My life is my own!

From Mises’  Human Action:

The wavelike movement affecting the economic system, the recurrence of periods of boom which are followed by periods of depression, is the unavoidable outcome of the attempts, repeated again and again, to lower the gross market rate of interest by means of credit expansion. There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved.

A paradigm shift in economics is necessary, in the sense meant by Thomas Kuhn, if we are to get out of this sustainably.

Via First in Line for New Money – Doug French – Mises Daily:

Increases in money aren’t sprinkled from the sky, floating indiscriminately into whoever’s hands are in the right place at the right time. Money-supply increases occur through the commercial banking system and Federal Reserve. Those who receive the money first benefit at the expense of those receiving the money last.

“The fiat dollar is an ‘elite’ system,” Jim Grant told the Wall Street Journal recently, “and Wall Street is its supporting ‘interest group’ — those nimble, market-savvy, plugged-in folks know how to shuffle assets and exploit cheap funding from the Fed to leverage up their profits and soften the downside.”

No wonder sales of luxury cars are up despite the general economic malaise.

Our present monetary arrangements are generating an unjust distribution of wealth while wrecking the economy for everyone. It’s time for that to change.

Via The Cobden Centre, The Crime Known as Quantitative Easing, a superb article by Robert Sadler:

Rather helpfully, on the Bank’s website there is an explanation of how Quantitative Easing was supposed to improve the economy.  Quite clearly, the Bank explains that they purchased British Government bonds (gilts) and high quality (investment grade) bonds from private sector companies (banks, pension funds, insurance companies and non-financial institutions).  The Bank’s concern was that there was too little money “circulating” in the economy.  Using this method, the Bank was able to inject the much needed money directly into the economy and the companies that needed it.  The idea was two-fold; a) asset prices increase, wealth increases and spending increases; b) more money, means more spending, bank reserves increase, meaning more lending, spending and income increases, inflation arrives at the magic 2% rate and we all live happily ever after, growing fat off of the magic wealth creation machine at the Bank.  But there is a dark side to this fairy tale and at the risk of sounding clichéd, it is because in this case, more money really does mean more problems.

I recommend the entire piece.

In researching a piece on QE, I found this from Mises’ Socialism, which can stand alone for the moment. Here, by “inflation”, Mises means an increase in the money supply, which causes price rises. For Mises, “Destructionism” is the socialist strategy of tearing down the existing order in the hope that the socialist utopia will emerge. The work dates from 1932 and it tells us most of what we need to know today.

Inflation is the last word in destructionism. The Bolshevists, with their inimitable gift for rationalizing their resentments and interpreting defeats as victories, have represented their financial policy as an effort to abolish Capitalism by destroying the institution of money. But although inflation does indeed destroy Capitalism, it does not do away with private property. It effects great changes of fortune and income, it destroys the whole finely organized mechanism of production based on division of labour, it can cause a relapse into an economy without trade if the use of metal money or at least of barter trade is not maintained. But it cannot create anything, not even a socialist order of society.

By destroying the basis of reckoning values—the possibility of calculating with a general denominator of prices which, for short periods at least, does not fluctuate too wildly—inflation shakes the system of calculations in terms of money, the most important aid to economic action which thought has evolved. As long as it is kept within certain limits, inflation is an excellent psychological support of an economic policy which lives on the consumption of capital. In the usual, and indeed the only possible, kind of capitalist book-keeping, inflation creates an illusion of profit where in reality there are only losses. As people start off from the nominal sum of the erstwhile cost price, they allow too little for depreciation on fixed capital, and since they take into account the apparent increases in the value of circulating capital as if these increases were real increases of value, they show profits where accounts in a stable currency would reveal losses. This is certainly not a means of abolishing the effects of an evil etatistic policy, of war and revolution; it merely hides them from the eye of the multitude. People talk of profits, they think they are living in a period of economic progress, and finally they even applaud the wise policy which apparently makes everyone richer.

But the moment inflation passes a certain point the picture changes. It begins to promote destructionism, not merely indirectly by disguising the effects of destructionist policy; it becomes in itself one of the most important tools of destructionism. It leads everyone to consume his fortune; it discourages saving, and thereby prevents the formation of fresh capital. It encourages the confiscatory policy of taxation. The depreciation of money raises the monetary expression of commodity values and this, reacting on the book values of changes in capital—which the tax administration regards as increases in income and capital—becomes a new legal justification for confiscation of part of the owners’ fortune. References to the apparently high profits which entrepreneurs can be shown to be making, on a calculation assuming that the value of money remains stable, offers an excellent means of stimulating popular frenzy. In this way, one can easily represent all entrepreneurial activity as profiteering, swindling, and parasitism. And the chaos which follows, the money system collapsing under the avalanche of continuous issues of additional notes, gives a favourable opportunity for completing the work of destruction.

The destructionist policy of interventionism and Socialism has plunged the world into great misery. Politicians are helpless in the face of the crisis they have conjured up. They cannot recommend any way out except more inflation or, as they call it now, reflation. Economic life is to be “cranked up again” by new bank credits (that is, by additional “circulation” credit) as the moderates demand, or by the issue of fresh government paper money, which is the more radical programme.

But increases in the quantity of money and fiduciary media will not enrich the world or build up what destructionism has torn down. Expansion of credit does lead to a boom at first, it is true, but sooner or later this boom is bound to crash and bring about a new depression. Only apparent and temporary relief can be won by tricks of banking and currency. In the long run they must land the nation in profounder catastrophe. For the damage such methods inflict on national well-being is all the heavier, the longer people have managed to deceive themselves with the illusion of prosperity which the continuous creation of credit has conjured up.

In the course of scheduling a series of articles for The Cobden Centre on the Theory of Money and Credit, I found this quote which seems apposite after our recent spell of “quantitative easing”, the injection of new money into the economy, also known in some circles as inflation of the money supply:

A government always finds itself obliged to resort to inflationary measures when it cannot negotiate loans and dare not levy taxes, because it has reason to fear that it will forfeit approval of the policy it is following if it reveals too soon the financial and general economic consequences of that policy. Thus inflation becomes the most important psychological resource of any economic policy whose consequences have to be concealed; and so in this sense it can be called an instrument of unpopular, i.e., of antidemocratic, policy, since by misleading public opinion it makes possible the continued existence of a system of government that would have no hope of the consent of the people if the circumstances were clearly laid before them. That is the political function of inflation. It explains why inflation has always been an important resource of policies of war and revolution and why we also find it in the service of socialism. When governments do not think it necessary to accommodate their expenditure to their revenue and arrogate to themselves the right of making up the deficit by issuing notes, their ideology is merely a disguised absolutism.

Emphasis mine.