ADVERTISEMENT

Are Rate Increases the Right Response to Inflation?

It's obvious that we have more demand than we have available goods and services, and that this disparity is what's driving inflation,... I think problems exist on both sides of the equation so the solution needs to address both sides of the equation,... We need to tighten up the money supply and improve the supply chain. If we can get these two elements back to being closer in sync inflation will begin to abate.
 
Congress has lots more tools it could use, than the Fed does. It is a genuine failure of governance that we leave this up to the Fed.
Do you trust a government that can't balance their own budget to write laws telling people how they are supposed to get loans, let alone anything financially responsible?
 
Companies got fat on just in time delivery. Offshoring is not a sustainable business model and frankly a threat to our national security. But we need need the cheap goods so ceos can make 380x their average employee wage. It's comical honesty if it wasn't reality.
 
It's obvious that we have more demand than we have available goods and services, and that this disparity is what's driving inflation,... I think problems exist on both sides of the equation so the solution needs to address both sides of the equation,... We need to tighten up the money supply and improve the supply chain. If we can get these two elements back to being closer in sync inflation will begin to abate.
But who is going to hang the bell on the cat?
 
It's obvious that we have more demand than we have available goods and services, and that this disparity is what's driving inflation,... I think problems exist on both sides of the equation so the solution needs to address both sides of the equation,... We need to tighten up the money supply and improve the supply chain. If we can get these two elements back to being closer in sync inflation will begin to abate.
@Rifler and I agree on something for once!

It's a bit of both supply and demand problems. With so many supply problems over the past year, it's silly to not acknowledge the role that low supply had in inflation.
 
The non-productive got relief, then pennies from heaven, then a pot of gold from the end of the rainbow.

This Congress just needs to adjourn...
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldmom
If the main drivers of inflation are pandemic disruptions of supply chains, war-related spikes in energy costs, war and climate related increases in food costs, and rampant profiteering in certain sectors, tell me how higher rates make sense as a "solution."

Sure, higher rates are likely to slow growth, reduce employment, and dampen demand. But rate changes don't actually address any of the real problems.

The real problems should be addressed by sensible federal policies. Instead we have gridlock. If you are one of those who has been a cheerleader for gridlock, you might want to rethink.
That would mean the current administration would actually have to understand business and economics AND work with them not just dictate to them
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldmom
Do you trust a government that can't balance their own budget to write laws telling people how they are supposed to get loans, let alone anything financially responsible?
I trust the people loaning out the money to decide how people get loans, with the caveat that they loan out their money.
This means no bailouts.
 
Congress has lots more tools it could use, than the Fed does. It is a genuine failure of governance that we leave this up to the Fed.
Agree with this...

We've basically given an unelected board control of the economy cuz they're so incredibly smart. Until they aren't.
 
An ECON 101 truism that ignores the current actual causes of inflation.
Not really. There are multiple actual causes, but money supply increase by both monetary and fiscal policy is the leading cause, compounded by poor energy production policy and supply chain issues. We also have a classic wage price spiral that has been initiated by multiple factors, with fiscal policy being a major contributor.

Also, don't forget the Fed is also engaged in quantitative tightening going forward.
 
Last edited:
Congress has lots more tools it could use, than the Fed does. It is a genuine failure of governance that we leave this up to the Fed.
It shouldn't be left entirely up to the Fed. Congress needs to act to balance the budget. Federal spending should be no more than about 18% of gdp. When Clinton left office Federal spending was about 18%, very good. The 50 year avergae is 20.8%.

Federal spending was 30% of gdp in 2021. That's the most on record since at least 1972 by a wide margin (that's how far back the CDC data I'm looking at goes). Even in the 2009 great recession, the next highest, we only hit about 24% Federal spending.

The problem is the supply side. Employment hasn't even got back to pre-pandemic levels in terms of actual number employed. That won't be helped by raising rates or raising taxes.

 
It shouldn't be left entirely up to the Fed. Congress needs to act to balance the budget. Federal spending should be no more than about 18% of gdp. When Clinton left office Federal spending was about 18%, very good. The 50 year avergae is 20.8%.

Federal spending was 30% of gdp in 2021. That's the most on record since at least 1972 by a wide margin (that's how far back the CDC data I'm looking at goes). Even in the 2009 great recession, the next highest, we only hit about 24% Federal spending.

The problem is the supply side. Employment hasn't even got back to pre-pandemic levels in terms of actual number employed. That won't be helped by raising rates or raising taxes.

Excellent post. It can't be left to the Fed because the Fed doesn't control fiscal policy or energy policy. The Fed appears to be doing what it can until the next Congress is seated. While there's little hope the next Congress will show fiscal responsibility, they might at least show a little fiscal restraint. The GOP has typically been extremely lazy when it comes to solving problems. That said, sometimes doing nothing is better than taking action, which we've got recent evidence of.
 
Federal spending was 30% of gdp in 2021. The most on record since at least 1972 by a wide margin (that's how far back the CDC data I'm looking at goes).
Only other time you find spending that high is middle of World War 2 (‘43-‘45), and 85% of that spending was on the war.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hwk23 and Finance85
Companies got fat on just in time delivery. Offshoring is not a sustainable business model and frankly a threat to our national security. But we need need the cheap goods so ceos can make 380x their average employee wage. It's comical honesty if it wasn't reality.
Who stopped you from doing the stockpiling you should have? Or are you saving money on storage?
Are the Mormons right, should we all keep a year’s worth of food stored?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Finance85
Companies got fat on just in time delivery. Offshoring is not a sustainable business model and frankly a threat to our national security. But we need need the cheap goods so ceos can make 380x their average employee wage. It's comical honesty if it wasn't reality.
Are you saying Trump was right? Your post sounds an awful lot like you are paraphrasing Make America Great Again, and you are a proponent of essential goods being produced domestically.

Most of us hate the notion that an @sshole like Trump might have actually been right. If we simply look at the bare policy, and take away who is a proponent of the policy, the merits of the policy look a little different.
 
Are you saying Trump was right? Your post sounds an awful lot like you are paraphrasing Make America Great Again, and you are a proponent of essential goods being produced domestically.

Most of us hate the notion that an @sshole like Trump might have actually been right. If we simply look at the bare policy, and take away who is a proponent of the policy, the merits of the policy look a little different.
If he would have acted on any of that policy you'd have a point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Firekirknow
Go back to Russia fool.
good-answer-family-feud-canada.gif


Seriously, why isn’t the duty to pay for stockpiling goods you want and need on you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroupThink
Go live in the woods and jerk it to ayn rand.
So much deflection.
Whose responsibility are you?
Who stopped you from doing the stockpiling you should have? Or are you saving money on storage?
Are the Mormons right, should we all keep a year’s worth of food stored?
 
If the main drivers of inflation are pandemic disruptions of supply chains, war-related spikes in energy costs, war and climate related increases in food costs, and rampant profiteering in certain sectors, tell me how higher rates make sense as a "solution."

Sure, higher rates are likely to slow growth, reduce employment, and dampen demand. But rate changes don't actually address any of the real problems.

The real problems should be addressed by sensible federal policies. Instead we have gridlock. If you are one of those who has been a cheerleader for gridlock, you might want to rethink.
It’s a moving target as a business. Gouging or profiteering is just short term strategy to account for future cost increases. Look at the stock market- these companies have lost 20% of value. That’s not just something to brush off.
 
So much deflection.
Whose responsibility are you?
Who stopped you from doing the stockpiling you should have? Or are you saving money on storage?
Are the Mormons right, should we all keep a year’s worth of food stored?
No we will in a society. But you know that.
 
If he would have acted on any of that policy you'd have a point.
Actually he did. Tariffs, energy policy, and even foreign policy.

I happen to think Trump went too far on (punitive) tariffs with China, but there was clearly intent to bring manufacturing back to the US.
 
A great number of people are heavily leveraged at this time as well. The fed needs to walk a tightrope here

They won't, and the result will be a recession.

Side note: With them raising the interest rates, when should we expect the backs to raise interest rates on savings accounts?
 
They won't, and the result will be a recession.

Side note: With them raising the interest rates, when should we expect the backs to raise interest rates on savings accounts?
That will definitely lag. Banks have become addicted to the Fed window instead of leveraging savings.
 
It shouldn't be left entirely up to the Fed. Congress needs to act to balance the budget. Federal spending should be no more than about 18% of gdp. When Clinton left office Federal spending was about 18%, very good. The 50 year avergae is 20.8%.

Federal spending was 30% of gdp in 2021. That's the most on record since at least 1972 by a wide margin (that's how far back the CDC data I'm looking at goes). Even in the 2009 great recession, the next highest, we only hit about 24% Federal spending.

The problem is the supply side. Employment hasn't even got back to pre-pandemic levels in terms of actual number employed. That won't be helped by raising rates or raising taxes.


This. The Fed is supposed to be the "backstop", not the first thing that is used. 30% of GDP is insane.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hwk23 and Finance85
This. The Fed is supposed to be the "backstop", not the first thing that is used. 30% of GDP is insane.
They never ever increases taxes to pay for anything.

I don’t care what they spend money on, just increase taxes to pay for it. Let the voters decide if it is worth it.
 
They won't, and the result will be a recession.

Side note: With them raising the interest rates, when should we expect the backs to raise interest rates on savings accounts?
I have an Ally savings account. was stuck at 1/2% for a long time but they bumped it to .0075 and then .009 in the last month.
 
They never ever increases taxes to pay for anything.

I don’t care what they spend money on, just increase taxes to pay for it. Let the voters decide if it is worth it.
I think you mean increase tax revenue. There are 2 ways to do that - increase tax rates, or grow the economy. Growing the economy has the potential to raise far more tax revenue than raising income tax rates. Reagan proved this in the mid 80's, and Ireland proved it again at the turn of the century.

Politicians can't stand prosperity. No matter how much revenue increases, it's never enough. Reagan made deals with Tip O'Neal that negated the increases - military spending in exchange for domestic spending. And the Irish went down a similar path, but obviously just domestic spending.
 
  • Like
Reactions: An Iowa fan
I think you mean increase tax revenue. There are 2 ways to do that - increase tax rates, or grow the economy. Growing the economy has the potential to raise far more tax revenue than raising income tax rates. Reagan proved this in the mid 80's, and Ireland proved it again at the turn of the century.

Politicians can't stand prosperity. No matter how much revenue increases, it's never enough. Reagan made deals with Tip O'Neal that negated the increases - military spending in exchange for domestic spending. And the Irish went down a similar path, but obviously just domestic spending.
Just seems like a lot of stuff gets passed with the promise of “this will cause the economy to grow even more and pay for itself”. I am pretty damn skeptical.
 
I think you mean increase tax revenue. There are 2 ways to do that - increase tax rates, or grow the economy. Growing the economy has the potential to raise far more tax revenue than raising income tax rates. Reagan proved this in the mid 80's, and Ireland proved it again at the turn of the century.

Politicians can't stand prosperity. No matter how much revenue increases, it's never enough. Reagan made deals with Tip O'Neal that negated the increases - military spending in exchange for domestic spending. And the Irish went down a similar path, but obviously just domestic spending.
This is exactly correct. Thank you. Thank you.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT