The evidence is overwhelming. As Steven Kopits comments:
Yes, Powell and Yellen [are at fault for causing the inflation and resulting banking crisis]. Nothing new there.
And, yes, the US can export inflation. If a US fiscal impulse goes into a full employment (or upwardly constrained employment) economy, then the difference will show up in imports. We would expect to see a blow-out in the trade deficit and clogging of ports. Which we did. And we would expect that supply chains across the world would be under pressure with price increases across the globe. Which we did. So, yes, best I can tell, the US is able to export inflation.
I think Steven Kopits meant Biden, not Yellen, in his comment, since Dr. Janet Yellen hasn’t been Fed chair since 2018; or maybe he did mean Yellen as the person who he blames for fiscal policy. In any case, this graph proves indisputably he is right!
Figure 1: CPI for US (blue), Euro Area (tan), UK (green), Sweden (lilac), Poland (brown), and Korea (sky blue), all not seasonally adjusted, in logs, 2021M01=0. NBER defined peak-to-trough US recession dates shaded gray. Source: BLS, Eurostat, OECD via FRED, and author’s calculations.
Of course, there’s not a lot of empirical evidence to support the view that US monetary policy drives foreign inflation in the way Mr. Kopits posits. See for instance Figure 2 in Caldara, Ferrante, and Queralto (2022). At 8 quarters, the effect of a 100 bps change in the Fed funds rate on foreign inflation is near zero. If you’re not bothered by the lack of empirical evidence, then Swedes (and even more so Poles), blame Powell (or Yellen or Biden, whoever you don’t like) for your troubles! Don’t be troubled that all these countries have exchange rates that float relative to the US dollar…
Figure 2 below depicts year-on-year inflation for these economies.
Figure 2: Year-on-Year CPI inflation for US (blue), Euro Area (tan), UK (green), Sweden (lilac), Poland (brown), and Korea (sky blue). NBER defined peak-to-trough US recession dates shaded gray. Source: BLS, Eurostat, OECD via FRED, and author’s calculations.
Every troll has a style. Stevie’s style is heavy on “I say so”. He simply declares things to be true. He’s a consultant, after all.
When challenged, Stevie’s style extends to “It’s true if I can tell a story in which it seems true.” That’s what we have here. Stevie tells a story in which the Fed drives inflation around the world. Nowhere does evidence appear in the story.
We can’t blame Stevie for creating this style. It’s the “elite” conservative style in the U.S. (not that conservatives elsewhere don’t indulge). Tax cuts are self-financing. “Black Lives Matter” is a violent movement. The mortgage crisis was the result of banks being forced to lend to blacks. In Stevie’s world, the tie-wearing, chin-stroking part of the conservative bubble, telling a story is evidence.* No data. No econometrics. Just stories.
Problem is, telling a story is just a more elaborate version of “I say so.” There’s arrogance in this style.
*”The base” relies on shouted factoids instead of stories. Stories are too complicated for “the base.” Grievance is in style for pretty much all conservatives now.
It actually is one of the fundamental differences between conservatives and liberals. Conservatives are authoritarians. When the “authority” claims something you accept it. You do not question the authority or out comes the rod. Don’t question the Bible, obey it. Not because its right by evidence, but because it is Holy. Sure there can be “rebels” in conservative circles, but their approach is to claim “I am the authority”. Trump doesn’t argue for specific policies, he just belittle his opponents – then sets out the absurd claim that he knows more than the generals.
Liberals alway question things and demand proof regardless of the status of those making a claim. There is no respect for where someone is in the pecking order, only how solid their claims and arguments are. In that sense it is true that most colleges are liberal. We don’t tech students to simply obey and trust the professor we teach them the underlying “mechanisms” that support what the professor claims to be truths.
In my experience, liberals do not “always question things and demand proof regardless of the status of those making a claim.” There is very strong pressure to conform to group think in liberal circles regarding many controversial issues, to the extent that many people are afraid to oppose or question policy positions around many social justice/DEI issues.
