vineri, 19 decembrie 2014

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis


Russia Not Selling Gold, It's Buying; Reflections on Extremely Sloppy Reporting

Posted: 19 Dec 2014 07:24 PM PST

On December 17, ZeroHedge asked Will Putin's Next Step Be To Sell Gold?

On December 18, ZeroHedge answered his own question wrongly with Russia Has Begun Selling Its Gold, According To SocGen.

I did not believe that when I saw it yesterday, and I sure don't today after viewing a few charts from Nick at Gold Charts "R" Us.

Russia Gold Reserves Up 600,000 Ounces for November



In US dollar terms, Russia's gold reserves are worth about $0.4 billion less.

Russia Gold Reserves in US Dollars



Of course, Russia may have started selling in December, but that's not precisely what happened either.

Gold Chat Debunks Russia Selling Gold Rumor

Please consider this snip from the December 19 Gold Chat article ZH fail on Soc Gen fail on Russia selling its gold.
As is common in internet land, people pick up stuff by others without doing basic drilling down to the source. The reason you have to do this is because people often misinterpret the source. Other times the source is wrong.

ZH quote the following from Soc Gen: "It appears possible that the Central Bank of Russia has started to sell off some of its gold reserves in December, with some sources reporting that official gold reserves dropped by $4.3 billion in the first week of the month."

Now that is a very specific figure, $4.3b. It seems that Soc Gen got it from this Business Insider republication of a Vesti Finance article which said "On Thursday, the Central Bank of Russia announced that gold reserves dropped by $US4.3 billion in just one week, reports Vesti Finance."

However, if we check the [Vesti] source link [using Google Translate] we get the following:

"Russia's international reserves for the week from November 28 to December 5, decreased from $ 420.5 billion to $ 416.2 billion, the central bank said on Thursday. ... For the previous week, from 21 to 28 November, gold reserves increased from $ 420.4 billion to $ 420.5 billion. On November 14th the size of gold reserves stood at $ 420.6 billion, on November 7 - $421,400,000,000 rubles."

Now the decrease they are talking about is $4.3b in total reserves but the headline mistakenly assumes it is all gold. The gold specific figures they mention show completely different numbers.
Link Sloppiness

This this precisely what happens when you are sloppy with links.

My major criticism is not that ZeroHedge posted something inaccurately, but that he frequently fails to link to stories.

On many occasions ZeroHedge states things like "Bloomberg says" and I spend 15 minutes looking and cannot find anywhere Bloomberg said anything remotely close to what was being attributed.

I realize sometimes there is no link. On such occasions, I will say something like via email, no link available.

In this case it appears the source of this misrepresentation was Business Insider who also got the story amazingly wrong.

On December 12, Business Insider reported Russia Is Fighting Its Financial Problems By Selling The Gold They Have Been Hoarding.
Russia is finally using all that gold they have been hoarding.

On Thursday, the Central Bank of Russia announced that gold reserves dropped by $US4.3 billion in just one week, reports Vesti Finance.

Which isn't all that surprising. ....

In the third quarter alone, Russia added more gold to its reserves than any other nation, according to the Telegraph. And over the last decade, Russia has tripled its gold stocks, according to data from the World Gold Council.

Until recently, Russia hasn't dipped into these enormous reserves.

But now that the ruble is getting pummelled following the decline in oil prices and sanctions imposed on Russia's economy by the West, Russia's central bank is apparently selling off some of its gold reserves to fight inflation and the ruble's decline.
Business Insider Sloppy Reporting

Russia is not selling gold, rather the US$ value of its international reserves fell by $4.3. Billion. Here is the opening sentence "Russia's international reserves for the week from November 28 to December 5, decreased from $ 420.5 billion to $ 416.2 billion, the central bank said on Thursday."

Gold Chat ended with ...

"Editor's Note: Earlier it was reported that the Central Bank's gold reserves decreased by $4.3 billion, quoting Vesti Finance. However, in actuality, it is international reserves assets that have decreased — not gold. Appropriate changes have been made."

Now how hard was that fact checking Soc Gen and ZH?

ZeroHedge messed up another gold story as well. Please consider the December 17 Gold Chat article Zero Hedge fail on undocumented gold supply story

This kind of nonsense is precisely why I am meticulous with links. I want others to carry the same standard.

