Protests in France

[EyeBRollin]

I asked you to clarify the question as there were a couple of major items in the 70s that a newbie may confuse as causation for inflation.

I shall repeat the question.

Are you talking about true inflation or about temporary market dislocations which can cause inflationary symptoms?

The cause of inflation is the devaluation of it via printing. This is why gold has retained all of its purchasing power in the last 100 years while the dollar has lost 98% of it.

That's not the correct answer. Money printing was not the cause of inflation in the 1970s. It's not a hard question. Quite obvious if you do some thinking.

 

[EyeBRollin]

1. I disagree.

Your proposed solution doesn't even attempt to solve the problem. Hence, why it's a slogan. Repeating the question:

How do you propose poor people afford health care?

2. Subject change and irrelevant.

Nope, it's relevant. They had the opportunity to do what they campaigned on, and what you just advocated, for almost a decade. They didn't do it. Care to guess why?

3. Go back and reread it, because it does explain how the cost of procedures drop low for people to afford them.

Making the procedures cheaper doesn't solve the central problem. A poor person will never be able to afford heart surgery or cancer treatment. What do you propose we do to fix this?

4. Doctor supply absolutely contributes to high costs. If we allowed more doctors and removed Government involvement, the market could right itself.

The market hasn't solved health care because it can't. Sick people are not profitable. This is really complicated stuff....

No go ahead and claim these aren't solutions since you only believe in more Government and in stealing people's money (to make insurance companies richer).

I'll concede as soon as you offer a way for poor people to afford health care.

And hospitals only make you pay 12$ a month on it, that is if you are "priveledged".

Sounds like you agree with this ^^^^. Not paying...

 

[user43770]

Show me a section 8 landlord who is not a rich white man. Such a thing may exist, but I have never seen it. That's where section 8 money goes. It's the same with food stamp dollars that immediately get spent at the walmart supercenter, and go straight into the pockets of the Walton family heirs. What you see as welfare for the poor immediately makes rich people richer, which is the prime directive of our economic existence.

You live in a small world, bible

 

[user43770]

Of what? Be specific.



Bull**** statement #1. This is a strawman fallacy. Which liberal advocated making everyone poor?



No, you made a false statement when you said "great many" people are gaming the welfare system. This is an anecdotal fallacy.



This is Bull**** statement #2. Here you imply that anyone who thinks America shouldn't socialize the rich feels that way out of jealousy.

1) I was specific.

2) Which liberal? You did.

3) I never said anyone was gaming the system, I merely pointed to the numbers.

4) Kiss my ass

 

[EyeBRollin]

I recommend you take an economics class. This chart clearly demonstrates the very strong correlation between M1 money supply and inflation. Even during the 70s, as an extra gift for you.

https://www.google.com/search?q=m1+...oECA0QAg&biw=412&bih=652#imgrc=klao1FI6mYvwMM

At this point, you believe what you believe rather than what the data says:

Federal outlays vs. CPI

Energy prices vs. CPI

 

[EyeBRollin]

You should ask the insurance compabies how profitable sick people are.

Or therapists.

Or big pharma.

Yes, lower costs make everything affordable. Lower costs are achieved by increased investment (savings), competition, increased supply (the result of investment), reduced overhead and middlemen (insurance and government).

Basically everything that a free market does, whoch you absolutely detest.

But rage on about the evils of capitalism provate property, and how the price of health care and computers and black and white tvs will never come down and be affordable for poor people.

Oh wait, those prices have come down....oops.

Done trying to educate you. You refuse to learn. Good luck with your tyrannical socialism fueled by misapplied moral authority claims.

Got it, you have no solution to how sick poor people can afford health care.

 

[EyeBRollin]

1) I was specific.

I have no idea what you are talking about. I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here.

2) Which liberal? You did.

Where did I advocate making everyone poor?

3) I never said anyone was gaming the system, I merely pointed to the numbers.

So, now you're a liar?

All of which are abused by anyone with a 90 level IQ. This goes for you, too, @Bible_Belt. I don't hate poor people, I hate those that game the system, politicians and poor alike.

 

[Spaz]

What I state is what the data shows, as I linked above.

You believe printing money does not devalue it, yet printing it for 100 years is exactly what devalued it.

If you cannot grasp the basic fundamental principles of supply and demand then all of your conclusions become suspect.

Are you still confused between the difference of devaluation and depreciation of currency Danger?

Best you use your idle time to research it.

 

[Spaz]

Fair point if you want to strictly use economic terminology. However both have the same overall definition in migrating lower in value.

However since you are clearly sore from the past beatings I have given you, I will exchange depreciation for you and it will still trigger the uneducated.

Printing causes inflation and depreciates the value of a currency. This is why the value of the dollar has plummeted over time while gold has not.

Spaz, care to apply that logic to Ukraine and Poroshenko? Or do you still insist on relying on your feelz for that?

Seems u r still feeling insulted by the past...

Did my above post insulted your intelligence that motivated the subsequent butthurt post ?

 

[Spaz]

I corrected you once again in stating they have the same meaning as far as lowering of value.

You dodged my question.

Let me ask again to see if you have acheived the masculinity needed to answer it.

Will you still rely on feelz regarding Putin, Ukraine and Poroshenko? Or are you willing to engage facts and logic now?

Here is the post so we can pick up again. Come back and answer the questions.

https://www.sosuave.net/forum/threads/ukraine-whats-really-happenin.213096/page-9#post-2593995

I must have elicited some sort of massive self delusional - self imposing insult with my post for you to get so emotionally excited.

