–Can increased federal deficit spending actually prevent inflation?

The debt hawks are to economics as the creationists are to biology. Those, who do not understand Monetary Sovereignty, do not understand economics. If you understand the following, simple statement, you are ahead of most economists, politicians and media writers in America: Our government, being Monetarily Sovereign, has the unlimited ability to create the dollars to pay its bills.
==============================================================================================================================================================================

Can increased federal deficit spending actually prevent inflation?

TIME magazine recently ran an article about inflation, which supplements what I’ve written earlier about the cause of inflation (See: The Cause of Inflation)

Think Commodity Prices Are High Now? Just Wait
Posted by ZACHARY KARABELL Monday, May 16, 2011

The just-released monthly inflation report showed that prices for most goods eased a bit. The exception of course is oil, and even though oil prices globally have declined in recent weeks, most Americans are paying ever more for gasoline even as inflation overall remains statistically tame.
[. . .]
But the real issue today is that inflation is almost entirely a product of rising raw material costs and for now, these are being born not by individuals but by companies. Many economists assume that eventually, these rising input costs will be passed on to consumers in the form of higher price tags.
[…]
The emerging world is hungry for goods, for food, cars, appliances, gadgets, homes, and clothing. And governments in Sao Paulo, Beijing, and New Delhi are authorizing vast spending on modern infrastructure. China’s is well known, but Brazil and India both have significant needs that are only now beginning to be met.

I just returned from a conference with some of the world’s leading money managers, and one theme was clear: there has been massive underinvestment in the global supply chain of industrial metals and raw materials. This is less about oil and gas than about things like copper, iron ore, palladium, titanium, zinc, rhodium, and a host of other “iums” that are the essential, irreplaceable inputs for the industrial world that we all inhabit and that billions are on their way to inhabiting. Simply put there is yawning gulf between demand and supply. . .

That means we are in for a period of rising commodity inflation, including oil and of course food as more people consumer more calories and crop yields strain to increase.
[. . .]
So unless China truly implodes or Brazil stops growing, or hundreds of millions in India and Indonesia stop believing that they have a right to the same middle class lifestyle that has characterized the West for the past century, we are at the early stages of a spike in commodity prices the likes of which we have never seen. And judging from debates in Washington over how much to spend on Planned Parenthood and how much to reduce pension of state workers, we are nowhere near prepared for this world that we are entering.

Debt-hawks endlessly cite the Weimar Republic’s hyper-inflation (which occurred 90 years ago under special economic circumstances) as an example of what growing U.S. federal deficits will cause “soon,” “some day” or “inevitably.” Factually they are wrong.

Hyper-inflation has been caused by circumstances unique to each affected nation, but always involve massive printing of money in response to existing inflation, not as the cause of, inflation. Analogy: Gasoline is necessary to make a car run, but if the car bursts into flame, you don’t keep adding gasoline. Hyperinflated nations pour gasoline on an already burning car.

Mr. Karabell writes the truth. Historically, inflation has been caused by rising production costs. In the economists’ mantra, “Inflation is too much money chasing too few goods.” The debt hawks focus on the “too much money” side, while the real cause has been too few (or really, too expensive) basic goods. Oil, whose price is manipulated, has been the main culprit, (See: INFLATION) and as a result of insufficient spending on basics, many other commodities are about to have increased involvement.

So yes, there will be inflation, “soon,” “some day” or “inevitably,” just as the debt-hawks predict, but the cause will not be federal deficit spending, as they surely will claim, but rather, oil prices and shortages of other basics.

In fact, inflation could be prevented were the U.S. to pump more money into oil exploration, other energy development, mining, plant and equipment development, R&D of all types, farming, wood and other basics. Pumping more money would include tax breaks as well as deficit spending.

To build our economy efficiently, we need increased investment in its foundations.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com


==========================================================================================================================================
No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth. It’s been 40 years since the U.S. became Monetary Sovereign, , and neither Congress, nor the President, nor the Fed, nor the vast majority of economists and economics bloggers, nor the preponderance of the media, nor the most famous educational institutions, nor the Nobel committee, nor the International Monetary Fund have yet acquired even the slightest notion of what that means.

Remember that the next time you’re tempted to ask a dopey teenager, “What were you thinking?” He’s liable to respond, “Pretty much what your generation was thinking when it screwed up my future.”

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

–Open letter to John Mauldin re. his myths

      John Mauldin is President of Millennium Wave Advisors, LLC (MWA) which is an investment advisory firm registered with multiple states. He also is a registered representative of Millennium Wave Securities, LLC, (MWS) an NASD registered broker-dealer. He is the author of Thoughts from the Frontline, a blog at Mauldin.
      Recently, Mr. Mauldin wrote an article for his blog, and I wrote to him with a critique, as follows:

5/9/10
Mr. Mauldin:

      This note is sent to you in the spirit of helpfulness. Your article titled “The Center Cannot Hold,” quoting G. Cecchetti, M. S. Mohanty, and Fabrizio Zampolli contains several widely quoted, commonly believed myths. For example:

      Myth: “Long before we get to the place where we in the US are paying 20% of our GDP in interest (which would be about 80% of our tax collections, even with much higher tax rates) the bond market, not to mention taxpayers, will revolt. The paper’s authors clearly show that the current course is not sustainable.”
      Fact: Federal borrowing no longer (after 1971) is necessary nor even desirable. See: How to Eliminate Federal Deficits

      Myth: “A higher level of public debt implies that a larger share of society’s resources is permanently being spent servicing the debt. This means that a government intent on maintaining a given level of public services and transfers must raise taxes as debt increases.”
      Fact: Society’s resources do not service federal debt. See: Taxes do not pay for federal spending.

      Myth: “And if government debt crowds out private investment, then there is lower growth.”
      Fact: This also commonly is stated, “Government debt crowds out private borrowing” and government debt crowds out private lending.” There is no mechanism by which federal spending can crowd out investment, borrowing or lending. On the contrary, federal spending adds to the money supply, which stimulates investment, borrowing and lending. See: Why spending stimulates investment

      Myth: “A government cannot run deficits in times of crisis to offset the affects of the crisis, if they already are running large deficits and have a large debt. In effect, fiscal policy is hamstrung.”
      Fact: This is the strangest myth, since running deficits in a time of crisis is exactly what the U.S. government has been doing. It would be true of Greece and the other EU nations, but not of then U.S., Canada, Australia, China and other monetarily sovereign systems. See: Greece’s solution

      Myth: “[…] the current leadership of the Fed knows it cannot print money.”
      Fact: This myth is even stranger than the above “strangest” myth, since printing money is exactly what the Fed does. See: Unsustainable debt.

      Myth: “As frightening as it is to consider public debt increasing to more than 100% of GDP, an even greater danger arises from a rapidly aging population.”
      Fact: The famous federal debt/GDP ratio is completely meaningless – a classic apples/oranges comparison – that neither describes the health of the economy, nor measures the government’s ability to pay its bills nor has any other meaningful purpose. See: The Debt/GDP ratio

      If you would like to see more common myths about our economy, go to: Common economic myths

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell