"Putin Price hike"- not at all

dukkha

Verified User
White House aides were out in force on Monday warning that Tuesday’s inflation report would be ugly and blaming it on Vladimir Putin. No doubt that beats blaming your own policies. But inflation didn’t wait to appear until the Ukraine invasion, and by now it will be hard to reduce.

The White House was right about the consumer-price index, which rose 1.2% in March, the highest monthly rise since the current inflation set in. The price rise in the last 12 months hit 8.5%, the fastest rate in 40 years.

Energy prices in the month contributed heavily to the increase, and some of that owes to the ructions in oil markets since the invasion. But so-called core prices, excluding food and energy, rose 6.5% over the last 12 months. Service prices excluding energy, which weren’t supposed to be affected by supply-chain disruptions, were up 0.6% for the month and 4.7% over 12 months.

the inflation trend began in earnest a year ago at the onset of the Biden Presidency. It has accelerated for most of the last 12 months. That’s long before Mr. Putin decided to invade. The timing reflects too much money chasing too few goods, owing mainly to the combination of vast federal spending and easy monetary policy.

the overall price news is terrible for American workers and consumers.
The March surge means that real wages fell 0.8%, or a decline of 2.7% in the last year.
Real average weekly earnings fell a striking $4.26 in March alone, and they’ve fallen nearly $18 during the Biden Presidency.

If you want to know why Americans are sour about the economy even as jobs are plentiful, this is it. Their real wages are falling while the prices of everyday goods and services are rising fast. The average worker Democrats invoke when they demand more federal spending is getting crushed by the inflationary consequences of too much federal spending.
 
The inflation surge calls for a policy shift to tighter money and less spending that fuels excess demand. The Fed is now on the case, raising interest rates and starting to shrink its bloated $9 trillion balance sheet. Its task would be easier had it begun a year ago. Now it will have to move faster in an economy that is still growing, but with less business and consumer confidence.

Even core inflation of 6.5% is more than three times the Fed’s target rate of 2%. The Fed’s consensus target at its March meeting for a fed funds interest-rate peak of 2.8% in 2023 looks inadequate. History suggests that once inflation is this high, interest rates will have to exceed the inflation rate to break it.

That will run the risk of recession. The Fed’s anti-inflation resolve will be tested if growth ebbs and financial troubles erupt. Any central banker can cut interest rates. The Paul Volcker test of monetary mettle is raising rates when the political class is screaming at you.

As for the Biden Administration and Congress, the best anti-inflation policy would be a spending freeze on everything but defense. Cut tariffs, which would be a one-time price cut. Put a moratorium on new regulation that raises costs for business.

This advice conflicts with the Democrats’ Build Back Better agenda. But their inflation responses to date of allowing more ethanol fuel (see nearby) and releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve are futile gestures. Republicans could pick up the spending freeze and moratorium for their election agenda.

Inflation is a powerful political force because it can’t be explained away. Nearly every voter feels it every day. If the November elections are a referendum on the cost of living, voters won’t blame the Kremlin. They’ll blame the party in power in Washington.
 
And as I understand, they are going to do what they always do to make inflation seem better, they are going to be changing the formula !
Looking for confirmation but my source is reliable and it falls in line with past actions.

Thats why real inflation is 17.15%.

Anyone who actually buys products in the real world knows the cooked govt numbers are, well, cooked.
 
And as I understand, they are going to do what they always do to make inflation seem better, they are going to be changing the formula !
Looking for confirmation but my source is reliable and it falls in line with past actions.

Thats why real inflation is 17.15%.

Anyone who actually buys products in the real world knows the cooked govt numbers are, well, cooked.

This is kinda comical, all thru the Obama Presidency we heard that any numbers regarding the economy were “cooked, and then, mysteriously, nearly miraculously, the “cooked” numbers conspiracies ended in January of 2016 only to reappear now, what a coincidence
 
I mean, of course inflation started before the Ukraine crisis - but that CERTAINLY exacerbated & extended it.

You are honest and correct on that statement. The question will remain, if Trump had been re-elected, would America have been far better prepared in the unlikely event (my words) Putin would have invaded Ukraine in the first place.
 
You are honest and correct on that statement. The question will remain, if Trump had been re-elected, would America have been far better prepared in the unlikely event (my words) Putin would have invaded Ukraine in the first place.

There could be endless speculation on that. My own take is that Putin may not have invaded, because he saw Trump as weakening NATO anyway. If he did invade, I don't think Trump would have taken strong action or led sanctions against Russia - it just wasn't his m.o. when it came to Russia, or world affairs in general.

The world probably would have still been relatively united against the action, so it might be the same overall situation with a protracted conflict going on. I'm not sure if the level of inflation we're experiencing would have been avoidable under either Trump or Biden.
 
The “inflation rate” began when the threat of Covid lessened with the nationwide administration of vaccines, it would have happened regardless of who was President, classic demand pull inflation, the article’s early framing it as Biden’s fault immediately tells the reader where it is going

Did Biden’s Covid relief accelerate demand thereby inflation, probably, as did early Covid packages and tax cuts, generating excess discretionary income, too much money out there pursuing too few foods. The war’s effect on the world’s economy, especially as it effects supply chains, added to the problem, as does some suppliers taking advantage of the situation

Point being the inflation is more complicated than just laying blame on individual politicians. Could the Biden team seen it coming, sure, but anticipated it wouldn’t be as grave, and the Fed, as much as it aided growth, also was shortsighted
 
The “inflation rate” began when the threat of Covid lessened with the nationwide administration of vaccines, it would have happened regardless of who was President, classic demand pull inflation, the article’s early framing it as Biden’s fault immediately tells the reader where it is going

Did Biden’s Covid relief accelerate demand thereby inflation, probably, as did early Covid packages and tax cuts, generating excess discretionary income, too much money out there pursuing too few foods. The war’s effect on the world’s economy, especially as it effects supply chains, added to the problem, as does some suppliers taking advantage of the situation

Point being the inflation is more complicated than just laying blame on individual politicians. Could the Biden team seen it coming, sure, but anticipated it wouldn’t be as grave, and the Fed, as much as it aided growth, also was shortsighted

Sure, it's always more nuanced than crediting or blaming any individual 100%. But political partisans tend to operate in that world. Look at the economic growth last year and all the 'Praise God for Joe Biden' posts crediting him for all the activity occurring. Well here's your flip side, people blaming inflation all on him.

Partisans want to chop up economic activity to spin positive news as a result of their 'sides' actions and blame any negative news on someone/anything else. It doesn't work like that in the real world but partisan politics aren't always the real world.
 
There could be endless speculation on that. My own take is that Putin may not have invaded, because he saw Trump as weakening NATO anyway. If he did invade, I don't think Trump would have taken strong action or led sanctions against Russia - it just wasn't his m.o. when it came to Russia, or world affairs in general.

The world probably would have still been relatively united against the action, so it might be the same overall situation with a protracted conflict going on. I'm not sure if the level of inflation we're experiencing would have been avoidable under either Trump or Biden.

Agreed.
Like it or not Trump caught the attention of NATO when he brought up the fact many of the members were not spending enough on their own defense. Germany being a prime example. NATO and the United Nations have been relying on US money for decades and it was Trump that called that out so remarkably well.
As for inflation, I believe Trump's oil policies would have kept a lid on much of the inflation. The entire world runs on fuels removed from the earth and when an administration in office threatens that industry, dramatic results follow. Few people understand the deep involvement oil and its byproducts have on everyday life and any disruption in that process is devastating to everyone.

I feel sorry for the lower and middle class that feel the brunt of Biden's ill-timed decisions.

The mid-terms will be very interesting.
 
Back
Top