Tsk tsk Danger. R u going to once more complaint that I'm insulting you ? Let me assuage that sensitive heart there, it's not an insult buddy...I'm merely pointing the obvious and it's for good order per the discussion.

Now get back to my post and study the difference between devaluation and depreciation. You obviously still dont understand it.

Then come back here and discuss.

 

[samspade]

I believe to devalue something is transitive. E.g., the government devalued the dollar by increasing circulation. Whereas to depreciate is intransitive. E.g. the value of my house depreciated over ten years. That's a linguistic point of difference - I'm not an economist. It seems to me they arrive at the same place but one explains interference whereas the other only explains a result.

 

[EyeBRollin]

What I state is what the data shows, as I linked above.

You believe printing money does not devalue it, yet printing it for 100 years is exactly what devalued it.

If you cannot grasp the basic fundamental principles of supply and demand then all of your conclusions become suspect.

That’s what you got from the graphs? Sounds like you need your eyes checked. As shown, more money has no correlation to inflation.

 

[samspade]

That’s what you got from the graphs? Sounds like you need your eyes checked. As shown, more money has no correlation to inflation.

Can you explain the blue line to me in the first graph? I don't get what "liability" means in this case.

The red and blue lines are almost mirror images of each other, so there is some correlation, but I don't get what.

 

[EyeBRollin]

I stated it. You just struggle with basic concepts.

Your “solution” of a poor person paying a health provider directly doesn’t make a $50,000 surgery affordable. You have offered nothing to address this. One can only conclude you prefer they either stop being poor or just die.

As I stated, your answers always come down to more government and more socialism.

We are done. Move to Venezuela if that is what you want, it should be heavenly for you.

You are a parrot of right wing talking points and ideology. You prefer needless suffering for anyone who isn’t rich.

 

[EyeBRollin]

Can you explain the blue line to me in the first graph? I don't get what "liability" means in this case.

The red and blue lines are almost mirror images of each other, so there is some correlation, but I don't get what.

Government liability is federal deficit spending. Deficits are expansion of the money supply, as all federal spending happens by “printing” (specifically federal credit deposits). The lines mirroring each other actually show that the government reduced spending during some inflationary times, but there’s no link between spending being the actual cause of inflation.

Graph two shows that energy prices (its the oil folks!) pull the CPI up. When they fall, the CPI declines or stabilizes.

To summarize, the government adjusts the supply of money to target inflation of 2-3%. The true driver of this policy is energy prices. If oil spikes, interest rates will go up and the government will cut back on spending. If oil tanks, the government will inject more money and lower interest rates.

 

[samspade]

Government liability is federal deficit spending. Deficits are expansion of the money supply, as all federal spending happens by “printing” (specifically federal credit deposits). The lines mirroring each other actually show that the government reduced spending during some inflationary times, but there’s no link between spending being the actual cause of inflation.

Graph two shows that energy prices (its the oil folks!) pull the CPI up. When they fall, the CPI declines or stabilizes.

To summarize, the government adjusts the supply of money to target inflation of 2-3%. The true driver of this policy is energy prices. If oil spikes, interest rates will go up and the government will cut back on spending. If oil tanks, the government will inject more money and lower interest rates.

Got it. So around 2010, for example, deficit spending spiked, probably as a result of the crash. Consumer prices dropped. But as you said there may not be causation. Obviously if the public has less money it feels comfortable spending, prices will drop to entice them. I remember airline tickets being dirt cheap in 2009-10. Meanwhile the gov't is pumping money into the economy, I'm guessing trying to push up consumer confidence and get the wheels turning faster.

 

[Spaz]

Look at that, Depreciation is a definition for Devaluation.

Damn Spaz, you're batting .000

Now, back to that Putin / Poroshenko discussion. Will you be abandoning your feminine feelz and embrace masculine logic yet? Click the link in my post above and let's find out.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=devaluation+definition&atb=v135-4__&t=cros&ia=definition

devaluation
►

• n.
  The removal or lessening of something's value.
• n.
  The intentional or deliberate lowering of a currency's value compared to another country's currency or a standard value -- the price of gold for example.
• n.
  Depreciation.

Who thought you that devaluation is the same as depreciation?

Trying to argue that's it's the same doesn't make it the same. It only makes you look foolish.

Go back to your Google research and read once more in detail. Even with that aid such as Google you have a hard time understanding a simple difference.

 

[Spaz]

That's a linguistic point of difference - I'm not an economist

The linguistic difference is because it's different.

Devalue, is on purpose, in many instances it's used as an opportunity for growth.

Depreciation, is on market forces, like when you buy a new car, say $25k and as time passes it depreciates as market views it as used and unreliable due to heavy maintenance or heavy mileage.

 

[Spaz]

Yes, now you can battle the dictionary. Have fun with that.

Don't be a sore loser.

Observe and learn.

 

[EyeBRollin]

Got it. So around 2010, for example, deficit spending spiked, probably as a result of the crash. Consumer prices dropped. But as you said there may not be causation. Obviously if the public has less money it feels comfortable spending, prices will drop to entice them. I remember airline tickets being dirt cheap in 2009-10. Meanwhile the gov't is pumping money into the economy, I'm guessing trying to push up consumer confidence and get the wheels turning faster.

Correct. That was the stimulus. The government has been spending ever since 2008, yet until 2 years ago couldn’t even get inflation consistently above 2%. Why? Look at oil prices. The government wants 2-3% as it’s best for long term economic growth. They will manipulate the money supply to achieve it. Those who fear inflation dont understand economics.