http://www.bloomberg.com/…

The cost of living in the U.S. was unchanged in September, restrained by declines in fuel costs, automobile prices and airline fares that show the slowing economy is starting to cool inflation.

The Labor Department’s consumer price index was unchanged after a 0.1 percent drop in August; economists had forecast an increase for last month. So-called core prices, which exclude food and energy, rose 0.1 percent, also less than forecast.

Today’s figures show that for the first time in two years, prices didn’t increase for two straight months. Waning inflation gives Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke scope to lower interest rates further as policy makers attempt to unfreeze credit markets.

“It’ll give the Fed a little bit of cover to cut rates when they meet next,” on Oct. 28-29, John Ryding, chief economist at RDQ Economics in New York, said in an interview with Bloomberg Television.

Does this look like a wane in inflation?

Oh… they mean price inflation. Well… that will come. The wave is coming. I’d like to be upset about the impending interest drop but at this point so much money has been injected and will be injected in the future… a 0.0% rate wouldn’t make much of a difference.

The Data Don’t Justify Financial-Market Panic by Robert Higgs

As the hysteria has grown in the discussion of financial markets and related government policies, I have been puzzled by the discrepancy between the best available data and the descriptions quoted in the press – statements by financial gurus, traders, and professors, as well as by government officials. To hear these spokesmen tell the story, you’d think that the world will soon go to hell in a hand basket, if it hasn’t gone there already. Yet every time I look for data to check these claims, I find nothing solid to back them up. …

Consider first the interest rates for commercial paper. For the past several weeks, 30-day nonfinancial paper has been going for about 2 percent; 60-day and 90-day loans in this market have required a slightly greater rate of interest. Financial commercial paper has been going for roughly 3 percent, give or take a few tenths of a point, with little difference among the 30-day, 60-day, and 90-day rates.

Given that the rate of inflation at present is greater than 3 percent, and presumably will remain greater than 3 percent for the next three months, these nominal interest rates on commercial paper imply that lenders are actually giving away money to corporations that sell commercial paper – the nominal rates of interest are less than the expected rate of inflation. Is this situation what one expects to see during a “credit crunch”? Hardly.

Many commentators claim, however, that virtually no transactions are occurring in this market. These claims are completely false. For the week that ended October 1, which is the most recent week currently reported, total commercial paper outstanding amounted to $1,607 billion. Yes, this amount was down from the $1,702 billion reported for the previous week, but is a 5.6 percent drop a good reason to panic? If we go back to March 2008, when nobody was talking excitedly about the commercial market’s “freezing up,” we find that the total amount outstanding, on average, was $1,822 billion, or only 13 percent more than last week. In March, the market was working fine; now it’s “locked up.” This sort of hyperbole, with which we are being bombarded hourly around the clock, is totally without a basis in the facts.

For the year 2006, when the financial markets were, for the most part, still ripping along very nicely, the total amount of commercial paper outstanding, on average, was $1,983 billion; for 2007, it was $1,781 billion. For the past seven months, on average of the monthly data, it was $1,743 billion.

Either someone is deliberately trying to spook us, or these panic-mongers have simply lost their grip on reality. Officials at the Fed and the U.S. Treasury are running around like chickens with their heads cut off. They are dragging the world’s leading central bankers and finance ministers around with them. The news media are raving like lunatics. The big unanswered question is: WHY?

I’ve been suspecting the same. I’d seen numbers here and there that didn’t seem to add up. I’m sure there are components missing to this analysis… but what?

I love how Bernanke stutters after Paul interrupts him with “coins.”
The pleading of the Fox Business people are pretty entertaining too.

