Inflationese: Pick Up a New Language Today!

Inflationism can be a tricky religion, and becoming fluent in inflationese can be downright strange. (Because inflation is under control, and doesn’t even exist, and wouldn’t be a threat if it did exist, but is also an omnipotent force that solves all problems, and how can all those claims be true? It's like the consecrated host being both a candy and a gum.)

But if you throw out the baffling logic and reason you developed as a grownup and just go with the flow, you can learn native-or-better inflationese in a few easy sessions. 

The first thing to know is that inflationese is more than a mere cognate language of 21st-century English. It's even older than 21st-century English, and it inflects nearly every phrase in our language. Consider the rich inflationese prose in the ostensibly pro-buyer article "Traditional 'rules' of homebuying return: Buyers can balance the bargain hunt with realistic expectations." by U.S. News & World Report's Rachel Koning Beals. 

Under the old paradigm, our ancestors might have asked, "How can you trust an article where the title uses scare quotes to undermine the article's claim?" Those fools in old-time hats and coats might also have assumed a journalist advising buyers would consider price inflation something her readers want to avoid. 

But Koning Beals is so gracefully attuned to the higher purpose of inflation that even as a friend of the buyer she advises only deference to the seller's position, debt-fueled purchases, presumption of price increases, and avoidance of "hardball." Some nuggets: 

There may be wiggle room with seller concessions — covering closing costs, tossing in repair credits — entering into a prospective deal armed with local-market knowledge and respectful consideration of the seller's position can go a long way toward getting a great deal on a great property.

Semantics are important: Ask, "How flexible are they on the price?" Avoid: "How much less will they take?" 

Save yourself and all involved the delay and headache of financial surprises by researching your own credit report. 

[P]laying hardball with lowball offers that are out of sync with comparable local sales can be time-consuming. Time can mean money.

Short sales, foreclosed properties or rent-to-own dwellings shouldn't be ruled out [but] may take more time and involve more financial hoops...

Price isn't all that matters; find out how long properties are staying on the market, on average. 

[N]egotiations [are] back and have been for a few years. Gone — in most markets — are the bidding wars where would-be buyers didn't stand a chance unless they came in above the asking price from the start. Ironically, tough competition has cropped up in some instances, thanks to the weak housing market. 

[An overpriced local market may be] good for your long-term investment, but it also means the seller has a pricing advantage at the outset and couldn't care less about macro-pricing trends. Competition may be tight...

Cash, and the prospect that the buyer might in time be committed to pay his or her mortgage off in cash, gets little mention. To Koning Beals, money is mostly a token used to lock in the deal: 

Buyers may also have to put up "earnest" or "good faith" money, which is essentially a deposit before moving into the offer/contract phase.

Inflationese is a dynamic language that turns words (supply, demand) into non-words and ideas (deflation) into non-ideas. But by recreating the immersion environment you can learn inflationese with the same ease you had when you were a baby and first learned to talk.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Old Mexican||

    Set your sarcasmotron on "stun"!

  • dan bloom||

    Wait a minute? scare quotes? Sir, you used a meaningless mis-named faux term that MOST readers here do not even understand or "get" -- do ''you'' even KNOW who coined the term or when or why? I do, ask me! And you are wrong.

    Maybe, Sir, do a story later on about "Are 'scare quotes' really 'scary' and other things you might not have known about "scare quotes" 'quote unquote'"?

    google "scare quotes + dan bloom" to find the truth about scare quotes being a meaningless faux term that everyone parrots without even fact checking its origins

    RE: you wrote:
    Under the old paradigm, our ancestors might have asked, "How can you trust an article where the title uses ***scare quotes*** to undermine the article's claim?"

  • Randian||

    Jim, will you stick around? I always wanted a version of Time Cube Guy for reason's very own.

  • ||

    I and my associates, sir, were doing heavy scare quote research when you were still "banging cheerleaders."

  • dan bloom||

    @Tim Cavanaugh -- BUT in this S piece from 12 years ago when I was still in "diapers", true, you never ''once'' tell readers who coined the term nor why nor when it was coined. So there is still a story to be written and i got the smoking gun. Can you write it? I cannot write. I am poster and commenter and email guy only.HELP?

