UK Deflation

What is deflation

The 'general price level' comprises the price of wages, consumption goods and services. As with inflation, there are economists who regard deflation as a purely monetary effect, when the monetary authority constricts the money supply, and there are those who believe that price deflation follows dramatic falls in business confidence, which reduces the velocity of money, i.e. the speed with which money is circulating. However, it is at least theoretically possible to have a falling money supply but stable or rising prices, if the rate of increase of the velocity of money is substantially greater than the rate at which the money supply is falling. Presumably, this is what happens in the early stages of a hyper-inflation as the monetary authorities lose control over the money supply (but are initially, at least, trying to put on the brakes by the usual remedy of restricting money supply).

In the recent years, economists have also started to use the term inflation and deflation in relation to assets (i.e., as a short-hand for price inflation or price deflation), such as stocks and housing (production goods). Indeed, policies designed to fight inflation in goods, services and wages, have seemed to spur stock and housing price inflation, or asset bubbles. During deflation, while consumers can buy more with the same amount of money, they also have less access to money (e.g., as wages, debt, or the return realized on sales of their products). Consumers and producers who are in debt, such as mortgagors, suffer because as their (money) income drops, their (money) payments remain constant. Central bankers worry about deflation, because many of the tools of monetary policy become ineffective as the real cost of money (the interest rate minus the inflation rate) begins to turn higher again once the inflation rate drops below zero (nominal interest rates cannot fall below zero; that would be equivalent to the banks paying customers to borrow money!). Deflation may set off a deflationary spiral, where businesses slow or stop investing, because the investment risk is perceived as higher than just letting the money appreciate due to deflation. (The deflationary spiral is the opposite of the hyper-inflationary spiral.)

Deflation is generally regarded as a negative in modern currency environments, because a deflationary spiral may cause large falls in GDP and purchasing power, and may take a very long time to correct.

However, a deflationary bias is the norm under specie or specie backed money economies, as population and production tend to increase faster than the stock of specie. (Conversely, an inflationary bias is the norm under credit money economies.) There are also episodes where there may be deflation in only a particular kind or type of goods, such as commodities during the Great commodities depression of 1982-1998.

Deflation should not be confused with disinflation which is a slowing in the rate of inflation, that is, where the general level of prices are still increasing, but slower than before.

In monetarists theory, deflation is defined in terms of a rise in the demand for money, based on the quantity of money available. The Quantity Theory of Money is founded on the Fisher equation (also called the equation of exchange),

MV = PT, [2]
where M is the money supply, V is the velocity of money, P is the average price level and T is the total number of transactions.

In this model of deflation, it is a contraction of the money supply which reduces the velocity of mone, and thus the number of transactions falls and therefore the general price level falls in response.

Effects of deflation
In mainstream economic theory deflation is a general reduction in the level of prices, or of the prices of an entire kind of asset or commodity. Deflation should not be confused with temporarily falling prices; instead, it is a sustained fall in general prices. In the IS-LM model this is caused by a shift in the supply and demand curve for goods and interest, particularly a fall in the aggregate level of demand. That is, there is a fall in how much the whole economy is willing to buy, and the going price for goods. Since this idles capacity, investment also falls, leading to further reductions in aggregate demand. This is the deflationary spiral. The solution to falling aggregate demand is stimulus either from the central bank, by expanding the money supply, or by the fiscal authority to increase demand, and borrow at rates which are below those available to private entities.

In more recent economic thinking, deflation is related to risk, where the risk adjusted return of assets drops to negative, investors and buyers will hoard currency rather than invest it, even in the most solid of securities. This can produce the theoretical condition, much debated as to its practical possibility, of a liquidity trap. A central bank cannot, normally, charge negative interest for money, and even charging zero interest often produces less stimulative effect than slightly higher rates of interest. In a closed economy, this is because charging zero interest also means having zero return on government securities, or even negative return on short maturities. In an open economy it creates a carry trade and devalues the currency producing higher prices for imports without necessarily stimulating exports to a like degree, the experience of Japan during its 1988-2004 depression is though to illustrate both of these problems.

In monetarist theory deflation is related to a sustained reduction in the velocity of money or number of transacitons. This is attributed to a dramatic contraction of the money supply, perhaps in response to a falling exchange rate, or to adhere to a gold standard or other external monetary base requirement.

Deflation is generally regarded negatively, as it is a tax on borrowers and on holders of illiquid assets, which accrues to the benefit of savers and of holders of liquid assets and currency. In this sense it is the opposite of inflation (or in the extreme, hyperinflation), which is a tax on currency holders and lenders (savers) in favor of borrowers and short term consumption. In modern economies, deflation is caused by a collapse in demand (usually brought on by high interest rates), and is associated with recession and (more rarely) long term economic depressions.

In modern economies, as loan terms have grown in length and financing is integral to building and general business, the penalties associated with deflation have grown larger. Since deflation discourages investment and spending, because there is no reason to risk on future profits when the expectation of profits may be negative and the expectation of future prices is lower, it generally leads to, or is associated with a collapse in aggregate demand. Without the "hidden risk of inflation", it may become more prudent just to hold onto money, and not to spend or invest it.

Deflation is, however, the natural condition of hard currency economies when the rate of increase in the supply of money is not maintained at a rate commensurate to positive population (and general economic) growth. When this happens, the available amount of hard currency per person falls, in effect making money scarcer; and consequently, the purchasing power of each unit of currency increases. The late 19th century provides an example of sustained deflation combined with economic development under these conditions.

Deflation also occurs when improvements in production efficiency lowers the overall price of goods. Improvements in production efficiency generally happen because economic producers of goods and services are motivated by a promise of increased profit margins, resulting from the production improvements that they make. But despite their profit motive, competition in the marketplace often prompts those producers to apply at least some portion of these cost savings into reducing the asking price for their goods. When this happens, consumers pay less for those goods; and consequently deflation has occurred, since purchasing power has increased.

While an increase in the purchasing power of one's money sounds beneficial, it can actually cause hardship when the majority of one's net worth is held in illiquid assets such as homes, land, and other forms of private property. It also amplifies the sting of debt, since-- after some period of significant deflation-- the payments one is making in the service of a debt represent a larger amount of purchasing power than they did when the debt was first incurred. Consequently, deflation can be thought of as a phantom amplification of a loan's interest rate. (But, conversely, inflation may be thought of as a regressive, across the board general tax.)

This lesson about protracted deflationary cycles and their attendant hardships has been felt several times in modern history. During the 19th century, the Industrial Revolution brought about a huge increase in production efficiency, that happened to coincide with a relatively flat money-supply. These two deflationary catalysts led, simultaneously, not only to tremendous capital development, but also to tremendous deprivation for millions of people who were ill-equipped to deal with the dark side of deflation. Business owners-- on average, better educated in economic theory than their unfortunate cohorts (or just better able to withstand the economic stresses)-- recognized the deflation cycle as it unfolded, and positioned themselves to leverage its beneficial aspects.

Hard money advocates argue that if there were no "rigidities" in an economy, then deflation should be a welcome effect, as the lowering of prices would allow more of the economy's effort to be moved to other areas of activity, thus increasing the total output of the economy. However, while there have been periods of 'beneficial' deflation (especially in industry segments, such as computers), more often it has led to the more severe form with negative impact to large segments of the populace and economy.

Since deflationary periods favor those who hold currency over those who do not, they are often matched with periods of rising populist sentiment, as in the late 19th century, when populists in the United States wanted to move off hard money standards and back to a money standard based on the more inflationary (because more abundantly available) metal silver.

Most economists agree that the effects of modest long-term inflation are less damaging than deflation (which, even at best, is very hard to control). Deflation raises real wages which are both difficult and costly for management to lower. This frequently leads to layoffs and makes employers reluctant to hire new workers, increasing unemployment. However, in the last 5 years or so, real wages for the average worker has remained fixed or actually decreased, with little effect on unemployment.

Causes of deflation
From a monetary perspective deflation is caused by a reduction in the velocity of money and/or the amount of money supply per person. In a hard money economy (with limited specie sources), deflation is the more natural state of the economy - people multiply and economies grow faster than hard money is created. Capitalism (when sufficient competition exists) is also an engine of deflation: as capital stocks improve, and there are more competitors, the supply of goods goes up, which means prices must fall until they balance demand. Capitalism also drives efficiency and innovation which has a downward pull on prices.

A distinction then, should be drawn between deflation in hard currency economies, such as those on the gold standard and economies which run on credit. In modern credit based economies, a deflationary spiral may be caused by the (central bank) initiating higher interest rates (e.g., to 'control' inflation), thereby possibly popping a(n asset) bubble or the collapse of a command economy which has been run at a higher level of production than it could actually support. In a credit based economy, a fall in money supply leads to markedly less lending, with a further sharp fall in money supply (since debt is money), and a consequent sharp fall-off in demand for goods. Demand falls, and with the falling of demand, there is a fall in prices as a supply glut develops. This becomes a deflationary spiral when prices fall below the costs of financing production. Businesses, unable to make enough profit no matter how low they set prices, are then liquidated. Banks get assets which have fallen dramatically in value since the (mortgage) loan was made, and if they sell those assets, they further glut supply, which only exacerbates the situation. To slow or halt the deflationary spiral, banks will often withhold collecting on non-performing loans (as in Japan, most recently). This is often no more than a stop-gap measure, because they must then restrict credit, since they do not have money to lend, which further reduces demand, and so on.

In unstable currency economies, barter and other alternate currency arrangements are common, and therefore when the 'official' money becomes scarce (or unusually unreliable), commerce can still continue (e.g., most recently in Russia and Argentina). Since in such economies the central government is often unable, even if it were willing, to adequately control the internal economy, there is no pressing need for individuals to acquire official currency except to pay for imported goods. In effect, barter acts as protective tariff in such economies, encouraging local consumption of local production. It also acts as a spur to mining and exploration, since one easy way to make money in such an economy is to dig it out of the ground.

When the central bank has lowered nominal interest rates all the way to zero, it can no longer further stimulate demand by lowering interest rates - "deflation is when the central bank cannot give money away". This is the famous liquidity trap. When deflation takes hold, it requires "special arrangements" to "lend" money at a zero nominal rate of interest (which could still be a very high real rate of interest, due to the negative inflation rate) in order to (artificially) increase the money supply.

This cycle has been traced out on the broad scale during the Great Depression. Specifically when the collapse of the Viennese Credit-Anstalt bank led to the subsequent collapse of the entire global financial system.[3] International trade contracted sharply, severely reducing demand for goods, thereby idling a great deal of capacity, and setting off a string of bank failures. A similar situation in Japan, beginning with the stock and real estate market collapse in the early 1990s, was arrested by the Japanese government preventing the collapse of most banks and taking over direct control of several in the worst condition. These occurrences are the matter of intense debate. There are economists who argue that the post-2000 recession had a period where the US was at risk of severe deflation, and that therefore the Federal Reserve central bank was right in holding interest rates at an "accommodative" stance from 2001 on.