Inflation is Already Here… But It’s Being Masked

Since 2007, the world’s Central Banks have collectively put more than $10 trillion into the financial system since 2008. To put that number into perspective, it’s equal to roughly 15% of global GDP.

 

This kind of money printing is literally unheard of in modern history. And it has set the stage for a roaring wave of inflation to hit the financial system. Indeed, the first signs are already showing up… not in the “official” Government data (which is bogus) but in how those who run businesses around the globe are acting.

 

Most people believe that when inflation hits, prices have to go higher. This is true, but higher prices can be manifested in multiple ways. Firms usually do not simply raise prices in nominal terms as price elasticity can kill revenues because it would hurt sales.

 

Instead, companies resort to a number of strategies to maintain profit margins without hurting their sales. One of them is to simply leave part of a package EMPTY, thereby selling LESS product for the SAME price (a hidden price hike).

 

Food manufacturers, like the politicians currently debating health reform, may have a solution to the obesity crisis: Feed Americans a lot of hot air. But this heated air is not just a figure of speech for packaged goods companies including Ralcorp Holdings' (RAH) Post Foods and PepsiCo (PEP) subsidiaries Frito-Lay and Quaker.

 

In many packaged products, as much as 50% of the contents is just empty space, an investigation by Consumer Reports reveals. And we consumers are buying that nothingness every day.

 

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/12/08/how-much-for-the-air-as-much-as-half-of-food-packaging-is-empty/

 

Another tactic corporation use is to simply sell smaller packages for the SAME price (another means of selling less for MORE= a price hike).

 

U.S. Companies Shrink Packages as Food Prices Rise

           

Large food companies have recently announced that they will raise the prices they charge grocery retailers for commodities-based products. For example, a chocolate bar will cost more soon: Hershey last week announced a 10% increase for most of its confectionery goods.

 

Of course, straightforward price hikes could cause consumers to buy less of those products or to choose less costly store brands. So in many cases, food companies are trying a different tactic: Keeping the price of an item the same while decreasing the amount of food in the package. The company recoups the costs of the rise in commodities and hopes consumers don't notice that they're getting less of the product for the same price.

 

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/04/04/u-s-companies-shrink-packages-as-food-prices-rise/

 

However, perhaps the most scandalous policy employed by companies looking to engage in stealth price hikes is to swap out higher quality ingredients for lower quality/ lower cost alternatives. One bigname coffee maker was caught doing this just a few years ago.

 

Reuters is reporting that many of America's major brands have been quietly tweaking their coffee blends. While most coffee companies consider their blends trade secrets, and are loath to disclose exactly what goes into them, both circumstantial and direct evidence suggests they're now substituting lower-grade Robusta beans for some of their pricier Arabica, and degrading the quality of our coffee…

 

At least one coffee roaster has admitted it. In November, Massimo Zanetti USA, which roasts for both Chock full o'Nuts and Hills Bros., publicly confirmed upping its Robusta usage by 25% this year.

 

Why the switcheroo? Prepare to not be shocked. The answer is: price.

 

Last year, a shortage of Arabica caused prices of the premium bean to spike as high as $3 a pound — $2 more than what a pound of Robusta would cost. This compares to a five-year historical trend of Arabica costing closer to 70 cents more than Robusta. In recent weeks, the trend has reversed, with Arabica prices falling to just a 62-cent premium over Robusta.

 

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/06/19/noticed-that-your-coffee-tastes-funny-heres-why/?a_dgi=aolshare_twitter

 

In simple terms, inflation is already around us, though it’s not yet showing up in LITERAL price hikes. Instead, we’re all paying MORE for LESS. And it’s only a matter of time before the situation really gets out of control.

 

For a FREE Special Report on an uniquely profitable inflation hedge, swing by….

http://phoenixcapitalmarketing.com/goldmountain.html

 

Best Regards

Graham Summers


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/WBAYr5MqXLU/story01.htm Phoenix Capital Research

Senator Bernie Sanders Asks NSA If It Spies On Congress

The real life magic-mushroom, banana dictatorship envisioned by George Orwell just went full retard.

From VT Senator Bernie Sanders:

U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) today asked the National Security Agency director whether the agency has monitored the phone calls, emails and Internet traffic of members of Congress and other elected officials.

 

Has the NSA spied, or is the NSA currently spying, on members of Congress or other American elected officials?” Sanders asked in a letter to Gen. Keith Alexander, the NSA director. “Spying” would include gathering metadata on calls made from official or personal phones, content from websites visited or emails sent, or collecting any other data from a third party not made available to the general public in the regular course of business?”

 

Sanders said he was “deeply concerned” by revelations that American intelligence agencies harvested records of phone calls, emails and web activity by millions of innocent Americans without any reason to even suspect involvement in illegal activities. He also cited reports that the United States eavesdropped on the leaders of Germany, Mexico, Brazil and other allies.

 

Sanders emphasized that the United States “must be vigilant and aggressive in protecting the American people from the very real danger of terrorist attacks,” but he cited U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon’s recent ruling that indiscriminate dragnets by the NSA were probably unconstitutional and “almost Orwellian.”

 

Sanders has introduced legislation to put strict limits on sweeping powers used by the National Security Agency and Federal Bureau of Investigation to secretly track telephone calls by millions of innocent Americans who are not suspected of any wrongdoing.

 

The measure would put limits on records that may be searched. Authorities would be required to establish a reasonable suspicion, based on specific information, in order to secure court approval to monitor business records related to a specific terrorism suspect. Sanders’ bill also would put an end to open-ended court orders that have resulted in wholesale data mining by the NSA and FBI. Instead, the government would be required to provide reasonable suspicion to justify searches for each record or document that it wants to examine.

Uhm… yes?

 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/QAlgSutwIw8/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Miss Starr's Mill Pageant is next week

The 13th annual Miss Starr’s Mill High School Scholarship Pageant is January 9, 10, and 11.
Preliminary shows start at 7 p.m. and the finals begin at 7:30 p.m. The pageant, which is the annual fundraiser for the drama department at Starr’s Mill, has grown to be the largest high school scholarship pageant in the nation. This year it will award about $7,000 in college scholarships.

read more

via The Citizen http://www.thecitizen.com/articles/01-03-2014/miss-starrs-mill-pageant-next-week

Miss Starr’s Mill Pageant is next week

The 13th annual Miss Starr’s Mill High School Scholarship Pageant is January 9, 10, and 11.
Preliminary shows start at 7 p.m. and the finals begin at 7:30 p.m. The pageant, which is the annual fundraiser for the drama department at Starr’s Mill, has grown to be the largest high school scholarship pageant in the nation. This year it will award about $7,000 in college scholarships.

read more

via The Citizen http://www.thecitizen.com/articles/01-03-2014/miss-starrs-mill-pageant-next-week

Patches

By midnight the last glass was finally placed in the dishwasher and all the wrapping paper thrown away. The excitement of Christmas had been replaced by a whole-body weariness that only comes from the holidays. Entertaining of family and little ones are extremely rewarding, but also extremely draining.
With pj’s on and all the lights off, it was time for a long overdue appointment with bed. A good night sleep was definitely in order.

But such was not to be the case at our house. Sleep would be elusive, and peacefulness would not be found that night or any night since.

read more

via The Citizen http://www.thecitizen.com/blogs/rick-ryckeley/01-03-2014/patches

Legal Gun Owners Can Deter Crime, Says Detroit Police Chief

Detroit Police
Chief James Craig has said that legal gun owners can deter crime, a
position he adopted after becoming police chief in Portland, Maine
in 2009. According to Craig, “Maine is one of the safest places in
America. Clearly, suspects knew that good Americans were
armed.”

From
The Detroit News
:

Detroit— If more citizens were armed, criminals would think
twice about attacking them, Detroit Police Chief James Craig said
Thursday.

Urban police chiefs are typically in favor of gun control or
reluctant to discuss the issue, but Craig on Thursday was candid
about how he’s changed his mind.

“When we look at the good community members who have concealed
weapons permits, the likelihood they’ll shoot is based on a lack of
confidence in this Police Department,” Craig said at a press
conference at police headquarters, adding that he thinks more
Detroit citizens feel safer, thanks in part to a 7 percent drop in
violent crime in 2013.

The Detroit News also notes that Robyn Thomas, the
director of the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence in San
Francisco, disagrees with Craig on the relationship between gun
ownership and crime:

“I think at its core, his position is an emotional one, based on
the idea that people feel safer when they have guns. But studies
have shown more guns don’t deter crime,” Thomas said. “There’s no
research that shows guns make anyone safer, and it does show that,
the more guns in any situation, the higher the likelihood of them
harming either the owner, or people who have access to them.”

Make sure to read the
blog post
by Reason’s Ron Bailey on a recent study
written by Quinnipiac University economist Mark Gius on the effects
assault weapons bans and concealed carry laws have on murder
rates. 

From the abstract of Guis’
study
:

Using data for the period 1980 to 2009 and controlling for state
and year fixed effects, the results of the present study suggest
that states with restrictions on the carrying of concealed weapons
had higher gun-related murder rates than other states. It was also
found that assault weapons bans did not significantly affect murder
rates at the state level.

Follow these stories and more at Reason 24/7 and don’t forget you
can e-mail stories to us at 24_7@reason.com and tweet us
at @reason247.

H/T Chris Staley

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2014/01/03/legal-gun-owners-can-deter-crime-says-d
via IFTTT

Ronald Bailey Wonders If Skynet Is Inevitable

Robot HandsIn the new Spike Jonze movie Her, an
operating system called Samantha evolves into an enchanting
self-directed intelligence with a will of her own. Not to spoil
this visually and intellectually dazzling movie for anyone, but
Samantha makes choices that do not harm humanity, though they do
leave us feeling a bit sadder. In his terrific new book, Our
Final Invention
, the documentarian James Barrat argues that
hopes for the development of an essentially benign artificial
general intelligence (AGI) like Samantha amount to a silly pipe
dream. The book has given technological optimist and
Reason Science Correspondent Ronald Bailey a lot to think
about.

View this article.

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2014/01/03/ronald-bailey-wonders-if-skynet-is-inevi
via IFTTT

Why 2014 Is Already a Year of National Unity! And Why Politicians Don't Care!

Forget Duck Dynasty, belief in
evolution, whether the Cowboys really are (or ever were) “America’s
Team,” and other divisive issues.

The simple fact is that across a broad variety of topics –
including access to abortion, pot legalization, homosexuality, and
the threat of big government – Americans are in super-strong
agreement. Isn’t it about time we recognize that?


I’ve got a new column up at Time.com
that explores that topic
and suggests why despite such agreement the GOP and Democrats – and
their minions on cable news – seem so polarized.

Here’s a snippet:

The apparently massive and unbridgeable gulfs between
Republicans and Democrats, men and women, gays and straights,
secularists and believers, rich and poor, and coastal elites and
heartland Americans are belied by data that substantial and growing
majorities of folks actually agree on a wide variety of important
social and policy issues and attitudes….

In works such as Culture War?: The Myth
of a Polarized America
 (2004) and Disconnect:
The Breakdown of Representation in American
Politics
 (2010), Stanford political scientist Morris
P. Fiorina explains that the mechanisms for selecting
candidates and party platforms reward special-interest groups that
tend to have very narrow and unrepresentative views. “A polarized
political class makes the citizenry appear polarized, writes
Fiorina, “but it is only that – an appearance.” In short, we are
faced with political choices that don’t represent our actual
attitudes toward politics. The same holds true for cable news, too,
where many talkers are former or future party apparatchiks or
pulled from archly ideological publications.

The “bulk of the American citizenry,” Fiorina cheekily suggests,
“is somewhat in the position of the unfortunate citizens of some
third-world countries who try to stay out of the crossfire while
Maoist guerillas and right-wing death squads shoot at each other.”
That’s a pretty good description of channel surfing between Rachel
Maddow and Sean Hannity or flipping between a White House presser
and a John Boehner speech, isn’t it?


Read the whole thing
.

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2014/01/03/why-2014-is-already-a-year-of-national-u
via IFTTT

Why 2014 Is Already a Year of National Unity! And Why Politicians Don’t Care!

Forget Duck Dynasty, belief in
evolution, whether the Cowboys really are (or ever were) “America’s
Team,” and other divisive issues.

The simple fact is that across a broad variety of topics –
including access to abortion, pot legalization, homosexuality, and
the threat of big government – Americans are in super-strong
agreement. Isn’t it about time we recognize that?


I’ve got a new column up at Time.com
that explores that topic
and suggests why despite such agreement the GOP and Democrats – and
their minions on cable news – seem so polarized.

Here’s a snippet:

The apparently massive and unbridgeable gulfs between
Republicans and Democrats, men and women, gays and straights,
secularists and believers, rich and poor, and coastal elites and
heartland Americans are belied by data that substantial and growing
majorities of folks actually agree on a wide variety of important
social and policy issues and attitudes….

In works such as Culture War?: The Myth
of a Polarized America
 (2004) and Disconnect:
The Breakdown of Representation in American
Politics
 (2010), Stanford political scientist Morris
P. Fiorina explains that the mechanisms for selecting
candidates and party platforms reward special-interest groups that
tend to have very narrow and unrepresentative views. “A polarized
political class makes the citizenry appear polarized, writes
Fiorina, “but it is only that – an appearance.” In short, we are
faced with political choices that don’t represent our actual
attitudes toward politics. The same holds true for cable news, too,
where many talkers are former or future party apparatchiks or
pulled from archly ideological publications.

The “bulk of the American citizenry,” Fiorina cheekily suggests,
“is somewhat in the position of the unfortunate citizens of some
third-world countries who try to stay out of the crossfire while
Maoist guerillas and right-wing death squads shoot at each other.”
That’s a pretty good description of channel surfing between Rachel
Maddow and Sean Hannity or flipping between a White House presser
and a John Boehner speech, isn’t it?


Read the whole thing
.

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2014/01/03/why-2014-is-already-a-year-of-national-u
via IFTTT

Window Dressing On, Window Dressing Off… Amounting To $140 Billion In Two Days

On December 31 we demonstrated the biggest operation in the history of the Fed’s temporary open market operations: a $198 billion reverse repo under its brand new fixed-rate scheme, which, at least according to the Fed, was supposed to be a mechanism designed to prepare the market for the “normalization” of the Fed’s balance sheet and allow seamless liquidity extraction. What the Fed did not announce was that it was also the biggest collateral window-dressing scheme ever conceived (that there was $200 billion in free liquidity sloshing around was a distant second highlight).

What we said then was that “We will leave it up to readers to decide what is more surreal: that the Fed is allowing banks to “window dress” to the tune of several times more than total Treasury holdings owned by the Primary Dealers as disclosed by the Fed, or that there is an unprecedented $200 billion in free liquidity floating out there.”

Well, if what happened in the last days of 2013 was indeed merely reverse repo-assisted window dressing, then we would expect the that first days of 2014 should see a comparable collapse in the magnitude of the Fed’s reverse repo operations. Sure enough, as the chart below shows, this is precisely what has happened following today’s far more modest $56.7 billion reverse repo operation conducted among 50 bidding counterparties and the Fed, of course.

In short: collateral window dressing on; collateral window dressing off, all with the blessing of the banks’ overarching regulator, the Federal Reserve. What is most disturbing is that both the world’s largest financial firms, and by implication the Fed, just admitted there is a massive collateral shortage currently if banks are forced to pad their books to the tune of nearly $200 billion in “high quality collateral” just to pass year-end auditor muster.

And a tangent: in the past two days, the Fed has first withdrawn and subsequently re-injected a record $140 billion in liquidity, or nearly two months’ worth of post-taper POMO. One may be tempted to wonder just where it is that these hundreds of billions in fungible electronic monetary equivalents have ended up…


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/ZYqKy5qfuRk/story01.htm Tyler Durden