Austrian Economics: True Money Supply, Deflation and Inflation

Here is the Austrian theory of money supply and its measures in a nutshell.

"The True Money Supply (TMS) was formulated by Murray Rothbard and represents the amount of money in the economy that is available for immediate use in exchange. It has been referred to in the past as the Austrian Money Supply, the Rothbard Money Supply and the True Money Supply.

The benefits of TMS over conventional measures calculated by the Federal Reserve are that it counts only immediately available money for exchange and does not double count. MMMF shares are excluded from TMS precisely because they represent equity shares in a portfolio of highly liquid, short-term investments which must be sold in exchange for money before such shares can be redeemed.

For a detailed description and explanation of the TMS aggregate, see Salerno (1987) and Shostak (2000).

The TMS consists of the following: Currency Component of M1, Total Checkable Deposits, Savings Deposits, U.S. Government Demand Deposits and Note Balances, Demand Deposits Due to Foreign Commercial Banks, and Demand Deposits Due to Foreign Official Institutions."

True Money Supply, Ludwig Von Mises Institute

Here is some additional reading on the subject. The Austrian Theory of Money by M. Murray Rothbard

The weakness in TMS is the same as in all of the narrower money supply aggregate measures, in that it is very volatile in the short term because of seasonal demand. Ideally one would perform long term trending to get a better idea of the expansion or contraction of the money supply.



As one can see, the trend in money supply growth has been quite strong, almost parabolic.



Why do I present this? Because I thought it would be a good idea for those who aspire to be Austrian economists to know what the Austrian School thinks about money supply and how to measure it.

So when some point to M3, for example, and see an argument for deflation rampant, they should at least understand that they are not being 'true to their school.'

I should disclose here that although I have sympathy for many of the things that the 'Austrian School' says, I am not an 'Austrian' or a member of any economic school of thought for that matter. I think the Austrian school has been influenced to the point of being hijacked by the neo-liberal economists, due in large part to its marginalization in the study of economics and its lack of vigor.

Returning to what the Austrians think, a fairly recent discussion of this deflation issue was penned by Richard M. Ebeling in The Hubris of Central Bankers and the Ghosts of Deflation Past.

"One fact should be pointed out in terms of the current economic crisis. There has been no monetary deflation -- that is, an absolute decrease in the quantity of money and credit in the economy. Just the opposite. Since 2008, the Federal Reserve has increased the total amount of reserves in the banking system by around $1.5 trillion, mostly by buying up many of those "toxic" mortgages that were guaranteed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

This huge expansion in the potential quantity of money and credit that could flood through the financial markets and generate significant price inflation has been held off the market due to the fact that the Federal Reserve has been paying banks interest to hold those sums as unlent reserves. With key market interest rates being kept artificially low at near zero or one percent through activist Fed policy, banks have found it more profitable earn that positive rate of interest at the Federal Reserve.

But unless the Fed finds some way to drain those "excess reserves" out of the banking system, significant inflationary -- not deflationary -- forces may be at work looking to the next few years ahead."

This could help some people understand why the expected effects of monetary deflation have not been appearing as they planned.

There is certainly an undeniable slump in aggregate demand that it putting pressure on prices, and some sectors, like housing, are experiencing the collapse of asset bubble.

Some point to credit contraction as deflation, but as the Austrian school would point out, credit is not money, only a means of money creation. The Fed owns a printing press, and as most recently seen, can expand its Balance Sheet and True Money Supply almost at will.

Some things I have seen recently from 'Austrians' leads me to think that a portion of that camp has been hijacked by the neo-liberal economists. That would indeed be a shame if it is true, and ti becomes a trend. Stranger things have happened. But I see it clearly in the calls for austerity, and liquidationism, and 'free markets' from some who wear those school colors.

Markets are always and everywhere never naturally free. They require diligent effort and serious work to be maintained free of fraud, corruption, and inefficiencies. But some find it easy to believe in or at least promulgate economic theories based on the natural goodness of man, and assorted fairly tales and urban myths, if it suits their ideology or duplicitous agenda. One can usually spot them by the quantity of invective and rhetoric against the quality and detail of their thought.

As for Ben's printing press, baby, you ain't seen nothing yet.

Jesse's Paradox: Gold Can Perform Well In Both Monetary Inflation and Deflation

The average punter understands the first graph to the right. Gold tends to increase in price in times of monetary inflation, because as an alternative store of wealth it provides a safe haven from central bank debasement of the currency.

By monetary inflation, we do not mean the simple, nominal growth in money supply, and of course the same can be said of a simple decrease and deflation. This is obvious when one considers that money must have a natural relationship to the demand for it relative to population growth, but most importantly to the growth of real GDP.

But notice the second chart, and this is the one which so many speculators and economists miss. Gold tends to perform well when the inflation adjusted returns on the longer end of the curve are low. In other words, when the real returns on bonds are inadequate to the risk. But the risk of what?

Inflation, pure and simple. Deflation is a prelude to inflation, and sometimes a brief hyperinflation, in a fiat currency regime.  And even while the nominal money supply may remain flat or even negative, the decay in the underlying assets that support it may be declining, and sometimes dramatically so. 

The smarter money is not chasing the latest wiggles in the Elliot waves, or the price manipulation shenanigans of the central bankers and their minions at the bullion banks. They have been buying ahead of the increasing likelihood of a monetary event.

The underlying value of the dollars are deteriorating. So even though there might be fewer dollars nominally, in fact there should be much fewer dollars because of the contraction in GDP.

And the quality of the assets underlying those fewer dollars are much lower quality than only a few years ago.

Gold seems to perform less well, underperforming other asset classes, in a healthy economy where the growth of money is related to the organic growth of real production and not to financial engineering. Gold seems to be a hold in 'normal' times.

I would suggest that the extraordinary price in gold now is because for many years the central banks artificially suppressed the price and the means of production for gold by selling their holdings in a conscious attempt to mask their monetization and the unreasonable growth of the financial sector. They wanted things to look 'normal' while they were becoming increasingly out of balance, especially with regard to debt and international trade balances, and so they opted for appearance versus reality.

As Fernando of the Fed would day, "It is better for the economy to look good than to be good, and dahling while we were printing money and selling the public's gold it looked marvelous!"

And what if the Fed starts allowing the 10 year Treasury yield to start rising naturally. Will that be the time to start selling gold? Probably not because the money supply would most likely be artificially increasing again, and that yield increase would be a remedial reaction.  Keep an eye to negative real interest rates if you can find an indicator of inflation that has not been corrupted.

Cargo Cult Economics

People who really do not understand what is happening in a complex system sometimes react in funny ways, and suggest things that would be laughable if there were not in a relative position of power. Anyone who has worked in a large corporation will understand what funny things bosses can be when struggling to deal with complexity that they do not understand. Our duty of course is to help them, for the good of all, but sometimes that is beyond our reach, especially in dealing with Type A bosses who cannot conceive that there might be something beyond their comprehension. Since 'killing the messenger' is their reflexive reaction, their learning curves tend to be quite long, generally resolved in the insolvency of the division or even the entire company.

What I find incredibly amusing are the high priests of the economic cargo cult, dressed up in the ritualistic accoutrement's of academic credentials, sporting the codpieces of monetary policy, carrying the totems of efficient market theory, arrogant and presumptuous even in their frustration and failure. They are just so incredibly and unsuspectingly funny. I am sure history will have a good laugh over it, and for us, well at times we have to grin and bear it.

Much of what Larry Summers is doing now makes me think of Dilbert's boss. If gold is the signal of a problem in the economy, well then, let's just manipulate the price of gold. If slumping stock prices are a sign of economic deterioration, well then, lets just buy the futures and prop them up whenever they slide. See how short term and easy things can be?