Bloomberg is also terrible. In fact, mainstream media is horrendous in general.

Many mainstream media news outlets only link to themselves. And when that happens there is no way to check the facts. Then nonsense like this happens. I rest my case.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Spain to Abolish Rent Controls; 20,000 Small Businesses May Close; Good Thing or Not?

Posted: 19 Dec 2014 12:54 PM PST

Abolition of rent controls in Spain this month has prompted some landlords to increase fees by tens of thousands of euros. The Guardian claims Spanish rent changes 'could close 20,000 small businesses'.

Is this a good thing? Ponder that question for a moment, but also consider a few snips from the article.
Up to 20,000 small Spanish businesses could be forced to close when rent controls are abolished at the end of this month, according to the self-employed workers union. Many of the closures will be emblematic shops that shape the urban landscape in cities such as Madrid, Granada and Barcelona.

The Camisería Hernando has been in business since 1857 and has occupied the same shop on Madrid's Gran Vía for 50 years but is closing after the rent shot up from €3,000 to €30,000 a month.

Barcelona has already lost a toy shop and a secondhand bookstore that have been a feature of the old part of the city for more than a century. Both premises have been occupied by retail clothing chains. Other gems such as the modernista Monge stamp shop and the Quiles grocery are also under threat as the city succumbs to an influx of chain stores.

Local government officials have refused to intervene to preserve the city's heritage but local artists and intellectuals are taking the case of Monge to court. While some landlords have been prepared to negotiate affordable rent hikes, many shops are in buildings owned by banks and funds that simply notify the shopkeepers of the impending rise.

"About 60% of the 200,000 affected businesses have been able to negotiate a rise of around 35%," César García, of the self-employed workers union, said. "But most of the rest have received a letter telling them the rent is going up by thousands of euros and that it's not negotiable."

"We're closing after 72 years," said Susana Esnarriega, owner of Así, a doll shop on Madrid's Gran Via. "The landlord is giving us till Epiphany to get out but he hasn't even made us an offer."
Good Thing or Not?

Is this a good thing?

That's a somewhat misleading question because I was not specific.

Did I mean a good thing that 20,000 small businesses may close, or that rent controls will be abolished? Then again, does it really matter which question I meant? Let's start with rent controls and work our way through.

Without a doubt abolishing rent controls is a good idea. Government interference in the free market is never a good thing.

Will rents soar really from €3,000 to €30,000 a month? I rather doubt it, except perhaps in rare cases of a superb high-traffic location.

And in such cases, if an owner can really collect that much in rent, then yes, it is a very good thing the existing store closes. A new store would have to generate lots of income and create a lot of jobs to be able to pay that kind of rent.

Fear-Mongering

The closing of stores is in and of itself neither a good nor bad thing, but more productive uses of capital are always a good thing. In this case, if stores close and new ones open (which is what one would expect if rents go up) then yes, that's a very good thing.

The fear-mongering 20,000 store guesstimate by the small business association is highly questionable. But the more stores that close, the faster the Spanish economy is likely to grow as the land-owners will make better use of their land.

This was a superb decision by Spain to abolish rent controls. France and Italy should take note of such free-market reforms, because it's going to work.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Website Designing & Mobile Apps

Hello,

 

We are an IT company having expertise in Website Designing & Development and Mobile Apps.. We also have registered offices in UK and USA. Our Web Development team is highly experienced and makes sure that they give an outstanding result to your desire. At present, we cater to more than 300 Clients across USA, UK, Canada, Singapore and Australia.

 

We maintain Web 2.0 standards and W3C validations in all the websites we design and develop. The website we develop includes:

1. Great Design

2. Good navigation and usability

3. Quick loading

4. User Friendly Interface

5. SEO Friendly

6. Mobile Responsive converse

 

We have team of 50+ qualified professionals specializing in Web technologies like PHP, MYSQL, Code-igniter, ZEND Framework, Symfony, Joomla, Drupal, Wordpress, Magento, Ubercart, OS commerce, SEO services, SMO, SMM, PPC and other Open source, ERP and Mobile Applications like Android, iPhone/iPad.

If you believe your website needs redesigning, we can assist you with most modernized website with all new features. Our research team thoroughly studies the target audience to help us design the website accordingly.

 

We are optimistic that our credentials will be taken into account for outsourcing projects to us.

 

Let us know if you are interested!!

 

Kind & Regards,

Riaz

Marketing Manager.

Disclaimer: This is an advertisement and a promotional mail strictly on the guidelines of CAN-SPAM Act of 2003. We have clearly mentioned the source mail-id of this mail and the subject lines and they are in no way misleading in any form. We have found your mail address through our own efforts on the web search and not through any illegal way. If you find this mail unsolicited, please reply with "unsubscribe" in the subject line and we will take care that you do not receive any further promotional mail.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Damn Cool Pics

Damn Cool Pics


How Home Alone Would Be Different If It Happened Now

Posted: 19 Dec 2014 11:50 AM PST

The world is very different compared to the one Kevin McAllister was a part of in "Home Alone."























Man Spends £100,000 To Look Like Kim Kardashian

Posted: 18 Dec 2014 07:55 PM PST

The 23-year-old British man Jordan James Parke has spent £100,000 on cosmetic surgery and designer clothing in an effort to look like Kim Kardashian. Well, now he looks even better.






















Via instagram

Information Architecture for SEO - Whiteboard Friday

Information Architecture for SEO - Whiteboard Friday


Information Architecture for SEO - Whiteboard Friday

Posted: 18 Dec 2014 04:18 PM PST

Posted by randfish

It wasn't too long ago that there was significant tension between information architects and SEOs; one group wanted to make things easier for humans, the other for search engines. That line is largely disappearing, and there are several best practices in IA that can lead to great benefits in search. In today's Whiteboard Friday, Rand explains what they are and how we can benefit from them.

For reference, here's a still of this week's whiteboard!

Information Architecture for SEO Whiteboard

Video Transcription

Howdy, Moz fans, and welcome to another edition of Whiteboard Friday. This week we're going to chat a little bit about information architecture, and specifically how you can organize the content of your website in such a fashion to make information architecture help your SEO and your rankings and how search engines interpret your pages and the links between those.

I want to start by talking broadly about IA and the interaction with SEO. IA is designed to say, "Hey, we want to help web users accomplish their goals on the website quickly and easily." There are many more broad things around that, but basically that's the concept.

This actually is not in conflict at all, should almost never be in conflict, even a little bit, with the goals that we have around SEO. In the past, this was not always true, and unfortunately in the past some mythology got created around the things that we have to worry about that could conflict between SEO and information architecture.

Here we've got a page that's optimal for IA, and it's got this top navigation and left side navigation, some footers, maybe a big image at the front and some text. Great, fine. Then, we have this other version that I'm not going to call it optimal for SEO, because it's actually not optimal for SEO. It is instead SEO to the max! "At the Tacoma Dome this Sunday, Sunday, Sunday!"

The problem is this is kind of taking SEO much too far. It's no longer SEO, it's SE . . . I don't know, ridiculousness.

The idea would be things like we know that keyword rich anchors are important, and linking internally we want to be descriptive. We know that as people use those terms and links other places on the web, that might help our rankings. So instead of making the navigation obvious for users, we're going to make it keyword stuffed for SEO. This makes no sense anymore, as I'm sure, hopefully, all of you know.

Text high up on the page, this actually does mean something. It used to mean a little more than it does. So maybe we're going to take oh, yeah, we want to have that leader image right up at the top because that grabs people's attention, and the headline flows nicely into that image. But for SEO purposes, we want the text to be even higher. That doesn't make any sense either.

Even if there is some part of Google's algorithm, Bing's algorithm, or Baidu's algorithm, that says, "Oh, text higher up on the page is a teensy little spattering more meaningful," this is totally overwhelmed and dwarfed by the fact that SEO today cares a ton about engagement. If people come to this page and are less engaged, are more likely to click the Back button, are less likely to stay here and consume the content and link to it and share it and all these kinds of things, it's going to lose out even to the slightly less optimized version of the page over here, which really does grab people's attention.

If your IA folks and your usability folks and your testing is showing you that that leader image up top there is grabbing people's attention and is working, don't break it by saying, "Oh, but SEO demands content higher on the page."

