“Such temporary rate pressures can be price signals” that help markets redistribute liquidity to where it’s needed most: Fed’s Logan
By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.
ON RRPs – Overnight Reverse Repurchase agreements – fell to $155 billion today, the lowest since April 2021, down from the $2.3-trillion range prevailing in May 2022 through June 2023, and down by $2.4 trillion from the peak at the end of December 2022. ON RRPs are well on their way to zero or near-zero, where they were in normal times.
ON RRP balances represent cash that money market funds mostly put on deposit at the Fed to earn the interest that the Fed pays on ON RRPs as part of its policy rates, currently 4.8% since the rate cut on September 18.
They’re excess liquidity the Fed created during QE that financial markets don’t know what else to do with. The Fed has now drained about $2 trillion in liquidity from the markets via its QT, and essentially all of the drainage has come out of ON RRPs, instead of reserve balances.
The spikes in the chart occurred at quarter-end and at year-end for window-dressing purposes.
Money market funds have many other options, including buying Treasury bills and lending to the repo market. They will shift funds to where they can earn a little more and still satisfy their liquidity and regulatory needs.
Money market funds can currently earn 4.80% with ON RRPs, and they can earn a few basis points more by engaging in overnight repos in the repo market. There are $6.5 trillion in money market funds, of which $155 billion are now on deposit at the Fed. They mostly place their funds where they can earn more.
Reserve balances are the banking equivalent to ON RRPs. They represent cash that banks put on deposit at the Fed.
The purpose of QT is to drain liquidity out of the financial system by bringing ON RRPs down to near-zero and by bringing reserves down to merely “ample” from “abundant.”
But reserves have essentially not dropped since QT began in mid-2022. They did drop before QT started. The dropped from the peak at the end of 2021 through mid-2022 as funds shifted from banks to money market funds, and money market funds put their excess cash on deposit at the Fed, which caused ON RRPs to spike even as reserves plunged before QT started.
The fact that reserves are still at $3.24 trillion, essentially unchanged from July 2022 when QT started, shows that there is still aways to go with QT.
“Temporary rate pressures can be price signals” that help markets redistribute liquidity: Fed’s Logan.
Wall Street hates QT, and so earlier this year, there was this big to-do in the financial media how the Fed would be “forced” to end QT when ON RRPs drop to $700 billion or whatever, because it would drain so much liquidity out of the system that something would blow up when ON RRPs drop below $700 billion. And now they’re getting closer to zero or near-zero, and nothing has blown up, and reserve balances are still plump and ready for draining.
But spreads in the overnight funding markets have started to move, especially at month-end and at quarter end. The New York Fed maintains several indices of these overnight funding markets, and we’ll look at the recent details of three of them. Note the daily volume, from $100 billion (EFFR) to $2.2 trillion (SOFR):
- Effective Federal Funds Rate (EFFR) tracks about $100 billion in daily volume of unsecured overnight lending between banks.
- Tri-Party General Collateral Rate (TGCR) tracks about $750 billion in daily volume of repos secured by Treasury securities.
- Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR) tracks about $2.2 trillion in daily volume of a broader set of Treasury repos than TGCR.
The EFFR is held in the middle of the Fed’s target range by the New York Fed’s “open market operations.” Before the rate cut in September, the EFFR was 5.33%. Since the 50-basis-point cut, it has been 4.83%, without any kind of drama and only minuscule intraday variations if any:
The TGCR has experienced some yield mini-spikes, particularly at the end of last quarter when it rose by 11 basis points to 4.92% from 4.81% a few days earlier, building a positive spread of 9 basis points to the EFFR, when normally the TGCR (secured) is below the EFFR (unsecured). It then quickly fell back.
At the end of October, it rose by 4 basis points to 4.85% from 4.81%, building a positive spread to the EFFR of 2 basis points.
The SOFR experienced more movement. At the end of the quarter, it jumped 22 basis points to 5.05%, from 4.83% a few days earlier, widening the spread to the EFFR by 22 basis points. SOFR then quickly settled back down. At the end of October, it rose to 4.90% from 4.81% the day before, widening the positive spread to EFFR by 7 basis points.
Dallas Fed President Lorie Logan has spoken two weeks ago on precisely this issue of temporary increases of the overnight rates. She is a leading voice on the technicalities of the Fed’s balance sheet, QT, and liquidity issues due to her prior gig as executive VP of the New York Fed, managing the Fed’s securities portfolio and open market operations.
She said in her speech on normalizing the size and composition of the Fed’s balance sheet as QT moves forward:
“Such temporary rate pressures can be price signals that help market participants redistribute liquidity to the places where it’s needed most.
“And from a policy perspective, I think it’s important to tolerate normal, modest, temporary pressures of this type so we can get to an efficient balance sheet size.”
These sporadic mini-spikes of overnight rates in the repo market indicate that the financial system isn’t totally drowning in excess liquidity anymore, that there is still lots of excess liquidity but that markets once again are starting to fulfill their role in using rates to direct liquidity from where it’s in excess to where it’s needed.
Enjoy reading WOLF STREET and want to support it? You can donate. I appreciate it immensely. Click on the beer and iced-tea mug to find out how:
Would you like to be notified via email when WOLF STREET publishes a new article? Sign up here.
I wish Lorrie Logan was a voting FOMC member right now. She really seems to have a deep understanding of the monetary system and the kind of level headed judgment to not let politics or the markets sway her decisions. IMHO, she would make a good chairperson.
FED needs to be audited
What you’re talking about is an investigation into its activities and the activities of the Fed governors.
The Fed’s financial statements ARE audited every year.
Congress did force that kind of investigation on the Fed a couple of times in 2010 and 2011, to find out who talked to whom about what and did what during the bailouts because some of the Fed governors were deeply conflicted, such as Inmelt (then CEO of GE) being on the Board of the New York Fed which handled the bailout of GE (GE Financial was the big problem). This stuff was really bad.
The “audits” were performed by the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Those reports are still out there. I covered the second one (Oct 2011, a few months after I started the predecessor website, Testosterone Pit) and uploaded the report and associated documents to my server just to have them in case they vanish. But they’re not “audits” as much as “investigations.” The financial audits are done every year, and you can look at them on the Fed’s website.
Here is my article from 2011 about the GOA report on the Fed. It has links to the actual reports and documents, including Bernie Sanders scathing letter, that I uploaded to my server. The Fed was in real trouble with Congress back then. This led to legislation curtailing what the Fed can do without permission from Congress and the government, and restricting it in other ways.
https://wolfstreet.com/2011/10/21/the-gao-audit-of-the-fed-doesnt-call-it-corruption/
M2 growth is increasing to.
M2 growth for a long while was stagnant it’s growth while the balance sheet of the fed delcines means something is changing and shifting.
M2 increases by $200,000 when your $200,000 CD matures and you buy two $100,000 CDs with the proceeds. M2 is a bullshit measure, which is why no one who understand this uses it. It was conceived a long time ago and has never been adapted to the modern financial pipelines.
Wolf, can you elaborate? What is a better metric to use for money supply? Do you have any articles on it? Thank you sir
An economy creates and destroys money with the ebbs and flows of economic activity, collateral values, etc. That’s natural, and you don’t have to worry about it. What you have to worry about is artificial money creation by central banks. And in terms of the US, you look at the Fed’s balance sheet for that, which is why we cover this here so extensively (we also cover for that reason the balance sheets of the ECB, the Bank of Canada, the Bank of Japan, and the Bank of England):
https://wolfstreet.com/2024/10/03/fed-balance-sheet-qt-66-billion-in-sept-1-92-trillion-from-peak-to-7-05-trillion-back-to-may-2020-below-7-trillion-in-1-2-months/
Wolf: Your statement, ”An economy creates and destroys money with the ebbs and flows of economic activity, collateral values, etc. That’s natural, and you don’t have to worry about it. What you have to worry about is artificial money creation by central banks.”
Is EXACTLY why I am against the Federal Reserve Bank, as well as any other central bank with the ability to manipulate money.
Thank you for putting it so succinctly!!!
If FED would have continued QT at earlier pace and not slow down in June, we would have seen this happen by July-August timeframe.
But happy that FED is sticking to its plan though slower pace. Looking forward for vanishing those 150B too.
Wolf… forgive my ignorance 🙏 What’s the take home for just barely coming off ATHs in stocks, and what’s the FED gonna do following increases in inflation + higher revised inflation??
I will answer for Wolf: the take home is to back up your truck and load up on NVDA
Says the guy that already has NVDA and wants to manipulate you into driving its price higher with your purchase so that he can increase his profits when he dumps it after you buy it. Pump and dump right here in the middle of WOLF STREET. It never ends. All “Anonymous” ever does is pump NVDA.
🙄😆👍
I know it’s anybody’s guess wolf, it almost seems like the market (stocks) is finally accepting the reality of sticky/ rising inflation… ??? Almost seems and looks like in TA that regardless of the Fed not cutting, or pouring gas on a smoldering fire and cutting another .25%, it’s gonna follow through with a much needed correction… ?? Ur take?
Ummm I betcha Vanguard holds the most NVDA in the world thru just index funds.
Doubt much could move NVDA until like 2080 lol, except earnings
It’s amazing Microsoft is still such a strong stock.
Please.. u need some TA experience, and I know u ain’t got it with charts .. or women 🙄🙄😆
NVDA is in an EXCEPTIONALLY BEARISH pattern, and looks like it’s headed to $100. Sooo.. if u mean load up on NVDA .. PUTS … already have puts on QQQ 😊
better to PUTS your money in the 🗑️
lol 🤣
The wealth effect of money 💰 printing is increased asset prices, which enables all levels of government to collect more taxes, thereby reducing deficits and preserving the illusion of prosperity. When asset prices deflate as a consequence of QT, regardless of inflation, the Fed will go back to QE, in an attempt to keep deficits from expanding out the Wazoo. At some point, printing more money will stop working, possibly now. The best indicator that money printing has failed will be a run-up in long-term bond rates (which may force the Fed to buy them, which probably won’t work, because inflation).
The above is my opinion.
What to do when 5.4% cds are called? Looks like the new cds have priced this in already, with 4.4% new offerings. I believe Wolf has commented on this before, but with stocks at all time highs I hesitate to put the liquidity into the stock market. Might have to ride on with Logan at 4.4%. From the figures on Wolf’s charts the banks are still reeling in their 50 basis points.
See that’s where I think you are wrong.
The stock market is setup with about the perfect conditions to climb a good bit.
There is nothing technically even amiss that anyone can point to.
Yeah everyone seems gun shy and trigger happy with the sell button every so often, but it’s really just fear.
It has gone up 66% since 2022 lows, I wouldn’t hesitate to say it may do the inside the park home run of 100% within 4 years since 2022. There could be a fall of say 15% within the 4 years but I think it gets to the 100% (doubling) since 2022 lows.
“There is nothing technically even amiss that anyone can point to.”
LOL! So P/E multiples of 100 is the new normal?
In the 90’s you didn’t buy a company that had a P/E greater than 10. 2001 reminded us why, but then again the Fed put wasn’t a thing yet.
Ah yes, looking backwards to the 90s as some perceived astrological insight into an economy 30 years later.
The AI revolution is here. Wake up or be ground into Soylent.
PE multiples are sky high and beyond any reasonable rationale and that is getting progressively worse as earnings fall for most companies, so time to dump your manic speculative nutzoidal hopium in the garbage bin.
The 90s was a blip on the QE map. 2008-09 was also small stuff compared to now. Look at the 2009-2024 run-up in the $SPX and $NDX. Gold, silver, long-term rates, inflation and tent cities on the sidewalks are saying asset prices cannot rise to the sky. The QE game has to end at some point, possibly now.
Be fearful when everyone else is greedy.
Nothing amiss?
The entire run of the stock market is basically people hoping the feds cut rates soon. None of the AI companies are even producing anything of value. It’s literally the housing bubble and dot com bubble rolled into one. Nothing but mass speculation.
My Ignorance – is all of this “liquidity” permanent, and have to be “soaked up” somewhere – stock market, real estate, treasuries, commodities? And does “chasing higher yields” imply that somethings somewhere” (assets) are going to inflate (or re-inflate if they’ve lost value during this past QE cycle?
Liquidity is never permanent for specific entities that need it. For them, it can vanish overnight, with scary results. But there is a lot of excess liquidity in the system that the Fed created during QE, and the Fed is now removing some of the excess liquidity with QT. It has removed $2 trillion so far.
The Fed’s third (unspoken) mandate is to maintain tax receipts via the wealth effect. In my opinion, there will be reinjections of liquidity if the stock market bubble starts to falter, though I think money printing will fail to avert the consequences of the popping of the current bubble.
It’s about time that the Fed loses credibility and the financial engineering stops. I have called this “the economy leaving Wall Street and going back to Main Street.” I expect a harsh dislocation is inevitable, but we could also revisit the 1930s-1970s, where wealth returned to the middle class, and away from the ultrarich.
One other point, we’re already in a Great Depression (slower economic growth, caused by the central banks, and evidenced by homelessness and the affordability crisis). The last Great Depression restored the middle class. Yes, it’s a painful process, but the outcome is corrective.
Wolf,
Right before the 2019 “repocalypse” the government had resolved a debt ceiling, and the TGA began refilling by draining reserves from large banks. These reserves normally would have been loaned in repo, and I suspect this is one of the contributing factors to the funding shortage and repo rate spike.
We’ve had other debt ceiling battles since, but none while the Fed has been in a QT regime. Any concerns that we might see another episode when the next debt ceiling is lifted and the TGA once again refills?
I suspect the Fed might have to make some adjustments to the SRF, such as opening it earlier in the trading day and/or letting non-bank entities borrow from it, to keep repo rates in check during future funding shortages.
MMMFs are tabulated just like MSB balances were tabulated between 1913 and 1980. They represent a double counting of the money stock.
There’s no difference between retail and wholesale funds. Neither can create new money and credit.
A 2.4 trillion dollar drop in O/N RRPs funded the federal deficits. The deficits must be cut.
Spencer: Yes, the deficit should be cut. We should raise tax rates on corporations and the wealthy back to where they were in 1950’s.
4 qtrs. of accumulated net private savings came in at 4260.473 trillion.
And interest rates still didn’t fall.
I might support that if the rule would also be that you as a human person would have votes in some proportion to the amount of taxes you pay. I would exclude corporations from this, since they are not human persons but are fundamentally extensions of the state.
As it is, it’s well documented that the top 10% of income earners already pay more than their “fair share” (unless one has a wildly opaque definition of what Fair Share even means), while some large % of people provide no support at all to the burden of government and yet are mobilized by certain interests to vote for certain policies with the lie that those policies will put free money in their pockets. Somehow the money never arrives.
Something new does seem to be bubbling in very broad terms. All the old certainties of both left and right seem to be undermined. Everyone hopes that something like MMT and UBI will be the answer because cutting spending by the trillions needed is no longer even possible and who will accept higher taxes when MMT tells us that we can just borrow whatever is needed into existence. Or why even borrow it, a ledger entry will do all the work needed.
Danny: Taxation is not always a Left vs Right thing. Anyone EARNING a full time minimum wage pays more than double (in FICA alone) what a certain Billionaire presidential candidate bragged that he was paying in taxes ($500) because “he was smart”.
…..and I don’t think you know what MMT really is. Hint: it isn’t restricted to borrowing (and that should really scare you).
All books either public or private ultimately have to be accounted for in general ledgers which involve only 5 classes of accounts which are 1) assets, 2) income, 3) expenses, 4) capital/equity, and 5) liabilities.
“As it is, it’s well documented that the top 10% of income earners already pay more than their “fair share” (unless one has a wildly opaque definition of what Fair Share even means),…”
I disagree. In 2021, the top 10% paid 75.8% of Federal income taxes on 52.6% of total income. In a progressive tax system where 90% of people collectively share only 47.4% of all income, it makes sense they pay significantly less income taxes. The relative tax burden is simply a manifestation of significant inequalities in income. I don’t believe it’s well documented the top 10% already pay more than their fair share. If income were distributed even a little more evenly, then the top 10% would automatically see their tax burden as a percentage of total taxes reduced.
Or a progressive tax system whereby the more you make the more you pay. Like before.
Or we continue to allow those who paid so little in defense of this country, that have been able to accumulate so much. Yet don’t want too pay taxes.
dang – …have wondered every day, for too-many decades, about the miserable disparity-ratio of population-to-wealth/and who actually paid our nation’s KIA-taxes…
may we all find a better day.
Federal receipts as a percentage of GDP has remained at the same trend since the 50s. We need to look at federal spending with maybe small changes to taxes.
More taxes will not fix it because the distortions now didn’t exist in the 50s (higher taxes won’t be enough), and tax hikes dampen capital investment, which has also suffered during the bubble years.
We actually need end financial engineering in Washington and on Wall Street.
EXACTLY correct LH!
As Wolf said above, “An economy creates and destroys money with the ebbs and flows of economic activity, collateral values, etc. That’s natural, and you don’t have to worry about it. What you have to worry about is artificial money creation by central banks.”
OTOH it is certainly true that very clear rule of law MUST be applied to banksters to protect depositors, something that has seldom been done even to this day.
VintageVNvet
The Fed are the originators of financial engineering, and they have got the Treasury and most of Wall Street doing it, too (it’s a financial pandemic).
I think that the Fed’s inability to repair the popping of the current bubble will severely damage the credibility of the institution itself. But that will also disable all the rest of the financial engineering, causing first a brutal recession, then the restoration of the Main Street economy….
The end of the Fed’s financial engineering has to be a good thing!
The increasing complexity of the multiple layers of confusion in the rates game, is proportional to the amount of Fed talking heads that are jawboning contradictory theories as to how to screw this up even more.
“ Dallas Fed president Lorie Logan said at the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association’s annual meeting in October that it would be appropriate to operate with only “negligible balances” in the RRP. She also said some demand may be stickier as users value overnight assets or face counterparty credit limits for repo in the private market.”
“Logan also surmised if the remaining RRP balances do not evaporate as repo rates rise, then policymakers could alter the offering rate on the facility to incentivise participants to shift to private markets“
“ From the time the government suspended the debt ceiling in late June 2023 until early April this year, demand for the Fed’s facility dropped by nearly US$1.6 trillion as a deluge of bill supply syphoned cash from the market”
It’s worth putting that all in context with the following statement —because the debt ceiling is going to play a far larger role next year — and all these overlapping stupid things related to r* and repo rate balances are going to be inconsequential to the mechanical realities of the pending budget crisis — and probable sovereign downgrade.
“Historically once interest costs hit 14% of tax revenue, austerity kicks in for Congress. The ability of Congress to increase discretionary spending fades when interest costs crowd out the rest of the budget. Debt servicing costs approached 18 percent of tax revenue in September and the next President will be restrained in his or her ability to increase the deficit moving forward.”
The debt ceiling doesn’t exist in reality because the expenditures that forced the debt to increase have already been specified by the US congress. The Treasury department funds the expenditures specified by the Congress. The drama of the debt ceiling is disingenuous for a Congress to hype their constituents, IMO.
So nearing zero RRPs & a weak Oct jobs report may seal the deal for a Nov rate cut. And if Wolf is correct about the coming jobs rebound, we may end up with brisk Nov / Dec jobs & inflation reports. Can’t wait!
why would draining the Reserves and ON RRP’s indicate a reduction of liquidity if you could earn more interest in other places? It’s clear that reserves are paying more in interest that’s why they haven’t gone down. But to say that they represent liquidity is not convincing. Technically, can’t the FOMC lower the interest on Reserves and therefore lower “liquidity”. And yet Lorie Logan stated that in her speech for ON RRP’s.
“I anticipate the remaining balances will move out of the facility as repo rates rise closer to IORB, but if they do not, reducing the ON RRP interest rate could incentivize participants to return funds to private markets”. – Lorie Logan
https://www.dallasfed.org/news/speeches/logan/2024/lkl241021
You have rules, but in the end, there are no rules. Even the Fed isn’t totally convinced about what they say.
You got this completely wrong. Maybe you don’t understand what reserves are and what ON RRPs are.
Reserves are where BANKS deposit their excess cash at the Fed. Money market funds and other non-banks do NOT have access to reserves. ONLY banks do. Reserves represent liquidity in the banking system.
ON RRPs are open to a wide range of approved counter parties, including money market funds, banks, the GSEs, etc. You can look up the list on the NY Fed’s website. But they have been used almost exclusively by money market funds. ON RRPs represent excess liquidity in money market funds.
They’re both liabilities on the Fed’s balance sheet — meaning, liquidity that the Fed has taken on. When QT drains liquidity out of the financial system it comes out of ON RRPs and/or reserves. Since mid-2022, both combined declined by about the amount of QT.
ON RRPs are expected to go to zero or near zero because that’s their normal state. Reserves cannot go anywhere near zero because they’re how banks pay each other for all transaction via the centralized Fed payment system. On a daily basis, banks move trillions of dollars around between their reserve accounts at the Fed. When you make a mortgage payment, it goes from your bank’s reserve account at the Fed to the recipient bank’s reserve account at the Fed. Financial transactions, stock sales, etc. go through the reserve accounts at the Fed. The balance we’re looking at is the sum-total at the end of the day on Wednesday. We don’t see the huge movements during the day.