  • RBS||

    I have to say this is pretty pathetic. Why do any of us really care that you found "the smoking gun" re: scare quotes?

  • ||

    Double posts by editors is karmic justice.

  • nicole||

    Ah, but they control the squirrels, making you look foolish. Dare I ask..."karmic justice?"

  • Randian||

    No, dammit, we'll swear out affidavits that Cavanaugh got zapped by squirlz.

  • ||

    Until Tim proves it otherwise, nicole, he got karmic justice.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Go home Mary.

  • Randian||

    Speaking of, guess who made a new video?

  • Archduke PantsFan||

    uh, wow

  • Randian||

    Awesome, right?

  • Cytotoxic||

    Spectacular.

  • Suki||

    Warning: Another episode of "Big Bang Theory" without the jokes follows.

  • Killazontherun||

    Wheedon fans, I told you it was inevitable your FireFly worship would get to him.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-H.....alist-Rant

    Never saw the appeal of that boring ass show even when you spin it libertarian.

  • ||

    Firefly had potential and probably would have caught on had the suits at Fox not screwed with the ordering of the episodes.

    That being said, his work has always been more existential than libertarian. Firefly had strong anti-government themes in its portrayal of the Alliance as a centralized bureucracy similar to ours, but I think in the context of his rant he's referring to coporatism rather than capitalism itself. I'm not surprised if he isn't savy enough to see the difference between free market capitalism and cronyism, most people aren't.

  • Killazontherun||

    I hated the pacing of the show. Set ups for climatic scenes were always overly explained and were laid out to unfold in a non surprising, too logical even, manner. You know what causes this? Too much character development. The dialog in character emphatic narratives typically give away too much and become piled on exposition. It's aesthetics with me and Whedon. We don't have the same value system in that regard. Now, George R. R. Martin stories, though certainly character driven (I've read a lot of his pre-Saga work before I was even aware of GoT) is more to my liking because they are always properly clueless as people tend to be to whats coming up next. I hate to see plans always come together, A-Team style, and Firefly did a lot of that.

  • ||

    I hate to see plans always come together

    It would be nice if at least one plan came together in Game of Thrones.

  • ||

    Hey K

    Ya know how I decide the quality of a show/movie/book?

    First, I watch/read it. Second, I ask myself if I was entertained.

    Yes = good show
    No = bad show

    Firefly = good show

  • Cytotoxic||

    I watched the first episode of FF and it sucked so I never watched it again. But the movie was alright.

  • Killazontherun||

    I wasn't going Merchant/Ivory on you, I explained why it bored the shit out of me, overload of exposition, and boring to me is the opposite of entertaining.

  • Joe R.||

    Not sure about that. I read his line, "We have people trying to create structures and preserve the structures that will help the middle and working class, and people calling them socialists," and was dying for examples. I'm guessing that "free" health care and rent control are among his examples.

    So it's probably both anti-cronyism and anti-capitalism.

  • Bill||

    Apparently, it thinks if Obama is elected the economy will collapse and there will be civil strife. I can see now why it wants to comment here so bad(ly).

  • ||

    Notice the whopping number of subscribers? Any bets on how many of them are her alternate personas?

  • Suki||

    I ain't "scared" o' no quote.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Its amazing how Reasonoids get so whacked out by supply/demand concepts.

    $13 trillion (M3) left the US economy in 2008 and nothing was said. Bernanke buys $2 trillion in bonds later and the Inflationistas hyperventilate.

    Yet the Inflationistas are always wrong.

  • Randian||

    Irrelevant and incorrect, as always.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Ahhh, you must be an Inflationista - always wrong and always whining about rising milk/gas prices that have fallen since QE began.

    You're excused. Ron Paul (your leader) can't get the supply/demand matrix on money right either.

  • Randian||

    Ahhh, you must be an Inflationista

    Wrong.

    $13 trillion (M3) left the US economy in 2008

    Citation? The government does not track M3.

    nothing was said.

    Irrelevant, as I said earlier.

    Bernanke buys $2 trillion in bonds later and the Inflationistas hyperventilate.

    It slays me that you don't even know the difference or effect of the different kinds of "Ms" (as in money types). And you are aware that it is possible to create too much base and therefore trigger higher inflation, right? I mean, that is Econ and Finance 100 right there.

  • Randian||

    shrike, who said it?

    "There is no subtler, no surer way of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency".
  • Palin's Buttplug||

    The USD is at 83 or so and was 71 in 2008 you DUMBASS. No one is "debauching"!

  • Cytotoxic||

    83/71 whats? Plastic tokens? Keep in mind the USD normally climbs up and up in value during a downturn. The recession is really what saved it the USD was tearing lower circa 2007.

  • Randian||

    The only reason that is happening is because everyone else is debauching their currency even faster. If the ratings companies didn't have their fingers in their ears singing LA LA LA, the USD would be in the fucking toilet.

  • ||

  • Randian||

    Tim, do you have a list of commodities that have become more expensive in real terms since 2008? Might be a good list to throw down every time the inflation deniers come out of the woodwork.

  • shamalam||

    Five year chart of GLD, a proxy for gold:

    http://finance.yahoo.com/echar.....undefined;

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    The govt does not track M3 any since 2005 or so but they do track Net Personal Assets (which fell dramatically in 2008).

    M2 has risen but not inflation since dollars are scarce due to UE and deflation.

    Finally, the Treasury markets are at historic low yields - really, you Inflationistas track record is at or near perfectly WRONG.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Net worth =/= M3 or the money supply.

    Nice attempt at a save, though.

  • Randian||

    Finally, the Treasury markets are at historic low yields

    Which proves that there is too little money to be had how again?

  • VG Zaytsev||

    M2 has risen but not inflation since dollars are scarce due to UE and deflation.

    The collapse of lending in 09-10
    http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/LOANS
    has resulted in asset deflation, most notably in real estate.

    Money supply growth via QE has inflated the value of securities and created unprecedented excess reserves in the commercial banking system

    http://research.stlouisfed.org.....s/EXCRESNS

    and enabled the growth of the federal government.

    So far, the inflation has been isolated to the financial industry and government. A situation that will not last forever and when it ends there will be explosive inflation. No one can predict when that will happen, but it most certainly will at some point in the not too distant future.

    Finally, the Treasury markets are at historic low yields

    Which proves nothing beyond demonstrating that the FED is buying most new federal debt and creating money in the process.

    Seriously dude, if the money supply was contracting at the same time that the federal government was borrowing 10% of GDP, interest rates would increasing dramatically.

  • Randian||

    No one can predict when that will happen, but it most certainly will at some point in the not too distant future.

    It's going to happen around 2014. And it is going to be Helicopter Ben's fault.

  • Randian||

    VG, I know that we've mixed it up before, but I am glad that someone is finally calling shrike on his alleged financial acumen. Now I am totally satisfied that he is full of shit.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    But 100% correct so far.

    And long bonds say I am right - yet nothing says you are.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Yeah, it's not like assets can every be overvalued for an extended period of time. Like some sort of 'bubble'.

  • Randian||

    Yeah, it's not like assets can every be overvalued for an extended period of time. Like some sort of 'bubble'.

    Pfft. That doesn't happen.

  • Randian||

    The unemployment rate says you're wrong, shrike.

  • Cytotoxic||

    So does the price of gold.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Sorry for being a dick before.

    I was (still am) really twisted by Roberts decision on Obamacare.

  • Killazontherun||

    It helps to lay off the serious opinionating and devote one self to drinking for a good stretch. If Obama is reelected I may have to sequester myself to the Beer Advocate and Axe Body Spray forums. The previous two bottles I bought were Dark Temptation, but I want to try something new for the mid-Summer season, any recommendations?

  • Randian||

    Are you talking about beer or AXE?

  • Killazontherun||

    Dark Temptation -- Axe, but beer is to blame for the confusion.

  • Generic Stranger||

    Dark Temptation -- Axe, but beer is to blame for the confusion.


    No, I think the fact that you buy AXE is to blame for that.

  • juris imprudent||

    It's an adult beverage!
    No, it's a teenage body spray.

  • Killazontherun||

    Well, you just stay strange then, Mr. Generic.

  • Suki||

    "Finally, the Treasury markets are at historic low yields"

    That is because they are low risk. At least they were before you people took over.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    $13 trillion (M3) left the US economy in 2008 and nothing was said.

    Bullshit.

  • Randian||

    He's dumb. To compare QE, which is pretty clearly an add-on to the monetary base (M0) to the loss of M2 (not M3, but again, shrike is dumb) is utter nonsense.

  • Sevo||

    "but again, shrike is dumb"
    "but again, shrike is dumb"
    You can say that again!

  • Palin's Buttplug||

  • Randian||

    Which is, again, irrelevant towards the question of inflation.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    There is no inflation! Get a grip, man.

  • Cytotoxic||

    You just got owned like a bitch.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Fuck you, dumbass. No one here can point to any inflation since 2008/QE. Its why you fucking Paultards are always wrong.

  • Randian||

    Yes, when you keep interest rates artificially low, you can successfully mask inflation...for a while, anyway.

  • Bill||

    A flaw in their system: you can't really go lower than zero (well, not for long).

  • Calidissident||

    Inflation is not just a rise in the price level. Let's say there's a situation where, in the absence of monetary "stimulus" there would be deflation. But the central bank does intervene, and the result is slight price inflation. The real inflation is the difference between the price inflation rate and what the deflation rate would have been with no monetary intervention.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    But inflation is a comin' in 2014!

    SSure.. Randian. You wimp.

  • Randian||

    We'll see how it turns out, Alleged Financial Whiz-Kid and All Around Market Genius.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Except you're wrong, retard. As Tim has repeatedly pointed out, costs have risen over 10% since the onset of the Great Recession.

  • ||

    Why the fuck do you respond to it? That's what it wants. You understand that, right?

  • Randian||

    Ehn, acquiring financial acumen is worth it just to prove him wrong.

  • Cytotoxic||

    It must be crushed and broken. We have run out others like it.

  • Suki||

    The Teaparty had something to say about it, well before Maobama was a candidate.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Inflationism is a religion that comes with its own language - Inflationese? Is this a metaphor for Judaism and Hebrew? Because that's not cool.

    This article should have been titled How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Inflation. "You can't bargain hunt in here; this is the Inflation Room!"

  • Suki||

    You are off by a few years. Metaphors for Judaism and Hebrew are approved by the Leftopians as long as they are for bashing Israel. If he meant Inflationese as in Japanese, that is ok too as long as they oppose Red China. Otherwise, like when the US was defending against Japan it is all RACISM!

  • Hugh Akston||

    Thanks Tim. I have never been able to get my head around the idea that my money buying less today than it did yesterday is somehow a good thing. Now I know it's because some concepts don't translate well into other languages.

    Like l'esprit de l'escalier.

  • Joe R.||

    Mianzi, guangxi

  • Hugh Akston||

    Also, anyone who expects to do anything other than lose money buying a house should be tested for learning disabilities.

  • Randian||

    I am *prepared* to lose money, but that does not mean I *expect* to lose money. I actually expect that my prospective property purchase will retain or gain value, but I am prepared that it will not.

  • Sevo||

    Nope.
    A house is a collection of materials plopped on the land you buy. It can be replaced tomorrow at close to the same value.
    Asymmetric knowledge of (or even just thinking about) the land value is all that matters.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    It can be replaced tomorrow at close to the same value.

    If the local government will let you.

    And if they won't, the value of existing construction increases.

  • Sevo||

    VG Zaytsev|7.14.12 @ 11:13PM|#
    It can be replaced tomorrow at close to the same value.
    "If the local government will let you."

    True enough, and one of the constraints in making such a choice.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Asymmetric knowledge of (or even just thinking about) the land value is all that matters.

    I might have a witty rebuttal for you if I had one clue what the fuck you were talking about.

  • Killazontherun||

    He's hiding the fact there exist crude oil under his house until the right political conditions make it exploitable.

  • Sevo||

    Killazontherun|7.14.12 @ 11:38PM|#
    "He's hiding the fact there exist crude oil under his house until the right political conditions make it exploitable."

