money was mainly a way to permanently ratchet up the size of our government sector at the expense of the private sector. Many of the projects are turning out to be boondogles, or have created/saved government or union jobs at a great cost per job. A stimulus via tax cuts would have put money directly and immediately into consumers’ and businesses’ (read: job creators) hands, and the economy would have been well on its way to recovery by now.
It appears politicians and their economists greatly overestimated the multiplier effect of government spending, and underestimated the dampening effects on businesses and consumers of big deficits, looming regulations and a permanently larger government. Had tax cuts been used to stimulate consumers and job-creaters, especially small businesses, more lower-level new jobs would have been created in the private sector. Government workers and union jobs tend to make above average wages. New hires, the young, minorities tend to make below-average wages. If our goal is to lower unemployment rates and get these workers onto the job ladder so they can prove themselves and advance, the stimulus program is not working.ParticipantThere are some good points in this article by Robert Schiller of Case-Shiller fame.
We are now waking up to the fact that the stimulus money was mainly a way to permanently ratchet up the size of our government sector at the expense of the private sector. Many of the projects are turning out to be boondogles, or have created/saved government or union jobs at a great cost per job. A stimulus via tax cuts would have put money directly and immediately into consumers’ and businesses’ (read: job creators) hands, and the economy would have been well on its way to recovery by now.
It appears politicians and their economists greatly overestimated the multiplier effect of government spending, and underestimated the dampening effects on businesses and consumers of big deficits, looming regulations and a permanently larger government. Had tax cuts been used to stimulate consumers and job-creaters, especially small businesses, more lower-level new jobs would have been created in the private sector. Government workers and union jobs tend to make above average wages. New hires, the young, minorities tend to make below-average wages. If our goal is to lower unemployment rates and get these workers onto the job ladder so they can prove themselves and advance, the stimulus program is not working.ParticipantThere are some good points in this article by Robert Schiller of Case-Shiller fame.
We are now waking up to the fact that the stimulus money was mainly a way to permanently ratchet up the size of our government sector at the expense of the private sector. Many of the projects are turning out to be boondogles, or have created/saved government or union jobs at a great cost per job. A stimulus via tax cuts would have put money directly and immediately into consumers’ and businesses’ (read: job creators) hands, and the economy would have been well on its way to recovery by now.
It appears politicians and their economists greatly overestimated the multiplier effect of government spending, and underestimated the dampening effects on businesses and consumers of big deficits, looming regulations and a permanently larger government. Had tax cuts been used to stimulate consumers and job-creaters, especially small businesses, more lower-level new jobs would have been created in the private sector. Government workers and union jobs tend to make above average wages. New hires, the young, minorities tend to make below-average wages. If our goal is to lower unemployment rates and get these workers onto the job ladder so they can prove themselves and advance, the stimulus program is not working.ParticipantThere are some good points in this article by Robert Schiller of Case-Shiller fame.
We are now waking up to the fact that the stimulus money was mainly a way to permanently ratchet up the size of our government sector at the expense of the private sector. Many of the projects are turning out to be boondogles, or have created/saved government or union jobs at a great cost per job. A stimulus via tax cuts would have put money directly and immediately into consumers’ and businesses’ (read: job creators) hands, and the economy would have been well on its way to recovery by now.
It appears politicians and their economists greatly overestimated the multiplier effect of government spending, and underestimated the dampening effects on businesses and consumers of big deficits, looming regulations and a permanently larger government. Had tax cuts been used to stimulate consumers and job-creaters, especially small businesses, more lower-level new jobs would have been created in the private sector. Government workers and union jobs tend to make above average wages. New hires, the young, minorities tend to make below-average wages. If our goal is to lower unemployment rates and get these workers onto the job ladder so they can prove themselves and advance, the stimulus program is not working.ParticipantThe comments about low interest rates to savers are sadly true. This is part of the tragic fallout of the current Fed policy to help the big banks rebuild their balance sheets while hurting savers.
The best return for most people is to pay off any debt. Credit cards that charge you, say, 12% should never have a running balance. By paying the bill off, you implicitly are earning a 12% rate of return. OTOH, I’d guess you are already doing this.ParticipantThe comments about low interest rates to savers are sadly true. This is part of the tragic fallout of the current Fed policy to help the big banks rebuild their balance sheets while hurting savers.
The best return for most people is to pay off any debt. Credit cards that charge you, say, 12% should never have a running balance. By paying the bill off, you implicitly are earning a 12% rate of return. OTOH, I’d guess you are already doing this.ParticipantThe comments about low interest rates to savers are sadly true. This is part of the tragic fallout of the current Fed policy to help the big banks rebuild their balance sheets while hurting savers.
The best return for most people is to pay off any debt. Credit cards that charge you, say, 12% should never have a running balance. By paying the bill off, you implicitly are earning a 12% rate of return. OTOH, I’d guess you are already doing this.ParticipantThe comments about low interest rates to savers are sadly true. This is part of the tragic fallout of the current Fed policy to help the big banks rebuild their balance sheets while hurting savers.
The best return for most people is to pay off any debt. Credit cards that charge you, say, 12% should never have a running balance. By paying the bill off, you implicitly are earning a 12% rate of return. OTOH, I’d guess you are already doing this.ParticipantThe comments about low interest rates to savers are sadly true. This is part of the tragic fallout of the current Fed policy to help the big banks rebuild their balance sheets while hurting savers.
The best return for most people is to pay off any debt. Credit cards that charge you, say, 12% should never have a running balance. By paying the bill off, you implicitly are earning a 12% rate of return. OTOH, I’d guess you are already doing this.ParticipantGood point–I think most people should delay college for a year or two after high school. My best students were generally those who had real life experiences which made them appreciate college. They were always more motivated, curious, and intellectually engaged in pursuing knowledge than their younger bretheren who were there for the social life and status. They also challenged me more since they had definite opinions about economics. And, predictably, as earners and taxpayers, they tended to be more politically conservative.
-
AuthorPosts
