Don’t Miss a Post. Subscribe now.

A Friend Asks “Is the Fed Trying to Destroy the US Dollar?”

Purposeful Currency Debasement

The Powell Fed wants 2% inflation over time and has committed to let inflation run over 2% to make up for past undershoots.

Given that Fed-sponsored inflation is purposeful debasement, the answer to my friend’s question is “of course”. 

What About the Competition?

The Fed has competition. Every major central bank wants the same thing. 

One of the ways central banks sponsor inflation is by holding interest rates low. 

In addition to sponsoring inflation slowly, the more immediate impact of low interest rates is economic bubbles.

Why is the US Dollar So Strong?

Q: If the Fed wants to destroy the dollar, why is it so strong?
A: Look at interest rates. 

Other central banks are trying as hard or harder than the Fed. 

Note: My chart from a St. Louis Fed data download shows month-end values. The inset is as of  2021-05-21.

Greece so distorted the chart with yields that approached 30% I had to remove it from the display. 

Relatively Lofty Yield

What a hoot! 

Quote of the day in weekend FT, “Germany’s 10 yr yield was a relatively lofty minus .12% yesterday.” A new definition of ‘lofty.’

Competitive Debasement Competition 

The competitive currency debasement competition is intense. 

The Fed has help though, much more so than the EU. 

Three rounds of fiscal stimulus, one under Trump and two under Biden, has the Fed has inflation headed the right way (assuming of course you like your money to buy less).

Fed Sponsored Speculation

The real interest rate is -4.09%. Adjusted for housing prices, the real interest rate is even more negative.

Despite, year-over-year inflation a reported 4.2%, the Fed has pegged short-term rates at 0.07%. 

Adjusted for housing prices, real interest rates are even more negative.

For details, please see Fed Sponsored Speculation: Real Interest Rates Are -4.1 Percent, Lowest Since 1980

Economic Data is Weakening on Four Fronts

Nonetheless, despite the Fed doing all it can to kill the dollar (with considerable help from Biden and Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen), economic data is weakening.

In Economic Data is Weakening on Four Fronts I added Existing Home Sales to the List of Missed Expectations.

Home sales have declined for three months. Housing starts, retail sales, and jobs are also struggling. 

Trillions in stimulus and QE are not enough.

What’s Next?

I keep wondering when the Fed will target the long end of the curve with more force. 

I don’t think it would take much. A sustained stock market decline or weakening economic data could easily trigger more Fed intervention.

Note that the US 10-year yield is above that of Greece thanks to ECB targeting. How absurd is that?

If housing stumbles further, I believe it is a given the Fed will target the long end of the curve. 

Is Inflation Transitory?

The Fed says it is. Very few agree. I am one of them.

On May 7, 2021, I commented Add David Rosenberg to List of Those Who Believe Inflation is Transitory

This of course depends on how one measures inflation. 

The CPI is distorted as noted in Fed Sponsored Speculation: Real Interest Rates Are -4.1 Percent, Lowest Since 1980.

Year-over-year Inflation is much higher than 4% now. But if housing turns down, my measure of CPI inflation which factors in home prices will turn down too. See the above link for discussion.

As long as housing and asset bubbles keep expanding we will have inflation. 

Ten Point Synopsis 

  1. The Fed has pledged to destroy the dollar at a rate if 2% a year. The Fed calls this “stability”
  2. To make up for alleged undershooting of destruction, the Fed has pledged to destroy the dollar at a rate greater than 2% a year until it is satisfied it has met its goals on average.
  3. However, the Fed’s measure of inflation is very poor. It does not count housing prices at all and it has dramatically undercounted medical services inflation. 
  4. The Fed has succeeded already (if one calls destruction of currency a success). 
  5. The Fed relies on poor measures of inflation so it does not see its own “success”.
  6. Things are not entirely in the Fed’s control. All the major central banks want to destroy currency as well,  most of them to support exports. 
  7. Japan tried for decades to destroy the Yen, but failed. 
  8. The Fed has help from Congress much more so than the ECB which has budget deficit rules.
  9. The Eurozone does not honor deficit its rules, but the ECB has pegged interest rates in negative territory lending support to the dollar. 
  10. Add to the mix the fact that the Eurozone could conceivably break up, perhaps sending some member states into hugely inflationary scenarios. This too is dollar supportive.

My friend’s seemingly simple question has quite a complicated discussion behind the immediate answer “of course!”

Who Benefits?

Think about the above 10 points. Who benefits?

It is not the bottom 50%. That’s for sure. The bottom 40% holds almost no assets and is systemically destroyed by central bank policies.

Inflation benefits go up the asset holders and those with first access to money: the banks and the wealthy.

Q: Who is it that crows the most about wealth inequality?
A: Progressives whose polices could lead to hyperinflation, and the Fed who is beholden to banks and the wealthy.

Got gold?

It’s a nice hedge against dueling nonsense.

Mish

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!

Mish

Comments to this post are now closed.

33 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
ThaomasH
ThaomasH
5 years ago
If “debasement” of the currency at 2% per year is a bad thing. why not argue that it is a bad thing?  What are the pro and cons of a higher or lower price level trajectory target?
xbizo
xbizo
5 years ago
Mish,
I agree that this is a one-time bump up in prices.  But, the key inputs to living a middle class life have been rising 3.5% to 4% for decades – food, gas, healthcare, your home and F-150.  Other things that could not be exported to Asia and Mexico, like college tuition, dining out, hotels, rose more like 7% annually.  First, let’s focus on these key inputs that maintain our standard of living.  If this shifts to 5%, that is problematic.  I don’t see that, do you?
Second, what drives inflation after this bump up gets absorbed?  We lost about $500,000 to 1 million consumers during COVID.  The population of India is going to take a COVID hit.  U.S., China, the EU and Japan population shifts are becoming older and spending less per capita.  The main driver I see is the rise of the middle class in India, Africa and Asia which increases the competition for global resources.
PostCambrian
PostCambrian
5 years ago
So Mish, if you think that there will be a deflationary bust (I also think that this is a possibility) then why do you push gold? The price of gold should go down in a deflationary bust.  This is my big dilemma, deflation or inflation?  Maybe you are hedging against both which is the only prudent course in this economic mess that I can see.
Mish
Mish
5 years ago
Reply to  PostCambrian
Gold rose in the great depression and did well again 2008-2009
Money does well in deflation 
Gold is not a good inflation hedge It fell from 850 to 250 from 1980-2000 
It’s a hedge against financial stress and central banks 
Cocoa
Cocoa
5 years ago
Every transaction has to be cleared in Dollars. To change that scenario you need to clear out of dollars. That will require a huge run on dollars to acquire and then exchange to something else, no matter how bad you think the FED is managing liquidity. So, no matter what, some big dollar run up before it dies will occur…and then you have to overpay for dollars to clear your USD positions and then re overpay for the run that is occurring on the new currency-which of course will not be any better managed than the USD. Good luck
anoop
anoop
5 years ago
how is gold a good hedge if it’s manipulated?
Cocoa
Cocoa
5 years ago
Reply to  anoop
Its manipulated to reflect the Fed target inflation rate. It always gets hammered when it starts acting like money
Mish
Mish
5 years ago
Latest MMT Madness is QE = Savings. Really, What are Savings?
I added a lot of discussion including some Tweets and Responses by Hussman.
Maximus_Minimus
Maximus_Minimus
5 years ago
Reply to  Mish
Excerpt: First, the FOMC is going to make permanent the RRPs, essentially accepting the proposal by the Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis to create a standing repo facility for banks and nonbanks alike. This means that funds, REITs and especially smaller dealers are going to be able to go direct to the Fed of New York and finance collateral, breaking the monopoly control of the big primary dealer banks.
They are rewriting monetary history as they go, to fix the broken system they created.
What’s next? Hedge funds are periodically the source of financial instability. Maybe allow hedge funds direct access to printed money?
Carl_R
Carl_R
5 years ago
I have a “minor disagreement” with the above. It is fiscal policy that is destroying the dollar. If the government ran a balanced budget (“if wishes were horses…”), there would be nothing for the Fed to do. However, because fiscal policy is insane, the FED is tasked with the impossible task of maintaining a sane monetary policy in an insane world.  All things considered, the FED has done a pretty good job. The dollar has “only” lost 90-95% of it’s value in the last 50 years, and we haven’t had any major depressions. Sometimes I wonder how long they can keep juggling, and keep all the balls in the air, and not have a total currency implosion, but somehow they manage, year after year.
In fairness, I will concede that it is circular. In the absence of the FED, the fiscal policy would already have led to disaster. From that perspective, the FED is the great facilitator; they facilitate ongoing insane fiscal policy, which in turn comes back to make their own job more difficult, requiring them to find ever more creative policies to keep the balls in the air.
Cocoa
Cocoa
5 years ago
Reply to  Carl_R
In the end, regardless of the FED’s intentions, they will end up owning all debt and a lot of wealth as the sovereign governments fail one by one. US is turning into a basketcase like Greece as it’s politically been fractured(on purpose by Koch Brothers etc.) Now we have the stupidest people in charge of DC and at state level
Carl_R
Carl_R
5 years ago
Reply to  Cocoa
Their problem is that if they dollar implodes, all those “assets” they own will cease to have value. Yet, the only way to hold their value up is to keep buying more.
Casual_Observer2020
Casual_Observer2020
5 years ago
It is still the best currency in an above average neighborhood.  At some point, I believe China will try to pull out the rug from underneath the dollar. But then we will find out that this doesn’t work because other export driven countries in Asia can’t afford for the dollar to go down much at all.  Does the Treasury/Fed still use random computers in Caymans and elsewhere to game the bond auctions ? This can all go on longer than people think. We will get back to 1% rates sooner than most think.  
ajc1970
ajc1970
5 years ago
“Three rounds of fiscal stimulus, one under Trump and two under Biden”

Minor nitpick, but it was 2 under Trump (March 2020 and December 2020), one under Biden (March 2021).

Maximus_Minimus
Maximus_Minimus
5 years ago
Reply to  ajc1970
Nobody in the free world (free to educate themselves on financial matters) gets elected on fiscal prudence.
Monetary policy is different kettle of fish because it’s decided by unelected officials and representatives of banks, and goes under the radar of most.
Take a poll in the street, and ask what monetary prudence involves…
PostCambrian
PostCambrian
5 years ago
Reply to  ajc1970
Mish has repeated that several times.  I never did post about it but I am glad that you did.
KidHorn
KidHorn
5 years ago
The FED will destroy the dollar eventually. When it happens is anyone’s guess. My hunch is will happen shortly after countries like China figure out growing the economy by giving away exports is dumb. Better to focus on helping their own citizenry instead of Americans and Europeans. 
RonJ
RonJ
5 years ago

“Trillions in stimulus and QE are not enough.

What’s Next?”

Quadrillions. Then quintillions.
davidyjack
davidyjack
5 years ago
Biden’s proposed budget is for 1.8 Trillion deficit in 2022.  Or about $5,500 per person.   Unsustainable over 5 years without inflation well above 2%.
Farmer Ted
Farmer Ted
5 years ago
A more accurate and appropriate title would be:
Does the US intend to expand deficits and debt by issuing more debt securities in the form of Treasuries, and does the US intend to issue more debt instruments in the form of Federal Reserve Notes to the Federal Reserve System, who will then ultimately use them to buy the debt?   
You bet they will, and the dollar will remain exactly the same until Congress changes the law.   
In the meantime, talking heads will bleat about whether there is inflation and how much.
“The extension of the prohibition to bills of credit [to the states], must give pleasure to every citizen, in proportion to his love of justice, and his knowledge of the true springs of public prosperity.  The loss which America has sustained since the peace from the pestilent effects of paper money on the necessary confidence between man and man…”.  
Because it’s human nature and not human tendencies, the age old trick of paper money never will die.   
Farmer Ted
Farmer Ted
5 years ago
Reply to  Farmer Ted
Meant to cite the quotation:  James Madison; The Federalist: Barnes and Noble Classics, 2006, p. 249
Eddie_T
Eddie_T
5 years ago
Nice recent interview with Lacy Hunt. Lots of good history and a great explanation of his disinflationary POV.
Farmer Ted
Farmer Ted
5 years ago
Articles using language like this perpetuate the ignorance of our monetary system, which allows the lunacy to continue.  
The US Dollar is defined in the US Code. 31 USC §5112(e) defines it as 1 ounce of silver, which is just about the same as it was in 1792.   The Fed can no more debase the dollar than the treasury can.   
What the Fed has are Federal Reserve Notes, which are irredeemable.  They are paper debt instruments, and the Fed can and will debase them hand in hand with the Congress.   Effectively, the Congress is funding itself by emitting bills of credit, which if was the case in 1789, the Constitution would never have been ratified…not even close.   
Liberty, or freedom from arbitrary authority, is only possible when people hold the power of creating more money,  This was the case in 1792 when you could bring bullion to the mint and have it coined at no additional charge.  Now the government is the sole creator of what passes for money, which is actually a debt instrument.   
The distinction between dollars and federal reserve notes is probably the most substantive and significant distinction of our entire monetary system.   By choosing the language you did, Mish, you’re unfortunately part of the problem.  
Read “1913: From General to Specific Welfare.”   It has a section detailing our current monetary system.   It is very informative on our current monetary system as well as how it used to be prior to 1913.  
Mish
Mish
5 years ago
Reply to  Farmer Ted
The Fed absolutely has pledged to destroy the dollar at 2% a year as well as make up for lost time.
Holding interest rates too low accomplishes that goal, albeit with other competing central bank policies.
My article is accurate. 
That said, your point is understood. I made the same case recently.
China Announces It Will Fix the Price of the Yuan at a Basically Stable Level
What the world needs is not “price fixing” but “weight fixing”. 

A dollar, yuan, euro, or yen needs to represent a fixed weight of gold, audited, and 100% redeemable on demand. 

This is vastly different than saying “x” dollars will buy “y” gold given that dollars can be printed at will. 

A 100% gold-backed dollar, by weight, implies no government or central bank shenanigans. That’s true stability.
Farmer Ted
Farmer Ted
5 years ago
Reply to  Mish
That is my point.   Federal Reserve Notes are neither dollars nor are they redeemable in dollars.   A dollar is defined by statute as an ounce of silver.   A gold backed dollar makes no sense unless you are confusing federal reserve debt instruments with what is actually a dollar.  
The US Mint creates silver dollar coins, and they mint coins made of gold that are stamped with a nominal value, presumably based on the value of a dollar, which is a one ounce coin of silver.  
The Federal Reserve is not a steward of the dollar. Whether they should or shouldn’t be is irrelevant as they aren’t.   Congress defines the dollar by statute.   They could debase the dollar by defining it as 1/100th of an ounce of silver,  but they haven’t.   I think reading 12 USC §411, which defines Fed Notes, would help with the point I’m trying to make.   In short, they are debt instruments issued to the Federal Reserve System, but they are definitely not dollars.  
No, this isn’t arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, or a distinction without a difference.   What is a dollar and what is not is fundamental to everything.   
Mish
Mish
5 years ago
Reply to  Farmer Ted
A 100% gold backed dollar is supported by Rothbard.
It means a specific weight.
There is nothing wrong with a paper dollar as long as it is 100% backed by the weight promised.
That is what the expression means!
PostCambrian
PostCambrian
5 years ago
Reply to  Farmer Ted
If you look up the current version of US Code. 31 USC §5112(e) it doesn’t define the dollar as one ounce of silver. It just gives the physical specifications of a silver coin.  US Code. 31 USC §5112(f)(3) states “Numismatic items.—
For purposes of section 5132 (a)(1) of this title all coins minted under subsection (e) shall be considered to be numismatic items.” 
You must have an old edition of the USC.
Farmer Ted
Farmer Ted
5 years ago
Reply to  PostCambrian
The code is current.  31 USC 5112(e)(4):
… “1 Oz. Fine Silver”, “E Pluribus Unum”, and “”One Dollar”; and …
That’s your dollar defined in some obscure passage in the code regarding denominations and design of coins.  
PostCambrian
PostCambrian
5 years ago
Reply to  Farmer Ted
I guess you are right in the first statement (I just found the words “one dollar”) but it doesn’t “define” the dollar in terms of value.  The next section (f) states:
 (f)Silver Coins.—
(1)Sale price.—
The Secretary shall sell the coins minted under subsection (e) to the public at a price equal to the market value of the bullion at the time of sale, plus the cost of minting, marketing, and distributing such coins (including labor, materials, dies, use of machinery, and promotional and overhead expenses).
So you can have your one dollar silver coins they just are going to cost more than a dollar.
Farmer Ted
Farmer Ted
5 years ago
Reply to  PostCambrian
That is why they don’t circulate as a medium of exchange.  You must buy them at a price well above their nominal value of $1, and then if you sell them at market value above your basis, you must pay capital gains tax.   The Code provides that US coin and currency are legal tender, which includes Federal Reserve Notes.  However, there is no tax on federal reserve notes, which provides a substantial advantage for federal reserve notes to act as a medium of exchange despite the fact that they can be debased substantially without the citizenry abandoning them as a medium of exchange.  
The dollar has barely changed since 1792.   What has been debased are federal reserve notes.  
PostCambrian
PostCambrian
5 years ago
I think that the title is a little misleading (of course it gathers more views) but your explanation is good. The primary intent of the Fed is not to destroy the dollar but to improve the economy. Weakening (but not destroying) the dollar is a result (or a method depending on your outlook) of their actions. I think that their efforts (in improving the economy) will not be successful but it will result in a weaker dollar.
Mish
Mish
5 years ago
Reply to  PostCambrian
The title is the exact question I was asked. I did not make the question up.
Eddie_T
Eddie_T
5 years ago
A very long trend line says the 30Y UST will turn down before it hits 3%. Not sure when they have to do their manips for that not to overshoot.
I think destroying the dollar is the wrong way to look at this. The real problem is if the dollar blows out to the upside, the way it did at the start of the Great Depression. The Fed is trying to keep that from happening. The foreign debt denominated in dollars is the problem. That and negative rates in the more solvent European countries.
I certainly wouldn’t consider anything above a DXY of 75 to be much to worry about, as far as a dollar drop from here. Below that and it’s starting to weaken very significantly, imho.
The dollar made a swing low already….. and a close above roughly 90.25 would signal a new daily cycle in the dollar. We look to be flirting with that today. I don’t expect the up leg to last long though.

Decorate Your Walls with Mish Fine Art Images

Click each image to view details or purchase in the store.

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk

You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.