Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Saturday February 21 2015, @08:30AM   Printer-friendly
from the what-me-worry? dept.

Some time ago we discussed negative interest rates here on Soylent News. At that time there was some discussion of deflation and why it is such a mixed bag for consumers, companies, and countries.

The Economist has an article that explains deflation rather succinctly.

It turns out that deflation is bad because we are all so burdened with Debt. Not only personal debt, but corporate debt, and national debts. You end up paying debts with money that is more and more dear as time goes on.

Deflation poses several risks, some well-understood, one not. One familiar danger is that consumers will put off spending in the expectation that things will get even cheaper, further muting demand. Likewise, if prices fall across an economy but wages do not, then firms’ margins will be squeezed and employment will stagnate or decline. (Neither of these dangers is yet visible; indeed, America and Britain are seeing strong employment growth.) A third, well-known risk is debt deflation: debts become more onerous because the amount that is owed does not fall, even as earnings do. This is a big worry in the euro zone, where many banks are already stuffed with dud loans.

But in addition, all tools of Monetary Policy become useless.

The least-understood danger is also the most serious, because it is already here. Deflation makes it harder to loosen monetary policy. All of which means that policymakers risk having precious little room for manoeuvre when the next recession hits.

While some have been eager to see monetary policy reigned in, we did see the effects of this during the height of the recent depression, (which some claim we are still suffering from).

The US Federal Reserve had run out points it could cut when lending money to large banks. There were periods in 2010 where the Fed was lending money to banks at Zero Interest Rate. The link explains a number of serious risks with this policy.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by darkfeline on Saturday February 21 2015, @10:15PM

    by darkfeline (1030) on Saturday February 21 2015, @10:15PM (#147908) Homepage

    >TheMightyBuzzard
    I really need to get around to making that filtering script.

    >The difference here is under capitalism, the more you contribute to society the more you have. Under marxism the more you contribute to society, the more is taken from you by force.
    "The difference here is under capitalism, the more sociopathic you are the more you have. Under marxism the more you contribute to society, the more happiness you get back as a kind-hearted individual." There, fixed it for you.

    --
    Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday February 21 2015, @10:33PM

    Yeah, you are utterly not worth arguing with if you honestly believe taking from individuals by force what they have earned by their own sweat and giving it to lazyass slackers is a good thing. There is no sane way of incorporating that viewpoint in a rational mind. Seek help.

    --
    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 22 2015, @02:38AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 22 2015, @02:38AM (#147960)

      Yeah, you are utterly not worth arguing with if you honestly believe taking from individuals by force what they have earned by their own sweat and giving it to lazyass slackers is a good thing. There is no sane way of incorporating that viewpoint in a rational mind.

      If that money, given to "lazyass slackers", actually improves my lot - by virtue of essentially improving the quality of life of all members of my society, then you're damn right I think it's a good thing.
      I'm certainly happier to be living in heavily-taxed, expensive, "socialist" Norway (which has had increasing prosperity for over 100 years, tyvm), than any rich-get-richer, me-and-mine, dog-eat-dog, capitalist "utopia", you might care to throw out.

  • (Score: 2) by Justin Case on Sunday February 22 2015, @01:24AM

    by Justin Case (4239) on Sunday February 22 2015, @01:24AM (#147943) Journal

    > Under marxism the more you contribute to society, the more happiness you get back as a kind-hearted individual." There, fixed it for you.

    Say, are the meds bestowing ignorant bliss on everyone there in the asylum? Because back here in the real world being kind-hearted will motivate about 3 people, and the rest will take a vacation, stuff themselves with free food, play video games, and drink vodka until the Socialist dream collapses as it always does.

    I worked for it, I earned it, and those of you who think you can just take it are plain and simple thieves. And yes I'd deal with you as I'd deal with any thief given the opportunity.