http://money.cnn.com/…

• “NO NO NO. Not just no, but HELL NO,” writes Richard, a reader from Anchorage, Alaska.
• “This is robbery pure and simple,” Anna from Denver posted on CNNMoney.com’s TalkBack blog this weekend.
• “I’m tired of rewarding institutions and people for the bad decisions they have made,” said Dean from Madison, Wis. “Sure, it will hurt tax payers if/when some of these institutions fail, but perhaps we need to let that happen. We do not need more big government involved in our lives. Enough is enough.”
• “Companies, like individuals, should be held responsible for their decisions,” wrote Jorge from El Paso, Texas. “This buyout does not address the other problems in the pipeline such as personal credit default and market slowdowns in most industries. No new jobs will be created.”
• “It is time for the financial institutions of this country to be called to the mat. We should be expecting and demanding responsible and ethical business practice, not rewarding it at the expense of taxpayers.” Paul from Portsmouth, N.H.
• “The government does not have $700 billion dollars. WE have $700 billion, and it is being taken from us. If this is passed then the next administration and the next will be extracting this one from the people who are supposedly being protected by this bailout.” John from Springfield, Va.
• “Why not take the billions and … make funds available to home owners stuck in the loans these idiots created, marketed and sold,” asked Don from Coarsegold, Calif. “It will put the money where it should be with the little guy who made a mistake, instead of the big guy who created the problem.”
• “Once I invested in something and lost money. Maybe I could just change the rules of investing so that my loss turns into a gain? Oh, I forgot only banks can do that!” Jordan from Charlestown, Ind.
• “I will be watching to see which of our representatives vote for this bailout,” said R. Kidd in Troy, N.C. “Let the American people see how many we can fire come election time.”
• “Call your Congressman. Stop blogging, posting comments, and call your congressman. This is the patriotic thing to do. Let them hear your opinion, show them this is still America and that you will not stand for this!!” Danny from Texas

Not everyone is upset about this though:

• “I was opposed to the bailout at first, but realized that the scope of this thing is global and so massive that the entire global economy could collapse if nothing was done. …The priority has to be resolving the present crisis of confidence in our economy. Remember, if Wall Street collapses, Main Street will go with it.” Bill from St. Louis
• “This money is not a handout to companies. It’s simply giving banks and mortgage companies loans, since the banking system itself is too unstable to raise this kind of capital. And no, the government cannot just use the $700 billion to pay back all the citizens that will be hurt by this. If the companies like AIG fail, the cost will be far far greater than $700 billion. Wake up!!” Andy from Chicago
• “It’s NOT a bailout. The government is not handing out cash, they actually stand to make a great deal of money out of this, which will trickle down to YOU. First priority should be to try to control and fix the problem, then regulate sufficiently to make sure this NEVER happens again.” Surfta from Brooklyn, N.Y

From Answers.com:

bailout: n. A rescue from financial difficulties: corporate bailouts.

Any profit the government would make on this is going to be completely negated by price inflation and interest on the debt accumulated. There is no money to perform this bailout. The money will be borrowed or printed. If the market was allowed to unwind this those issues would not occur and recovery would be far faster. Malinvestment needs to be liquidated and prices recalculated… not arbitrarily inflated.

http://www.forbes.com/…

Despite these steps, more is needed. We must now take further decisive action to fundamentally and comprehensively address the root cause of our financial system stresses.

To restore confidence in our markets and our financial institutions so they can fuel continued growth and prosperity, we must address the underlying problem.

OH OH! So the Federal Reserve is going to be dismantled?! Remove regulations which are only show or there to help those at the top already?

And this morning, we’ve taken a number of powerful tactical steps to increase confidence in the system, including the establishment of a temporary guarantee program for the U.S. money market and mutual fund industry.

The federal government must implement a program to remove these illiquid assets that are weighing down our financial institutions and threatening our economy.

First, to provide critical additional funding to our mortgage markets, the GSEs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, will increase their purchases of mortgage-backed securities. These two enterprises must carry out their mission to support the mortgage market.

Second, to increase the availability of capital for new home loans, Treasury will expand the MBS purchase program we announced earlier this month. This will complement the capital provided by the GSEs, it will help facilitate mortgage availability and affordability.

These two steps will provide some initial support to mortgage assets, but they are not enough. Many of the illiquid assets clogging our system today do not meet the regulatory requirements to be eligible for the purchase by the GSEs or by the Treasury program.

I look forward to working with Congress to pass necessary legislation to remove these troubled assets from our financial system. When we get through this difficult period - which we will - our next task must be to improve the financial regulatory structure so that these past excesses do not recur.

This crisis demonstrates in vivid terms that our financial regulatory structure is suboptimal, duplicative and outdated. I have put forward my ideas for a modernized financial oversight structure that matches our modern economy and more closely links the regulatory structure to the reasons why we regulate.

Damn! No.

More artificial risk reduction. This will only continue the distortion price signals and cause more malinvestment. More regulation that will either further enrich Wall Street at the expense of those on Main Street or will stifle their ability to do what they need to do.

Q: Mr. Secretary, what is the alternative here? What is the dire picture you painted for members of Congress last night to try and convince them to support this effort? What is the alternative?

PAULSON: This is what we need to do. Because for some time we’ve been saying that the root cause of the problems in our economy and our financial system is housing, and until we get stability in the housing market we are not going to get stability in our financial markets.

We’ve worked with Congress on a number of the steps, all of which were important, leading up to this. But this is the way we stabilize the system and get at the root cause.

The root cause is central control of the economy. Something every American child is taught is a bad thing. Look at what happened to those evil commies. While the message we received was hyperbolic it’s has some truth. Central control isn’t only inefficient. It’s an inherently flawed system doomed to failure. These neo-Keynesians just won’t give up on their desire to control or antiquated theories. I saw Obama talking about how the fundamental reasons for this crisis include: not spending enough on infrastructure, not spending enough on education, not spending enough on labor (wages), not taxing the rich enough, etc. Just because you spend capital on something does not mean it’s good. It does not mean that’s what should be done. It does not mean you’ll receive a positive capital growth from the deal. The cost of education has doubled in real dollars since the 1970’s with at best a static result. The fundamental problems are the distortions of the pricing signals due to regulation and primarily the Fed’s interest rate and money supply manipulation. If you make debt cheap, or give it away like it is now (interest < price inflation), individuals will fall into the moral hazard trap and over estimate. They will over consume. Over invest. The illusion of wealth furthers the problem.

I wonder what could be the best practical policy to get this information out. I’m not looking to turn everyone into economists… I just want the to recognize something I think everyone does to some degree but stops short of applying it equally across others and the market as a whole. Perhaps just putting Henry Hazlitt’s Economics in One Lesson [pdf] in public places with Rothbard’s The Case Against the Fed [pdf] sprinkled about would help? I think after the recent happenings people would be happy to read through one of these while waiting for the doctor instead of reading People.

http://money.cnn.com/…

In another indication of growing inflation, wholesale prices increased in July to the highest annual rate in 27 years, according to a government report released Tuesday.

The annual Producer Price Index for finished goods rose 9.8% in the 12 months that ended in July.

The jump in wholesale prices is the fastest rate of increase since a 10.4% bump-up in June 1981, according to Joseph Kowal, economist at the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The Labor Department also reported that PPI rose 1.2% in July, after increasing 1.8% in June. Analysts polled by Briefing.com had expected an increase of only 0.6%.

The surge in producer prices is in large part due to higher energy prices, said Doug Roberts, chief investment strategist for ChannelCapitalResearch.com.

Crude oil prices doubled in the 12 months through July, but have since fallen nearly 24% from their peak hit last month.

The latest PPI report doesn’t reflect the recent drop in crude prices, but Roberts expects future readings to ease.

“The topline is a bit behind the curve - that will fall in the future,” he said. “Right now, it has not really taken into account the recent decrease in energy prices.”

Core inflation: The so so-called core PPI number, which excludes food and energy prices, rose by 0.7% - more than the 0.2% increase analysts had expected.

The core inflation index is “the more long term rate” because it indicates how much inflation “is seeping into the economy” beyond the volatile energy prices, said Roberts.

The index for finished goods other than foods and energy has advanced by 3.5% in the past year, according to the report.

Food and energy: The indexes that measure producers’ food and energy prices increased in July, but at a more moderate pace than in the previous two months.

Energy prices rose by 3.1%, after a 6.0% jump in energy prices in June and a 4.9% jump in May. In the 12 months through July, prices for finished energy goods have surged 28%.

Food prices rose by only 0.3% in July, after increasing by 1.5% in June and 0.8% in May. In a year-over-year comparison, prices for finished consumer foods have increased by 8.7%, according to the report.

The much more moderate increase in food prices in July compared with June is the one bright spot in the otherwise glum inflation report, according to Roberts.

Even though energy prices in July were still on the rise last month, “if you are seeing the other big component of inflation go down a bit, that could indicate a positive for the future,” he said.

The government reported last week that the the Consumer Price Index jumped by 0.8% in July, which was twice the increase that economists had expected.

And don’t forget that consumer price inflation is at 5.6%. Highest in 17 years. Assuming you can trust the government’s numbers. Which you can’t. So maybe double that.

Fun isn’t it? Thank the Federal Reserve, Congress, Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke.