About Nick Hill

Picture of Nick

Work and interests

  • Network Engineer
  • Internet Server Administrator
  • Software Programmer
  • Ethical Entrepreneur
  • Electronics Designer
  • Natural and cognitive philosophy enthusiast

Current interests

I don’t expect there are huge swarms of people interested in my random ramblings, but for those who are, I have retired the previous content of this page to an archive and decided to write a load more!.

Inflation or deflation - update November 2013

5 years ago, I wrote about the potential for economic catastrophe. We have seen a catastrophe with the implosion of AIG, Lehmans and Fannie May and Freddie Mac. This has resulted in a significantly revised federal reserve involvement with the markets.

The frightful monetary base

Many commentators have been rather shocked by the monetary base chart. In 2008, the "high powered" (non-fractional banking derived money) stood at around 800 billion dollars. The chart now stands closer to 3600 billion dollars. For many observers, this has provided an ongoing frightful portent of inflation.

Inflation? What inflation?

The rate of inflation reported by US government statistics, and pretty much mimicked by the UK government has been fairly low. peaking briefly at 5% but averaging at about 2% between nov 2008 and nov 2013. Meanwhile, for most ordinary people paying for food, heating bills, car fuel, postage stamps etc, the rate of inflation may appear nearer 9-11%.

Given that the U.S. monetary base has grown so quickly (35% compound growth since 2008), you may wonder why inflation isn't so high, hyperinflation has resulted.

Give out with one hand, take in with the other

The US Federal reserve has confused the market somewhat, whilst keeping inflation under control, by responding to financial institutions’s preference in these times to hold cash, as opposed to the more risky treasuries. The federal reserve has "Borrowed" money from the financial system then using that cash to buy treasuries, mortgage backed securities and similar financial instruments. This can be seen clearly in the following graph:

AMBNS AMBSL minus EXCSRESNS Monetary base minus Excess reserves

AMBNS AMBSL minus EXCSRESNS Monetary base minus Excess reserves


AMBNS or AMBSL Many will be familiar with the Federal Reserve monetary base AMBSL. AMNNS is the non-seasonally adjusted monetary base.

EXCSRESNS Excess Reserves not seasonally adjusted. One of these series have been discontinued, but there is a continuing series, just a little harder to find at the St Louis fed.


In september 2008, the US federal reserve started taking Mortgage backed Securities, then longer term treasuries onto it's balance sheet. On it's own, this would imply a significant increase in new currency in circulation. At the same time, the federal reserve started offering interest to financial institutions so that they would put currency on deposit with the federal reserve. In essence, the currency the federal reserve created to buy assets has been taken back out of the economy.

This graph neatly shows a continuation of the new currency in circulation by subtracting excess reserves held on deposit from adjusted monetary base. The key to this is the yellow line. This shows a very smooth and deliberate progression of actual new currency in circulation, derived from the two wildly changing volatile series of monetary base, and excess reserves.

This series shows an annual average compound growth rate in new currency between August 2000 and August 2008 of 4.7%. Using the AMBNS-EXCRESNS figure, we can see a progression between September 2008 and September 2013 a compound average annual growth rate of new currency of 8.1%. Everything else being equal, this would suggest a loss of spending power and the inflation of asset bubbles.

What is perhaps more interesting, financial institutions would rather put currency on short term deposit with the federal reserve to receive just 0.25% rate of interest, rather than buy 10 year government treasuries with a rate of 2.6%. The fed is simply responding to the desire of financial institutions to get out of treasuries. Financial institutions would rather have the currency right there, ready to spend.

This is dangerous. Very dangerous. If the financial institutions were to exercise their presumed right to grab that currency to spend it, it would create a tsunami of inflation. Tripling the amount of new, high power currency in the economy of USA. If these institutions believe they will be allowed access to these deposits en masse, they are in cloud cuckoo land. This would trigger a force majeure, bank holiday and trigger IMF rules for bail-in of their deposits back to treasuries. All the while, the spending power of these deposits are being eroded with new currency entering circulation. It is very difficult these days to maintain purchasing power whilst holding paper assets.

Economic backdrop

The above may seem like a big issue, but the factor which drives the economic systems is productivity. The power to provide valuable goods and services. It is hard to argue against the notion that our living standards today are as a result of industrialisation. The industrial revolution started in England, which has spread throughout the world. Providing warmth, transport, plentiful food, healthcare.

This stands against a movement of industrial productivity eastwards, and an increasing western economic reliance on a financial service sector and debt, coupled with de-industrialisation of the west as far as consumer goods are concerned. This also combined with an economic system whose foundations are compound growth in a world that is finite.

I would argue that the financial woes of 2008 and those continuing today are simply a result of a compound growth system hitting limits. The fall in living standards in recent years the lack of material productivity in the economy which is no longer back-stopped by the financial system.

Observtions. February 2014

Through the fed's announcements and actualities of quantative easing, then tapering, with the wild ride of AMBNS and EXCSRESNS, the subtracted nett of the two has been very smooth. I will assume the fed's policy has been to deliberately and directly steer the A minus E value, as opposed to either of the two factors.

Where economics exists without hitting the limits of nature, economic functions tend to be compound. I find particulary interesting:

Date RangeAverage rate of compound growth
of A - E fed new currency
2010-09-01 - 2014-01-01
1000 - 1327

We haven't seen a cataclysmic tidal wave of new currency as some observers have suggested looking at AMBNS alone, but have seen a steady and significantly increased rate of new currency in circulation. This dilution of the US dollar would certainly favour debtors over savers, especially given the very low interest rates. If we assume the rate of production of tangible goods being flat in the dollar demoninated productivity arena, we would see a year on year dilution of 8.85%, which equates to 8.13% purchasing power reduction of the dollar each year. Interest rates don't come close to compensating for that. It's a borrowers world, not a saver's world!

The story is the same accross all currencies US hegemon world.

I have updated the page, correcting my use of money. Of course, I should use the term CURRENCY for the dollar, pound, etc. Using the term money is probably incorrect, as one of the definitions of money is a store of purchasing power, which this article suggests may not be true over the longer term. I suggest only tangible assets are real money.

Other items:

Valid HTML 4.01!

Email nick at nickhill dot co dot uk.

Real life durability and life expectancy of white LEDs
Unfused chinese plugs coming into UK
How I stopped the central locking on my Peugeot 306 unlocking itself
Rate limiting to extend credit on mobile broadband
Why is Earth’s Oxygen level at 21%
Cast iron boiler actual in-system efficiency
ahappydeal.com - Not such a happy deal
Appliance collection and recycling SE London

Supplier of spare parts for notebooks and laptops