Is it me or is Joe Biden don’t a really good job!

@Zeus4par   

@thirdperson  

@Rush51

 Simmer down you dont have to get raging over a different viewpoint. I noticed you are not doing a great job holding your cool in many of your comments, that is some of why a few members wont reply back..you bite peoples heads off so quickly and make things too personal.

I guess I view different sources than you, I see and have seen supply chain as a lingering issue that isnt resolved, not that supply isnt BETTER but as I stated it is far from resolved. 

It would be interesting if you were able to prove based on consumption and an increase in GDP that would support your contention about inflation being demand driven. 

I can show you many GDP charts over the last 10-12 years that show where the economy has gone and that inflation went NOWHERE. So if given that GDP performed over the last 10-12 years and inflation never budged, you would have to show a MASSIVE increase in consumption to drive inflation like this...inflation went up 500-600-700 percentage points in less than three years when it didnt move for 10-12 years...the numbers just dont validate your demand theory. When inflation starts to reduce as it will, to validate your contention, demand will have to cool dramatically to support a slowdown and it isnt and wont happen.

In 2010 GDP was 14.7 and in 2020 it was 21.5 so a 50% increase in GDP over that period and inflation was 1% or even lower. From 2020 at 21.5 to 26.5 in 2023 is an increase of 25% and less in sum than the increase from 2010 to 2020...yet from 2020 to 2023 inflation kicked in to an exponential level. 

Your demand based theory just fails, if it had merit then inflation would have moved higher far sooner and yet it didnt. My Intel engineer neighbor who has worked for the company since 2002 keeps saying the chip group still faces component delays and price increases and that is what drives inflation not an increase in sales and demand from consumers.

Political polarization has made bipartisan legislations hard to achieve.  Despite a divided congress, remarkable that Biden could convince republicans to support anything.  But he has racked up more bipartisan victories than any president in decades.  So far, over 350 bipartisan legislations.  For examples, infrastructure, technology and gun safety.  Biden has succeeded where previous presidents have failed.  No substitute for job experience in exceeding expectations.

@thirdperson

Your sentiment is perfectly accurate ....but I must make a significant correction:

Biden's achievements now are GREATER THAN any modern day US president, including those serving 8 year terms.  I and others have detailed this previously, multiple times......but he accomplished them in just 2.5 years (not yet a full 4)  making this achievement far more impressive.

And when we consider, as you have rightly pointed out, that he was hamstrung by inheriting the worst mess in US history (left behind by a republican admin of course) combined with the most politically divided climate in US history (beside the Civil War) is astonishing he led the nation to even HALF of his current accomplishments! 

As a gambling man with a pretty damn good record for achieving profits from my bets I can honestly say that if there was such a bet available on Jan 21, 2021, I would have bet everything in my bank and book accounts **AGAINST** Joe Biden & his admin achieving as much as he already has over 4 years, let alone just 2.5!

Ok back patters I think you are off in the wilderness with this Biden fawning. When you have a slim margin on both segments, making a partisan move is much much easier and the hard work does not come from Biden, it comes from the party leaders and in the trenches. Biden does not get down and dirty with the reps, he is lucky to make it around the oval office to take meetings.

You would have better results if you were not grandstanding in giving credit to such a zero lifer as Biden is. You guys are acting worse than the Trump lovers did when he was in office, all these back patting kissing threads are not much more than you guys passing ham sandwiches around over and over.

Wall.. 

@Rush51

 Where are your sources,  Wall ?

I think you will continue to be disappointed in the lack of sources.  

I do not expect folks on here to understand the economics of this.  I do expect them to think what they have been led politically to think about this issue.  

If this is not something you understand or have studied it is very easy to be misled in this issue.  

I will follow this with some links and quotes people can read if they like.   These can also lead folks to other links to help get a better understanding of the dynamics at work here.  

What I would like to expect is people to read up and study subjects like this instead of just assuming they understand it.  

Even if this does not address political issues, the economics that one political party or the other implement can have very long lasting affects. 

https://rmaindia.org/why-supply-chain-issues-do-not-cause-inflation/#:~:text=While%20there%20is%20some%20correlation%2C%20it%20is%20wrong,resources%20to%20overcome%20the%20supply%20and%20demand%20imbalance.

“While there is some correlation, it is wrong to say supply chain kinks are a primary cause of inflation. There is a common misconception that when supply chains are disrupted, entities along the supply chain shore up more resources to overcome the supply and demand imbalance.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johntamny/2021/10/24/theres-no-supply-chain-shortage-or-inflation-theres-just-central-planning/?sh=249555e11479

“Please keep this in mind as you read media coverage of the so-called “supply-chain disruptions” resulting in “shortages” that are said to be causing “inflation.” If you want a bigger laugh, read about what President Biden wants to do in order to get “supply” back on the market with an eye on replenishing U.S. retail shelves that are increasingly bare. He’s decreed 24-hour port operations! Yes, thanks to the 46th president we now know what held the Soviets back, and ultimately destroyed the Soviet Union: their ports weren’t open long enough; thus the shortages of everything…

All of the above would be funny if it weren’t so sad. Media members, “experts,” economists, and politicians don’t even disappoint anymore. To say they do would be to flatter them.

Either they think we have inflation, shortages, or a combination of both. Wrong on all counts. Really, who was talking about supply-chain shortages or the impossibility that is demand-driven inflation in early 2020? Very few were, and that’s because the U.S. economy was largely free then. At which point politicians panicked. And in panicking, they imposed a rather draconian form of command-and-control on the U.S. economy.”

“Some were free to work, some weren’t, and more still were free to work and operate their businesses within strict political limits. From freedom to central planning in a very small amount of time. At which point it’s worth considering once again the simple pin factory that Smith witnessed in the 18th century versus the global cooperation that was the norm 19 months ago.

In which case let’s please not insult reason by talking about “shortages” or “inflation” now. Let’s instead be realistic and talk about central planning. We know from the 20th century that when politicians, authoritarians or both substitute their intensely narrow knowledge for that of the marketplace that immense want for very little (and lousy) supply is the logical result. Yes it is. When we’re not economically free, bare shelves are the inevitable result.

Really, what did they think was going to happen? While politicians couldn’t ever create or legislate billions working together around the world, they could and can surely break voluntary economic arrangements. When you have guns, handcuffs, the power to quite literally shut off power sources to the productive, not to mention the wealth produced by the productive, you have the power to impose command-and-control. And so they did, only for the “supply chains” painstakingly created in self-interested but spontaneous form over many decades to suddenly break apart. Just don’t call it inflation, or shortages.”

“Inflation is a devaluation of the unit of account. In our case it’s the devaluation of the dollar. And while Treasury hasn’t always done a great job as the dollar’s steward over the decades, that’s just the point. Devaluation was routine problem in the 1970s, it ceased to be in the 80s and 90s, but it reared its ugly head once again during the George W. Bush administration in the early 2000s. To say inflation is a “now” thing is to ignore that it’s more realistically been a 21st century-long thing.

We don’t suddenly have an inflation problem. To say we do is the equivalent of saying that the Soviets had inflation because all the goods worth getting were both difficult to find, and incredibly expensive if they could be found. In our case we’ve had a lockdown problem care of nail-biting politicians that suffocated commercial cooperation around the world. And with work divided less than it used to be care of government force, productivity is naturally lower than it used to be.

Please consider modern productivity in terms of Smith’s pin factory example yet again, and ask what it would do to supply. The only thing is supply shortfalls are not evidence of inflation. A rise in one price due to lack of supply implies a fall in other prices. Yes, we have a central planning problem. Were he around today, Adam Smith could diagnose this in seconds.”

https://www.aier.org/article/are-supply-chain-issues-driving-inflation/

“The first problem with the view that inflation is largely a consequence of supply-chain issues concerns the timing of inflation. The pandemic and corresponding stay-at-home orders began in early 2020. Prices remained below trend until February 2021. If the COVID-19 contraction increased prices, it did so with a considerable lag. Adverse supply shocks typically push prices up more quickly than that.

The second problem concerns the way in which prices have (and are projected to) evolve. Supply shocks tend to be temporary and, hence, have a temporary effect on prices. When supplies return to normal, so do prices. Even though some of the supply disturbances experienced early in the pandemic have since been resolved, the general level of prices remains elevated and, indeed, continues to grow more rapidly than usual. Federal Reserve officials project that, although inflation will eventually return to 2 percent, it will not fall below 2 percent—meaning prices will remain permanently elevated. That’s inconsistent with the standard supply-chain narrative.

Given the shortcomings of the conventional supply-chain narrative, it makes sense to consider an alternative explanation: loose monetary policy. Monetary policy is too loose if the central bank (1) increases the money supply too rapidly or (2) fails to reduce the growth rate of money sufficiently when velocity growth picks up. In either case, nominal spending will grow more rapidly.

I want to highlight two implications of the data in the table. First, it is clear that a negative real shock took place in 2020, with a recovery following in 2021. Real GDP growth was -3.4 percent in 2020 and 5.6 percent in 2021. The negative real-shock certainly affected inflation in 2020. But the recovery means it contributes much less to the inflation observed in late 2021 and 2022.

Second, there was a sharp increase in the growth rate of NGDP in 2021. Nominal spending averaged around 4.1 percent in the four years prior to the pandemic. In 2021, it was 10.1 percent. This huge increase in nominal spending accounts for much of the inflation observed over the last year.

Monetary policy and supply-chain issues can both push prices up. However, the recent inflation appears to be largely due to monetary policy. Nominal spending has surged. Supply disturbances have largely worked their way out.

To put inflation solely on, largely on, or still lingering — because of supply chain issues is very incorrect and does not hold up if you look at it from an economics viewpoint.  

People from both parties also want to put a lot of this on Wuhan Flu and use that as an ‘excuse’ to absolve them from the rise in inflation, politically.  This is very deceptive to the folks.

Maybe this will help understand the demand issue he is taking about.  People misunderstand the cause and affect situation in economics often.   Like was mentioned, for most businesses inflation has been practically theoretical because they have not experienced it in 40 years.  

3 Major Impacts Of Inflation On Global Supply Chains

Inflation is not only driving up the cost of everything, it is also wreaking havoc with long-established ways business leaders understand, plan and forecast product demand, supply chain resources, inventory and cash flow. Formerly reliable ways of doing these things just won’t hold up in inflationary environments.

The question everyone needs to ask is, what will? Let’s take a closer look.

1. Rising prices are leaving consumers with less disposable income, which is shrinking demand for goods and services.

Food, rent or mortgage, and gas prices are hitting consumers hard, leaving them with less wallet share for non-essentials. This means your company needs to get even better at demand planning, forecasting, and sensing consumer behavior, which in turn drives manufacturing, transportation, inventory management, and sourcing of raw materials. You’ll need to include leading market indicators, real-time consumer trends, and other external data signals into demand forecasting to better predict forward-looking product mixes and volumes.

2. Inflation is also driving up direct costs for materials, labor, energy, and transportation, making it more costly to manufacture, store, and ship goods.

It feels like a perfect storm on the input cost front, doesn’t it? Materials are scarce and pricy – and getting what’s available shipped to your manufacturing plants and warehouses is taking longer and costing more. At the same time, you’ve got the Great Resignation underway, driving up labor costs.

All this has put significant pressure on margins. Business leaders need to better plan resources and materials. For example, they need to account for variability ahead of time and have scenarios prepared to balance cost with service and alternate use of resources and carry multiple market scenarios into the regular sales and operations meetings so they can respond swiftly as trends solidify.

