Connect with us

Did the Fed Stop Reporting the Money Supply (M2)? Why Inflation is Coming Back

“Inflation is not a problem for this time as near as I can figure. Right now, M2 [money supply] does not really have important implications. It is something we have to unlearn.” — Jay Powell, Fed Chairman Reports are circulating that the Federal…

Published

on

“Inflation is not a problem for this time as near as I can figure. Right now, M2 [money supply] does not really have important implications. It is something we have to unlearn.” — Jay Powell, Fed Chairman

Reports are circulating that the Federal Reserve has given up on reporting the money supply because it’s a misleading guide to economic growth and price inflation.

The broad-based M2 has been growing at double-digit-percentage rates for several years — M2 is up by 25% in the past year — yet price inflation (Consumer Price Index) is still hobbling along at 2% a year.

Last week, Fed Chairman Jay Powell said he has given up on the money supply as an indicator of the economy and inflation.

Is monetarism dead?

I checked into the rumor that M2 is no longer being measured by the central bank, and found that they have discontinued the standard M2 data on a weekly basis, and have substituted this new M2 measure on a monthly basis. Click here for more details.

This new measure, “M2SL,” still shows a dramatic rise in money-supply growth in 2020 and 2021.

Based on the price action of treasury inflation-protected securities (TIPS), inflationary expectations are rising.

Robert Mundell, Father of the Euro and Supply-Side Economics, R.I.P.

“The ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood… Sooner or later, it is ideas, not vested interests, which are dangerous for good or evil.” — John Maynard Keynes (1936)

Last week, Nobel prize economist Robert Mundell died at the ripe old age of 88. He won the Nobel prize in 1999 for being both the Father of the Euro and the Father of Supply-Side Economics. He was a giant in the economic landscape.

Last month, over 800 economists voted in our poll, “Which four economists belong on Mount Rushmore?” (we’re holding our FreedomFest conference there July 21-24).

Supply-Side Economics Wins (in the 1980s)!

Mundell was not eligible since he was still alive. Several economists, such as Art Laffer (of Laffer Curve fame) voted for him anyway. Bob Mundell changed the world all for the better. I loved him dearly and believe him to be the greatest economist of at least the past century.”

In the inflationary 1970s, Mundell advocated a unique strategy to get us out of the malaise of stagflation (slow growth and high inflation): impose tight money to control inflation and cut taxes to stimulate production. Thus, was born “supply-side economics.”

That’s exactly what Ronald Reagan did when he became president. He cut taxes and tightened credit in the early 1980s. Reaganomics proved to be a big success as we entered a period of recovery and low inflation (and even lower interest rates).

Meeting Mundell in Chicago

I met Mundell back in January 2012 going to the American Economic Association (AEA) meetings in Chicago, home of the famed Chicago School of Milton Friedman. I wrote at the time:

Meeting Robert Mundell in Chicago in 2012.

“I did get a chance to interview free-market economist and Nobel Prize winner Robert Mundell. We were on the same flight together to and from New York. He was appalled by the ‘crude’ Keynesians [Paul Krugman, Larry Summers] at the AEA meeting who advocated all-out inflationary policies.

“What about the future of the euro and the Eurozone?” I asked. Mundell is considered the father of the euro. “Some countries, like Greece, will have to default on their debt, but the euro is here to stay, and the EU will survive,” he predicted.

Mundell, no doubt, would reject out of hand Robert Barro’s op-ed in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal that the euro be disbanded. (If Barro’s prediction came true, it would wreak havoc in the global stock market.)”

Mundell has been proven right, so far. The euro has survived Brexit and the Greek debt crisis. A European Union makes economic sense to have one large area where labor, capital and money can move around efficiently, all under one currency. As Spanish economist Jesus Huerta de Soto notes, the euro acts like the gold standard to provide stability and price competition in the eurozone.

That’s the genius of the United States of America. It’s the largest “free trade” zone in the world and is one reason it and the dollar have dominated the world economically.

Who Are the Most Influential Economists?

This July, we will announce what four economists belong on Mount Rushmore at a special session at FreedomFest. You will be surprised at who the winners are.

