2023年6月10日土曜日

2023/06/08 Isabella Weber on the Big Inflation Rethink | Odd Lots

ーー



2023/06/08 Isabella Weber on the Big Inflation Rethink | Odd Lots
https://youtu.be/H6WXKUQJ62Y?t=40m50s


https://twitter.com/isabellamweber/status/1667515818530287616?s=61






https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-06-08/economist-isabella-weber-on-inflation-greedflation-and-how-companies-set-prices?srnd=oddlots&leadSource=uverify%20wall

https://podcasts.apple.com/jp/podcast/odd-lots/id1056200096?i=1000616115966

Isabella (38:43):
Yeah, I mean maybe to add to your list, we have also of course seen the European gas price cap is an international, I mean transnationally coordinated kind of price cap and the oil price cap against Russian oil, which I mean in principle could be for all oil, right? I mean just in terms of the technicality of the price control mechanism.

So yes, absolutely. It's been a totally astonishing to me. The reason why I wrote this article at the time was because I felt that the debate amongst economists was polarized between those who were saying like "Oh, we don't have to worry about inflation too much, it's just transitory." And those who were saying "Oh, inflation's really a problem, therefore we have to hike interest rates yesterday." And I felt like there was a position missing there, which is, yeah, we have very large price spikes and they're a problem.

But if you have a fire in the kitchen, you don't set your whole house under the water, but you try to put out the fire in the kitchen, right? So not as an apologist of price controls, but to say, "hey, there is something sectoral that we can do." And direct means of price stabilization can be an emergency measure to buy time when you are faced with these kind of crazy price spikes.

Now the key word here I think is "emergency measure." And my sense is that the more urgent the emergency became, the more acceptable these kind of measures ended up being. And I think that in Europe you can see this very clearly in terms of the reactions to the war, but then also like basically as it became colder, right? And the fear of winter just became very real. The perceived emergency became more intense and the willingness to take these kind of measures became greater.

The seller's inflation story, I feel like is related but also kind of slightly separate in the sense that the price control debate is really about emergency measures that you take, right? And the sellers' inflation paper is really about how do we understand this kind of inflation. 

But I think the shift that we are seeing now that of course is not complete and so on, but that at least it's becoming more acceptable to think about other ways of understanding how inflation came about, is kind of the first step that we need to take to move towards a different kind of economic stabilization paradigm that I personally think we really need in this age of overlapping emergencies.

So it's been quite a wild ride, but I guess talking today — and it has been very wild, so god knows what's going to happen next — it looks like there has been some movement in a good direction in the sense that the discourse is becoming more open. And I think that an open discourse is really what we need if we are faced with these unprecedented situations because you cannot respond to an unprecedented situation by saying "we have always known how exactly it works."

イザベラ (38:43):
ええ、リストに追加したいと思いますが、ヨーロッパのガス価格の上限は国際的なものであり、国境を越えて調整された種類の価格の上限と、ロシアの石油に対する石油の価格の上限であることももちろん見てきました。私が言いたいのは、原理的にはすべての石油に当てはまりますよね?私が言いたいのは、価格管理メカニズムの技術的な観点だけです。

はい、絶対に。それは私にとってまったく驚くべきことでした。当時私がこの記事を書いた理由は、経済学者の間で議論が「インフレは一時的なものであまり心配する必要はない」という意見に二極化していると感じたからです。そして、「ああ、インフレは本当に問題だ。だから昨日利上げしなければならない」と言っている人たち。そして、そこにポジションが欠けているように感じました。つまり、非常に大きな価格高騰があり、それが問題になっているのです。

でも、キッチンで火事が起きたら、家全体を水の中に沈めるのではなく、キッチンで火を消そうとするでしょう?つまり、価格統制の擁護者としてではなく、「分野別に私たちにできることがある」と言いたいのです。そして、価格安定化の直接的な手段は、この種の異常な価格高騰に直面したときに時間を稼ぐための緊急手段となり得ます。
 

さて、ここでのキーワードは「緊急対策」だと思います。そして、私の感覚では、緊急事態がより緊迫すればするほど、最終的にはこの種の措置は受け入れられやすくなるのです。ヨーロッパでは、戦争への反応という点でこれが非常にはっきりとわかると思いますが、基本的に寒くなるにつれ、同様のことも同様ですよね? そして、冬の恐怖が非常に現実的になってきました。緊急事態の認識はさらに強まり、この種の措置を講じようとする意欲がさらに高まりました。

売り手のインフレの話は、価格管理の議論は実際にあなたが講じる緊急措置に関するものであるという意味で、関連しているようにも感じますが、少し別の話でもあるように感じますよね?そして、売り手のインフレに関する論文は、実際には、この種のインフレをどのように理解するかについてのものです。 

しかし、私たちが現在見ている変化は、もちろん完全などではありませんが、少なくともインフレがどのように生じたのかを理解する別の方法を考えることがより受け入れられつつあるということは、私たちが必要とする最初のステップのようなものだと思います。私は、緊急事態が重なり合うこの時代に本当に必要だと個人的に考えている、別の種類の経済安定化パラダイムに移行する必要があります。

かなりワイルドな展開でしたが、今日話していると、とてもワイルドだったので、次に何が起こるかは神のみぞ知るですが、言説が変わりつつあるという意味で、良い方向への動きがあったように見えます。もっとオープンに。そして、このような前例のない状況に直面した場合、本当に必要なのはオープンな議論だと思います。なぜなら、前例のない状況に「私たちはそれがどのように機能するかを常に知っている」と言うだけでは対応できないからです。

Isabella Weber Explains Why We're Rethinking the Way Inflation Works

‘Excuseflation’ is everywhere now.

Cooked pork dishes for sale at a food stall in Beijing, China, on Thursday, Jan, 12, 2023. 

Cooked pork dishes for sale at a food stall in Beijing, China, on Thursday, Jan, 12, 2023. 

