We are living in a time that can only be considered monetary chaos. The U.S. Federal Reserve has manipulated key interest rates down to practically zero for the last six years, and expanded the money supply in the banking system by $4 trillion dollars over that time. And with the true mentality of the monetary central planner, the Fed Board of Governors are now planning to manipulate key interest rates in an upward direction that they deem desirable.
The European Central Bank (ECB) has instituted a conscious policy of “negative” interest rates and planned an additional monetary expansion of well over a trillion Euros over the next year. Plus, the head of the ECB has assured the public and financial markets that there is “no limit” to the amount of paper money that will be produced to push the European economies in the direct that those monetary central planners consider best.
We also should not forget that it was the Federal Reserve that earlier in the twenty-first century undertook a monetary expansion and policy of interest rate manipulation that set the stage for the severe and prolonged “great recession” that began in 2008-2009, in conjunction with a Federal government distorting subsidization of the American housing market.
The media and the policy pundits may focus on the day-to-day zigs and zags of central bank monetary and interest rate policy, but what really needs to be asked is whether or not we should continue to leave monetary and banking policy in the discretionary hands of central banks and the monetary central planners who manage them.
All the leading countries of Europe were drawn into the war. It began when the archduke of Austria- Hungary, Franz Ferdinand, and his wife, Sophia, were assassinated in Bosnia in June 1914. The Austro-Hungarian government claimed that the Bosnian-Serb assassin had the clandestine support of the Serbian government, which the government in Belgrade denied.
How a Terrible War Began and Played Out
Ultimatums and counter-ultimatums soon set in motion a series of European military alliances among the Great Powers. In late July and early August, the now-warring parties issued formal declarations of war. Imperial Germany, the Turkish Empire, and Bulgaria supported Austria-Hungary. Imperial Russia supported Serbia, which soon brought in France and Great Britain because these countries were aligned with the czarist government in St. Petersburg. Italy entered the war in 1915 on the side of the British and the French.
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 10/23/2015 19:08 -0400
Dear Bureau of Labor Statistics: please pay careful attention to this case study of how your CPI “inflation” gauge, hedonically, seasonally-adjusted or otherwise, is completely inaccurate, and how what you record as 0% inflation is really 72%.
As Consumerist points out, for the latest example of “stealth inflation” we go to Sodastream, where as part of a redesign of its proprietary line of flavoring syrups which “cost the same” the actual bottle contents are now not only smaller but also diluted.
“How much smaller? The old version made 50 servings of flavored drink, and the new versions make only 29. Why 29? Why not 30? Such are the mysteries of the Grocery Shrink Ray.”
Consumerist shows that “the new bottles are somehow taller even though they’re smaller. On the positive side, they no longer look like petite laundry detergent bottles.”
Furthermore, while the number of servings is down to 2/3 of the original amount, the bottle size isn’t that much smaller. That’s because the measuring cap is now bigger, and each serving uses more syrup. “The worst part is that they just diluted it with more water so the ‘new improved’ ones LOOK like they are the same size,” reader Erik complained to us. “They are 440ml instead of the old 500. EVIL! Free the bubbles! Stop this shrink ray occupation of my favorite soda!”
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/19/2015 15:00 -0400
On the surface, Canada’s 1.2% inflation is negligible, and barely enough to keep up with the pace of overall growth as mandated by a few central bank academics. It is below the surface, however, that one finds the scary truth. Because when stripping away the sliding energy prices (which at the recent pace of short covering among oil speculators are about to surge) some scary numbers emerge, such as a 3.8% monthly jump in food prices, primarily as a result of a whopping 30-40% increase in select meat prices in the last 8 months.
How do ordinary people – which excludes those who work in central banks and have taxpayers fund their everyday purchases, which allows them to fully ignore soaring food and rent costs – survive in an environment of soaring food prices?
If ever there were an archetypal “bleak statement of everything,” it might be drug prices, at least in the United States. This is where the market literally kills people; life for the sick or injured becomes a great big Running Man game show, where not-surviving is around every corner and in every shadow. The game show, which is the prescription drug marketplace, takes in about $91 billion annually in sales, $31 billion in the US alone.
A study out this week from economics researchers at MIT offers a new perspective on said marketplace, particularly among its star earners: cancer drugs. Every year since 1995, a group of 58 leading cancer medications has increased on average by 10 percent. In 1995, they cost (on average) $54,100 per year of added life, while in 2013 they cost about $207,000 per added year (on average), an almost 300 percent increase in total.