Say Anything Blog

euros are worth more that dollars….she must be a smart girl…

Seems that is has now changed to someone in her camp claiming she likes to be paid in Euros, and that she herself is very pro American.. But it’s not really important.  She’s just a celebrity with no real skills.

As for River’s comment.  One can only assume based on the way it was written, that it was meant to be an insult of some sort.  Which is kind of funny, because a quick check around currency exchanges will clearly show the Dollar is weaker than the Euro, and HAS BEEN for quite some time.

If people checked their own facts before posting on the Internet, there would be a lot less flame wars,haha.

I think a lot of the hype around the value of the American dollar has more to do with self-loathing American liberals and international types jealous of America’s ranking as the globe’s #1 economic powerhouse getting in some cheap shots. 

Did you ever hear of sub-prime loans?  How about Merrill Lynch or CitiCorp?  Is this sinking in?

Well,

Last time I checked, she’s not from America is she? 

Now that we are winning in Iraq, the left has to look to silly stories like this to fill the headlines of the papers no one buys anymore.

Who the hell is Tom Brady and why should I give a crap what his stupormodel slut thinks?

And funny, outside banking/financial circles people across the water want dollarsUS. Perhaps our embassies should start pulling in our currency and burning it in the parking lot, since it is valueless and all. What you think there, river and oldskool? Ready to surrender that worthless money for some euros? Don’t forget to pay the EU currency tax, which is currently rated at 68%. Good luck.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

Oh, and while we are at it, river and oldskool, your heroes Al Queda pays its “bills” with dollarsUS. Could it be that poor people in the ME have far more confidence in dollarsUS than in euros or loonies?

Lets take a look at the world. Number 1 form of wealth gold, #2 silver, #3 dollarsUS.

What is the preferred currency worldwide? Got a clue, sweeties?

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

This story turned out to be false. And yes, the Federal Reserve needs to be audited for the first time in history, and after the results have been released to the public, I’d imagine you’d want it abolished.

Where was it proved false?

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

Did a sweep. Gisele, the stupormodel, has changed her story. Exactly how does that make what she did say before not exist?

It is an electronic world, and as soon as stupidity dribbles out of your mouth everyone can see and hear it. She should have known that, being a world famous stupormodel and all.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

Oh, and still see no reason anyone should care about stupormodel or this Brady idiot.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

Last time I checked, she’s not from America is she?

And before you ask, Bill, she can’t perform open heart surgery or fly a 747 either! (I’ll get back to you on how fluent she is in French!)

Shrugging off the mindless, baseless attacks of Liberal hyenas and jackals since 2007

”(Proof) You’re, as we say in Hawaii, No Ka Oi!”

-unsolicited testimonial

Without pictures this post was useless.

1% of Americans pay 40% of the income tax.
5% of Americans pay 60% of the income tax.
10% of Americans pay 70% of the income tax.

Without pictures this post was useless.

You’re welcome!

Shrugging off the mindless, baseless attacks of Liberal hyenas and jackals since 2007

”(Proof) You’re, as we say in Hawaii, No Ka Oi!”

-unsolicited testimonial

She’s a dumb blond.
If she was smart like you folks she would realize that the Euro has surpassed the USD in circulation and it’s only been around since 2002 and if she was smart like you guys she would also know that the USD has lost 34%  of it’s value against other currency’s in the past 5 years and is breaking records everyday….in fact, it is at a record low 75.98 as I write this, and she is so stupid that she knows every time Bernanke lowers interest rates he is printing more $$$$ and that makes it worth even less and imports like oil ($22.00 back in 2002)will cost more, and she probable thinks that when Americans consumers have to pay $4.00 for a gallon gas, we will shop less.
Dumb blond.
Just like Buffet, Gates, Rogers and all those other billionaires….... selling their dollar assets, and Saudi, Kuwait, UAE, Iran….etc. moving away from the dollar and selling our oil in other currencies…......
crazy fools.

“We have a dollar that’s adjusting and I am for a strong dollar…..
Our dollar doesn’t buy as many barrels of oil as it used to and so therefore it’s more expensive for the American people”..... Bush 3/12/08

Not that dumb, really, as the dollar has been plunging vs. the euro due to loose money policy at the Fed, just as it did prior to the euro vs. the Deutschmark. 

Of course, she *could* have simply taken the dollars and put it into euros, or whatever financial instrument she favored, after she received the dollars.  We’re not exactly the Weimar Republic at this time, after all.

In short, looks like a smart move at face value, but reality is that she would do well to have a good financial advisor that knows how to navigate the perils of expansionary monetary policy.

Here comes another lecture about the “worthless fiat money” we all pay our mortgages with.

Whistler:

Without pictures this post was useless.

Well said.  Enough talk of currency matters.  I think we need more analysis of her most important assets.

The purpose of government shouldn’t be to do good, but simply to refrain from doing evil.

Hmmm Euros….

1% of Americans pay 40% of the income tax.
5% of Americans pay 60% of the income tax.
10% of Americans pay 70% of the income tax.

