SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Non-Tech : Another Investment forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: richardred who wrote (42)5/6/2006 10:44:30 AM
From: richardred  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 340
 
High prices prompt 1970s comparisons
Other economic factors make repeat unlikely

By William Sluis
Tribune staff reporter
Published May 6, 2006

The stock market is at or near its all-time high. Gold is topping levels not seen in 25 years. Oil is above $70 a barrel. Housing prices are through the roof.

It isn't often that such a collection of indicators are all at or near their summits at the same time.

Economists, pondering the significance, see a fascinating and potentially dangerous historical parallel: the painful 1970s.

"There is a whiff of the `70s in the air, but it doesn't appear to be a case of deja vu all over again," said economist Brian Wesbury. "Although we are not likely to repeat those old problems, it's not entirely impossible."

The earlier era was a time when gasoline lines snaked around corners into filling stations and home prices zoomed beyond reach of the typical household. Gold skyrocketed above $800 an ounce in 1980 and interest rates hit the stratosphere.

The good times ended when the Federal Reserve, shocked by roaring inflation, sent interest rates to double digits. Lending for a home mortgage jumped to near 14 percent and the economy slumped into a 1982 recession that was the worst in any of our lifetimes.

But that was nearly a quarter-century ago, and few analysts are willing to say the scenario will repeat.

Even so, they worry that all aspects of commodity costs have been soaring skyward.

Many analysts blame a too-long period of low interest rates, which were held at Great Depression levels as the world economy stumbled along in the wake of the dot-com stock market collapse of Year 2000 and World Trade Center terrorist attacks the following year.

During an inflationary boom, not only do copper, oil, steel and precious metals rise as a group, they are joined by prices for land and homes. A widespread mentality of scarcity sets in.

Currently, shortages of commodities are becoming worrisome, partly because the economies of China and India are sucking in basic materials to produce the world's computers, household items and trinkets.

The question becomes: When does the boom mentality start to show cracks? When does a break appear in a sky's-the-limit attitude? Which part of the enormous economic edifice of prosperity will be the first to fall?

For now, the most suspect portion of the equation is real estate. At root, property is a commodity. And on Friday, luxury home builder Toll Brothers Inc., a leading builder of $700,000 homes, said that signed contracts fell 29 percent in its second fiscal quarter. It cut its full-year home deliveries forecast.

Wall Street, however, took little notice, and investors bid its shares higher.

Chicago economist Robert Dederick says there are major differences between the current situation and the nation's mood three decades ago.

"In those days, expectations of inflation began building, and there was far less faith that the Federal Reserve could bring prices under control," said Dederick, of RGD Economics.

Additionally, he said, workers in the 1970s went to bosses demanding raises--and got them. Labor unions were far more powerful than they are today. "There was a generally accepted view that if prices went up, wages would need to go up, too."

At the time, the economy faced little foreign competition, unlike today, when most products compete globally, Dederick said. Currently, businesses are having a tough time raising prices, as many are forced to swallow higher prices for fuel and metals.

While personal incomes are rising, there are no signs that weekly pay is zooming out of control. Many workers hold temporary positions. Entire industries, notably the airlines and domestic carmakers, continue to press for wage concessions and lower benefits. And, for good or ill, millions of undocumented workers are helping to hold wages down.

To keep inflation expectations firmly in check, Dederick expects the Fed to raise short-term interest rates on Wednesday, the 16th uptick in less than two years. The central bank's short-term barometer would rise to a flat 5 percent.

A concern is that were the central bank to squeeze credit too hard it would cut off consumer spending, taking the steam out of the economy's primary engine of growth.

Problems of the 1970s that haven't been repeated are rising levels of government regulation and spending, as well as higher taxes, said Wesbury, of First Trust Advisors in Lisle. "Today, government spending has gone up dramatically and the Fed has shown an expansive monetary policy--but nothing like the case 30 years ago," he said.

Mopping up excess monetary liquidity has become a commitment of central banks in all parts of the globe, said economist Lynn Reaser, of Bank of America's investment strategies group in Boston.

"There is a much greater commitment by all of the world's governments to keep inflation under control," she said. In recent months, inflation in this country has been running at less than a 3 1/2 percent annual rate, Reaser added.

For the stock market, a boom mentality means ever rising profits. After 15 quarters in a row in which corporate earnings have jumped by double digits, traders remain bullish, with few calling for caution.

"Investor sentiment remains subdued, valuations are reasonable and, in some sectors, are compelling," said Chicago investment manager Marshall Front of Front Barnett Associates.

Critics complain that a huge bulge of the profits hailed by investors is coming from producers of commodities, notably the oil companies. Some members of Congress, noting multibillion-dollar additions to the bottom line, have gone so far as to push for legislation aimed at petroleum price gouging, while admitting that they have no clear definition of what that means.

But economist Dederick said the current surge in petroleum prices "is nothing like the oil shock of the 1970s. That one was far more dramatic."

Although many Americans may hate the oil companies or blame them for buying feeder stock from foreign dictators, most have learned to live with high fuel prices, at least for now.

Those who believe the commodity boom will continue note that high prices are being stoked by hedge funds and other vast pools of money resembling mutual funds, which play the markets for petroleum, metals and gold, using money that has been accumulated by the wealthy and folks saving for retirement.

Economist Reaser says money pouring into such funds "represents a shift by investors into a different asset class. Some of them have taken money out of housing."

Until those investment pools suffer a severe setback, they will exert pressures to keep prices from falling.

In sum, economists say, while '70s-style inflation is unlikely to reappear, they are basing that view on expectations that activity will slow before the end of this year. If, instead, it builds further momentum, it will be time to reassess.

chicagotribune.com



To: richardred who wrote (42)5/7/2006 10:05:04 PM
From: Peter Dierks  Respond to of 340
 
May 06, 2006

Honest Money Part VII
by Douglas V. Gnazzo

Problems with Debt-Money

Abstract

Before proceeding to a discussion of the problems with today's monetary system of paper fiat debt-money, more commonly known as Federal Reserve Notes, we first want to reiterate the five most important attributes or functions of money:

Medium of exchange

Measure of value

Standard of value

Store of value

Legally accepted means of payment of debt

A sound monetary system is one in which the money-unit performs all of the above functions:

The money-unit most be usable as a medium-of-exchange for everyday transactions.

The money-unit must be a measure-of-value - that by which market participants compare or measure the value of all other goods by in the present.

The money-unit must be a standard-of-value - that by which all other goods are compared to not only in the present but in the future as well. Market participants must know the money they use now will be as good in the future as it is today.

The money-unit must be a store-of-value. This function follows from the money unit being a standard of value. Because it is a reliable standard of value, money is the perfect vehicle to save or store purchasing power needed in the future.

The money-unit must be accepted by all participants in the marketplace, including the State, however, the State should not issue the money unit. It is imperative that the State accepts the money unit as payment for taxes, etc. to the state, without having anything to do with its issuance.

Problems With Money

The main problems with the present day U.S. Federal Reserve Notes or dollar bills are:

Legal tender status for Federal Reserve Notes should not exist, unless approved by We The People by a constitutional amendment.

The State approved monopolization of the credit and money supply by the Federal Reserve should not be allowed without the approval of We The People.

The lack of a non-political free market unit-of-account without forced legal tender laws using the power of the State for enforcement.

The unit-of-measure-of-value and the means-of-payment are presently two different things.

The former is a measure, like an inch or a pound; the latter is either a commodity or a credit instrument. They should be the same entity.

The use of fractional reserve lending should either be abolished or approved of by the people through a constitutional amendment, including full disclosure to the public on exactly how it works, and a choice if the people want to use it or not.

Honest Money of silver and gold weight is not to have anything to do with fractional reserve lending.

The Money-Unit

We offer a somewhat different definition of the money-unit compared to most conventional monetary theory of the establishment, i.e. the State. Others know of the definition that we are about to set forth; unfortunately, they are voices in the wilderness, seldom heard.

The money-unit is that instrument/commodity that the free market by consensus agrees to use as money: money that fulfills all five (5) of the functions we have previously listed.

To reiterate, so there is no question or confusion on the subject:

Medium of Exchange
Measure of Value
Standard of Value
Store of Value
Legally Accepted Means of Debt Payment
Only the money-unit that can fulfill this multi-complex role is worthy of the distinction and honor as the money-unit. Honest and Sound Money should fulfill all five functions or major aspects of money simultaneously.

Defective Federal Reserve Notes

Today's Federal Reserve Note is clearly not a store of value, as it has lost 95% of its purchasing power since 1913, the year the Federal Reserve took control of our money supply.

It is not a standard of value as it continually loses purchasing power through the debasement and devaluation of the currency. This is why it does not function as a store of value.

Presently it functions as a measure of value and a medium of exchange, as well as the legally accepted means of payment of debt.

However, this too can change at any moment, as all that keeps the system going is faith - confidence that the money will continue to be accepted.

When the flicker of faith begins to wane - the flame will be snuffed out in an instant. Paper fiat currencies have been know to hyperinflate in a few weeks time and self-destruct in the process.

Regarding the last function concerning debt payment: we are of the opinion that the Federal Reserve Note is a debt instrument itself, and therefore cannot truly pay off debt.

It merely serves as the means to transfer debt from one account to another and to discharge debt by offset as well. Double-entry bookkeeping is not the blessing most believe; it is but a harbinger of that which has yet to come.

Besides, the five (5) original functions of money, to be Honest and Sound Money the money-unit most also perform the two following roles as well:

Unit-of weight

Unit-of-Account

Unit-of-Account

The unit-of-account is a unit of measurement of market value. Goods for sale in a market are priced using a unit-of-account. Value is measured by the seller and communicated to the buyer as a price denominated in the unit-of-account.

Accepted units-of-account can evolve from the natural dynamics of a free market or they can be forced upon the people through legal tender laws.

Obviously a unit-of-account that is forced upon the public by legal tender laws is inferior to a unit-of-account that the public freely chooses by common consensus based on free market principles of supply and demand, marginal utility, and objective exchange valuation.

The use of gold and silver occured according to natural free market principles. Paper fiat debt-money only occurs because of forced legal tender laws where the judicial, military and police power of the State stand ready to enforce the Kings prerogative.

When the value of a good is accepted by common consensus, to measure or compare the value of other goods; or when its value is used to denominate the payment of debts, then the commodity is said to be functioning as a unit-of-account.

Contracts of credit or debt are also denominated in a unit-of-account. The agreed value of the debt is measured, and the method of settling the debt is defined.

Once again - if legal tender laws are making the determination as to what the accepted unit-of-account is then whatever choice the State makes is inherently inferior to the choice made by a consensus of free market dynamics.

Freedom vs Force

Freedom always works better than forced obediance. One should lead by respect not by fear. We are supposed to live in the country that is the home of the free and the brave, not the enslaved and the dominated, no matter how clandestinely it occurs.

A debt instrument or an IOU should not be used as a unit-of-account,

as its value is determined by comparison to an external reference value: an actual unit-of-account that may be used for settlement;

or worse yet: the unit-of-account is merely expressed by a name for which there is no actual monetary definition other than the name.

An example would be the U.S. Dollar Bill, as when former Chairman Alan Greenspan was asked what the definition of money was he had no specific reply. Why didn't he reply - what is a Federal Reserve Note if not money?

The U.S. Code states that Federal Reserve Notes are redeemable in lawful money. If they are redeemable in lawful money, then apparently they are not lawful money, otherwise why would they need to be redeemed in lawful money - if they already were such?

Nowhere in the U.S. Code is there a definition of what is meant by lawful money. Seems like such an important value shoud be well defined and clearly understood - doesn't it?

The Constitution has a clear definition of money: the dollar (not dollar bill - dollar), and furthermore the Constitution states that nothing but gold and silver coin are to be legal tender.

The original Coinage Act of 1792 clearly defines a dollar as being a weight of silver - 371.25 grains of pure silver, which weight constitutes the existing SILVER STANDARD.

Hence, in a free market, the various names that units-of-account may have are simply

Definitions of units-of-weight - honest weights and measures.

Unit-of-Weight

The unit-of-weight is simply what it says: a unit-of-weight of a specific finesse of silver or gold per the Constitution and the Coinage Act of 1792.

No other names should appear on the money-unit other than its unit-of-weight.

There is no need or use for the name a dollar or 10 dollars or 20 dollars, or a yen or euro or pound. Such names do nothing more than add confusion and complexity to a most important distinction that should be as pure and simple as is possible.

The unit-of-weight is the purest and simplest standard. The Constitution calls for gold and silver coin, according to honest weights and measures. The Coinage Act of 1792 defines the standard weight to be 371.25 grains of pure silver.

The Silver Dollar Is Defined as the Constitutional Dollar

The Coinage Act of 1792 also delineates a bimetallic currency of both silver and gold coin according to weight.

However, it fixed the legal exchange rate of the two metals. This only hinders the monetary system as the legal rate is one thing, and the market price is another.

As we have said, all functions should be the same, including the legal rate and the market rate.

Both should float according to free market dynamics as determined on a daily basis. This is the purest, simplest, and most honest way - hence it provides the soundest monetary system.

Not only will this remove confusion as to what money is, but it will also prevent those in control of the money power from manipulating the money-unit. Hence, they will lose control of the money power.

What can be simpler than to call an ounce of gold an ounce of gold? What can be easier than calling an ounce of silver an ounce of silver?

The market can determine daily what the exchange rate of the two metals is according to free market principles of supply and demand.

No one man, or group of men can possibly know what the market knows. Besides, allowing an elite group to control the money power is allowing intervention in what is supposed to be a free market.

Such intervention prevents a free market - it is the antithesis of a free market. It is a fixed and contrived market.

The Money Power

Congress has the power to coin money not the power to issue money. The coins of silver and gold were in the possession of the people who brought the metals to the mint for coining.

The government did not own the silver and gold - the people owned the silver and gold. The government simply coined the bullion, and affixed its stamp certifying the weight and fineness of the metals content on the coin.

This is the critical difference between the power to coin money, and the power to emit money.

If Congress has the power to issue or create money, why would they need the power to borrow money? Why borrow money when you can simply create or issue it?

Article 1, Section 8, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution clearly states:

Congress shall have power to borrow money on the credit of the United States.

Furthermore, paragraph 5 of the same constitutional article states:

Congress shall have power to coin money, regulate the value thereof and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures

The Constitution does not provide Congress with the power to issue money, or to relegate that power to a private corporation such as the Federal Reserve.

The Mint Act clearly states that the government did not hold title to the silver and gold minted - ownership resided with the people who bought the metal to the mint expressly for minting. Once it was minted/coined, it returned to its original and rightful owner.

The gold and silver was private property - not State property.

Not until the formation of the Bank of England in 1694-1696 was there recognition by the State of private banking. The Bank of England was formed by a group of private bankers and merchants who made a deal with the British government.

The bankers agreed to lend the crown, at an agreed interest rate, enough new money to restore defaulted loans previously extended by some of the bankers. The banking charter given to the bankers secured their right to stray from hard money of gold and silver coin, to paper money decreed to be legal tender.

Paper money known as "bills of credit" became the rage. The same exact terminology is in our monetary history as well.

However, the Constitution prohibits the issuance of bills of credit.

Yet that is exactly what we presently have: Federal Reserve Notes or bills of credit.

Summary

We have seen the main problems and weaknesses of paper fiat debt-money. To reiterate they are:

Weaknesses

Legal tender laws of forced compliance

State approved monopolization of the credit and money power

The lack of a non-political free market unit-of-account

The unit-of-measure and the means of payment are two different things

Fractional reserve lending and lack of full disclosure

The use of names for money as compared to Honest Weights and Measures

Honest & Sound Money

The unit-of-money is the same as the unit-of-weight

The unit-of-weight is in accordance with the Silver Standard of the Constitution

The unit-of-weight is the same as the unit-of-measure

The unit-of-weight is the same as the unit-of-value

The unit-of-weight is the same as the unit-of-account

The economic and juristic definition of money is the same unit-of-weight

All aspects of money are to be the same: a unit-of-weight

No other names are on the unit-of-weight - only its weight and finesse

A constitutional amendment is passed to fix the existing problem of a fixed rate of exchange between the bimetallic system of gold and silver coinage per the Coinage Act of 1792.

Both the rates of exchange of silver and gold must float freely according to free market dynamics.

The above recommendations are not a fix-all for our monetary system. They are, however, a good starting point compared to what presently exists. There are far greater minds and experts than me that could easily fine-tune and provide a viable sound monetary system according to the Constitution of the United States.

Nevertheless, if We The People do not want it changed - and do not demand that our elected representatives change it, then we will get what we deserve: a dishonest monetary system that assures a future of debt servitude to our children and grandchildren.

Is that what we really want? No, I don't think so. However, the subject is complicated and confusing - for good reason: to confuse the public as to what is occurring by the use of paper fiat debt-money: a transference of wealth from the have-nots to those that have.

Our wealth disappears by stealth - a thief that comes in the darkness of night, from out of the shadows hidden from sight. Darkness cannot stay in the Light. Darkness is the absence of Light.

And so has it been spoken - "and night will be no more".

