Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mishedlo who wrote (81928)	7/23/2008 3:36:57 PM
From: ggersh	Respond to of 116555

Reason 26 The problem is contained and will only cost $80 bil...as first stated by BB and HP....a long long time ago....

To: mishedlo who wrote (81928)	7/23/2008 7:49:29 PM
From: benwood	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116555

Mish -- great summary... so far. I couldn't believe the headline that the bailout of Freddie & Fannie could cost us $25 billion. I am thinking it will eventually be well over $100 billion. Not including interest, which will push it to $500 billion or so, maybe infinity.

To: mishedlo who wrote (81928)	7/23/2008 8:58:25 PM
From: Claude Cormier	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116555

MIsh, I see that you and Saville have a similar definition of money supply, but I agree more with him when he says that credit contraction, in itself, is not deflationary. I guess he is implying in the short and intermediate term. It is certainly deflationary in the long term unless the gov and the feds act as they have and will always. So serious defflation in sight, in my very humble opinion. 321gold.com ... Similarly, a decrease in the supply of credit could lead to a decrease in the supply of money, but credit contraction is not, in and of itself, deflationary. For example, when a bank suffers loan losses the immediate result is a contraction of credit, but not a reduction in the supply of money. This is because the money that was created when the loans were made still exists after the loans fail. In this situation, however, the bank's ability to make FUTURE loans may be impaired by the loan losses, meaning that there could be less money-supply growth in the future.