To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (7513 ) 2/10/2004 10:35:29 PM From: gregor_us Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 110194 I Disagree with the European Banker, in part. One of his major points is that wealth stored in fixed assets like houses is not available to "enter back into the economy" causing inflation. Nothing could be further from the truth because the writer here has ignored the monetization of fixed assets through re-financing and home equity loans. But I agree with the writer that we are pretty much on the threshold of becoming Japan. I think we'll have zero interest rates... **LOCKED-IN LIQUIDITY This immediately raises the next great question that is repeatedly posed to us: Couldn’t all this excess liquidity in the financial markets one day flood into the real economy, boosting inflation in consumer and producer prices? Our answer is a categorical no. First of all, the excess liquidity went into fixed assets, having boosted their prices. But to move money out of these assets and into the real economy now would require the sale of such assets against cash. Undertaken at a major scale, however, this would merely depress asset values because invested money is in the aggregate definitely locked in. To flee into “real goods,” the investor has to find other people who are ready to take his asset against their cash, and that means that a net money inflow out of the financial markets and into the economy cannot take place. Therefore, when the stock market crashed in 2001–02, no money exited. Only prices changed. No money moves. Markets are liquid only as long as buyers predominate. They become illiquid when sellers predominate. Liquid markets can turn illiquid overnight, without any contraction in the money supply.**