In short, looks like a smart move at face value, but reality is that she would do well to have a good financial advisor that knows how to navigate the perils of expansionary monetary policy.

I know I always go to Brazilian supermodel for financial advice. /sarcasm

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

i would prefer to get paid in precious metals, ammo, and guns. the universal currency! i wonder if that’s against ms. bundchen’s ethic? also, the fact that this is attracting attention really shows the link between tits and monetary policy. I think before bush tells us again not to worry and to go out and spend like nice little citizens… he should get a tit job! more people would clearly listen.

For truth is named after the daughter of time, not of authority.

-Francis Bacon

I know I always go to Brazilian supermodel for financial advice.

She’s Brazilian?  With that name, I thought she was German.  But I guess she is Brazilian.

Leave it to r108 to know more about supermodels than me.

The purpose of government shouldn’t be to do good, but simply to refrain from doing evil.

Rob
Lots of brazilians are of german, austrian, and jewish decent. remember ww2 and the fallout? there is even a significant bolivian jewish population.

For truth is named after the daughter of time, not of authority.

-Francis Bacon

That makes sense.  I guess I never bothered to look it up.  I just saw the name and thought “German.”

The purpose of government shouldn’t be to do good, but simply to refrain from doing evil.

Leave it to r108 to know more about supermodels than me.

I’ll take that as a compliment, but it was in the original headline, I think.  Brazil, as Sparkie has already pointed out, is a real multiethnic country.  Lots of Germans have settled there, starting around the time of WWI.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

if she ain’t a jew, roma, or slav ... her grandaddy might have been a Nazi!

For truth is named after the daughter of time, not of authority.

-Francis Bacon

I’ll take that as a compliment

It was meant as one.

The purpose of government shouldn’t be to do good, but simply to refrain from doing evil.

“Wow! Brazil is big.”—George W. Bush, after being shown a map of Brazil by Brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, Brasilia, Brazil, Nov. 6, 2005

“We have a dollar that’s adjusting and I am for a strong dollar…..
Our dollar doesn’t buy as many barrels of oil as it used to and so therefore it’s more expensive for the American people”..... Bush 3/12/08

if she ain’t a jew, roma, or slav ... her grandaddy might have been a Nazi!

Actually, part of my family were nazis. When my great-great grandfather cane to America in 1854 his brither stayed in Germany. His descendants joined the Nazi Party in the late thirties (when everyone else did because if you didn’t they seized your homes, ancestral lands, took your jobs and gave them to Party members, etc.)

I have photos of a plaque given to them by the Nazi Party in 1939 awarding them the lands that were already theirs for being Party members. The beams in the ceiling of the family’s great room are carved with swastikas (which they hid with draperies for fifty years following the war).

Joining the Nazi Party was a matter of survival in the thirties. Schwarzenegger’s father did the same thing for the sake of his family in Austria.

The future ain’t what it used to be…..

(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

By the way…Mark D wins the award for the Most Tasteless Avatar.

The future ain’t what it used to be…..

(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

that hurts

“We have a dollar that’s adjusting and I am for a strong dollar…..
Our dollar doesn’t buy as many barrels of oil as it used to and so therefore it’s more expensive for the American people”..... Bush 3/12/08

No, Rob, not about that, but about the general perils of inflationary monetary policy.  Ms. Bundchen knows, as apparently a lot of people here do not, that the dollar has been plunging in the past few years due at least in part to the Fed’s work.  As such, she’d be happier if her employers would pay her in a currency that wasn’t losing its value so quickly, as it saves her the trouble of getting her pay into a form that will hold its value better.

Having grown up in Brazil during one of its hyperinflationary periods, I would dare suggest that Bundchen is aware of the perils of expansionary monetary policy in a way that few Americans can be.  Yes, we can learn a LOT from this particular supermodel in this regard, I dare suggest.

Ms. Bundchen knows, as apparently a lot of people here do not, that the dollar has been plunging in the past few years due at least in part to the Fed’s work.

Oh, I think we’re all well-aware of inflation.  We just don’t quite subscribe to conspiracy theories about the Fed as an explanation.

Ever heard of the national debt?  You fix that, you fix the currency problem.

The purpose of government shouldn’t be to do good, but simply to refrain from doing evil.

The truth about the “falling dollar” is that it’s a response to the constant whining about the so-called “trade deficit”.  Politically, one must address this “problem” even though it isn’t a real problem. The weak dollar(relative to other currencys) encourages spending in this country by foreign countries, which is the exact purpose of the weak dollar policy.  Those who want to denigrate our economic system try to sell the idea that the weak dollar is equivalent to a weak economic system; it’s really an intentional policy.  I don’t agree with it, but the truth needs to be told.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Well, you fix the national debt, and you remove the Fed’s ability to act—a policy I wholeheartedly agree with, but I think it misses the point.