Bloomberg
Earlier this year, Odd Lots talked about the idea of companies taking advantage of bottlenecks and other disruptions to raise their prices. Since then, the notion of this type of corporate-led inflation has burst into the public discourse with central bankers and politicians all taking a closer look. But how does this type of inflation differ from more traditional economic interpretations of prices, and what are the implications for monetary and economic policy? In this episode, we talk once again to Isabella Weber, the UMass-Amherst economics professor who dubbed this phenomenon "sellers' inflation" in a paper published earlier this year. She talks about how the way we think about inflation is changing and her own experience of seeing public attitudes shift in real time. This transcript has been lightly edited for clarity.
ーーーー Hello and welcome to another episode of the Odd Lots Podcast. I'm Tracy Alloway. And I'm Joe Weisenthal. Joe, do you remember the episode we did, I think it was just a couple months ago, with the Corbu strategist, Samuel Rines, about companies are telling us the real reason they're raising prices. Yeah, a great episode that sort of helped me like analyze like corporate earnings calls from then on and really like think about particularly in the consumer space where he had this thesis that companies are like very explicitly willing to sacrifice volume expansion in favor of higher prices and higher margins. Right. He called it price over volume. And since that episode, so we actually wrote an article based on that episode and we had a lot of quotes from Sam. We also cited a research paper from an Odd Lot's favorite, Isabella Weber, and we talked about this phenomenon, we called it excuseflation, So this idea that companies are using all these one-off emergencies as an excuse to raise prices. But since then this whole idea has exploded into the public consciousness in various ways under different umbrella terms. So Isabella used the term sellers inflation. I've seen like profit led inflation, greed inflation. Although I think that's a bad term for it personally, but it's everywhere now. Right, and it's funny 'cause it's one of these things where, you know, economists are sort of like scandalized by sort of alternative ideas about inflation and it's like they have certain things like some people say money supply, others say like labor costs and wages, but like it feels like on Wall Street there's kind of less mystery. It's like no, they're like at least you know, according to the people who read the calls, it's like no, they're telling us they're willing to push price. And I guess the question is like, you know, well there's lots of follow on questions, but like I think there's some really interesting policy ramifications from some of this identification. Totally. And it is funny, it's not, Pepsi isn't talking about like, oh the money supply is increasing, therefore we're raising our prices. They're talking very explicitly about, well we have these one-off reasons maybe to raise our prices and so we're gonna see how far we can take it to the consumer. So anyway, everyone is talking about this, whether you call it greedflation, excuseflation, profit-led inflation, sellers inflation. We need to go back to one of our favorite guests, who's done a lot of academic work on this topic. We specifically cited her work in the piece that we did. We're gonna be speaking with Isabella Weber. I'm psyched, on set. All right. Isabella Weber, economics professor at University of Massachusetts Amherst, thank you so much for coming back on. Thanks so much for having me back and it's a true pleasure to be here in person. Yeah, this is a treat. I didn't realize up until like five minutes ago that you were gonna be on set. I thought we were gonna look the video so great to finally meet you. Oh, the first time we're actually meeting in person. Yeah, have you been surprised at all by how quickly this seems to have become, I hesitate to call it mainstream 'cause people are still debating it but it's in the "Wall Street Journal", it's in the "New New York Times", certainly in Bloomberg coverage. Yeah, I think it has been very surprising, especially since some of the key data on the profit margins actually already came out in the fourth quarter of 2021. So, and you guys have actually been covering that at the time, you were covering the profit margin explosion that happened at the same time as inflation started to take off. And in this by now probably infamous "Guardian" piece that I wrote, I actually started by saying there is a so far pretty much undiscussed phenomenon, which is an explosion of profit margins that coincides with inflation and we should take a closer look at that. So I think in many ways when our paper came out at the beginning of this year, it has kind of been something that had been going on for a long time and companies have been saying this on earnings calls for a long time. The groundwork folks have been calling this out for a long time, but now it really took off, so. So I guess one of my questions and have many is, you know, there are different factors that people talk about driving inflation and obviously the tight labor market, fast wage growth, high levels of consumer demand, a lot of the supply chain bottlenecks that we've talked about over the years on the show, the supply side factors, why is it important? Let's start with that to sort of like think about correct identification of different causes. Yeah, I mean when economists talk about causation, they have very, very high standards, right? So I'm not yet there to say like what I did, it's like a causal analysis just to put this out there. It's kind of a disclaimer, but I think this is kind of part of the challenge that we face because we are in a really unprecedented moment in the world, in the economy, in the global economy, right? And inflation is kind of part of that whole unprecedented moment. So you are getting these pieces of data that are coming out and you kind of have to reason on them however incomplete the data might be. And if you just look at it from the perspective of your standard inflation paradigm, then you basically just look at money supply, aggregate demand, and maybe wages. And you don't look at all these other stuff that you guys have been reporting about for months and months and months, right? But if you sit in a corporate boardroom, then you are actually looking at all this other stuff. So then from your perspective, prices present themselves as something very different. So what we are doing with this research I think is to kind of say let's take the information that we have, however incomplete it still may be, and try to make sense why we are seeing what we are seeing. What we are seeing is that on earnings calls time and again corporate leaders are saying that they can take pricing and that they can increase prices in ways that they might not even have expected and that they can increase prices even when volumes are going down, which is just against the logic of basic supply demand, right? Where we would expect with demand going up, prices going up and not the other way around. Now you might say, well it's about the bottleneck and then demand is strong so therefore it's still a demand kind of story. But then I would say, well if I look at the earnings calls in the latest quarter, right? Where clearly the bottlenecks for the most part have ceased and they're still taking price when volumes are going down, then clearly this is also not a pure kind of bottleneck type of story. Well maybe just to step back for a second, talk to us about what seller's inflation, this is the term that you use actually is and how maybe it differs to traditional conceptions of greedflation, because this is one reason I remember when we were writing that piece, Joe, this is one reason why I wanted to call it something other than greedflation because it's not like everyone woke up in March, 2020 and suddenly decided to become more greedy. Which is a common critique of like that. Yeah, and quite frankly, I think that everybody agrees on that. Like no one is saying that there has been this sudden greedy impulse, firm leaders just became more greedy than they used to be, right? That is just not a good theory. So the question is how can it be that in incredibly concentrated industries we had decades of surprising price stability, right? Even like deflation in some periods. And now in this same highly concentrated kind of setup, we suddenly get this price over volume type of pricing behavior, right? And what we are arguing in our paper is that there's basically different components that coordinate price hikes in ways in which they could not be coordinated without these emergencies happening, right? So one prominent thing is a cost shock. I mean we have had gigantic cost shocks coming out of energy, right? That kind of send a signal to firms, okay, now is the time to increase prices, which means that they can be fairly sure that their competitors are also increasing prices because the way that they're pricing is to protect their profit margins. So the first goal is to make sure that their profit margins are not gonna collapse, which means that if costs go up, they are gonna increase their prices. Now this is like kind of the most benign form of coordination, but they can also be bottlenecks that can then coordinate pricing behavior and that can coordinate this pricing behavior even when the actual bottleneck might already start to seize because there's still this signal to the whole sector that something different is going on. And then there is, I guess the component that the excuseflation label is getting at where from the perspective of the consumers, it's also more legitimate to see prices going up when there are clear reasons why they're going up. If you imagine you go to your favorite coffee shop every day and then from one day to the next, the coffee costs twice as much, then you would probably say like, oh, somehow the guy who's running the coffee shop went nuts, right? If this guy has been telling you over and over again that they are expecting a rent increase and then you come back and the price of coffee goes up, you'll probably go like, oh yeah, of course makes sense, right? And something like this, but on a sectoral global level I think has been going on for example, in the food sector where no one can judge, I mean you had this amazing episode on grain prices and prices of food items that use grain, right? And I mean as a consumer, I don't know how much is the cost component of grain in my pasta, right? Or in my bread, but if I hear on the news in the radio on TV that grain prices are exploding and I see pasta price going up, it kind of makes sense. So there is in other words also a component of legitimacy in pricing behavior, right? It's something that in economic theory we have a very hard time capturing. It's not like people walk around with a budget constraint and a given set of preferences on their mind and like robots, they react to the price that they see, but they look at the context, right? So if in normal times are basically two things that would constrain firms in their pricing behavior, on the one hand competition that is fear of losing market shares to their competitors, right? Which would happen if they start hiking prices and kind of a unilateral action, then that fear is kind of gone once these price hikes start to be more or less coordinated due to these emergency situations. And the second constraint would be fearing that customers are just not willing to pay these prices, right? Like whether they are they actually can pay these prices or not, they might just be deterred if prices suddenly go up for no obvious reason. Now if they are obvious reasons, they seem to be more willing to accept these price increases. So therefore both of these constraints are quite dramatically softened in this emergency situation that we have been living through. So some economists might listen to the story and nod their head and say, yeah, this makes sense, but for whatever reason prices are going up and workers are gonna demand higher wages to compensate for the higher prices and you get this self-sustaining, you know, increased more demand and they're like, okay, I can fit this into the typical inflation expectation story and therefore the Fed should be hiking rates regardless. Like why couldn't, like could this fit into a typical inflation expectation story? This is how it becomes entrenched. Yeah, maybe it's like a different thing than like 1970s inflation, but it's still the thing and ultimately the Fed has to respond the same way. Yeah, I mean first on the wage part of that story, what we are seeing is basically eventually labor is trying to fight back against collapsing real wages as workers are basically losing purchasing power, right? But this is a very different story. If you have an initial cost shock that comes from the energy market, that comes from commodity markets, comes from shipping and so on, basically comes from upstream stuff and then you have a propagation amplification of that shock as firms react by pricing over volume type of behavior, right? And then eventually labor goes like, wait a minute, like my purchasing power has collapsed and I'm trying to fight back to regain some of this lost territory, then this is a reaction to inflation rather than the origin of inflation. I think this really matters for how we think about what to do against inflation. But secondly also, I mean when we talk about expectations and expectation anchoring and so on, we somehow think that firms look at the Fed and they kind of like greet these signals from the Fed to anchor or de-anchor the inflation expectations. I'm not saying none of this is going on, but when I am reading the earnings calls, I don't see them talk about the Fed a lot. I see them talk about what their competitors are doing, I see them talk about rational pricing environments. I see them say things like, with this new force major like the winter storm Elliot, this has made our pricing environment even more conducive. So they are looking at their immediate environment, they're looking at are customers accepting of these price increases? Which is a completely different set of expectations than what we think of when we talk about expectations in this kind of central bank centered type of fashion. So throughout economic history, I mean the classic worry about inflation has always been this wage price spiral that you kind of just outlined. But if that's not what's happening here or if it's not the actual cause of higher prices, if instead we have like I guess a profit price spiral of some sort, what should we do? Like what actually arrests this behavior? Because again, if you listen to the company earnings calls, you can see the executives talking about how surprised they've been about how strong customer demand has been, how far they've been able to push up prices, and also you see the share price reactions they're getting rewarded for raising prices. So it seems like there's very little incentive or a catalyst for this to actually stop. Absolutely. And I would actually say that the investors expectations is another set of expectations as probably more immediate from the perspective of people taking pricing decisions, right? Were when representatives of let's say Morgan Stanley, just to pick a random example here are asking questions on earnings calls about pricing. They are also asking on behalf of a player that is actually gonna invest quite substantial amounts of money, right? So there's that layer to the expectation story to, but to actually go to your question, I think first of all we need to stop these impulses, right? I mean these like gigantic cost shocks that then coordinate these kind of price hikes. If they can be arrested kind of in the onset, that I think would've made a huge difference. I think something like the strategic petroleum reserve, which of course eventually was mobilized in 2022, if that had been mobilized sooner because there was a mindset on the part of policymakers to say oil prices going up as they started going up in 2021 is a real problem and has the potential to undermine price stability and economic stability, then they might have acted sooner and they might have acted more decisively. Now it's of course not only about oil, it's also about gas, other sources of energy, it's about other forms of raw materials and importantly also about grain. I think for grain actually we ideally would need some sort of a coordinated international buffer stock, which is an idea that Keynes had for the institutions, something that he wanted to see as one of the institutions. But that did not materialize. And there have been proposals like this in the seventies when, I mean obviously there were also very major commodity price cycles going on at the time. So I think these type of ideas are pretty important. And they're important not only like looking back and saying, oh yeah, the last three years somehow weren't great, but now we are back to normal life. So this is a nice historical anecdote or something like this. But they're important because we are living in an age of overlapping emergency. And as far as I understand, people in the grain market are saying things like we are basically one major weather event away from another price hike in grain, right? And if there are bad harvests that are related to climate change happening much faster than many of us might have thought tipping points being reached much, much sooner than climate scientists still projected not that long ago, right? Then I think this is something that is quite likely to happen. So what I'm thinking about here is really a form of economic disaster preparedness so that we have shock absorbers where shocks to these systemically important things like grain, like energy can be absorbed locally so that we don't even get this gigantic impulse in the first place. Now for this like propagation and amplification that comes as firms react to these shocks, I think what we basically need is some sort of a windfall profits tax that vote kick in whenever there is a major emergency. Because we have now learned that in these emergencies, these pre-taxes that happen can present situations where prices can go up very quickly. And I think that if corporate leaders had to learn this this time, then next time around they have a playbook in hand, right? They know how price over volume works, they know what to look for, they know what they did last time. And if this is a coordination issue in the sense that it depends on what your competitors are doing and last time it worked out really well because everybody kind of implicitly agreed to be doing exactly that, then next time around they just have to look back at what they did last time. So I think that if there are more shocks, it's likely that we would see what we have seen now in possibly and even more fast. Windfall profits tax. How does that fight inflation? Because some people would hear that it's like, oh, you're gonna like add taxes, you're gonna add costs. Maybe there's some like redistribution element or punishing the rich or punishing the successful. What does that actually, what is the mechanism via which this is a inflation fighting tool? Well, it's a mechanism that basically takes away the incentive to do a price over volume strategy, right? Because price over volume makes sense. If you can't increase prices so much that even when you're selling less, you still end up making more money because you have hike prices so much. Now of course there can be situations where price over volume happens to just protect profit margins. So win for profit tax would not happen that, but we have seen situations where firms actually have managed to quite dramatically increase their margins with this kind of pricing behavior. So it would kind of cut off the edge of that process, right? Would cut off what we are calling in our paper amplification. So you have this initial shock and the then this shock is actually not just propagated through your system, but it's amplified as it as it coordinates these additional profit increasing price hikes. So what do traditional ways of fighting inflation, how do they actually play out in a seller's inflation world? So for instance, the fed hikes interest rates in theory that's supposed to curb demand and therefore prices start going down. But what's your instinct on how that actually plays out in a world where companies are the driving force behind prices? Yeah, I mean at best in a very roundabout way, I mean in any case this is always a very roundabout instrument, right? We have to keep in mind that this is a very, very indirect tool of fighting inflation. Which by the way, if we are in a situation where we are already at the edge of a recession where we are already at the edge of a banking crisis where we have had a pandemic and we have a war, and now let's say we have another major climate shock, right? And let's say we have already hiked interest rates to a point where even hawkish people feel like okay really shouldn't go higher. I mean what are you gonna do? If you have another shock that unleashes this kind of process. So first of all, I would say it's too blunt of a tool to deal with frequent, extremely sectoral shocks as I think they have become more likely. Of course no one hopes that they will happen. I don't hope they're happening, but I think they have become more likely. So I don't think we are prepared to actually achieve priceability with the tools that we have in terms of just relying on the central bank. I also think that if it is the case that there is such a big energy shock, which then central banks would say, oh we are actually looking through this, right? Then your mindset is like, oh yeah, this is something that is not part of the core inflation. I'm just looking through this, like la, la, la, that's not happening, right? I think this is not the right mindset that we need because this is like a very, very dangerous impact. So in that sense it's kind of leading us in the wrong direction. But also at the end of the day what happens with interest rate hikes is that it's designed to cool down the labor market right? Now if it is a case that inflation erases purchasing power and rate increases were not the origin of this inflation. This means that the majority of wage dependent people are actually being hurt by inflation and then they're kind of punished a second time by cooling down the labor market, right? So I think even from a kind of justice perspective that is hugely problematic, but it's also not very effective because it's kind of getting at the wrong thing. So I take your point about things like the strategic petroleum reserve and how the logic of these sort of buffer stocks, particularly of commodities could be used in like future shocks as buffers in both directions. But how do you think about this idea with respect to services? Because it's hard to believe, okay, maybe we keep a lot of oil that we don't use in tankers. It's hard to believe we would say like, you know, we're not gonna under book, you know, have all flights be 80% booked or all hotels be 80% booked or all veterinarians like carve 20% of their time, and services in terms of right now even like, you know, in spring 2023 like services inflation is particularly what the Fed is like focused on. So how do you like think about some of these things outside of the sort of pure goods commodity realm, like applying some of the same insight and logic? Yeah, so I think if we look at services, shipping has probably been the most important service that had a very large price explosion that I would see as part of the impact stage. And I think what we saw there is that basically you had, I mean a literal bottleneck, right? Like if you think back to how the Port of LA looked, I mean this is the image of a bottleneck, right? And shipping companies could increase their freight rates several times over. So prices went up and they had actually the largest profits in years and years, right? So they were in a situation where as I mean if I was a leader of one of these large shipping companies, I was in no rush to get out of this bottleneck, right? Because it's the best of times for me, right? Sure. So for example, for shipping, I think A ,we need protocols like, I mean how do you unblock a port, and B, some sort of a price gouging legislation of the type that the New York State Attorney General is currently introducing also for essential stuff that is further up the value chain rather than just the essential consumer facing stuff I think could be really helpful because this is not to say that prices cannot go up at all if this kind of emergency happens and shipping companies have higher costs because things get complicated. But it's to say that they don't get these perverted incentives of having freight rates that increased multiple times over, which I think would actually also give them more incentive to get out of the blockage as as opposed to basically profit from the situation. Wait, so just on this point, can you talk to us a little bit about investment? Because the classic argument against some sort of windfall tax or price control would be, well you don't wanna artificially bring down the prices, you want people to make a ton of money and that way they'll invest more in their business and build out capacity and eventually the additional production is gonna be the thing that maybe starts to resolve the bottleneck and bring down prices. How does that work and is that a viable critique of some of the measures that you're talking about? Well, I mean first of all I would say that hiking interest rates is a recipe designed to bring down investment, right? So if we are talking about different ways of fighting inflation, then I am more worried about the interest rate hiking policy than I am about an emergency price gouging law or an a national emergency win for-profit tax or something like that. But also we have to see that if we are talking about price over volume, then we are in a situation where with lower volumes firms can make more money, right? Which means that they are basically contracting their capacity. And I think that if we look at the oil sector, which on my mind has been a very important element in this inflation story, that it's quite clear that they are saying very explicitly on the earnings calls that they are taking a disciplined approach to investment because they are reaping record profits, as they have reduced capacity. Everyone remembers 2013 and the big expansion and they don't wanna repeat that. Exactly, exactly. So it's not necessarily the case that if you can, I mean if you have learned that you can actually reap record profits when your supply is constrained, that this then encourages you to have a lot of redundant extra capacity or to hugely expand your capacity and therefore go for big investments. Where there are areas where we are particularly worried about curtailing investments with these kind of policy measures. I think you could have a policy that basically stipulates that if you are investing in like let's say green technologies, like let's say you you you are using the crisis a moment to upgrade your technology to become a low carbon manufacturer or something this, that you could have a tax write off for these kind of investments that we really want, that we want for a green transition that would not count towards the ways in which your windfall profits tax is calculated. So that in this kind of situation these firms might still have an incentive to do price over volume, but at least they would use the money that they get to invest in the stuff that we really need to make our economy more resilient rather than to buy back shares or do these kind of things. You know, it's interesting going back to this point that part of the impulse or part of the expectation comes from investors themselves and these sort of expectations. You're gonna push price too. You're gonna push price too. Do you think there's any element here where corporations themselves would like to get outta this game, that a sort of like third party administrator of supply of price of investment comes in and actually like solves a problem for corporations so that they get off this treadmill? Because one thing that I think about sometimes is any individual company may benefit from higher prices and higher margins, but on the whole a series of like Fed rate hikes to hike inflation is not great for stocks, which is how most of these executives get paid. Yeah, absolutely. I think there is like on the one hand a lot of coordination, right? With these price hikes. On the other hand there's a lot of coordination failure if you want. So because there are outcomes of this process that in some sense not sustainable, right? And actually if we look at what happened after World War I, when you had like kind of price hikes coming out of a bottleneck kind of transition from war to post-war economy, you had a very short lived boom that was very inflationary and then at a sharp turn into a deflationary recession. I don't think that such a sharp turn is in the cards because now we have these very concentrated sectors for most of the economy, which means that in these sectors firms are price makers and they tend to not lower prices in these kind of sudden ways in which we would see it in commodity markets or price taking markets. So I'm not so worried about this sudden turn as I would've been in a different setup, but nevertheless, yes it does trigger, it does trigger rate hikes, it does create a situation where I think a lot of corporate leaders are also nervous, like how far can we take this? It's like it's a bit like you're in this gambling game where you keep winning but you kind of don't trust. And everyone seems surprised that it's actually paid off this much for so long, right? Yeah, everybody seems to be really surprised that, I mean that, yeah, so the degree of coordination on that front has been totally surprising. But then you can also not chicken out, right? I mean we saw when Walmart for very short blips of time was making announce that they are discounted and that they are not going to play this price hiking game and then they had this share selloff, right? So I mean there's also like kind of a discipline from financial markets to keep doing this, but at the same time it's kind of clear that maybe it cannot keep going. But also we have to see that if we look at the data of changes in profit margins, it's very roughly speaking about two thirds of sectors that benefited and one one third or so that did not benefit. I don't have a very clear picture yet like how this distribution works. But in any case, we know that there are also sectors and that there are firms that are suffering pretty badly from this, right? And if we think of a capitalist economy as being coordinated by the profitability of different things, right? As the most important signal for capital allocation and this profitability gets kind of random because in some sectors firms can play this prize of a volume game and then some other sectors it might be more difficult to pour this off. And this doesn't have reasons that are necessarily tied into the entrepreneurial genius of one firm versus the other or the necessity for society for production of one thing over the other. But it just has to do with whatever specific consolation enabled these kind of price hikes. And I think we also really have a problem, right? If profitability becomes random. Right? So maybe like the egg companies do really well for some reason 'cause everyone's heard about bird flu for instance. We did a whole episode on it. And so all the egg companies raise their prices at the same time and make a lot of money. But meanwhile there's some, I don't know, software startup doing something really cool but they can't push through the same kind of price increases. Absolutely. And even like between product lines in individual firms, like if you look at what happened in the car sector, right? Where suddenly because I mean there you actually had a real physical bottleneck and car companies decided to only, I mean not only but predominantly produce higher end models that then resulted in a situation where all these cars that normal people are driving became basically not available on the market, right? Which is an outcome that is in many ways undesirable because then maybe people can't make it to work because they can't afford a car, which then like kind of makes the labor market less fluid in a situation where we already have labor shortage in certain areas. So, but yeah. So since we're on the topic of capital allocation and capitalist economies and how it's supposed to work, can we maybe talk about a slightly less capitalist country, the first time we ever had you on the show it was to talk about China and I'm wondering if you contrast and compare inflation in the West, and Europe and the US, with what's going on in China, it does seem like although there are some pockets of high prices in the East, it does feel like on the whole it's less of an inflation story. So what are you thinking about in terms of that comparison? Yeah, I think it's really an important thing to look at. I think we haven't discussed this like generally enough that there has been really this pretty dramatic divergence between Europe and the US with this high inflation in China with almost a deflation kind of problem in some stretches. I think of course it has to do with the different timeline of COVID. I mean no question about that, right? I mean they have had shutdowns when we were not in shutdown and they were open when we were in shutdown and so on, right? So clearly macro economically speaking, they are at a different point. They also did not have the kind of stimulus packages that they had in the global financial crisis and so on. So certainly the macro environment is different, but I think there's still the question of how did the global food and energy price shock arrive in China, right? And why did this shock not unleash similar kind of dynamics there. Right, it didn't seem to get propagated as much as it did elsewhere. Yeah. So I think there like different layers. So first of all, I mean for grain, which I think is an important one for food, they have of course a gigantic national reserve system, right? And they basically have to a certain degree buffer their domestic prices against international prices. So Chinese prices used to be, for important grains like rice, wheat, used to tend to be higher than the international prices, but stable. And when the international prices exploded, they kind of stayed broadly speaking where they were. And the way that they have managed that is that first of all they have a very high self-sufficiency rate, but I don't think this is enough because I mean the US has a very high self-sufficiency rate, right? It's even like a major exporter. Germany for example, also has a very high self-sufficiency rate. It's also an exporter, but still these international price movements have arrived right in China. They have not because the import quota is very strictly managed and it's basically a situation where most of the imports are managed by a very large state owned company, COFCO. And then domestically. So in that sense the international domestic prices are not really as interlinked as they would be in other situations and domestically they still have a minimum purchase price. So that they basically ensure that wherever it's reasonable to cultivate with this minimum purchase price grain is being cultivated. And then they have these grain auctions where they would be adding supply to the grain market if there is a shortage from basically a state-owned reserve system. So in some sense they have for grain, what the US has with the strategic petroleum reserve just on a probably even much more gigantic scale. And I'm saying probably here because we don't really know the size of of the reserve. It's a state secret. Yeah, I think there's a strategic pork reserve as well, right? There is. That's my favorite one, whenever they replenish the pigs. The other SPR. Yeah, there's actually also a live pig reserve. In other words they're like state owned pork farms, pig, sorry, you can't have a pork farm. You only can have a pig farm, sorry, the state owned pick farms, they're frozen pig reserves and they are also like kind of attempts of the state. But again these auctions and I mean purchases and auctions to basically send signals into the market. So it's not really just about the physical supply, but it's also about like let's say there's a price hike for pork and then there's an announcement that the state is now doing a major auction of frozen pork and this is send sending a signal to all market players that this price hike might not continue, which then should encourage people to get rid of the inventories and thereby also add supply. So it sounds like, I mean we have our SPR and it was never really used as a price stabilizer. So in addition to all these vehicles like the strategic pork supply and the other grain, it seems like they also have practice in this that actually like unlike RSPR, which was sort of pivoted or like, oh we don't have to use it just for strategic purposes, that this is like part of like a more ingrained macro management there. Absolutely. And I mean the pork example is actually one where it doesn't work that great because hawk cycles are a thing, right? And they are a thing in China too, and you have like millions of small holders farming pigs. So you have very intense hawk cycles. So you can smoothen the cycle but you never get rid of it. But it's technically not at all simple, right? I mean you need to have basically a system that can store that stuff in a way that the pork that they sell is the pork that you want to buy and eat, right? You need to have agents that are able to purchase this on a relatively large scale. You then have to have these auctions that have to be professionally organized and you also have to understand the market really well. I mean, remember when there was an announcement earlier this year that the US was gonna buy back oil to replenish its strategic petroleum reserve and then oil prices started spiking, right? So you have to have a very good handle on how to communicate with the market, like when to say something about what you're doing and when not to say something about what you're doing. So it's quite demanding and a lot of things can go wrong. Yeah. And even in China where they do have practice doing this, I mean I remember with pork specifically after the African swine fever outbreak, they actually made the cycle even worse 'cause they told everyone ramp up production and then it was too much and then prices collapsed and everyone got out. And so it's just been going like seesawing ever since then. Absolutely. And it's actually been for the first time a situation where European pork importers have had difficulty selling in China because suddenly the prices collapsed in China and in Europe they were going up with the very high grain prices. The funny thing is, while I was in China, I was doing many interviews with people on inflation, including folks from the Word Bank, from the IMF, from major banks and so on. And eventually every single economist that I talked to started to talk about pork. Oh really? And they even have all these like jokes on pork. So they say like the CPI in China actually stands for the China Pork . That's great, I love that all the economists are viewing inflation through the lens of pork. Like we do with the oil here in this country. Yes, it's true. But can I ask a personal question, which is, you know, you mentioned, well we started off this conversation talking about how this idea of sellers inflation has really gathered steam in recent weeks. And you mentioned the "Guardian" article where you talked about price controls and I remember when that came out, you got a ton of criticism online, lots of Twitter people calling you various names, Paul Kirkman said some not very nice things. But since then we've seen price controls in Europe, we've seen on the subject of sellers inflation and maybe windfall taxes. We've seen the UK for instance, talking about capping grocery items and things like that. How do you feel about how this is sort of seeping into the the mainstream? Yeah, I mean maybe to add to your list, we have also of course seen the European gas price cap, which is an international, I mean transnationally coordinated kind of price cap and the oil price cap against Russian oil, which I mean in principle could be for all oil, right? I mean just in terms of the technicality of the price control mechanism. So yes, absolutely. It's been totally astonishing to me. The reason why I wrote this article at the time was because A, I felt that the debate amongst economists was polarized between those who were saying like, oh, we don't have to worry about inflation too much, it's just transitory. And those who were saying, oh, inflation's really a problem, therefore we have to hike interest rates yesterday. And I felt like there was a position missing there, which is like, yeah, we have very large price spikes and they're a problem. 

40:50

But if you have a fire in the kitchen, you don't set your whole house under water, but you try to put out the fire in the kitchen, right? So not as an apologies of price controls, but to say, hey, there is something sectorial that we can do and direct means of price stabilization can be an emergency measure to buy time when you are faced with these kind of crazy price spikes. 

Now the key word here I think is emergency measure. And my sense is that the more urgent the emergency became, the more acceptable these kind of measures ended up being. And I think that in Europe you can see this very clearly in terms of the reactions to the war, but then also like basically as it became colder, right? And the fear of winter just became very real. The perceived emergency became more intense and the willingness to take this kind of measures became greater. The sellers inflation story, I feel like it's related but also kind of slightly separate in the sense that the price control debate is really about emergency measures that you take, right? And the sellers inflation paper is really about how do we understand this kind of inflation. But I think the shift that we are seeing now that of course is not complete and so on, but that at least it's becoming more acceptable to think about other ways of understanding how inflation came about is kind of the first step that we need to take to move towards a different kind of economic stabilization paradigm that I personally think we really need in this age of overlapping emergencies. So it's been quite a wide ride but I guess talking today and it has been very wide so god knows what's gonna happen next. It looks like there has been some movement in a good direction in the sense that the discourse is becoming more open. And I think that an open discourse is really what we need if we are faced with these unprecedented situations because you cannot respond to an unprecedented situation by saying we have always known how exactly it works. Yeah. Isabella Weber, thank you so much for coming back on Odd Lots. Really appreciated having you in person as well. It was really fun. Thank you so much for having me. Thank you so much. So Joe, I always enjoyed talking to Isabella. It is crazy to see how quickly things seem to be changing in this particular area of discourse. Totally. And you know, I know we didn't really get into it, but I also just think that like the internet and Twitter and like it sort of cuts in both directions because you could put out an idea and get tons of abuse and backlash, but there's also like a really rapid way which ideas proliferate right? In a way I don't think would've happened in like, you know, a different era where you like wait like five years to get a paper, you know, referee it in a journal or something like that. But I'm fascinated as I think we both are by like how ideas like can move so fast and like, especially in the nature of crisis. Absolutely. And the other things that stood out to me are one, you mentioned this treadmill idea Yeah. Of like, you know, it sounds great companies raising prices in order to pad their profit margins, but at some point you have to imagine like there are some executives who get nervous about how far they can actually push this. I liked Isabella's point about like the gamble, right? Because at some point, like you could imagine where you like go with a pricing strategy and you really mistime it and suddenly you really do like lose share in like a meaningful way, right? Or you damage your brand, which seems plausible. It's like, oh this company is greedy at a time. And so it sort of depends on like the sort of coordination. And I do wonder whether like executives would ever like off the treadmill. In some way, right? They're sort of, they're pulling the lever every quarter and so far it's paid out each time, but maybe one day it won't. The other thing that really stood out to me was, I mean what we're talking about is basically the need potentially for a more interventionist government in the economy in one way or another. Whether it's, you know, trying to smooth out some of those production cycles, trying to smooth out big price spikes. And I feel like that's always going to be controversial, particularly- It's always gonna be political. It's always gonna be political, particularly in the US, but it is, you know, that said, we have seen some inklings of it with, for instance, the strategic petroleum reserve. And I think this is really the, like to my takeaway from all this is people look at this greenflation story, whatever, and they're like, yeah, but inflation is still really high. And so the Feds, we gotta do something about it. And I think to Isabella's point, like, it's important by looking at different dimensions and not just saying, oh, it's 'cause of wages or not just 'cause of like rates or money supply. It allows us like this sort of like mental space to open up. And some of them, like we may not have the tools, like we may not have the tools right now to like stabilize, keep grain prices stable. We don't have the sort of equivalent, but like in thinking about like, is rate hikes really gonna be the best way here? Is the cost in terms of like general welfare and employment worth it? If this is really not what the story is about. I think it's still like very useful from that perspective is like, okay, how good are these tools? And if we're gonna use a blunt tool like, right, how much damage are we gonna do with this like, mediocre tool. Well again, going back to the investment point. If the issue is a bottleneck in production, then maybe you don't wanna raise the cost of investment and production. Do you wanna raise the cost of a real estate developer at a time when rent is one of the highest, yeah things like that, yeah. You know what Joe, I've decided I'm gonna base my entire personality going forward on campaigning for a strategic pork reserve in the US. But it's hard there too I guess, even that isn't foolproof. But yeah, I support that. Bringing home the bacon. That's my motto. Stimulizing the bacon. Shall we leave it there? Let's leave it there. All right, this has been another episode of the Odd Lots Podcast. I'm Tracy Alloway. You can follow me on Twitter @TracyAlloway. And I'm Joe Weisenthal. You can follow me on Twitter @TheStalwart. Follow our guest, Isabella Weber on Twitter @IsabellaMWeber. Follow our producers Carmen Rodriguez @CarmenArmen and Dashiell Bennett @DashBot. And for more Odd Lots content, go to bloomberg.com/oddlots where we have a blog, we have transcripts, we have a newsletter that comes out Friday. And check out the Discord, discord.gg/oddlots, hang out 24/7 with other listeners and talk about all these topics. And you should stream Bloomberg Originals on Samsung TV, Roku, Apple, any other of these streaming platforms. And make sure to tune in on Bloomberg TV at 10:00 p.m. Thanks for listening and watching.


2023/06/08 イザベラ・ウェーバー、大インフレの再考について語る | 奇数ロット

2023/06/08 イザベラ・ウェーバー、大インフレの再考について語る | 奇数ロット 

イザベラ・ウェーバー氏、インフレの仕組みを再考する理由を説明 - ブルームバーグ
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-06-08/isabella-weber-explains-why-we-re-re Thinking-the- way-inflation-works?leadSource=uverify%20wall

イザベラ・ウェーバーがインフレの仕組みを再考する理由を説明

「言い訳」は今どこにでもあります。

2023 年 1 月 12 日木曜日、中国の北京の屋台で販売されていた調理済みの豚肉料理。

2023年1月12日木曜日、中国・北京の屋台で販売されていた調理済みの豚肉料理。 

ブルームバーグ
今年初め、 奇数ロット 企業がボトルネックやその他の混乱を利用して価格を引き上げるというアイデアについて話しました。それ以来、この種の企業主導のインフレという概念が公の場で議論されるようになり、中央銀行家や政治家が皆、注意深く観察するようになりました。しかし、この種のインフレは、より伝統的な経済的な価格解釈とどのように異なるのでしょうか、また金融政策や経済政策にどのような影響を与えるのでしょうか? このエピソードでは、今年初めに発表された論文の中でこの現象を「売り手のインフレ」と名付けたマサチューセッツ州アマースト校の経済学教授、イザベラ・ウェーバーに再び話を聞きます。彼女は、インフレに対する私たちの考え方がどのように変化しているか、そして国民の態度がリアルタイムで変化するのを目の当たりにした自身の経験について語ります。このトランスクリプトは、わかりやすくするために軽く編集されています。
ーーー こんにちは。Odd Lots ポッドキャストの別のエピソードへようこそ。私はトレイシー・アロウェイです。そして私はジョー・ヴァイゼンタールです。ジョー、私たちが行ったエピソードを覚えていますか。ほんの数か月前だったと思いますが、コルブのストラテジスト、サミュエル・ライネスとの、企業が値上げの本当の理由を私たちに語っているという話でした。そうですね、それ以来、企業の決算発表などを分析するのに役立ち、特に消費者分野について考えるのに役立ちました。そこでは、企業は価格を上げるために量の拡大を非常に明確に犠牲にする傾向があるという持論がありました。そしてより高いマージン。右。彼はそれを量よりも価格と呼んだ。そのエピソード以来、私たちは実際にそのエピソードに基づいて記事を書き、サムからたくさんの言葉を引用しました。また、Odd Lot のお気に入りの研究論文も引用しました。イザベラ・ウェーバーと私たちはこの現象について話し、それをエクスキューズフレーションと呼んでいました。 つまり、企業がこうした一度限りの緊急事態をすべて価格引き上げの言い訳として利用しているという考えです。しかしそれ以来、このアイデア全体が、さまざまな包括的な用語の下でさまざまな方法で大衆の意識に爆発的に浸透してきました。そこでイザベラは売り手インフレという言葉を使いました。私は利益主導のインフレや貪欲インフレなどを見てきました。個人的には悪い言葉だと思いますが、今ではどこにでもあります。そうです、そしてそれは面白いことです。なぜなら、経済学者がインフレに関するある種の別の考え方にスキャンダルを起こしているようなもので、マネーサプライについて言う人もいれば、人件費について言う人もいるなど、彼らは特定のことを持っているかのようだからです。賃金はあるが、ウォール街では謎が少ないように感じられる。それ' 電話を読んだ人々によれば、彼らは少なくともご存知のように、「ノー、彼らは価格を押し上げるつもりだと言っているようです」とのことです。質問は次のようなものだと思います。後続の質問はたくさんありますが、この特定の一部からは非常に興味深い政策への影響があると思います。完全に。面白いことに、そうではありません。ペプシは、マネーサプライが増加している、だから価格を上げる、などというようなことを言っているのではありません。彼らは非常に明確に、価格を引き上げるためにこれらの 1 回限りの理由があるので、消費者にどこまでそれを提供できるかを確認するつもりだと話しています。とにかく、貪欲インフレ、言い訳、利益主導インフレ、売り手インフレと呼ぶかどうかにかかわらず、誰もがこれについて話しています。このテーマに関して多くの学術研究を行ってきた、私たちのお気に入りのゲストの一人に話を戻す必要があります。私たちは、私たちが行った作品の中で彼女の作品を具体的に引用しました。イザベラ・ウェバーと話す予定です。撮影現場では興奮しています。わかった。マサチューセッツ大学アマースト校の経済学教授、イザベラ・ウェバーさん、また来てくれて本当にありがとう。戻ってきてくれて本当にありがとう、そして直接ここに来られて本当に嬉しいです。はい、これはご褒美です。5分ほど前まで、あなたがセットに入るとは思いませんでした。ビデオがとても良くて、やっとお会いできると思っていました。ああ、実際に会うのは初めてです。ええ、これがあまりにも急速に進んでいることに少しでも驚きましたか?私はそれを主流と呼ぶのを躊躇します、なぜなら人々はまだそれについて議論しているからですが、それは「」の中にあります それは長い間行われてきたことであり、企業は長い間決算会見でこのことを言ってきました。基礎工事の人々は長い間この問題を訴えてきましたが、今ではそれが本格的に始まりました。そこで、私の質問の 1 つは、多くの質問があると思いますが、人々がインフレを促進する要因として語られているさまざまな要因があり、明らかに、労働市場の逼迫、急速な賃金上昇、高レベルの消費需要、サプライチェーンのボトルネックの多くが挙げられます。私たちは番組で長年にわたって供給側の要因について話してきましたが、なぜそれが重要なのでしょうか? まずは、さまざまな原因を正しく特定する方法について考えてみましょう。そうです、経済学者が因果関係について語るとき、彼らは非常に高い基準を持っているのですよね?だから、私はまだ自分がやったことのように言える段階には達していないのよ」これを世に出すためだけの因果分析のようなものです。これは免責事項のようなものですが、これは私たちが直面する課題の一部だと思います。なぜなら、私たちは世界、経済、世界経済において前例のない瞬間に直面しているからです。そしてインフレは、その前例のない瞬間全体の一部のようなものです。つまり、出てくるデータの断片を取得し、それがたとえ不完全であっても、それを基に推論する必要があるのです。そして、標準的なインフレパラダイムの観点からだけ見てみると、基本的にはマネーサプライ、総需要、そしておそらく賃金だけを見ていることになります。そして、あなたたちが何ヶ月も何ヶ月も報告してきた他のすべてのことを見ていませんよね?しかし、企業の役員室に座っていると、実際には他のすべてのものを見ていることになります。したがって、あなたの視点から見ると、価格はまったく異なるものとして見えます。それで、私たちがこの研究でやっているのは、たとえそれがたとえ不完全であっても、私たちが持っている情報を取り上げて、なぜ私たちが見ているものを見ているのかを理解しようとすることだと私は思います。私たちが目にしているのは、企業のリーダーたちが決算会見で何度も、価格設定ができる、予想もしなかった方法で価格を引き上げることができる、販売量が減少している場合でも価格を引き上げることができる、と言っているということです。それは基本的な需要供給の論理に反していますよね?需要が増加し、価格が上昇すると予想されるのですが、その逆はありません。さて、それはボトルネックの問題であり、需要は強いので、それでも需要のような話だ、と言う人もいるかもしれません。しかし、最新四半期の決算報告を見てみると、そうでしょう? 明らかにボトルネックの大部分が解消され、量が減少しているときに依然として価格が上昇している場合、明らかにこれは純粋な種類のボトルネックタイプの話ではありません。そうですね、ちょっと一歩下がって、セラーズ・インフレーションとは何かについて話してください。これはあなたが実際に使っている用語であり、それが従来のグリードフレーションの概念とどのように異なるのかについて話してください。なぜなら、これが、私たちが次のことを書いていたときのことを覚えている理由の 1 つだからです。ジョー、これが私がこれを貪欲フレーションとは別の名前で呼びたかった理由の 1 つです。2020 年 3 月に誰もが目覚めて、突然もっと貪欲になろうと決心したわけではないからです。それはそのようなものに対する一般的な批判です。そうですね、率直に言って、これには誰もが同意すると思います。このような突然の貪欲な衝動があったとは誰も言っていないように、堅実なリーダーたちは以前よりもさらに貪欲になっただけですよね? それは良い理論ではありません。そこで問題は、信じられないほど集中した産業において、なぜ数十年にもわたって驚くべき価格の安定が得られたのかということですよね? 時期によってはデフレのようなものさえあります。そして今、これと同じ非常に集中した種類の設定で、突然、ボリュームオーバータイプの価格設定行動が発生します。そして、私たちがこの論文で主張しているのは、基本的に価格上昇を調整するさまざまな要素があり、これらの緊急事態が起こらなければ調整することはできなかったということですよね? したがって、顕著なことの 1 つはコストのショックです。つまり、エネルギーに起因する巨大なコストショックが起きているということですよね?それは企業に「よし、今が値上げの時期だ」というシグナルを送ることになる。これは、競合他社も利益率を守るために価格設定を行っているため、競合他社も価格を引き上げているとかなり確信で​​きることを意味します。したがって、最初の目標は、利益率が崩壊しないようにすることです。つまり、コストが上昇した場合には、価格も引き上げることになります。これは一種の最も無害な調整形式のようなものですが、ボトルネックにもなり、価格設定の動作を調整できます。また、実際のボトルネックが既に発生し始めている場合でも、全体へのシグナルがまだ存在するため、価格設定の動作を調整できます。何か違うことが起こっているセクター。そして、消費者の観点からすると、言い訳ラベルがどのような影響を及ぼしているかという要素があると思います。」また、価格が上昇する明確な理由がある場合、価格が上昇するのはより正当です。毎日お気に入りのコーヒー ショップに行っているのに、ある日から次の日までコーヒーの値段が 2 倍になったと想像したら、おそらく、「ああ、どういうわけかコーヒー ショップの経営者がおかしくなったのではないか」と言うでしょう。もしこの男が家賃の値上げを期待していると何度もあなたに言っていて、あなたが戻ってきてコーヒーの値段が上がったら、おそらくあなたは「ああ、もちろん当然ですよね」と思うでしょう。そして、これと似たようなことですが、分野別の世界レベルで、例えば誰も判断できない食品分野で起こっていると思います。つまり、穀物の価格と穀物を使用する食品の価格に関する素晴らしいエピソードがありましたね。 ? つまり、消費者として、私はそうではありません 私のパスタに含まれる穀物の原価がいくらなのか知りませんよね?パンの場合もそうですが、穀物価格が爆発的に上昇し、パスタの価格が上昇しているというニュースをテレビのラジオで聞いたら、なんとなく納得できます。つまり、価格設定行動には正当性の要素も含まれているということですね。これは経済理論では理解するのが非常に難しいものです。人々は予算の制約や一定の好みを頭の中に持ち歩き、ロボットのように目に見える価格に反応するのではなく、コンテキストを考慮します。では、平常時に企業の価格設定行動を制約する要因が基本的に 2 つあるとすれば、一方では競合他社に市場シェアを奪われることへの恐怖である競争、ですよね?彼らが価格引き上げや一方的な行動を始めたら、それは起こります。こうした緊急事態による価格引き上げが多かれ少なかれ調整され始めると、その不安はある程度消えます。そして 2 番目の制約は、顧客がこれらの価格を支払う気がないのではないかという不安ですよね。実際にこれらの価格を支払うことができるかどうかのように、明確な理由もなく価格が突然上昇した場合、彼らは単に思いとどまる可能性があります。現在、それらが明白な理由であれば、彼らはこれらの値上げをより積極的に受け入れるようです。したがって、私たちが経験しているこの緊急事態では、これらの制約は両方とも非常に劇的に緩和されます。ですから、一部の経済学者はこの話を聞いて、うなずいて、「なるほど、それは一理ある」と言うかもしれませんが、何らかの理由で物価は上昇しており、労働者は物価上昇を補うためにより高い賃金を要求するでしょう。そうすれば、これは自立できるのです。需要がさらに増加すると、彼らは、「わかった、これを典型的なインフレ期待の話に当てはめることができる、だからFRBは関係なく利上げすべきだ」といった感じです。なぜそれができないのか、これが典型的なインフレ期待の話に当てはまるのか、など。こうやって定着していくのです。確かに、これは 1970 年代のインフレとは異なるものかもしれませんが、それでも問題であることに変わりはなく、最終的には FRB も同じように対応しなければなりません。ええ、最初にその話の賃金の部分について言いたいのですが、私たちが見ているのは、労働者が基本的に購買力を失いつつある中、最終的には実質賃金の崩壊に対して労働者が反撃しようとしているということですよね?しかし、これは全く別の話です。エネルギー市場、商品市場、海運などに起因する初期コストのショックがある場合、基本的には上流のものから来ていますが、その後、企業が量よりも価格を設定して行動するため、そのショックが伝播して増幅されます。そして最終的に労働者は、「ちょっと待って、私の購買力が崩壊したので、この失われた領土の一部を取り戻すために反撃しようとしているように、これはインフレの原因ではなくインフレへの反応です」というようになります。これは、インフレに対して何をすべきかをどのように考えるかにとって非常に重要だと思います。しかし第二に、私たちが期待や期待アンカリングなどについて話すとき、私たちはどういうわけか企業はFRBに注目しており、インフレ期待を固定したり固定解除したりするFRBからのシグナルを歓迎しているようなものだと考えています。何も起こっていないと言っているわけではありませんが、決算報告を読んでいると、FRBについてあまり話しているようには見えません。彼らが競合他社が何をしているのか、合理的な価格設定環境について話しているのを目にします。彼らは、冬の嵐エリオットのようなこの新しい戦力のメジャーのおかげで、価格設定環境がさらに有利になった、というようなことを言っているのを目にします。つまり、彼らは自社の当面の環境に注目しており、顧客がこれらの値上げを受け入れているかどうかを検討しているのです。これは、この種の中央銀行中心のタイプの期待について話すときに私たちが考えるものとはまったく異なる期待です。つまり、経済の歴史を通して、インフレに関する古典的な懸念は常に、先ほど概説したような賃金価格スパイラルでした。しかし、それがここで起こっていることではない場合、またはそれが価格高騰の実際の原因ではない場合、代わりに、ある種の利益価格スパイラルのようなものが起こっている場合、私たちは何をすべきか?この行動を実際に阻止するものは何でしょうか? なぜなら、繰り返しになりますが、会社の決算説明を聞いてみると、顧客の需要がどれほど強かったか、価格をどこまで押し上げることができたかについて、経営陣がどれほど驚いたかを話しているのがわかります。彼らは価格を上げることで報酬を得ているという株価の反応。したがって、これを実際に止める動機やきっかけはほとんどないようです。絶対。実際、投資家の期待は、おそらく価格決定を行う人々の観点からすると、より直接的な期待のもう 1 つのセットであると言いたいですよね? ここでランダムな例を挙げますが、たとえばモルガン・スタンレーの代表者が決算会見で価格設定について質問したときのことです。彼らはまた、実際にかなりの金額を投資しようとしているプレイヤーに代わって依頼しているのですよね?つまり、期待の話にはその層がありますが、実際にあなたの質問に進むには、まず第一に、これらの衝動を止める必要があると思いますよね?つまり、これらは巨大なコストショックのようなものであり、それがこの種の価格上昇を調整するのです。初期段階で逮捕できれば、大きな違いがあったと思います。戦略的石油備蓄のようなものは、もちろん最終的には2022年に動員されたと思うが、政策立案者の側に2021年に上がり始めた原油価格の上昇は現実的だという考えがあったため、もっと早く動員されていたら。問題があり、価格の安定と経済の安定を損なう可能性があります。そうすればもっと早く行動できたかもしれないし、もっと決断力のある行動をとれたかもしれない。もちろん、それは石油だけではなく、ガスやその他のエネルギー源、他の形態の原材料、そして重要なことに穀物についても重要です。実際、穀物については、理想的にはある種の国際的な調整された緩衝在庫が必要だと思います。これはケインズが金融機関に対して持っていたアイデアであり、金融​​機関の一つとして望んでいたものです。しかし、それは実現しませんでした。そして、このような提案は70年代にもありましたが、当時は明らかに非常に大きな商品価格サイクルも進行していました。ですから、こういった考え方は非常に重要だと思います。そしてそれらは、過去を振り返って「ああ、この 3 年間はうまくいかなかった」と言うだけではなく、今は普通の生活に戻っているということが重要です。これは素晴らしい歴史的な逸話か何かです。しかし、私たちは緊急事態が重なる時代に生きているので、それらは重要です。そして、私の理解する限り、穀物市場の人々は、基本的に、穀物の価格高騰はあと 1 回で大きな気象現象が起きるといったようなことを言っていますよね。そして、気候変動に関連した凶作が、私たちの多くが考えていたよりもずっと早く、気候科学者たちが少し前に予想していたよりもずっと早く、転換点に達するということが起こっているとしたら、そうですよね?それから、これはかなりの確率で起こることだと思います。ここで私が考えているのは、経済的な災害への備えの一種です。穀物やエネルギーなど、システム上重要なものへの衝撃を局所的に吸収できるショックアブソーバーを備え、私たちが災害に遭わないようにするためのものです。そもそもこの巨大な衝動さえ感じられない。さて、企業がこれらのショックに反応するにつれて生じる伝播と増幅のようなものについて、私たちが基本的に必要としているのは、重大な緊急事態が発生したときはいつでも投票で発動されるある種の棚ぼた的利益税だと思います。なぜなら、このような緊急事態においては、税引前が発生すると、価格が急速に上昇する可能性があることがわかったからです。そして、企業のリーダーが今回これを学ばなければならなかったとしたら、次回は戦略書を手にすることになるでしょう? 彼らは、出来高に対する価格がどのように機能するかを知っており、何を探すべきか、前回何をしたかを知っています。そして、これが競合他社が何をしているかに依存するという意味で調整の問題であり、前回は全員がまさにそれを行うことに暗黙のうちに同意したため非常にうまくいきました。そうすれば、次回は前回やったことを振り返るだけで済みます。したがって、さらなる衝撃があれば、おそらく今私たちが見ているものを、さらに早く目にすることになると思います。棚ぼた利益税。それはインフレとどのように戦うのでしょうか?なぜなら、「税金を追加するつもりだ、費用を追加するつもりだ」というようなことを聞​​く人もいるからです。おそらく、再分配要素や金持ちを罰する、成功者を罰するなどの要素があるかもしれません。これは実際には何を意味するのでしょうか。これがインフレ対策のツールとなるメカニズムは何でしょうか? そうですね、これは基本的に量より価格戦略を行うインセンティブを奪うメカニズムですよね。量よりも価格が合理的だからです。販売量が減ってもあまり値上げできないのであれば、価格を大幅に引き上げるので、最終的にはさらに多くのお金を稼ぐことになります。もちろん、利益率を守るために、数量よりも価格が優先される状況も考えられます。したがって、利益税を勝ち取ることは起こりませんが、企業が実際にこの種の価格設定行動で利益率を大幅に増加させることに成功した状況を私たちは見てきました。つまり、それはそのプロセスの端を切断することになりますよね?私たちが紙の増幅で呼んでいるものを遮断してしまうでしょう。つまり、この最初のショックがあり、その後のこのショックは実際にはシステム全体に伝播するだけでなく、追加の利益を増加させる価格の引き上げを調整する際に増幅されます。それでは、インフレに対抗する従来の方法はどのようなものであり、売り手のインフレの世界で実際にどのように機能するのでしょうか? たとえば、理論上、FRBは需要を抑制するはずの金利を引き上げるので、価格は下がり始める。しかし、企業が価格の原動力となっている世界で、それが実際にどのように展開するかについて、あなたはどう感じていますか? ええ、私が言いたいのは、せいぜい非常に回りくどい方法ということです。つまり、いずれにせよ、これは常に非常に回りくどい手段であるということですよね?これはインフレと戦うための非常に間接的なツールであることを念頭に置く必要があります。ところで、私たちがすでに不況の瀬戸際にあり、パンデミックが発生し、戦争が起こり、銀行危機の瀬戸際にある状況にあるとします。また大きな気候ショックが起きますよね?そして、タカ派の人たちでさえ実際には金利を上げるべきではないと感じるレベルまですでに金利を引き上げたとします。つまり、何をするつもりですか?この種のプロセスを引き起こす別のショックが発生した場合。まず第一に、頻繁に発生する非常にセクター別のショックの可能性が高まっているため、これに対処するにはあまりにも鈍感なツールだと思います。もちろん、それらが起こることを期待する人は誰もいません。そうなることを望みませんが、その可能性は高まっていると思います。したがって、中央銀行に依存するだけでは、私たちが持っているツールを使って実際に価格を実現する準備ができているとは思えません。また、これほど大きなエネルギーショックが起こった場合、中央銀行は「ああ、我々は実際にこれを検討しているのではないか」と言うだろうとも思います。そうなると、あなたの考え方は、ああ、これはコアインフレの一部ではないということになります。私はただこれを眺めているだけです、ラ、ラ、ラ、そんなことは起こらない、右?これは非常に危険な影響であるため、これは私たちが必要とする正しい考え方ではないと思います。そういう意味では、私たちを間違った方向に導いているような気がします。しかし、結局のところ、利上げで何が起こるかというと、利上げは労働市場を冷やすように設計されているということですよね?さて、インフレによって購買力が消失し、金利上昇がこのインフレの原因ではなかったとすれば。これは、賃金に依存している大多数の人々がインフレによって実際に打撃を受けており、その後、労働市場の冷え込みによって二度目の懲罰を受けているということを意味しますよね?したがって、ある種の正義の観点から見ても、これは非常に問題があると思いますが、ある種間違った方向に進んでいるためにあまり効果的でもありません。したがって、戦略的石油備蓄のようなことや、この種の緩衝在庫、特にコモディティのロジックが将来の同様のショックの際に両方向の緩衝材としてどのように使用できるかについて、私はあなたの意見を理解します。しかし、サービスに関してこの考えをどう思いますか? 信じられないことですが、私たちはタンカーに使用しない石油を大量に保管しているのかもしれません。私たちが、予約を下回るつもりはない、すべてのフライトを 80% 予約するように、またはすべてのホテルを 80% 予約するようにする、またはすべての獣医師が自分の時間とサービスの 20% を負担するようにするなどと言うのは信じがたいです。現時点でも、ご存知のとおり、2023 年春にはサービスのインフレが特に FRB の注目の的となっているようです。それでは、純粋な商品の領域の外でこれらのことについてどのように考えますか? 同じ洞察とロジックを適用するのはどうでしょうか?そうですね、サービスに注目すると、影響段階の一部として非常に大きな価格の爆発をもたらした最も重要なサービスはおそらく配送だと思います。そこで私たちが見たのは、基本的に、文字通りのボトルネックがあったということだと思います。LA港の様子を思い出してみると、これがボトルネックのイメージですよね。そして、運送会社は運賃を数倍に値上げする可能性がある。それで価格は上昇し、実際にはここ数年で最大の利益を上げましたよね?つまり、彼らは、私がこれらの大手海運会社のリーダーであれば、このボトルネックから抜け出すことを急ぐ必要はないという状況にあったのですよね?だって今が私にとって最高の時だからね?もちろん。たとえば、配送の場合、 A だと思います。港の封鎖をどうやって解除するかというような議定書が必要です。そして、B、ニューヨーク州司法長官が現在導入している種類の価格つり上げ法案のようなものです。これは、バリューチェーンよりもさらに上の重要なものに対しても導入されています。この種の緊急事態が発生し、事態が複雑化して運送会社のコストが高くなった場合に、価格がまったく上昇しないというわけではないため、消費者向けの重要なものだけが本当に役立つと思います。しかし、それは、運賃が何倍にも値上がりするという倒錯したインセンティブが彼らには受けられないと言うことであり、そのことが実際には、この状況から基本的に利益を得るのではなく、閉塞状況から抜け出すためのより多くのインセンティブを彼らに与えることになると思います。ちょっと待って、この点に関しては、投資について少し話してもらえますか?なぜなら、ある種の棚ぼた税や価格統制に対する古典的な議論は、人為的に価格を引き下げたくはない、人々にたくさんのお金を稼いでもらい、そうすれば彼らは自分たちのビジネスにもっと投資して、生産能力がなくなり、最終的には追加生産によってボトルネックが解決され、価格が引き下げられる可能性があります。それはどのように機能するのでしょうか?また、それはあなたが話しているいくつかの対策に対する実行可能な批判ですか? そうですね、まず最初に言いたいのは、金利引き上げは投資を減らすために設計されたレシピですよね?つまり、インフレと戦うためのさまざまな方法について話しているのであれば、その場合、私は緊急物価つり上げ法や国家緊急利益獲得税などよりも、金利引き上げ政策の方が心配です。しかし、量よりも価格について話しているのであれば、量が少ない企業がより多くの利益を得ることができる状況にあることも理解する必要があります。つまり、彼らは基本的に能力を縮小していることになります。そして、このインフレの物語において非常に重要な要素であると私は考えていますが、石油セクターを見てみると、彼らが投資に対して規律あるアプローチをとっていると決算報告で非常に明確に述べていることは明らかだと思います。生産能力が減った分、記録的な利益を上げているからだ。誰もが 2013 年と大規模な拡張を覚えており、それを繰り返したくありません。まさに、まさに。それはそう' 必ずしもそうとは限りませんが、もし可能であれば、つまり、供給が制限されているときに実際に記録的な利益を得ることができることを学んだ場合、そのことが、余分な余剰生産能力をたくさん持つか、生産能力を大幅に拡大することを奨励することになります。大きな投資に行く。この種の政策手段による投資の抑制について特に懸念している分野がある場合。例えばグリーンテクノロジーなどに投資している場合、例えばあなたが危機を利用して技術をアップグレードして低炭素メーカーか何かにしようとしている場合、基本的に規定するポリシーを設けることができると思います。私たちが本当に望んでいるこの種の投資に対しては税金が控除される可能性があります。私たちは、棚ぼた利益税の計算方法にカウントされないグリーン移行を望んでいます。したがって、このような状況でも、これらの企業は量よりも価格を優先するインセンティブをまだ持っているかもしれませんが、少なくとも彼らは得た資金を、購入するのではなく、経済をより回復力のあるものにするために本当に必要なものに投資するために使うでしょう。バックシェアしたり、こういうことをしたり。ご存知のとおり、この点に戻ると興味深いのは、衝動や期待の一部が投資家自身やその種の期待から来ているということです。価格も押し上げるつもりだ。価格も押し上げるつもりだ。企業自身がこのゲームから抜け出したい要素がここにあると思いますか? 投資価格の供給を管理する第三者のような人が入ってきて、企業がこのトレッドミルから降りられるように実際に問題を解決してくれるということですか?なぜなら、私が時々思うのは、個々の企業は価格上昇と利益率の上昇から恩恵を受けるかもしれないが、全体としては、インフレ率を上昇させるためのFRBのような一連の利上げは株式にとって良くないということであり、これらの幹部のほとんどはそうして給料をもらっているのです。 。ええ、絶対に。一方でコーディネート力も高いと思いますよね?こうした価格高騰に伴い。その一方で、必要に応じて、調整の失敗もたくさんあります。このプロセスの結果には、ある意味では持続可能ではないものがあるからですよね?そして実際、第一次世界大戦後に何が起こったかを見てみると、戦争から戦後経済への移行というボトルネックから生じた同様の価格上昇のときは、非常に短命な非常にインフレの好景気が続き、その後急激にデフレ不況に転じました。私は、そのような急激な変化が起こる可能性は低いと考えています。なぜなら、現在、経済の大部分においてこれらの非常に集中したセクターがあるからです。つまり、これらのセクターでは企業が価格決定者であり、このような突然の事態では価格を引き下げない傾向があるということです。これは、商品市場や値踏み市場で見られる方法です。ですから、私はこの突然の変化については、別の環境にいたときほど心配していませんが、それでも、確かにそれが引き金となり、利上げの引き金となり、多くの企業リーダーが次のような状況を引き起こしていると私は思います。緊張もするし、どこまでやれるかな?まるでそうだね』それは、勝ち続けるギャンブルゲームに参加しているようなものですが、ある意味信頼していません。そして、これほど長い間、実際にこれだけの利益が得られてきたことに、誰もが驚いているようですよね? はい、みんな本当に驚いているようです、つまり、そうです、その点での調整の度合いはまったく驚くべきものでした。でも、だからといって、逃げ出すこともできませんよね?つまり、ウォルマートがほんの少しの間、値下げを発表し、このような値上げゲームには参加しないと発表し、その後、この株を売却したのを見ましたよね? つまり、これを継続するための金融市場からの規律のようなものもありますが、同時に、おそらくこのままでは継続できないことは明らかです。しかし、利益率の変化のデータを見ると、非常に大まかに言えば、利益を受けたセクターの 3 分の 2、利益を受けなかったセクターの 3 分の 1 程度です。この分布がどのように機能するかについては、まだ明確なイメージがありません。しかし、いずれにせよ、これによってかなり深刻な被害を受けているセクターもあり、企業も存在することは承知していますよね?そして、資本主義経済はさまざまなものの収益性によって調整されていると考えると、そうでしょう? 資本配分とこの収益性にとって最も重要なシグナルは、ある種のランダムなものになります。なぜなら、一部のセクターでは企業がボリュームゲームのこの賞金をプレイできる一方で、他のセクターではこれを注ぎ出すのがより困難になる可能性があるためです。そしてこれには、ある企業と他の企業の起業家としての天才性や、あるものを他のものより優先して生産する社会の必要性と必ずしも結びつく理由はありません。しかし、それは、この種の価格引き上げを可能にした具体的な慰めと関係があるだけです。そして私たちにも本当に問題があると思いますよね?収益性がランダムになる場合。右?つまり、鳥インフルエンザについて誰もが聞いたことがあるから、鶏卵会社が何らかの理由で非常にうまくいっているのと同じように、おそらく鳥インフルエンザについて聞いたことがあるでしょう。私たちはそれについてエピソード全体を作りました。それで鶏卵会社は一斉に価格を上げて大儲けするのです。しかしその一方で、私にはわかりませんが、本当に素晴らしいことをやっているソフトウェアスタートアップ企業もいくつかありますが、彼らは同じような価格引き上げを押し通すことができません。絶対。個々の企業の製品ライン間でさえ、自動車分野で何が起こったかを見てみるとわかりますか? ここで突然、実際に物理的なボトルネックがあり、自動車会社が次のことを決定したということです。つまり、主にハイエンドモデルを生産するだけでなく、その結果、一般の人が運転するこれらすべての車が基本的に市場で入手できない状況になりました。これは多くの意味で望ましくない結果です。なぜなら、車を買う余裕がないために人々は仕事に行けなくなるかもしれないからです。そうなると、すでに労働力が不足している状況において、労働市場の流動性が低下するのと同じことです。特定の地域では。だから、でも、そうだね。それで、私たちは資本配分と資本主義経済、そしてそれがどのように機能するかというテーマを扱っているので、もう少し資本主義の弱い国について話してもいいでしょうか。初めてあなたを番組に出演させたとき、それは中国と私について話すことでした。西側諸国やヨーロッパ、米国のインフレと中国で起こっていることを対比させて比較してみませんか? 東部には物価が高い地域がいくつかあるものの、全体としてはインフレの話ではないように思えます。それで、その比較に関して何を考えていますか?そうですね、本当に大事な視点だと思います。中国のこの高インフレと、一部の部分ではほとんどデフレのような問題があり、欧州と米国の間に実際に非常に劇的な乖離があったことについて、私たちはこれほど一般的に十分に議論してこなかったと思います。もちろん、それは新型コロナウイルスの異なるタイムラインと関係があると思います。それについては質問はありませんね?つまり、私たちがシャットダウンしていないときに彼らはシャットダウンしていて、私たちがシャットダウンしているときは開いていた、などということですよね?したがって、明らかにマクロ経済的に言えば、両者は異なる地点にいます。また、世界金融危機時などにあったような景気刺激策もなかった。確かにマクロ環境は異なりますが、世界的な食料とエネルギーの価格ショックがどのようにして中国に伝わったのかという疑問は依然としてあると思いますよね?そして、なぜこの衝撃はそこに同様のダイナミクスを引き起こさなかったのでしょうか。そう、他の場所ほどには広まっていないようだった。うん。だから、いろんな層がいると思うんです。まず第一に、穀物については、食料として重要だと思いますが、当然、巨大な国家備蓄システムがありますよね?そして基本的には国際価格に対して国内価格をある程度緩衝する必要がある。そのため、米や小麦などの重要な穀物の中国の価格は、かつては国際価格よりも高くなる傾向があったものの、安定していました。そして、国際価格が爆発的に上昇したとき、それらは大まかに言えば、現在の位置に留まりました。そして、それをどのようにやってやってきたのかというと、まず自給率が非常に高いということですが、これでは十分ではないと思います、なぜならアメリカは自給率が非常に高いということですよね。大手輸出業者のようです。例えばドイツも非常に高い自給率を持っています。中国は輸出国でもありますが、それでもこうした国際価格の動きは中国にも伝わっています。輸入割当が非常に厳格に管理されており、基本的に輸入の大部分が非常に大きな国有企業であるCOFCOによって管理されている状況であるため、そうしていない。そして次は国内。その意味では、国際的な国内価格は他の状況ほど連動しておらず、国内では依然として最低購入価格が存在します。したがって、彼らは基本的に、この最低購入価格で栽培するのが合理的な場所で穀物が栽培されることを保証します。そして、基本的に国有の備蓄システムから穀物が不足した場合、穀物市場に供給を追加する穀物オークションが行われます。つまり、ある意味、米国が穀物に関して持っているものと、おそらくさらに巨大な規模の戦略的石油備蓄を持っているのである。私がここで「おそらく」と言っているのは、埋蔵量の規模が実際には分からないからです。それは国家機密です。そうですね、豚肉の戦略的備蓄もあると思いますね。がある。それが私のお気に入りなのですが、彼らが豚を補充するたびに。もう一つのSPR。そう、実は生きた豚の保護区もあるんです。言い換えれば、彼らは国営の養豚場のようなものです、豚、申し訳ありませんが、養豚場を持つことはできません。養豚場だけを持つことができます。申し訳ありませんが、国営の養豚場です。これは冷凍養豚であり、国の試みのようなものでもあります。しかし、繰り返しになりますが、これらのオークション、つまり購入とオークションは、基本的に市場にシグナルを送るためのものです。つまり、これは単に物理的な供給の問題だけではなく、例えば豚肉の価格が値上がりし、その後州が冷凍豚肉の大規模なオークションを行っているとの発表があり、これが全市場にシグナルを送っているようなものでもあるのです。この価格上昇は続かないかもしれないとプレイヤーは考えていますが、そうすれば人々は在庫を処分するよう促され、それによって供給も増えるはずだ。つまり、私たちは SPR を持っていますが、実際には価格安定剤としては決して使用されなかったように聞こえます。つまり、戦略的な豚肉供給やその他の穀物のようなこれらすべての手段に加えて、彼らは、ある種ピボットされた、またはある種のRSPRとは異なり、実際にこれを使用する必要はないという実践も行っているようです。戦略的な目的のため、これはより深く根付いたマクロ管理の一部のようなものです。絶対。つまり、豚肉の例は、タカサイクルが問題であるため、実際にはそれほどうまく機能しない例ですよね?そして、それらは中国にもあり、何百万もの小規模所有者が豚を飼育しています。つまり、非常に激しいタカサイクルが存在します。したがって、サイクルをスムーズにすることはできますが、サイクルを取り除くことはできません。でも、それは」技術的にはまったく簡単ではありませんね? つまり、基本的に、販売されている豚肉が自分が買って食べたい豚肉であるように、それらを保管できるシステムが必要ですよね。これを比較的大規模に購入できるエージェントが必要です。その場合、オークションを専門的に組織する必要があり、市場をよく理解する必要もあります。つまり、今年初めに米国が戦略的石油備蓄を補充するために石油を買い戻すと発表され、その後原油価格が急騰し始めたときのことを覚えていますよね?したがって、自分がやっていることについていつ発言すべきか、いつ発言すべきでないのかなど、市場とのコミュニケーション方法を非常にうまく把握する必要があります。したがって、非常に要求が厳しく、多くのことがうまくいかない可能性があります。うん。そして、このようなことを実践している中国でさえ、特にアフリカ豚コレラの発生後の豚肉のことを覚えていますが、彼らは実際にサイクルをさらに悪化させました、なぜなら彼らは皆に生産量を増やすように言ったのに、それが多すぎて、その後価格が上がったからです倒れて全員が外に出た。そしてそれ以来、シーソーのように進んでいます。絶対。そして、中国では突然価格が暴落し、ヨーロッパでは非常に高い穀物価格が上昇したため、ヨーロッパの豚肉輸入業者が中国で販売することが困難になるという状況が実際に初めて起きた。面白いことに、私は中国にいた間、ワードバンク、IMF、大手銀行などの人々を含め、インフレに関して多くの人々にインタビューしていました。そして最終的には、私が話をした経済学者全員が豚肉について話し始めました。まあ、本当に?そして彼らは豚肉に関するジョークのようなものさえ持っています。つまり、中国の CPI は実際にはチャイナポークを表しているのだと彼らは言います。それは素晴らしいことです。すべての経済学者が豚肉のレンズを通してインフレを見ているのが大好きです。この国で石油を扱うのと同じように。はい、それは本当だ。でも、個人的な質問をしてもいいですか、それは、あなたもおっしゃいましたが、この会話は、売り手インフレという考え方がここ数週間でいかに本格的に勢いを増したかについて話し始めたところから始まりました。そして、あなたは価格統制について語った『ガーディアン』の記事について言及しましたが、それが掲載されたとき、オンラインで大量の批判を受け、多くのツイッター民があなたをさまざまな悪口で呼び、ポール・カークマンがあまり良くないことを言ったのを覚えています。でもそれ以来、私たちは ヨーロッパでの価格統制を見てきましたし、売り手のインフレ、そしておそらく棚ぼた税についても見てきました。たとえばイギリスでは、食料品のキャップなどについて議論されているのを目にしました。これが主流に浸透しつつあることについてどう思いますか? ええ、リストに追加するかもしれませんが、私たちはもちろんヨーロッパのガス価格の上限も確認しました。これは国際的な、つまり国境を越えて調整された種類の価格の上限であり、ロシアの石油に対する石油の価格の上限は原則としてです。すべての石油に使えるんじゃないでしょうか?私が言いたいのは、価格管理メカニズムの技術的な観点だけです。はい、絶対に。それは私にとってまったく驚くべきことでした。当時私がこの記事を書いた理由は、A、経済学者の間で議論が「ああ、我々はそうではない」と主張する人々の間で二極化していると感じたからです。インフレは一時的なものなので、あまり心配する必要はありません。そして、ああ、インフレは本当に問題だ、だから昨日利上げしなければならない、と言っていた人たちです。そして、そこにポジションが欠けているように感じました。つまり、非常に大きな価格の高騰があり、それが問題になっているということです。

でも、キッチンで火事が起きたら、家全体を水没させるのではなく、キッチンで火を消そうとするでしょう?つまり、価格統制に対する謝罪ではなく、部門別に私たちにできることがある、価格安定化の直接的な手段は、この種の異常な価格高騰に直面したときに時間を稼ぐための緊急措置となり得る、と言いたいのです。  

さて、ここでのキーワードは緊急対策だと思います。私の感覚では、緊急事態がより緊迫すればするほど、この種の措置が最終的により受け入れられるようになりました。ヨーロッパでは、戦争への反応という点でこれが非常にはっきりとわかると思いますが、基本的に寒くなるにつれ、同様のことも同様ですよね? そして、冬の恐怖が非常に現実的になってきました。緊急事態への認識がさらに強まり、この種の措置を講じようとする意欲が高まった。売り手のインフレの話は、価格管理の議論が実際にあなたが講じる緊急措置に関するものであるという意味で、関連しているようにも感じますが、少し別のような気もしますよね?そして、売り手インフレに関する論文は、この種のインフレをどのように理解するかについて書かれています。しかし、私たちが現在見ている変化は、もちろん完全ではありませんが、少なくともそれは完了していると思います。」インフレがどのようにして起こったのかを理解する別の方法について考えることがより受け入れられるようになるということは、私たちが緊急事態が重なるこの時代に本当に必要だと個人的に思う別の種類の経済安定化パラダイムに移行するために取るべき第一歩のようなものです。かなり幅の広い道のりでしたが、今日話していると、非常に幅が広​​かったので、次に何が起こるかは神のみぞ知るです。言説がよりオープンになっているという意味では、良い方向への動きがあったように見える。そして、このような前例のない状況に直面した場合、本当に必要なのはオープンな議論だと思います。なぜなら、前例のない状況に対して、それがどのように機能するかを常に正確に知っていると言うだけでは対応できないからです。うん。イザベラ・ウェーバー、Odd Lots に戻ってきてくれて本当にありがとう。直接お越しいただき本当にありがとうございました。それは本当に楽しかったです。私を迎えてくれて本当にありがとう。どうもありがとう。ジョー、私はいつもイザベラと話すのが楽しかったです。この特定の言説分野で物事がどれほど急速に変化しているかを見るのはクレイジーです。完全に。そして、ご存知のとおり、私たちがあまりそれに熱中しなかったことはわかっていますが、インターネットやツイッターのように、アイデアを発表すると大量の罵倒や反発を受ける可能性があるため、両方の方向に切り込むのが好きだとも思います。でも、アイデアが急速に広まる方法もありますよね? ある意味、論文を得るのに5年も待ち、ジャーナルなどで査読するような別の時代には起こらなかったと思います。しかし、私' 私たち二人とも、特に危機という性質の中で、どのようにして同じようなアイデアがこれほど速く、同じように進むことができるのかに似ていると思うので、私は魅了されています。絶対。他に私にとって印象に残ったことの 1 つは、トレッドミルのアイデアについて言及したことです。たとえば、利益率を水増しするために価格を上げる企業は素晴らしいように聞こえますが、ある時点で、実際にどこまでこれを押し上げることができるかについて不安になる幹部がいるのと同じように想像する必要があります。イザベラのギャンブルのような指摘が気に入りましたね。なぜなら、ある時点で、あなたが想像できるように、価格設定戦略をどのように進めても、本当にタイミングを逸し、突然、意味のある形でシェアを失いたくなるからです。あるいは、ブランドを傷つけることになりますが、それはもっともなことだと思われます。「ああ、この会社は一度に貪欲だ」という感じです。つまり、それは調整のようなものに依存します。そして私は、同じような経営者がトレッドミルから離れることを好むだろうかと疑問に思っています。ある意味ですよね?彼らは四半期ごとにレバーを引いていて、今のところ毎回支払われていますが、いつか支払われなくなるかもしれません。私にとって本当に印象に残ったもう一つのことは、つまり、私たちが話しているのは基本的に、何らかの形で経済により介入主義的な政府が潜在的に必要であるということです。それは、生産サイクルの一部を平滑化しようとしたり、大幅な価格の高騰を平準化しようとしたりすることです。そして、それは常に物議を醸すだろう、特に、それは常に政治的になるだろうという気がします。特に米国では、常に政治的な問題が絡んでくるが、そうは言っても、例えば戦略的石油備蓄などで、私たちはその兆候をいくらか見てきた。そして、これが本当に重要なことだと思います。今回のことすべてから私が学んだことは、人々がこのグリーンフレーションの話を見て、何であれ、「ああ、でもインフレはまだ非常に高い」ということです。そこで連邦当局は、それについて何かをしなければなりません。そして、私はイザベラの指摘に、それは単に「賃金のせいだ」とか「金利やマネーサプライのせいだけじゃない」と言うのではなく、別の次元に目を向けることが重要だということだと思います。それは私たちにこの種の精神的なスペースを開くことを可能にします。そしてそのうちのいくつかは、私たちが安定させるための手段を持っていないのと同じように、穀物価格を安定させるための手段を今持っていないかもしれません。これに相当するものはありませんが、次のようなことを考えるのと同じように、本当に利上げが最善の方法なのでしょうか?一般的な福利厚生や雇用などの観点から見て、そのコストはそれだけの価値があるのでしょうか? これが本当にこの話の内容ではない場合。その観点からすると、これはまだ非常に便利だと思います。「これらのツールはどれほど優れているのでしょうか?」そして、もし私たちが鈍器のようなものを使うつもりなら、このような平凡な道具でどれだけのダメージを与えるつもりですか。さて、また投資の話に戻ります。問題が生産のボトルネックである場合は、投資と生産のコストを上げたくないかもしれません。家賃が最も高い時期に不動産開発業者のコストを上げたいですか、そうですね、そのようなことです、そうです。ご存知のとおり、ジョー、私は今後、自分の全人格を米国の戦略的豚肉備蓄のための運動に注力することに決めました。でも、それは」そこも難しいと思いますが、それさえ確実ではありません。でも、ええ、私はそれを支持します。ベーコンをお持ち帰り。それが私のモットーです。ベーコンに刺激を与えます。そこに置いておきましょうか?そこはそのままにしておきましょう。さて、これも Odd Lots ポッドキャストのエピソードです。私はトレイシー・アロウェイです。Twitter @TracyAlloway で私をフォローしてください。そして私はジョー・ヴァイゼンタールです。Twitter @TheStalwart で私をフォローしてください。Twitter @IsabellaMWeber でゲストのイザベラ ウェーバーをフォローしてください。プロデューサーのカルメン・ロドリゲス @CarmenArmen とダシール・ベネット @DashBot をフォローしてください。さらに Odd Lots のコンテンツについては、bloomberg.com/oddlots にアクセスしてください。ここにはブログ、トランスクリプト、金曜日発行のニュースレターがあります。そして、Discord (discord.gg/oddlots) をチェックして、他のリスナーと 24 時間年中無休で集まり、これらすべてのトピックについて話し合ってください。そして、Samsung TV、Roku、Apple、その他のストリーミング プラットフォームでブルームバーグ オリジナルをストリーミングする必要があります。午後 10 時からのブルームバーグ TV もぜひご覧ください。ご視聴いただき、ありがとうございます。



