• HOME
  • About the contributor
  • Articles (RSS)
Subscribe to Newsletter
RECENT ARTICLES
  • Another attempt in the history of failed manipulations
  • A short history of currency swaps
  • Why the Fed’s buy & hold (no sales) exit is not feasible
  • From Shirakawa to Kuroda: The regime change explained
  • Modern Monetary Theory is the winner…at least for now
  • The template that nobody is watching
  • Why Mr. Dijsselbloem is right and Cyprus is a template for the Euro zone
  • Why Cyprus 2013 is worse than the KreditAnstalt (1931) and Argentina 2001 crises
  • Gold manipulation, Part 3: “The systemic risk of gold manipulation”
  • Gold manipulation, Part 2: How they do it (and a suggestion to hedge it)

ARTICLES CALENDAR
February 2010
S M T W T F S
« Jan   Mar »
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28  

ARTICLES CATEGORIES
  • Letter Articles

ARCHIVES
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009


Search this Blog

Archive of February 2nd, 2010

Seeking a framework

Published on February 2nd 2010

Please, click here to read this article in pdf format:february-2-2010 When Maynard Keynes wrote the already famous sentence: “…And when output has increased and prices have risen, the effect of this on liquidity-preference will be to increase the quantity of money necessary to maintain a given rate of interest…”, he was clearly considering “time” as [...]

Please, click here to read this article in pdf format:february-2-2010

When Maynard Keynes wrote the already famous sentence: “…And when output has increased and prices have risen, the effect of this on liquidity-preference will be to increase the quantity of money necessary to maintain a given rate of interest…”, he was clearly considering “time” as a magnitude in his analysis.
It takes time to increase output and it takes time for prices to rise, reacting to such increase. The rise in prices and the speed of the output increase have to be matched by the nominal interest rate referred above. This is why Keynes also wrote, in the same paragraph: “…prices will rise in a degree partly governed by the shapes of the physical supply functions, and partly by the liability of the wage-unit to rise in terms of money…” (The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money”, Ch 13, S. III). Briefly, Keynes’ idea was to coordinate monetary policy to debase a currency taking advantage of productivity slack (i.e. the shapes of the physical supply functions) and unemployment (i.e. the liability of the wage-unit to rise in terms of money).

Since the start of 2010, it seems that of all sudden, central bankers have forgotten this idea, while at the same time, governments attack banks with higher reserve requirements and capitalization ratios. Banks are not to blame for the shocks. Shocks are produced by central banks, which determine the money supply function, but I guess somebody has to be blamed.

With the above in mind, I thought of 3 phases that may unfold in 2010. In all of them, the challenge of matching monetary policy to productivity is omnipresent. This framework suggests a long-term bullish view of gold and commodity based currencies, and a definite path to inflation by 2011, when it is most likely that the real tightening will take place.
These phases are presented in the chart below, which I think is self-explanatory. In the next letter, I will nevertheless elaborate more on this framework. In terms of timing, the only certainty we may have is that we will need to wait another quarter to see earnings disappointing.

feb-2-2010

Martin Sibileau

Twitt

142 Comments »

  • The comments expressed in this website and daily letters are my own personal opinions only and do not necessarily reflect the positions or opinions of my employer or its affiliates.
  • All comments are based upon my current knowledge and my own personal experiences. You should conduct independent research to verify the validity of any statements made in this website before basing any decisions upon those statements. In addition, any views or opinions expressed by visitors to this website are theirs and do not necessarily reflect mine.
  • The information contained herein is not necessarily complete and its accuracy is not guaranteed. If you are receiving this communication in error, please notify me immediately by electronic mail (martin@sibileau.com) or telephone at 647-999-2055.
  • My comments provide general information only. Neither the information nor any opinion expressed constitutes a solicitation, an offer or an invitation to make an offer, to buy or sell any securities or other financial instrument or any derivative related to such securities or instruments (e.g., options, futures, warrants, and contracts for differences).
  • My comments are not intended to provide personal investment advice and they do not take into account the specific investment objectives, financial situation and the particular needs of any specific person.
All rights reserved. A view from the Trenches is proudly powered by WordPress. Wordpress theme designed and coded by SibileauLang