The point is that unless we can argue that the Fed is powerless to adjust the supply of money (its very purpose for existence), we must ascribe at least a portion of blame to the Fed for inflationary pressures.  In contrast, the European Bank (and prior to it, the Bundesbank of Germany) has done a pretty good job of restraining inflation.

Notably, the German “Wirtschaftswunder” occurred as the Bundesbank was holding the line on inflation, while the Fed kept it humming quite well for the dollar.  Between the 1960s and the 1980s, the dollar dropped by about a factor of five vs. the Deutschmark.

Again, although there is an easy work-around for her, Bundchen’s got a very good point.  Loose money policies at the Fed have greatly reduced the dollar vs. the euro.

You “fix the national debt” by reining in the power and influence of govt. Social spending for vote-buying purposes, beyond any real need, is the biggest crime of govt, and is actually what produces the dreaded inflation.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Yes, the big problem is social spending, which is why Germany (and most of Western Europe for that matter) spends far more on social spending than we do, and yet has had far less inflation than our country in the past half century. 

We can’t actually have people figuring out that the “price” of money is related to supply and demand, after all.  Who needs this Econ 101 garbage, anyways?

Sorry, guys; you can make arguments for a Federal Reserve, but please don’t spout off this bull about inflation not being due in part to their policies.  Anyone who remembers the Carter years ought to know better.

Is the glass half empty… or is it half full?

In the past week, I’ve had a nagging suspicion that the problem isn’t a “weak” US dollar as much as it is a “strong” Euro.  Rather than US inflation, the culprit may well be European deflation instead.  With Euro interest rates higher than market and a relative shortage of euros in circulation, the effect would be exactly the same as what we have seen lately… complete with the sort of ignorant (and tasteless!) commentary we’ve seen lately as well.

Whether or not this is a deliberate attempt by the EU to undermine the US I can’t say, although it is worth noting that another socialist international organization, the Wrd Bank, yesterday announced a $1 billion aid package to the Iranian theocracy, in direct contravention of US attempts to isolate Iran via economic and financial sanctions.

“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

I don’t see Germany doing that well economically.  Our PPP GDP per capita is 42% higher than theirs.

I would also say that the US has more slackers holding us down than Germany does, but their overall levels still are that much lower than us.

1% of Americans pay 40% of the income tax.
5% of Americans pay 60% of the income tax.
10% of Americans pay 70% of the income tax.

Sorry, guys; you can make arguments for a Federal Reserve, but please don’t spout off this bull about inflation not being due in part to their
policies.

Since no one here has made any such argument, we must regard that statement on your part as simply another strawman designed to undermine our faith in our economic system.  Won’t work.
The fact is that inflation(your bugaboo) isn’t the problem you try to exaggerate it into being.  Deflation is far worse, as we learned during the Great Depression.  Even the Carter years didn’t come close to destroying our economy, and his runaway inflation was due more to his anti-growth socialist policies than any real economic weakness.  He certainly injured our economy(high interest rates were also part of his economic policy, remember?), but was spectacularly unable to kill it.  The quick response under Reagan, like the quick response after 9/11, was due to the resilience of our economy and the efficacy of monetary policy.
You keep selling, and we keep not buying.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Non sequitur, Whistler.  Just because a nation has a lower GDP than us means nothing about its monetary policy.  You could just as sensibly point out that the German Wirtschaftwunder moved tens of millions of Germans from B-17-induced homelessness to significant prosperity, a record that our economy simply can not match.

Again, let’s approach the central question; is Miss Bundchen correct to point out that the dollar is losing value at a precipitous pace?  (yes)  Do we further agree that the supply of money is one of the big causes of inflation (I sure hope so)? 

At that point, we can suggest that the supplier, the Federal Reserve, is acting in such a way as to make any sane Brazilian—one who remembers that country’s hyperinflation—very nervous, and justifiably so.

Is that so complicated?

bat

In the past week, I’ve had a nagging suspicion that the problem isn’t a “weak” US dollar as much as it is a “strong” Euro

Don’t forget a strong,
Australian Dollar
British Pound
Canadian Dollar
Japanese Yen
Swiss Franc
Brazilian Real
and even the Mexican Peso

“We have a dollar that’s adjusting and I am for a strong dollar…..
Our dollar doesn’t buy as many barrels of oil as it used to and so therefore it’s more expensive for the American people”..... Bush 3/12/08

You lie, 108.  Here is your very quote. 

Social spending for vote-buying purposes, beyond any real need, is the biggest crime of govt, and is actually what produces the dreaded inflation

If social spending is “actually what causes the dreaded inflation,” as you say, that would seem to exonerate the Federal Reserve, wouldn’t it?

Deal with it; an absurd claim of yours has just been refuted with evidence.  Unless, of course, you wish to use one of your characteristic evasions and say that “if you wish to compare a society that drinks real beer and eats real sausage with ours, I’m afraid I won’t be able to help you.”

BB You did say that their welfare state wasn’t hurting them and it is.

What happened 60 years ago isn’t holding them back today.  They’ve got the capital and the human resources to meet or exceed our output.  Ireland’s managed to grow their economy from those levels to slightly higher than ours in the course of 15 years or so.