But reserves can be a lot smaller than what they are, and QT will bring them down after ON RRPs are reduced to near zero.
https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2024/apr/bank-reserves-start-quantitative-tightening
Can’t banks put their excess liquidity money markets funds, treasury bills, real estate? Lorie Logan stated this in his speech
“In the long run, I believe it will be appropriate for the Federal Reserve to operate with money market rates close to, but perhaps slightly below, IORB.”
From my understand, because of the fed policy of ample reserves, they are going to incentivized banks to keep cash in Reserves rather than banks going to other options. So, keeping interest on Reserves higher than money market rates they can continue with their “ample reserves” policy. I don’t see banks staying in Reserves if they can earn more elsewhere.
Great article. It leaves me with the same sense when I think of the MLB hall of fame without Pete Rose, the greatest hitter of all time. Only Ty Cobb even came close to the 4262 base hits of Pete Rose.
How are they equivalent ? Let me explain my reasoning.
“The fact that reserves are still at $3.24 trillion, essentially unchanged from July 2022 when QT started, shows that there is still aways to go with QT.”
They’re not even remotely similar except in the sense that one has to consider the inability to see the obvious in front of their faces.
Now we can trust the feckless Fed too drain the honeypot for the previously insolvent banks that the Fed suckled and nurtured back from bankruptcy.
Thankfully QT will continue and hopefully with the rate cuts won’t see a slowdown or inflation . Unfortunately Covid globally created too much cash and has unleashed inflation that we need to squash .
They did that already.
Now it’s just that jobs are weak.
Interestingly I was watching Bernanke on a fidelity/Pimco bond selling podcast (strange but ok), so Bernanke gets into if the world’s appetite for US treasuries slows down. IF that happened interest rates would have to be raised.
As Wolf has shown, the covid cash has been retracted by QT, What lies ahead of the nearly 3 trillion added by the Fed before covid, during the fiscally responsible President’s hot economy.
One interpretation is that the economy was lurching into a recession as a result of QT1. Yellen refused the White House demands that she stop QT and re-institute QE. She was replaced, tout de suite with Powell who re-instituted QE.
That’s my understanding. If I’m wrong, feel free to shred my argument with a more logical interpretation.
Since economics is always dependent on politics, there is about to be a change come Tuesday.
Will the inflated asset bubbles continue to defy the laws of Capitalism ?
I don’t know but I bet that the stock market sets new records for overvaluation by historic measurements.
Well, I’m not actually betting one way or another. Harmless speculation about the future of the overindulgence society.
What I hope is that America continues too be the land of opportunity.
Which too me, a WW2 child, means that the everyday people that make up 99 pct or maybe 89 of our society are doing well.
As the fed unwinds its balance sheet. It’s likely we will see deflation in the next 2 years. As many of the inflation issues in the economy were supply chain related during the pandemic. We no longer have supply chain constraints. Even if the fed eases on the short end it’s unlikely to lead to and inflation run up again if longer term rates stay elevated which will still put pressure on the economy. Trading for a reinflation trade and much higher yields is misguided. Oil is currently trading 70, goods inflation especially in autos (used cars was one of the biggest increases in inflation during pandemic). If yields spike here I think long the belly of the curve will be a great trade as it’s likely inflation will not materialize as expected.
Your deflation theory is marred by the fact that inflation has been in core services for the past 3 years, and goods have already been in deflation since mid-2022 as supply chain issues eased in 2021 and early 2022. That’s history.
Since mid-2022, inflation has been in core services — insurance, housing, healthcare, education, and other core services that have nothing to do with supply chains. If you ever read an inflation article here over the past two-plus years, you would have known that.
Core services are 65% of CPI, and that’s where inflation is. Good luck getting deflation in services. That has never happened before in the data going back to 1968:
*Mic drop lol
Wolf said – “An economy creates and destroys money with the ebbs and flows of economic activity, collateral values, etc. That’s natural, and you don’t have to worry about it. What you have to worry about is artificial money creation by central banks.”
—————————————–
@ Wolf – Please give a moderately priced seminar or set of seminars on Money Supply, M2, etc., either in San Francisco, via zoom, whatever ……
Count me as your first customer. I know you have done phd caliber reports over the years, but it would help me and I am sure, others to go over the matter from start to finish.