|
In today's, July 14, 2005, 8:30 a.m. CPI report, inflation was reported to
be non existent or benign at worst and the price of gold was slammed AGAIN,
this time to the tune of about 5 bucks, right on cue at 11:00 a.m. ET at the
hands of N.Y.'s COMEX paper traders. These regular 'bear raid'

Compliments: www.kitco.com
muggings have become more predictable than sunup and sundown. But let's not
pinch ourselves and hope no one else notices too, ok?
Lord Keynes gave the name "Gibson's paradox" to the
correlation between interest rates and the general price level observed
during the period of the classical gold standard. It was, he said, "one
of the most completely established empirical facts in the whole field of
quantitative economics." J.M. Keynes, A Treatise on Money (Macmillan,
1930), vol. 2, p.198. And it was a paradox because contemporary monetary
theory, largely associated with Irving Fisher, suggested that interest
rates should move with the rate of change in prices, i.e., the inflation
rate or expected inflation rate, rather than the price level itself. Yet
when Keynes wrote, data for the prior two centuries showed that the yield
on British consols (government securities issued at a fixed rate of interest
but with no redemption date) had moved in close correlation with wholesale
prices but almost no correlation to the inflation rate.
The above passage is from an essay titled, Gibson's Paradox Revisited,
available at: http://www.goldensextant.com/
The above passage is important in that in it Keynes clearly states that long
term interest rates [as depicted by British consols, which were 'long bonds'
of their day] are directly correlated with the general price level or wholesale
prices and NOT the inflation rate or expected inflation rate. In layman's terms,
Keynes is saying that long term interest rates are directly correlated, and
in fact hardwired, to the PPI [Producer Price Index] - not the CPI [Consumer
Price Index].
If we examine recent developments where PPI is concerned, we can see that
PPI reporting was significantly
delayed at least twice in 2004 - while CPI reporting had no such interruptions.
Furthermore, today - July 14th, 2005, in a break with tradition,
CPI was actually scheduled by the BLS [Bureau of Labor Statistics] for release
prior to PPI.
For those who feel this is irrelevant, I would offer that the BLS felt it
relevant enough to devote a whole page on their web
site with this headline banner:
"Why is the CPI being released before the PPI this month?"
The explanation offered is as follows,
Improvements to the data collection process introduced
into the CPI program in recent years have shifted the timetable for producing
the CPI relative to the PPI. Specifically, the deployment of penpad computers
to BLS field data collectors permits them to transmit newly-collected data
directly to headquarters in Washington for analysis and review. This replaces
a longstanding procedure in which data collectors filled out paper forms
in the field and mailed them to Washington. The new process also eliminates
the need for manual data entry that had existed once the paper forms were
received in Washington.
And then goes on to add:
These improvements mean it will not be atypical for
future CPI news releases to be issued prior to the PPI release for that
month. In fact, the CPI is scheduled to be published prior to the PPI in
four of the six remaining months of 2005 (July, August, October, and December).
You see, dear reader, I keep asking myself why the BLS would buy penpad computers
for the CPI data gatherers and no mention of the plan to purchase new computers
for the PPI folks? I find this all very confusing, particularly when BLS officials
made quotes like this one in response to ongoing PPI reporting delays in March
of 04,
"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Outdated computers are partly
to blame for the delayed release of the U.S. producer price index and only "God
knows when" the data will be ready, a top analyst at the Bureau of Labor
Statistics said Monday."
After all, it was the BLS themselves that made
the claim back on June 9, 2004, when May's PPI report was delayed "indefinitely" that
aging computers had caused numerous delays in publishing timely PPI reports
for much of 2004?
"WASHINGTON, June 9 (Reuters) - The release of the
U.S. Producer Price Index for May has been delayed indefinitely by renewed
calculation problems, but figures already out are accurate, the Bureau
of Labor Statistics said on Wednesday."
So there you have it folks, aging computers being blamed for PPI not being
reported in a timely fashion on numerous occasions throughout '04 and apparently
the fix for the problem rested in the procurement of new penpad computers for
the folks who tabulate CPI?
What I see occurring here right before our eyes amounts to brazen 'economic
revisionism' or the reworking of benchmark yardsticks of historic value. I
would suggest that economic revisionism has been elevated to a 'high art form'
at the Fed, Treasury and the BLS. These people practice their craft ever so
incrementally and with cunning - beginning with seasonal adjustments to reporting
numbers, then factoring in substitution, hedonic and quality adjustments and
finally - once all the lines delineating reality are sufficiently blurred -
they simply move the uprights back 25 yards whilst telling the blindfolded
place kicker he has a simple 'chip shot' from the 20-yard line.
None of this happens by accident. I would contend this is all part and parcel
of a decaying fiat monetary system whose perpetuation mandates
usurping inflation by its very definition. There is no conundrum on interest
rates. Long term interest rates have been engineered down and remain low to
induce credit expansion and consumption expenditure - period. Without it, the
fiat system dies. Couple unnaturally cheap credit with a globalist mentality
and you end up with exactly what we have achieved - zero savings and investment,
plenty of outsourcing, dislocations and asset bubbles, a hollowed out manufacturing
base and debt burdened and compromised middle class. In recent weeks, such
luminaries as Warren
Buffett, Robert
Rubin, Paul
Volcker and Stephen
Roach have all - to varying degrees - fired warning shots humming a similar
tune.
Interest rates, inflation and the price of gold are co-related and interdependent.
This is why I write about gold and the suppression of its price. A rising gold
price would make a mockery of nascent claims that inflation is low. It would
also expose many of these false claims as deceptions. Unfortunately and shamefully,
monetary officials prefer to conduct their carnie act, violating all of us,
cloaked in double speak and secrecy behind drawn curtains.
This 'creeping repositioning' of the CPI [outlined above] relative to the
PPI has the same aroma as the recent
recalibration of the CRB Index. What I do know for a fact is the BLS has
been pumping out reports for a number of years suggesting inflation is tame
or non existent. Empirically, I used to fill the gas tank of my car for less
than 40 bucks two years ago and today it costs a cool 50. And I live in Canada
- a country whose currency has risen appreciably against the U.S. dollar -
oil's settlement currency. I don't really want to go off on a rant about the
increased cost of food, insurance, tuition, cable tv, property tax, new homes,
professional fees, prescription drugs and anything else associated with health
care. Amazingly, the bulk of pundits and monetary officials getting airplay
in the main stream media insist we're living in a 'Goldilocks' economy.
What ever you do, dear reader, don't pinch yourself too hard - you might wake
up in a cold sweat to find someone else sleeping in your bed, your chair broken
and your soup bowl empty - not to mention an angry bear or three growling at
your stock portfolio. Now wouldn't that be a bummer?
|