Hyperinflation

Together with the Fed's balance sheet, we are now convinced that the second most important developing metric for the economy is a granular analysis of the key public monetary aggregates: M1+M2. Within a month we also hope to develop our own definition of M3, to supplement such work elsewhere, in order to provide an independent opinion on what the true monetary growth is, now that increasingly more people are discussing the threat of outright hyperinflation. But before we get there, here is our first breakdown of M1 and M2 data. As a reminder, M1, or the monetary base, consists of the i) Currency in Circulation, ii) Demand Deposits, and iii) Other Checkable Deposits (technically it also includes roughly $5 billion worth of Travellers Checks each week, but this is merely a remnant of a bygone era and it rarely if ever changes). In the most recent week, total M1 was $1,700.7 billion, a modest decline from the prior week mostly due to a $12 billion drop in Other Checkable Deposits. Beyond pure M1, there are also i) Savings Deposits at Commercial Banks, ii) Savings Deposits at Thrifts, iii) Total Small Denomination Time Deposits and iv) Retail Money Funds. All these, in addition to the items listed under M1, make up M2, which closed the week ended September 8 at just over $8.7 trillion for the first time in history. For those who look at M2 as an indication of just how much liquidity is sloshing in the system, and use it as a proxy for inflation, the attached chart must be rather troubling.

In his new post, Gonzalo Lira analyzes the Oil Shock of '79, and the subsequent run up in inflation. He comes to some interesting conclusions about 1979, and how those conclusions might apply to today, if and when there is a run on Treasuries. "In both 1979 and today, dollars were poised to chase after commodities, following a triggering event. In ‘79, it was the fall of the Shah. In 2010, we are waiting for our moment to exit Treasuries. Therefore, one can look at the events of ’79–’82 as a dress rehearsal for what I think will happen today, and in the immediate future, if and when the Treasury bond bubble pops." — Gonzalo Lira

John Williams, arguably one of the best trackers of real, unmanipulated government data via his Shadow Stats blog, has just released a note to clients in which he warns that hyperinflation may hit as soon as 6 to 9 months from today. With so many established economists and pundits seeing nothing but deflation as far as the eye can see, and the Fed doing all in its power to halt the deleveraging cycle, both in the open and shadow economies, what is Williams' argument? Read on. Incidentally, even if some fellow bloggers disagree with Mr. Williams' assesment, we believe it is in our readers' best interest to have them make up their own mind on this most critical economic development.

A recent guest post by Gonzalo Lira on Zero Hedge, providing a theoretical framework for the arrival of hyperinflation, went viral, generating over 75k views and over 1,000 comments, further confirming that the biggest and most confounding debate in all of finance is what will the final outcome of the Fed's market manipulative actions be: deflation, inflation or, and not really comparable, hyperinflation (which is a distinctly different phenomenon from either of the above). The post infuriated some hard core deflationists who continue to refuse to acknowledge the possibility that in its attempt to inspire inflation at all costs, the Fed may just push beyond the tipping point of monetary imprudence away from mere target 2-3% inflation, and create an outright debasement of the world's reserve currency. One among these was none other than Mish himself, who a week ago recorded a podcast on Global Edge with Eric Townsend and Michael Hampton (link here), in which his conclusion was that Hyperinflation is the endgame, "so it is unlikely." Of course, the very premise of this statement argues that even in a monetary collapse the Fed will retain control over the flow of money, which of course is unlikely, and thus makes us very skeptical that such a simplistic and solipsistic argument is enough to resolve the debate. Since one of the items covered in the Mish podcast was Lira's argument, it was only fair that Gonzalo himself should be heard. Here is the Gonzalo Lira podcast defending the "Hyperinflation" case.

I usually don’t do follow-up pieces to any of my posts. But my recent longish piece, describing how hyperinflation might happen in the United States, clearly struck a nerve. There were two issues that many readers had a hard time wrapping their minds around, with regards to a hyperinflationary event: The first was, Where does all the money come from, for hyperinflation to happen? The second question was, Why will commodities rise, while equities, real estate and other assets fall? In other words, if there is an old fashioned run on a currency—in this case, the dollar, the world’s reserve currency—why would people get out of the dollar into commodities only, rather than into equities and real estate and other assets? In this post, I’m going to address both of these issues — Gonzalo Lira

Yields are low, unemployment up, CPI numbers are down—in short, everything screams "deflation". Nevertheless, the next leg down in the Global Depression will be a hyperinflation. Here's why it will happen, how it will happen, and what to do about it. - Gonzalo Lira

This is the fourth and final part of my major four part series dealing with what I feel is the primary question investors must now answer: is our future to be inflation or deflation? The answer has vast implications to our investment planning and decisions for the near term, and possibly for our long term. It is a very complex question with a lot of moving parts involving economics and politics. For those of you who have stuck with me for this series, thanks!

