On Wednesday last the Fed surprised most people by deciding not to taper. What
is not generally appreciated is that once a central bank starts to use
monetary expansion as a cure-all it is extremely difficult for it to
stop. This is the basic reason the Fed has not pursued the idea, and why
it most probably never will.
That is a strong statement. But consider this: Paul Volcker faced
this same dilemma in 1979, when he was appointed Chairman of the Fed. In
raising interest rates to choke off inflation he had two things going
for him that his successor has not: rising inflation was already over
10% so was an obvious priority, and importantly private sector
debt-to-GDP was at a far lower level than today. It was a tough decision
at the time to nearly double interest rates. Today, with official
inflation low and private sector indebtedness high it would be extremely
difficult.
Until official inflation picks up, it is far more comforting to
pretend it won’t be an issue, which reasonably describes the Fed’s
approach. Instead it is targeting unemployment rates, on the basis that
price inflation is tied to capacity utilisation, which in turn is tied
to employment.
One thing is certain in life, besides death and taxes, and that is if
you expand the quantity of money prices eventually rise; or more
accurately the purchasing power of debased money falls. The problem is
how to measure currency debasement, and this has been a topic of heated
debate since fiat currencies first developed. This has led me to propose
a new measure of money, which at James Turk’s suggestion I am calling
the Fiat Money Quantity (FMQ). The purpose is to gives us a measure of
fiat money that enables us to assess the danger of currency
hyperinflation. I shall be publishing a paper on this shortly explaining
the methodology.
The principle behind it is to signal deviations from the long-term
trend of currency growth to alert us to both monetary crises and
excessive inflation. The approach is to unwind the historic progression
from full gold convertibility to the current state of no convertibility.
Our gold was first deposited with our banks, and then from there with
the central bank. In return for our gold deposits we have been issued
cash notes and coin and credits in the form of deposits at the bank, and
our bank equally has deposits at the central bank.
The FMQ is therefore comprised of the sum of cash and coin, plus all
accessible deposits, plus our bank’s deposits held at the central bank.
This for the US dollar is illustrated in the chart below.
The dotted line is the long-term exponential trend rate, and it is
immediately obvious that the FMQ is now hyper-inflating. It currently
requires a $3.6 trillion contraction of deposits to return this measure
of currency quantity back to trend.
This accurately sums up the problem facing the Fed. We must
understand they are in an almost impossible position that dates back to
their monetary response to the banking crisis. Not even Paul Volcker
could have got us out of this one. Once the addiction to weak money hits
this pace there is no solution without threatening to bring down the
whole system.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-09-22/guest-post-gold-and-monetary-inflation-prospects