Django also needs to pin a default Postgres container image, and default NGINX image. The default stack should be extensively end-to end tested and optimized, including an optional patched kernel, cgroup2 settings, and untrusted nsjail worker process for handling media files.
It was in response to my motion for injunction in Apple's racketeering case for bribing the City of Waukee $100m to abate $177m. I pointed out they were spying on Judges' iOS devices and iCloud accounts - Judges don't like to be spied on.
Injunction on Apple filed today in my racketeering action CVCV043016 District Court for Dallas County Iowa on behalf of major shareholder Iowa Public Employee Retiree System. The last thing shareholders need is erosion of equity via a massive NLRA lawsuit.
He let thousands of IBM point of sale systems to be replaced with crap that can't buffer keystrokes - instead of modernizing the SDKs for those who know Linux and not AIX.
He bought RedHat, but not Digital Ocean so they had a cloud consumers trust.
He didn't win a serious contract with Facebook for kernel tuning. He didn't win a serious contract with AWS for AWS Linux 3.
He let COBOL and APL continue to die instead of funding modern tooling.
I'm guessing Arvind Krishna by the "He bought RedHat...". But I didn't realize the IBM CEO is expected by investors (or anyone really) to be that involved in those kinds of sales mentioned in the other points.
This is in line with State tax credits on large data centers. At least a credit wouldn't favor Intel over AMD. Companies like Tesla, Deere, Ford would abuse the credit shifting as much cost as they can on their unit that manufactures and tests boards.
You’re correct that the recent uptick is unprecedented, but given that the other graph (shared by Nobel prize winning economist) shows no stable relationship between M2 and inflation, why does it matter? He might be wrong and you might be right, but that graph alone doesn’t tell that story.
These morons are trying to pump a certain crypto-token by instilling inflation fears, but since inflation has been a non-issue in the US since the 1970s, they are now trying to shift the focus to the money supply as if it had any relevance at all.
Because money which isn't spent doesn't contribute to inflation. It might contribute to inflation, but prices don't increase in reaction to possible buyers, only actual buyers (or the expectation of actual buyers, but that's a short term effect since if the customer doesn't materialize you've still got bills to pay).
Correct, which is why I said you have to look at demand. Velocity tells you nothing, it isn't an input.
Also, you are wrong about prices not increasing "in reaction to possible buyers". If we lived in the fabulous world of rational expectations and flexible prices moving instantly but we don't. Understanding why this isn't the case, ironically, is why we use monetary policy/inflation targeting.
It describes a very sharp increase in created money. The poster of the linked tweet is implying this is unique and we will see negative economic effects (like inflation) because of it.
Parent to that tweet is arguing we have not seen those effects despite past federal reserve action and so there is no worry.
The wider context to this conversation is that some people [who?] believe federal reserve policy is flawed and supported by systemic bias in the reporting of economic indicators like GDP.
It's not created money. We didn't just print this money. The money is printed on collateral, that is private industry traded assets for US dollars.
This graph also completely ignores that the US dollar is the de facto reserve currency of the world, so dividing dollars by US population is fairly meaningless in 2021.
You mean they are buying assets and thus the money is simply providing liquidity and has tangential value. They aren't just printing it and giving it away, this subtle but significant difference is one of the reasons that money supply and inflation have very little if anything to do with one another.
Yes, buying assets, but basically buying risk-free treasuries that come in inexhaustible quantities. When they make the purchase that money goes directly to the federal government to be spent.
And that money is in competition with others who are buying treasuries, driving down the interest rate (since it’s an auction) and presumably pushing that money to other uses.
So you are right, it’s not “given away”, but it’s a pretty frictionless way for “new money” to enter the financial system. It’s not like the money is put in a bank account and just sits there.
But your point is well taken. There is no “2 + 2 = 4” rule when it comes to money supply and inflation.
Yes, don't worry guys. The Federal Reserve has got you covered. And if things get too expensive, you can always just ask for a raise, amirite! :)
Anyway, here's a cash crop chart for corn that has more than doubled in price since last year. Once the cost of making finished products with these crops increase, you can be sure that shop prices will also reflect it. Some of these charts are even growing exponentially.
If you zoom out to 20 years it shows that back in 2011 the same thing happened; did we have hyperinflation in 2011 or huge price increases in food in 2011?
I didn't say we'd have hyper-inflation. I said we'd have inflation, and the banks are saying that too, btw. What we're seeing now isn't just some seasonal pump, but a huge across the board pump. Of course, if wages also reflect that increase, then there's not much of a problem. But what we're facing today is massive unemployment, and a massive amount of money sitting un-touched in banks, sometimes with negative interest. Negative interest plus more inflation equals less purchasing power for you either way you try to argue. So what we're witnessing now is a massive transfer of wealth. The only thing most normies can hope for, is a higher price on Doge. But yes, if the printing gets out of hand, we'll have hyper-inflation too. Some of these charts are already going exponential.
Since the massive QE is happening in economies around the world,vthere will be some flight to the dollar as well as gold. A lot of money could continue to sit at negative rates. There won't be much impetus for capital investment for a decade. It's hard to say exactly how this will play out month to month, but it is going to be a harrowing.
If the comparison is with 2008, the answer is that the "money" was created on different sides of the balance sheet for different purposes. (We all remember that banks are effectively statistically multiplexing asset cash against liability deposits, nu?)
2008 the Fed printed $2 trillion asset cash(M0) and used it to buy bad debt off the banks books, and put the debt in a runoff fund. No discernible impact on M2. (well, it stopped it imploding).
2020 Fed prints ~$4 trillion of liability deposits, and hands it out to all and sundry to pay their rents, and support the stock market.
M2 goes vertical. Which it has never done for the US in the last 100 odd years. So this time it will actually be different.
“Print” is a misnomer, as only the US Mint prints paper currency and mints metal coins which is a very tiny sliver of the M0 money supply.
So to rephrase what actually happens: “in 2008, the Federal Reserve decided to buy a notional amount of $2 trillion in bonds and debt securities, every time it bought some it created the same amount of new US dollars at the time of transaction which becomes owned by the seller. Increasing the money supply upon payment.”
Its primary mechanism for controlling the money supply and people’s behavior is by purchasing a predetermined amount and category of assets from people. Unless authorized by Congress to do something specific.
Congress does not usually touch the Federal Reserve Act, as the whole point of the Federal Reserve system was to remove politics from management of the money supply. But they obviously can and always could alter the Federal Reserve’s charter and in 2020 they let the Federal Reserve give money directly to individuals in some of the stimulus programs.
More about breaking down exactly how the Fed's digital dollar ledger updates actually result increasing the money supply.
Despite everyone knowing the "printer go brr" meme being just a colloquialism, I don't think people are really clear on what the reality is. It is Just-In-Time creation of dollars upon transaction.
There is no one definition of "money". M0, M1, M2, M3, MZM are various metrics which have been proposed over time for trying to track the supply of USD all with varying definitions. M2 is frequently used as the simplest and best general case proxy for "how much USD is out in circulation" in a way that tracks credit + currency.
So saying the M2 is high relative to population means that we have been "printing money" (increasing the USD money supply) at a high rate relative to population.
M2 is a measure of the money supply. There are different measures of the money supply, which roughly speaking are M0 (cash), M1 (M0+current accounts), M2 (M1+savings accounts) and M3 (M2+money market instruments). The fact that they have divided M2 by the population seems a little strange, but basically the graphic shows the amount of "money" (cash+current accounts) per person over a time period in the US.
