How Can We Fix Inflation? With Economist Steve Hanke | The Problem With Jon Stewart Podcast

Watch The Problem With Jon Stewart on Apple TV+
theproblem.lin...
Jon is joined by Steve Hanke, a Professor of Applied Economics at The Johns Hopkins University, for a chat about why we find ourselves in this current inflation disaster and how we might get out of it. They get into whether the Fed is blowing it, the role of money supply, and whether anyone is looking out for the little guy in all of this monetary maneuvering. They don’t always agree, but Jon manages to score a passing grade from the professor.
Listen to the full episode on Apple Podcasts:
theproblem.lin...
Subscribe to The Problem with Jon Stewart podcast:
theproblem.lin...
Subscribe to The Problem with Jon Stewart’s KZbin channel:
theproblem.lin...
Follow The Problem With Jon Stewart
Instagram:
theproblem.lin...
Twitter:
theproblem.lin...
Follow Apple TV:
Instagram:
theproblem.lin...
Facebook:
theproblem.lin...
Twitter:
theproblem.lin...
Giphy:
theproblem.lin...
Follow Apple TV+
Instagram:
theproblem.lin...
Apple TV+ is a streaming service with original stories from the most creative minds in TV and film. Watch now on the Apple TV app:
apple.co/Apple...
#economy #inflation #podcast

[@BALD_PAB]

Exxon Mobil: highest profit in 7 years Chevron: highest profit in 7 years Shell: highest profit in 7 years BP: highest profit in 8 years Chipotle: 26% profit increase. Raising prices. Starbucks: 31% profit increase. Raising prices. McDonalds: 59% profit increase. Raising prices. Shell/Mobile/BP: 60% profit increase. Raising prices. There's not a labor shortage. This isn't inflation. It is 100% corporate greed.

[@Jeddin]

You are supporting his point about the money supply being the culprit. Corporations will always be greedy. If there is money out there to be taken they will increase prices and take it. Increasing the money supply creates the ability for corporations to keep increasing their prices to make record profits by getting their hands on more of that money supply out there. If money supply is increased and corporations see that you have an extra dollar in your pocket they will increase the price to take that dollar from you. His point is the same point you are making. It’s not labor shortages. It’s not supply. It’s corporations being greedy because the corporate response to increased money supply is to increase their profits to take that money for themselves even though they didn’t need to based on supply side economics.

[@Rkcuddles]

So you are saying these profit seeking corporations that are ALWAYS trying to cut costs to increase profits, are the devil because their profits increased? I don’t get the argument here… it’s almost like apple telling us the new iPhone is the fastest iPhone produced in the last 7 years. Well duh… why would you make a crappier iPhone with years of improving the manufacturing and design and… many of the companies we are talking about laid people off and stopped risky investments and improved their operations … that’s why the profits are higher.

[@It-b-Blair]

And this guy is clearly dancing in the oil money… this interview got so frustrating so quickly 😮‍💨

[@It-b-Blair]

@@Rkcuddles you’re not looking at all the information. Cherry picking information won’t help you or this conversation. Watch some Beau of the Fifth Column and Adam Ruins Everything just covered the Patagonia bs. With all the information at your fingertips it’s not wise to play dumb just so you can have a corporate silver spoon shoved up you know where.

[@Sol-Invictus]

Yeah US oil is sold on the international market. So we nationalize it like OPEC+ has and we are good. No joke then we can price control within our nation and sell it for direct funding just like OPEC+ nations do. Capitalist can't think outside private/personal profits.. Boeing too you have one job and well that's not flying well... Hand the companies to a nerd social servant that just wants to do their duty well! No profit drive just a drive to do your best for your fellows, your nation, and humanity.

[@andimayer1119]

The best analogy I have for this interview is, a self-absorbed games developer describing the game-breaking bugs in his "masterpiece" as features.

[@michaelschneider-]

@andi mayer ... +1. Agreed,,, kinda, sort a, yeah.

[@vbevan]

So he's basically the Todd Howard of economics?

[@ThisIsmiXTV]

@@vbevan *SIXTEEN TIMES THE DETAIL*

[@JustOdie]

SIXTEEN TIMES THE INFLATION, FOUR TIMES THE SIZE OF THE RECESSION OF 2009

[@rogersmith7396]

Hes totally old school ivory tower capitalist. People don't matter, just his numbers.

[@fademusic1980]

because inflation TOTALLY isn't exacerbated by the fact that the top 1% hoard 99% of the liquid wealth in our economic circulatory system in draconian clutches. Inflation is only a problem when every day people get hand outs, but one person having 200 billion dollars to their name is totally a non issue. Got it. I would love to see who has bought this man

[@JulyTiger1986]

I don't think he said income inequality does not exacerbate the effects of inflation on the little guy. They kind of danced around the topic of redistribution of wealth without ever actually addressing it directly.

[@francoisbouvier7861]

The guy is a reaganite, say no more.

[@bd3470]

He's a capitalist in the vein of Mises and Austrian economics. His argument is basically, rich people earned it and deserve to be protected

[@jedinxf7]

wait really? you don't see why prices of diapers and wonderbread would be more responsive to the 200 million Americans in the bottom two thirds of the country by wealth having an extra thousand dollars apiece than if jeffrez bezos had more savings and investments to the tune of doubling his already excessive, never going to be consumed wealth? that seems incredibly obvious to me.

[@Hangrid1]

The problem with inequality and distribution of wealth effect the player, not the game. Like in monopoly if one person have all the money and others don't doesn't really affect the house prices and rents directly, but if the bank keeps giving out money every turn, say instead of 200dollars a round it's 2k or 20k, to one or all players, people compete to buy houses and the prices keep growing, that's what he explained.

[@vasilisavassileva9231]

Mr. Hanke mastered a 3000 % inflation in Bulgaria in the 90s, he is genius and his tools still work here

[@qwerty_and_azerty]

Hanke is technically correct in that inflation has to do with money supply. However, Jon was trying to point out how the monetary policy that results from this theory hurts the poor and helps the rich. And Hanke very firmly steered the conversation away from that concern. Because to him, it’s not a concern. It’s the inevitable cost of capitalism and he and his friends are rich. They made it on top, and don’t care about those in the underclass. Or at least they don’t care enough to want to change the system in any substantial way. Ultimately, this means the two of them were basically talking past each other the whole interview. Very frustrating.

[@jacobjones630]

quickest way to remove excess money from the money supply is progressive taxation of the richest. Inflation raises wages, and wages are sticky so we can't have that, better jack up the interest rates and crash the economy and push unemployment high enough to remove the bargaining power from labor. It has nothing to do with growth, it has nothing to do with inflation. Money is about power

[@InverseAgonist]

Yeah, this one sucked. I wish we got a bit more of "Roll 212" Jon, but he never shifted into being a truly adversarial interviewer. He absolutely should have smacked down the condescending "signal and noise" stuff once it became clear that it was just a glib and dismissive device.

[@alejohernandez75]

Inflation has more to do with government involvement in the economy. They increase the minimum wage you get price increases. They increase regulation requirements you get price increases. They increase taxes on businesses you get price increases. They dump a bunch of free dollars into the markets you get price increases. They shutdown the economy you get price increases.

[@ccsullivan9164]

26 minutes in and I have to get out of here. If Henke ever addressed the $7 trillion plus that 45 added to the deficit I wouldn’t believe a word. Thank you for your comments and insight.

[@jacobjones630]

@@alejohernandez75 who said anything about taxing business. Tax individuals. Tax estates and offshore bank accounts with trillions stashed away. Tax the people hoarding all the wealth and if they are such great entrepreneurs like they keep telling us they are, they’ll go and make more money.

[@Cypress77]

Inflation is caused by increased money supply, and yet, the majority of new supply is disproportionately going to the top 1%.

[@BALD_PAB]

Hoarded wealth causes inflation. When the wealthy hoard their wealth, that money is taken out of the economy, driving inflation.

[@franklin9400]

@@BALD_PAB If we took all the money from the richest Americans billionaires. Which we would have to dissolve their huge corporations to do so. Along with the jobs they provide. Which is where most of their wealth is. It would barely make an interest payment on the USA debt.

[@ninemoonplanet]

It's "trickle down economics theory" in practice, the ultra-wealthy get tax breaks, stock buybacks, and the rest get the crumbs left over. Reagan introduced this scheme for the donors so the GOP had the money to run campaigns.

[@wynnefox]

Honestly, that was my thought too. If we're adding to the supply while not removing it, we need to redistribute some wealth here rather than just add water to the money pool. At least that's the way it sounds to me.

[@tomconverse7862]

4 replies show but only ACTUALLY 1 SHOWING. WTF KZbin?

[@Abderian]

I can't help but regard with skepticism someone who thinks his ideas have no flaws and everyone not following them is just wrong and stupid, or choosing to be wrong and stupid to save their reputations. He dodges or dismisses every issue that might take the shine off the theory he's pushing, and, yeah, if you ignore everything wrong with an idea, it's going to look perfect.

[@that_heretic]

I don't take economic experts seriously who don't understand how a major supply disruption can affect an asset price. This guy is seriously arguing without irony, that inflation is a 1:1 relationship to issued currency. And they tell me we live in a meritocracy. Ha!

[@hawkname1234]

@@that_heretic Yeah. That damaged his credibility pretty early on. Jon made the correct point - we've HAD exploding money supply at multiple points with no inflation. But now we explode the money supply because there is an international supply + demand shock all at once and it's the money supply that created this once in a generation inflation? And the supply and demand shocks didn't cause anything? Nope.

[@willingoYT]

My loss of respect began when he claimed "the relationship between monetarty supply and inflation is 1 to 1" not "0.96 to 1" and not even a confidence interval like "between 0.8 and 1.1 to 1". Any economist who can't use basic stats is sketch

[@barnabusdoyle4930]

Yeah, this guy is a clown and doesn’t understand how money supply works nor how our economy works. Jon hits him with great point after great point and he sticks his head in the sand. This is also the type of mentality that is running the Fed and working as White House economic advisors.

[@SingularSolarus]

@@willingoYT Maybe he was considering the prospective audience of the podcast. If the confidence interval isn't

[@JoelVeena]

I just totally cracked up at the ‘monetary bathtub’ - Jon you are awesome. ‘There’s a lot of money in there now, you might want to get in there.’ ‘No.’ 😂😂 15:25

[@Nembula]

The facts, Jon, the fact that he and his rich cronies might have to absorb some financial pain. That is to be avoided at all costs. This guy is a rich man's best friend.

[@rogersmith7396]

Yep. No doubt an Ivy Leaque man.

[@nandayane]

I have been hearing this bullshit my whole life, about the deficit. One way we could reduce the money supply that this economist doesn’t talk about: Tax the fucking rich, just tax them, tax them 40%, Tax their dividends, Tax their capital gains, Tax their assets. If it really is a money supply issue, then why not take money from people who are making out like bandits?

[@mattharker9212]

Beautifully said. Another ‘War on the Poor’ - not the irresponsibility of these ‘economists’. I’d ask for my college money back if he was my professor….the weakest argument I’ve ever heard for the 2008 crisis. It’s not the fault of the banks & Lehman brothers - it was the fault of the American people. Not due to the financial scams the banks were running.

[@WindFireAllThatKindOfThing]

"I've seen things you wouldn't believe. These people don't lose money. They don't mind if everyone else does, but at the end of the day, they don't lose." - Margin Call, 2011

[@tomfoolery5844]

Jon knows this he’s just trying to get as much info he can directly from the horses mouth. Jon did this on the Daily Show all the time. Both of these guys know they don’t agree with each other, but they know there’s value in learning from one another. As much as I’d like Jon to air out this Reaganomics geezer, there’s much more value in a conversation such as this.

[@benderboyboy]

Watching this, all I can reminded of is that money is made up, and we made up the rules, and this guy is the one making up the rule to make it harder for people who are poorer than him.

[@Name-ql7jf]

The “signal” is John bringing up how these policies hurt regular people. The “noise” is this guy ignoring it and diverting the conversation.

[@MyContestPix]

Steve Hanke is part of the Cato institute. That's all you need to know about his ideology and biases. Of course, he going to blame the money supply when a Dem is POTUS. Didn't seem to have any problems/ issues when we bailed out Wall St in 2009, endless wars, bloated defense or the $1.9T tax cut by King Trumpo. This guy is a RW extremist/ fraud. Next!!! The Cato Institute is libertarian in its political philosophy, and advocates a limited role for government in domestic and foreign affairs as well as a strong protection of civil liberties.

[@pauldorasil5114]

You're missing it. Money is made up. And the Fed is making up the rules. They are making up the rules in a way that make life harder for people poorer than us. And this guy, Hanke, is one of old guys calling them out for doing it.

[@darkmater4tm]

Yes, to an extent, but also no. Economies follow rules of nature that cannot be tricked. Money is merely a model for those rules of nature and is bound by them. Libertarian, whose views Steve Hanke echoed here, are arguing for no extra rules, and to let everything happen naturally. The problem is that, in a perfectly free market, the poor always lose. It takes deliberate policies and effort to help the lower classes.

[@ohdaUtube]

@@darkmater4tm his point was that if bonds were available for people to buy instead of the Fed, those who bought it would no longer have cash to move inflation up (reduction in spending). If that happens, inflation levels aren't at current levels according to him, which not only helps poor people now but also helps them later by not needing to induce significant unemployment later, which crushes poor people as well.

[@ST-fq2vc]

If this guy is the expert and he offers no way to fix the problem, then that is why we are where we are. So glad he's not my cardioligist

[@CarlosAnglada]

OMG RIGHT??!!!

[@TNM001]

the solution is wage increases...as soon as possible.

[@VigEuth]

He has a solution completely driven by his ideology: Let the poors suffer. Of course Keynesian / FDR solutions and simple things like right to housing and and food are completely achievable, but this clown would never acknowledge it.

[@killzone866]

@@TNM001 actually its the opposite. cut as many jobs as possible and reduce wages. Get the money out of the system and get fucked in a recession. That would not happen though.

[@ST-fq2vc]

@@TNM001 but that my friend only increases the money flow, thus increases inflation......

[@Riggsnic_co]

A perfect storm is brewing in the United States. Inflation, bank collapse, severe drought in the agricultural belt, recession, food shortages, diesel fuel and heating oil shortages, baby formula shortages, available automobile shortages and prices, the price of living place. It's all coming together and it could lead to a real disaster towards the end of this year (or sooner). With inflation currently at about 6%, my primary concern is how to maximize my savings/retirement fund of about $300k which has been sitting duck since forever with zero to no gains.

[@Jamessmith-12]

These are the conditions in which life-changing money is made by those who remain calm, patient, and take controlled risks. Volatility goes both ways. The bigger the red candles, the bigger the green ones.

[@Ashley186fre2]

Investing in stocks can be a wise decision, especially if you have a dependable trading system that can lead to successful outcomes. Personally, I've been working with a financial advisor for about a year now. Starting with less than $200K and I'm now just $19,000 away from making half a million in profit.

[@JacquelinePerrira]

please who is the consultant that assist you with your investment and if you don't mind, how do I get in touch with them?

[@Ashley186fre2]

Carol Vivian Constable is the licensed fiduciary I use. Just research the name. You’d find necessary details to work with a correspondence to set up an appointment..

[@JacquelinePerrira]

She appears to be well-educated and well-read. I just ran a Google search for her name and came across her website; thank you for sharing.

[@MsNeha95]

Does anyone else watch these interviews and just marvel at Jon's capacity for patience?

[@rsr789]

Patience? I'm shocked Jon doesn't fly over to the guys house and (justly and rightly) beats him to death.

[@winstonfaulkner537]

💯 I would have lost it with this prof

[@samsprague3158]

@@winstonfaulkner537 no because i don’t even have enough to sit through the video. These jokers are paid to waste our time and distract us from real progress. Not Jon, he’s done more activism than me by far.

[@dionysusnow]

He interrupted the guy a lot, could have been more patient.

[@jamesmcdonough1761]

Like sitting in a classroom with a Nobel winner explaining things in a down to earth way. There will always be debates but the professor is going to eat your lunch in the end.

[@Kat1775]

There is no way that this guy can help us solve our financial problems. He is so close minded he doesn't even know he's in the box, let alone think outside of it!

[@chill_pill4193]

😂😂😂

[@jramone8567]

So don’t believe the economist? What is your solution?

[@MyContestPix]

Steve Hanke is part of the Cato institute. That's all you need to know about his ideology and biases. Of course, he’s going to blame the money supply when a Dem is POTUS. Didn't seem to have any problems/ issues when we bailed out Wall St in 2009, endless wars, bloated defense or the $1.9T tax cut by King Trumpo. This guy is a RW extremist/ fraud. Next!!! The Cato Institute is libertarian in its political philosophy, and advocates a limited role for government in domestic and foreign affairs as well as a strong protection of civil liberties. If people dig deep enough, you’ll find the Koch brothers funding/pushing their toxic policies to enrich themselves at the expense of everyone else. Hanke is the latest stooge/sycophant to do so. What a bleeping loser! Conservatives still believe in voodoo economics, ie Trickle-Down Theory which means endless tax cuts for the wealthy elites/corporations. Must support the Kleptocracy at all costs!! Nothing but a bogus wealth transfer upwards. Works like a charm in any economic environment over the last 40+ years. How are we going to pay for it?? They ain't. Not their stink'in problem, but yours!! C’mon, Libertarians believe in “free market”, little regulation, pull yourself up by your damn bootstraps and little to no government. They don’t give a damn about the “money supply” except to use as a ruse to get what they want like lower stock prices, stock buybacks and paying dividends, baby!! Now we have a new bogeyman - inflation caused by supply chain issues, the war in Ukraine, endless price gouging and a rapacious OPEC with rising oil prices. Oh my!! How can they profit off that? By throwing the damn economy into a bleeping man-made recession, thus forcing massive layoffs, freezing wages while controlling costs as they keep their prices/profit margin high. Price gouging anyone?? Who does this recession benefit?? The wealthy elites/ corporations!! Well duh!! The little guy gets screwed - again! Genius!! So, this whole stupid discussion has nothing to do with the damn money supply. (too much money chasing too little goods). Completely bogus! Seems the average middle/lower class doesn't have enough money to pay for gas, food, shelter/rent, exorbitant - airline fees, college and drugs/healthcare. CC debt is rising so people have less money not more. Their flat wages certainly haven't matched the CPI/inflation rate so Hanke is just blowing smoke! Just a diversion/red herring they trot out as they carry out their dastardly plans/schemes to enrich themselves. 99.9% of the people buy their BS hook-line-and sinker. Always voting against their own best interests!! We’re screwed people, both figuratively and literally!! You Reap what you Sow!!

[@dameongeppetto]

@@jramone8567 break up the monopolies (tech, food producers, oil, etc) and tax the price gouging (windfall profits tax). Inflation at a 40 year high and corporate profits at a 70 year high are correlated.

[@Gmo50]

He kept talking about money supply being the reason for inflation as if it was some major revelation. That's the first thing you learn in any economics class. What he fails to grasp (or more likely refuses to admit) is that the reason the money supply is so large is because the vast majority of it is increasingly tied up in corporate. Then whenever Jon brings up any topic on the equity of the money supply he just reiterates his elementary point that everyone knows and moves on without actually talking about it. This interview was Jon falling into insanity trying to get this man to discuss the distribution of the wealth

[@HelloWandererAustralia]

I suddenly felt really old and tired watching this but I hung in there, got the bathtub analogy, enjoyed the dulcet and strangely meditative tones of your guests voice and WHAM! I actually fucking learnt something! And I have to say that I just love the idea that Jon thinks that if he just pays attention and concentrates HE MIGHT JUST BE ABLE TO WORK OUT HOW TO FIX IT. You are all of us Jon, you really are. Love from Australia x

[@TheNocturnalpheonix]

🤘😘🔥

[@malanalan1]

What did you learn? Commercial banks magically create money? Regulating and constraining gamblers causes inflation. You would think that only central banks can create money- wrong. According to that guy any banker can do. The lesson to all of us is become a banker then you can create money for yourself and lend it to others. Money is not made by corporations, money is transferred from one man's pocket to another man's pocket.

[@matthewmcclain9852]

@@malanalan1 thing about bank money (loans) is that money must be repaid and destroyed. No new net assets.

[@JewTube001]

He probably sounds meditative because he has the exact same accent as David Lynch, who is a TM practitioner.

[@theprojectproject01]

@@matthewmcclain9852 With one exception: the Fed. Ok, Ok, the circle does close eventually, but it can take years. Whether this is a feature or a bug depends on your view of government in general.

[@SatiricalSpartan]

Man… humility is a virtue you don’t notice how important it is until you listen to someone without any.

[@noorykorky5056]

What do you mean exactly? Also, what does humility have to do with inflation?

[@myfakeempire101]

The dude being interviewed is not humble at all and staunchly refuses to consider alternative explanations. Hence, he had no humility because he left no room in his analysis for other explanations. The conversation was about inflation. Dude talking about inflation has no humility. There is the connection between humility and inflation. Was that really too difficult to understand? You can agree with this dude 100% and still understand this comment. I hope it’s an English issue with the meaning of “humility.”

[@fhowland]

What a dumb Comment

[@whramijg]

100%

[@retroboomer3197]

If what this man is saying is true, then it's a tacit admission that our economy is not based on supply and demand, but rather a price gouging apparatus that says businesses get to price gouge me just because I have more money in my pocket.

[@joelvig]

I don't think he'd disagree. When it comes to gouging I suspect he'd want to ensure true competition (not oligopoly) to ensure proper pricing of products.

[@naomibee8881]

Yes.

[@rogersmith7396]

What do you think monopoly is for? The free market is a fantasy which has never existed.

[@michaelmarler9550]

Yep. Probably because it's observably true and the only argument worth having is to what degree, and how can we fix it without completely uprooting the whole thing. Understanding that there are going to be significant short term externalities that are incredibly negative for many it would otherwise help in a longer term. It's the same issue with infrastructure. It's a cancer that gets worse the longer you delay treatment. But, many of the most effective tools in dealing with it could also kill you.

[@user-ts5yg5bj6s]

Nuh uh. If you hold constant the quantity of goods, more cash in our pockets means we'll bid up prices.

[@bdubs8500]

This guy sort of confirms my observation about many economists. They seem to favor policy that helps the rich maintain their wealth and power and have a hard time thinking about the little guy and how to improve their lives or design policy that is not so harmful to those at the bottom. This seems in line with the fact that many (most actually) grew up wealthy and attended elite institutions like Harvard.

[@frevazz3364]

And they all have the same ideology from the Chicago Business School where regular people don't exist.

[@sebastienlundby-thomas7823]

When he replied to Jonhs question is it possible to conceive of a way to get out of inflation by shifting some of the pain off the little guy and he immediately replied "no" that encapsulates your exact point. If I toss him a bone that maybe he has thought about it over the course of his career without finding an answer he could still say "we haven't come up with it yet," or "ultimately I believe companies being profitable is good for ppl" and we could debate that, but he just can't conceive of that.

[@bdubs8500]

@@sebastienlundby-thomas7823 I was rolling my eyes after every time he spoke. Its incredible to me that someone like him can honestly say there isn't a way to tame inflation without hurting middle to lower income. At the very least, we should be trying to do so. The problem with people like him is that they don't care about the little guy. He can't conceive of anything different because he has money and doesn't really care. I also don't understand how you could believe such a complicated problem can be explained/solved by a one size fits all solution. It's intellectually lazy. I'm a scientist myself (specifically, a mathematician) and people like this guy really discredit the entire field of economics for me.

[@t.dmytryshyn2615]

@@frevazz3364 Exactly these types of theories from Milton Friedman screwed the average American but certainly made the rich richer.

[@tuckerbugeater]

@@frevazz3364 this isn't the 70s

[@davidkea1607]

I really like Jon Stewart. I don't always agree with him, but I appreciate his openness to the other side's arguments. Great interview.

[@picneec13]

Please keep this going as a series including rebuttals. I think I’m going to learn a lot.

[@francoisbouvier7861]

New flash. Big money and big power take care of themselves. One day, when the great unwashed raise up they'll wonder what went wrong.

[@francoisbouvier7861]

Jon has had at least 2 other interviews with opposite and compelling arguments. They seemed much more coherent than this baffon's dogma.

[@picneec13]

@@francoisbouvier7861 already knew the bad news. Just trying to rebut Republican arguments

[@thethegreenmachine]

I'd love to see Jon interview Richard Wolff or Mark Blyth or Robert Reich right about now.

[@matthewhodge6374]

Yeah, interview someone about Marxism "Yeah it's never worked before and people get shot when they try to flee it, but let's try it again."

[@JerikoFeng]

I was thinking I'd love to see Robert Reich on the same chat with this clown Hanke. I think he'd get a lot more push back than he did from Jon.

[@ryana42]

Not Reich or Wolff, Blyth would be way way better.

[@thethegreenmachine]

@@ryana42 I think I'd prefer Blyth because Jon wouldn't let him talk over our heads.

[@thethegreenmachine]

@@JerikoFeng Yeah Reich would contradict him stronger than Jon did.

[@just4guitar558]

The dude that put ALL of his weight and influence behind “REAGANOMICS” is NEVER going to be anything other than a GRIFTER. He’s among the top 2% because of the way he convinced an entire populous to sign their worth away. Jon Lived through this shit, and knows it all too well. “COMPLEXITIES” is Jon’s way of saying the word BULLSHIT to a man that doesn’t truly deserve that respect.

[@matthewhodge6374]

Nah, just lefties want to inject social policy into economics, which skews economic outcomes, and hurts everyone. When you have the government do something like force mortgage banks to loan to low-income mortgage applicants, the mortgage banks create a sub-prime market, and then when the first downturn hits, the sub-prime applicants then foreclose. Boom - 2008 happens because governments injected social policy into economics.

[@duncanbleak3819]

Exactly!

[@hollyhold6960]

Trickle-down econ is the biggest lie of all. Just repeat enough + reality changes. Geez. They can't be rich w/o the workers, we make it all work. Power coupons.

[@jeanninesilkey8536]

@@hollyhold6960 That is correct.

[@penguin12902]

@@Dave-hb7lx I've never understood why people believe that old tired lie that "tax cuts create jobs". Why would a company hire people just because they get a tax cut? They hire people ONLY when the demand exceeds their ability to produce a good or service. They need to increase PRODUCTION, so the hire more producers. That's the ONLY time companies hire.

[@orangefortune]

Awesome interview! As an economist myself, I like to raise awareness about what a simple tool as Taxes can do to avoid "screwing over the little guy"

[@nathanlonghair]

THANK YOU! I kept thinking this guy is so razor focused on inflation and supply, he cannot fathom any other levers to pull

[@yophono5929]

That was screaming in my head the entire time. If inflation is only money supply and we cant help the little guy by increasing money supply there is really only one solution tax the rich and give it to the poor.

[@evilapple3427]

He is following the Milton Friedman's view on economics. Milton Friedman is heavily against government intervention because in his view, governments have no incentives to spent money wisely - when you spent your own money on yourself, you spent it efficiently and effectively; when you spent your own money on other people, you will spent money efficiently; when you spent other people's money on yourself, you will spent it effectively but not efficiently; and if you spent other people's money on other people, you will spent it neither effectively nor efficiently....and unfortunately the last quadrant is what the government falls under when they spent tax dollars.

[@chrisborello8306]

I fully agree, taxes would be an ideal and positive choice for the government to enact. Not only as a tool for decreasing the allotment of privately held government bonds but additionally to redistribute wealth, diminishing the inefficiencies inequality presents. However, this is one major aspect of the debate which I believe was not touched upon being the separation of the Fed and the federal government. The Fed has two constitutional objectives; to decrease unemployment and maintain healthy inflation. With all due respect to John Stewart I believe that at times he might have conflated the responsibilities of the Fed with those of the government. In my mind it is the governments job to react to what the people need (aka the stimulus) and the feds to mitigate negative effects on inflation and unemployment from a purely monetary perspective.

[@neotagatg3238]

People like this will never allow more taxes they deep down want to kill our country and get to one with corporation in charge 100%. John here is 100% on point there a very easy way to take care of this and not cause widespread pain raise taxes on the rich. John tried again and again to point out the rich are richer than ever their profit are historic. Meanwhile all the expert can do is argue the rest of us need to hurt so they don't have to. This is how we ended up with the Guillotine the idea that the rich should never hurt but the people should.

[@raskov75]

So glad to hear the lions' opinion about how it was all that free grass that made the antelope disappear.

[@SayAhh]

Not sure what's worse, that he believes all that or that he is covering for greedy banks and corporations. Hank Paulson and the Bush regime also played a huge part in screwing not only specific players on Wall Street that they didn't like, but also almist everyone on Main Street. Inflation cannit be blamed on one single factor, plus the CPI can arbitrarily include or exclude goods or services in order to spin the story and aid an agenda.

[@TheTimelapseTraveler]

Nicely said

[@adamm6329]

Which one of them is the lion?

[@raskov75]

@@adamm6329 not Stewart. I mean I’m no fan of his and as much as I hate centrists these financial ghouls are a different species afaic.

[@marshcurt8930]

Don't act like you understood a word he said. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@jplabre]

Oh Jon Stewart, I'm so happy you exist and are still giving your time for this show and a bunch of great causes.

[@robbiejennings3]

Me too!

[@gfride1]

Me three!

[@Serialkoala]

Woulda been great if he and Colbert had used that rally they held to run for President+Vice!

[@mslch]

@@Serialkoala Got my vote!

[@scambammer6102]

"inflation is preceded by increases in money supply" to the extent that is true, it is correlation not causation. Govts don't print more money just for the hell of it. They print more money to deal with real or perceived crises, like natural disasters and supply shortages. I bet if you look at each instance of prolonged inflation you will find that increased money supply was preceded by some kind of social crisis. This dude would just let everyone who lost their job from covid get evicted

[@joshuaguzman-rolon2919]

PLEASE have Professor Richard Wolff on!!! We need to have his take on inflation and refute the claims here because he certainly will argue the pain is not necessary.

[@ployonion]

I Thought Steve Hanke represented him extremely well and I thought Jon asked all the right questions and it was a respectful conversation. Thank you 🙏🏻

[@DanA-nl5uo]

I noticed that while he complained there was too much money supply causing the infection the solution wasn't for the government to remove money from the supply by taxing excess profits which would decrease the monetary supply. His solutions always by definition have to benefit the wealthy and increase inequality

[@ermining1]

Yes that was a dumb solution but so is taxing it's to late now. The money supply started growing not because of a few small spendings on ppl, it came for the trillions to the companies, which was the biggest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich in history

[@DanA-nl5uo]

@@ermining1 it isn't too late to tax the money back away from the wealthy and the corporations that is what needs to happen now. Also make stock buybacks illegal again

[@iamjeramy]

Taxes don't remove the supply of money unless the government destroys the money coming in instead of spending it. Taxes will end up being passed through government programs to government contractors through more wartime funding and whatever programs they can blow money on, thereby continuing to pull from our pockets (or in the best case, corporate pockets - which means they up prices to pull from our own) and then transfer that through the government to other corporate interests. While I agree that taxes on corporations and the rich should be higher, that taxrate only serves to reduce the deficit, not reduce inflation. With the major caveat being that if the rising taxes are earmarked to specific social programs to help people who are struggling, which is what I wish they would do (but due to the nature of people in power will never happen, in my opinion). -Sorry for the long reply.... it got away from me, lol.

[@DanA-nl5uo]

@@iamjeramy taxes offset government deficit spending and as a result definitely reduce the money in the monetary system. You can't say deficit spending causes the monetary supply to increase and deny that taxes are the alternative to deficit spending.

[@iamjeramy]

@@DanA-nl5uo I'm definitely NOT saying that deficit spending causes the money supply to go down. I'm saying raising taxes doesn't reduce the supply. With no other change in goverment laws and programs other than raising the tax rate, the money just goes to the government pool of funds which gets spent on established government programs (which ends up reducing the deficit). The vast majority of those programs go on to put money into larger corporations' pockets, so you are just swapping money between rich people when you raise corporate taxes. The exception to this (in my opinion and in my hope) is if you create a new program to funnel the money to that actually helps people. Unfortunately that's not where we are with how the government operates right now. Everything is set up to pull the maximum amount of money from us little guys.

[@BillKSC]

Bring Katie Porter in, she has a chart for this

[@oscarinacan]

she is nothing short of amazing

[@gilbertmoreno3621]

Exactly.

[@HumboldtRefugee]

"Fuck the little guy. The world is built for the investor, not the home owner and laborer." - Steve Hanke

[@skoltrollkallamik4450]

The little guy = "noise" in his argument

[@beddythecorgi4269]

Just because you don't like it it doesn't make it untrue.

[@zacharyboruta2975]

Eh, actually not at all what he said here *shrug". And in fact, what he said was a refusal of Keynesian Economics. Actually a rebellion against the worst kind of rich people out there, who would (and actively do/have) murk the waters to continue to grab your money's value without blame. John Keynes was born into riches, and with no formal history in anything economics (other than being quite rich himself) managed to guess at the economy in such a way that would benefit... himself... and the government, who also liked the sound of this dollar-value-reducing blame-removal, latched onto strictly in order to benefit who...? Again, no comment on how well Steve here succeeded in communicating this, but that he tried alone is actually bad ass! And also very much in favor of any "little person" lost in noise, and therefore in line with the principles of Mr. Jon Stewart himself.

[@gedonckers]

Investor makes money, issues credit, finances projects. We know economy without investors, it's Medieval Europe, where GDP was consistently at the level of poorest countries in the world today. Homeowner and laborer doesn't organize building sewers, doesn'f drive innovation. So as frustrating as it may be to the poor little guy (which all of us are, realistically), none of us would really want to live in an economy where it is otherwise

[@watamatafoyu]

Accurate paraphrase. "Get rich or die trying" is another one.

[@Mookiecat]

Mr Hanke does have some valid points regarding money supply. The Oil cartel is real, what really occurred is the cartel tolerated low prices with the express purpose to drive the higher “cost of production” producers (shale oil) out of business. This savvy long term approach results in way less US domestic production, less competition, and sustainably higher prices. Had we taxed oil imports that were priced below a minimum cap that reflected the shale cost of production, we could have protected that industry. On the other hand, higher fuel costs drive conservation and reduce consumption over longer time periods which is really the most reliable means to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. What’s also “missed” is that after the 2022 substantial surge of inflation, the month to month inflation has ebbed and we’re seeing some mild deflation the past few months. When measured year over year, which is how the Fed has been measuring, inflation has dropped a bit in rate, and will continue to drop as we get to summer 2023 where it will be substantially negative as 2023 goods/services will be way less than it was at the 2022 peak.

[@paulmaakestad1624]

Fascinating discussion. When the professor said he would've issued bonds instead of checks in 2020 and 21, though, my question would've been whether they'd've been tastier with ketchup to people out of work.

[@Dbb27]

Apparently this man has never had a day without food.

[@Name-ql7jf]

Imagine not factoring in that bonds don’t pay rent. This guy is detached from the reality of middle and lower America, and does not care about us. This is the face of oppression in America, telling us we deserve it.

[@amyschmidt1113]

My thoughts exactly

[@2stitchesforward...304]

I believe he said for us all to "hunker down" and get through it. Then we could use all those bonds cool cool cool!

[@catherinecrawford2289]

he said it himself when he said if you spend every dollar you make, that's inflation. How to make it possible for that person to save some of that money? That's an answer he did not have.

[@Stoned_apeTheory22]

I demand a Richard wolff rebuttal immediately lol

[@totonow6955]

Absolutely!

[@StephenDix]

Yup. I REALLY wish Jon would moderate a long discussion between two big brains who think each other is wrong. I'm just a dumb data analyst so I will never make sense of this stuff if the big brains can't give me a straight story.

[@toddymust4446]

💯 John is uninformed & weak!

[@jorgemartinez42069]

I find him just as rigid in his explanations as any other economist, just in the other direction. I'm glad someone in the field is out there advocating for working people, but just because something feels good doesn't make it true and I often find Wolff to be more driven by ideology and dogma than by exploring real technical analysis of the systems.

[@Brett_S_420]

F-ING A!

[@monitoradiation]

Dang, the gaslighting is going so hard I think he might have to join OPEC. I think what he's actually saying is that consumer buying power is ultimately the source of inflation, not actually the money supply. He can't let you have money because discretionary spending is inherently inflationary.

[@rogersmith7396]

You just are'nt smart enough to have money. Only the rich are.

[@adidas2684]

His "fix" is literally to reduce buying power of the consumer. By buying bonds from the gov, the average person would have LESS income to spend. They would be tying up their money in government assets that will, at best, be worth the same money spent on it in the first place. He expects the average consumer to "hunker down" and budget and not spend. That is just the other side of the circle on a deflationary mode. Instead of using the Fed to start the deflation process, he wants to shift responsibility to the consumer. In any case, regardless of where the process starts, consumers will reduce spending if they have less money or fear having less money in the future. This guy is definitely in the conservative pocket trying to push the narrative that ordinary people just have to bite the bullet and suffer while the top 1% keep raking in profits. I mean, for fuck's sake, econ 101 teaches the impact of supply/demand on inflation. It is real. However, what I will sort of agree with him on, is that in some sectors, supply chain interruptions aren't the actual cause of inflation, but there are many that did have, and still continue to have, interruptions that are impacting inflation. I work in supply chain management. I see this every day. The US imports a ton of product from China and they're still struggling to get raw materials which interrupts the whole pipeline and impacts costs of goods resulting in inflated costs. The other side of inflation is definitely profiteering of big businesses. There's no ifs ands or buts about it. Money supply is also a contributor, but it certainly is not the sole contributor. Even if he wants to focus on money supply, lets look at where that money supply went. $1600 bucks for every day consumers is pennies compared to the billions in PPP loans that were unnecessarily distributed and forgiven (stolen). The government can help workers, especially those out of work from a pandemic, with subsidizing their paychecks while not giving away billions to businesses that don't need it. That would reduce money supply real easy.

[@woodlandgangsta3931]

That's exactly what he is saying which is BS.

[@woodlandgangsta3931]

@@adidas2684 OH he's wasn't speaking of offering bonds to the public now.. He was referring to the start of the pandemic which would have been a recipe for another great depression. Sounds great for long term investing but I needed food, clothing, and shelter and my creditors don't understand bond talk. They only understand cash. I was patiently waiting to here his theory go off the rails.just like I thought it would. This guy has great depression vibes to me. We all would have been in soup lines if the fed had listen to this man.

[@jawstrock2215]

That's not what he was saying at all. People having money has nothing to do with it. It's new money coming out of nowhere, devalues the worth of all the existing money, and thus your 1 dollar bill, can now only buy a portion of what it could buy before the new money was created.

[@jituji70]

I learned so much from this episode (not saying much since I'm very poorly educated in Economic concepts). This is probably the best 45 minutes I've spent, since I also was able to finish 3 loads of laundry and wash a sink full of dishes while playing this video intermittently. THANK YOU JOHN STEWART!

[@mosab643]

The sad thing is the world of Econ is full of ideologues like this guy. They usually pick a side earlier in their careers or their academic lives and stick with it from there on out, despite the emergence of new information which might contradict their side. You don’t see that in hard sciences.

[@watamatafoyu]

@@mosab643 Yep, US econ courses are almost completely right-wing supply-side Reaganesque propaganda. Friedman is one of the worst economists ever. The philosophy shifts money up to rich so it can float in vortexes while the rest of us scramble around for scraps.

[@anti-classist]

You learned that this guys shouldn't be respected as an economist.

[@gotzmadskittlez3406]

@@mosab643 Yup. When Jon mentioned the fact that inequality skyrocketed during and after the Reagan administration's actions, the guy skipped over it with "You've been reading the ads but not the facts". He had no real answer as to why his precious theory did what it always does in practice: Pumped money to the top and screwed the little guy.

[@Markdfadf]

​@@gotzmadskittlez3406 His precious little theory is what Volcker used to end double digit inflation and give the country 20 years of almost uninterrupted growth. We live in the future. It worked.

[@marieugorek5917]

I love /sarcasm/ that Jon says, "the problem is that big corporations are making record profits, but when they aren't they get cash from taxpayers," and this guy hears "the problem is Putin and oil prices."

[@belkyhernandez8281]

It's all those things.

[@willd.8040]

The oil companies are absolutely price gouging. OPEC just recently decided to cut oil production yet we saw gas prices skyrocket two years ago. While they saw record profits. How could they make record profits when fewer people and companies were driving due to the pandemic, and they SUPPOSEDLY weren’t just raising prices of gas because they could? If their costs go up, and demand goes down, the price increase wouldn’t lead to record profits. It’s simple math.

[@philippebrehier7386]

WIKI : "Steve H. Hanke is a senior fellow and director of the Troubled Currencies Project at the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington, DC (...) He was a senior economist with President Ronald Reagan's Council of Economic Advisers from 1981 to 1982 (...) So, basically, We should do the opposite of what he says.

[@ninemoonplanet]

Cato Institute = Koch brothers. Right-wing hard-line people who believe in "smaller gov't" (read no gov't) and few if any regulations regarding banking, stocks, corporations, business and profits, and especially wages and worker safety. In fact, if you combine the Cato Institute, the Federalist Society, and Judicial Watch, you get a few billionaires pumping billions into undercutting voting, appointing hard-line judges, and cutting funding for schools and all public services so they're moved to private ownership for profit.

[@MsSgent]

If Ben Carson says my kid needs neurosurgery I'm going to hear him out. I may not take his advice but dismissing him out of hand seems unwise. You do realize that he is basing is economic theory on the same one as AOC -- modern monetary theory.

[@philippebrehier7386]

@@MsSgent And if I want to know if there is a (valid) proof that a god exists, should I ask an evangelist that "earns" money thanks to donations ? Despite his biases ? Not a good analogy either.

[@rdean150]

Oh he's a director at the Cato Institute? Why, that's the organization created by the Kochs, the most trustworthy billionaires in America! What's that? The Kochs did what? Oh. Oh my. They funded what now? Oh. My god, that too? Ok, scratch my original statement. We need to burn this. Burn it all to the ground.

[@anthonytwohill9726]

@@MsSgent No, and a bad comparison. Dr. Carson is a board certified surgeon with decades in the practice and demonstrable proficiency. If he effs up really bad, his license to practice can be taken away (which is an important part of being an actual professional). Economics is not a profession and nobody can stop him from ruining nation states because he's seriously wrong. I get the sentiment, but I think you haven't thought this through.

[@backbeat3254]

This really needs another economist. Or a rebuttal. Neoclassical theory isn't the only game in town, and an advocate of neoliberal monetary policy isn't necessarily the best voice right now. There are some throw away comments that need unpicking, like the whole issue of Chinese economic policies and their impact not only within China but elsewhere. Like the issue that inflation isn't a global phenomenon, when obviously a bunch of countries are dealing with a similar problem in a similar way. And he's saying supply-push is the only cause of inflation, when demand-pull is another inflationary lever. Great interview, just filled with "facts" that are more like hypotheses.

[@joelvig]

Yes, I'd love to hear J Pow supporter say how a lot (not a little bit) of cheap money is good.

[@kuanjuliu]

Finally, a reasoned response with a clear understanding of Prof. Hanke’s words and where he is coming from. Not saying I agree with you (or Hanke) but there is so much noise in this comment section (including, irrelevantly, criticisms of Hanke’s delivery) that I despaired anyone was really paying attention. I wasn’t convinced Jon Stewart could make finance interesting, but now I hope he does more such economics/finance interviews.

[@chrislubs1341]

Insight by "Communist Professor Explains Causes of Inflation" kzbin.info/www/bejne/oJSblJqFqL2Enc0, Ask Prof Wolff: Wages, Prices & Inflation” kzbin.info/www/bejne/bGrRoJ59acmDZ6M

[@concernedcitizen9374]

He lost credibility when he said inflation is not global.

[@jman2542]

Economics is always fascinating to me. It's not an exact science, nor is it as simple as Hanke makes it out to be. Economists can be on opposite ends of an issue and both will be right and wrong at the same time, usually because of the assumptions they make in their research. But I absolutely appreciate the logical, scientific approach to understanding economics. It usually always leads to an insightful and informative debate.

[@scorch4299]

its fairly exact. if you double the dollars out there via printing, then each dollar will be worth half as much :P Meaning food prices will increased 2x (you will still have the same amount of dollars, just theyre buying power is lower)

[@diytwoincollege7079]

My wife owns a retail store. During the pandemic, it was nearly impossible to buy the goods we needed to stock the store. When the goods started coming in, shipping prices caused the prices to soar. We had to raise prices. Shipping prices have come down, but the wave of price increases hasn’t subsided. I don’t see the Federal Reserve having much to do with it.

[@missq5200]

Thank you for this comment. With my limited understanding, it does seem like the issue isn't the portion of people who have extra to spend, but those who've decided to continue raising prices because they know *someone* will pay it. I don't understand how making things harder for consumers who can and cannot afford it is the answer, then. Not expecting a response, just something on my mind and this comment underscores my personal impression.

[@BryanFarmLife]

Shipping prices were high because of the price of diesel and gas.

[@bob_bobsen]

@@BryanFarmLife as a cover yes. When you look at Maersk’s 21 to 22 to 23 profit actuals and estimated, it becomes clear it’s demand, and gouging built on high demand

[@schofell84]

@@BryanFarmLife Its not proportional. Fuel costs are minimal compared to how much money went into their pockets, normally in the form of stock buybacks.

[@akash_goel]

​@@schofell84 Stock buybacks is how they spend money, not make it. It pushes the stock price up, so the shareholders individual assets grow, but the company as a whole doesn't make more profit.

[@martman123456]

Someone get this man a Werther's Original.

[@ym160]

Don't worry, I got Circus Peanuts for this clown.

[@marissaED]

I snorted.

[@sandollor]

Fucking killed me.

[@malanalan1]

@@ym160 This clown is a fraud. Why would anyone hire him?

[@Nikephorus]

SMH. Over regulation of Dodd-Frank? That kind of makes me chuckle. There was basically no regulation before the 2008 crisis and Dodd-Frank put in very basic rules and regulations, mostly to protect consumers from abuse from financial institutions. What a crazy overreach.

[@ninemoonplanet]

Ok, bank regulations. Two countries that had stiffer bank regulations NEVER went through the "financial crises" of 2007-8. No monetary crises, no financial services failures, no bankruptcies, property defaults. Which countries? Canada and Australia. Both had regulations that demanded any financial institutions have at least 30% of the outstanding loan monies IN the banks to ensure the banks were kept solvent. The 2007-8 crisis brought in very weak regulations, but better than none, as before. Credit Default Swaps were traded wildly on markets, where various "property bundles" were bought and sold without any actual funds to cover them.

[@vbevan]

But without Dodd-Frank, the banks wouldn't have had to worry about keeping a reasonable amount of cash on hand and could have kept freely buying debt from themselves with cash that didn't exist. It's a well known fact that the Adam Smith quote about the benefits of a well regulated markets always misses the end, where he finishes with "except banks, they should have no regulation and it's totes reasonable for them to use the economic system like a casino".

[@samanthaB7712]

I would love to see a panel of: Katie Porter, Peter Zeihan, Jon Stewart, Jerome Powell, and Hanke. Stewart to keep it on track, Porter to break it down, Zeihan to keep it real, Powell to convince us to keep getting screwed for the overall good, and Hanke to tell Powell to slow the F down. Then we can know what really happens in the Room.

[@kweightthree]

Its almost like he ignores everything that doesn't fit his world view, no matter how much more it makes since.

[@walterwang2011]

Who?

[@HnH1369]

It’s not that. Hanky just exists to look at the work in a job creators first and only That’s why he can speak in macroeconomic terms Without providing any solution whatsoever, only what he would have done Guys like this provide cover for the businesses who then bring them in as consultants to scout political candidates. It’s all sophistry

[@observing_paradoxes]

I love how at the end he ALMOST admitted that the solution under his own theory is wealth redistribution. Also, that he said sell treasury bonds but not RAISE CORPORATE TAXES.

[@intricatic]

Well, he did spend a lot of time crapping on Dodd-Frank and lamenting over-regulation "all over the place." When people like this guy talk about inflation, I'm nearly convinced they have in their heads that inflation is de facto just an increase in the money supply, regardless of whether it impacts prices or not. The terms are ambiguous from the outset. I wish Jon had hit him out of the gate about price inflation and not just inflation more broadly. Looking at it structurally like that necessarily ignores the human beings at the center of all economic activity. Why would someone increase their prices? I know if I ran a shop, I wouldn't even consider the money supply when thinking about the prospect. The money supply is some nebulous thing out there in the ether. If my costs go up to produce a good or service, I might increase my prices. But I might also do it if I felt like consumers could absorb the increase without diminishing my volume of orders.

[@stevechance150]

@@intricatic If your costs went up, because of inflation on your raw materials coming in to you, and you raised your prices proportionally to compensate, then your profits would remain "flat", or level. That's NOT what we're seeing. We're seeing record high profits across multiple segments. It's as if all the C.E.O.s in unison said, "Everybody is talking about inflation, let's take our prices up a notch and see if consumers flee". And C.E.O.s doing exactly that here kzbin.infopsYyiu9j1VI?feature=share

[@ALL_CAPS__]

@@intricatic that's what is called "whatever the market could bare". And it is the mantra of capitalism. They will charge you whatever you're willing to pay. No matter if that affects you negatively or positively. To capitalism, it's all the same. Maximize profit and cut costs. That is why we need common sense regulation. The system will eat itself alive if you let it.

[@charlidog2]

The taxes on corps and the rich must be marginal or they'll just pass them on to us.

[@jeconomics2850]

There’s no evidence that corporations and their profit margins are a determinant of inflation so why should we expect corporate tax reform to do anything?

[@nickit8871]

People with disabilities who rely on public assistance aren't allowed to save their money without consequences to their benefits. They aren't allowed to increase their income beyond a certain limit, keeping them in poverty. Inflation hits this group particularly hard. I don't think that Hanke understands what "hunkering down" looks like for this group. I appreciate you speaking up for the underdog, Jon.

[@allanwilmath8226]

Really? You want to use Japan as an example of a working economy? A society currently suffering negative population growth because the young have no futuer and the old are either committing suidced or stealing so they eat in prison?! Jon, where'd you get this guy from? Seriously....... Don't even get me started on China, yes they are not printing money which explains why people can't get their money from Chinese banks! Again, not a good example genius. It's nice how this rich white guy conveniently overlooks the many more trillions of funny money the Fed used to buy junk corporate bonds than was spent to keep working people from being homeless. If this guy doesn't know the banks were the cause of the 2008 crash due to outright fraud I don't need to listen to him. Lehman was alloed to go awsay because Goldman Sacks runs our economy and Lehman was their only competitor.

[@AlyssaSummey]

Thank you for this observation. 100% accurate.

[@johnstibal2131]

I love Jon's responses! He can actually laugh and make fun humor even though he doesn't agree with what he's hearing. I wish Most people on either side of our political spectrum could handle discussions this way.

[@vietimports]

jon please invite jeff snider to talk about all of this, i dont think this professor is listening to what you're saying. i think he just has his points lined up and throwing them out regardless of what you're saying lol.

[@MikesterMF]

Agree 100%

[@ViruzFitia]

Yep, his and Emil Kalinowski are good info. He talks about the bond markets specifically and how they're used in the back-end

[@jlr06005]

Yes, though I appreciate that Jon had guests who don't always agree with my view point. I like to hear what other sides have to say. I'm this case I felt it lacked a lot/any substance.

[@vietimports]

@@ViruzFitia he talks more than just the bond market. he talks about the mechanics of finance, the monetary system, currency itself. all of which involves bonds in some way, but he goes way deeper than just the bond market

[@vietimports]

@@jlr06005 this guest just straight up dismissed a lot of what jon was asking lmao and just mocked his questions or didnt even bother addressing his concerns about alternative views of inflation. this professor was actually awful

[@kennethhudson5513]

A great discussion would be with Robert Riech and Steve Hanks with John Stewart

[@jonathanbaker8939]

I want to see Hanke go against Reich. I would argue Reich would win.

[@InverseAgonist]

Not that I don't like Robert Reich, but he is very much in the realm of "pop culture expert" at this point, and with a very intense polemic angle. I mean his son is the head of College Humor, it's very clear that showmanship runs in the family. This is not the kind of personality I want in a debate. I'd rather they pull somebody who's esteemed within the circles of heterodox economics.

[@VigEuth]

Actual tweet from Steve Hanke: "Supply-Side economics has a flawless record." 🤡

[@rogersmith7396]

"There is no supply chain disruption".

[@Sicaughtik]

@@rogersmith7396 "There is no war in Ba Sing Se."

[@WindFireAllThatKindOfThing]

And I couldn't help but find it rich that Steve claimed Jon was saying a 'bunch of noise' when Steve approached this whole interview with the same level of businessman-turned-college-professor level buzzword speak common to ALL economics professors who's continued employment hinges on making 3-step economics sound like some infathomable Machiavellian astrophysics problem by loading up on the lingo and slow walking the explanation of what really can just be mapped out on a flowchart.

[@annemarie1507]

@@WindFireAllThatKindOfThing Great 4-line one-paragraph sentence

[@ragerequiem6323]

The keep great records of their mistakes

[@thomthum2000]

Hanke & Stewart, they’re a real Laurel and Hardy. Can’t wait to see more from this comedic duo.

[@christinahaftmann4065]

Hanke needs to talk with Katie Porter! 🙏

[@rsr789]

Nah, his mind has turned into stone and will never be flexible again, best to permanently remove him from the living for his part / actions in the death, starvation, and misery of the general American populace.

[@sanjayt6472]

Jon, Very good good topic. I am fan. Answer to issue bond to fund the pandemic was great. Why didn't they do it. Ppp loans did anyone do any analysis how was used?

[@Buttlather]

Quite frankly, he would embarrass her. She has made weak points, and his proven to have a very tenuous grasp on the issue.

[@DHPersonal]

I think she makes more sense than him. He seems to care very little about the difficulty that his methods would cause for the average citizen and is instead more focused on businesses.

[@MinionNumber3]

@@DHPersonal he also contradicts himself repeatedly, and she'd call him out on that. Little guy get screwed when line goes down and again when line goes up? Oil prices are due to inflation, but oil is an international commodity and inflation is determined within national markets? Or that oil prices are due to inflation and inflation is caused 1:1 by increased money supply, but also there's lower production and oil is impacted by supply and demand? This is the logic that comes from following Friedman economic theory, that comes from a mind that was convinced in the efficacy of Regan's "Golden Shower" economics and has desperately warped itself to hide from the apparent flaws.

[@billclinton-f8n]

You cannot cut your way out of recession you've got to invest your way out of recession, the Conservative party are in the dark ages on policy they've got to think again. My primary concern is how to maximize my savings/retirement fund of about £170k which has been sitting duck since forever with zero to no gains.

[@viewfromthehighchairr]

A strategy to protect against inflation is through the U.S stock market, especially the S&P500 & various ETFs. Investors must know where to put their money and how to distribute it in order to protect it against inflation while still making a profit, especially during a recession.

[@AlbertGReene-p8w]

@@viewfromthehighchairr The truth is that people are finally waking up to the fact that our systems are breaking down in thousands of different ways all around us. Personally, the financial market seems like the only way to go with my long-term horizon (accumulated about £557,000 in earnings since May 2021), but if you don't have that time luck, it's a tough market out there down almost nowhere feels safe!

[@devereauxjnr]

@@AlbertGReene-p8w I've known I've wanted to start investing for a few months but just haven't been brave enough to start due to the market so far since mid last year. I have 60k i want to transfer into an s&s isa but its hard to bite the bullet and do it. £557k is a huge milestone , Please whats your strategy ? i will love to have an insight.

[@AlbertGReene-p8w]

@@devereauxjnr Yes, a Fidelity financial advisor named "NICOLE DESIREE SIMON" put an end to my fears about investing, and after making more investments, I was able to reach the high six-figure mark in less than 3 years. A licensing advisor satisfies the necessary security criteria; hence, reimbursement is guaranteed if I'm dissatisfied with the service, so I'm much better off hiring one.

[@devereauxjnr]

@@AlbertGReene-p8w I just copied and pasted her full name on my browser, super impressed with what I've seen so far. thanks for sharing!

[@modawgblue]

This guy has his theories established and will never get off of em’

[@colinm6989]

Milton is his god.

[@brando_handle]

Unfortunately he sold his soul to these theories decades ago and admitting their faults would also admit that he has failed in his previous roles

[@SolidAir54321]

It's very old school. It's like the stuff I was taught in economics 101 decades ago.

[@programking655]

Because those theories are correct, whether you like them or not

[@YourBestFriendforToday]

​@@brando_handle Keep carrying Yellens water.

[@williamscustomwoodworking]

“Everyone is wrong but me.” I summed his responses up.

[@Erotemic]

That's not fair. Hanke came in with reasonable data to back up his core thesis. He's restricted his scope to one metric: inflation, and cited reasonable evidence to support that inflation is causally related to the supply of money. Within this scope it's difficult to refute the conclusion without stronger counter-evidence. A better critique might point out how that singular metric does not capture the complexities of an economy and that any argument he made against more complex - and risker - methods of stabilizing the economy are based on a risk-averse mindset caused by already existing in the upper class that does not feel the current economic pain. Hanke has no incentive to promote or investigate untested economic stabilization mechanisms and every incentive to point out how previous experiments have failed, which causes him to push the (perhaps) unfounded conclusion that there doesn't exist a way to stabilize the economy without causing disproportionate pain to those who already have the least assets. He seems (based solely on this interview, which perhaps is also unfair) unwilling to explore any solution that may involve risk or untested waters. The failure to explore or consider those solutions is what I see as the major weakness in his position. That being said, I do think that any experimental solution should be guided by fundamentals, and supply of money versus its value seems to (my non-economist sensibilities) be a fairly strong constraint.

[@rickthorn6522]

Thank you Jon. This was extremely helpful. Thank you for standing up for Veterans.

[@scuddyleblanc8637]

Its a good thing that Jon was so uninformed and misinformed to ask the right questions so that the economist could give the truthful answer.

[@BlueRidgeBubble]

​@@scuddyleblanc8637 Supply side economics rapes economies and is totally based in short term gains which is unsustainable It also doesn't apply to corporations, so it's bullshit Just because you agree with someone, doesn't mean they're right The man came up in different economic situations and the same modes of thought aren't always going to work, they can't. Life and civilization are progressing too quickly for that.

[@TruckeeFam]

Inflation today is caused by corporate greed, not just supply chain issues. Corporations are recording record profits, so we know that the money being raised by the higher prices isn’t being passed on down the supply chain. The money raised by higher prices is stopping at the corporations and going into their pocket. That’s how we know it’s not supply related inflation. It's a good time to take a beat up 401k and do a Roth Conversion if your stocks are really beaten down. Then you'll only pay taxes on the much lower current prices, and your Roth will be tax free.

[@Americanpatriot723]

Precisely! Our main focus at the moment should be strategies to manipulate our current situation, many people are making millions from this down market, but information like this doesn't make the news.

[@MatthewVinson]

@Valerie Sullivan The uncertainties that come with this current market are yet another reason why my daily investment decisions are guided by an investment advisor, as their entire skill set is built around being long and short at the same time, using to both a profit-driven strategy and removing risk as a hedge against the inevitable downtrends, coupled with proprietary insights/analysis, it is utterly impossible not to outperform. Brought in over $1.5 million in ROI, since using an investment advisor for about 2 years.

[@84gaynor]

@@MatthewVinson Nice one mate, what is the procedure with the investment adviser like?

[@MatthewVinson]

@@84gaynor It's a fairly simple process, my portfolio only reflects what she trades, not just some particular securities of my choice. "THERESA MARY CHAMBLEE" has been amazing so far, she has influenced my portfolio a lot.

[@84gaynor]

@@MatthewVinson That's fine, I curiously looked up the name and came across her webpage, her credentials/testimonials seem solid with positive reviews, I just left her a note. Thanks a lot

[@seedorf1010]

This is a prime example of the adage “To a man with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.”

[@rdean150]

To a professor with a prepared statement about the money supply, every question looks like his prepared statement about the money supply.

[@0ntimetaiment921]

​@@rdean150 But that was the topic, no? Jon was bringing up other issues which might also be true and important, but which were simply off-topic. The video is called "How Can We Fix Inflation?" The guest answered that question. If the topic had been: "How to help poor people during an economic collapse?" Jon would have needed another specialist. I personally liked, that he did not stray from the main issue and hammered his point home. Too many lies have been told about inflation.

[@TheJonHolstein]

@@0ntimetaiment921 but the professor ignores that the is an ongoing energy and oil crisis, that there are still supply issues. If those were solved and there was still inflation, his points would be valid. But hisntheory/model can't handle ongoing issues, so he simply ignored them. Thus he is just another person telling us lies.

[@0ntimetaiment921]

@@TheJonHolstein But there is a difference between general inflation and a rise in prices in certain areas. He gave good examples how these two things can be separated depending on monetary policies. The only "trick" he used was defining inflation in a way. That is not a lie though, as I think that is the only honest way to defining it.

[@DankoStojanovic]

​​@@TheJonHolstein He acknowledged all those things but states that they do not create long lasting inflation. Maybe you can claim that he is wrong but he certainly addressed all those issues.

[@trifacto]

These supply side guys can never explain the Golden Age of FDR and Keynesian economics where a decent amount of profits went to investments and wages.

[@programking655]

Actually they can, it’s not that difficult

[@TheSashapooch]

Thanks, John for taking me on a spin around the planet old Steve Hanke is orbiting! It was fun watching the 'money supply' guy contort himself into a pretzel to make his ideology fit. I particularly enjoyed how he glommed onto Japan and Switzerland like two wooden planks keeping him afloat after a shipwreck! Steve's prescription for a cure, 'you ordinary Joes have to suffer pain!' Only if you come down from your well padded ivory tower, Stevie and join the rest of us feeling the pain. Been there, done that, sweetie, won't fall for it again. I really enjoyed how you skewered this old fart, John. Keep it up!

[@jwins04]

It’s like Jon is talking to a robot with 3 programmed responses

[@rogersmith7396]

Thats what he is.

[@woodlandgangsta3931]

The guy is partially right but his ideas would have led us back to another depression. The feds weighed both options and chose a year or two of inflation instead of a depression. There are no winners here....just the least of two evils. In the process cooperations are racking in massive profits. .

[@dogeared100]

So arrogant. Just can't listen to anything he says.

[@brando_handle]

Its almost as if he wants viewpoints he disagrees with to come on his show so he can talk about them

[@mohrmedia2676]

Nope. Sounds like you just don't have the patience for it.

[@8088I]

The "Velocity of Money" (Lifting of 'All' Boats) is hypercharged when it flows from the bottom-up and is severely squelched when it is 'trick'led-down.

[@MarkSentesy]

So fascinating how helpless he is about the little guy always being screwed. He appeals to this being bad so often, and yet asserts that there is very little, almost nothing people can do to do anything about it. If he's right about how the economy works, the way the economy works needs to change.

[@Floccini]

He said that if the Fed gets us back on the 5%/year economic growth that would be good of the little guy.

[@OzarkGenerations]

There's one thing that bothers me, going to Jon's point about bailing out corporations: That permits them to continue to consume resources, continue to add to the money supply, while they bank the bailout dollars. If making the little guy feel pain is good, then it's equally good for the corporation. Allowing them to crash will free up the resources they'd normally consume. This unused supply reduces demand, and that reduces prices. However, the fat cats won't like that rough treatment. They'd never apply that part of the money theory.

[@DavidDcruz]

The answer is to raise interest rates to reduce private money supply and increase direct money supply to individual people to offset the reduction in money supply to corporate America

[@jamescrawford8959]

'Bank the bailout' is spot on, but also raises question of what the corps (public entities) did with the capital injection from Uncle Sam. Profits are reported as a net in any given quarter. Businesses can retire capital debt, pay dividends, build a reserve for some purpose with the net proceeds. It is not always a rake off, but a build up of capital that might be used for future expansion, hence jobs. 'Profits' and net income are often treated as one and the same. Even so-called business channel news obscures this big difference.

[@shimes424]

@@jamescrawford8959 they've all had over a decade of stock buybacks, but still nobody's reinvesting. Even railroad companies can't keep their cars on the tracks anymore

[@tankkl9659]

Exactly...like why would billionaire sht on a 9_5 person making $15 per hour SMDH....so we have billionaire vs 9_5 person making $15 per hour....... It's all BS

[@tankkl9659]

IN OTHER WORDS IF BILLIONAIRE IS IN FINANCIAL TROUBLE THE GOVT BAIL THEM OUT BUT IF 9_5 AKA $15 PER HOUR PERSON GET IN FINANCIAL TROUBLE NOBODY HELP THEM?????? WTF KINNA BACKWARDS ISH IS THIS??????..

[@qwerty_and_azerty]

42:28 instead of fixing prices, you could fix the profit margin. That way companies can’t use inflation as an excuse for record breaking profits. And it’s doesn’t cause the artificial distortions in the market, since prices can still float freely. But God forbid we regulate the market even a little bit, right?

[@JC6one7]

This is like the video with the Economist. You walk away feeling like the expert doesn’t “get” our/John’s perspective.

[@Martcapt]

Economists like him basically only care about the big picture. I have several colleagues like him and it's not that they don't personally care, just that their line of work is geared in that way. It's often avcompanied by shit politics but not always. In the big picture, maybe 2 million people die, but overall it's better and that's what it is. Btw, probably the opposing view would be keynesian economics, where, in this case maybe we stimulate supply, in this case, to match the previous increase in money. I think a lot of times economists have a terrible way to express themselves, they're often using technical languange that seemingly passes of as normal language, while for them it has very specific meanings.

[@JeffCaplan313]

​@@Martcapt That last paragraph...might I suggest another phrasing? "I think a lot of times women have a terrible way to express themselves, they're often using emotional language that seemingly passes of as normal language, while for them it has very specific meanings." what is love? what is a woman? Figure this out and we'll solve all the world's problems.

[@JewTube001]

Yes, he's basically the type of economist from The Economist. Not all economist are like that though, there ARE differing views. As for economists seeming out of touch personally, it's because macroecon is marco, which basically means we'll shift the trolly to kill 1 person instead of 10. We'll make that decision every time, and very easily. Because anyone who doesn't isn't doing macroecon, they're doing personal finance.

[@River-zo6ve]

I love how the price of oil, which factors into the price of every good and commodity that gets transported (ie, everything), is somehow "noise".

[@TMAN-hw8ep]

Yeah I'm not too sure I buy his point that changes in the supply of oil doesn't affect prices or inflation of that commodity. It's only the money supply that matters, and he points to Japan as an example. Japan has an aging population and workforce and high savings rate. Demand is too low in Japan, which keeps inflation there in check. But no, it's only the MS apparently.

[@Buttlather]

Well, like he said, if price of one good (gas or wheat) goes up, and you don't have more money to spend, you will spend less on other goods. So while one sector may see increase in prices, others would see decreases, and you wouldn't get price increases across all sectors. But we are seeing price increases broadly.

[@anahatatutu]

Yeah. He's full of crap.

[@dionysusnow]

He did say that it's complicated and everything is connected.

[@Blair1Collins]

Greed is the signal. Smoke and mirrors to avoid looking at the monetary taking from the banks and corporations .... is gross.

[@tripnip03]

He never answered this question, "why did it take 12 years for us to see inflation after 2008 despite rapid and dramatic increases in the money supply?

[@adeevakuliner4269]

Actually he answered by saying that there was only 4.5%-5.5% of money supply growth during QE after 2008 meanwhile from Feb 2020 money supply growth’s 40%

[@kevincanady7211]

Awesome discussion, I feel the guest has a very myopic view. PLEASE continue this discussion with other economists . Awesome awesome stuff!

[@sprymonkey]

Yes, the answer is always everything except greedy corporations price gouging consumers.

[@CashCopMineZ]

That’s not an “answer” though that’s literally describing what inflation is. In capitalism, we assume corporations are as greedy as they can be all the time, that’s Econ 101. The question is “Why they feel like they can be more greedy now?” and that’s exactly the root of inflation. “Greedy price gouging” means nothing to explain inflation, it simply IS inflation.

[@claiminglight]

@@CashCopMineZ Right, but the problem is, Hanke isn't prepared to accept any solution that seeks to target the actual problem. His answer is: squeeze everybody or it won't work.

[@snowytyler3793]

I can’t even pretend to understand what is being discussed in this video 😳. It feels like a confusing math class to me. But I really appreciate how Jon Stewart does deep dives into important topics like inflation and also how he really listens to his guests and reflects thoughtfully on a topic. Even without really getting it, I appreciate him sharing it.

[@PatWeston]

Steve Hanke needs to understand not everyone is an economist nor should they have to be to live fulfilling, happy lives

[@Kevin-oc2jb]

The people at the Fed should be.

[@iconbrad]

I’m an idiot so maybe some can explain. How am I suppose to pay for my groceries, health insurance and/or rent, with a bond from the government? The cash is what saved many people. Great conversation, but would have liked to hear a little more detail about the proposed solution. Five stars otherwise. Love this podcast!

[@roboparks]

The relief Cash that was given during the lockdowns to workers and poorer Americans is gone it's already spent. It's in Hands of Corporations. The messaging that the Inflations is caused by all that money going to Working Americans is BS. Its Pure BS . All the extra Cash is being Held by Corporations and they are the ones also controlling the supply chain . So its double penetration on about 250mil Million Americans. Democrats and the Biden Admin are not holding Corporations accountable . Actually they are giving them more money and more power. Putting you and I into debt slavery. Looks like Dems are going to get their Slaves back. But this time it will be all of us. It will be Mulit-Cultrue Slavery LOL. See They made it equal LOL

[@chrisheist652]

Hanke's "solution" is that 100 million Americans should be further pushed into poverty. The fact that his ideas are taken seriously at all by anyone, let alone Jon, is another sign of the current day level of ignorance and gullibility of what thirty years ago were extremely knowledgeable liberals and leftists.

[@beddythecorgi4269]

The answer is we never should have shut down. That is the fundamental problem with the inflation. We printed money to not be productive which is contrary to all past stimulus. Past stimulus gave money to be productive.

[@SmilingBoB420]

@Nathan Anderson "the Fed" is not the government, it's a private company. that has a monopoly over the banking system. it's complex. not going to get into the who distinction here. but just wanted to point out because it confuses allot of folks. "The Fed", and "The Treasury" are two separate things.

[@farrahupson]

@@beddythecorgi4269 What's the point in even being a country if we can't use our resources properly to make things work during hard times and disasters? A country with as much wealth as ours should be able to weather a shutdown without people being pushed out onto the street. Being productive isn't the only important thing, sometimes other things come into play, like how to deal with sickness, overrun hospitals, and people dying.

[@Jeff-wn5sv]

It's in little phrases like "hunker down" that the pain is hidden. When you're looking from this guy's bird's-eye-view, the pain of the little guy is a feature, not a bug. Jon never forgets it, and that's why they don't agree.

[@esme011]

Wow that was frustrating, Jon always manages to make an interview productive. Thanks for continuing to ask about the little guy. I kept getting the “let them eat cake vibe” from this guy. I did find the info on global inflation not really true an eye opener(Japan, Switzerland )Would definitely like to hear follow on topics

[@richardgrumbine4867]

I live in Japan… inflation IS a thing here and about to get worse… my seat of the pants feeling is that inflation is close to 10% here over the last year on things most folks need to buy (groceries, electricity, clothes etc)... I know of nothing that has not gone up in the last 6 months… other than gasoline which has stabilized… and housing which is over saturated (shrinking population so been going down for years already)… wages have been stagnant here for decades… interest rates have been rock bottom for years… and remain so…

[@danielGGV123]

The guest conveniently left of the fact that Japan's inflation rate was 0.5% before it ballooned to 3% just so that he could defend his point of view. So yes, Japan does have an inflation problem, just not as bad.

[@johnbirman5840]

One of the unfortunate beliefs that needs to be loaded and shot out of the torpedo tubes is this idea that we must focus on the little guy. Usually this involves screwing the Un-little guys - whomever that might mean! Perhaps, you are one of them, or perhaps you are one of the people whom are targeted. It’s all relative my friend. In a third world country, even our poor look rich! It is a much better policy that focuses on good monetary policies, limiting tax burdens, encouraging growth, not overspending, and so forth. A perhaps better policy is the “rising tide raises all boats” policy, that allows growth for all classes of people? This would mean a government not picking on one group of people to punish, or promoting another group of people. This breeds discontent. Is that not the basis of our American system? Where discrimination is seen as discriminatory? The government’s sole role in an economy is to protect the currency’s purchasing ability, and grow the economy, while taxing the minimum needed to provide certain functions that governments provide - like defending it from foreign interests/enemies When a government no longer fulfill that role, it is a drag on both the economy and it’s citizens. It should not direct an economy beyond these areas. Adam Smith - the Father Of Free Trade had 2 instances where governments needed to “interfere” in Trade: National Security; and Other Nations “dumping” of Goods, and returning with ballast -only- on their ships. Big government or Big Nanny Governments being all for all is a government that will fail. History has shown this to be true in every instance. Cheers.

[@boodleheimer]

@@johnbirman5840 But John, what happened with Covid was very much something the government had to get involved in. It was not an option to just sit back and see if the bodies started to pile up as they very well might have, or to tell people "you're on your own, do whatever you want." That would have been dereliction of duty. Remember we had no idea what was happening at first. Governments around the world in general did the right thing -- precautions against worst-case scenarios. You disagree? Glad you're not in charge then. Prof. Hanke seems to think we should not have told people to hunker down and shouldn't have paid people to stay home -- that's maybe good economic policy but it's horrible public health policy. He also came off sounding ridiculous about the lockdowns hurting affluent people's investments as if that is in the same universe as struggling people needing to feed their families -- what rubbish! And on top of that, in the US we had bad leadership -- hunches and rumors carried the same weight as opinions from scientists; the President failed to call for shared sacrifice and patience with the evolving knowledge, which created horrible disagreements instead of getting everyone to pull together in the same direction. And at first the cash relief was flowing disproportionately to the affluent. Nightmarish. Hanke's non-response on that was striking. I think it's pretty clear that cranking all that money into the economy plus all the other stuff Hanke called "noise" did feed the inflation. Hanke failed to address major issues. Nothing about how it should have been essential to prioritize those in mortal danger during Covid. Nothing about the out-sized power of energy speculators. Very little about record oil company profits. No acknowledgement of Russia's role. Yikes. I think Jon's idea to get an opposing view on the show to debate Hanke is good. Get Liz Warren in there.

[@mbadgett61]

Never really gave an answer to how to get this excess money supply out of the economy except for having a recession. Hus answer about giving bonds to people. Well you can't eat bonds and I don't know any gas station that take bonds etc... Jon also expresses my question (that never gets answered) why dudn't year of quantitative easing over year's and years not cause inflation.

[@evelyndominguez4757]

Robert Reich nailed the inflation issue and what can be done to fix it. Everything is up due to unchecked greed by big corporations. It’s price gouging.

[@Markdfadf]

Except literally no mainstream economist agrees. Robert Reich is not an economist. He is a fringe ideologue grifter.

[@rdean150]

@6:40 Jon asked a crucial question and Hanke basically ignored the question and continued with his prepared statement.

[@joelvig]

He answered it. Just listen to the whole thing. He's just saying it's how we fund the money supply increase that causes the inflation not how we spend it. Another way to word it is spend the money any way you want just make sure that it's properly funded.

[@titaniumismagical8643]

@@joelvig so why is the US dollar value at a 20 year high then? With all this money in circulation? It doesn't add up. I'm going to say this one more time...No economist or professor has any data or experience of what happens to an economy of this magnitude, coming out of a world wide pandemic. In 1918 Spanish flu, we didn't have anything close to this population or economy to make an analysis.

[@rogersmith7396]

@@titaniumismagical8643 Well I wouldworry its so high because the rest of the world is so low. Look at little honeys England.

[@badwolftx2139]

Ding ding ding! This is the fundamental problem. In the 1970's the US was dominant and there was very little global trade. Anything the US did, automatically impacted everything and it was really only important to manage the US economy. Now the US is a smaller part of the global puzzle and everything is integrated. The 'experts' are using a 1970's mentality and tools to try to fight 2020's global stagflation. There has to be global coordination. Thus, we are all screwed. Something is going to break. Europe is in BIG trouble.

[@chrisheist652]

Hanke is a propagandist and a corporate stooge. His job is to lie and make it look correct and official.

[@bsjeffrey]

the problem with inflation is that the elites who control the money supply also control the prices.

[@Rudy1150]

The fed is selling eggs now?

[@bsjeffrey]

@@Rudy1150 and baskets and egg counters.

[@Rudy1150]

@@bsjeffrey Do the egg counters look like the monopoly guy? with a top hot and tuxedo?

[@bsjeffrey]

@@Rudy1150 the egg counters look like hand held clickers that the worrkers use to count the eggs before they hatch

[@stephenschultz9901]

I just want to extend my thanks and appreciation for conversations like these. I wish larger media outlets would follow suit and pursue more in depth discussions instead of sound bites from the echo chamber. Hooray for civil discourse!

[@usmanchohan1444]

I get why they say "an economist is someone who didn't have enough personality to be an accountant"

[@tchrisou812]

I thought he was funny - dry, yes but it's subjective imo

[@rickhunter3930]

I feel like there were two different conversations going on. Jon was attempting to get practical answers from him on how (if?) government/corporate world/central bank could support the little guy. Professor was hellbent explaining the theory of inflation. Sometimes they came together, but it felt like Jon was frustrated that he wasn't getting practical answers on how the little guy keeps his family fed and a roof over their head.

[@AlanLamb11]

The only way he does is because several of his neighbors are thrown out of work and accept lower wages out of desparation and when that occurs with enough people, their new lower incomes will decrease demand. Meanwhile most of the wealth of the rich are tied up in assets which increase nearly in tandem with inflation and can be sold for proportionally more in the future (NFT/crypto and fine art unproven as of yet, unlike land and the means of production represented by ownership of companies).

[@Nomorerobota9]

These economists don’t see people they just see formulas. They are dogmatic and believe the economy can only work if most people get screwed

[@unipartyhellscape8895]

Jon for a different perspective you should talk to professor of economics Mark Blyth.

[@seangearhart2494]

Seconded.

[@anthonytwohill9726]

Nomi Prins also.

[@jgostylo]

Hell yeah, Blyth is amazing. Much more entertaining as well.

[@vegigun]

Or Robert Riech

[@seangearhart2494]

@@vegigun no.

[@gecblack]

Excellent!!!

[@rdean150]

How many times is this guy gonna ignore Jon's questions? This is not an interview. This is a guy reading a script about money supply, and an interviewer asking great questions that are totally ignored by the guy reading his script.

[@marcoskilar9637]

Questions…that’s just noise

[@ShadSterling]

I might have asked, if the problem is increasing money supply, how can we reduce the money supply in a way that doesn't screw the little guy? Sure, bonds sound alright, if you can get rich people to buy them, but for that you have to offer a high return, which guarantees a further increase in supply when the bonds mature. Would it work to reduce the supply by taxing the rich? I'd be delighted to see those questions in the next round

[@dreamervanroom]

Tax corporations and the rich. End Citizens United and corporations as people. Take the money out of Congress: stop sptock trading for members of our legislative bodies and federal monetary positions and their immediate family, - also to adopt the British system of resricting election funding. $$$ that is the problem. Forcing corporations to maximize profits, that is the bast and root of bad policy, per Reagan-omics - smile at the people and spike the rick. We have seen that it works - the billionaires have gotten richer and the people getting poorer. That is what they want, Capiche?

[@josho6038]

Its called a bank bailin

[@Ishkur23]

Taxes. Not once was that word uttered in this entire interview and I wish Jon would bring it up.

[@andrewbaldwin4454]

You weren't listening to Hanke. According to him Powell now wants to get rid of inflation in a way that will hurt the little guy, hiking up the federal funds rate so drastically that there is little or no growth in the money supply and causing a massive recession. Hanke would grow the money supply at about 5% per year, enough to avoid a severe recession, but not enough to fuel inflation, and with time inflation will fall. The trouble is that the US Fed has raised inflationary expectations and bringing them back down to 2% per year or lower (I would prefer lower) is necessarily a rough and ready process, and you can push a little too hard on the break. But that's different from driving the economy over a cliff, which Hanke claims that Powell is doing, or likely to do.

[@MrRidgeforrester]

You don't need to shrink the money supply, you just need to stop expanding it. Inflationary damage has already been done and you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.

[@sspbrazil]

This guy sites Milton Friedman several times, that’s a huge red flag.

[@rsr789]

The economic equivalent of praising Hitler or Stalin.

[@sspbrazil]

@@rsr789 yep.

[@robertmallia8730]

You use the word "site" rather than "cite". That's a red flag to me.

[@sspbrazil]

@@robertmallia8730 being a typo Nazi is a red flag for me. 18 people looked passed that and understood my intentions. I guess that went over your head.

[@AustinSnider]

Thank God for Jon Stewart. Kudos for actually doing a deep dive and talking to people to finally get to the root of things and help dispel the myths.

[@darkranger116]

"there is no problem. the system works fine."

[@dougf1249]

You weren’t not listening where you?

[@dabayss1584]

I respect and admire Jon and glad he's back in his element. That said, y'all would benefit from expanding your base of guests on this topic. Put Yanis Varoufakis on the top of your list. UT Austin professor and former Finance Minister for Greece when the EU made them a sacrificial lamb. The man has many things to say about these dynamics.

[@TravellerDM007]

Bravo. My thought exactly.

[@Ti4g00liveira]

lol, you're gonna put the finance minster that bankrupted the country?

[@pieintheskyguy1130]

@@Ti4g00liveira You have no f-ing idea what you're talking about. I'm not even going to try to explain to you why your'e statement is sooooo idiotic. Maybe someone with more patience than me will educate you.

[@thomaswikstrand8397]

@@Ti4g00liveira that's a very dumb way of looking at things. Impressive.

[@dillond9599]

Steve Hanke's solution to the little guy not being able to afford rent because of layoffs and government closures is: give them bonds that can't be cashed in, so the poor just starve to death.

[@joelvig]

What??? He just stated that we need to properly fund the relief we give. Not print "cheap" money.

[@gubbehplezz8415]

Let them eat cake, right?

[@joelvig]

@@gubbehplezz8415 All this guy would say is make sure we properly pay for the cake. :)

[@roboparks]

@@joelvig Why does it have to be Relief? Why Can't we just earn a living on our own Locally ?? Why do I have cater and compete with Globiest Corporations that are causing the problems in 1st Fin Place????????????? Why can't I grow my own?????? Or Produce food my own ?????? Why Cant have a shop in my Garage ?????? Why do I have to pay the city , County , State and Federal to own a small business. Just to get it started????????? The Shop I had in 1999 cost about 8k to get it up and running today for the same shop it would be over 100k ????? And most of that is paying government for regulations?? Those regulations are not even safety regulations.

[@joelvig]

@@roboparks I'm not sure how that applies to the amount of money supply growth

[@nancymiller7038]

Get Powell on with this guy to debate this topic Jon!

[@Tanktaco]

I hope this one does well so we can actually get a follow up.

[@BenJosephStewart]

The title of this should be, “Steve’s Love Letter to Supply Side Economics” This is what happens when you spend your entire life in an “Ivory Tower”…… Complete detachment from reality for Academic Theories, and intellectual hubris… 🎓

[@Milton_Friedmanite]

Good on Jon to have him on, Hanke is 100% correct.

[@MikesterMF]

This guy is literally reading off a script and doesn't actually feel like he's addressing anything Jon says.

[@pauliusvaskys971]

maybe profesor knows more then comedian, just maybe

[@MikesterMF]

@@pauliusvaskys971 with how flabbergasted the guy gets at 27:52, I think I'm siding with the comedian.

[@joelvig]

Have you talked to many economists? They're pretty dry bunch. :)

[@saintsfearful]

@@joelvig "Dry" is an interesting way to say "dogmatic doctrinaire idiots".

[@joelvig]

@@saintsfearful Calling names and making this political does not help the discussion.

[@ireneroseart4858]

Jon, your patience is truly a virtue!!

[@LeoMDuque]

Awesome! Make it an ongoing segment. Economics in our lives.

[@unaffiliated5133]

Here's what happened - during the pandemic labor got strong, unions started forming and workers were demanding real wages, benefits and better conditions. In response - corporations raise prices causing 'inflation' until people feel so much pain they cry out for the Fed to 'fight inflation.' 'Fighting inflation' means raising rates which creates the recession narrative i.e., massive layoffs. This breaks the back of labor, takes away their bargaining power, stops the calls for better conditions and wages. This is 100% deliberate, calculated and engineered to kill labor's strength so corporations can continue paying slave wages in poor conditions. This is all to increase 'shareholder value' i.e., the profits of the top 1% who own 90% of the stock market.

[@suicune2001]

100%

[@JAMinerViews]

Lest we forget about the trade war of 2019 that seemed to spark this… delayed and camouflaged by a pandemic.

[@MotherOfOwlbears]

Yeah, farmers here in Ohio weren't losing their asses when Biden took office. They were doing so after Trump's tariff war.

[@concernedcitizen9374]

@@MotherOfOwlbears Yet white farmers are still trump cultists. He's OK to them as long as they received funding from the taxpayers.

[@MotherOfOwlbears]

@@concernedcitizen9374 a few. Most farmers I know were done with him after that.