One more time

 

JPMorgan economists evoke God (and Samuel L. Jackson) in a chilling research note about central banks

"JPMorgan’s global economic research team just published note titled: “They will know I am the lord when I lay my vengeance on them.“

"The quote comes from Ezekiel 25:17. It was popularized in “Pulp Fiction” by fictional hitman Jules Winnfield — portrayed by Samuel L. Jackson. 

(Gotta go with sort of on that, see Google search Ezekiel 25:17)

"JPMorgan’s global economic research team just published note titled: “They will know I am the lord when I lay my vengeance on them."

(Maybe some folks is waking up?)

"Led by Bruce Kasman, JPMorgan’s economics team employs the chilling language to characterize the Federal Reserve’s “decisively hawkish shift“ in the wake of recent hotter-than-expected inflation reports.

(Bear with me on the following jargon, I'll translate here in a minute.)

"While downside risks to the economy have intensified, the economists believe “that central bankers have not completely forsaken the expansion. While the Fed should move forcefully to contain inflation, we expect it to become more sensitive to growth disappointments once rates reach 3% later this year. How quickly the expected mix of restrictive policy, inflation moderation, and a slowdown in job growth end this phase of tightening has become harder to gauge and will be a key determinant of the life of this expansion.“

(The expansion has been over for a few weeks already yo)

(Okay, translations time:

"While the Fed should move forcefully to contain inflation, we expect it to become more sensitive to growth disappointments once rates reach 3%..."

Translates into:

"We know what happens at 4% and so does the fed, so we expect them to back off interest rate increases when they get to 3%."

"the expected mix of restrictive policy"

"Restrictive monetary policy is how central banks slow economic growth. It's called restrictive because the banks restrict liquidity. It reduces the amount of money and credit that banks can lend. It lowers the money supply by making loans, credit cards, and mortgages more expensive. That constricts demand, which slows economic growth and inflation. Restrictive monetary policy is also known as contractionary monetary policy."

Restrictive Monetary Policy, Its Purpose and Tools

It wont do a thing for supply shocks which is exactly what we are seeing. Think about it for a second, constricting demand is gonna is gonna lower the price of what you cant get already?" How are you gonna restrict demand for food energy and housing exactly? (Big things hit hard by inflation everybody needs to get by on.)

"inflation moderation"

Until there is more refining capacity and more wheat/cereals/grains in the world? You can flat out forget about inflation moderation.

Central banks simply can not solve supply shocks and that's where we are at. Anything else is just a dog and pony show to try and say the right things while all the while knowing where things are heading.

"a slowdown in job growth..."

The slowdown in job growth is already here.

Average job growth of last 3 months better measure of labor market than 115,000 jobs added in April

"Statistics showed 115,000 jobs were added in April.  This is a drop from recent months, but given seasonal factors, the average job growth of the last three months – 176,000 jobs – is probably the best measure of the current underlying trend.  This trend is well above the roughly 100,000 jobs per month we need to keep the unemployment rate stable, so the labor market continues to very slowly improve, but it is a far cry from the 300,000 or 400,000 jobs we would need per month to get back to full employment in a reasonable timeframe.

Okay back to for a minute:

"Central banks simply can not solve supply shocks and that's where we are at. Anything else is just a dog and pony show to try and say the right things while all the while knowing where things are heading.

Why would they (JPMorgan et al) do such a thing? You might ask.

Because they're investment firms and as long as they can convince people everything is going to be okay people will continue to fork over their $ to them. See 1 Thessalonians 5:3 again.

Okay done with translations :-)

"The news spooked a lot of folks who were expecting inflation to be improving."

(The fact that inflation went up again in May after leveling off in April)

(8.5% in May, 8.3% in April, Everybody gets excited, 8.6% in May)

"spooked a lot of folks who were expecting inflation to be improving."

Again, their expectations were just not grounded in any tangible reality. Over $3 more a gallon for diesel to harvest the same crop as last year but inflation is just gonna subside? Not enough oil or food in the world to meet demand but raising interest rates is gonna fix that problem? These people think your stupid and they just want you to keep forking over your $ to them that is all this amounts to.)

The author of the piece says:

"I’m of the mind that the economy and the stock market are biased to the upside in the long run. We have a long history of recessions, depressions, geopolitical conflicts, financial crises, pandemics, and even inflation scares. And yet, the economy and stock market have never failed to recover losses and come back even stronger."

Dear sir:

You are ignoring the fact that we have never had all of them all at once like we currently are.

Matthew 24:21

For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equaled again.

And Lets throw in the economic cost of climate change along with everything in your list as well since that's has been left out of your calculation that "the economy and the stock market are biased to the upside in the long run.", and this would  most assuredly be something we have not experienced on this scale previously.

Climate crisis is ‘battering our economy’ and driving inflation, new book says

"According to Keefe, citing National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa) figures, climate-related weather disasters cost the US economy more than $145bn in 2021 – a nearly 50% increase from last year. Over the last five years, they have cost $750bn. Since 1980 323 weather and climate disasters have cost $1bn or more, the total cost of these events exceeds $2.195tn."

(This is what they want you to think is sustainable? 2.2 trillion since 1980 and costing more every year?)

"Another study published in Environmental Research Letters in July last year, found long-term warming contributed $27bn to the losses covered by the US crop insurance program from 1991 to 2017, or just over 19% of the total. In 2012, the single costliest year, rising temperatures contributed nearly half of losses valued at $18.6bn."

"Loss of timber and homes due to wildfires in the west might show up in housing construction costs, or the cost of retrofitting homes to guard against coastal erosion and flooding. “Right there you have several things that are either increasing demand or undermining supply,” Super points out. “And that’s just one small part of it.”

"Similarly, supply chain issues frequently cited as inflationary may not simply be issues around China Covid lockdowns affecting manufacturing, but a range of issues from roads washing out or loss of crops due to extreme weather events and shifting weather patterns.

“What we do know is that the economic cost of climate change, both from weather disaster and commodities costs, is taking an increasing toll on economies,” says Keefe.

(How in the world are you gonna argue with that?)

But if one of the major inflationary forces is climate, it’s also one that can’t be tackled simply by central bankers adjusting interest rates.

(Just like supply shocks even though the keepers of the status quo want to convince you otherwise.)

Like I said earlier...

"...and the band played on..."

I love you baby.

My head needs a rest sweetheart. TTYS.