As far as the most influential, they would definitely have to include these “Big Three in Economics”:

18th Century Choice: Adam Smith, the Scottish economist who wrote “The Wealth of Nations” in 1776 — a declaration of economic independence. He advocated free trade and a “system of natural liberty.” He is considered the father of modern economics.

19th Century: Karl Marx, the German economist and philosopher, considered the most vociferous critic of capitalism ever. Despite the collapse of the Soviet central planning model, his theories of exploitation, alienation and inequality have had a devastating impact throughout the world and still are popular in universities and political institutions.

20th Century: John Maynard Keynes, the British economist, is considered the most impactful economist in the 20th century since the Great Depression. Both Republican and Democratic presidents have pursued Keynesian “big spending” policies to stimulate the economy, leaving a legacy of slow growth, the welfare state and excessive national debt.

What About the 21st Century?

The fourth most influential economist is up for debate. It could be Mundell. It could be Keynesians Paul Krugman or Joe Stiglitz.

I nominate Milton Friedman in my book, “The Making of Modern Economics” with a title he loved: “Milton’s Paradise: Friedman Leads a Monetary Counterrevolution.”


Friedman made many positive contributions. He brought back the importance of monetary policy: how to get inflation under control and bring interest rates down. He made the case for eliminating the draft and encouraging school choice.

 Understand How the Economy Works in One Book

Want to read the thrilling episodes of the great economic thinkers and how they changed the world? Get a copy of my book, “The Making of Modern Economics.” John Mackey, CEO of Whole Foods Market, says, “Mark’s book is fun to read on every page. I’ve read it three times, and recommend it to all my friends.” The retail price is $49, but you pay only $35. I autograph all copies and mail them at no extra charge if mailed inside the United States. To order go to www.skousenbooks.com.

Milton Friedman said it best: “All histories of economics are BS — Before Skousen!”

Special Sessions at FreedomFest

We’re planning some special events at this year’s FreedomFest, July 21-24, at the Rushmore Civic Center.

I will moderate a special panel/debate on this question, “Who deserves to be on the ‘Mount Rushmore of Economists’?” Who are the most influential economists? Who advocated the soundest economics?

Our panelists will be Steve Moore (Heritage Foundation), Deirdre Nansen McCloskey (the University of Illinois at Chicago), Barbara Kolm (Austrian Economics Center) and Mark Perry (American Enterprise Institute). Let the debate begin!

We are also planning a debate on Murray Rothbard’s “Conceived in Liberty” series on the Constitution — did it guarantee limited government and increase government power?

Bitcoin is all the rage this year. Has it replaced gold as the ultimate inflation hedge? Adrian Day will moderate this debate.

We will also have a fiery debate between John Mackey (Conscious Capitalism) and Yaron Brook (Ayn Rand Institute) about “Profits — is that All that Matters?”

Plus, the mock trial: “Was the Lockdown Necessary to Stop the Pandemic?” with Tom Woods as the judge.

This year’s FreedomFest is going to be bigger and more influential than ever before, with over 1,600 people already registered. As John Fund (senior writer, National Review) says, “FreedomFest doesn’t just ride the wave, it invents the wave.” He and 200 other movers and shakers (including Eagle financial gurus Jim Woods, Hilary Kramer and yours truly) will meet this July 21-24 in Rapid City, South Dakota, near Mount Rushmore.

Special Thanks to Subscribers

I thank all those subscribers who have signed up for our private meeting in South Dakota on Thursday, July 22. Glad to hear that 222 of you are coming so far! The meeting will take place at the historic Alex Johnson Hotel in Rapid City, South Dakota, where six presidents have stayed, including Ronald Reagan.

We have split the private meeting into two groups, so we can accommodate all the subscribers who wish to attend. Each subscriber (or couple) will receive a 2021 American Eagle silver dollar and a numbered, autographed copy of the new 10th anniversary of “The Maxims of Wall Street.” I will also have a special surprise guest at our private meeting you won’t want to miss.

Use code EAGLE50 to get a $50 discount on the regular conference fee. Special discount for students and young professionals. Go to www.freedomfest.com, or call Hayley at 1-855-850-3733, ext. 202.

Fly there, drive there, bike there, RV there, be there!

You Blew it!

U.S. Mint Blunders in Redesigning American Eagle Silver Dollar

It’s not often that the U.S. Mint releases a perfectly designed silver dollar, but the American Eagle Silver Dollar is a gem.

It has all the ideals of America inscribed in the one-ounce legal tender coin. On the front side, a portrait of Lady Liberty, the motto “In God We Trust” and the rising sun, Ben Franklin’s favorite symbol of America.

On the backside, it has 13 stars representing the original colonies, and the American bald eagle, carrying the ribbon “e Pluribus Unum” and the arrows in one claw (representing war) and palm leaves in the other (representing peace).

The eagle is perfectly symmetric, far better than the obverse side of the official gold coin.

But, for some odd reason, the U.S. Mint decided that it needed to make a change. Now, it’s just an eagle landing on a branch. It is pretty lame and no longer symmetric. What a shame. You can’t improve upon perfection.

The post Did the Fed Stop Reporting the Money Supply (M2)? Why Inflation is Coming Back appeared first on Stock Investor.

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Buried Project Veritas Recording Shows Top Pfizer Scientists Suppressed Concerns Over COVID-19 Boosters, MRNA Tech

Buried Project Veritas Recording Shows Top Pfizer Scientists Suppressed Concerns Over COVID-19 Boosters, MRNA Tech

Submitted by Liam Cosgrove

Former…

Published

on

Buried Project Veritas Recording Shows Top Pfizer Scientists Suppressed Concerns Over COVID-19 Boosters, MRNA Tech

Submitted by Liam Cosgrove

Former Project Veritas & O’Keefe Media Group operative and Pfizer formulation analyst scientist Justin Leslie revealed previously unpublished recordings showing Pfizer’s top vaccine researchers discussing major concerns surrounding COVID-19 vaccines. Leslie delivered these recordings to Veritas in late 2021, but they were never published:

Featured in Leslie’s footage is Kanwal Gill, a principal scientist at Pfizer. Gill was weary of MRNA technology given its long research history yet lack of approved commercial products. She called the vaccines “sneaky,” suggesting latent side effects could emerge in time.

Gill goes on to illustrate how the vaccine formulation process was dramatically rushed under the FDA’s Emergency Use Authorization and adds that profit incentives likely played a role:

"It’s going to affect my heart, and I’m going to die. And nobody’s talking about that."

Leslie recorded another colleague, Pfizer’s pharmaceutical formulation scientist Ramin Darvari, who raised the since-validated concern that repeat booster intake could damage the cardiovascular system:

None of these claims will be shocking to hear in 2024, but it is telling that high-level Pfizer researchers were discussing these topics in private while the company assured the public of “no serious safety concerns” upon the jab’s release:

Vaccine for Children is a Different Formulation

Leslie sent me a little-known FDA-Pfizer conference — a 7-hour Zoom meeting published in tandem with the approval of the vaccine for 5 – 11 year-olds — during which Pfizer’s vice presidents of vaccine research and development, Nicholas Warne and William Gruber, discussed a last-minute change to the vaccine’s “buffer” — from “PBS” to “Tris” — to improve its shelf life. For about 30 seconds of these 7 hours, Gruber acknowledged that the new formula was NOT the one used in clinical trials (emphasis mine):


“The studies were done using the same volume… but contained the PBS buffer. We obviously had extensive consultations with the FDA and it was determined that the clinical studies were not required because, again, the LNP and the MRNA are the same and the behavior — in terms of reactogenicity and efficacy — are expected to be the same.

According to Leslie, the tweaked “buffer” dramatically changed the temperature needed for storage: “Before they changed this last step of the formulation, the formula was to be kept at -80 degrees Celsius. After they changed the last step, we kept them at 2 to 8 degrees celsius,” Leslie told me.

The claims are backed up in the referenced video presentation:

I’m no vaccinologist but an 80-degree temperature delta — and a 5x shelf-life in a warmer climate — seems like a significant change that might warrant clinical trials before commercial release.

Despite this information technically being public, there has been virtually no media scrutiny or even coverage — and in fact, most were told the vaccine for children was the same formula but just a smaller dose — which is perhaps due to a combination of the information being buried within a 7-hour jargon-filled presentation and our media being totally dysfunctional.

Bohemian Grove?

Leslie’s 2-hour long documentary on his experience at both Pfizer and O’Keefe’s companies concludes on an interesting note: James O’Keefe attended an outing at the Bohemian Grove.

Leslie offers this photo of James’ Bohemian Grove “GATE” slip as evidence, left on his work desk atop a copy of his book, “American Muckraker”:

My thoughts on the Bohemian Grove: my good friend’s dad was its general manager for several decades. From what I have gathered through that connection, the Bohemian Grove is not some version of the Illuminati, at least not in the institutional sense.

Do powerful elites hangout there? Absolutely. Do they discuss their plans for the world while hanging out there? I’m sure it has happened. Do they have a weird ritual with a giant owl? Yep, Alex Jones showed that to the world.

My perspective is based on conversations with my friend and my belief that his father is not lying to him. I could be wrong and am open to evidence — like if boxer Ryan Garcia decides to produce evidence regarding his rape claims — and I do find it a bit strange the club would invite O’Keefe who is notorious for covertly filming, but Occam’s razor would lead me to believe the club is — as it was under my friend’s dad — run by boomer conservatives the extent of whose politics include disliking wokeness, immigration, and Biden (common subjects of O’Keefe’s work).

Therefore, I don’t find O’Keefe’s visit to the club indicative that he is some sort of Operation Mockingbird asset as Leslie tries to depict (however Mockingbird is a 100% legitimate conspiracy). I have also met James several times and even came close to joining OMG. While I disagreed with James on the significance of many of his stories — finding some to be overhyped and showy — I never doubted his conviction in them.

As for why Leslie’s story was squashed… all my sources told me it was to avoid jail time for Veritas executives.

Feel free to watch Leslie’s full documentary here and decide for yourself.

Fun fact — Justin Leslie was also the operative behind this mega-viral Project Veritas story where Pfizer’s director of R&D claimed the company was privately mutating COVID-19 behind closed doors:

Tyler Durden Tue, 03/12/2024 - 13:40

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Association of prenatal vitamins and metals with epigenetic aging at birth and in childhood

“[…] our findings support the hypothesis that the intrauterine environment, particularly essential and non-essential metals, affect epigenetic aging…

Published

on

“[…] our findings support the hypothesis that the intrauterine environment, particularly essential and non-essential metals, affect epigenetic aging biomarkers across the life course.”

Credit: 2024 Bozack et al.

“[…] our findings support the hypothesis that the intrauterine environment, particularly essential and non-essential metals, affect epigenetic aging biomarkers across the life course.”

BUFFALO, NY- March 12, 2024 – A new research paper was published in Aging (listed by MEDLINE/PubMed as “Aging (Albany NY)” and “Aging-US” by Web of Science) Volume 16, Issue 4, entitled, “Associations of prenatal one-carbon metabolism nutrients and metals with epigenetic aging biomarkers at birth and in childhood in a US cohort.”

Epigenetic gestational age acceleration (EGAA) at birth and epigenetic age acceleration (EAA) in childhood may be biomarkers of the intrauterine environment. In this new study, researchers Anne K. Bozack, Sheryl L. Rifas-Shiman, Andrea A. Baccarelli, Robert O. Wright, Diane R. Gold, Emily Oken, Marie-France Hivert, and Andres Cardenas from Stanford University School of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Columbia University, and Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai investigated the extent to which first-trimester folate, B12, 5 essential and 7 non-essential metals in maternal circulation are associated with EGAA and EAA in early life. 

“[…] we hypothesized that OCM [one-carbon metabolism] nutrients and essential metals would be positively associated with EGAA and non-essential metals would be negatively associated with EGAA. We also investigated nonlinear associations and associations with mixtures of micronutrients and metals.”

Bohlin EGAA and Horvath pan-tissue and skin and blood EAA were calculated using DNA methylation measured in cord blood (N=351) and mid-childhood blood (N=326; median age = 7.7 years) in the Project Viva pre-birth cohort. A one standard deviation increase in individual essential metals (copper, manganese, and zinc) was associated with 0.94-1.2 weeks lower Horvath EAA at birth, and patterns of exposures identified by exploratory factor analysis suggested that a common source of essential metals was associated with Horvath EAA. The researchers also observed evidence of nonlinear associations of zinc with Bohlin EGAA, magnesium and lead with Horvath EAA, and cesium with skin and blood EAA at birth. Overall, associations at birth did not persist in mid-childhood; however, arsenic was associated with greater EAA at birth and in childhood. 

“Prenatal metals, including essential metals and arsenic, are associated with epigenetic aging in early life, which might be associated with future health.”

 

Read the full paper: DOI: https://doi.org/10.18632/aging.205602 

Corresponding Author: Andres Cardenas

Corresponding Email: andres.cardenas@stanford.edu 

Keywords: epigenetic age acceleration, metals, folate, B12, prenatal exposures

Click here to sign up for free Altmetric alerts about this article.

 

About Aging:

Launched in 2009, Aging publishes papers of general interest and biological significance in all fields of aging research and age-related diseases, including cancer—and now, with a special focus on COVID-19 vulnerability as an age-dependent syndrome. Topics in Aging go beyond traditional gerontology, including, but not limited to, cellular and molecular biology, human age-related diseases, pathology in model organisms, signal transduction pathways (e.g., p53, sirtuins, and PI-3K/AKT/mTOR, among others), and approaches to modulating these signaling pathways.

Please visit our website at www.Aging-US.com​​ and connect with us:

  • Facebook
  • X, formerly Twitter
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
  • Reddit
  • Pinterest
  • Spotify, and available wherever you listen to podcasts

 

Click here to subscribe to Aging publication updates.

For media inquiries, please contact media@impactjournals.com.

 

Aging (Aging-US) Journal Office

6666 E. Quaker Str., Suite 1B

Orchard Park, NY 14127

Phone: 1-800-922-0957, option 1

###


Read More

Continue Reading

International

A beginner’s guide to the taxes you’ll hear about this election season

Everything you need to know about income tax, national insurance and more.

Cast Of Thousands/Shutterstock

National insurance, income tax, VAT, capital gains tax, inheritance tax… it’s easy to get confused about the many different ways we contribute to the cost of running the country. The budget announcement is the key time each year when the government shares its financial plans with us all, and announces changes that may make a tangible difference to what you pay.

But you’ll likely be hearing a lot more about taxes in the coming months – promises to cut or raise them are an easy win (or lose) for politicians in an election year. We may even get at least one “mini-budget”.

If you’ve recently entered the workforce or the housing market, you may still be wrapping your mind around all of these terms. Here is what you need to know about the different types of taxes and how they affect you.

The UK broadly uses three ways to collect tax:

1. When you earn money

If you are an employee or own a business, taxes are deducted from your salary or profits you make. For most people, this happens in two ways: income tax, and national insurance contributions (or NICs).

If you are self-employed, you will have to pay your taxes via an annual tax return assessment. You might also have to pay taxes this way for interest you earn on savings, dividends (distribution of profits from a company or shares you own) received and most other forms of income not taxed before you get it.

Around two-thirds of taxes collected come from people’s or business’ incomes in the UK.

2. When you spend money

VAT and excise duties are taxes on most goods and services you buy, with some exceptions like books and children’s clothing. About 20% of the total tax collected is VAT.

3. Taxes on wealth and assets

These are mainly taxes on the money you earn if you sell assets (like property or stocks) for more than you bought them for, or when you pass on assets in an inheritance. In the latter case in the UK, the recipient doesn’t pay this, it is the estate paying it out that must cover this if due. These taxes contribute only about 3% to the total tax collected.

You also likely have to pay council tax, which is set by the council you live in based on the value of your house or flat. It is paid by the user of the property, no matter if you own or rent. If you are a full-time student or on some apprenticeship schemes, you may get a deduction or not have to pay council tax at all.


Quarter life, a series by The Conversation

This article is part of Quarter Life, a series about issues affecting those of us in our 20s and 30s. From the challenges of beginning a career and taking care of our mental health, to the excitement of starting a family, adopting a pet or just making friends as an adult. The articles in this series explore the questions and bring answers as we navigate this turbulent period of life.

You may be interested in:

If you get your financial advice on social media, watch out for misinformation

Future graduates will pay more in student loan repayments – and the poorest will be worst affected

Selling on Vinted, Etsy or eBay? Here’s what you need to know about paying tax


Put together, these totalled almost £790 billion in 2022-23, which the government spends on public services such as the NHS, schools and social care. The government collects taxes from all sources and sets its spending plans accordingly, borrowing to make up any difference between the two.

Income tax

The amount of income tax you pay is determined by where your income sits in a series of “bands” set by the government. Almost everyone is entitled to a “personal allowance”, currently £12,570, which you can earn without needing to pay any income tax.

You then pay 20% in tax on each pound of income you earn (across all sources) from £12,570-£50,270. You pay 40% on each extra pound up to £125,140 and 45% over this. If you earn more than £100,000, the personal allowance (amount of untaxed income) starts to decrease.

If you are self-employed, the same rates apply to you. You just don’t have an employer to take this off your salary each month. Instead, you have to make sure you have enough money at the end of the year to pay this directly to the government.


Read more: Taxes aren't just about money – they shape how we think about each other


The government can increase the threshold limits to adjust for inflation. This tries to ensure any wage rise you get in response to higher prices doesn’t lead to you having to pay a higher tax rate. However, the government announced in 2021 that they would freeze these thresholds until 2026 (extended now to 2028), arguing that it would help repay the costs of the pandemic.

Given wages are now rising for many to help with the cost of living crisis, this means many people will pay more income tax this coming year than they did before. This is sometimes referred to as “fiscal drag” – where lower earners are “dragged” into paying higher tax rates, or being taxed on more of their income.

National insurance

National insurance contributions (NICs) are a second “tax” you pay on your income – or to be precise, on your earned income (your salary). You don’t pay this on some forms of income, including savings or dividends, and you also don’t pay it once you reach state retirement age (currently 66).

While Jeremy Hunt, the current chancellor of the exchequer, didn’t adjust income tax meaningfully in this year’s budget, he did announce a cut to NICs. This was a surprise to many, as we had already seen rates fall from 12% to 10% on incomes higher than £242/week in January. It will now fall again to 8% from April.


Read more: Budget 2024: experts explain what it means for taxpayers, businesses, borrowers and the NHS


While this is charged separately to income tax, in reality it all just goes into one pot with other taxes. Some, including the chancellor, say it is time to merge these two deductions and make this simpler for everyone. In his budget speech this year, Hunt said he’d like to see this tax go entirely. He thinks this isn’t fair on those who have to pay it, as it is only charged on some forms of income and on some workers.

I wouldn’t hold my breath for this to happen however, and even if it did, there are huge sums linked to NICs (nearly £180bn last year) so it would almost certainly have to be collected from elsewhere (such as via an increase in income taxes, or a lot more borrowing) to make sure the government could still balance its books.

A young black man sits at a home office desk with his feet up, looking at a mobile phone
Do you know how much tax you pay? Alex from the Rock/Shutterstock

Other taxes

There are likely to be further tweaks to the UK’s tax system soon, perhaps by the current government before the election – and almost certainly if there is a change of government.

Wealth taxes may be in line for a change. In the budget, the chancellor reduced capital gains taxes on sales of assets such as second properties (from 28% to 24%). These types of taxes provide only a limited amount of money to the government, as quite high thresholds apply for inheritance tax (up to £1 million if you are passing on a family home).

There are calls from many quarters though to look again at these types of taxes. Wealth inequality (the differences between total wealth held by the richest compared to the poorest) in the UK is very high (much higher than income inequality) and rising.

But how to do this effectively is a matter of much debate. A recent study suggested a one-off tax on total wealth held over a certain threshold might work. But wealth taxes are challenging to make work in practice, and both main political parties have already said this isn’t an option they are considering currently.

Andy Lymer and his colleagues at the Centre for Personal Financial Wellbeing at Aston University currently or have recently received funding for their research work from a variety of funding bodies including the UK's Money and Pension Service, the Aviva Foundation, Fair4All Finance, NEST Insight, the Gambling Commission, Vivid Housing and the ESRC, amongst others.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending