Mathematical Proof that Academics are Idiots
Facts:
Paul Krugman, a Nobel prize winner, has repeatedly claimed the following:
"And huge emphasis on monetary aggregates, which have been totally useless at predicting inflation (Milton Friedman got this repeatedly wrong in the 1980s)"
Krugman used the chart below as validation.
The red curve shows the rate of change of inflation and the blue curve shows the rate of change of M1. The amount of inflation is the area under the red curve; The total M1 is the area under the blue curve; this is high school mathematics.
The total inflation (over a long period of time), aligns quite well with the total M1 (over a long period of time); hence, this chart is not evidence that inflation is not correlated with M1; indeed, the chart indicates the opposite.
The chart does indicate that inflation is not instantaneously related to M1; but to be honest, no one cares if money printed today causes hyper-inflation tomorrow, or in two years time.
I suggest that these series of posts are evidence that Krugman is either an idiot or deliberately disingenuous. Further, no academics have called him out; and he has been waving the chart around for quite a few months; this indicates that academics in general, are either disingenuous or idiots.
Krugman is no idiot, but he is being disingenuously sneaky. He’s using M1, which is completely worthless as a measure of broad-based money supply. A graph of M3 vs CPI shows that money creation and inflation are VERY much correlated.
ReplyDeleteAnother factor during the 2000-2015 period was the deflationary effect of cheap Chinese exports. In sum, the West printed money (ie went into debt) to buy cheap imports: they exchanged low prices with massive trade deficits and debt.
That deflationary mechanism is now over. China is no longer “cheap”.
That is true... China is inflating; you can feel it now.
DeleteI didn't know there was another M1-M3 trick on top of the graph interpretation trick; makes you wonder if we are missing some motive somewhere...