Current Affairs Cost of living…

[dCahill17]

Nope. We have the data for this, about 200 years in the UK. There has never been an inflation without a sharp increase in the money supply. Likewise there has never been a sharp increase in the money supply that didn't result in inflation.

MV = Py

When you increase the money supply, the price of things goes up it's really that simple.

Everything else is narrative that is being sold to you.

Inflation (printing money) robs us all of our money by constantly debasing the value of the currency.

MV =Py is a simplified model that shows generally printing money causes inflation. It has weakness though for example, it assumes the velocity of money is constant. I do not disagree that printing money causes inflation but I do disagree that is the only cause.


I suggest in your 200 years of data you look at the 1970s and the cost of energy and what happened. Cost push inflation is economic theory.

Feel free to dig in:

Cost-Push Inflation: When It Occurs, Definition, and Causes

Cost-push inflation occurs when overall prices rise (inflation) due to increases in production costs such as wages and raw materials.

www.investopedia.com

Inflation is looked at via cost push, demand pull and monetary. But lets assume what you’re saying is true and that monetary inflation is the only type of inflation.


The fact remains peoples disposable income has taken a huge hit due to increases in costs, in particular due to the costs of energy, mainly due to the the war in Ukraine and our reliance on natural gas. If no money was printed we would face huge costs, true?

I estimate with interest rates, food, energy, fuel, tax for weapons, printing money that it’s costing each household in the uk about £400 a month for a stupid war.

Which is funnily enough roughly about the amount the remainer project fear brexit lie said would cost each household, which is devastating. Makes the 350 million a week look like chick feed.

Will each UK household be £4,300 worse off if the UK leaves the EU?

Treasury analysis of Brexit implications includes claims about impact on growth and households, but do they stack up?

amp.theguardian.com

 

[DuuuncanHadaPigeon]

MV =Py is a simplified model that shows generally printing money causes inflation. It has weakness though for example, it assumes the velocity of money is constant. I do not disagree that printing money causes inflation but I do disagree that is the only cause.


I suggest in your 200 years of data you look at the 1970s and the cost of energy and what happened. Cost push inflation is economic theory.

Feel free to dig in:

Cost-Push Inflation: When It Occurs, Definition, and Causes

Cost-push inflation occurs when overall prices rise (inflation) due to increases in production costs such as wages and raw materials.

www.investopedia.com

Inflation is looked at via cost push, demand pull and monetary. But lets assume what you’re saying is true and that monetary inflation is the only type of inflation.


The fact remains peoples disposable income has taken a huge hit due to increases in costs, in particular due to the costs of energy, mainly due to the the war in Ukraine and our reliance on natural gas. If no money was printed we would face huge costs, true?

I estimate with interest rates, food, energy, fuel, tax for weapons, printing money that it’s costing each household in the uk about £400 a month for a stupid war.

Which is funnily enough roughly about the amount the remainer project fear brexit lie said would cost each household, which is devastating. Makes the 350 million a week look like chick feed.

Will each UK household be £4,300 worse off if the UK leaves the EU?

Treasury analysis of Brexit implications includes claims about impact on growth and households, but do they stack up?

amp.theguardian.com

The formula doesn't assume V is constant lol otherwise what's the point in it being there. It represents the money velocity, so when you say if no money was printed we would face huge costs. Well not necessarily because the money velocity could decrease resulting in price staying the same.

Sure you can have instances of cost push inflation but they are just that, instances. If the central banks didn't print as much as they did during COVID the resulting inflation due to the Ukraine war as you claim, wouldn't be anywhere near what it is now.

 

[magicjuan]

MV =Py is a simplified model that shows generally printing money causes inflation. It has weakness though for example, it assumes the velocity of money is constant. I do not disagree that printing money causes inflation but I do disagree that is the only cause.


I suggest in your 200 years of data you look at the 1970s and the cost of energy and what happened. Cost push inflation is economic theory.

Feel free to dig in:

Cost-Push Inflation: When It Occurs, Definition, and Causes

Cost-push inflation occurs when overall prices rise (inflation) due to increases in production costs such as wages and raw materials.

www.investopedia.com

Inflation is looked at via cost push, demand pull and monetary. But lets assume what you’re saying is true and that monetary inflation is the only type of inflation.


The fact remains peoples disposable income has taken a huge hit due to increases in costs, in particular due to the costs of energy, mainly due to the the war in Ukraine and our reliance on natural gas. If no money was printed we would face huge costs, true?

I estimate with interest rates, food, energy, fuel, tax for weapons, printing money that it’s costing each household in the uk about £400 a month for a stupid war.

Which is funnily enough roughly about the amount the remainer project fear brexit lie said would cost each household, which is devastating. Makes the 350 million a week look like chick feed.

Will each UK household be £4,300 worse off if the UK leaves the EU?

Treasury analysis of Brexit implications includes claims about impact on growth and households, but do they stack up?

amp.theguardian.com

What a tit

 

[magicjuan]

Thought the Tories wanted nuclear under Cameron and Osborne, and due to skill shortage tasked China to build them, then they realised having them build static nuclear bombs up down the country may not be a good idea.

Iirc it was scrapped due to 'security concerns'.

 

[dCahill17]

What a tit

I know you are but what am I?

The formula doesn't assume V is constant lol otherwise what's the point in it being there. It represents the money velocity, so when you say if no money was printed we would face huge costs. Well not necessarily because the money velocity could decrease resulting in price staying the same.

Sure you can have instances of cost push inflation but they are just that, instances. If the central banks didn't print as much as they did during COVID the resulting inflation due to the Ukraine war as you claim, wouldn't be anywhere near what it is now.

Understanding the Quantity Theory of Money: Key Concepts, Formula, and Examples

Discover how the Quantity Theory of Money explains inflation through changes in the money supply. Learn the key formula and fundamental examples in this comprehensive guide.

www.investopedia.com

“V was assumed to be constant“

Economic theory is not like maths, you cannot just prove beyond doubt, for example there are infinitely many primes. The point is, there are lots of factors causing issues and the modelling is not perfect.

And yes, it is an interesting question of which was worse for us Ukraine or the Pandemic. Whatever the case, the cost of energy is of the utmost importance no matter what. And the current situation sucks.

 

[DuuuncanHadaPigeon]

I know you are but what am I?

Understanding the Quantity Theory of Money: Key Concepts, Formula, and Examples

Discover how the Quantity Theory of Money explains inflation through changes in the money supply. Learn the key formula and fundamental examples in this comprehensive guide.

www.investopedia.com

“V was assumed to be constant“

Economic theory is not like maths, you cannot just prove beyond doubt, for example there are infinitely many primes. The point is, there are lots of factors causing issues and the modelling is not perfect.

And yes, it is an interesting question of which was worse for us Ukraine or the Pandemic. Whatever the case, the cost of energy is of the utmost importance no matter what. And the current situation sucks.

Printing more money had a bigger effect on inflation than rising energy costs, it's not even close, but that's my opinion.

I agree it does suck, we are all being robbed by inflation.

 

[Martin Alvito]

MV =Py is a simplified model that shows generally printing money causes inflation. It has weakness though for example, it assumes the velocity of money is constant. I do not disagree that printing money causes inflation but I do disagree that is the only cause.


I suggest in your 200 years of data you look at the 1970s and the cost of energy and what happened. Cost push inflation is economic theory.

Feel free to dig in:

Cost-Push Inflation: When It Occurs, Definition, and Causes

Cost-push inflation occurs when overall prices rise (inflation) due to increases in production costs such as wages and raw materials.

www.investopedia.com

Inflation is looked at via cost push, demand pull and monetary. But lets assume what you’re saying is true and that monetary inflation is the only type of inflation.


The fact remains peoples disposable income has taken a huge hit due to increases in costs, in particular due to the costs of energy, mainly due to the the war in Ukraine and our reliance on natural gas. If no money was printed we would face huge costs, true?

I estimate with interest rates, food, energy, fuel, tax for weapons, printing money that it’s costing each household in the uk about £400 a month for a stupid war.

Which is funnily enough roughly about the amount the remainer project fear brexit lie said would cost each household, which is devastating. Makes the 350 million a week look like chick feed.

Will each UK household be £4,300 worse off if the UK leaves the EU?

Treasury analysis of Brexit implications includes claims about impact on growth and households, but do they stack up?

amp.theguardian.com

Your logic is Econ 101 stuff. The moment you start talking about printed money in a world where the vast majority of what we call 'money' and 'securities' is in fact electronic, you out yourself as not understanding the subject. What matters is what central banks do, and not what comes off an antiquated press.

It gets worse:

Economic theory is not like maths, you cannot just prove beyond doubt, for example there are infinitely many primes. The point is, there are lots of factors causing issues and the modelling is not perfect.

What I can prove with economic theory is that the results are true, should we agree upon the assumptions. Modelling is not perfect in the sense that the model is always an oversimplification. An utter non sequitur like the problem of infinite primes has zero bearing on the actual limitations of economic theory.

Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy and your conclusions are highly questionable. You are a poor scientist, Dr. Venkman.