There are also plenty of issues where liberals are very authoritarian. Climate, Covid, environment, employment laws such as AB-5, minimum wage rules, and support for closed union shops, race, trans issues, and on and on*. Liberals are very comfortable mandating what every one has to do. I am sure most liberals would say that people they trust have carefully evaluated the rules and regulations they impose on everyone and that its all for the best, while people with different assessments or values are just wrong or evil, but there is a lot of hubris involved and many of the schemes seem to fail as they get more and more complicated, over regulated, and subject to regulatory capture, purity cycles, human nature, and unexpected events.
*I am not stating agreement or disagreement with any specific position, just noting that liberals are fine with an authoritarian approach. I agree with your statement about Trump and agree many conservatives are also authoritarian, although often in different areas than liberals.
@ Craig
Are you sure Trump is authoritarian?? We don’t want you to extend yourself out too far just to placate the dirty liberals. We don’t want you to feel awkward or forced. I think when Trump phoned up and had extended intimidating conversations with election officials in Georgia, he wasn’t trying to create votes out of thin air, Republican Trump was just checking to see what the weather was like in Georgia and if any of them were running a fever on account of Covid-19.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-raffensperger-call-transcript-georgia-vote/2021/01/03/2768e0cc-4ddd-11eb-83e3-322644d82356_story.html
Thank God the new generation of Republicans is not authoritarian or trying to control what people read, what people think, or what people are exposed to. Thank God for that.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2023/03/17/florida-school-library-controversy-teachers-sue-desantis-government/11491268002/
@Moses
To clarify, yes I am sure that Trump has very authoritarian instincts and never said he did not. He has a personality uniquely unsuited for leadership in a democracy, or in any system for that matter. I think he is a transactional politician who values personal benefits and loyalty over any specific policy except where that policy directly affects him, and his style of personal attacks and playing fast and loose with the truth is unhelpful to say the least. That has nothing to do with the cleanliness of liberals. The liberals I know tend to have personal hygiene that is roughly equivalent to the conservatives I know. I also believe Trump has brought out the worst in his opponents as well and accelerated a viscous circle that is breaking longstanding political norms and boundaries and likely will not end well.
I have already stated that many conservatives are authoritarian, but I believe that there are far better examples of that than trying to keep graphic descriptions and images of porn out of school libraries. I have seen a number of the books being banned and agree that they do not belong in school libraries given the depiction of oral and other sexual activities. In a similar vein, I don’t believe kids should be able to use school internet to watch Pornhub or check out Playboy and similar magazines from their school libraries. There is a longstanding consensus in this country that children are not mature enough to be exposed to everything adults can see and do (R rated movies, drinking ages, limits on sexual activity, etc.) Maybe the books I have seen have been cherry picked as the worst examples, but curation of school library materials to match community norms seems reasonable to me. There are always going to be borderline cases, but the books are not banned from the general public, so if any parent would like their children to access those materials, they are free to do so.
@ Craig
Straight porn is not what people are really debating, and it’s typical Republican obfuscation by you to say that anyone is arguing for children’s access to pornhub etc. It’s about transgender/gay depictions of mature relationships, or even “experimentation” if you prefer, to find out during developmental years who they are, where they’re going, and what they will become. That’s a very natural stage/process of growing up. And if you have conservative Republican legislators creating an atmosphere where transgenders and gays feel that they are “the only ones” feeling attractions to the same gender they are feeling and even ostracized by federal law as being “deviant” it creates a higher rate of suicides, and yes murder. Six dead in Nashville at last count, 3 of them children~~Just 4 days after “Craig” and I had this little debate.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/28/nashville-school-shooting-tennessee-warning-messages-police
If you think young adults committing suicide and going on mass murder sprees is better than having a few library books (with context and story, which is what Republican federal and state leaders are calling “porn”) I think you need to reevaluate your “values”. Or just understand what true porn is. Apparently some people do NOT know “what ‘it’ (porn) is,, when they see it”.
No librarians are taking these books up randomly to young people. Librarians are providing these books/materials when they are being searched out for.
Just watched Jason Furman who noted: (1) there are a lot of healthy banks out there; (2) the problem of a lot of uninsured deposits is receding already; and (3) those implicit guarantees are working. But what does he know since he is contradicting all of Princeton Steve’s huffing and puffing.
We have other examples of degreed people making fools of themselves. I think the question is, is it an honest mistake or is it disingenuous statements made for an audience?? For me, after some time to take it in, I feel like most of Mr. Kopits’s statements are disingenuous and he knows what he is saying is a lie. That’s the only real rub for me~~is the intentional lying. If you can block out the fact that he’s just knowingly telling lies all the time, I suppose it’s just humorous and also can be used for learning (with the Fed NOTES link and that). I just don’t know how people sleep and it doesn’t bother their conscious when they just go around telling lies 24/7. Get a higher education degree—all to then go around telling lies all day. That doesn’t bother people?? Maybe I’m the last remnants of Protestant thought in that aspect?? I have no idea. I presume Menzie’s Dad wasn’t Protestant and his Dad taught him the same kind of outlook as my Dad taught me on that specific thing, I would guess
It also kind of makes university degrees look like a joke (which I know they aren’t) and Kopits’ professors look like a joke when a man with a college education speaks and writes words that are really about the same you’d expect from a high school drop out, and I think some young people must ask themselves “Why would I get a university degree when people like this Kopits and Navarro don’t seem to have gotten any deeper insights from it??”.
When you get a college degree, you have at least semi-responsibility to behave and act like you got a college degree. At least that’s the idea my father always gave me. And that’s not a snobbery thing, maybe the opposite. It’s not holding your nose high in the air, and ignoring those without a degree. It’s showing intelligence in your decisions and showing good judgement in life. Not snorting and hiking your breeches up to say your income or what premium item you got in the store that day. Snobbery is not worldliness or civilized.
*I don’t know how it doesn’t bother their conscience, excuse me.
In fact, doesn’t the literature of the past decade or so point to increasing influence from a common global inflation factor? The global economy is responsible for something like 25% of U.S. inflation performance, rather than the U.S. being increasingly responsible for global inflation. Energy and food price shocks account for their share of global inflation, and are set in world markets.
And in recent times, there have been supply shocks due to Covid and Russia’s war in Ukraine. After taking all of these into account, Powell and Yellen (Biden?) don’t have a whole lot of room left to cause inflation at home, much less in Sweden.
Exactly.
MD opines: “In fact, doesn’t the literature of the past decade or so point to increasing influence from a common global inflation factor? The global economy is responsible for something like 25% of U.S. inflation performance, rather than the U.S. being increasingly responsible for global inflation. Energy and food price shocks account for their share of global inflation, and are set in world markets.”
Yet still ignores the impact of POOR POLICY DECISIONS as; “Energy and food price shocks …” Both are examples of liberal policy nirvana FAILURES. This was known about net zero energy policy in German,Jan. 29, 2019, before Biden adopted the same failing policy: https://www.wsj.com/articles/worlds-dumbest-energy-policy-11548807424
“World’s Dumbest Energy Policy
After giving up nuclear power, Germany now wants to abandon coal.
How bad is/was this policy? Germany is now building more coal and gas power plants. And that’s just the beginning of how badly tyhis policy is failing:
“03/09/2023 | 05:13am EDT
WIESBADEN (dpa-AFX) – Coal gained importance as the most important energy source for electricity production in Germany last year. The share of electricity generated from coal-fired power plants, which are considered harmful to the climate, rose by 8.4 percentage points to one-third (33.3 percent) compared with 2021,…” https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/E-ON-SE-3818998/news/Coal-more-important-as-energy-source-for-German-electricity-production-43198248/
the liberal mind is an amazement.
“there’s not a lot of empirical evidence to support” anything little Stevie says. But let’s challenge him to articulate how monetary policy in the US transmits to inflation in Sweden under floating exchange rates. This should be fun.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DEXSDUS
Speaking of floating exchange rates – the Krona devalued after Biden took office. Not exactly fitting the blame game Stevie tried to point even in Stevie’s little monetarist world. Of course bloviating Steve is too dumb to get my point so hey.
Menzie unequivocally states: “Of course, there’s not a lot of empirical evidence to support the view that US monetary policy drives foreign inflation in the way Mr. Kopits posits.” While ignoring the totality of Biden’s policy. I certainly have commented upon his ENERGY policies, which clearly have much empirical evidence of oil price inflation. looking here at the 5Yr chart: https://markets.businessinsider.com/commodities/oil-price?type=wti. As has been show many times now US/EU inflation responded with these price increases. Only those in denial of this evidence and ENERGY policy (Biden’s US & EU) ignore this impact.
Bad policy is not limited to just the US (Biden) and the EU, but ignoring the impacts of ENERGY policy as a cause of inflation is obviously ludicrous. Just ask Russia.
The denial is strong here. Yes, Biden’s policies have been the cause of today’s US inflation, and SOME OF IT has been exported to the EU, although their governments have been on own bad policy paths.
So are we to assume you like Putin because Fox news likes Putin and that he’s white?? We’ll wait for your limp-wristed answer.
In a global energy market – only the dumbest troll God ever created could with a straight face say a temporary blip in world energy prices was the fault of Biden. Gee CoRev – nice show. It at first appeared that little Stevie was going to win the dumbest troll award for 2023 but we all knew you would work hard to regain your lead.
Yes it looks like the elephant in the room put its foot in his eye. War in Ukraine? I see no war in Ukraine?
Hey CoRev – way to help Speaker McCarthy with his boondoggle!
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/kevin-mccarthy-s-first-legislative-farce-the-lower-energy-costs-act-is-a-fossil-fuel-scam/ar-AA18W1V3?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=0063a7e0557146bda261f874a9fc6160&ei=11
The first new legislation of Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s Republican Congress — HR1, the Lower Energy Costs Act — is an exorbitantly mislabeled bill. It allows utilities and pipeline companies to build thoroughly unnecessary energy infrastructure, which will be paid for by electricity and gas consumers decades into the future. Despite its name, it will raise energy prices by fast-tracking efforts by oil, gas and coal producers to export an ever-expanding share of U.S. production, a strategy that has already tripled gas prices for American consumers. What this legislation reveals is that McCarthy go to nearly any lengths to allow his extreme-right members sacrifice the public interest to the interests of fossil-fuel producers.
Make America Corrupt Again!
Ole Bark, bark wants to “Make America Corrupt Again! ” It’s hard to measure how more corrupt it can be after watching the past years of Pelosi, Biden and Soros in action.
Look dude – we get you are a worthless troll so take a chill. GEESH!
Refute what I said??? NOPE! Just another weak personal attack. WHEEE!!!!!
Your comment content level is way below LTR’s.
CoVid is at it again. If you click the link, you’ll find that oil prices are now just about where they were when Biden took office. So we have “empirical evidence” of oil prices rising and then falling during Biden’s presidency, contrary to what CoVid implies. CoVid claims Biden’s policies are to blame for the oil price rise – which has evaporated under those same policies – but offers no evidence. He keeps making this claim, never providing evidence.
And there’s the little issue of Russia’s war and Saudi Arabia’s output limits, but let’s not get in CoVid’s way with silly facts.
MD, I’m laughing so had I’m almost falling out of my chair: “He keeps making this claim, never providing evidence. ” How much evidence is needed to show increasing energy prices even needs evidence that it affects prices. I’ll wait for your list of products that would NOT be effected.
You must also believe that Biden’s inflation did not cause the Fed to raise rates.
I used an oil example for a far wider reaching term energy. I wish there was a review of energy prices, but what we usually see is an incomplete component break down. Pick your own graph and disprove my point.
I’ll wait for your list of products and all inclusive graph.
CoRev So did Biden cause higher inflation in most of the other OECD countries? Do you think your lord and master Vladimir Putin might have had something to do with rising food and energy prices?
You’re also fixated on oil, as though that is the only energy commodity. It’s not. For example, here’s a graph that shows production of electricity and gas utilities: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/IPUTIL. Looks to me like it’s been steadily rising since Biden took office and is higher than it was under Trump. And then there’s natural gas liquids (NGL), which have continued to rise since Biden took office. And biofuels production has increased over what it was during most of the Trump years.
https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/browser/index.php?tbl=T03.01#/?f=A&start=2008&end=2021&charted=7-8-5-4
But you seem to have some kind of perverse fetish about crude oil, as though that’s the only energy source that matters.
2slugs, do not even read a comment? “You’re also fixated on oil, as though that is the only energy commodity. ” When I actually wrote: “I used an oil example for a far wider reaching term energy. I wish there was a review of energy prices, but what we usually see is an incomplete component break down. Pick your own graph and disprove my point.” A stand alone paragraph no less.
At least you provided a couple of graphs to continue an incomplete list of ENERGY subcategories, and you’ve started your list of products affected by ENERGY.
BTW thanks for the two links that reinforce my complaint that there is no comprehensive graph for ENERGY mostly just its subcategories. In you case electricity and oil/oil byproducts.
But you seem to have some kind of perverse fetish about ENERGY incomplete list of subcategories, as though that’s the only energy source that matters.
No one has noticed that inflation was rising the YEAR before Russia invaded Ukrania, and the common denominator is ENERGY Policies, many aimed fighting Climate Change.
The liberal mind is an amazement.
CoRev Simple question. Do you believe oil prices fully capture all costs? Yes or no.
CoRev has told us that pollution creates more positive externalities than negative externalities.
2slugs, what a stupid question. Why can you NOT read a comment? NO. Oil prices DO NOT fully capture all ENERGY costs?
Just as I believe that current pricing models for renewable sources of electricity do not fully capture their true costs. Do you believe their costs are fully captured? Try reading this: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4000800
You are telling someone else that their comments are stupid? This from the most worthless troll ever. I see you were incapable of answering a simple but fundamental question. Yea – we get you are beyond dumb.
Therefore, the authors suggest energy policy makers to refocus on the three objectives, energy security, energy affordability, and environmental protection. This translates into two paths for the future of energy,
(1) invest in education and base research to pave the path towards a New Energy Revolution where energy systems can sustainably wean off fossil fuels.
(2) In parallel, energy policy must support investment in conventional energy systems to improve their efficiencies and reduce the environmental burden of generating the energy required for our lives.
This is the recommendation of CoRev’s paper. Note CoRev is opposed to the first of these two proposals. NO ONE is saying we end the use of fossil fuels today. NO ONE but CoRev loves to play those straw men games.
How typical of the most abusive commenter here to ignore the context of his pull from the paper. The previous paragraph provides this:
“We conclude with suggestions for a revised energy policy. Energy policy and investors should not favor wind, solar, biomass, geothermal, hydro, nuclear, gas, or coal but should support all energy systems in a manner which avoids energy shortage and energy poverty. All energy always requires taking resources from our planet and processing them, thus negatively impacting the environment. It must be humanity’s goal to minimize these negative impacts in a meaningful way through investments – not divestments – by increasing, not decreasing, energy and material efficiencies.”
This is a paper cautioning the over emphasis of renewables because current pricing philosophies are incomplete.
Sounds a lot like the unsupported climate arguments we constantly see. A list of successful catastrophic Climate predictions would be appropriate from these religious zealots.
CoRev I did not ask if oil prices captured all energy costs. I asked if oil prices captured all costs. There’s kind of a big difference in those two questions. Of course, you wouldn’t know that since you never took a microeconomics class.
2slugs, now doubling down on stupid comments? Why not show us the pricing strategy that capture all costs? The paper compares the current liberal pricing strategy for renewable energy which is egregiously incomplete.
Do you believe that energy policy hasn’t increased energy costs and that these increased costs have not affected inflation? Yes/No?
Yes in a global market, prices are global. The US is a minor part of that market and has minor influence on it. We have seen that with oil where our ability to influence the market with increased production and release of reserves, can be dwarfed by the Saudi cut of 2 million bpd. As much as we like to think of US as the only major player, we are fairly limited in what we can do to manipulate global markets. Limited by our size and by our free market ideology.
In a free market, prices are set as high as the seller can get away with. When supply is restrained and/or demand goes up, then prices go up – as high as the seller can get away with. The Covid pandemic caused serious supply constraints and shifts in consumption patterns. The Trump administration and governments all over the world reacted to Covid by massive stimulus. Was that stimulus excessive or just about right to make sure Trump didn’t go into the election with a recession on his hands? Should the Trump stimulus have been smaller? Should he have been better at working out the kinks in the supply chains? Would any of that have made a difference given that the exact same issues were dealt with in the rest of the world and he had no influence on their actions? Was is better to overreact a deal with a minor price bubble later than to undreamt and have a recession?
Steve’s presumption that the Trump stimulus sucked all the products out of the world economy, and caused price increases, should have the footprint of US imports growing substantially more than imports in Sweden and Poland and the rest of Europe. Is that what the data show? Steve always throw out these crazy ass postulates without being bothered to build the mechanistic model and produce supportive data. Truly a Faux news guest approach, not an academic approach.
Stevie must be having a day of utter confusion over what the FED should do today . On the one hand, little Stevie is saying the FED has caused global inflation so I guess he would advise an increase in interest rates. Oh wait – little Stevie is telling us that high deposit rates is about to bankrupt all of our banks. The sky is falling, raise rates. The sky is falling, lower rates.
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Did Princeton Steve writes this stupidity for the WSJ and the Republicans who want multinationals to shift profits to tax havens?
https://www.wsj.com/articles/yellens-global-minimum-tax-would-be-a-boon-for-beijing-european-union-state-owned-exemption-defense-china-aa33350
The issue is the proposed Global Minimum Tax. The claims made here misrepresent the current state of international tax law in so many ways. A lot of high sounding words which are nothing more than complete BS. And to top it all off – if Apple has to pay is fair share of taxes, then our national security is threatened.
Yea – the kind of bloviating Stevie excels in.
Meanwhile…
https://www.ft.com/content/a66907e7-017e-4783-91eb-23c248f5b011
Get your CoCos here! (Not so) Fresh, hot CoCos here!
Excellent comment on inflation:
https://www.fisherinvestments.com/en-us/insights/market-commentary/as-winter-wanes-prices-continue-to-cool
The main point being that most of current inflation is driven by housing and the fact that changes in that component takes some time to show up in official inflation numbers. So we already have a baked in reduction in inflation as it is.
Rather than the typical (for this blog) resort to personal attacks, it might be interesting to consider the question:
How much lag do you think there should be between results in various countries if one of them is actually the driver of inflation? And why should there be a lag at all?
Are economies interlocked closely enough now so that price changes show up within minutes? hours? days? weeks? And what reason for or against similar quantitative results?
Inflation lags result from contracts (including futures) which specify delivery prices. There is also a price lag associated with changes in exchange rates, at least some of which is due to contracts. Spot market prices change at the speed of electrons.q
There is also the old story of friction in price changes, because items on the shelf have price stickers. But these days, shelves, rather than individual items, have price stickers and computers speed the process of reprising, all of which reduces lags.
So yes, reprising happens faster now, but contracts and friction do induce lags.
I’m glad my Dad died before he saw crap like this. What’s next, public shelters and food pantries for rats??
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/reborn-ringling-bros-circus-leap-120036535.html
You know there’s a serious problem for a nation, when a significant portion of its functionally illiterate citizens think animals are more important than humans.
“He shot my dogs, so I gutted him.”
Jack Osborne (Lee Marvin) in “Gorky Park”
: ) Classic
I’m gonna watch that this week. If I ever watched it I forgot. Lee Marvin was a bastard in real life (and so was William Hurt in all likelihood) but both great actors. Love the “old school” films.
@ Macroduck
Watching the “Gorky Park” film right now in the late hours with a soda pop and the lights off. Enjoying it thoroughly. If I was to be super picky I would say I have moments where I question the realism of Russian characters continually speaking to each other in mostly British English, but I know most people hate subtitles, and it really doesn’t take away from the story itself or the acting which are quite good. One fascinating thing to me, I was listening to the soundtrack and thinking it reminded me of the Aliens score, and sure enough it was james Horner. I used to listen to that soundtrack a lot just before and even after I went to China, of the Alien “trilogy”. But he was kind of a “ripoff” artist even though most of his scores did sound really great. I guess if you can just ripoff from a catalogue of geniuses then your music is apt to sound pretty good—and his did sound good. But he died in 2015 in a plane crash and I had no idea that he had died. I think music is a very personal thing, and I think when someone who wrote music you took to heart dies, it’s always a kind of strange sensation.
https://www.npr.org/sections/deceptivecadence/2016/09/22/494922417/james-horners-posthumous-works-tell-a-story-of-his-life
Did you post the wrong link? The link you posted didn’t support your claim:
“Years of protests by animal rights groups are among the things that took their toll on the circus in recent years, along with declining attendance and changing public tastes.”
The preferences and ingenuity of humans led to the demise of big traveling circuses. It would take a hell of a trapeze artist to leap from that to “citizens think animals are more important than humans.”
@ ottnott
It was not “preferences” that killed the circus/carnival. It was “Kill Everyone Else’s Fun ‘Do-gooder’ Karen” that killed the circus.
I don’t suppose you have any stats handy on people who lost their jobs at carnivals and circuses, and circuses/carnivals that went bankrupt because Suzy Housewife, and Idealist College Carla got upset when she found out elephants and other animals got punished while being trained do you?? I mean it would be annoying as hell but I’ll track those figures down for you, assuming you’re not just mesmerized for hours watching skateboarders at “the circus”??
‘Cuz we all know small children stop everything to watch a skateboarder or BMX bikes vs say watching monkeys or elephants, right?? What about a big tent where we watch humans playing badminton?? No animals at the badminton table, you know, so Suzy and Carla don’t have to see their children smiling or laughing (assuming they had any in their lifetime). Children smiling or laughing at animals while Suzy and Carla “feel sad”……. “traumatic” thought of the day. I’m sorry, did you need a trigger warning before I mentioned children smiling/laughing?? Five thousand sorries for the faux pas.
@ ottnott
“In 2014, Feld Entertainment won $25.2 million in settlements from groups including the Humane Society of the United States, ending a 14-year legal battle over allegations that circus employees mistreated elephants.
The initial lawsuit was filed by a former Ringling barn helper who accepted at least $190,000 from animal-rights groups. The judge called him ‘essentially a paid plaintiff’ who lacked credibility and standing to sue, and rejected the abuse claims.
Kenneth Feld testified about the elephants’ importance to the show at that 2009 trial.
“The symbol of the ‘Greatest Show on Earth’ is the elephant, and that’s what we’ve been known for throughout the world for more than a hundred years,” he said.
Asked whether the show would be the same without elephants, Feld replied, ‘No, it wouldn’t.’
And, it wasn’t. Feld Entertainment removed the elephants in 2016, sending all 40 of them to their Center for Elephant Conservation in Florida. Ticket sales plummeted. The circus, already an afterthought for many, receded further in the public mind.”
https://www.salon.com/2017/01/15/nowhere-left-to-run-away-to-the-final-days-of-the-circus/
So much for “preferences” aye?? But no need to worry, children cannot watch elephants (or other animals apparently) perform at the circus anymore, and the Karens of the world feel so pure, saintly, and virtuous in their otherwise bitter and dark hearts. No smiling children sharing intergenerational joys with their parents and grandparents. But many many sadistically satiated “Karens”. Surely, a win-win happy ending.
A 25 bp increase is stupid, but small enough to have limited negative effects. None of the data suggested we needed those 25bp. The current bank crisis has already reduced lending much more than even a 50bp hike would have done. Do we really need to restrain lending more than that?
Reduced lending???? Prove it.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/milk-wk butar-congressman-rails-against-fraudulent-products-soy-and-almond-in-house-floor-screed-our-students-deserve-better/ar-AA18Xddh?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=7ca20fb3cb8f497994dc77c8d1f5f1dd&ei=9
‘Rep. John Joyce (R-PA) wants to protect the nation’s school children from the evils of soy and almond milk, which he calls “fraudulent products” that are far inferior to the kind that comes from cows.’
Now I may drink regular milk but protecting our children from the Communist horrors of soy milk is part of the MAGA agenda? These guys have lost their marbles.
Could it be that CoRev is the junior Senator from Kentucky?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/rand-paul-stunned-by-moderna-ceo-less-risk-of-myocarditis-for-people-who-take-vaccine/ar-AA18WPyH?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=5ca5bebb9fb64591828bbb692452af19&ei=10
“Is there a higher interest or a higher incidence of myocarditis among adolescent males 16 to 24 after taking your vaccine?” Paul, a vaccine critic, asked the CEO at a Senate hearing on Wednesday. “First, let me say we care deeply about safety and we are working closely with the CDC and the FDA,” Bancel replied before being interrupted. “Pretty much a yes or no,” Paul said. “Is there a higher incidence of myocarditis among boys 16 to 24 after they take your vaccine?”
“The data I’ve shown, actually, I’ve seen, sorry, from the CDC, actually shown that there’s less myocarditis for people who get the vaccine versus who get COVID infection,” Bancel explained. Paul sounded shocked: “You’re saying that for ages 16 to 24 among males who take the COVID vaccine, their risk of myocarditis is less than people who get the disease?” “That is my understanding, Senator,” Bancel confirmed. “That is not true,” Paul griped. “And I’d like to enter into the record six peer-reviewed papers from the Journal of Vaccine, the Annals of Medicine that say the complete opposite of what you say.” According to the CDC, myocarditis and pericarditis “have rarely been reported” after Covid-19 vaccinations.
The CDC or six papers that Rand Paul misrepresents? Who to believe?
The point that this eye doctor/Senator doesn’t seem to get is that side-effects of a vaccine should not be compared to non-vaccinated health people from before Covid.
The information you want is how bad is it to be vaccinated compared to how bad is it to not be vaccinated.
The extremely rare, minor and temporary, myocarditis slightly increased in one little cherry-picked age group of vaccinated boys, has to be compared to the not nearly as rare severe health problems (including death) that are seen in a much larger fraction of unvaccinated boys in that same cherry-picked age group (who got severe Covid because they were not vaccinated).
Based on the Sahm rule, the FOMC’s Summary of Economic Projections continues to forecast a recession this year. The median jobless rate forecast for for Q4 of this year is 4.5% vs a recent 3-month average of 3.5%. The Sahm rule says a 0.5% rise in the 3-month average of the U3 rate is a coincident indicator of recession. The SEP anticipates a full 1% rise in the U3 rate.
The SEP also indicates that the median expectation among Fed policy makers for the terminal Fed funds rate is just 25 basis points above the rate set today. Why, exactly, do we need one more 25 bp hike of recession is already baked in the cake?
Their forecasts are dead. They simply don’t matter outside Wall Street traders who gamble.They do not and never have had control over the economy like they state. It’s political blabber brought in by Volcker.
There are now at least two criminals competing for the Republican presidential nomination:
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/joe-exotic-running-long-shot-101645218.html?guccounter=1
I’m exceedingly confused right now. I thought once you had been convicted of a felony crime that you couldn’t run for U.S. President?? Did I just make that up in my own mind??
The duel between Ohtani and Trout was classic. Yea – Trout lost. Obviously Biden”s fault,
I haven’t looked at Sweden. However, it’s clear that the stimulus plus easy money led to the blowout of the trade deficit, if I recall, to the tune of $400 bn. Much of this landed in China. Thus, the US stimulus package in large part stimulated the economy of China, which would lead one to believe that excess demand would have had some effect on prices there, and in countries exporting to the US more broadly. We can see, for example, that the US dollar index soared during the pandemic, with the US dollar up around 15% against many other currencies. So, yes, the pandemic stimulus most definitely did have a real effect on the economies of countries exporting to the US.
Further, central banks in many countries feel compelled to follow the lead of the Fed.
So, yes, I think the US can export its inflation quite well under certain conditions.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/07/16/business/strong-dollar.html
“I haven’t looked at Sweden.”
But you did claim to know why their inflation rate was so high. Yea – you say a lot of things where you have no clue. No clue at all.
‘However, it’s clear that the stimulus plus easy money led to the blowout of the trade deficit, if I recall, to the tune of $400 bn. Much of this landed in China. Thus, the US stimulus package in large part stimulated the economy of China’
So you are guessing about how much we import from China. Dude the Census folks report this regularly and it has been that high or higher well before Biden. BTW – do you even know what the inflation rate in China even is? Didn’t think so.
So why do you not just SHUT UP since it is clear you know NOTHING.
China’s inflation rate over the past 10 years:
https://tradingeconomics.com/china/inflation-cpi
It seems its recent inflation rate is about what it has been even before Biden. But how can this be as Stevie pooh told us Biden’s policies led to a sharp rise in China’s inflation rate. Never mind the facts – pay attention to the bloviating of Princeton Stevie pooh!
My take on the banking situation.
Understanding the Bank Run
https://www.princetonpolicy.com/ppa-blog/2023/3/21/understanding-the-bank-run
You posted this rehash trash under another post. Both Macroduck and I noted how this is nothing more than your discredited rehashed BS. It was wrong the first time at every level as we noted. It is wrong the 1000th time. I guess you never address the critics of your trash just repeating the same BS over and over again. You are a total waste of time so do go far far away.