Come visit our new website: Honest Money Gold & Silver Report

And read the Open Letter to Congress



Talk Back


Douglas V. Gnazzo
Honest Money Gold & Silver Report

Douglas V. Gnazzo is CEO of New England Renovation LLC, a historical restoration contractor that specializes in restoring older buildings that are vintage historic landmarks. He writes for numerous websites, and his work appears both here and abroad. Just recently he was honored by being chosen as a Foundation Scholar for the Foundation of Monetary Education (FAME).


safehaven.com



To: richardred who wrote (42)6/9/2006 9:39:42 AM
From: richardred  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 340
 
U.S. Consumers Taking Gas Prices in Stride
Friday June 9, 7:59 am ET
By Jeannine Aversa, AP Economics Writer
American Consumers Confident About Economy in Spite of High Gas Prices and Interest Rates

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Consumer confidence in the economy rebounded over the month, suggesting that people are taking still-elevated gasoline prices and the specter of even higher borrowing costs in stride.

The RBC CASH Index, based on results from the international polling firm Ipsos, showed confidence snapped out of the doldrums and clocked in at 84.1 in early June. That was a big improvement from May's reading of 67.1, a seven-month low.

June's number marked a return to a more normal reading for the confidence barometer. A year ago, consumer confidence stood at 84.

"In spite of high energy costs and all the uncertainties around them, consumers are holding in there. It's still a decent economy," said Joel Naroff, president of Naroff Economic Advisors. "Consumers seem to be weathering a lot of storms out there."

Economists were especially encouraged that consumers' attitudes brightened because they viewed it as a sign that people are holding up fairly well not only to high energy prices but also to some other recent turbulence.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke issued a stern inflation warning on Monday that was seen as a strong signal that interest rates will go up again later this month. Bernanke's message has sent stocks swooning for three days in a row. Stocks recovered from an earlier plunge to close mixed Thursday.

Information for the index was collected Monday through Wednesday.

The rebound in confidence also comes after a government report, issued last week, showed job creation slowed dramatically in May to 75,000, the fewest new positions in seven months.

Even though the jobless rate dipped to 4.6 percent, a five-year low, economists viewed the employment report as more evidence that overall economic growth, which barreled ahead in the opening quarter of this year, is now slowing.

The economy grew in the first quarter at a 5.3 percent pace, the fastest spurt in 2 1/2 years; It is expected to moderate to half that pace -- around 2.5 percent -- in the April-to-June quarter, analysts said.

Even though consumers' confidence improved in early June, many Americans have concerns about President Bush's economic stewardship. Sixty percent disapprove of Bush's handling of the economy, according to an AP-Ipsos poll.

Analysts track consumer confidence for clues about consumers' willingness to spend, an important force shaping overall economic activity.

So far, most shoppers haven't been daunted by high gasoline prices, which have topped $3 a gallon in some areas. Major retailers last week reported strong sales for May. The big exception: Wal-Mart Stores Inc., whose lower-income customers are feeling the biggest pinch from prices at the pump.

The rebound in consumer confidence buttressed economists' forecasts that economic growth will slow modestly, not dramatically, in coming months.

"It is a hopeful sign that we won't ebb too far and will get back to a pace of growth that is positive but not so strong as to exacerbate inflation," said Carl Tannenbaum, chief economist at LaSalle Bank.

The confidence index is benchmarked to a reading of 100 on January 2002, when Ipsos started the gauge.

Showing the biggest over-the-month improvement was consumers' expectations about the next six months -- including the overall economy's prospects as well as conditions where they live or work and their own financial positions.

That expectations measure rose to 40.4 in June, from a very low reading of 6.3 in May. This gauge turned negative for the first time ever in September highlighting consumers' anxiety in the wake of the devastating Gulf Coast hurricanes. It had been slowly showing some signs of improvement until the plunge in May. A year ago, this measure stood at 37.2

Despite last week's mostly disappointing employment report for May, consumers' feelings about the jobs climate were much more upbeat. This jobs barometer jumped to 124.1 in June. That was up from 110.3 in May and 119.6 in June 2005.

Consumers' attitudes about current economic conditions also improved, with a reading of 99.4 in June compared with 90.3 in May. A year ago, this measure was at 100.8.

Another gauge tracking consumers' sentiments about making a purchase, saving and other investment decisions climbed to 88.4 in June, up from 79.9 in May. In June 2005, this measure stood at 93.

The RBC consumer confidence index was based on responses of 1,003 adults surveyed Monday through Wednesday about their attitudes on personal finance and the economy. Results of the survey had a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
biz.yahoo.com