 

[dCahill17]

Your logic is Econ 101 stuff. The moment you start talking about printed money in a world where the vast majority of what we call 'money' and 'securities' is in fact electronic, you out yourself as not understanding the subject. What matters is what central banks do, and not what comes off an antiquated press.

It gets worse:

What I can prove with economic theory is that the results are true, should we agree upon the assumptions. Modelling is not perfect in the sense that the model is always an oversimplification. An utter non sequitur like the problem of infinite primes has zero bearing on the actual limitations of economic theory.

Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy and your conclusions are highly questionable. You are a poor scientist, Dr. Venkman.

The infinite prime problem shows that with mathematics you can make absolute certain claims and with economics you cannot do the same. In particular the quantity theory of money model presented was not a proof there was only one type of inflation.

It was a simplified model with assumptions and some of them assumptions are known to be false. Anyone who knows anything about modelling or equations could have spotted that almost instantly.

The economic models are weak and lack predictive power, economics it’s not even classed as a science. You won’t make assumptions and prove you are correct at all. So funny though, you literally have no idea about proof, and it seems a weak understanding of modelling.

Generally the economic models use assumptions then make predictions and the predictions are wrong.

Inflation: how the Bank of England got it wrong - University of Liverpool News

Inflation: how the Bank of England got it wrong

news.liverpool.ac.uk

Your main complaints:

1)

“Print money” doesn’t literally mean print, you knew that anyway I’m sure.

Feel free to actually challenge any of the points directly instead of just saying the argument is weak. Such as how increasing the amount of money in a system does not cause inflation?

2)

Feel free to explain how the 15% of the worlds grain coming from Ukraine and Russia, energy from Russia into Europe has not caused cost push inflation from rises in food and energy.

It seems my claims are backed up by the below:

To what extent did Covid cause inflation? - Economics Help

There is no doubt that as the economy emerged from Covid lockdowns in 2021, the world experienced a surge in inflation, not seen since the 1970s. There are many supply and demand factors, which have caused this unexpectedly high inflation. The first factor is that Covid lockdowns, especially in...

www.economicshelp.org

“The Covid Pandemic was a cause behind the inflation we see today. It led to unprecedented disruption, especially to production and supply chains. Even when some of these were being eased, we saw the Ukraine war cause another surge in oil/gas prices and more inflationary pressures. The stimulus effects have played some role in causing the US economy to be running with an output gap, but generally, around the world, the inflation we see is primarily cost-push inflation.“


Good day!

 

[Calvin]

“The Covid Pandemic was a cause behind the inflation we see today. It led to unprecedented disruption, especially to production and supply chains. Even when some of these were being eased, we saw the Ukraine war cause another surge in oil/gas prices and more inflationary pressures. The stimulus effects have played some role in causing the US economy to be running with an output gap, but generally, around the world, the inflation we see is primarily cost-push inflation.“

Absolute nonsense, Covid was just used as an excuse to cover the mismanagement of the economy (robbery) which has been taking place. If i remember correctly the Pandemic and the money printing came at a very convenient moment as the bank overnight lending rate (REPO rate) had spiked from less than 2% to over 10%. The spending on Covid is a tiny fraction of the money that has been printed over the last 40-50 years, there's no way its responsible for the inflation that has happened in the stock market, housing market, bond market in that time. You see, inflation has always been there just not in the "Real" Economy, that is what has happened in the last couple of years. And by the way, don't believe that any government truly wants rid of Inflation, they want inflation, its how they pay their debts, they inflate the debts away, that's what has happened historically. Just another lie from the elites, just like Covid spending was responsible for all this inflation ( which was transitory, of course), Then it was Russia, Ukraine. Government spending, running huge deficits, government borrowing over 40-50 years is what is responsible for Inflation. And its not going to stop, the government will still run deficits and spend more than it raises even as the economy is collapsing, so you will have deflationary pressures from fall in demand as masses lose their jobs etc all the while the government is spending more than it raises telling everyone that its "Fighting Inflation",the truth is, it needs and wants inflation.

 

[Martin Alvito]

The infinite prime problem shows that with mathematics you can make absolute certain claims and with economics you cannot do the same. In particular the quantity theory of money model presented was not a proof there was only one type of inflation.

It was a simplified model with assumptions and some of them assumptions are known to be false. Anyone who knows anything about modelling or equations could have spotted that almost instantly.

The economic models are weak and lack predictive power, economics it’s not even classed as a science. You won’t make assumptions and prove you are correct at all. So funny though, you literally have no idea about proof, and it seems a weak understanding of modelling.

Generally the economic models use assumptions then make predictions and the predictions are wrong.

