Could the Weimar Hyperinflation Happen Again in America?

Money Supply running up to the credit crunch actually contracted very sharply. Indeed, a reason why the Bank of England is not worried about the recent blip in inflation is because the underlying deflationary effect has not changed that much in spite of quantitative easing (www.countryriskservices.com)

"Originally Posted by LondonJimmy View Post
If we look at the last three decades then there has been plenty of inflation (increase in the money supply) but prices for things like computers, plasma tv's, calculators etc. has been falling due to advances in technology. These prices would suggest a deflationaty environment by the modern definition, whereas if you look at the money supply you would see that we were in an inflationary environment during the last 3 decades."



Product life cycle costing
Competition
Growth and globalisation
Aging population
Higher disposible income
Gadget culture
 
you do realise bond yields are gona be pushed to near 0 soon yeh?
I wonder how N Rothschild feels now about the Bond markets, Greece's 50% haircut, the safety of the Bond market etc ectc etc.

I am still laughing over his ill-informed rant about "bond yields being pushed to near zero."

It has nothing to do with the government pushing yields down, because they, the Government, is quite unable to hold yields down for long, given that the yield is simply a measure of risk.

Recently yields in Greece soared to 150% + indication the market believed that there was a greater than 100% chance of a default. (Check the yields on Italian Bonds ... surprise awaiting!)

It happened as the yield predicted it would, only the cunning ECB and the EFSF engineered the slow-burn so that Greece technically avoided a default, and thus made any CDS (the Credit Default Swaps Insurance on a default) null and void. Banks win again - no payout on the insurance against the default.


From Greg Canavan in Sydney: Australian Financial Market News | The Daily Reckoning Australia

-- As far as can kicks go, this one was not a bad effort.
The question you should ask, though, is how long it
will take the market to accept this latest European
bailout still doesn't solve any fundamental problems.

It is just a shameless attempt for gain without pain.

-- Let's look at a few of the details. Greece will get a
50 per cent haircut on its debt?
Not so fast.
Their total debt load is a mind-boggling €350 billion.

This includes around €70 billion in loans from the IMF etc.
and about €75 billion that the European Central Bank (ECB)
has kindly purchased from the private sector.

-- These amounts will not be subject to a haircut, so Greece is
still on the hook for this debt.
That leaves around €200 billion subject to the 50 per cent
reduction...which actually means it's only a (roughly)
30 per cent trim (we wouldn't even call it a haircut).

-- Given Greek pension funds and banks own a decent chunk
of this outstanding amount, it's easy to see who's really
paying for this. Banks 1 Greece 0.


The whole point of this post is to point to the fact that many supposedly knowledgable members of the financial world and the public at large, do not fully understand what is going on.

And that includes me, though I remain an interested observer.

If this can occur with Greece, who was bankrupt and remains bankrupt, what hope is there for Europe and The USA generally?

The whole system needs reforming. It may have been painful, but would it not have been better to allow the collapse of the system when Lehman Bros went down, instead of wasting further assets in propping up the whole shaky house of cards?

Trillions of dollars have been spent supporting, stimulating and bailing-out, yet the mess is no further advanced towards stability and security than it was before the collapse of Lehman.

The problem is exactly as I highlighted with N Rothschild - he didn't understand that rising bond yields are a sign of rising risk, and as we shall shortly see, rising inflation everywhere.

The first thing we shall see is a recovery in the commodities markets, and Gold getting into a decent rally. This might occur because of what happened in Greece. Those who have money to put in bond markets are worried now, and are casting around for "somewhere safe" to put their cash. The commodities markets are about the only place left - where you get something tangible for your buck.

Unfortunately a rise in commodities only exports inflation to those who are forced to pay the higher prices, and food riots in the North of Africa, with the follow-on effect of bringing down Mubarak in Egypt, and Benali in Tunisia, and lately Gadaffi in Libya. The Arab spring is the movement we see today, but the revolutions began simply because of rising food prices, as a result of rising commodities.

If this continues, we may indeed see hyperinflation in the west, but we will see more blood in the Middle East, and more food riots and revolutions in third world and poverty-bound nations. This is what is feared more than any deflation, and is the reason why hyperinflation is to be avoided at all costs.

Unfortunately, the only way out for the western world, and vicariously, capitalism, is to hyperinflate-away the debt.

And there is no way that a slow-burn can be orchestrated in that. Human greed caused it, and human greed and self-interest will ensure that "slow-and-controlled" inflation will not happen. It will be hyperinflation until the final collapse. After that, who knows?

As for the question: Could the Weimar Hyperinflation Happen Again in America?

I think we all feel that answer in our water.

The question will have it's answer, as it turns from "could" to "when will" to "what the ..."
 
Greedy money men and greedy politicians caused the 1929 Crash - well not a lot has changed since then because Clinton took the controls off bankers ( for how big a kick-back ? ) in America and Blair ( now worth an estimated $100m ) copied in the UK.

Absolutely discraceful imho while starvation etc. lurks all around but that won't bother the fatcats just yet.
 
you do realise bond yields are gona be pushed to near 0 soon yeh?

And i can think it though, perhaps better than you?
So ... we have had 2 years ... and Bond yields have failed to be "pushed to near 0 soon." How's that theory standing up right about now?

Well ... Nigel is not going to volunteer an answer, that's certain, since he is a little embarrassed at the recent massive rises in yields.

"In late afternoon trade Thursday 5th Sept 2013,
the benchmark 10-year Treasury note fell 25/32
in price, yielding 2.992%, according to Tradeweb.

The yield has soared from this year's low of 1.61%,
near a record low, on May 1st 2013."


That's an 86% rise in yields in 4 months! And it's just getting started.

Don't know about you, Nigel, but this is going the wrong way, if yields are "heading for zero!"

Could it be that your ideas about hyperinflation are a little short of substance?

You see, the fed has no control over the Bond markets. China and Japan are leading the selling spree, which is forcing up yields. And when there are no buyers competing, but only sellers, yields will rise exponentially.

Your position is untenable - the evidence is there. Why, instead, don't you admit your error, and join in discussion about events forthcoming?
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately, the only way out for the western world, and vicariously, capitalism, is to hyperinflate-away the debt.

I don't know why you had to drag Capitalism into this. The problem has zero to do with Capitalism and everything to do with fiduciary money. Capitalism functions perfectly with sound money.

It is Governments who run huge deficits funded by the ability of Central bankers to create money out of thin air, backed by nothing, that results in excessive debt and inflation.

This is Keynesian "Deficits don't matter" Economics!
 
I don't know why you had to drag Capitalism into this. The problem has zero to do with Capitalism and everything to do with fiduciary money. Capitalism functions perfectly with sound money.

It is Governments who run huge deficits funded by the ability of Central bankers to create money out of thin air, backed by nothing, that results in excessive debt and inflation.

This is Keynesian "Deficits don't matter" Economics!

That's the problem. Creating new money should have been backed by assets. The general public just doesn't really want to know but they would sit up and take notice if a parcel of land was backing the new money. If the incompetent admins of the US had known this then just maybe they wouldn't have gone into wild spending sprees of overseas adventures. Say California was now owned by China then the political dopes could be seen to have failed in their responsibilities.

If Greece had to hand over islands for bail out money, they might have tried harder in the first place.
 
I don't know why you had to drag Capitalism into this. The problem has zero to do with Capitalism and everything to do with fiduciary money. Capitalism functions perfectly with sound money.

It is Governments who run huge deficits funded by the ability of Central bankers to create money out of thin air, backed by nothing, that results in excessive debt and inflation.

This is Keynesian "Deficits don't matter" Economics!

Are there any places/countries in the world where capitalism is used correctly as per your understanding of the term?


I'm thinking Marx included the institution of Government, banks and financiers in the creation of goods and services for profit when describing his view of now what is termed capitalism...

In fact looking at wikipedia I can see that there is now a whole hosts of capitalisms...

Corporate capitalism
Free-market capitalism
Laissez-faire capitalism
Regulatory capitalism
Rhine capitalism
State capitalism
Welfare capitalism

From my perspective we pretty much had pure capitalism in the British Empire culminating in atrocious wars and Victorian era of horrendous living standards of the masses, with 4 year olds sent down coal mines and people made to work for 18 hours a day. Another example, the East India Company consumed everything in its path in the pursuit of profit including incorporating Government to fight wars against other countries in company interest.

So where do you see your correct version of capitalism?
 
Last edited:
It’s easy to see who was educated in a Government school. According to these imbeciles, instead of employing one adult to dig a hole using a backhoe, Capitalists would rather have thousands of 4 year olds digging with a teaspoon.
 
It’s easy to see who was educated in a Government school. According to these imbeciles, instead of employing one adult to dig a hole using a backhoe, Capitalists would rather have thousands of 4 year olds digging with a teaspoon.

So you are saying those 4 year olds who went down the minds were incorrectly employed by pure or non-pure capitalists? We are not talking about now but back then when there were little or no regulation or government controls or health and safety.

That is a very poor answer to a decent question NT.

Are you also suggesting or saying, you were educated in a so called assumed to be a better 'private' school???

Instead of avoiding the question can you kindly enlighten us please?




So where do you see your correct version of capitalism?

So where do you see your correct version of capitalism?
 
Last edited:
You just can't win with the anti-Capitalists...
If people are working 18 hours a day, greedy Capitalists are accused of employing slave labour.
If a labour saving device is invented, the greedy Capitalists are blamed for creating unemployment.
 
You just can't win with the anti-Capitalists...
If people are working 18 hours a day, greedy Capitalists are accused of employing slave labour.
If a labour saving device is invented, the greedy Capitalists are blamed for creating unemployment.


Q:
So where do you see your correct version of capitalism?

A:
You just can't win with the anti-Capitalists...
If people are working 18 hours a day, greedy Capitalists are accused of employing slave labour.
If a labour saving device is invented, the greedy Capitalists are blamed for creating unemployment.


Mate you arguing with your self in your head or what?

1. I am not anti-Capitalist.
2. I did not call employers of 4 year olds going down coal minds greedy. Point I'm making is it was cost efficient compared to enlarging holes and paying more to get bigger adult bodies down those small holes and dark tunnels. There were no machinery back then to dig coal out of mines.
3. I did not, and do not object but embrace creative destruction as you should know coming from a man in the IT industry and who used to show secretaries how to use word processors for mass mailings.


So ask one of those men in your head known as NT this question please...


So where does NT see correct version of capitalism as per his divine vision of how it should be executed in practice???
 
Can I just point out At they are coal mines not coal minds.
A small error to be sure but.............
 
We all know capitalists are greedy swine with no feelings for others

next question
 
Can I just point out At they are coal mines not coal minds.
A small error to be sure but.............

Thanks Pat, was correct on first use post #587 and then went to pot. Slip of the keyboard so to speak. :cheesy:

Addenda: Just noticed in point 2. I've used it twice once incorrectly. Always wonder how the mind works seeing the sound rather than the written word. Amazing stuff. :)
 
Last edited:
We all know capitalists are greedy swine with no feelings for others

next question


Going back to Ingot's post, this hyperinflation hasn't developed or progressed as I would have imagined considering the magnitude of the bail out. I think this is due to the transmission mechanism and lack of understanding on my behalf.

I think bond yields are rising for sure and earlier than announced rate rises are being penciled in. Like a tight rope walk governments will have to keep rates negative w.r.t inflation to have a chance of paying debt back.

Not sure how governments will force buyers to step forward with falling bond prices???
 
FFS :rolleyes:

Bond prices are falling because investors are selling them! :rolleyes:

"How Governments will "FORCE" buyers to step forward"...Spoken like a true Socialist...Government force :rolleyes:

Governments need to raise interest rates if they want investors to hold onto the bonds, but because the yields are below price inflation the only people dumb enough to buy them are Central Banks through the process of Q.E, otherwise known as debt monetization. Create money out of thin air and buy the bonds, this IS inflation...FFS! :rolleyes:
 
One of the big characteristics of the Weimar period / Great Depression was the euphoria over low borrowing rates. Gamblers borrowed huge sums to gamble on the stock market. All was fine until the bubble burst. The Weimar republic was a perfect storm imho of various negative factors e.g.
1. Losing the war
2. social unrest/communism let the Nazis in
3. Anti Jewish programmes.
4. Collapse of the old order.
5. Rise of anarchy. Berlin was famous for it's libertarian clubs etc.
6. No confidence in a poor leadership.

Yes there seem to be similarities for these days.
 
FFS :rolleyes:

Bond prices are falling because investors are selling them! :rolleyes:

"How Governments will "FORCE" buyers to step forward"...Spoken like a true Socialist...Government force :rolleyes:

Governments need to raise interest rates if they want investors to hold onto the bonds, but because the yields are below price inflation the only people dumb enough to buy them are Central Banks through the process of Q.E, otherwise known as debt monetization. Create money out of thin air and buy the bonds, this IS inflation...FFS! :rolleyes:


Mr FFS, bond prices are falling because expectation on interest rate rises are built in to the system; is the reason why buyers aren't stepping up to buy them.

Inverse price / yield relationship. Not simply because people are selling them.
 
That's new to me...a price just falls all by itself because of expectation! Imagine having the power to change the value of anything by "expectation"...amazing ! There are no buyers buying...but at the same time, no sellers selling...it's all expectation making the price change...

*LOL*


http://www.moneynews.com/Economy/Pimco-withdrawals-June-safety/2013/07/08/id/513852

Pimco US Funds Had Record $14.5 Billion of Withdrawals in June

Pacific Investment Management Co., the world’s largest active fixed-income manager, absorbed a record $14.5 billion in net redemptions last month across its U.S. mutual funds as investors fled bonds in anticipation of the Federal Reserve scaling back its asset purchases.
 
That's new to me...a price just falls all by itself because of expectation! Imagine having the power to change the value of anything by "expectation"...amazing ! There are no buyers buying...but at the same time, no sellers selling...it's all expectation making the price change...

*LOL*


http://www.moneynews.com/Economy/Pimco-withdrawals-June-safety/2013/07/08/id/513852

Pimco US Funds Had Record $14.5 Billion of Withdrawals in June

Quote:
Pacific Investment Management Co., the world’s largest active fixed-income manager, absorbed a record $14.5 billion in net redemptions last month across its U.S. mutual funds as investors fled bonds in anticipation of the Federal Reserve scaling back its asset purchases.

Agree we are talking about the same thing but to say prices are falling because people are selling is very basic.

Question why, has been answered.

If you read your link, anticipate is to expect right? So why is your first sentence so against expectations with ridicule?

No need to reply as I'm sure even in agreement you'll find something to rant about.
 
Last edited:
Top