Katie Porter - What Is Causing Inflation?

[blastula]

Maybe it is because Katie Porter's party has printed money to death to devalue the currency even more, plus the extremely high taxes in her state, plus the fact that her President decided to shut down the pipelines and drilling in America to jack up fuel prices even more which in turn makes shipping that much more expensive making everything we buy in the stores and supermarkets that much more expensive. Plus that her state has made creating and maintaining a business in her state so much more difficult and again, taxing them to death. Prices go up to cover the costs and someone has to pay for them.

Democrats hate job creators and businesses, and have no problem shipping jobs and industry overseas.

All false and/or irrelevant

 

[George S]

Milton Friedman had one explanation. Other economists have differing opinions. He made the claim that inflation IS the difference between collections -- taxes and fees -- and spending. Such excess spending introduces more "money" into the economy. More cash pursuing the same goods. Inflation.
What the Fed issues is not money, it is scrip. It has value only because it is accepted in payment of taxes and fees by the government. At one time there was a notice on Federal Reserve Notes: "May be exchanged for lawful money at any Federal Reserve Bank."

 

[laughing dog]

Milton Friedman had one explanation. Other economists have differing opinions. He made the claim that inflation IS the difference between collections -- taxes and fees -- and spending. Such excess spending introduces more "money" into the economy. More cash pursuing the same goods. Inflation.
What the Fed issues is not money, it is scrip. It has value only because it is accepted in payment of taxes and fees by the government. At one time there was a notice on Federal Reserve Notes: "May be exchanged for lawful money at any Federal Reserve Bank."

Um, money of any type only have value either because it is accepted as payment or it has value in other uses.

 

[George S]

Milton Friedman had one explanation. Other economists have differing opinions. He made the claim that inflation IS the difference between collections -- taxes and fees -- and spending. Such excess spending introduces more "money" into the economy. More cash pursuing the same goods. Inflation.
What the Fed issues is not money, it is scrip. It has value only because it is accepted in payment of taxes and fees by the government. At one time there was a notice on Federal Reserve Notes: "May be exchanged for lawful money at any Federal Reserve Bank."

Um, money of any type only have value either because it is accepted as payment or it has value in other uses.

Surely you know that wampum was legal tender, too. Nevertheless your response has no relevance to Friedman's thesis. Inflation IS excess government spending over funds collected.
"Under the Constitution, only gold and silver coins may be required to be used as legal tender (‘a tender in payment of debts’). Today in the United States, legal tender is statutorily defined as all coins and currency issued by the United States Treasury or the Federal Reserve System, including fiat money coins and notes."
The Constitution had it right: Gold and silver coin have intrinsic value. The Constitution should apply over statute.

 

[laughing dog]

Milton Friedman had one explanation. Other economists have differing opinions. He made the claim that inflation IS the difference between collections -- taxes and fees -- and spending. Such excess spending introduces more "money" into the economy. More cash pursuing the same goods. Inflation.
What the Fed issues is not money, it is scrip. It has value only because it is accepted in payment of taxes and fees by the government. At one time there was a notice on Federal Reserve Notes: "May be exchanged for lawful money at any Federal Reserve Bank."

Um, money of any type only have value either because it is accepted as payment or it has value in other uses.

Surely you know that wampum was legal tender, too. Nevertheless your response has no relevance to Friedman's thesis. Inflation IS excess government spending over funds collected.

That is his thesis. His thesis is more applicable to reality over long periods of time.

"Under the Constitution, only gold and silver coins may be required to be used as legal tender (‘a tender in payment of debts’).

Quote the Article of the Constitution that says that.

Today in the United States, legal tender is statutorily defined as all coins and currency issued by the United States Treasury or the Federal Reserve System, including fiat money coins and notes."
The Constitution had it right: Gold and silver coin have intrinsic value. The Constitution should apply over statute.

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution say Congress has the power to coin money and regulate its value. It says nothing about commodity vs fiat money. There are many reasons why almost every society has moved from exclusive commodity money to fiat money over time. The notion that commodity money's value is more stable is contradicted by the long historical record.

 

[lpetrich]

Surely you know that wampum was legal tender, too. Nevertheless your response has no relevance to Friedman's thesis. Inflation IS excess government spending over funds collected.
"Under the Constitution, only gold and silver coins may be required to be used as legal tender (‘a tender in payment of debts’). Today in the United States, legal tender is statutorily defined as all coins and currency issued by the United States Treasury or the Federal Reserve System, including fiat money coins and notes."
The Constitution had it right: Gold and silver coin have intrinsic value. The Constitution should apply over statute.

I read the Constitution and nowhere does it state that the only legitimate form of money shall be gold and silver coins.

• The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription | National Archives
• The Bill of Rights | National Archives
• The Constitution: Amendments 11-27 | National Archives

It has exactly one mention of gold and silver, and that is in Article I Section 10. It only refers to what states may do.

 

[Worldtraveller]

Maybe it is because Katie Porter's party has printed money to death to devalue the currency even more, plus the extremely high taxes in her state, plus the fact that her President decided to shut down the pipelines and drilling in America to jack up fuel prices even more which in turn makes shipping that much more expensive making everything we buy in the stores and supermarkets that much more expensive. Plus that her state has made creating and maintaining a business in her state so much more difficult and again, taxing them to death. Prices go up to cover the costs and someone has to pay for them.

Democrats hate job creators and businesses, and have no problem shipping jobs and industry overseas.

You're like a walking caricature of wrong factoids from fox.

 

[Elixir]

…like a walking caricature of wrong factoids from fox.

Even FOX isn’t THAT wrong. This one is putting you on, I’m pretty sure.

 

[Elixir]

Democrats hate job creators and businesses, and have no problem shipping jobs and industry overseas.

I vote Democrat almost every time. In the las 15 years, I and two “lib'rul” partners started a business from nothing (my 3rd) grew it into an 8-figure concern, employed almost 30 people before we sold it to some Republicans …
SNW’s statement above is an insult born of ignorance, stupidity or a lame attempt at humor. Whichever it is, I bet SBW has never created a job or a business in his life.

 

[scombrid]

I wonder if Basil Marceaux is still alive?

 

[George S]

Surely you know that wampum was legal tender, too. Nevertheless your response has no relevance to Friedman's thesis. Inflation IS excess government spending over funds collected.
"Under the Constitution, only gold and silver coins may be required to be used as legal tender (‘a tender in payment of debts’). Today in the United States, legal tender is statutorily defined as all coins and currency issued by the United States Treasury or the Federal Reserve System, including fiat money coins and notes."
The Constitution had it right: Gold and silver coin have intrinsic value. The Constitution should apply over statute.

I read the Constitution and nowhere does it state that the only legitimate form of money shall be gold and silver coins.

• The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription | National Archives
• The Bill of Rights | National Archives
• The Constitution: Amendments 11-27 | National Archives

It has exactly one mention of gold and silver, and that is in Article I Section 10. It only refers to what states may do.

The Treasury is authorized to "coin" money. Nothing about issuing fiat.

 

[George S]

Milton Friedman had one explanation. Other economists have differing opinions. He made the claim that inflation IS the difference between collections -- taxes and fees -- and spending. Such excess spending introduces more "money" into the economy. More cash pursuing the same goods. Inflation.
What the Fed issues is not money, it is scrip. It has value only because it is accepted in payment of taxes and fees by the government. At one time there was a notice on Federal Reserve Notes: "May be exchanged for lawful money at any Federal Reserve Bank."

Um, money of any type only have value either because it is accepted as payment or it has value in other uses.

Surely you know that wampum was legal tender, too. Nevertheless your response has no relevance to Friedman's thesis. Inflation IS excess government spending over funds collected.

That is his thesis. His thesis is more applicable to reality over long periods of time.

"Under the Constitution, only gold and silver coins may be required to be used as legal tender (‘a tender in payment of debts’).

Quote the Article of the Constitution that says that.

Today in the United States, legal tender is statutorily defined as all coins and currency issued by the United States Treasury or the Federal Reserve System, including fiat money coins and notes."
The Constitution had it right: Gold and silver coin have intrinsic value. The Constitution should apply over statute.

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution say Congress has the power to coin money and regulate its value. It says nothing about commodity vs fiat money. There are many reasons why almost every society has moved from exclusive commodity money to fiat money over time. The notion that commodity money's value is more stable is contradicted by the long historical record.

If I might indulge in a little mind-reading: I think Mr. Friedman would disagree about that claim of "stability" of fiat currency. In the 40's a house was in the thousands. 80 years of inflation is not "stability" in my opinion. The Tresasury can "coin" money, not "print" money. At least according to the Article you quote.

 

[ZiprHead]

What the Fed issues is not money, it is scrip. It has value only because it is accepted in payment of taxes and fees by the government. At one time there was a notice on Federal Reserve Notes: "May be exchanged for lawful money at any Federal Reserve Bank."

I don't believe that was ever printed on money but it was cited in two court cases. But I could be wrong. And federal reserve notes are legal money.

 

[bilby]

The Constitution had it right: Gold and silver coin have intrinsic value.

I don't care whether the Constitution says it, or anyone else; That's horseshit.

Nothing has "intrinsic value". Value is an entirely human psychological construct.

Gold is a shit basis for money; Silver is even worse.

 

[laughing dog]

Milton Friedman had one explanation. Other economists have differing opinions. He made the claim that inflation IS the difference between collections -- taxes and fees -- and spending. Such excess spending introduces more "money" into the economy. More cash pursuing the same goods. Inflation.
What the Fed issues is not money, it is scrip. It has value only because it is accepted in payment of taxes and fees by the government. At one time there was a notice on Federal Reserve Notes: "May be exchanged for lawful money at any Federal Reserve Bank."

Um, money of any type only have value either because it is accepted as payment or it has value in other uses.

Surely you know that wampum was legal tender, too. Nevertheless your response has no relevance to Friedman's thesis. Inflation IS excess government spending over funds collected.

That is his thesis. His thesis is more applicable to reality over long periods of time.

"Under the Constitution, only gold and silver coins may be required to be used as legal tender (‘a tender in payment of debts’).

Quote the Article of the Constitution that says that.

Today in the United States, legal tender is statutorily defined as all coins and currency issued by the United States Treasury or the Federal Reserve System, including fiat money coins and notes."
The Constitution had it right: Gold and silver coin have intrinsic value. The Constitution should apply over statute.

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution say Congress has the power to coin money and regulate its value. It says nothing about commodity vs fiat money. There are many reasons why almost every society has moved from exclusive commodity money to fiat money over time. The notion that commodity money's value is more stable is contradicted by the long historical record.

If I might indulge in a little mind-reading: I think Mr. Friedman would disagree about that claim of "stability" of fiat currency

I don't care what Mr. Friedman thought. His views on inflation were not reflected by the historical record over short periods of time. Measured over decades, he has a point. But he was dead wrong when it came to looking year to year.

. In the 40's a house was in the thousands. 80 years of inflation is not "stability" in my opinion. The Tresasury can "coin" money, not "print" money. At least according to the Article you quote.

I quoted no article. When the US was on the gold standard, it would have sometimes decades of inflation followed by decades of deflation.

In colonial America, the colonists complained about the lack of specie (gold coins) because the lack of money made commerce more difficult. It literally constrained their ability to invest and trade among themselves. Ancient China used paper money for centuries before the West for the same reason - to facilitate commerce. Commodity money was also prone to debasement by unscrupulous gov'ts.

 

[laughing dog]

Surely you know that wampum was legal tender, too. Nevertheless your response has no relevance to Friedman's thesis. Inflation IS excess government spending over funds collected.
"Under the Constitution, only gold and silver coins may be required to be used as legal tender (‘a tender in payment of debts’). Today in the United States, legal tender is statutorily defined as all coins and currency issued by the United States Treasury or the Federal Reserve System, including fiat money coins and notes."
The Constitution had it right: Gold and silver coin have intrinsic value. The Constitution should apply over statute.

I read the Constitution and nowhere does it state that the only legitimate form of money shall be gold and silver coins.

• The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription | National Archives
• The Bill of Rights | National Archives
• The Constitution: Amendments 11-27 | National Archives

It has exactly one mention of gold and silver, and that is in Article I Section 10. It only refers to what states may do.

The Treasury is authorized to "coin" money. Nothing about issuing fiat.

Coining money is issuing fiat money. Do you think a penny has a penny's worth of copper or a nickel has a nickel's worth of nickel?

 

[George S]

What the Fed issues is not money, it is scrip. It has value only because it is accepted in payment of taxes and fees by the government. At one time there was a notice on Federal Reserve Notes: "May be exchanged for lawful money at any Federal Reserve Bank."

I don't believe that was ever printed on money but it was cited in two court cases. But I could be wrong. And federal reserve notes are legal money.

I remember it. There were also silver certificates ($1) and Treasury notes redeemable in Gold.
"Lawful money" is a term used in the Federal Reserve Act, the act that authorizes the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to issue Federal Reserve notes. The Act states that Federal Reserve notes "shall be obligations of the United States and shall be receivable by all national and member banks and Federal reserve banks and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues. They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve bank."

 

[George S]

Surely you know that wampum was legal tender, too. Nevertheless your response has no relevance to Friedman's thesis. Inflation IS excess government spending over funds collected.
"Under the Constitution, only gold and silver coins may be required to be used as legal tender (‘a tender in payment of debts’). Today in the United States, legal tender is statutorily defined as all coins and currency issued by the United States Treasury or the Federal Reserve System, including fiat money coins and notes."
The Constitution had it right: Gold and silver coin have intrinsic value. The Constitution should apply over statute.

I read the Constitution and nowhere does it state that the only legitimate form of money shall be gold and silver coins.

• The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription | National Archives
• The Bill of Rights | National Archives
• The Constitution: Amendments 11-27 | National Archives

It has exactly one mention of gold and silver, and that is in Article I Section 10. It only refers to what states may do.

The Treasury is authorized to "coin" money. Nothing about issuing fiat.

Coining money is issuing fiat money. Do you think a penny has a penny's worth of copper or a nickel has a nickel's worth of nickel?

There are, today, fiat coins. Coinage used be such that the silver dollar contained one dollar's worth of silver. Pre 1965 all coins had intrinsic value.

 

[laughing dog]

Surely you know that wampum was legal tender, too. Nevertheless your response has no relevance to Friedman's thesis. Inflation IS excess government spending over funds collected.
"Under the Constitution, only gold and silver coins may be required to be used as legal tender (‘a tender in payment of debts’). Today in the United States, legal tender is statutorily defined as all coins and currency issued by the United States Treasury or the Federal Reserve System, including fiat money coins and notes."
The Constitution had it right: Gold and silver coin have intrinsic value. The Constitution should apply over statute.

I read the Constitution and nowhere does it state that the only legitimate form of money shall be gold and silver coins.

• The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription | National Archives
• The Bill of Rights | National Archives
• The Constitution: Amendments 11-27 | National Archives

It has exactly one mention of gold and silver, and that is in Article I Section 10. It only refers to what states may do.

The Treasury is authorized to "coin" money. Nothing about issuing fiat.

Coining money is issuing fiat money. Do you think a penny has a penny's worth of copper or a nickel has a nickel's worth of nickel?

There are, today, fiat coins. Coinage used be such that the silver dollar contained one dollar's worth of silver. Pre 1965 all coins had intrinsic value.

All coins intrinsic value. But there is no Constitutional requirement that face value of of US coins equals the market value of the metal in the coin. The part of the Constitution I quoted to you gives Congress to coin money and REGULATE its value. That suggests Congress has the Constitutional authority to make fiat money (otherwise would it regulate the value of a coin). Or are you arguing the "regulate the value" means that Congress is only authorized to change the amount of metal in a silver dollar when the price of silver changed?

 

[ZiprHead]

Surely you know that wampum was legal tender, too. Nevertheless your response has no relevance to Friedman's thesis. Inflation IS excess government spending over funds collected.
"Under the Constitution, only gold and silver coins may be required to be used as legal tender (‘a tender in payment of debts’). Today in the United States, legal tender is statutorily defined as all coins and currency issued by the United States Treasury or the Federal Reserve System, including fiat money coins and notes."
The Constitution had it right: Gold and silver coin have intrinsic value. The Constitution should apply over statute.

I read the Constitution and nowhere does it state that the only legitimate form of money shall be gold and silver coins.

• The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription | National Archives
• The Bill of Rights | National Archives
• The Constitution: Amendments 11-27 | National Archives

It has exactly one mention of gold and silver, and that is in Article I Section 10. It only refers to what states may do.

The Treasury is authorized to "coin" money. Nothing about issuing fiat.

Coining money is issuing fiat money. Do you think a penny has a penny's worth of copper or a nickel has a nickel's worth of nickel?

There are, today, fiat coins. Coinage used be such that the silver dollar contained one dollar's worth of silver. Pre 1965 all coins had intrinsic value.

Who determined a silver dollar contained a dollar's worth of silver? What if a huge cache of silver was found and the price of silver dropped so far no one was interested in obtaining it?