This is Part 3 of a major four part series dealing with what I feel is the primary question investors must now answer: is our future to be inflation or deflation? The answer has vast implications to our investment planning and decisions for the near term, and possibly for our long term. It is a very complex question with a lot of moving parts involving economics and politics.

This is Part 2 of a major four part series dealing with what I feel is the primary question investors must now answer: is our future to be inflation or deflation? The answer has vast implications to our investment planning and decisions for the near term, and possibly for our long term. It is a very complex question with a lot of moving parts involving economics and politics.

This is a major four part series dealing with what I feel is the primary question investors must now answer: is our future to be inflation or deflation? The answer has vast implications to our investment planning and decisions for the near term, and possibly for our long term. It is a very complex question with a lot of moving parts involving economics and politics. This is Part 1.

"In 2010, the authorities seem to have only two choices: allow defaults, which lead to deflation and
tremendous stress to the political system and public order; or inflate so that debts lose their
significance, which eventually leads to hyper-inflation and tremendous stress to the political system and
public order. Growth is a theoretical way out of this dilemma, but with shrinking populations and
increased regulation, Europe cannot manage this option. The US might, but the way will be difficult.
Cascading defaults will strip away many entitlements upsetting the rentiers and those who had planned
to become rentiers in the future. Countries that choose to allow defaults will see their currencies rally
as there will be a shrinkage of currency outstanding increasing the value of the rest, but collapsing
equity markets will test their resolve at every turn. We rentiers will be lucky if we can enjoy our dotage." John Taylor, FX Concepts

As we’ve discussed recently, persistent deflationary forces do not augur for a repeat of Japan circa 1990s or the US in the 1930s. Instead, because of the inability of governments to finance their current and future debt burden (there is a dearth of domestic savings and global capital), deflationary forces will ultimately lead to severe inflation or hyperinflation. In today’s missive, we explain how this will happen but in various stages.

The endlessly entertaining Hugh Hendry, who gave Jeffrey Sachs a royal beatdown yesterday and pretty much discredited the Columbia professor for life, is back in this interview with Money Week's Merryn Webb, in which he once again is not afraid to make "bold" statements. Such as that hyperinflation is pretty much inevitable, that China is the functional equivalent of the Next fashion chain in the 1980s, that instead of listening to idiots on TV who just talk their high beta books, investors should buy the largest and safest stocks. Interestingly, Hendry actually suggests a viable way to fix America's problems, which would require China to write off its US debt, thus "securing the health and vitality of China's biggest customer." Alas, we don't think it would be sufficient, as China holds about $1 trillion of US debt (at least officially). For the Hendry plan to work, debt repudiation would have to go viral, with all banks, US and European, writing down foreign debts as well. Of course, this would bring about the crash of the financial system overnight which is why it won't happen. And yes, it still will crash, as the financed assets are bled of all their cash flows, but at least the grind into systemic bankruptcy will be slow, painful (for the middle class) and very drawn out. As for hyperinflation, Hendry's view coincides with that of Zero Hedge: "the current deflationary shock will deepen and then create "political legitimacy to go nuclear with hyperinflation" via the printing press."

In today's note by David Rosenberg, the economist quotes a reader letter which provides a unique perspective on how hyperinflation arises: it is not so much a monetary supply/demand phenomenon, as it is one of faith in a currency, any currency. With the world stuck with the USD as a reserve currency, the question is how much more monetization and QE (and make no mistake, the Fed will be forced to do more of both of these activities) needs to occur before people give up on the greenback. And for all those who question what could possibly take the place of the dollar as the world reserve currency, we would like to point out that any country that has a massive stockpile of resources, an even more massive producing class (as opposed to consuming), a clean sovereign balance sheet, and a society hell-bent on being far more capitalist than the US, would likely make a great target. One specific country in Asia comes to mind. However, this will not occur before the next global economic collapse as century-old habits are difficult things to break. Once the economic reset button is pushed half way once again, and the US-China vassal linkage is broken, look for fund flows to redirect promptly across the Pacific.

Must watch hour long video from Inflation.us that is now making the viral rounds, explaining what everyone on this website understand, in simple language. Please forward to your friends and neighbors. Inflationist or deflationist, the facts behind this video are undeniable. It is time for the truth about our economy to break through the propaganda machine.