This is not always humorous of course. Powerful people who are frustrated and amoral can tend to do increasingly destructive things. And then the response of the people is to try to ignore them. If necessary one must basically tell them to 'stuff it,' and give them the boot. And if they persist and start acting out, well, tyrants eventually get replaced one way or the other, but it is far too early to discuss things like that now.

When Will the Gold Bull Market End

So, the frustrated investor says, when will gold finally start topping?

Gold have topped when the smart money is convinced that the real economy is becoming naturally sustainable, robustly organic in its credit creation and allocation, and healthy in the growth of the median wage to support consumption, without subsidy or interference or new unpayable debt from the Federal Reserve, or the draconian 'taxes' from an outsized financial sector that stifles real growth.

When people are no longer obsessed with what Goldman Sachs and their ilk are doing, or what Bernanke and his merry pranksters have to say that day, then will be the time to be out of gold. I do not see even a move in that direction anywhere on the horizon.  Because of the credibility trap, the impulse to reform is stifled in the corridors of power.

This is no top, and sentiment is unusually bearish. As I have said, I believe this is the base for a new leg up that is going to surprise all but a few. No one knows the future and I could be wrong.

But I do not think that I am, unless there is a new market panic and a general liquidation of all assets. The hedge funds, BIS, and the Fed can play their games, but they cannot hold back the tide of history without being overwhelmed.

Austerity or Stimulus Without Significant Reform Is Madness; Corporatism Is Fascism

The economy will not 'cure itself' through benign neglect and liquidationism, because it did not get this way by itself. It did not suffer an accident, or an act of God. This is an unfortunate application of the principle of human healing after an injury to the economy.

The market was warped and distorted for many, many years by the neo-liberal forces of crony capitalism. It does not have the natural forces and efficiency for self-organization, and certainly not for self-repair. It is a man-made thing, and requires intelligence and hard work.

To say that the economy can somehow heal itself now is nothing more than an extension of the efficient markets hypothesis. The market will repair itself and get back on the road to recovery if only we will leave it alone, get the government out of the way, and allow the natural goodness and efficiency of traders to flourish, while handing out some additional and unnecessary pain to the victims.

To suggest that by subjecting the economy to harsh austerity measures, but without changing the abuses that caused it to become distorted and unstable with a bloated and intrusive financial sector, and then crash in the first place, is merely to hasten the final collapse, and the tearing of the fabric of society, which some wish to see for their own dark purposes.

This is the failure of those who prescribe austerity, or stimulus, but without significant systemic reform. There are those who wish to bring the economy down, and to institute a command and control form of government.

The austerity without reform being promoted is what the Americans call 'a con.' Here is a decent description of it by my friend, Charles Hugh Smith in his essay, The Con of the Decade part II.

Are austerity and stimulus without reform equivalent? No. Austerity is designed to benefit those who have already benefited unjustly and sometimes immensely by the financial frauds. Stimulus can at least mitigate the suffering of those who are being squeezed by the economic dislocation.

However, and I wish to stress this, the core issue is and has been reform, eliminating the ongoing 'con' in the system that is merely serving to transfer wealth from the many to the few in the form of monopolies, fees, and soft taxes, starting with but not limited to the financial sector.

Corporatism is fascism. And the opportunity and impulse to reform has been co opted by the promotion of a stalking horse, a new Emmanuel Goldstein, into the presidency. Obama's tenure may be remembered as Bush' third term.

Judging from the inane and virulent emails that are circulating, most of which cannot survive a few minutes of common sense or the 'Snopes' test, the American people are being prepared for domination by a 'strong leader.'

Why do people forward such easily debunked rubbish? Why do so many older people get angry when the error, the blatant lie, is pointed out to them? Because they have set aside reason, and the burden of freedom, and taken the easier path to fear, blind hate, and serfdom. And in too many cases, it is working. I would again caution those promoting this campaign that madness has no master.

The banks must be restrained, the financial system reformed, and balance restored to the economy, before there can be any sustained recovery.