Likewise, if you have something where you say, "Hey, in order to flow or sculpt the link equity around these things, we don't want to link to this page and this page. We do want to link to these things. We want make sure that we've got a very keyword heavy and link heavy footer so that we can point to all the places we need to point to, even though they're not really for users. It's mostly for engines. Also, BS. One of the things that modern engines are doing is they're kind of looking and saying, "Hey, if no one uses these links to navigate internally on a site, we're not going to take them into consideration from a ranking perspective either."

They have lots of modeling and machine learning and algorithmic ways to do that, but basic story is make links for users that search engines will also care about, because that's the only thing that search engines really do want to care about. So IA and SEO, shouldn't be in conflict.

Important information architecture best practices

Now that we know this, we can move on to some important IA best practices, generally speaking IA best practices that are also SEO best practices and that most of the time, 99.99% of the time work really well together.

1. Broad-to-narrow organization

The first one, in general, it's the case that you want to do broad to narrow organization of your content. I'll show you what I mean.

Let's say that I've got a website about adorable animals, a particularly fun one this week, and on my adorable animals page I've got some subsections, sub-pages, one on the slow loris, which of course is super adorable, and hedgehogs, also super adorable. Then getting even more detailed from there, I have particular pages on hedgehogs in military uniforms -- that page is probably going to bring down the Internet because it will be so popular -- and hedgehogs wearing ridiculous hats. These are two sub-pages of my hedgehog page. My hedgehog page, subset of my adorable animals page.

This is generally speaking how I want to do things. I probably would not want to organize, at least from the top level down in my actual architecture for my site, I probably wouldn't want to say adorable animals and here's a list of hedgehogs in military uniforms, a list of hedgehogs wearing ridiculous hats, a list of slow loris licking itself. No. I want to have that organization of broad to more narrow to more narrow.

This makes general sense. By the way, for SEO purposes it does help if I link back and forth one level in each case. So for my hedgehog page, I do want to link down to my hedgehogs in military uniforms page, and I also want to link up to my adorable animals page.

You don't have to do it with exactly these keyword anchor text phrases, that kind of stuff. Just make sure that you are linking. If you want, you can use breadcrumbs. Breadcrumbs are very kind of old-fashioned, been around since the late '90s, sort of style system for showing off links, and that can work really well for some websites. It doesn't have to be the only way things can work though.

2. Link to evergreen pages from fresh content

When you're publishing fresh content is when I think many SEOs get into a lot of trouble. They're like, "Well, I have a blog that does all this, but then I have the regular parts of my site that have all of my content or my product pages or my detailed descriptions. How do I make these two things work together?"

This has actually become much easier but different in the last five or six years. It used to be the case that we would talk, in the SEO world, about not having keyword cannibalization, meaning if I've got an adorable animals page in my main section of my website, I don't actually want to publish a blog post called "New Adorable Animals to Add to My Collection," because now I'm competing with myself and I'm diluting my link juice.

Actually, this has gotten way easier. Google, and Bing as well, have become much more intelligent about identifying what's new content, what's old, sort of evergreen content, and they'll promote one. You even sometimes have an opportunity to get both in there. Certainly if you're posting fresh content that gets into Google news, the blog or the news section can be an opportunity to get in Google news. The old one can be an opportunity to just stay in the search results for a long time period. Get ting links to one doesn't actually dilute your ranking ability for the other because of how Google is doing much more topic focused associations around entire websites.

So this can be actually a really good thing. However, that being said, you do still want to try and link back to the most relevant, evergreen kind of original page. If I publish a new blog post that has some aggregation of hedgehogs in military uniforms from the Swiss Naval Academy -- I don't know why Switzerland would have a navy since they're landlocked -- I would probably want to take that hedgehogs in Swiss military uniforms and link back to my original one here.

I wouldn't necessarily want to do the same thing and link over here, unless I decide, hey, a lot of people who are interested in this are going to want to check out this article too, in which case it's fine to do that.

I would worry a little bit that sometimes people bias to quantity over quality of links internally when they're publishing their blog content or publishing these detail pages and they think, "Oh, I need to link to everything that's possibly relevant." I wouldn't do that. I would actually link to the things that you are most certain that a high number, a high percent of the users who are enjoying or visiting or consuming one page, one piece of information are really going to want in their journey. If you don't have that confidence, I wouldn't necessarily put them in there. I wouldn't try and stack those up with tons of extra links.

Like I said, you don't need to worry about keyword cannibalization. If you want to publish a new article every week about hedgehogs in military uniforms, you go for it. That's a great blog.

3. Make sub-pages if intent is unique, combine if not

Number three, and the last one here, make these sub-pages when there's unique intent. Information architecture is actually really good about this in practice. They basically say, "Hey, why would we create a new page if we already have a page that serves the same goals and same intent?" One of the reasons that people used to say, "Well, I know that we have that, but it doesn't do a great job of targeting phrase A and phrase B, which both have the same intent but aren't going to rank for those two separate phrases A and B."

That's also not the case anymore in the SEO world. Google and Bing have both become incredibly good at sorting out searcher intent and matching those to the pages and the keywords that fit those intents, even if the keyword match isn't perfect one-to-one exact.

So if I've got a page that's on slow lorises yawning and another one on slow lorises that are sleepy, are those really all that different? Is the intent of the searcher very different? When someone is searching for a sleepy loris, are they looking for one that's probably yawning? Yeah. You know what? I would say these are the same intent. I would make a single page for them.

However, over here I've got a slow loris in a sombrero and a slow loris wearing a top hat. Now, these are two very different kinds of head wear, and people who are searching for sombreros are not going to want to find a slow loris wearing a top hat. They might want to see a cross link over between them. They might say, "Oh, top hat wearing slow lorises are also interesting to me." But this is very specific intent, different from this one. Two different intents means two different pages.

That's how I do all of my information architecture when it comes to a keyword and SEO perspective. You want to go broad to narrow. You want to not worry too much about publishing fresh content, but you do want to link back to the original evergreen. You want to make sure that if there are pages or intents that are exactly the same, you make a single page. If they're intents that are different, you have different pages targeting those different intents.

All right everyone, look forward to the comments, and we'll see you again next week for another edition of Whiteboard Friday. Take care.

Video transcription by Speechpad.com


Sign up for The Moz Top 10, a semimonthly mailer updating you on the top ten hottest pieces of SEO news, tips, and rad links uncovered by the Moz team. Think of it as your exclusive digest of stuff you don't have time to hunt down but want to read!

Seth's Blog : This or that vs. yes or no

This or that vs. yes or no

It's much easier to persuade a philanthropist to fund your project than it is to persuade a rich person to become a philanthropist.

Encouraging someone to shift slightly, to pick this instead of that, is a totally different endeavor than working to turn a no into a yes, to change an entire pattern of behavior.

When looking to grow, start with people who already believe that they have a problem you can help them solve.

       

More Recent Articles

[You're getting this note because you subscribed to Seth Godin's blog.]

Don't want to get this email anymore? Click the link below to unsubscribe.



Email subscriptions powered by FeedBlitz, LLC, 365 Boston Post Rd, Suite 123, Sudbury, MA 01776, USA.

joi, 18 decembrie 2014

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis


Competitive Theories: "Deflation Warning" vs. "Inflation is Nearly Everywhere"

Posted: 18 Dec 2014 05:22 PM PST

Theory #1: Break-Even Rates Provide "Deflation Warning"

Bloomberg is sounding a Deflation Warning as 2-Year Break-Even Rates Go Negative.

Break-even rates are the difference between treasuries and the same-duration Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities (TIPS). The break-even rate turned negative yesterday for the first time since 2009.

In theory, break-even rates reflect investors' expectations for inflation over the life of the securities.

When break-even rates are negative, it's an indication investors expect price deflation for the duration, in this case for two years.

From Bloomberg ...
The drop in the break-even rate followed a Labor Department report yesterday that showed consumer prices dropped 0.3 percent in November, the most in almost six years, on tumbling energy prices. Principal and interest payments on Treasury Inflation Protected Securities are indexed to changes in the consumer price index, so a lower than forecast CPI diminishes the value of projected future payments from TIPS.

The break-even rate dropped to negative 0.035 percent yesterday. The difference was 0.024 percent today.

