Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 07:40, 4 August 2009

Biflation

Biflation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

patent nonsense. Article claims that biflation is simultaneous inflation and deflation. Inflation and deflation are both concepts which apply to the whole economy. The economy cannot inflate and deflate at the same time. Article says that some parts of the economy inflate while others deflate. This is a misuse of the terms "inflation" and "deflation". Some random refs do not add to the understanding. Jasy jatere (talk) 17:48, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

• Keep - The above statement inflation and deflation cannot occur simultaneously is not true at all. They can, indeed occur simultaneously. The commenter above is referring to “Economic” inflation and deflation not occurring simultaneously. I agree. However, the term ‘Biflation’ refers to “Price” inflation (not economic inflation) which can occur simultaneously. Refer to an 2007 article by Professor Antal E. Fekete, “Can We Have Inflation and Deflation at the Same Time?” Professor Fekete is a full Professor of Mathematics and Economics at the University of Newfoundland. He’s an expert on monetary economics and has served as a consultant to Paul Volker (Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank). In the article he states:

What does it all mean? At minimum it means that we can have inflation cum deflation. I am not referring to stagflation. I refer to the seemingly impossible phenomenon that the money supply inflates and deflates at the same time. The miracle would occur through the devolution of money. This is Alf Field’s admirable phrase to describe the „good money is driven out by bad” syndrome. Electronic dollars driving out FR notes. The more electronic money is created by Helcopter Ben, the more FR notes will be hoarded by banks and financial institutions while passing along electronic dollars as fast as they can. Most disturbing of all is the fact that FR notes will be hoarded by the people, too. If banks

cannot trust one another, why should people trust the banks? Devolution is the revenge of fiat money on its creator, the government. The money supply will split up tectonically into two parts. One part will continue to inflate at an accelerating pace, but the

other will deflate. Try as it might, the Federal Reserve will not be able to print paper money in the usual denominations fast enough, especially since the demand for FR notes is global. Regardless of statistical figures showing that the global money supply is increasing at an unprecedented rate, the hand-to-hand money supply may well be shrinking as hoarding demand for FR notes becomes voracious. The economy will be starved of hand-to-hand money. Depression follows deflation as night follows day.

The term "Biflation" has 1,260 hits on Google and is being discussed internationally. Why would you want to delete the term? - Karl —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.107.217.23 (talk) 15:33, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

• Keep - I have to agree with 209.107.217.23. There would seem to be a number of ghits with apparently sensible articles on the subject. Ben MacDui 15:18, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Neutral If registered users with an interest in economics don't think its worth keeping then I don't want to argue with that. Ben MacDui 07:18, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

• Delete - The concept seems possible, i.e. that there is inflation in one class of goods, and deflation in another class of goods at the same time. However, except for this one article from the Dallas News, there are no reliable sources showing that the concept is notable. There is no plausible explanation given for how this could happen (the explanation in the article is confused and OR), and no external links to articles giving plausible explanations. Also, a search on google scholar, google news, and google books turn up nothing related to the concept as it is described in the article. (There is a obviously unrelated use in some material science articles.) The Fekete paper cited above, appears to be self-published, and is not about what the concept described in the biflation article, rather it is about a related concept which Fekete calls 'Devolution'. LK (talk) 17:18, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
• Delete: Appears to be original research. CRGreathouse (t | c) 17:34, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
• Keep - I read the article by Dr. Antal Fekete. The quoted passage is entitled "Devolution" but the article is titled "Inflation and Deflation Can We have both at the same time". It does support the concept that both can exist simultaneously. It does not mention the term "Biflation" but it seems to describe the concept of Biflation as defined here at Wiki. As a side note, one of my recent graduate macro-economics seminars discussed, among other things the concept of Biflation. Although there was disagreement as to whether such a thing is occurring at present, most agreed that Biflation is a real concept, not yet widely accepted (as are many new economic ideas) and needs to be more widely explored and developed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.107.217.5 (talk) 19:18, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
• Kill it with fire, and throw the socks in the wash. Non-notable neologism supported by perverse redefinition of standard terms. —SlamDiego_←T 00:41, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
• Comment: Doing a Google search for “biflation” which excludes pages with the terms “wikipedia”, “*wiki*”, and “blog” results in just 81 hits, and these remaining hits do not appear to be notable. (They start with a couple at digitalganster.com.) It appears that this term is being kited like a check for which there are no covering funds. —SlamDiego_←T 00:58, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment: An edit by the Lawrencekhoo has unfairly made it seem that 209.107.217.23 has attempted to vote twice. —SlamDiego_←T 01:32, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment: 209.107.217.23 did vote twice, I fixed it for him so that he only voted once. He has since voted a third time (perhaps due to being unclear on what to do). I'll leave that for you to fix. In the future, it would be good if you did your homework before accusing other editors of cheating. LK (talk) 07:40, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

• Keep - The term 'biflation' is not uncommonly used in China. McCombs School of Business. McComb’s School of Business at the University of Texas-Austin

http://www.mccombs.utexas.edu/news/mentions/march05.asp

Business in China Causes ‘Biflation’ in USA
The Dallas Morning News, The Kansas City Star, March 13-31, 2005
Although China is heralded for benefiting Americans by producing low-cost consumer goods, consumption practices in China may actually cause other commodity prices to rise, experts say, resulting in “biflation.” While shoes and shirts made in China cost less, gasoline, electricity and maybe even houses in the U.S. cost more as a result of consumption in China. For example, last year, China accounted for 40 percent of the increase in global consumption of oil. This higher demand, of course, drives prices higher worldwide. As China becomes the world’s leading consuming nation, Michael Brandl, a lecturer of finance at McCombs, sees dangerous signs of a Chinese asset bubble. “Real estate prices have gone through the roof,” he said. “At the same time, China has poorly run banks with lots of non-performing loans.” A similar situation in Thailand created a financial crisis in Asia from 1997-1998. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.248.145.188 (talk) 01:55, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

• Comment: That's a very different definition than that provided in an earlier comment. This clash of definitions illustrates that this isn't a notable term; we just have a small number of authors slapping-together the same portmanteau when they want to be cute. —SlamDiego_←T 02:04, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

• Comment And all of those instances (in the Dallas Morning News and Kansas City Star ) seem to stem from a coinage by a Chinese guy named Weijian Shan, which means it is a neologism. The word seems to have had separate unrelated etymologies, but all appear to be neologisms that have not yet gained widespread acceptance/usage. Strikehold (talk) 02:58, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

• Delete - Term has certainly been used, but it is a neologism used for different concepts, none of which seem to have gained enough traction to achieve notability individually. Strikehold (talk) 03:47, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

• This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 17:27, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

• AfD debates (Science and technology)
• AfD debates