FacebookTwitter

HAI

Unless otherwise indicated, the material below has not been prepared by Van Eck Associates Corporation or HardAssetsInvestor.com.
Neither assumes any liability for any content on a third party website or material prepared by a third party.
   |
Poor Nothing special Worth watching Pretty cool Awesome!
Rate this article
Understanding Inflation
Written by Julian Murdoch   
January 08, 2009 2:17 pm EST

 

Commodities and inflation are in the same headlines time and again. So what's the connection?

It's always good to start with a definition, even if you lived through the double-digit inflation of 1974-75 and the early 1980s and know what inflation is firsthand.

Here, then, is that definition, courtesy of Webster's:

 

in·fla·tion

A continuing rise in the general price level usually attributed to an increase in the volume of money and credit relative to available goods and services

 

Now let's bring that back down to the real world.

Everything in the world changes with time. Seasons shift, people grow older and prices move up and down - in some cases with each tick of the clock. We humans have a compulsion to label things, so when prices persistently go up, we call it inflation. When prices go down, we call it deflation.

The tricky bit to remember is that with rising prices, we get a corresponding decrease in purchasing power. For example, a candy bar that cost $1 in 2003 would cost roughly $1.15 today - or to think of it another way, if you only wanted to spend $1, that same stale candy bar would be slightly smaller today. In order just to stay even - to have the same basic wealth - you're source of cash flow (investments, paychecks, lottery winnings) has to at least keep pace, or you're literally becoming poorer, no matter what the numbers in your bank account look like.

 

Measuring Inflation

To make sure we're comparing apples to apple, U.S. inflation (and deflation) is calculated based on a specific basket of things consumers actually buy every day - captured in the Consumer Price Index (CPI), published in the U.S. by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

In practice, what we refer to as the CPI is really the CPI-U: The CPI for All Urban Consumers, which is a basket of goods and services commonly purchased by urban households. The CPI-U is designed to represent the average, real-market experience of 87% of the households in the U.S. When headlines talk about the CPI, what they usually mean is the CPI-U.

Another oft-headlined index is the Core CPI - the CPI-U without the items in the basket that are directly food- and energy-related. Why would anyone remove food and energy? After all, I know that my oil, gas and grocery bills make up a very large part of my household budget.

Well, since the CPI is watched as a yardstick for monetary policy by many economists and policy makers, the idea is that food and energy are subject to short-term microeconomic supply-and-demand shocks, and are thus too volatile to be a good yardstick for assessing the impact of monetary policy. (In other words, food and energy prices change too quickly.) But since most of us live in the real world - not the monetary policy theme park - we typically refer to (and journalists report on) the CPI-U, and not the core CPI.

Included in the CPI are things like food, beverages, housing, apparel, transportation, medical care, recreation, education, communication and other goods and services. Also included in the basket are all the little taxes and fees that make this nation great - things like auto registrations, water and sewer taxes, etc. Income and Social Security taxes are not included. (To learn more, visit the CPI's home at the Bureau of Labor Statistics. It's great nightstand reading.)

There's a third set of inflation indexes we should be paying attention to as commodities investors, however, and that's the Producer Price Indexes (PPI). The PPI, instead of measuring what consumers spend, measures the actual amount that producers receive for their goods. Here's how the BLS describes it:

 

PPIs measure price change from the perspective of the seller. This contrasts with other measures, such as the Consumer Price Index (CPI), that measure price change from the purchaser's perspective. Sellers' and purchasers' prices may differ due to government subsidies, sales and excise taxes, and distribution costs. (PPI FAQs Bureau of Labor Statistics)

 

Besides highlighting the difference between purchasers and consumers, the main differences between the two indexes is that the PPI is only domestic, and it removes the entire retail service sector from the equation, both of which can be seen as "noise" if you are trying to understand nuts and bolts U.S. economics. The CPI, with its consumer perspective, collects data on anything that is bought by consumers, and includes imports, as well as sales and excise taxes. PPI is just the price the producer gets for its good.

 

The differences between the PPI and CPI are consistent with the different uses of the two measures. A primary use of the PPI is to deflate revenue streams in order to measure real growth in output. A primary use of the CPI is to adjust income and expenditure streams for changes in the cost of living. (PPI FAQs Bureau of Labor Statistics)

 

There's some belief among economists that because the PPI is less volatile, and that it may in fact be a better longer-term measure of shifts in the economy. But that is a subject we'll leave to the economists. From a commodities perspective, since consumers don't directly consume #2 Field Corn and Crude, the PPI is one step closer to the actual industrial transactions that drive commodity prices.



 

More on this topic (What's this?)
Best Investments During Inflation
Marc Faber: Massive Inflation and then War
FABER: DON’T TOUCH U.S. GOVERNMENT BONDS
SA economic drag anchors fully deployed
Read more on Inflation at Wikinvest
 
Subscribe to Our Weekly Newsletter 

Comments (3)

 Thursday, 08 January 2009 16:18 EST - Posted by John

 
Your definition of Inflation has been redefined to serve a Keynesian economics view. It serves to hide the real cause of the rise in prices of goods, services & commodities. Rather, it focuses on the effects of the expansion of money/credit and calls that "inflation".

Inflation is an increase in the supply of fudicary money and credit. Deflation is a reduction in the supply of fudicary money and credit. Inflation is caused by a central bank (the Federal Reserve) monetary policy who prints money or similary creates computer balance sheet entry in order to make interest rates lower than can be serviced via savings deposited in banks. The increase in Federal Reserve balance sheet is magnified when loaned out via fractional reserve banking. All newly created money/credit is placing additional demand to consume goods/services/commodities without being earned first. If it were earned (or borrowed from existing dollars)then the work done to earn that money would first have contributed a service/good/commodity to the economy that would be available for consumption. This would keep prices flat or down. Simultaneously, if the dollars were borrowed from existing savings the lender would not have their dollars to spend/compete for those same goods that were consumed by the borrower.

 Tuesday, 13 January 2009 16:50 EST - Posted by Julian Murdoch

 
Thanks for the comments,

I'm not sure I disagree with you, or that in fact this 101 piece really disagrees with you. The purpose of the article was to provide a primer on how to interpret inflation as reported, and the impact that inflation-as-reported can be expected to have on an investors commodities portfolio.

 Thursday, 04 March 2010 0:31 EST - Posted by Joel Pierson

 
If you start Larry Swedroe's Gold vs inflation example at the beginning of 1980 instead of the end of 1980 when gold was at $400 oz. the result at the end of 2008 (1 year added) would be $1020 oz. As you can see, depending on the time span, one can make either side of this argument. Practically speaking, one needs to buy right just like every other purchase to make it work.



Post a Comment

Comment
(Limit 2,000
characters) 
*
Name: *
E-mail: *
Home page:

(optional)

Type in the displayed characters
Email follow-up comments to my e-mail address
 


Terms of Use
The HardAssetsInvestor.com message board and comment features are designed to facilitate thoughtful discussion of the biggest issues impacting commodity investors. All comments should be respectful. Insults and profanity are not permitted. The editor reserves the right to remove comments at his/her discretion.

 

Related Articles »

Did you like this article? Then you may be interested in:

  • The Good, The Not-So-Bad, And The Ugly
    You could say that it's the best of all possible worlds when the worst funds in an asset class crank out positive returns.
    February 21, 2008
  • An Interview With Michael Metz
    Michael Metz, chief investment strategist for Oppenheimer & Company, lays out his opinions on each segment of the commodities market.
    December 06, 2007
  • Nusbaum: Buying Agriculture
    Financial adviser and TheStreet.com contributor Roger Nusbaum sees opportunities in agriculture and other hard asset categories.
    May 29, 2009
  • Commodities Vs. Commodity Stocks Redux
    HardAssetsInvestor.com's managing editor runs down the recent stark contrast in several commodity/stock ratios.
    March 12, 2009
  • Getting Technical With Commodities: An Interview
    Bruce Zaro, chief technical strategist at Delta Global Advisors, says what's hot and what's not from a technical perspective in the commodities market.Gold at the top of its trendAgs look good from hereWhy oil is a no-go
    February 13, 2009
 

Commodities Data

September 10, 2010 01:24 PM EST

  Loading data ...
 

Weekly Commodities Poll

Do you think futures-based ETFs have a significant effect on commodities prices?

 

Related Articles »

Did you like this article? Then you may be interested in:

  • The Good, The Not-So-Bad, And The Ugly
    You could say that it's the best of all possible worlds when the worst funds in an asset class crank out positive returns.
    February 21, 2008
  • An Interview With Michael Metz
    Michael Metz, chief investment strategist for Oppenheimer & Company, lays out his opinions on each segment of the commodities market.
    December 06, 2007
  • Nusbaum: Buying Agriculture
    Financial adviser and TheStreet.com contributor Roger Nusbaum sees opportunities in agriculture and other hard asset categories.
    May 29, 2009
  • Commodities Vs. Commodity Stocks Redux
    HardAssetsInvestor.com's managing editor runs down the recent stark contrast in several commodity/stock ratios.
    March 12, 2009
  • Getting Technical With Commodities: An Interview
    Bruce Zaro, chief technical strategist at Delta Global Advisors, says what's hot and what's not from a technical perspective in the commodities market.Gold at the top of its trendAgs look good from hereWhy oil is a no-go
    February 13, 2009
 

Seminal Papers »