So a few days ago Global Edge ran a follow up podcast with just Gonzalo Lira, in which the Chilean was given the opportunity to defend himself and to further validate his argument. In a very lively and heated discussion, which teaches the amateurs at CNBC just how one should run a financial debate, Lira and host Hamtpon agree that hyperinflation may play out differently than many expect. Among the questions probed are whether property will be a good investment in a hyperinflation scenario, and what may happen to all other key asset classes once the Fed finally loses control of everything. Still, the best outcome would be to give Lira and Mish a one to one venue in which the two can battle it out: surely it would have no actual impact as the deflationists and hyperinflationists of the world tend to be among some of the most dogmatic individuals in the world, but it sure makes for much more entertaining theater than watching those idiots in Congress pretend they are in control of the financial destruction currently going on in America.
Sunday, September 12, 2010
providing a theoretical framework for the arrival of hyperinflation, went viral, generating over 75k views and over 1,000 comments, further confirming that the biggest and most confounding debate in all of finance is what will the final outcome of the Fed's market manipulative actions be: deflation, inflation or, and not really comparable, hyperinflation (which is a distinctly different phenomenon from either of the above). The post infuriated some hard core deflationists who continue to refuse to acknowledge the possibility that in its attempt to inspire inflation at all costs, the Fed may just push beyond the tipping point of monetary imprudence away from mere target 2-3% inflation, and create an outright debasement of the world's reserve currency. One among these was none other than Mish himself, who a week ago recorded a podcast on Global Edge with Eric Townsend and Michael Hampton (link here), in which his conclusion was that Hyperinflation is the endgame, "so it is unlikely." Of course, the very premise of this statement argues that even in a monetary collapse the Fed will retain control over the flow of money, which of course is unlikely, and thus makes us very skeptical that such a simplistic and solipsistic argument is enough to resolve the debate. Since one of the items covered in the Mish podcast was Lira's argument, it was only fair that Gonzalo himself should be heard.