The negative break-even rate represents "an uncertainty premium that maybe oil could fall to $40 a barrel," said Donald Ellenberger, who oversees about $10 billion as head of multi-sector strategies at Federated Investors in Pittsburgh. "The shortest-term TIPS are very influenced by the direction of the consumer price index. It's telling you inflation on the short-end could turn negative."

Fed Chair Janet Yellen downplayed the notion at the press conference after the conclusion of yesterday's two-day policy meeting. Falling break-even rates may represent a decline in the inflation premium risk or the range of inflation outcomes investors are taking into consideration, she said. One of the justifications for the Fed to raise rates for the first time since 2006 is to keep consumer price increases from getting out of control.
Out of Control Consumer Prices?

Color me extremely skeptical regarding out of control consumer prices. In fact, I side with this headline: Krugman, Fighting Consensus, Says 2015 Fed Rate Increase Is Unlikely.
Paul Krugman, challenging the consensus of economists and the Federal Reserve's forecasts, said policy makers are unlikely to raise interest rates in 2015 as they struggle to spur inflation amid sluggish global economic growth.

"When push comes to shove they're going to look and say: 'It's a pretty weak world economy out there, we don't see any inflation, and the risk if we raise rates and it turns out we were mistaken is just so huge'," the 2008 Nobel laureate said in Dubai. "It's certainly a real possibility that they'll go ahead and do it, but probably not, and for what it's worth I and others are trying to bully them into not doing it."
Agreement With Krugman

Aside from that last sentence, I am in general agreement with Krugman.

Please read carefully. Although I endorse Krugman's belief about how the Fed will react, I do not endorse the policy itself.

Krugman precisely summed up how economic illiterates at the Fed think (and that is how Krugman, thinks as well).

No bullying by Krugman is needed. The Fed already thinks like he does.

Jean-Claude Yellen

Please consider Krugman's December 10th column Jean-Claude Yellen.

In his post, Krugman says Jean-Claude Trichet's decision to raise rates in Europe in 2011 "a big mistake", just as the Swedish Riksbank's early rate hike was a "mistake", just as Japan's rate hike in 2000 was a "mistake".

The notion that a quarter-point hike caused Europe's problem is absurd. Moreover, I propose Krugman understands just that.

Keynesian or Austrian theory aside, the notion that one interest rate can serve the likes of widely differing fiscal policies in Germany, France, Spain, Ireland, Grecee, etc. is preposterous. Krugman has to know that!

If I am wrong, and Krugman cares to disagree, then I welcome the rationale.

Krugman continues ...

"Suppose, on the other hand, that the Fed raises rates, and it turns out that it should have waited. This could all too easily prove disastrous. The economy could slide into a low-inflation trap in which zero interest rates aren't low enough to achieve escape — which has happened in Japan and is pretty clearly happening in the euro area."

Yes Japan is in a trap, and the reason is Japan did precisely what Krugman wanted - wasted money on inane projects to "stimulate" the economy!

Reasonable people would intuitively understand that as soon as stimulus was removed, the recovery would end too (over and over and over again).

And any economist with an ounce of common sense would understand that the buildup of debt would require lower and lower interest rates to service! The alleged "trap" happens precisely because central bank fools fight short-term imbalances, creating long-term problems in the wake.

I don't think the Fed will hike, but they sure as hell should have long ago. Repetitive bubbles of increasing magnitude bring upon the very thing Krugman rails about!

I will expound more on rate hikes and inflation in a bit, but for now let's continue with more of Krugman's rant this time in block quotes because of the length
My guess — and it's only that — is that they [the Fed] have, maybe without knowing it, been bludgeoned into submission by the constant attacks on easy money. Every day the financial press, many of the blogs, cable financial news, etc., are full of people warning that the Fed's low-rate policy is distorting markets, building up inflationary pressure, endangering financials stability. Hard-money arguments, no matter how ludicrous, get respectful attention; condemnations of the Fed are constant. If I were a Fed official, I suspect that I would often find myself wishing that the bludgeoning would just stop, at least for a while — and perhaps begin looking for an opportunity to prove that I'm not an inflationary money-printer, that I can take away punchbowls too.

