The Quantum of Quantitative Easing Inflation is Coming!

joe_blotts

Now whilst you should by now be agreeing fully with me that the global banking system is fraudulent and possibly even start to see that the central banks are party to this fraud by evidence of their actions as illustrated by money printing, the whole of which has been effectively funneled into the back pockets of the Bankster elite where in the UK this stands to the tune of £375 billion over 3 years, all aided by pure propaganda that central banks are pumping money into the economy which I have repeatedly illustrated as being a PURE LIE because it has NOT been pumped into the the economy as politicians continually state but into the banks.

If the Government / Bank of England wanted to boost the economy then they would have handed over at least some of the money that has been stuffed into the bankster banks to the people of Britain by means of tax refunds. The only reason why they have not done so is because it will be highly inflationary, after all Britain being an economy in depression for the past 4 years has still suffered Inflation of 15% as illustrated by the Inflation Mega-trend graph below -



I am quite often asked where will future inflation come from as disposable incomes are falling and my answer is that the government will ignite the wage price spiral. Then I am asked how will they ignite the wage price spiral and my answer to that is what I call the Quantum of Quantitative Easing.

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article35687.html

Interesting article and quite thought provoking I thought (Of which the above is a snippet). I'd be interested in other forum members views as I'm trying, at the moment, to get my head around this whole QE thing.

MacMickster

Good grief. The wonders of the internet.

I've just looked at the marketoracle website. A few years ago these type of fruitcakes would be confined to wandering around Speakers Corner with a sandwich board telling us all that the end is nigh, whilst claiming to be the new messiah. Now they can produce webpages galore of their nonsense.

vivatifosi

joe_blotts wrote: »

I am quite often asked where will future inflation come from as disposable incomes are falling and my answer is that the government will ignite the wage price spiral.

I ran this phrase through google and the first website that it came up with was called lunaticoutpost.com, which has the tagline UFO + FUN + CONSPIRACY.

Told me everything I needed to know.

pqrdef

If people can't service their debts in good money, they can either service them in bad money or not at all.

There comes a point where inflation is the preferred option. It spreads the load more evenly than defaults, but most importantly, it creates a lot less uncertainty than the threat of defaults. Your money will depreciate a bit, well what doesn't. But not knowing who's going bust next is a killer.

abaxas

Surely the world banking system is the 'fruitcake'?

10 years of not realizing that they wont get back money lent to people who have a history of never paying it back.

Surely that makes even David Ike look sane.

oldvicar

I read the entire article with both great interest and a little difficulty. It is written in a complicated way with long words and longer than necessary sentences.

I ran the article through what is known as the Gunning 'Fog Index', and it estimated the reading age as being 17.1 years. Believe me this is incredibly high, and supposedly beyond the understanding of most people.

Comparitive Fog Index reading ages are

17.1 Years: The full article quoted from in post #1

13.3 Years: The Bank of England Inflation Report, Chapter 5 "The prospects for inflation"

12.3 Years: A very recent Daily Telegraph article about the latest inflation figures

8 Years: The Fog Index 'reading age' of the Daily Mail

The Daily Mail fog index reading age of 8 was quoted to me on a training course about effrective writing many years ago. This was held out as a goal for writing for the general population, but 10 years was deemed reasonable for a technical report you wanted to be understood.

[The Fog Index reading age of my words above is: 9.5 years]

gagahouse

oldvicar wrote: »

I read the entire article with both great interest and a little difficulty. It is written in a complicated way with long words and longer than necessary sentences.

I ran the article through what is known as the Gunning 'Fog Index', and it estimated the reading age as being 17.1 years. Believe me this is incredibly high, and supposedly beyond the understanding of most people.

Comparitive Fog Index reading ages are

17.1 Years: The full article quoted from in post #1

13.3 Years: The Bank of England Inflation Report, Chapter 5 "The prospects for inflation"

12.3 Years: A very recent Daily Telegraph article about the latest inflation figures

8 Years: The Fog Index 'reading age' of the Daily Mail

The Daily Mail fog index reading age of 8 was quoted to me on a training course about effrective writing many years ago. This was held out as a goal for writing for the general population, but 10 years was deemed reasonable for a technical report you wanted to be understood.

[The Fog Index reading age of my words above is: 9.5 years]

Interesting, what program do you use to do this?

MacMickster

oldvicar wrote: »

I read the entire article with both great interest and a little difficulty. It is written in a complicated way with long words and longer than necessary sentences.

I ran the article through what is known as the Gunning 'Fog Index', and it estimated the reading age as being 17.1 years. Believe me this is incredibly high, and supposedly beyond the understanding of most people.

Comparitive Fog Index reading ages are

17.1 Years: The full article quoted from in post #1

13.3 Years: The Bank of England Inflation Report, Chapter 5 "The prospects for inflation"

12.3 Years: A very recent Daily Telegraph article about the latest inflation figures

8 Years: The Fog Index 'reading age' of the Daily Mail

The Daily Mail fog index reading age of 8 was quoted to me on a training course about effrective writing many years ago. This was held out as a goal for writing for the general population, but 10 years was deemed reasonable for a technical report you wanted to be understood.

[The Fog Index reading age of my words above is: 9.5 years]

Don't confuse being literate and verbose with being astute or intelligent.

I suspect that the works of, for example, Erich von Daniken may have quite a high Fog Index score, despite being complete tosh.

RickRule

pqrdef wrote: »

If people can't service their debts in good money, they can either service them in bad money or not at all.

There comes a point where inflation is the preferred option. It spreads the load more evenly than defaults, but most importantly, it creates a lot less uncertainty than the threat of defaults. Your money will depreciate a bit, well what doesn't. But not knowing who's going bust next is a killer.

That is the point, debts will get defaulted on so more bad money has to be added to the supply. Where does this come from it is borrowed from thin air with interest owed on it. Where does the interest come from?

It is borrowed from thin air with interest owed on it. And so on.

Inflation is guaranteed down the line.

GeorgeHowell

What evidence have these individuals got that the UK (and/or other) government intends to start printing money in order to fund their direct expenditure ? It's just pure alarmist speculation of the type that will appeal to the sort of callow individuals with too much time on their hands who soak up every conspiracy theory going.

The article acknowledges that the present QE policy is not about printing money in the traditional sense expressly because of the risk of stoking up inflation. Printing money willy-nilly is the stuff of banana respublics, not developed western democracies. Stoking up uncontrollable inflation would see any government hiked out of office at the first opportunity, and they know that -- look what happened to Heath and Callaghan, neither of whom could get to grips with unacceptably high inflation.

There is certainly likely to be some popular easing of the financial shackles before an election, as there always is, but it will come in the form of tax breaks and some state handouts. If the Conservatives get elected they will figure that if the growth corner is not turned they'll just have to claw it back again, and if Labour is elected it will be their problem

But printing money indiscriminately ? No. Not even Brown and Balls did that.