0:12
Hello and welcome to another episode of the Odd Lots Podcast. I'm Tracy Alloway. And I'm Joe Weisenthal.
0:17Joe, do you remember the episode we did, I think it was just a couple months ago,
0:22with the Corbu strategist, Samuel Rines, about companies are telling us the real reason they're raising prices.
0:29Yeah, a great episode that sort of helped me like analyze like corporate earnings calls from then on
0:35and really like think about particularly in the consumer space where he had this thesis that companies are like very explicitly willing
0:41to sacrifice volume expansion in favor of higher prices and higher margins. Right.
0:47He called it price over volume. And since that episode, so we actually wrote an article based on that episode and we had a lot of quotes from Sam.
0:55We also cited a research paper from an Odd Lot's favorite, Isabella Weber,
1:01and we talked about this phenomenon, we called it excuseflation, So this idea that companies are using
1:08all these one-off emergencies as an excuse to raise prices. But since then this whole idea has exploded
1:16into the public consciousness in various ways under different umbrella terms.
1:21So Isabella used the term sellers inflation. I've seen like profit led inflation,
1:28greed inflation. Although I think that's a bad term for it personally, but it's everywhere now. Right, and it's funny 'cause it's one
1:35of these things where, you know, economists are sort of like scandalized by sort of alternative ideas
1:42about inflation and it's like they have certain things like some people say money supply, others say like labor costs and wages,
1:47but like it feels like on Wall Street there's kind of less mystery. It's like no, they're like at least you know,
1:53according to the people who read the calls, it's like no, they're telling us they're willing to push price.
1:58And I guess the question is like, you know, well there's lots of follow on questions, but like I think there's some really interesting policy
2:04ramifications from some of this identification. Totally. And it is funny, it's not, Pepsi isn't talking about like,
2:09oh the money supply is increasing, therefore we're raising our prices. They're talking very explicitly about,
2:15well we have these one-off reasons maybe to raise our prices and so we're gonna see how far we can take it to the consumer.
2:22So anyway, everyone is talking about this, whether you call it greedflation, excuseflation, profit-led inflation, sellers inflation.
2:30We need to go back to one of our favorite guests, who's done a lot of academic work on this topic.
2:36We specifically cited her work in the piece that we did. We're gonna be speaking with Isabella Weber. I'm psyched, on set.
2:42All right. Isabella Weber, economics professor at University of Massachusetts Amherst,
2:47thank you so much for coming back on. Thanks so much for having me back and it's a true pleasure to be here in person.
2:52Yeah, this is a treat. I didn't realize up until like five minutes ago that you were gonna be on set. I thought we were gonna look the video
2:58so great to finally meet you. Oh, the first time we're actually meeting in person. Yeah, have you been surprised
3:03at all by how quickly this seems to have become, I hesitate to call it mainstream 'cause people
3:08are still debating it but it's in the "Wall Street Journal", it's in the "New New York Times", certainly in Bloomberg coverage.
3:15Yeah, I think it has been very surprising, especially since some of the key data on the profit margins
3:21actually already came out in the fourth quarter of 2021. So, and you guys have actually been covering
3:26that at the time, you were covering the profit margin explosion that happened at the same time as inflation started to take off.
3:34And in this by now probably infamous "Guardian" piece that I wrote,
3:39I actually started by saying there is a so far pretty much undiscussed phenomenon,
3:45which is an explosion of profit margins that coincides with inflation and we should take a closer look at that.
3:51So I think in many ways when our paper came out at the beginning of this year,
3:56it has kind of been something that had been going on for a long time and companies have been saying this on earnings
4:03calls for a long time. The groundwork folks have been calling this out for a long time, but now it really took off, so.
4:11So I guess one of my questions and have many is, you know, there are different factors that people talk about driving inflation
4:16and obviously the tight labor market, fast wage growth, high levels of consumer demand,
4:23a lot of the supply chain bottlenecks that we've talked about over the years on the show, the supply side factors, why is it important?
4:31Let's start with that to sort of like think about correct identification of different causes.
4:37Yeah, I mean when economists talk about causation, they have very, very high standards, right?
4:43So I'm not yet there to say like what I did, it's like a causal analysis just to put this out there.
4:48It's kind of a disclaimer, but I think this is kind of part of the challenge that we face because we are
4:54in a really unprecedented moment in the world, in the economy, in the global economy, right? And inflation is kind of part
5:00of that whole unprecedented moment. So you are getting these pieces of data that are coming out and you kind of have
5:06to reason on them however incomplete the data might be. And if you just look at it from the perspective
5:13of your standard inflation paradigm, then you basically just look at money supply, aggregate demand, and maybe wages.
5:19And you don't look at all these other stuff that you guys have been reporting about for months and months and months, right?
5:25But if you sit in a corporate boardroom, then you are actually looking at all this other stuff. So then from your perspective,
5:31prices present themselves as something very different. So what we are doing with this research I think is
5:37to kind of say let's take the information that we have, however incomplete it still may be,
5:43and try to make sense why we are seeing what we are seeing. What we are seeing is that on earnings calls time and again
5:51corporate leaders are saying that they can take pricing and that they can increase prices in ways
5:56that they might not even have expected and that they can increase prices even when volumes are going down,
6:02which is just against the logic of basic supply demand, right? Where we would expect with demand going up,
6:09prices going up and not the other way around. Now you might say, well it's about the bottleneck and then demand
6:15is strong so therefore it's still a demand kind of story. But then I would say, well if I look at the earnings
6:20calls in the latest quarter, right? Where clearly the bottlenecks for the most part have ceased
6:26and they're still taking price when volumes are going down, then clearly this is also not
6:32a pure kind of bottleneck type of story. Well maybe just to step back for a second,
6:37talk to us about what seller's inflation, this is the term that you use actually is
6:42and how maybe it differs to traditional conceptions of greedflation,
6:49because this is one reason I remember when we were writing that piece, Joe, this is one reason why I wanted to call it something other than greedflation
6:55because it's not like everyone woke up in March, 2020 and suddenly decided to become more greedy.
7:01Which is a common critique of like that. Yeah, and quite frankly, I think that everybody agrees on that.
7:06Like no one is saying that there has been this sudden greedy impulse, firm leaders just became more greedy
7:13than they used to be, right? That is just not a good theory. So the question is how can it be that in incredibly
7:20concentrated industries we had decades of surprising price stability, right?
7:26Even like deflation in some periods.
7:31And now in this same highly concentrated kind of setup, we suddenly get this price
7:36over volume type of pricing behavior, right? And what we are arguing in our paper
7:42is that there's basically different components that coordinate price hikes in ways in which
7:48they could not be coordinated without these emergencies happening, right?
7:53So one prominent thing is a cost shock. I mean we have had gigantic cost shocks
7:58coming out of energy, right? That kind of send a signal to firms, okay, now is the time to increase prices,
8:05which means that they can be fairly sure that their competitors are also increasing prices because the way that they're pricing
8:11is to protect their profit margins. So the first goal is to make sure that their profit margins
8:16are not gonna collapse, which means that if costs go up, they are gonna increase their prices. Now this is like kind of
8:22the most benign form of coordination, but they can also be bottlenecks that can then coordinate
8:28pricing behavior and that can coordinate this pricing behavior even when the actual bottleneck might already start
8:33to seize because there's still this signal to the whole sector that something different is going on.
8:40And then there is, I guess the component that the excuseflation label is getting at where from
8:47the perspective of the consumers, it's also more legitimate to see prices going up
8:52when there are clear reasons why they're going up. If you imagine you go to your favorite coffee shop
8:58every day and then from one day to the next, the coffee costs twice as much,
9:03then you would probably say like, oh, somehow the guy who's running the coffee shop went nuts, right? If this guy has been telling you over and over again
9:11that they are expecting a rent increase and then you come back and the price of coffee goes up, you'll probably go like,
9:16oh yeah, of course makes sense, right? And something like this, but on a sectoral global level I think
9:22has been going on for example, in the food sector where no one can judge, I mean you had this amazing episode on grain prices
9:30and prices of food items that use grain, right? And I mean as a consumer, I don't know how much is the cost component
9:38of grain in my pasta, right? Or in my bread, but if I hear on the news in the radio on TV
9:44that grain prices are exploding and I see pasta price going up, it kind of makes sense. So there is in other words also
9:51a component of legitimacy in pricing behavior, right? It's something that in economic theory
9:56we have a very hard time capturing. It's not like people walk around with a budget constraint
10:02and a given set of preferences on their mind and like robots, they react to the price that they see, but they look at the context, right?
10:08So if in normal times are basically two things that would constrain firms in their pricing behavior,
10:15on the one hand competition that is fear of losing market shares to their competitors, right? Which would happen if they start hiking prices
10:22and kind of a unilateral action, then that fear is kind of gone once these price hikes start to be more or less coordinated
10:30due to these emergency situations. And the second constraint would be fearing
10:35that customers are just not willing to pay these prices, right? Like whether they are they actually can pay these prices or not,
10:40they might just be deterred if prices suddenly go up for no obvious reason. Now if they are obvious reasons,
10:46they seem to be more willing to accept these price increases. So therefore both of these constraints
10:52are quite dramatically softened in this emergency situation
10:57that we have been living through. So some economists might listen to the story and nod their head and say, yeah, this makes sense,
11:06but for whatever reason prices are going up and workers are gonna demand higher wages to compensate for the higher prices
11:12and you get this self-sustaining, you know, increased more demand and they're like, okay, I can fit this
11:18into the typical inflation expectation story and therefore the Fed should be hiking rates regardless.
11:24Like why couldn't, like could this fit into a typical inflation expectation story?
11:30This is how it becomes entrenched. Yeah, maybe it's like a different thing than like 1970s inflation, but it's still the thing and ultimately
11:36the Fed has to respond the same way. Yeah, I mean first on the wage part of that story,
11:42what we are seeing is basically eventually labor is trying to fight back against collapsing real wages
11:49as workers are basically losing purchasing power, right? But this is a very different story. If you have an initial cost shock that comes
11:57from the energy market, that comes from commodity markets, comes from shipping and so on, basically comes from upstream stuff
12:03and then you have a propagation amplification of that shock as firms react by pricing over volume type of behavior, right?
12:10And then eventually labor goes like, wait a minute, like my purchasing power has collapsed and I'm trying to fight back
12:17to regain some of this lost territory, then this is a reaction to inflation
12:22rather than the origin of inflation. I think this really matters for how we think about what to do against inflation.
12:30But secondly also, I mean when we talk about expectations and expectation anchoring and so on, we somehow think that firms look at the Fed
12:37and they kind of like greet these signals from the Fed to anchor or de-anchor the inflation expectations.
12:43I'm not saying none of this is going on, but when I am reading the earnings calls, I don't see them talk about the Fed a lot.
12:49I see them talk about what their competitors are doing, I see them talk about rational pricing environments.
12:55I see them say things like, with this new force major like the winter storm Elliot,
13:00this has made our pricing environment even more conducive. So they are looking at their immediate environment,
13:07they're looking at are customers accepting of these price increases?
13:12Which is a completely different set of expectations than what we think of when we talk about expectations in this
13:18kind of central bank centered type of fashion. So throughout economic history,
13:24I mean the classic worry about inflation has always been this wage price spiral
13:30that you kind of just outlined. But if that's not what's happening here or if it's not the actual cause of higher prices,
13:36if instead we have like I guess a profit price spiral of some sort, what should we do?
13:43Like what actually arrests this behavior? Because again, if you listen to the company earnings calls,
13:49you can see the executives talking about how surprised they've been about how strong customer demand has been,
13:55how far they've been able to push up prices, and also you see the share price reactions
14:01they're getting rewarded for raising prices. So it seems like there's very little incentive
14:06or a catalyst for this to actually stop. Absolutely. And I would actually say that the investors expectations
14:13is another set of expectations as probably more immediate from the perspective of people taking pricing decisions, right?
14:20Were when representatives of let's say Morgan Stanley, just to pick a random example here
14:25are asking questions on earnings calls about pricing. They are also asking on behalf of a player that is actually
14:33gonna invest quite substantial amounts of money, right? So there's that layer to the expectation story to,
14:39but to actually go to your question, I think first of all we need to stop these impulses, right?
14:47I mean these like gigantic cost shocks that then coordinate these kind of price hikes.
14:52If they can be arrested kind of in the onset, that I think would've made a huge difference.
15:00I think something like the strategic petroleum reserve, which of course eventually was mobilized in 2022,
15:06if that had been mobilized sooner because there was a mindset on the part of policymakers to say oil prices going
15:14up as they started going up in 2021 is a real problem and has the potential to undermine price stability
15:21and economic stability, then they might have acted sooner and they might have acted more decisively.
15:27Now it's of course not only about oil, it's also about gas, other sources of energy, it's about other forms of raw materials
15:34and importantly also about grain. I think for grain actually we ideally would need
15:40some sort of a coordinated international buffer stock, which is an idea that Keynes had
15:46for the institutions, something that he wanted to see as one of the institutions.
15:51But that did not materialize. And there have been proposals like this in the seventies when, I mean obviously there were also
15:57very major commodity price cycles going on at the time. So I think these type of ideas are pretty important.
16:06And they're important not only like looking back and saying, oh yeah, the last three years somehow weren't great,
16:11but now we are back to normal life. So this is a nice historical anecdote or something like this. But they're important because we are living in an age of overlapping emergency.
16:19And as far as I understand, people in the grain market are saying things
16:24like we are basically one major weather event away from another price hike in grain, right?
16:30And if there are bad harvests that are related to climate change happening much faster than many of us might have
16:37thought tipping points being reached much, much sooner than climate scientists still projected not that long ago, right?
16:45Then I think this is something that is quite likely to happen. So what I'm thinking about here is really
16:50a form of economic disaster preparedness so that we have shock absorbers
16:55where shocks to these systemically important things like grain, like energy can be absorbed locally
17:02so that we don't even get this gigantic impulse in the first place. Now for this like propagation and amplification
17:08that comes as firms react to these shocks, I think what we basically need is some sort of
17:16a windfall profits tax that vote kick in whenever there is a major emergency.
17:22Because we have now learned that in these emergencies, these pre-taxes that happen can present situations
17:28where prices can go up very quickly. And I think that if corporate leaders had to learn this this time,
17:34then next time around they have a playbook in hand, right? They know how price over volume works,
17:41they know what to look for, they know what they did last time. And if this is a coordination issue in the sense
17:47that it depends on what your competitors are doing and last time it worked out really well because everybody kind of implicitly
17:53agreed to be doing exactly that, then next time around they just have to look back at what they did last time.
17:59So I think that if there are more shocks, it's likely that we would see what we have seen now in possibly and even more fast.
18:08Windfall profits tax. How does that fight inflation?
18:13Because some people would hear that it's like, oh, you're gonna like add taxes, you're gonna add costs. Maybe there's some like redistribution element
18:19or punishing the rich or punishing the successful. What does that actually, what is the mechanism via which this
18:25is a inflation fighting tool? Well, it's a mechanism that basically takes
18:31away the incentive to do a price over volume strategy, right? Because price over volume makes sense.
18:38If you can't increase prices so much that even when you're selling less, you still end up making more money
18:44because you have hike prices so much. Now of course there can be situations where price
18:49over volume happens to just protect profit margins. So win for profit tax would not happen that,
18:55but we have seen situations where firms actually have managed to quite dramatically increase
19:01their margins with this kind of pricing behavior. So it would kind of cut off the edge of that process, right?
19:09Would cut off what we are calling in our paper amplification. So you have this initial shock and the then this shock
19:15is actually not just propagated through your system, but it's amplified as it as it coordinates
19:21these additional profit increasing price hikes.
19:26So what do traditional ways of fighting inflation, how do they actually play out in a seller's inflation world?
19:33So for instance, the fed hikes interest rates in theory that's supposed to curb demand and therefore prices start going down.
19:41But what's your instinct on how that actually plays out in a world where companies are the driving force behind prices?
19:49Yeah, I mean at best in a very roundabout way, I mean in any case this is always
19:54a very roundabout instrument, right? We have to keep in mind that this is a very, very indirect tool
20:00of fighting inflation. Which by the way, if we are in a situation where we are already at the edge of a recession
20:06where we are already at the edge of a banking crisis where we have had a pandemic and we have a war, and now let's say we have
20:11another major climate shock, right? And let's say we have already hiked interest rates to a point where even hawkish people feel
20:18like okay really shouldn't go higher. I mean what are you gonna do? If you have another shock
20:23that unleashes this kind of process. So first of all, I would say it's too blunt of a tool to deal with frequent,
20:32extremely sectoral shocks as I think they have become more likely. Of course no one hopes that they will happen.
20:39I don't hope they're happening, but I think they have become more likely. So I don't think we are prepared to actually achieve
20:46priceability with the tools that we have in terms of just relying on the central bank.
20:52I also think that if it is the case that there is such a big energy shock, which then central banks would say,
20:58oh we are actually looking through this, right? Then your mindset is like, oh yeah, this is something that is not part of the core inflation.
21:04I'm just looking through this, like la, la, la, that's not happening, right? I think this is not the right mindset that we need
21:09because this is like a very, very dangerous impact. So in that sense it's kind
21:15of leading us in the wrong direction. But also at the end of the day what happens with interest rate hikes is that it's designed
21:22to cool down the labor market right? Now if it is a case that inflation erases purchasing power
21:27and rate increases were not the origin of this inflation. This means that the majority of wage dependent people
21:34are actually being hurt by inflation and then they're kind of punished a second time by cooling down the labor market, right?
21:40So I think even from a kind of justice perspective that is hugely problematic, but it's also not very effective
21:46because it's kind of getting at the wrong thing. So I take your point about things like the strategic
21:52petroleum reserve and how the logic of these sort of buffer stocks, particularly of commodities could be used
21:59in like future shocks as buffers in both directions. But how do you think about this idea
22:06with respect to services? Because it's hard to believe, okay, maybe we keep a lot of oil that we don't use in tankers.
22:11It's hard to believe we would say like, you know, we're not gonna under book, you know, have all flights be 80% booked
22:17or all hotels be 80% booked or all veterinarians like carve 20% of their time,
22:22and services in terms of right now even like, you know, in spring 2023 like services inflation
22:29is particularly what the Fed is like focused on. So how do you like think about some of these things outside
22:35of the sort of pure goods commodity realm, like applying some of the same insight and logic? Yeah, so I think if we look at services,
22:42shipping has probably been the most important service that had a very large price explosion
22:47that I would see as part of the impact stage. And I think what we saw there is that basically you had,
22:53I mean a literal bottleneck, right? Like if you think back to how the Port of LA looked,
22:59I mean this is the image of a bottleneck, right? And shipping companies could increase
23:07their freight rates several times over. So prices went up and they had actually the largest profits in years and years, right?
23:14So they were in a situation where as I mean if I was a leader of one of these large shipping companies,
23:20I was in no rush to get out of this bottleneck, right? Because it's the best of times for me, right?
23:25Sure. So for example, for shipping, I think A ,we need protocols like, I mean how do you unblock a port,
23:33and B, some sort of a price gouging legislation of the type that the New York State Attorney General
23:38is currently introducing also for essential stuff that is further up the value chain
23:43rather than just the essential consumer facing stuff I think could be really helpful because this is not to say that prices cannot
23:50go up at all if this kind of emergency happens and shipping companies have higher costs because things get complicated.
23:57But it's to say that they don't get these perverted incentives of having freight rates
24:03that increased multiple times over, which I think would actually also give them more incentive
24:08to get out of the blockage as as opposed to basically profit from the situation.
24:15Wait, so just on this point, can you talk to us a little bit about investment? Because the classic argument against some sort
24:23of windfall tax or price control would be, well you don't wanna artificially bring down the prices,
24:29you want people to make a ton of money and that way they'll invest more in their business and build out capacity and eventually
24:36the additional production is gonna be the thing that maybe starts to resolve the bottleneck and bring down prices.
24:42How does that work and is that a viable critique of some of the measures that you're talking about?
24:48Well, I mean first of all I would say that hiking interest rates is a recipe designed to bring down investment, right?
24:55So if we are talking about different ways of fighting inflation, then I am more worried about the interest rate hiking policy
25:01than I am about an emergency price gouging law or an a national emergency win
25:06for-profit tax or something like that. But also we have to see that if we are talking about price over volume,
25:11then we are in a situation where with lower volumes firms can make more money, right? Which means that they
25:17are basically contracting their capacity. And I think that if we look at the oil sector,
25:22which on my mind has been a very important element in this inflation story,
25:28that it's quite clear that they are saying very explicitly on the earnings calls that they are taking a disciplined
25:34approach to investment because they are reaping record profits, as they have reduced capacity.
25:41Everyone remembers 2013 and the big expansion and they don't wanna repeat that. Exactly, exactly.
25:47So it's not necessarily the case that if you can, I mean if you have learned that you can actually reap record profits
25:54when your supply is constrained, that this then encourages you to have a lot of redundant extra capacity
26:01or to hugely expand your capacity and therefore go for big investments. Where there are areas where we are particularly worried
26:10about curtailing investments with these kind of policy measures. I think you could have a policy
26:18that basically stipulates that if you are investing in like let's say green technologies,
26:24like let's say you you you are using the crisis a moment to upgrade your technology
26:29to become a low carbon manufacturer or something this, that you could have a tax write off
26:36for these kind of investments that we really want, that we want for a green transition that would not count towards the ways
26:41in which your windfall profits tax is calculated. So that in this kind of situation these firms
26:47might still have an incentive to do price over volume, but at least they would use the money that they get to invest in the stuff that we really need
26:54to make our economy more resilient rather than to buy back shares or do these kind of things.
27:00You know, it's interesting going back to this point that part of the impulse or part of the expectation comes from investors
27:07themselves and these sort of expectations. You're gonna push price too. You're gonna push price too.
27:12Do you think there's any element here where corporations themselves would like to get outta this game,
27:19that a sort of like third party administrator of supply of price of investment comes in and actually like solves a problem for corporations
27:27so that they get off this treadmill? Because one thing that I think about sometimes is any individual company may benefit
27:34from higher prices and higher margins, but on the whole a series of like Fed rate hikes
27:39to hike inflation is not great for stocks, which is how most of these executives get paid.
27:45Yeah, absolutely. I think there is like on the one hand a lot of coordination, right? With these price hikes. On the other hand there's
27:51a lot of coordination failure if you want. So because there are outcomes of this process that in some sense not sustainable, right?
27:58And actually if we look at what happened after World War I, when you had like kind of price hikes
28:04coming out of a bottleneck kind of transition from war to post-war economy,
28:09you had a very short lived boom that was very inflationary and then at a sharp turn into a deflationary recession.
28:17I don't think that such a sharp turn is in the cards because now we have these very concentrated sectors
28:23for most of the economy, which means that in these sectors firms are price makers
28:28and they tend to not lower prices in these kind of sudden ways in which we would see it in commodity markets
28:34or price taking markets. So I'm not so worried about this sudden turn as I would've been in a different setup, but nevertheless,
28:41yes it does trigger, it does trigger rate hikes, it does create a situation where I think a lot of corporate
28:49leaders are also nervous, like how far can we take this? It's like it's a bit like you're in this gambling game
28:55where you keep winning but you kind of don't trust. And everyone seems surprised that it's actually paid off this much for so long, right?
29:02Yeah, everybody seems to be really surprised that, I mean that, yeah, so the degree of coordination on that front
29:08has been totally surprising. But then you can also not chicken out, right? I mean we saw when Walmart for very short blips of time
29:15was making announce that they are discounted and that they are not going to play this price hiking game
29:21and then they had this share selloff, right? So I mean there's also like kind of a discipline from financial markets to keep doing this,
29:29but at the same time it's kind of clear that maybe it cannot keep going. But also we have to see that if we look
29:36at the data of changes in profit margins, it's very roughly speaking about two thirds of sectors
29:45that benefited and one one third or so that did not benefit. I don't have a very clear picture yet
29:50like how this distribution works. But in any case, we know that there are also sectors
29:57and that there are firms that are suffering pretty badly from this, right? And if we think of a capitalist economy
30:03as being coordinated by the profitability of different things, right?
30:09As the most important signal for capital allocation and this profitability gets kind of random
30:15because in some sectors firms can play this prize of a volume game and then some other sectors it
30:21might be more difficult to pour this off. And this doesn't have reasons that are necessarily tied
30:27into the entrepreneurial genius of one firm versus the other or the necessity
30:35for society for production of one thing over the other. But it just has to do with whatever specific consolation enabled these kind of price hikes.
30:43And I think we also really have a problem, right? If profitability becomes random. Right?
30:48So maybe like the egg companies do really well for some reason 'cause everyone's heard about bird flu for instance.
30:54We did a whole episode on it. And so all the egg companies raise their prices at the same time and make a lot of money.
31:00But meanwhile there's some, I don't know, software startup doing something really cool but they can't push through
31:06the same kind of price increases. Absolutely. And even like between product lines in individual firms,
31:13like if you look at what happened in the car sector, right? Where suddenly because I mean there you actually
31:19had a real physical bottleneck and car companies decided to only, I mean not only but predominantly produce higher end models
31:30that then resulted in a situation where all these cars that normal people are driving became
31:35basically not available on the market, right? Which is an outcome that is in many ways undesirable
31:41because then maybe people can't make it to work because they can't afford a car, which then like kind of makes the labor market less fluid in a situation
31:48where we already have labor shortage in certain areas. So, but yeah. So since we're on the topic of capital allocation
31:55and capitalist economies and how it's supposed to work, can we maybe talk about a slightly less capitalist country,
32:04the first time we ever had you on the show it was to talk about China and I'm wondering if you contrast and compare inflation in the West,
32:14and Europe and the US, with what's going on in China, it does seem like although there are some pockets of high prices in the East,
32:21it does feel like on the whole it's less of an inflation story.
32:27So what are you thinking about in terms of that comparison? Yeah, I think it's really an important thing to look at.
32:35I think we haven't discussed this like generally enough that there has been really this pretty dramatic divergence
32:40between Europe and the US with this high inflation in China with almost a deflation kind of problem in some stretches.
32:47I think of course it has to do with the different timeline of COVID. I mean no question about that, right?
32:54I mean they have had shutdowns when we were not in shutdown and they were open when we were
32:59in shutdown and so on, right? So clearly macro economically speaking, they are at a different point. They also did not have the kind of stimulus packages
33:07that they had in the global financial crisis and so on. So certainly the macro environment is different,
33:13but I think there's still the question of how did the global food
33:18and energy price shock arrive in China, right? And why did this shock not unleash similar
33:26kind of dynamics there. Right, it didn't seem to get propagated as much as it did elsewhere. Yeah.
33:32So I think there like different layers. So first of all, I mean for grain, which I think is an important one for food,
33:37they have of course a gigantic national reserve system, right? And they basically have to a certain degree buffer
33:45their domestic prices against international prices. So Chinese prices used to be,
33:50for important grains like rice, wheat, used to tend to be higher than the international prices, but stable.
33:57And when the international prices exploded, they kind of stayed broadly speaking where they were.
34:03And the way that they have managed that is that first of all they have
34:10a very high self-sufficiency rate, but I don't think this is enough because I mean the US has a very high self-sufficiency rate, right?
34:16It's even like a major exporter. Germany for example, also has a very high self-sufficiency rate. It's also an exporter,
34:21but still these international price movements have arrived right in China. They have not because the import quota
34:30is very strictly managed and it's basically a situation where most of the imports are managed
34:36by a very large state owned company, COFCO. And then domestically.
34:43So in that sense the international domestic prices are not really as interlinked as they would be in other situations and domestically
34:49they still have a minimum purchase price. So that they basically ensure that wherever it's reasonable to cultivate
34:56with this minimum purchase price grain is being cultivated. And then they have these grain auctions
35:02where they would be adding supply to the grain market if there is a shortage from basically a state-owned reserve system.
35:09So in some sense they have for grain, what the US has with the strategic petroleum reserve
35:15just on a probably even much more gigantic scale.
35:20And I'm saying probably here because we don't really know the size of of the reserve. It's a state secret.
35:26Yeah, I think there's a strategic pork reserve as well, right? There is. That's my favorite one,
35:31whenever they replenish the pigs. The other SPR. Yeah, there's actually also a live pig reserve.
35:38In other words they're like state owned pork farms, pig, sorry, you can't have a pork farm.
35:45You only can have a pig farm, sorry, the state owned pick farms, they're frozen pig reserves
35:51and they are also like kind of attempts of the state. But again these auctions and I mean purchases
35:58and auctions to basically send signals into the market. So it's not really just about the physical supply,
36:06but it's also about like let's say there's a price hike for pork and then there's an announcement
36:13that the state is now doing a major auction of frozen pork and this is send sending a signal to all market players
36:18that this price hike might not continue, which then should encourage people to get rid
36:24of the inventories and thereby also add supply. So it sounds like, I mean we have our SPR and it was
36:31never really used as a price stabilizer. So in addition to all these vehicles like the strategic pork supply and the other grain,
36:37it seems like they also have practice in this that actually like unlike RSPR, which was sort of pivoted or like,
36:43oh we don't have to use it just for strategic purposes, that this is like part of like a more ingrained macro management there.
36:50Absolutely. And I mean the pork example is actually one where it doesn't work that great because hawk cycles are a thing, right?
36:57And they are a thing in China too, and you have like millions of small holders farming pigs.
37:02So you have very intense hawk cycles. So you can smoothen the cycle but you never get rid of it.
37:07But it's technically not at all simple, right? I mean you need to have basically a system
37:13that can store that stuff in a way that the pork that they sell is the pork that you want to buy and eat, right?
37:19You need to have agents that are able to purchase this on a relatively large scale.
37:24You then have to have these auctions that have to be professionally organized and you also have to understand the market really well.
37:30I mean, remember when there was an announcement earlier this year that the US was gonna buy back oil to replenish
37:38its strategic petroleum reserve and then oil prices started spiking, right? So you have to have a very good handle
37:44on how to communicate with the market, like when to say something about what you're doing and when not to say something about what you're doing.
37:51So it's quite demanding and a lot of things can go wrong. Yeah.
37:57And even in China where they do have practice doing this, I mean I remember with pork specifically after the African swine fever outbreak,
38:04they actually made the cycle even worse 'cause they told everyone ramp up production and then it was too much
38:10and then prices collapsed and everyone got out. And so it's just been going like seesawing ever since then.
38:16Absolutely. And it's actually been for the first time a situation where European pork importers have
38:23had difficulty selling in China because suddenly the prices collapsed in China and in Europe they were going up
38:30with the very high grain prices. The funny thing is, while I was in China, I was doing many interviews with people on inflation,
38:38including folks from the Word Bank, from the IMF, from major banks and so on.
38:43And eventually every single economist that I talked to started to talk about pork. Oh really? And they even have all these like jokes on pork.
38:50So they say like the CPI in China actually stands for the China Pork .
38:57That's great, I love that all the economists are viewing inflation through the lens of pork. Like we do with the oil here in this country.
39:03Yes, it's true. But can I ask a personal question, which is, you know, you mentioned,
39:08well we started off this conversation talking about how this idea of sellers inflation has really gathered steam in recent weeks.
39:17And you mentioned the "Guardian" article where you talked about price controls and I remember when that came out,
39:23you got a ton of criticism online, lots of Twitter people calling you various names,
39:31Paul Kirkman said some not very nice things. But since then we've seen price controls
39:37in Europe, we've seen on the subject of sellers inflation and maybe windfall taxes.
39:43We've seen the UK for instance, talking about capping grocery items and things like that.
39:50How do you feel about how this is sort of seeping into the the mainstream?
39:57Yeah, I mean maybe to add to your list, we have also of course seen the European gas price cap,
40:03which is an international, I mean transnationally coordinated kind of price cap and the oil price cap against Russian oil,
40:10which I mean in principle could be for all oil, right? I mean just in terms of the technicality of the price control mechanism.
40:16So yes, absolutely. It's been totally astonishing to me.
40:22The reason why I wrote this article at the time was because A,
40:27I felt that the debate amongst economists was polarized between those who were saying like,
40:34oh, we don't have to worry about inflation too much, it's just transitory. And those who were saying, oh, inflation's really a problem,
40:40therefore we have to hike interest rates yesterday. And I felt like there was a position missing there,
40:46which is like, yeah, we have very large price spikes and they're a problem. But if you have a fire in the kitchen,
40:52you don't set your whole house under water, but you try to put out the fire in the kitchen, right?
40:57So not as an apologies of price controls, but to say, hey, there is something sectorial
41:03that we can do and direct means of price stabilization can be an emergency measure to buy time
41:10when you are faced with these kind of crazy price spikes. Now the key word here I think is emergency measure.
41:17And my sense is that the more urgent the emergency became,
41:22the more acceptable these kind of measures ended up being.
41:28And I think that in Europe you can see this very clearly in terms of the reactions to the war,
41:35but then also like basically as it became colder, right? And the fear of winter just became very real.
41:44The perceived emergency became more intense and the willingness to take this
41:49kind of measures became greater.
41:55The sellers inflation story, I feel like it's related but also kind of
42:01slightly separate in the sense that the price control debate is really about emergency measures that you take, right?
42:08And the sellers inflation paper is really about how do we understand this kind of inflation.
42:14But I think the shift that we are seeing now that of course is not complete and so on,
42:20but that at least it's becoming more acceptable to think about other ways of understanding how inflation came about is kind of the first step that we need to take
42:28to move towards a different kind of economic stabilization paradigm that I personally think we really need
42:35in this age of overlapping emergencies. So it's been quite a wide ride but I guess talking today
42:43and it has been very wide so god knows what's gonna happen next. It looks like there has been some movement
42:51in a good direction in the sense that the discourse is becoming more open. And I think that an open discourse is really what we need
42:58if we are faced with these unprecedented situations because you cannot respond to an unprecedented situation
43:04by saying we have always known how exactly it works. Yeah. Isabella Weber,
43:10thank you so much for coming back on Odd Lots. Really appreciated having you in person as well.
43:15It was really fun. Thank you so much for having me. Thank you so much. So Joe, I always enjoyed talking to Isabella.
43:21It is crazy to see how quickly things seem to be changing in this particular area of discourse.
43:28Totally. And you know, I know we didn't really get into it, but I also just think that like the internet and Twitter
43:34and like it sort of cuts in both directions because you could put out an idea and get tons of abuse and backlash,
43:40but there's also like a really rapid way which ideas proliferate right? In a way I don't think would've happened in like, you know,
43:46a different era where you like wait like five years to get a paper, you know, referee it in a journal or something like that.
43:52But I'm fascinated as I think we both are by like how ideas like can move so fast and like,
43:57especially in the nature of crisis. Absolutely. And the other things that stood out to me are one, you mentioned this treadmill idea Yeah.
44:03Of like, you know, it sounds great companies raising prices in order to pad their profit margins,
44:09but at some point you have to imagine like there are some executives who get nervous about how far they can actually push this.
44:15I liked Isabella's point about like the gamble, right? Because at some point, like you could imagine where you like go
44:20with a pricing strategy and you really mistime it and suddenly you really do like lose share
44:25in like a meaningful way, right? Or you damage your brand, which seems plausible. It's like, oh this company is greedy at a time.
44:32And so it sort of depends on like the sort of coordination. And I do wonder whether like executives
44:38would ever like off the treadmill. In some way, right? They're sort of, they're pulling the lever every quarter
44:44and so far it's paid out each time, but maybe one day it won't. The other thing that really stood out to me was,
44:51I mean what we're talking about is basically the need potentially for a more interventionist government
44:57in the economy in one way or another. Whether it's, you know, trying to smooth out some of those production cycles,
45:04trying to smooth out big price spikes. And I feel like that's always going to be controversial,
45:12particularly- It's always gonna be political. It's always gonna be political, particularly in the US, but it is, you know, that said,
45:18we have seen some inklings of it with, for instance, the strategic petroleum reserve.
45:23And I think this is really the, like to my takeaway from all this is people look at this greenflation story, whatever,
45:29and they're like, yeah, but inflation is still really high. And so the Feds, we gotta do something about it.
45:34And I think to Isabella's point, like,
45:40it's important by looking at different dimensions and not just saying, oh, it's 'cause of wages or not just
45:45'cause of like rates or money supply. It allows us like this sort of like mental space to open up. And some of them, like we may not have the tools,
45:51like we may not have the tools right now to like stabilize, keep grain prices stable. We don't have the sort of equivalent,
45:57but like in thinking about like, is rate hikes really gonna be the best way here? Is the cost in terms of like general welfare
46:03and employment worth it? If this is really not what the story is about. I think it's still like very useful from
46:09that perspective is like, okay, how good are these tools? And if we're gonna use a blunt tool like, right,
46:14how much damage are we gonna do with this like, mediocre tool. Well again, going back to the investment point.
46:21If the issue is a bottleneck in production, then maybe you don't wanna raise
46:26the cost of investment and production. Do you wanna raise the cost of a real estate developer at a time when rent is one of the highest,
46:33yeah things like that, yeah. You know what Joe, I've decided I'm gonna base my entire personality going forward on campaigning
46:38for a strategic pork reserve in the US. But it's hard there too I guess,
46:43even that isn't foolproof. But yeah, I support that. Bringing home the bacon. That's my motto. Stimulizing the bacon.
46:49Shall we leave it there? Let's leave it there. All right, this has been another episode of the Odd Lots Podcast. I'm Tracy Alloway.
46:54You can follow me on Twitter @TracyAlloway. And I'm Joe Weisenthal. You can follow me on Twitter @TheStalwart.
47:00Follow our guest, Isabella Weber on Twitter @IsabellaMWeber. Follow our producers Carmen Rodriguez @CarmenArmen
47:08and Dashiell Bennett @DashBot. And for more Odd Lots content, go to bloomberg.com/oddlots where we have a blog,
47:16we have transcripts, we have a newsletter that comes out Friday. And check out the Discord, discord.gg/oddlots,
47:22hang out 24/7 with other listeners and talk about all these topics. And you should stream Bloomberg Originals on Samsung TV,
47:30Roku, Apple, any other of these streaming platforms. And make sure to tune in on Bloomberg TV at 10:00 p.m.
47:37Thanks for listening and watching.

0 件のコメント:

コメントを投稿