Avatar
Thank you, Sir.
df5c518bba192bc24336958684518845e564abfa2170cfbfbb280551fb1bc4a0
Proud Dad. I am not developing software. He/haw. spbrouillette@strike.me stephenbrouillette@npub.cash

I concur. If you’re American, you’ll learn where many of the idiosyncrasies of your area sprung from, and what they could become.

Also, many of the things he warned against have come to pass. Chilling.

Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville.

You could even set them up with their own wallet and everything - the perfect onboarding gift. Warmth and wealth. 😎

I brew my own. Decentralization without taxation baby.

I just ordered a dumb phone, but it won’t fix this.

Replying to Avatar Lyn Alden

The Fed has a dilemma, almost a race, between two things as they raise rates here.

1) Raising rates generally results in tighter borrowing standards on a lag. This can reduce lending-driven money creation and lead to disinflationary demand destruction around the margins.

https://void.cat/d/LciK171UhVRj6yZuNHk2u7.webp

2) At high public debt levels, raising rates also increases federal interest expense, which increases the fiscal deficit, which is a source of ongoing inflationary stimulus into the economy.

https://void.cat/d/FX7vWUrUF4kiNidN1g5PQ3.webp

In the 1940s, inflation was fiscal-driven and public debt was high.

In the 1970s, inflation was mostly lending-driven and public debt was low.

Currently, the Fed is using a 1970s-style playbook to deal with 1940s-style fiscal-driven inflation.

https://void.cat/d/CJDEwxkbWBj3zqyq4i9rW1.webp

https://void.cat/d/UQ2mm8e1cHXEjJiypg79Eu.webp

Thank you for the note, Lyn.

Why did tightening lending standards front-run the effective interest rates this cycle? If one feeds the other, could they ever even out like they did in years past?

Does Damus have zaps yet? I’m not seeing them. 🤙

Leaving my phone at home today. Those who care can cry harder.

My two sats says they’ll be redeemable in dog coins one day.

Thought is an invisible, almost intangible power that makes a mockery of tyranny in all its forms. The most absolute sovreigns in Europe today are powerless to prevent certain thoughts hostile to their authority from silently circulating through their states and even within their courts. The same cannot be said of America: as long as the majority remains in doubt, people talk, but as soon as it makes up its mind once

and for all, everyone falls silent, and friends and enemies alike seemingly hitch themselves to its chariot. The reason for this is simple: no monarch is so absolute that he can gather in his hands all the forces of society and overcome all resistance, as a majority can do if vested with the right to make and execute the laws.

-Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, vol. 1, pt. II, ch. 7, p.292, 1835-40

I understand your question better now. Thanks for clarifying.