    That'd be one of the options, but I don't know how to find oil.

  • Killazontherun||

    You shoot at a possum by the creek like Uncle Jed.

  • Suki||

  • Killazontherun||

    But you have to admit, silly or not, it was a good example of asymmetric knowledge.

  • Sevo||

    Hugh Akston|7.14.12 @ 11:19PM|#
    Asymmetric knowledge of (or even just thinking about) the land value is all that matters.
    "I might have a witty rebuttal for you if I had one clue what the fuck you were talking about."

    What I'm talking about is the part that has value regardless of the commodities required to build a "house".
    There is no more 'lake-side' land tomorrow than there is today. If you, today, somehow decide that limited commodity is more valuable than others, you might buy it today and sell it tomorrow when the market agrees with your determination.
    Looking for 'witty rebuttal'....

  • Hugh Akston||

    No, you're right. If you're faced with losing money on your house, you can always just sell the quarter-acre suburban plot to build a hog farm or a Walmart on.

  • nonluddite||

    "There is no more 'lake-side' land tomorrow than there is today."

    Actually, they are building new lakes all of the time!

  • Emperor Wears No Clothes||

    There is no more 'lake-side' land tomorrow than there is today.

    Wrong. Land can be subdivided.

  • Randian||

    I have no idea what the hell Cavanaugh is babbling about in this article. How is "earnest money", a common concept when it comes to real estate transaction, in any way a facet of "inflationese"? Hell, how is any of this home buying advice in any way influenced by some sort of made-up allegiance to the 'religion of inflation'?

  • Randian||

    I should say that my "babbling" comment is borne out of frustration of failing to understand and not meant as disrespectful, but I completely fail to see how the MSN article and inflation are in any way tied together.

  • Paul.||

    Is this a comment walk-back?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    There was a time when people regularly got into bidding wars on property? Is that happening now somewhere?

  • Randian||

    The year was 2005...

  • ||

    It's been happening all year in Seattle. I know multiple people who went for houses/condos and had their bid get overridden by an all-cash bid. There's a crazy, inexplicable boom here right now. The best explanation I've seen is that houses are being put on the market for very low since the market was so bad. Then people come in and go "this house is great and I want it, and this price is amazing", and then other people start bidding. Human nature being what it is, they start bidding up past what they had considered their ceiling because they liked the house so much, and suddenly they're way over what the listing price was.

  • nicole||

    So in other words...we continue to be doomed.

  • Randian||

    People need to buy a place to live and fucking stay there. Living smaller helps too.

  • Killazontherun||

    That was one aspect of the poor market signaling of the credit expansion. So many people bought houses that were one step up from what was realistic for them that when it tumbled their actual wealth versus their life style came as a shock to them.

    I could show a before and after of a couple I know in pictures from the real estate ads between the two hundred and fifty thousand house they were forced to give up in bankruptcy versus the tiny eighty thousand dollar house they live in now, but it would be too easy for that information to be used as an invasion of their privacy, so I wont do it.

    ABC theory is ugly in action, hence the all around denial of its applicability.

  • Paul.||

    People need to buy a place to live and fucking stay there. Living smaller helps too.

    But walkable neighborhoods and hardwood floors!

  • ||

    It's a bit wacky, but in this case it's the market, and that's fine with me. There's no governmental meddling; it's just people going after what they want.

    I mean, there's nothing "doomed" abut an all-cash bid; admittedly I don't get tying up so much capital in an asset when interest rates are low, but hey, it's their money, right?

  • nicole||

    Yeha, I just meant human-nature-wise. I mean, I know that feeling, of "this is the place, and I must have it." But you gotta fight that sometimes...

  • BakedPenguin||

    Low interest rates cut both ways. Where are you going to invest your money today?

  • Randian||

    If you find the place you think is perfect for the next 40-50 years, it might make sense to bid it up a bit, especially since the interest rates are so ridiculous.

  • ||

    Nobody here will live in that house for 40-50 years. At least not the people I'm talking about.

    It's an interesting situation, actually. I don't know if you've bought a house before, but if you find one you really, really like, you end up getting a little obsessed about it and want it really badly. So we have this perfect storm of timing, bad market, and human nature. Prices are low. People find a house, fall in love with it, and can't believe that they can get it such a great price. But they're not the only ones. Get several people doing this, and suddenly they're in a bidding war because they want the house. The original low price sucked them in, the house grabbed them, and then they go far above its price to get it.

  • nicole||

    I've witnessed similar behavior in depressed rental markets, actually. People come in and say "holy crap, look at this beautiful sunroom and exposed brick, and it's a steal," and before you know it tenants are having "open houses" toward the end of a lease, demanding the future tenant (a) sublet for the remainder of the current lease and (b) pay a "finder's fee" to do so. You bring a bunch of people to look at the apt at the same time and say, so who's going to pay me the most?

  • Hugh Akston||

    Yeah, living in the same place for 40 years sounds like about the worst thing ever. People only die when they stop moving.

  • ||

    I thought that was sharks, Hugh. Why are you obsessed with sharks?

  • Hugh Akston||

    It's not just sharks, Epi. It's any organism whose liver constitutes 25% of its total body weight.

  • ||

    So...polar bears? And me?

  • Hugh Akston||

    So you're macrohepatic? I'll add that to the list of reasons to hate you.

  • ||

    It's all the alcohol, Hugh. You of all people should understand.

  • Randian||

    So which one's Will Riker and which one's Thomas?

  • Hugh Akston||

    You know what would have made Thomas so much more awesome? If in that episode of DS9 he ripped off a fake goatee leaving only the real muttonchops.

  • Randian||

    Putting down roots in a decent city is, IMHE, the express route to happiness.

  • nicole||

    Unfortunately, "decent" isn't a permanent state.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Yeah but you live in Ohio.

  • ||

    PWN'D

  • Randian||

    I know that it can be tough finding a decent city in California, Hugh, but don't take it out on me that you have to pay 400 psf for your filthy 'hacienda-style' hovels

  • edcoast||

    Same down the road in Portland. Part of the issue here is everyone thinks we haven't hit the "bottom" yet and is holding onto their house until it turns up. The result is zero inventory in certain price ranges.

  • ||

    The result is zero inventory in certain price ranges.

    Nope. You are missing a few steps. The result is demand goes up then builders try to build...in Portland it is impossible to build because of growth management and nothing is built...so the price goes up and low end buyers are squeezed out of the market.

  • ||

    The best explanation I've seen is that houses are being put on the market for very low since the market was so bad.

    Here is not only the best explanation but what is actually happening.

    For all intents and purposes it is illegal to build homes/apartments in and around Seattle. Jobs can still be found so people keep moving there...so they buy homes to live in demand goes up but without new supply the price goes up.

    Eventually the good job market can no longer feed the price bubble and it will burst.

    In the long run the Seattle home market will be a series of price bubbles and bursts the whole time the cost of living will forever creep up and business and jobs will leave until Seattle turns into Cleveland.

  • Paul.||

    There was a time when people regularly got into bidding wars on property? Is that happening now somewhere?

    Welcome to Seattle. Try to ignore the weather.

    As for "happening now anywhere"-- can't answer that.

  • ||

    The market went to shit....but growth management is as strong as ever.

    As I said 5 years ago the housing bubble was fed by growth management.

    Seattle home prices now proves me right. Welcome to bubbles and bursts forever.

  • SKR||

    It's still happening in parts of Los Angeles.

  • Archduke PantsFan||

    Sadly, this is not a parody

  • Killazontherun||

    I bet Kat Williams gets a heart before the credits roll.

  • Killazontherun||

    But what can you possibly say to express your level of disgust when they go beyond any sense of nausea that you have ever experienced?

  • Cytotoxic||

    I saw that. I don't want to live on this planet anymore.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    That's gotta be a parody.

  • Randian||

    Humanity is just the gift that keeps on giving.

  • Brutus||

    A fitting tribute to our Dear Leader, Kim Il Barack.

  • Randian||

    We interrupt this shrike beatdown to bring you a message from our resident lunatic.

