<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Economics Questions</title><link>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/5.aspx</link><description /><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2008.5 SP2 (Build: 40407.4157)</generator><item><title>Re: Money Supply Growth, GDP, and Kel Kelly</title><link>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/460305.aspx</link><pubDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2012 11:11:22 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">944abf2b-d1be-4bf2-990d-438cb0e377e9:460305</guid><dc:creator>Kakugo</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/460305.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=5&amp;PostID=460305</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;p&gt;
	Very well done. &lt;img alt="smiley" height="20" src="http://direct.mises.org/ckeditor/plugins/smiley/images/regular_smile.gif" title="smiley" width="20" /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Money Supply Growth, GDP, and Kel Kelly</title><link>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/460299.aspx</link><pubDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2012 07:49:33 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">944abf2b-d1be-4bf2-990d-438cb0e377e9:460299</guid><dc:creator>ThreeTrees</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/460299.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=5&amp;PostID=460299</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;p&gt;
	&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	I was fooling around with the Fed&amp;#39;s data transformations and came up with the below graph. &amp;nbsp;I thought it was cool so I thought I&amp;#39;d share. &amp;nbsp;Please critique my reasoning. &amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	I submit that growth in US GDP is becoming increasingly dependent on the expansion of central bank credit. (Credit for this goes entirely to Kel Kelly as I generated this graph working off his articles, that is, if I&amp;#39;ve done his theory justice :P ):&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	&lt;img alt="" src="http://research.stlouisfed.org/fredgraph.png?g=5xu" style="width:630px;height:378px;" /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	A few assumptions:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	First, MZM according to investopedia&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;span style="font-family:Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif;text-align:left;"&gt;A measure of the liquid money supply within an economy. MZM represents all money in M2 less the time deposits, plus all money market funds.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	&lt;span style="font-family:Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif;text-align:left;"&gt;I chose MZM as my measure of the money stock because today&amp;#39;s banking system relies heavily on securities exchangeable for cash more-or-less on demand&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="font-family:Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif;text-align:left;"&gt;to collateralize debt&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="font-family:Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif;text-align:left;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;(like in the highly liquid government bond market). &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	&lt;span style="font-family:Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif;text-align:left;"&gt;Again from investopedia:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;span style="font-family:Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif;text-align:left;"&gt;Portfolios are comprised of short-term (less than one year) securities representing high-quality, liquid debt and monetary instruments.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	&lt;span style="font-family:Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif;text-align:left;"&gt;Money market funds are composed of what von Mises would call fiduciary media and for all intents and purposes is used to bid up asset prices.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	Second, GDP. &amp;nbsp;(I know most of you disparage stats like GDP but hear me out.) &amp;nbsp;As I&amp;#39;m sure most of you know GDP is essentially a tally of all incomes of all individuals in a country in one year (in this case the United States). &amp;nbsp;This means that GDP rises two ways, 1) the (nominal) value of some or many of the transactions increases and/or 2) the number of transactions occuring during the year increases. &amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	Now, the velocity of money as calculated at the Fed is GDP/MZM which means Velocity rises if the numerator is increasing or the denominator is decreasing. &amp;nbsp;Conversely, and much more relevant to the above graph, Velocity falls if the&lt;strong&gt; numerator is decreasing&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;strong&gt;or the denominator is increasing. &amp;nbsp;&lt;/strong&gt;And if Velocity of money is falling while GDP is rising then we know&amp;nbsp;&lt;em&gt;a priori&lt;/em&gt; that it is at least partially because MZM increased.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	Thus I submit that rising GDP with falling velocity means growth is being increasingly supported by expansion of fiduciary media. &amp;nbsp;Through open market operations like QE the Fed has indeed &amp;quot;eased&amp;quot; credit conditions and consequently raised the nominal prices of economic transactions (inflation) as well as increased the number of transactions per year. &amp;nbsp;This is evidence that we are not in a &amp;quot;virtuous growth cycle,&amp;quot; and furthermore, even if somebody wanted to debate the presence of inflation they would logically have to concede the point on number of transactions per year.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>