The difference is their government which is holding them back.

As far as the low dollar, I don’t claim to know that much about how the world exchange rates happen, but I think Robert 108’s right that it’s our reaction to keep the trade deficit down.  (Something that is a result of our economic success.)

I wouldn’t think the dollar will go a lot lower, but I think we’re actually in better shape than the Europeans who must be having a heck of an hard time with exports.  Of course the high Euro is hurting the standard of living which must really sting with their already pathetic GDP. 

If the Europeans want to man up their Euro let them, they’re the ones that are going to suffer, not us.

1% of Americans pay 40% of the income tax.
5% of Americans pay 60% of the income tax.
10% of Americans pay 70% of the income tax.

Nope, Whistler, here’s what I actually said:

Yes, the big problem is social spending, which is why Germany (and most of Western Europe for that matter) spends far more on social spending than we do, and yet has had far less inflation than our country in the past half century.

As you can see, I was talking about the relationship between inflation and social spending, and how the example of Europe in general and Germany in particular ought to disabuse us of that notion.

I’d agree that social spending holds them back.  I just wasn’t saying anything about that, and your inference that I was is a clear non sequitur.

Do we further agree that the supply of money is one of the big causes of inflation (I sure hope so)?
Actually, as I have already said, transferring huge quantities of money from the productive sector to the non-productive sector is the biggest cause of inflation.  That would be excessive social spending.

At that point, we can suggest that the supplier, the Federal Reserve, is acting in such a way as to make any sane Brazilian—one who remembers that
country’s hyperinflation—very nervous, and justifiably so.

As long as the political class uses social spending to buy votes, we will have inflation(not hyperinflation, btw); which is the real cause of the inflation, not the Federal Reserve, which is simply the agent of the spending, not the cause.  You keep confusing cause and effect, BB.  Might be your agenda.

BTW, you haven’t refuted anything, except in your own mind.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

...but I think Robert 108’s right that it’s our reaction to keep the trade deficit down.

Whistler,

You are correct.  Starting with the tariffs imposed on steel imports in 2002, the Bush administration has been slowly allowing the dollar to drift downward to encourage more US exports.

“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

BB: Your incorrect premise is that inflation is any indicator of the strength of an economy.  This leads you to the incorrect conclusion that Germany’s economy is stronger than ours, simply based on the amount of inflation they admit to.  No economy with any amount of central planning generates real economic numbers.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

108, your incorrect premise is that I wrote any such thing.  Now here, again, is what I actually wrote:

Yes, the big problem is social spending, which is why Germany (and most of Western Europe for that matter) spends far more on social spending than we do, and yet has had far less inflation than our country in the past half century.

In the same way, if low social spending reduced the impetus for inflation, we should expect very low inflation in Latin America and Africa.  Again, the opposite is the case.

So 108, your hypothesis simply fails.  High government spending simply does not correlate to monetary inflation, let alone cause it. 

Rather, it happens when the Fed greatly increases the money supply (say by 10% or so annually) without corresponding increases in actual production.  More money chasing the same amount of goods = inflation, and anyone who has understood Econ 101 knows this.

Gang, y’all can talk in circles all you want, the majority of people in the street, worldwide, see dollarsUS as THE currency, in 3rd place behind gold and silver. The euro is fiat currency, it has no history and no physical backing. The EU Constitution has not even been ratified by a minority of its “members”. And the forcing of European countries to surrender their stable, hard currencies for fiat euros is a sore point for many Europeans.

Bottom line, dollarsUS are the preferred currency in the majority of countries, blahblah all you want, people outside America happily and greedily grab up dollarsUS.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

So 108, your hypothesis simply fails. High government spending simply does not correlate to monetary inflation, let alone cause it.

BB: It’s not an hypothesis, it’s reality.  Money spent unproductively(social spending) increases the money supply without increasing productivity, which results in the money being worth less.  It’s not rocket science.  Any command economy(like Germany) creates its own economic stats, and if they want to show low inflation for political purposes, they can do that.  It’s just shifted into another sector of the economy, resulting in lowered economic growth.  Whether you call it inflation or lowered productivity, the end result is the same.  Your semantic game is simply wrong.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

108, you’re displaying a lot of ignorance today.  First, Germany is not a command economy, but rather a market economy with heavy social spending.  Moreover, they have never used fixed exchange rates, but rather have let the currency “float” since it was established.

Now if they’d been trying to support their currency at far above its actual value, their exports would have collapsed and George Soros would have made a bundle shorting it. 

More or less, the very fact that you can buy German products refutes your claim, and you are left where you were before; trying to explain how nations with the highest social spending have some of the lowest inflation.

Tha answer, again, is basic discipline by their central bankers, a trait not always shared by the Fed.  Kudos again to Miss Bundchen for realizing this.

BB, the only thing stupormodel realized is that her target audience is America and so she has backpedaled desperately.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

2h, your talkin through your you know what, as usual.
First of all the Euro holds $452,757,000,000 in currency reserves, while the USD holds $65,000,000,000.

Gold reserves:

I’m not sure what street you are talking about, but,
many, many countries and investors have been moving away from the USD in the past few years and as they do the dollar falls further.
FYI…..the USD and all others are considered fiat because they are only backed by paper.

“We have a dollar that’s adjusting and I am for a strong dollar…..
Our dollar doesn’t buy as many barrels of oil as it used to and so therefore it’s more expensive for the American people”..... Bush 3/12/08

I’m not sure; one side is a claim that her sister speaks for her, and the refutation is her manager trying to repair a PR debacle.  The manager’s refutation doesn’t really address the fact that Bloomberg talked with her sister in September.

I would have to put my money on the sister, not the manager, here.

Your argument is with the several billion people who would rather have dollarsUS in hand than any other currency. Try to explain away reality, it is entertaining to watch.

Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

...trying to explain how nations with the highest social spending have some of the lowest inflation.

They have sacrificed productivity for lowered inflation, and our politicians have sacrificed productivity for vote-buying purposes.  Germany is a socialist country, where the major means of production are owned or controlled by the central govt.  You are wrong yet again.  Your monomaniac obsession with inflation as the ony measure of economic health is simply wrong.  Even if I did buy German products(which you are making up, since you have no knowledge of what I buy), it would be because they are the best deal for the money.  In our system, things are worth what people are willing to pay for them.  You need to absorb that fact.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Bullshit, 108.  Most businesses in Germany are privately owned and controlled, and you can buy their stocks on the European stock markets, and to some extent on the NYSE and NASDAQ.

If you can’t get this right, would you please SHUT UP?

If you can’t get this right, would you please SHUT UP?

I know you want to silence the truth, but that won’t happen here.  Like Japanese industry, German industry is propped up by heavy govt protection. The govt partners with industry in Germany, which is socialism, no matter how you slice it.  You are wrong again.
Your continued obsession with trying to demonize the Fed with your false premise that inflation is the only measure of economic health is simply sad.  Your premise assumes your conclusion.  The facts don’t matter to you, apparently.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Oh sure, like we need them.

Nov. 7 (Bloomberg)—The dollar slid to record lows against the euro and the Canadian dollar after a Chinese government adviser said plans to diversify foreign-exchange reserves will involve buying better-performing currencies.

We can just print more coz it won’t cause inflation!!
Just like r108 says….

As long as the political class uses social spending to buy votes, we will have inflation(not hyperinflation, btw); which is the real cause of the inflation,

see, keep printing, it don’t matter.

“We have a dollar that’s adjusting and I am for a strong dollar…..
Our dollar doesn’t buy as many barrels of oil as it used to and so therefore it’s more expensive for the American people”..... Bush 3/12/08

Bat

Starting with the tariffs imposed on steel imports in 2002, the Bush administration has been slowly allowing the dollar to drift downward to encourage more US exports.

Please ask the bush administration to back off a bit….... dollar index down 1.2% today.
I know it helps exports, but I think they went too far.
And ask for another tax cut…...to help this robust, sizzling economy.

“We have a dollar that’s adjusting and I am for a strong dollar…..
Our dollar doesn’t buy as many barrels of oil as it used to and so therefore it’s more expensive for the American people”..... Bush 3/12/08

108, if Germany’s economy were managed by the government, its products would resemble the Trabants, gosh-awful chocolate, and sickening cola I had while walking the Alexanderplatz in East Berlin.  Sorry, but you don’t get BMW vehicles, Bitburger Pils, Zeiss and Leica cameras and optics, and wonderful breads and chocolates when you tell workers “to each according to his need, from each according to his ability,” as socialist control of the markets would do.

Yes, Germany has a welfare state and regulations, just like the United States.  That doesn’t make it a planned economy, however, and anyone who has ever been to Germany ought to know this just by seeing what happens at every meal.

And in the same way, any real conservative should know that when governments artificially prop up their currencies, exports cease (again, Germany is a top exporter) and currency traders like George Soros short it like a vulture circling a carcass.

So again, you’re left with the reality that government social spending doesn’t drive inflation.  Printing too many units of currency by the central bank does, as any employee of the Bundesbank will tell you with a quick reference back to the 1920s.

You really need to get out more and see the real world, 108.  If a Brazilian supermodel can do so, so can you.

So again, you’re left with the reality that government social spending doesn’t drive inflation.

It does in this country, although your blanket description of all investment borrowing as “inflationary” is the real source of your error here.
Germany protects it’s major industrial giants, which reduces competition, which in turn reduces new investment, since you don’t have the entry and exit(with the concomitant need for new funding) that is characteristic of a more competitive business environment.  This situation reduces economic growth in order to increase security for the existing businesses.  You may choose to ignore this fact, but it results in exactly what I described: Germany sacrifices economic growth through restricting competition, which results in lower “textbook” inflation.
I have to point out that your definition of inflation really defines almost any economic growth as a source of inflation, and ignores the real difference between economic(productive) debt and non-productive debt.
Sorry, your adolescent attempts to attack me just don’t wash.
Our currency isn’t “artifically propped up by govt”, btw.  As long as demand creates supply, it’s OK.
Your superstitious fear of a sensible monetary supply policy is duly noted.
The “store of value” function of money is archaic, and the transactional value function is what matters now.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

OK, let’s try to dispel some of your ignorance here:

1.  No, centrally planned economies are, well, centrally planned.  The bureaucrats are deciding how much of what to make.  Sorry, but subsidies and perks for favored industries (which., ahem, we have here—is Erich Honecker the president perchance?) does not qualify.  Germany does have a market economy like our own, else it would not be able to tax the heck out of it, nor would you be able to buy BMW or Diamler-Benz stock.

2.  If social spending drove inflation in our country, explain why the CPI is around 2-3% despite ever higher social spending in the past 40 years?  Again, data do NOT square with your hypothesis, even in a very limited scope with several confounding variables. 

3.  Economic growth actually decreases inflation until the government “compensates” by increasing the money supply, 108, because you take the same amount of money and use it to buy a larger amount of goods and services.

So once again, we are left with basic supply and demand.  When the Fed increases the money supply faster than the (real) economy grows, we get the increase in prices commonly called inflation. 

If this is complicated to you, maybe you should send Miss Bundchen a note and ask her to explain it.  Obviously, Econ 101 is NOT getting through to you.

If social spending drove inflation in our country, explain why the CPI is around 2-3% despite ever higher social spending in the past 40 years?

The only valid comparison would be to what the economy would have done without the drag on it by the misallocation of resources through social spending.  Your blind devotion to inflation being a measure of economic health continually leads you to wrong conclusions.

The relationship between govt and business in Germany is very “friendly”, as I said before.  It’s not an out and out centrally planned economy, but it’s much closer to that than is our economy.

Economic growth actually decreases inflation until the government “compensates” by increasing the money supply, 108, because you take the same amount of money and use it to buy a larger amount of goods and services.

Again, you get it wrong.  Borrowing precedes economic growth, so you have textbook inflation as a necessary part of economic growth.  What you describe is consumer spending, not investment spending.  Demand creates supply, not the other way around.  This is where you “inflationists” always get it wrong.  The real creation of excess money supply is for social spending, not investment spending.

So once again, we are left with basic supply and demand.  When the Fed increases the money supply faster than the (real) economy grows, we get the increase in prices commonly called inflation.

You have the pieces to the puzzle, now you just have to put them together in the proper configuration.
Even so, real inflation is an increase in price without a commensurate increase in value.  It’s not a simple arithmetic calculation, as you “inflationists” would have us believe.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

108, please take a look at your first paragraph, and tell me exactly how someone would prove or disprove ANYTHING with the criteria you suggest?  You more or less condition the acceptance, or rejection, of your hypothesis on an experiment that cannot be performed.

Forget Econ 101.  Try Logic 101, 108.

You more or less condition the acceptance, or rejection, of your hypothesis on an experiment that cannot be performed.

I said it couldn’t be proved, as you assert it has been proved.  It’s very similar to all your claims about inflation.  Your premise is wrong, so your conclusions are wrong, and our economy refutes you every day.

All your speculations about what might have happened if the Fed hadn’t been created, and all your speculations about how it would be if we went back on the gold standard, are simply hypotheticals.  They may or may not be instructive, but they have certainly stimulated discussion. Why do you object when I do it?  Double standard?

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Baloney.  I’m sorry, but I’m going to have to hold you to your original statement:

Social spending for vote-buying purposes, beyond any real need, is the biggest crime of govt, and is actually what produces the dreaded inflation

Sorry, but this is what you said, and it’s complete and utter baloney.  Stop trying to defend it.

Sorry, but this is what you said, and it’s complete and utter baloney.
Stop trying to defend it.

Actually, it’s true, and I have demonstrated how it works in several ways, using simple economic logic.  You are misled by your fanatical focus on inflation as a measure of economic health, and it isn’t.  This false premise leads you to false conclusions, time after time.
When you divert resources from the productive sector to the non-productive sector(social spending), you decrease the value of the economy by making it less productive.  I know it takes a deeper understanding than simply reading a textbook, but there it is.
When the money supply increases to meet investment demand, no real inflation takes place; when it expands to meet consumption demand, it is slightly inflationary, but when it expands to meet govt social spending, it is almost 100% inflationary.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

If your logic is so impeccable, it should also be testable.  Any logical syllogism has premises and conclusions that must be connected to the real world to be applied.

Your hypothesis is easily testable; nations with high social spending out to have high inflation, and vice versa. 

I’ve made the case that we don’t see what you claim in real life.  So let’s have it; give some evidence for your position.  Maybe you can quote Malthus or Bill Buckner.

Maybe you can quote Malthus or Bill Buckner.

You still don’t get my Malthus reference; you made up the Bill Buckner thing out of your ignorance.

I never said my logic was impeccable; you made that up all by yourself.  I simply pointed out that your rejection of my hypothesis out of hand could just as well be applied to your many hypotheses.  We would have very little basis for discussion, then, but so be it.

Your hypothesis is easily testable; nations with high social spending out to have high inflation, and vice versa.

This is your premise, not mine.  I spoke of our system, not others with different parameters.  I spoke of our social spending, which would otherwise be used to generate more prosperity; social spending in other systems would not be so applied.
You see, our system is one that works from the bottom up, using the individual independent free citizen as the fundamental building block.  Other systems are more of the top down nature, where govt has the ultimate say in how resources are allotted, and social goals are built into that type of system.
Hint: it’s the difference between microeconomic analysis and macroeconomic analysis. In your case, it’s also the difference between static analysis(yours) and dynamic analysis(mine).

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Stop the baloney; how do you propose to test your hypothesis?

Stop the baloney; how do you propose to test your hypothesis?

No “baloney” involved; drastically roll back the size, scope and cost of govt, especially by eliminating social spending.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Great, your only test depends on things that, lest you be God, you cannot control.

You fail a most basic test of logic; falsifiability.  If you can’t under any circumstances disprove it, your hypothesis is most likely false to begin with.

Let’s try using the data we have, OK?  If it’s good enough for Adam Smith, Galbraith, Friedman, and Mises, it’s good enough for you, too.

BB: You can’t test any of your hypotheses, can you?
You would destroy our entire system on the basis of your belief in the “bugaboo” of static inflation analysis.  That’s just silly.
The “falsification” of which you speak is the present situation, where we spend excessively, and have to jigger with the price of money(the interest rate) to cover up the effects of that excessive social spending, which is totally non-productive.  Can you explain to me how wasteful social spending isn’t a misuse of resources?

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Great, your only test depends on things that, lest you be God, you cannot control.

We have these things every so often called “elections”, in which we can vote out the social spenders.  They hardly require any Godly intervention, just responsible citizenship.  Your hyperbole is misplaced.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

BB: In reviewing he entire arc of this discussion, I notice some contradictions in your position.
You hold up more managed and less free systems, strictly on the basis of their reported low inflation(although that is impossible to determine for the Kingdom of Solomon), asserting that social spending, which is their first priority, isn’t a cause of inflation.  It is certainly non-intuitive, but you don’t back it up with any economic reasoning.  In our system, investment and consumption have the first call on our financial resources, which makes that sector of our economy much more active and productive, which makes it more susceptible to your static inflation model.  On the other hand, you preach that inflation is a danger in our system, even though it is quite low.  I’m puzzled by your reasoning there, since you don’t explain it.  How is the economic growth in Germany, and what is their unemployment rate?  High unemployment is endemic to more socialized systems, as investment in growth is restricted by protectionism and the “social concerns first” thinking in those systems.  Instead of inflation, they have unemployment and low growth.
If that is the real choice, I’ll take inflation every time.  If you don’t, please explain your reasoning.
Also, from 1947-1951, the CPI in our country doubled, but it didn’t destroy our economy.  To the contrary, there was staggering economic growth.  Please explain why we should worry so much about inflation(calculated by any means, static or dynamic).  There is a practical, applicable, historical fact that falsifies your “inflation is the measure of the health of our economy” hypothesis.  There are many more, but one is enough.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

108, we have the data to test your hypothesis already, and if we used your test, it would only add one or two data points to what we already have.  There is simply no correlation.

And since when do I advocate more management of the economy?  Did the grower of cabbage in Solomon’s time have to pay 40% of his income in taxes and conform to 325 or so pages of regulations on how to bring cabbage to market?

Not in his wildest nightmares.  He had the Torah, and that was it, with only 614 short laws in toto.

No, I advocate less management, starting with the end of central banking and fiat money.

So once again, or one thousand times again, your claims have no root in reality.  You should take your lesson from that supermodel.

And since when do I advocate more management of the economy? Did the grower of cabbage in Solomon’s time have to pay 40% of his income in taxes and
conform to 325 or so pages of regulations on how to bring cabbage to market?

Any actual data on this, especially that presents more than one side of the story?

My statements are grounded in economic logic.  You may take all the financial advice you want from a Brazilian supermodel.  I’m smarter than that.
It is just plain silly to compare a Biblical monarchy in any way with a modern industrial free enterprise economy.  Any data on the inflation rate then?  How about unemployment figures, or return on capital?  Do you really maintain that there was any amount of private ownership and control of capital in King Solomon’s time?  As benign as he was in the context of his time, there is no valid comparison, and you are making yourself look foolish to try to use such a comparison, absent any sound economic logic, to justify your position.
You may choose, at any time, to quit using banks and to trade in gold, silver or puka shells as you like.
Just don’t try to force that on the rest of us.  We know better.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

How do we know that the cabbage grower didn’t face what he does today?  Well, for starters, it would have been impossible to produce 325 pages of regulations for every cabbage grower 2300 years before Gutenberg invented the printing press, don’t you think?  Heavy regulation, and onerous taxation, is really a fairly modern invention, because of “little” factors like this.

(typical tax rates at the time were about 10%, according to 1 Samuel)

Sorry, but you’re not looking very smart here, even compared to supermodels.

Well, for starters, it would have been impossible to produce 325 pages of regulations for every cabbage grower 2300 years before Gutenberg invented the printing press, don’t you think?

Pure speculation, and onerous regulations predate the printing press.  You have no argument here, lacking both facts and logic.  Not so smart at all.  I think even a Brazilian supermodel is smart enough to see through what you have written.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Try writing with a quill on parchment, and you’ll understand soon enough how I know that no cabbage grower in Solomon’s day ever was handed an inch thick book full of regulations on his trade.  While certainly governments erected barriers to entry to some trades, and certainly trade guilds did in the middle ages, the reality is that it’s just plain impossible to generate the kind of regulations that OSHA and the USDA generate without a printing press.

The modern regulatory state was no more possible prior to Gutenberg than flying from New York to California was possible prior to the Wright Brothers. 

Oh, and did you see that the dollar is still plunging vs. the euro and the loonie?  Dang, I wish *I* was as smart as that model is said to be!

The modern regulatory state was no more possible prior to Gutenberg than flying from New York to California was possible prior to the Wright Brothers.

This is simply nonsense; ever heard of “oral tradition”?  Regulations exist, whether they are written down or not.  You can speak a lot faster than you can write.  This whole argument of yours is nonsense.  Are you really trying to sell the concept that no one in King Solomon’s kingdom knew what the rule were because there were no printing presses?

It’s instructive that you are gloating over the state of the dollar.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Whatever you say, 108.  I’m sure that my ancestors in the distant past spent hours around the fire listening to the orator reciting regulations about growing cabbage.

At least when it wasn’t a real treat; tax oration time!  They got to listen to someone explaining Solomon’s Alternative Minimum Tax!  Woo hoo!

Forget the Mishna, the Nibelungenlied or the Song of Roland—we get to hear the new regulations come from the castle!  No more epic poetry for us, we get to listen to chicken-shit regulations!  Break out the new wine!  Slaughter the fatted calf!  Yes, it’s time for petty bureaucrats to regale us with the newest from OSHA!

You do know that those regulatory documents are intended not as epic literature, but as reference documents, right?  And that people only started to produce them about a century ago, right?

I guess not.  Nice talking with you, Mrs. Federline.

I guess not. Nice talking with you, Mrs. Federline.

You reveal your emotional/intellectual level.  Nice.
Your facts and logic are just overwhelming.  /sarcasm

I ask again: Did any of King Solomon’s subjects not know what the King demanded of them?  Whether you call them regulations or mandates or commandments, and whether they are transmitted orally, on stone tablets, parchment scrolls or printed documents, this type of thing has always been with us; to maintain anything else is simply nonsense.  You grasp at straws here.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

You’re right; I should not insult Britney by comparing you with her.  My apologies.

Now try something to get the impossibility of heavy regulation through your skull; try to memorize a tax form, or copy it with quill and parchment.  Just one page.

If you succeed at this, try to imagine somebody memorizing hundreds of pages of regulations, and then try to imagine people actually listening to them.  Or try to imagine somebody making lots of copies of it for every cabbage grower in the country.

If the very thought doesn’t come across as some sort of absurd Monty Python skit to you, you just plain aren’t thinking.  Period.  Regulation requires a printing press to produce the reference documents.  That’s why you don’t find the kind of regulation we have today before 1930; it was simply cost prohibitive, and people would never have submitted to what it would take to do so.

Historically, the rules for making various products have been handed down from father to son, or by guilds, not by government.  There would be records of regulation if it had truly existed—and probably revolts by people forced to listen to cabbage regulations in their time off.

And if you can read history, even of the past 150 years, without being struck at how greatly the state has increased its control of private business, I’m sorry; you just plain aren’t thinking.

And if you can ignore supply as a factor in the dollar’s current plunge, I’m sorry; you just plain aren’t thinking.

Sorry, but I’m seeing a pattern here.  You are simply refusing to think about the basic implications of supply and demand and technology on what’s going on.  Give it a try, it won’t hurt you.

And if you can ignore supply as a factor in the dollar’s current plunge, I’m sorry; you just plain aren’t thinking.

Thanks for making my point; the increase in the money supply to pay for non-productive social spending is inflationary, which is what I have been saying from the beginning.  I don’t know how you twisted yourself around to my position, but I have to assume you are so emotionally triggered that your thinking processes have become deranged.  As I have said many times, all govt spending and regulation is inflationary; it’s just that social spending is a much larger part of it than anything else.
Just to refresh your memory, I am against all but Constitutional govt spending.  Thanks again.
Your adolescent insults are pathetic.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

First of all,why is she in American again?And second of all,if you take all that makeup off of her,she’d either look like crap or a normal girl.Point blank.

-yours