  • Killazontherun||

    If Obama wins, we'll avoid politics for a short time for more productive hobbies at the worst. If Obama loses, suicides. Hazard to guess, but his MMMM, Barrack Obama brigade are entirely dependent on his success or failure for their life support. it could be mass, or it could be sporadic, no one knows. But there will be suicides.

  • Cytotoxic||

    All the more reason to hope he loses.

  • Archduke PantsFan||

    That means Romney wins.
    Be careful what you wish for.

  • Cytotoxic||

    I know, I know. Romney would be an improvement for all his multitudinous failings.

  • Killazontherun||

    That could very well be another Dark Reign, but the end of the current one can't happen fast enough. I can't imagine wading through another four years of this asshole. Give me a new asshole.

    There is no excuse for voting for Barack Obama. If you are a liberal, the LP has provided you with a very good alternative this year in Gary Johnson if you feel you HAVE to vote. Same with Republicans, Romney is not your guy, and he isn't, Gary is closer to your beliefs, and if you feel you must vote what else could compel you besides a desire to have someone as similar to your own thinking in office? Any other reason is a compromise of your best interest to something that is a distant second.

  • Killazontherun||

    And personally, as bad as I suspect Romney will be, I don't think he can top Obama on ignorance of economic factors even though Romney is a centrist Keynesian. Obama will not learn from his mistakes, mistakes born of fundamental ideological fallacies that he will not under any circumstances let go. He still speaks of 'green investment' after personally losing billions in the public monies perusing that croniest policy.

  • Killazontherun||

    'perusing' -- reverse the 'u' and the 's'.

  • Ted S.||

    Did you mean "persuing" or "pursuing"?

  • Ted S.||

    Aw crap, I mean "perusing" or "pursuing".

  • BakedPenguin||

    Is that a joez law?

  • Killazontherun||

    The one and only!

    I saw the problem too, but decided, you know what, everyone can figure it out from there without me holding their hands.

  • Cytotoxic||

    When I have a flu or something else that makes me physically uncomfortable because of the lymph node swelling and I'm lying down to rest, I like to change position even though the new position will still be painful. Same thing with this presidential contest.

  • Archduke PantsFan||

    How can anyone vote against someone who won the Nobel Peace Prize? THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE!

  • ||

    If Obama wins republicans will still hold the house and probably take the senate.

    Republicans and Democrats screaming at each other for 4 years and getting nothing done is not something I worry too much about.

  • Cytotoxic||

    But that isn't good enough. We need some legislation to pass to repeal earlier bad legislation.

  • SIV||

    Nothing done? No they passed "bipartisan" highway and farm bills.

  • ||

    Say what you like about Mary but she's a half-decent editor. That shit is entertaining as hell.

  • Randian||

    I actually laughed out loud more than once, especially at "fuck the pigs!"

  • nicole||

    Me too. It was weird.

  • ||

    It's a shame she can't channel her boundless rage into something useful.

  • Hugh Akston||

    I did that once. The Steak n' Shake people were not impressed.

  • Killazontherun||

    We were. We are just not allowed to be expressive with our feelings in front of the customers.

    After they hauled you away, it was all, 'for a second there I thought he was really going to kill us', and the dishwasher commented, 'shit got real up in here, yo.'

  • Killazontherun||

    You made a former enforcer for the Latin Kings on work release call his mother and tell her he loved her.

  • ||

    It's a shame she can't channel her boundless rage into something useful.

    what?

    I can't think of anything more useful for Mary to do then make fan movies about us.

    Seriously hit and run needed this more then anything in the world.

  • Killazontherun||

    It reminded me of 90's Tool videos. Good job, Mary!

  • Archduke PantsFan||

    I'm speechless.

  • Cytotoxic||

    "Fuck the pigs!" *Machine gun rounds*

  • Randian||

    I have some bad news for us both, though, Cyto: Check out the comments section of this video.

  • Killazontherun||

    But the kittens love poop!

  • Cytotoxic||

    I couldn't see what was so bad but I only skimmed.

  • Bill||

    There's something in there before that line about shooting dogs as well.

  • Cytotoxic||

    "Dude, the pigs shot my dog."

  • Bill||

    All right Randian, that's twice in a single thread. To paraphrase Goldfinger, three times is enemy action.

  • Archduke PantsFan||

    Did anyone else see Garcia knock Khan on his ass?

  • Killazontherun||

    Mary lay on her deathbed mumbling, 'sacré blue'. What did it mean? In all her years she never quelled her passionate soul long enough to find out much of anything.

    She repeated the two words as if that would help. The young nurse beside her asked, "you say something, dear?"

    "Sacré bleu," asked Mary,"what does it mean?"

    "I think it means, 'blue blood'."

    Mary thought for a moment. No, 'sange' is the word for 'blood.'

    She turned to correct the nurse, but she was no longer there. Soon after, Mary died, with no answer.

  • Hell's Librarian||

    Mary can't translate for shit either, I see.

  • Killazontherun||

    Yep. Pretty sad.

  • ||

    Sooo...

    Isn't this a home sale?

    And isn't the advice about how to haggle from the buyers perspective?

    I will admit it was terribly written and if it was meant for a laymen totally indecipherable.

    Anyway everyone is fucked by what the fed has been doing is doing and will continue to do...and further fucked by our government owing 100% of GDP and growing...

    But should every purchase advice include some disclaimer bout infaltion?

    PC prices have been falling for the last million years....is it bad for me tell you to buy the parts at newegg and build it yourself without telling you the price will come down in 12 months?

    what is even more odd Tim is that you digging into this when there is a such a target rich environment.

    Didn't a report come out saying that stock prices are 50% over valued due to inflation?

  • Bill Woolsey||

    Cavanagh:

    It would help to learn some economics principles.

    Yes, it is better for an individual to buy at a lower price. And, of course, to sell at a higher price. But no monetary regime can manage that for everyone at once.

    If you hold everthing else equal and say, lower housing prices are better for home buyers, then it is true, but pretty empty.

    Improved productivity in the construction industry would be better for home buyers, worse for existing home sellers, and good overall. That is true.

    A monetary regime that creates less money that people want to hold will tend to make it cheaper for people to buy things, including houses. This isn't good because all of those people buying houses will earn less from what they sell.

    Improved productivity is good. Deflation due to a shortage of money--the quantity of money less than the amount people want to hold--is bad. When relative supply and demand conditions change, relative prices should change too. But identify relative price increases with inflation and relative price decreases with deflation is wrongheaded. They are both happening at the same time.

    As for the recent past, spending on output dropped absolutely in late 2008 and early 2009. It remains on a lower growth path. The broad Divisia measures of the quantity showed the same change. The major factor was the otherwise unmessured overnight repurchase aggreements and commercial paper. That is, the money created by the shadow banking system.

  • Cytotoxic||

    No deflation is not bad. Deflation was normal in the late 1800s in America and America thrived then.

  • d||

    Semantics are important: Ask, "How flexible are they on the price?" Avoid: "How much less will they take?"

    Hmm...I think Koning Beals meant to say that semantics is less important than *pragmatics* (since that's what she was saying, without knowing the semantics of the word 'semantics', I suppose). Dipshit journalists!

  • d||

    Semantics are important: Ask, "How flexible are they on the price?" Avoid: "How much less will they take?"

    Hmm...I think Koning Beals meant to say that semantics is less important than *pragmatics* (since that's what she was saying, without knowing the semantics of the word 'semantics', I suppose). Dipshit journalists!

  • Bill Woolsey||

    During the 19th century there were some deep recessions and deflation. These were bad.

    However, there were also recoveries and deflation. Those were OK.

    And there appear to be periods where spending on output was growing, but productivity capacity was growing faster, leading to deflation. That is fine as well.

    Having spending on output fall is a bad thing. If spending on output cannot be reversed, then deflation of prices is least bad, and will allow real expenditure and real output to recover.

    But the U.S. prospered from deflation in the late 19th century is way too simplistic. Almost as bad as noting that people buying new homes (or any good) benefit from lower prices. It says little about appropriate monetary regimes.

  • Emmerson Biggins||

    When productivity goes up, prices should go down. If the monetary regime can handle that I'm OK with it. If that becomes impossible, then we need regime change.

  • Reverse Loan Rates||

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement