Tuesday, May 10, 2016

BI: Donald Trump just made a new mess while walking back his controversial plan for US debt


Blodget and crew weigh in:




They fall hook, line and sinker for the idiot economist "inflation!" metaphor.

This whole "inflation!" concept is AT BEST once maybe an applicable gold standard concept and now just evidence of the complete lack of competency and qualification of the academe of economics as scientists.

No competent scientist would ever modify THE unit of measure over time within their discipline.

"Oh...wait.... my bad... that was supposed to be in 2003 kilowatt-hours!....."    ??????????

They are second rate scientists, completely unqualified to be working in the area they are working, sorry.

And Blodget and crew need to figure this out till then they are just enablers.



3 comments:

Ignacio said...

Money is not a natural measure grounded in some material condition (careful, you may end up sounding like a gold bug), that's the whole point, purchasing power of currency varies over time. How would you explain that? It's established in the marketplace.

What you have to point out is that there is no "inflation!" problem! And if people says hyperinflation just point out QE. Yeah, I know is an asset swap, which uses reserves which are useless outside of the interbank system; but they truly believe in that crap so let them eat cake and profit from their own confusion.

If you take this line of argument you won't get anywhere as you will end up in a mess of talking about "what inflation is..." and metaphysics like "what money is...", output gap, falling prices, etc. No "hyperinflation!", QE, CBN's stacking trillions upon trillions worth of financial assets: no "hyperinflation!".

Use facts against them, don't fall on metaphysical arguments.

Matt Franko said...

I,

c'mon PRICES change in USD terms ... not "the value of the dollar!"...

I'm making a PURELY scientific argument... there is nothing "meta physical" about it...

You keep your units constant....

These people have a MAJOR problem with the time domain in their analyses... this "inflation!" nonsense is just PART of it....

Matt Franko said...

Think of a demonstration of osmotic flow across a membrane in a U-tube situation... you have 1 l of solvent and one g of solute on both sides... 1 g/l concentration...

You change the concentration of salt in on the one side of the tube by adding 1 l of solvent decreasing the g/l on the one side to one half g/l...

Are you saying we should just say "the solute has lost half its value!" on that side rather than the concentration has decreased by 50% ?

substitute the word "price" for 'concentration' in this last sentence...

They're idiots....