Inflation: how the Bank of England got it wrong - University of Liverpool News

Inflation: how the Bank of England got it wrong

news.liverpool.ac.uk

Your main complaints:

1)

“Print money” doesn’t literally mean print, you knew that anyway I’m sure.

Feel free to actually challenge any of the points directly instead of just saying the argument is weak. Such as how increasing the amount of money in a system does not cause inflation?

2)

Feel free to explain how the 15% of the worlds grain coming from Ukraine and Russia, energy from Russia into Europe has not caused cost push inflation from rises in food and energy.

It seems my claims are backed up by the below:

To what extent did Covid cause inflation? - Economics Help

There is no doubt that as the economy emerged from Covid lockdowns in 2021, the world experienced a surge in inflation, not seen since the 1970s. There are many supply and demand factors, which have caused this unexpectedly high inflation. The first factor is that Covid lockdowns, especially in...

www.economicshelp.org

“The Covid Pandemic was a cause behind the inflation we see today. It led to unprecedented disruption, especially to production and supply chains. Even when some of these were being eased, we saw the Ukraine war cause another surge in oil/gas prices and more inflationary pressures. The stimulus effects have played some role in causing the US economy to be running with an output gap, but generally, around the world, the inflation we see is primarily cost-push inflation.“


Good day!

I would say the bolded part is the most ridiculous claim I've heard, but for two problems. One, supply-side economics once had adherents. Two, I'm divorced.

Absolutely anything in mathematics is predicated on assumptions. You can argue that Zermelo and Fraenkel make better ones, and that argument will go well seeing how you can prove a lot (and suggest that they are correct) without making their assumptions. I have observed my ex violate three of Von Neumann and Morgenstern's four axioms of rationality (yes, I counted) with my own eyes. They still have enormous predictive power in the right circumstances.

One thing you would have learned, literally on day one in academia in the social sciences, is that we don't fight over assumptions. We fight over results. Nobody cares whether the assumptions of your model are, in fact, correct. We only care about predictive power, because we know that any given set of assumptions about humanity must be a lie. People are crazy. You have observed this.

Your #2 is an irrelevant straw man that you made up, then knocked down. My observation on #1 is that anyone informed doesn't talk about printing money. They know this phrase in English has the potential to cause confusion, so they discuss the monetary supply instead. This is how I know you are a quack.

 

[Yarrgh]

I would say the bolded part is the most ridiculous claim I've heard, but for two problems. One, supply-side economics once had adherents. Two, I'm divorced.

Absolutely anything in mathematics is predicated on assumptions. You can argue that Zermelo and Fraenkel make better ones, and that argument will go well seeing how you can prove a lot (and suggest that they are correct) without making their assumptions. I have observed my ex violate three of Von Neumann and Morgenstern's four axioms of rationality (yes, I counted) with my own eyes. They still have enormous predictive power in the right circumstances.

One thing you would have learned, literally on day one in academia in the social sciences, is that we don't fight over assumptions. We fight over results. Nobody cares whether the assumptions of your model are, in fact, correct. We only care about predictive power, because we know that any given set of assumptions about humanity must be a lie. People are crazy. You have observed this.

Your #2 is an irrelevant straw man that you made up, then knocked down. My observation on #1 is that anyone informed doesn't talk about printing money. They know this phrase in English has the potential to cause confusion, so they discuss the monetary supply instead. This is how I know you are a quack.

TLDR: @dCahill17 is a grade A buffoon.

 

[dCahill17]

I would say the bolded part is the most ridiculous claim I've heard, but for two problems. One, supply-side economics once had adherents. Two, I'm divorced.

Absolutely anything in mathematics is predicated on assumptions. You can argue that Zermelo and Fraenkel make better ones, and that argument will go well seeing how you can prove a lot (and suggest that they are correct) without making their assumptions. I have observed my ex violate three of Von Neumann and Morgenstern's four axioms of rationality (yes, I counted) with my own eyes. They still have enormous predictive power in the right circumstances.

One thing you would have learned, literally on day one in academia in the social sciences, is that we don't fight over assumptions. We fight over results. Nobody cares whether the assumptions of your model are, in fact, correct. We only care about predictive power, because we know that any given set of assumptions about humanity must be a lie. People are crazy. You have observed this.

Your #2 is an irrelevant straw man that you made up, then knocked down. My observation on #1 is that anyone informed doesn't talk about printing money. They know this phrase in English has the potential to cause confusion, so they discuss the monetary supply instead. This is how I know you are a quack.

lol I’m sure your ex did.

Mathematics is based on axioms not assumptions. And everything else is deduced, gold standard of proof, abstract world rules are fixed. The predictive power of economics has long been known as weak.