But the objective case for a rate hike just isn't there. The risks of premature tightening are huge, and should not be taken until we have a truly solid recovery that includes strong wage gains and inflation clearly on track to rise above target. We don't have any of that, and if the Fed acts nonetheless, it has the makings of tragedy.
Objective Case

Krugman does not see the "objective case" for rate hikes for the simple reason he is totally clueless about what constitutes inflation!

That assertion brings up my point of view ...

Inflation is Nearly Everywhere You Look

Inflation is not quite everywhere, just nearly everywhere. Looking for price deflation? Yes, you can find it in the price of gasoline.

And across the board there is little CPI inflation, nor will there be any time soon. And on those scores I am in complete agreement with Krugman!

But that's not what inflation is really about. Inflation is really about the expansion of money supply and credit. When those soar, so does "real" inflation.

Any realistic look shows there is inflation in home prices (not in the CPI), sovereign bond prices (not in the CPI), equity prices (not in the CPI), student loans (not in the CPI), junk bond prices at amazingly low yields (not in the CPI), tuition (underrepresented in the CPI for many), and healthcare costs (underrepresented in the CPI in general).

Break-Even Theory Irrelevant

The break-even rate theory warns about consumer prices. That theory may or may not be correct. I think the theory is accurate, but it matters not given all the things it totally or partially ignores. Break-even theory is totally irrelevant "at best", but more likely counterproductive.

In contrast, asset bubble breakages are relevant. And the Fed just blew the second or third biggest asset bubble in history following the advice of Krugman.

Now Krugman wants to bully the Fed into halting the hikes. The irony is that it's already far too late to hike. The bubbles have been blown. By definition they will pop. And when they pop economic illiterates like Krugman will say "I told you so" while blaming the Fed for irrelevant actions like rates hikes of 0.25%.

Economic Illiterates Caused the Problems

Economic illiterates at central banks following horrible advice from fellow economic illiterates like Krugman are the ones who caused the problem in Europe, in Japan, and in the US.

Opposite Extreme Illiterates Make Krugman Look Good

Unfortunately, economic illiterates of the opposite extreme, people like Peter Schiff, John Williams, etc., have been screaming about the blow-up of the US dollar and/or hyperinflation for so long they actually make Krugman's theories look reasonable by comparison (at least for now).

Deflation Will Return

Credit deflation (and that's what's important) will return (fueled by a decline in asset prices). Policies espoused by Krugman and enacted by central banks will be the cause.

Asset Deflation vs. Consumer Price Deflation

For more on asset deflation (the real concern) vs. consumer price deflation (a welcome event), please see ...


I particularly would like to see Paul Krugman answer my Challenge to Keynesians "Prove Rising Prices Provide an Overall Economic Benefit".

I even challenge Krugman to a debate, with proceeds going to charity. I doubt Krugman will respond for the simple reason I will be a far more formidable challenge than the hyperinflationists who have been as wrong as he is.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Students Support Deporting US Citizens to Allow Illegal Immigrants to Stay

Posted: 18 Dec 2014 11:23 AM PST

Here's an amusing but totally unscientific informal poll on how to tackle the illegal immigrant problem.

Students were asked if they would sign a petition to deport US citizens on a one-for-one basis in exchange for allowing illegal immigrants to stay in the US.



Link if video does not play: Deport US Citizens to Keep Illegal Immigrants?

The people who conducted this experiment said about 2/3 of the college students signed the petition.

What does this suggest, if anything, about the quality of our education system? Or is it simply proof that people in general do not listen?

Support for the Plan

Such questions aside, I actually think this is a brilliant plan, with just one minor modification: We have to have sufficient grounds for deporting.

I suggest war crimes are sufficient grounds. More specifically, I propose we deport to an international war crimes tribunal a select group of the worst war crimes offenders.

Top Five War Crimes Candidates

  1. Former Vice President Dick Cheney
  2. Former President George Bush 
  3. Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld 
  4. Former CIA director George Tenet
  5. President Barack Obama - for drone policy

Cheney, Bush, and Rumsfeld would be on charges of various war crimes, bombings, and torture. Tenet would be for torture. Obama would be for indiscriminate killing of innocent men, women, and children via his drone policy.

Doesn't that look like a good start?

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com