So which of the components ot either M1, M2 or M3 do you feel is not being reported accurately?
On Dec 07 05:17 PM pgvinter wrote:
> I would appreciate actual constructive criticism of the points made > rather than a blanket rejection with absolutely no alternative point. > It is this kind of behavior that takes value away from a forum such > as seeking alpha. My point is that the money supply statistics no > longer accurately represent real amount of money available in either > the US economy. The increased use of securitization and the variable > reserve requirements imposed on lending institutions which are effected > as much by the ratings of assets held as by deposit volume has taken > many of the actual sources of money out of the transactions which > compose the data points used for calculating real money supply. I > am very interested in hearing a counter point to this contention > but do not think that simply saying "you don't know what you are > talking about" and putting previously posted information in quotation > marks suffices to offer a counterpoint.
-
So which of the components ot either M1, M2 or M3 do you feel is not being reported accurately?
Dec 07 18:44 pm
|Rating:
0
0
All Comments by ghassan karam »Defining Deflation [View article]
On Dec 07 05:17 PM pgvinter wrote:
> I would appreciate actual constructive criticism of the points made
> rather than a blanket rejection with absolutely no alternative point.
> It is this kind of behavior that takes value away from a forum such
> as seeking alpha. My point is that the money supply statistics no
> longer accurately represent real amount of money available in either
> the US economy. The increased use of securitization and the variable
> reserve requirements imposed on lending institutions which are effected
> as much by the ratings of assets held as by deposit volume has taken
> many of the actual sources of money out of the transactions which
> compose the data points used for calculating real money supply. I
> am very interested in hearing a counter point to this contention
> but do not think that simply saying "you don't know what you are
> talking about" and putting previously posted information in quotation
> marks suffices to offer a counterpoint.