You'll often see charts or visuals illustrating the depreciation of the $USD over time, normalized to $1.00, of which I occasionally share myself.

However, there's an important caveat: these visuals rarely account for short-term yields. Displayed below is the purchasing power of $1, adjusting for annual CPI inflation (in red) versus the purchasing power of $1 accounting for 1-year Treasury yields less annual CPI inflation (in blue), starting from 1962

Notice anything?

The purchasing power of $1 from 1962 to the present equates to $1.85 when accounting for 1-year Treasury yields and inflation. Meanwhile, adjusting for inflation alone leaves you with just $0.10 of purchasing power.

Quite the massive difference.

However, there's more nuance to consider:

1) Let's separate the data into distinct eras,

From 1962 to start of 2009:

- Average annual inflation: 4.40%

- Average 1y yields: 6.22%

- Average difference: +1.82%

Real gains in purchasing power.

From 2009 to Present:

- Average annual inflation: 2.34%

- Average 1y yields: 1.00%

- Average difference: -1.34%

Real losses in purchasing power.

2) The data doesn't include the 1940s where financial repression massively devalued the USD to erode real debt burdens (the data I quickly threw together only went back to 1962) in the post war period.

3) Why 2009 for the change in eras? What has changed? If the U.S. can just pay a nominally higher yield than the inflation rate in perpetuity, are the fiat doomers really just delusional?

In my view:

- Positive real yields can be sustained with a clean balance sheet. It's feasible for the government to pay creditors a positive real interest rate when real debt burdens are low, demographics are booming, and the global GDP is exploding as the world industrializes.

- With Debt to GDP meaningfully > 100% and other tailwinds reversing, this is no longer the case. Post GFC and the introduction of ZIRP + QE to facilitate "growth", has the positive real yield era behind us, at least until real debt burdens have been eroded - which will take either explosive real growth, or a steady dose of inflation above yields, debasing creditors in the process.

The Bottom Line: The reality is that the average/median American individual or family often doesn't have much disposable income to capture such yields. The ones that do, benefit; and the ones that don't are the ones that pay for it.

When you look at charts showing record wealth disparity, or are wondering why the political landscape is more polarized than ever, keep this chart in mind.

Fiat inflation didn't bother the investor class from for forty years as yields outpaced inflation. Currency devaluation wasn't felt in the slightest by this cohort, they didn't just escape the devaluation, but outpaced it significantly.

Now, with Debt to GDP levels domestically and globally near record levels, expect the post 2009 dynamic to continue into the future on a longer time frame. Don't let the current tightening cycle fool you as to what must occur.

Inflation > Yields, over a sustained period of time, is the only way global governments can mask their insolvency.

Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

⚡️

thanks for sharing stuff on here. don't even have to open x today

👆🏻 This!

Thanks for posting such interesting stuff on nostr Dylan.

TLDR stack #sats

Dylan has entered the building

The differential shown here post-GFC inversion is even more profound when you consider that this chart uses the govt stated CPI figures, which are heavily manipulated and are 'calculated' by often-changed metrics and definitions.

Explains the wealth disparity more accurately and truthfully than any course currently taught at any academic institution in US.

CPI is only a metric for inflation if you substitute the consumer goods you purchase as the CPI does. If you continue buying the same consumer goods (steak instead of ground beef or pork) then inflation is much higher and “real returns” from bond yields is nothing but a dream. But as we know the rate of inflation varies from person to person, so there are people out there that made real returns from bond yields.

Where does that yield come from? Taxes or money printing so either way you’re getting fucked.

It's a good point about your particular consumer bundle, but if we're using a catchall metric then the average reflects the fact that most people are changing their bundles. What's lost in that case is the likelihood that they preferred the previous bundle to the current one.

There's also the possibility that someone's bundle consists of goods that don't inflate as quickly as average, which is often the case for less-processed goods: like produce and beans.

Wait, Your name is Ted?

So should I stack sats?

Yes. ~4000 sats per $1 today.

In less than a century, that will be the mining reward to pay for 10 mins of all the energy spent worldwide mining Bitcoin. Stack Amy and all sats you can for the long haul and don't look back, lest you be turned into a pillar of Salt.

Too bad no one gets paid in treasury bills, and it’s not taught (by design) in school that that would’ve been your best option for some time to outpace inflation

Nioce mate! Enjoyed the read

Thanks for this Dylan. Hoping you will post here more and more 🍀

Pura Vida 💜🤙🫂

In reality one should also include productivity increases on the order of 6% per year through innovation and technology. That’s the hidden theft.

And so, yield curve control is, inevitable...

"The reality is that the average/median American individual or family often doesn't have much disposable income to capture such yields. The ones that do, benefit; and the ones that don't are the ones that pay for it."

TLDR

j/k, good read

Very cool.

Biiiiiiiiitcoooooooooinnnnn!

Really sucks to be non-yield bearing cash holders.

I didn't realize 1y treasury yields were that high. Of course, you should also take into account that this gets chopped down some by federal income tax.