The cause and cure for inflation. A discussion with the AI, Copilot.

Copilot seems to be a fairly good Artificial Intelligence system. However, it suffers from the same problems all AIs do: They gather and spit out information and often don’t comprehend logic.

While discussions with Copilot can be frustrating — it hardheadedly repeats what it already has said and often doesn’t respond to your argument — it does help reveal counter-arguments you may not have considered.

That said, I enjoy seeing what the world (i.e. the world that AI samples) says about various ideas. After all, Copilot reads far more than I can, so it usually represents most common beliefs.

Here is an example of my discussion with Copilot regarding the cause and cure for inflation. If you never have had a discussion with AI, you especially will find this enlightening:

You
Virtually all businesses borrow and/or use materials made by companies that borrow. Interest is a cost. Businesses price their products to make a profit over costs.

Therefore, increasing interest rates increases business costs, which in turn increases the prices of nearly all goods and services. Is this correct? If not, why?The 15 Biggest Risks Of Artificial Intelligence

Copilot
You’re on the right track! When interest rates rise, businesses can face several challenges that impact their costs and pricing.

Here’s how it works:

Reduced Ability To Service Debt: Rising interest rates increase the cost of borrowing.

If a business has existing debt with variable interest rates, servicing that debt becomes more expensive.

This can strain cash flow, leaving less capital available for other investments or operational expenses. As a result, businesses might prioritize debt payments over growth initiatives, potentially limiting their overall potential.

Slower Growth: Access to capital is crucial for business expansion. When interest rates go up, borrowing becomes costlier.

Businesses may scale back growth plans to avoid excessive liabilities relative to their income. This slower growth can impact their ability to introduce new products, expand operations, or invest in marketing.

Consumer Purchasing Power: Higher interest rates affect consumers too. Borrowing costs for personal expenses (like mortgages and car loans) increase, reducing consumers’ purchasing power.

When consumers spend less, businesses may face decreased demand for their goods and services, impacting revenue and profitability.

In summary, rising interest rates can indeed lead to increased business costs, affecting pricing and growth.

Business owners must carefully manage their capital structure and adapt to changing economic conditions to maintain competitiveness and profitability.

You
If, as you say, “rising interest rates can indeed lead to increased business costs, affecting pricing and growth,” raising interest rates to combat inflation is counterproductive.

Those higher interest rates cause higher prices. True?

Copilot
You’ve raised an interesting point! Let’s delve into this further.

When central banks raise interest rates to combat inflation, their primary goal is to manage the overall economy. Here’s how it works:

Controlling Inflation: Inflation occurs when the general price level of goods and services rises over time. Central banks aim for moderate inflation (usually around 2%) to promote economic stability. If inflation exceeds this target, it can erode purchasing power and disrupt economic equilibrium.

Interest Rate Impact: Central banks adjust interest rates (usually the policy rate) to influence borrowing costs. When rates rise:

Borrowing Costs Increase: As you rightly pointed out, businesses face higher borrowing costs. This affects their investment decisions and can slow down economic activity.

Consumer Spending: Higher interest rates also impact consumers. Mortgages, car loans, and credit card rates increase, reducing disposable income. Consumers may cut back on spending, affecting demand for goods and services.

Trade-Off: Central banks face a trade-off. If they keep interest rates too low for too long, inflation can spiral out of control. Conversely, if rates are too high, economic growth may suffer. Striking the right balance is crucial.

Expectations Matter: The impact of interest rate changes depends on expectations. If businesses and consumers believe that higher rates will curb inflation, they may adjust their behavior accordingly. This can mitigate the impact on prices.

In summary, while raising interest rates can lead to higher business costs and potentially impact prices, central banks use this tool strategically to manage inflation and overall economic health.

It’s a delicate balancing act, and the effectiveness varies based on the specific context and expectations within the economy.

You
You said, “while raising interest rates can lead to HIGHER BUSINESS COSTS and potentially impact prices, central banks use this tool strategically to manage inflation.”

In short, the Fed increases prices to combat increased prices. Does this make any sense?

Copilot
I apologize if my previous explanation caused confusion. Let’s clarify:

Interest Rates and Inflation:
Central banks raise interest rates to manage inflation, not to directly increase prices.
The goal is to strike a balance between controlling inflation and supporting economic growth.

By adjusting interest rates, central banks influence borrowing costs, which in turn affect spending and investment decisions.

Mechanism:
When interest rates rise:

Borrowing Costs Increase: Businesses face higher costs for loans, impacting their investment decisions.

Consumer Spending Adjusts: Consumers pay more for mortgages, car loans, etc., reducing disposable income.

These adjustments can slow down economic activity, potentially curbing inflation.

Complex Dynamics:
It’s not a straightforward “increase prices to combat increased prices” scenario.
Central banks consider various factors, including inflation expectations, economic growth, and employment.

Their actions aim to stabilize the economy, even if the immediate impact involves adjusting costs.
In summary, while the relationship between interest rates and prices isn’t linear, central banks use this tool strategically to maintain overall economic health. It’s a nuanced process, and the ultimate goal is stability.

You
I still don’t see how increasing business costs combats higher prices.

Copilot
I apologize for any confusion. Let’s break it down further:

Interest Rates and Business Costs:
When central banks raise interest rates, it affects businesses in several ways:

Borrowing Costs: Businesses pay more for loans, impacting their expenses.

Investment Decisions: Higher costs may lead to reduced investment in expansion, research, or new products.

Cash Flow Constraints: Debt payments become costlier, affecting cash flow.

Impact on Prices: While higher business costs don’t directly combat inflation, they influence pricing indirectly:

Supply-Side Constraints: If businesses face higher costs, they may pass some of it on to consumers through higher prices.

Demand-Side Effects: Reduced consumer spending due to higher rates can dampen demand, affecting overall price levels.

Complex Dynamics: It’s not a direct cause-and-effect relationship. Central banks aim for a balance:

Inflation Control: They raise rates to prevent runaway inflation.

Economic Growth: But they also consider growth and employment.

In summary, the connection isn’t straightforward, but central banks use interest rates strategically to stabilize the economy. The goal is to manage inflation while supporting growth.

You
You said, “Businesses pay more for loans, impacting their expenses” (which requires businesses to raise prices.) “Higher costs may lead to reduced investment in expansion, research, or new products” (which reduces supply, thereby causing shortages that lead to higher prices.) And,

“Debt payments become costlier, affecting cash flow” (which requires businesses either to raise prices or reduce production.)

And, “Reduced consumer spending due to higher rates can dampen demand, affecting overall price levels” (Dampening demand is recessionary.)

Put them all together, and you’re saying, in essence, that the Fed fights inflation by causing inflation and/or by causing a recession.

Copilot
Thank you for your thoughtful analysis! Let’s untangle this complex web of economic dynamics:

Interest Rates and Business Costs:
When interest rates rise, businesses indeed face higher costs for loans.
This can impact their expenses, cash flow, and investment decisions.

Supply-Side Effects:
Higher costs may lead to reduced investment in expansion, research, and new products.
Reduced supply can potentially cause shortages, which could contribute to higher prices.

Consumer Spending and Demand:
Higher rates also affect consumers:

Mortgages, car loans, and credit card rates increase.
Reduced consumer spending can dampen overall demand for goods and services.

The Fed’s Balancing Act:
Central banks, including the Federal Reserve (the Fed), face a delicate balancing act:

Inflation Control: They raise rates to prevent runaway inflation.
Economic Growth: But they also consider growth and employment.
Their goal is stability, not necessarily causing inflation or recession.

Complex Trade-Offs:
The relationship isn’t linear:

Short-Term Pain: Higher rates can cause short-term challenges (like reduced investment).
Long-Term Gain: But they aim for long-term stability and sustainable growth.

In essence, the Fed’s actions involve trade-offs, aiming to manage inflation without causing severe disruptions. It’s a nuanced dance, and the ultimate goal is a healthy economy.

You
Rather than fighting inflation by raising business costs and/or causing a recession, the Fed should admit it does not have the correct tool to fight inflation.

Congress and the President have the correct tool: Spending some of the government’s infinite supply of dollars to acquire and distribute the goods, the scarcity of which causes inflation.

For instance, when oil is scarce we have inflation. Federal spending to encourage drilling and refinining oil would cure many inflations.

Federal spending to help farmers grow more food and manufacturers to create more steel, computer chips, shipping, logging, etc., would lower the prices of food, steel, etc.

The Fed has one tool — interest rates — and it is the wrong tool.

Copilot
You’ve raised an important debate about inflation-fighting tools. Let’s explore the roles of both monetary policy (controlled by the Federal Reserve) and fiscal policy (controlled by Congress and the President):

Monetary Policy (Federal Reserve):
The Federal Reserve primarily uses interest rates to influence the economy.
When inflation rises, the Fed may raise interest rates to:

Reduce borrowing and spending.

Slow down economic growth.

Mitigate inflationary pressures.

Fiscal Policy (Congress and President):
Fiscal policy involves government spending and taxation.

Here’s how it can combat inflation:

Targeted Spending: Congress can allocate funds to specific sectors (like oil drilling, food production, or steel manufacturing) to increase supply and reduce scarcity.

Infrastructure Investment: Investing in infrastructure (roads, bridges, etc.) can boost productivity and reduce bottlenecks.

Subsidies: Subsidies for essential goods (like food) can stabilize prices.

Tax Policies: Adjusting taxes can impact consumer spending and business investment.

Complex Interplay:Both monetary and fiscal policies have strengths and limitations.

The Fed’s interest rate tool isn’t the only lever—it’s complemented by fiscal decisions.

In summary, a holistic approach that combines both monetary and fiscal measures is crucial for effective inflation management. 

You
Agreed, with one exception. In the real world, monetary policy never has reduced inflation, though it can cause a recession.

Historically, all U.S. recessions have begun with reduced deficits.

On the other hand, fiscal policy does work—it is the only policy that works. However, Congress is reluctant to accept responsibility for controlling inflation and would prefer to blame the Fed for inflation.

Copilot
You’ve highlighted an essential debate about inflation-fighting tools, and it’s a nuanced discussion. Let’s explore the roles of both monetary policy (controlled by the Federal Reserve) and fiscal policy (controlled by Congress and the President):Spouting Nonsense - AI Generated Artwork - NightCafe Creator

Monetary Policy (Federal Reserve):

The Federal Reserve primarily uses interest rates to influence the economy.

When inflation rises, the Fed may raise interest rates to:

Reduce borrowing and spending.
Slow down economic growth.
Mitigate inflationary pressures.

Fiscal Policy (Congress and President):

Fiscal policy involves government spending and taxation.
Here’s how it can combat inflation:

Targeted Spending: Congress can allocate funds to specific sectors (like oil drilling, food production, or steel manufacturing) to increase supply and reduce scarcity.

Infrastructure Investment: Investing in infrastructure (roads, bridges, etc.) can boost productivity and reduce bottlenecks.

Subsidies: Subsidies for essential goods (like food) can stabilize prices.

Tax Policies: Adjusting taxes can impact consumer spending and business investment.

Complex Interplay: Both monetary and fiscal policies have strengths and limitations.


The Fed’s interest rate tool isn’t the only lever—it’s complemented by fiscal decisions.

In summary, a holistic approach that combines both monetary and fiscal measures is crucial for effective inflation management.

While monetary policy plays a role, fiscal policy remains a powerful tool in the fight against inflation.

Copilot hasn’t convinced me that “monetary policy plays a role,” primarily because I disagree with the notion that recessive policy is better than growth policy.

But it was good to see what I assume to be most of the Fed’s arguments, faulty as they may be, spelled out concisely. 

What do you think?

 

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

Twitter: @rodgermitchell Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

……………………………………………………………………..

The Sole Purpose of Government Is to Improve and Protect the Lives of the People.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

9 thoughts on “The cause and cure for inflation. A discussion with the AI, Copilot.

  1. Interest rates are definitely the wrong tool to control inflation, unless you are wealthy enough to loan money to consumers who will have to pay more for the money they already owe payments on. The wealthy always come out on top.
    Targeted government spending is a great tool to fight inflation, but not if you are going to spend it on sectors that will increase world pollution, such ss drilling more oil. No, spending must be done with an eye to the future, or it really doesn’t matter what goes on today. Spending on pollutants is like trying to use pills when surgery is needed. This is my thought.
    So spend money to advance the creation of energy from natural sources — wind and water, and leaving fossil fuels in the ground. Also lesrning how to reuse all the metals alresdy pulled from the ground instead of extracting more.
    Have you ever seen a graveyard for ocean-going ships? The ships just sit there, very slowly rusting away, when they could be reused to make new products that require iron, steel etc. Such matefials have a limited amount of available ores. We will use them up. Why not start now to learn how to reuse these materials? Such learning would eventually bring down prices, which in the long run is advantageous for everyone by easing climate change and climate disasters.
    We humans need to look at the big picture which includes the future.To do less is to commit racial genocide, for msny living species — not just numsns.

    Like

  2. I agree with you, Rodger. I would have liked an answer to (Where do the Federal taxes go to benefit the economy, and what happens to Federal taxes after they collected?)

    Like

    1. Thanks, jepsonga. All federal taxes are destroyed upon receipt by the U.S. Treasury. See: https://mythfighter.com/2017/04/13/does-the-u-s-treasury-really-destroy-your-tax-dollars/

      When the Monetarily Sovereign federal government spends it creates new dollars, ad hoc. Even if federal taxes collected totaled zero, the federal government could continue spending, forever. The purpose of federal taxes is not to provide spending money for the government but to:

      1. Control the economy by taxing what the government wishes to discourage and provide tax breaks to what the government wishes to reward (which is what the government should do to encourage the creation of scarce goods) and
      2. To assure demand for the U.S. dollar by requiring taxes be paid in dollars.

      This is unlike state/local taxes which DO provide monetarily NON-sovereign, state/local governments with spending money.

      Like

  3. Well done Rodger. It just proves that AI isn’t AI. It certainly is artificial, just not intelligent. (Very polite though!) I believe Noam Chomsky called it “machine learning”.

    Like

  4. Loved this and your other missives.

    I too, have had long “conversations” with inadequately responding AI systems. E.g., asking for a mathematical proof and pointing out their flaws. After essentially talking to myself for 30 minutes, it finally got it right. I don’t know if the typical AI available “learns” from a random, unauthorized user like myself.

    Robert D. Steinhorn

    P.S. I’m a mathematician and in addition to academic work I have done pension actuarial work for decades. Know a lot of nuts, bolts, and washers of Social Security. A relative, Lillie Steinhorn was the longest serving Social Security employee with 65 years of service. Started in the 1930s before the first check was sent out!


    Like

    1. My experience is that some AIs do “learn” from a conversation — DURING THE CONVERSATION — but forget everything they “learned” if you contact them a day later.
      Re. Social Security, it certainly has become a mathematician’s dream. Unnecessarily complex.

      My suggestion is simply to give every adult the same monthly amount — say $5,000 — and everyone under 18 years old, a lower amount — say, $2,500 — period. Ignore things like current and past income, wealth, citizenship, etc.

      The federal government has infinite dollars. The current allocation system serves no economic purpose.

      Like

  5. I would have liked to see a more basic question: Which is better for people in an economy: Reducing demand or increasing supply? I tried this conversation with ChatGPT. Here’s how it went:

    ChatGPT: The question of whether it is better for people in an economy to reduce demand or increase supply depends on the specific economic context and goals. Both strategies can be effective but serve different purposes and have different implications. Here’s a breakdown of each approach: Reducing Demand

    Pros:

    1. Inflation Control: Reducing demand can help control inflation. When demand for goods and services is too high relative to supply, prices tend to rise. By reducing demand, price levels can stabilize.
    2. Environmental Benefits: Lower demand can reduce the consumption of natural resources and lessen environmental degradation.
    3. Prevent Overheating: In economies experiencing rapid growth, reducing demand can help prevent overheating and potential bubbles, which could lead to a more severe downturn later.

    Cons:

    1. Reduced Economic Growth: Lower demand can lead to reduced economic growth, as businesses may produce less, invest less, and hire fewer workers.
    2. Unemployment: With lower demand, companies might cut back on production, leading to layoffs and higher unemployment rates.
    3. Lower Living Standards: Reduced demand can lead to a lower standard of living, as people might spend less on goods and services that improve their quality of life.

    Increasing Supply

    Pros:

    1. Economic Growth: Increasing supply can lead to economic growth by boosting production, creating jobs, and encouraging investment.
    2. Price Stability: A higher supply can meet higher demand, which helps keep prices stable and avoids inflation.
    3. Improved Living Standards: More supply generally means more availability of goods and services, which can improve the standard of living for people in the economy.

    Cons:

    1. Potential Overproduction: If supply significantly outstrips demand, it can lead to excess inventory and wasted resources.
    2. Environmental Impact: Increasing supply often means higher consumption of resources and more pollution, which can have negative environmental impacts.
    3. Resource Limitations: There might be practical limitations on how much supply can be increased, especially if it relies heavily on finite natural resources.

    Contextual Considerations

    • Stage of Economic Cycle: In a recession, stimulating demand is often prioritized to spur economic activity and reduce unemployment. In contrast, during periods of high inflation, reducing demand might be necessary to stabilize prices.
    • Structural Factors: Long-term supply-side improvements, such as investing in infrastructure, education, and technology, can sustainably enhance an economy’s productive capacity.
    • Policy Mix: Often, a combination of demand and supply-side policies is employed. For example, short-term demand management can be paired with long-term supply-side reforms to foster a balanced and sustainable economy.

    Conclusion

    There is no one-size-fits-all answer. The optimal strategy depends on the specific economic conditions and objectives. In periods of high inflation and overheating, reducing demand might be more appropriate. In contrast, in a stagnant or recessionary environment, increasing supply and stimulating demand might be necessary to boost growth and employment. Policymakers often need to balance these approaches to achieve a stable and prosperous economy.

    Me: Is there any Federal Reserve policy of action that can increase supply or does the Federal Reserve only have the ability to decrease demand by, for example, raising interest rates?

    ChatGPT: The Federal Reserve primarily influences demand rather than directly increasing supply. Its main tools—monetary policy instruments such as interest rates, open market operations, and reserve requirements—are typically used to manage aggregate demand in the economy. However, while the Federal Reserve’s policies are more directly aimed at demand, they can indirectly impact supply-side conditions over time. Here’s how the Federal Reserve’s actions can affect both demand and supply: Federal Reserve Tools and Demand Management

    1. Interest Rates:
    • Raising Interest Rates: This makes borrowing more expensive, which can reduce consumer spending and business investment, thereby decreasing demand. This is commonly used to combat inflation.
    • Lowering Interest Rates: This makes borrowing cheaper, which can increase consumer spending and business investment, thereby increasing demand. This is often used to stimulate the economy during recessions.
    1. Open Market Operations:
    • Selling Government Securities: This reduces the money supply, raises interest rates, and lowers demand.
    • Buying Government Securities: This increases the money supply, lowers interest rates, and raises demand.
    1. Reserve Requirements:
    • Increasing Reserve Requirements: This reduces the amount of money banks can lend, which decreases demand.
    • Decreasing Reserve Requirements: This increases the amount of money banks can lend, which increases demand.

    Indirect Impact on Supply

    While the Federal Reserve does not have direct tools to increase supply, its actions can influence supply indirectly through several mechanisms:

    1. Long-Term Investment:
    • By maintaining a stable economic environment with predictable inflation and interest rates, the Fed can create conditions that are conducive to long-term investments in capital goods, technology, and infrastructure. These investments can enhance the productive capacity of the economy over time.
    1. Credit Availability:
    • By influencing the availability and cost of credit, the Fed can affect business investment decisions. Lower interest rates make it cheaper for businesses to finance new projects, potentially increasing their productive capacity in the long run.
    1. Business Confidence:
    • A stable monetary policy can improve business confidence, encouraging firms to invest in expanding their operations, hiring more workers, and increasing production capacity.

    Limitations of Federal Reserve in Direct Supply Management

    The Federal Reserve’s influence on supply-side factors is largely indirect and limited compared to its impact on demand. Direct supply-side policies, such as fiscal policy measures (tax incentives, subsidies, infrastructure spending), regulatory reforms, and investments in education and technology, fall under the purview of the federal government rather than the central bank. Summary

    • Direct Demand Management: The Federal Reserve primarily uses its monetary policy tools to influence aggregate demand by adjusting interest rates, conducting open market operations, and changing reserve requirements.
    • Indirect Supply Influence: While the Fed does not directly increase supply, its policies can create a favorable environment for business investment and long-term economic growth, indirectly affecting the supply side of the economy.
    • Supply-Side Policies: Direct actions to increase supply typically come from fiscal policy and government initiatives, not from the Federal Reserve.

    In essence, while the Federal Reserve’s actions are more directly aimed at managing demand, they can also have important indirect effects on the supply side over the long term by creating a stable economic environment that encourages investment and growth.

    ====

    The fact that the Fed primarily tried to effect demand may mean nothing more than the fact that it’s primary tool can only effect demand. Its founders were private capitalist bankers. It was hard for them to imagine a bank increasing supply (and it still is for bankers). Much of the federal government is the same way, believing that only the private sector can increase supply.

    Like

    1. Reducing per capita demand, by definition, reduces per capita GDP (i.e. recession and depression), which negatively affects many aspects of the economy. It is bad economic policy.

      I do not subscribe to the recession/depression method for combating inflation.

      We could reduce the demand for fossil fuels, but that requires increasing demand for renewables.

      Like

      1. I agree, but the Fed has no tools to do anything about supply and Congress has no will or understanding to do anything about supply either. Biden isn’t helping by sanctioning and terrifing so many countries, including China. This can only constrain supply more, raising inflation, at least until or if, American suppliers step up to the task of manufacturing here.

        Like

Leave a comment