“Both Shiller and Hayek have voiced their concerns about the limitations of economic models and the difficulty of predicting economic events with great precision” Nobel prize winners in the field.

Comparing a mathematical proof with an economic model is perfectly valid, and shows the difference in power of being able to say something with certainty v economic modelling.

And if you don’t care about assumptions just results then you just have loads of models with random scatter and eventually someone is right, then the model fails again. Which is funnily enough a criticism I have seen of economics when it is described as a pseudo science.

The claims I’ve made are the following

1) economics has weak predictive power.
2) there is more than one cause of inflation
3) cost push inflation is the main cause of the cost of living crisis due to the war in Ukraine which has seen rampant increase in costs of energy and raw materials such as grain
4) printing money QE can cause inflation

Your claim is I’m wrong a quack blah blah economics has high predictive power, when it doesn’t.


Good day!


.

 

[Daveysgingerlovechild]

The infinite prime problem shows that with mathematics you can make absolute certain claims and with economics you cannot do the same. In particular the quantity theory of money model presented was not a proof there was only one type of inflation.

It was a simplified model with assumptions and some of them assumptions are known to be false. Anyone who knows anything about modelling or equations could have spotted that almost instantly.

The economic models are weak and lack predictive power, economics it’s not even classed as a science. You won’t make assumptions and prove you are correct at all. So funny though, you literally have no idea about proof, and it seems a weak understanding of modelling.

Generally the economic models use assumptions then make predictions and the predictions are wrong.

Inflation: how the Bank of England got it wrong - University of Liverpool News

Inflation: how the Bank of England got it wrong

news.liverpool.ac.uk

Your main complaints:

1)

“Print money” doesn’t literally mean print, you knew that anyway I’m sure.

Feel free to actually challenge any of the points directly instead of just saying the argument is weak. Such as how increasing the amount of money in a system does not cause inflation?

2)

Feel free to explain how the 15% of the worlds grain coming from Ukraine and Russia, energy from Russia into Europe has not caused cost push inflation from rises in food and energy.

It seems my claims are backed up by the below:

To what extent did Covid cause inflation? - Economics Help

There is no doubt that as the economy emerged from Covid lockdowns in 2021, the world experienced a surge in inflation, not seen since the 1970s. There are many supply and demand factors, which have caused this unexpectedly high inflation. The first factor is that Covid lockdowns, especially in...

www.economicshelp.org

“The Covid Pandemic was a cause behind the inflation we see today. It led to unprecedented disruption, especially to production and supply chains. Even when some of these were being eased, we saw the Ukraine war cause another surge in oil/gas prices and more inflationary pressures. The stimulus effects have played some role in causing the US economy to be running with an output gap, but generally, around the world, the inflation we see is primarily cost-push inflation.“


Good day!

You lifting stuff from chatGPT AGAIN mate?

 

[Calvin]

lol I’m sure your ex did.

Mathematics is based on axioms not assumptions. And everything else is deduced, gold standard of proof, abstract world rules are fixed. The predictive power of economics has long been known as weak.

“Both Shiller and Hayek have voiced their concerns about the limitations of economic models and the difficulty of predicting economic events with great precision” Nobel prize winners in the field.

Comparing a mathematical proof with an economic model is perfectly valid, and shows the difference in power of being able to say something with certainty v economic modelling.

And if you don’t care about assumptions just results then you just have loads of models with random scatter and eventually someone is right, then the model fails again. Which is funnily enough a criticism I have seen of economics when it is described as a pseudo science.

The claims I’ve made are the following

1) economics has weak predictive power.
2) there is more than one cause of inflation
3) cost push inflation is the main cause of the cost of living crisis due to the war in Ukraine which has seen rampant increase in costs of energy and raw materials such as grain
4) printing money QE can cause inflation

Your claim is I’m wrong a quack blah blah economics has high predictive power, when it doesn’t.


Good day!


.

No, the cause of inflation has been the increase in the money supply over decades and decades, not Covid not Ukraine / Russia. Governments and Central Banks in the West have caused inflation and have been blaming everything other than themselves.
Years ago they even changed the way that they calculated inflation to hide / mask their actions.
They’re now at a point where they will need to reverse course, lower interest rates, print more money or there’s going to be a credit event as there isn’t enough liquidity in the system. Watch for another Banking crisis in the near future.

 

[Calvin]

And just in case anyone is wondering, inflation is a Stealth Tax, it’s a mechanism that the elites use to steal / transfer your wealth to pay for the massive debts that they have build up.
Which is why they are lying to you when they say they are “fighting Inflation”, they want inflation.