Since 1971, and the disconnection of the dollar from a finite gold backing, the value of money (the dollar) has been determined by it's purchasing power versus the inflation of the assets to be purchased. Thus printing more money has not necessarily created "wealth" if the assets to be purchased are rising as fast or faster than the purchasing power of the "money". The Fed touts it's dual mandate of full employment and stable prices...but the result in prices; not so stable.
The primary global asset purchasable only in US dollars, crude oil, has told a story of wildly gyrating prices. Since the end of Bretton Woods and the subsequent Congressionally dual mandated roles bestowed on the Fed...crude oil prices have gone bezerk, twice climbing nearly 10x's within a decade. This is the opposite of stable (particularly compared to the price stability from WWII's end until the?Fed took over).
Soooo - Growth - Money - Growth - Population
Soooo, theoretically the growth of "money" should be linked to the growth of the population, to ensure an adequate and stable money supply exists for the growing population. In a moment I'll show you anything but a stable money supply. But first, the chart below shows the total 25-54yr/old US population, those employed among them, and the value in dollars of all publicly traded US stocks (represented by the Wilshire 5000). Something far beyond population growth or employment growth is pushing up the value of dollar based assets, gauging by US stock markets accelerating appreciation.
With that in mind, the chart below shows the growth of M3...
Wake Up To Breaking News!