3. To tamp down inflation, the Federal Reserve has increased interest rates, making cheap money a thing of the past.

As a result, now you need to closely monitor and optimize management of working capital and inventory buffers. This is key, because when your business needs cash, the last thing you’ll want to do is borrow at high rates while capital is tied up in unused inventory. You need to know exactly what’s needed and manage available inventory closely and effectively based on real-time variability of demand and supply.

Hopefully, some of that gives folks stuff to think about and study — if they are interested.  

Raiders great read.  

@Rush51

 Oh boy! But I’ll play Its not a Biden & Its not a Trump problem they used tools they think with help the economy. Inflation can be extremely hard to control. Not only does the central bank have to raise interest rates, but that can’t be offset by the government borrowing more money to spend as stimulus to 'ease the pain ’ of the high interest rates or to bail out failing businesses. You need a combination of low domestic spending and high interest rates. How high do rates have to go? Well, in 1980 they went to 14.8% in the U.S. Mortgages went even higher. The ‘Taylor Rule’ is an economic principle that says interest rates need to be raised 2% above inflation, adjusted for GDP growth. You need interest rates to be higher than inflation, or the interest rate is actually stimulative. Think about it: If interest rates are 5% but inflation is 8%, the real rate is -3% and peoole have an incentive to borrow more money, or to spend their money rather than leaving it in the bank.Here’s the problem: Policymakers have used zero interest as an excuse to borrow outrageous amounts of money, and so have states, cities, businesses and individuals. This has made increasing interest rates even more destructive. The U.S. government has 32 trillion in debt. Half of it has an average maturity of about 3.5 years. If interest rates are 10% when that debt rolls over, that will cost 1.6 trillion dollars that will have to be borrowed. If the entire debt rolls over and interest is 10%, that’s 3.2trillion in annual debt service - an amount that would break the government.” Are you with me Bro?” Ok now here’s where we disagree as Republicans & Democrats 

So I’m not sure what practical tools are available I’m not a economic major but how about these ,One would be a tax increase on the rich, the middle and lower classes, with every nickel of it used to retire debt.But Im not OK with this As the middle class has been screwed since the 80s ! Another method would be to improve the supply side by lowering expensive regulations to help bring supply closer to demand.

Another possibility is that we raise interest rates more, but not THAT high, but because our terrible leaders have flown us into the proverbial economic coffin corner it still causes cascading failures of businesses, a mortgage crisis, government crises, and a very deep recession. That is another way to shrink the momey supply. But this my disconnect with the GOP and there idea of tax cuts

Republicans believe that lower taxes for higher income people is good for the economy because

1. They’ve been told so by someone they believe without question,
2. They don’t know anything about economics, or
3. It is a suitably vague justification to hide behind while the fleecing the public. 

As remember even daddy Bush saw this as voodoo economics” but Mr Trump had no problem, In his word to his cronies I made you all richer” as did Reagan did the same! This is all BS which was literally a napkin sketch based upon no data whatsoever, or even scales that would let you test it against actual economic indices but Republicans leaders love it. 

Now Mr Rush I would like to here why it’s a democrat debt problem  ! But spare me yearly data that Skews and clouds the route cause of the problem! 

@Raiders22

 Listen...you have no purpose to try and hen peck me as you do and I would prefer that you either keep those comments and not say them or just avoid me completely. It is obvious you are unable to discuss without the regular shots you take, the way you butt in when not addressed to try and pick a fight. I dont care if you agree with me or that you are 100% the opposite, I do care that you quit with the tactics you use and how it has nothing to do with a topic or making good discussion.

I made my comments to Rush specifically and with precision on purpose..if you notice I gave very precise information, detailed and to the decimal regarding GDP, it for sure is not my approach to throw crap on the ceiling and see what sticks, if I make a comment it for sure is not random yammering. Rush has a way of going on the offensive and tries to disprove or deflect by asking pointed questions while not doing the same thing himself. I asked him for specific demand based data because I know he does not have it, yet HE asks it as a means to disprove my reply. I can throw out links all day long, but why when it wont get viewed, it wont change any opinion and is just a ploy to try to minimize a comment?

I also am not a 5 post cut and paste person in describing my position, I nearly never quote someone else because that is not discussion or debate that is just copying someone elses position and nobody reads that or is interested. If you would like to try and corner me in the same way Rush does, then corner me with specifics, links, stats not some cut and paste theory from someone else, bring data and statistics and then ask me to do the same. If I want to read a right wing economists views I can find plenty of that on ZH and other sites, I would rather hear your words not someone elses that you quote and your data found, specifics and details...so if you want to debate demand vs supply economics and have a view that is opposite mine then bring the DATA not bring some economists theory that government spending can cause XYZPDQ, show me in real consumer data, show me in GDP figures, extrapolate it and explain how we can go from over a decade of GDP growth with ZERO inflation then suddenly that statistical fact is gone because Biden is in office. Our GDP data in the three years he is in office is up a small degree relative to the previous 10 years but not to the creation of a 5-7-1000 percent increase in inflation...to generate that would take GDP and consumption growth similar to the inflation growth, and we do not have that in any factual way.

@wallstreetcappers

 So, provide him the links.   Then he can review them. 
Very easy to do. 
You also need to get your feelings off of your shoulders.  I just pointed out you never post links to back up your thoughts. That is not hen-pecking.  
It is an honest assessment.  

That is the sole reason why I posted the links I did and COPIED and pasted what I did.  
Because I know you guys do not have the background in it and haven’t studied it.  
So, you have a partial understanding that is biased.  

Even though there is a lot of theory in economics and finance, there are plenty of examples of praxis.  

That is how you increase your knowledge and see all sides of an issue. 

But there is no need to be so sensitive as to decide who can address points you put in an open forum.  

You post them because some folks that are interested will read them and it gives validity to your points.  

A point backed up by data or experts and studies is ALWAYS better than some opposing random viewpoint.  

For example, you can look through the links and look at the data and the footnotes will lead you to more studies.  They have graphs, formulas, data — all good stuff to look at. 

No need to have a short-sighted view of an issue.  Economics is very complex.  But can be very fun for someone that has an interest in it.  Some of it gets very complex.  But I always try to present it in a manner that is easy for an average person to understand — and with links where others do the same. 

An easy way I like to explain it, is to take the opposite view of what you have.  Then research it and try to prove that view.  It will open up more avenues if you can honestly present an opposing viewpoint well.  It always helps to be able to see both sides well enough to understand what they other person is saying and where they are getting their viewpoint from.  

Your assumption on how they politically lean does not make sense. 
Most of the ones I have known I would have no idea how they vote, we never even discuss politics.  

They give well thought out ideas on economic issues that they back up with actual data to support it. They also use it to counter the opposing views and/or doubts.  

That is how you demonstrate your views and convince someone to consider your side as viable. 

@Raiders22

 If someone asks for data and links but does not provide them, I consider that a ploy and a diversion to the topic. If you or anyone wants to debate then that requires data and information on both sides..not one side dictating the direction and the assignments, that is called a deflection.

So as I asked you above if you would like to discuss supply vs demand economics then lets do that, I laid out my data pretty clearly that from 2010 to 2020 GDP went up 50% from the figures I gave which I pulled from a data driven website and during those ten years inflation never passed 1% for any period of time. That means the GDP move did not generate higher inflation. Then from 2020 to 2023 GDP went up 25% or so yet inflation went up 500-700-1000 percent. Government spending did not decline from 2010 to 2020, GDP moved higher pretty consistently during that time but inflation did not move. 

So extrapolate for me using data not theory and support that conclusion with data that can be validated with alternate data..that is what I have done here and my comments regarding JIT inventory models, cost of capital increasing means supply chain issues will linger and even when supply chain is returned to previous function the queue wont return, it costs more to hold inventory than it did before so companies will not stock it.

If you want to point fingers then make sure you are exceeding the expectations you are requiring, that does not mean cut and pasting someone elses writings, bring your conclusions and data and research not copy and paste stuff.