I'm not worried about inflation if anything it's helpful to my commodity based trades. WTI is at $80.61 I'm not sure how that fits your overly bearish thesis.
Rising oil prices are a contraction in the purchasing power of consumers, but especially usd as oil is quoted in dollars. On that note, most of the inflation we are seeing is transitory (suntrader are you willing to bet that Baltic dry index remains at these levels for the next 5-10 years? If not, then you think that shipping costs will decline in the future). Some of the inflation is worrisome which is why centrals banks are reducing easing, but there’s a difference between a nuanced view and a call for rates at 20% lol.
The $SPX currently fits mine and the markets bearish thesis. And my only worry is that The Fed might fall behind the curve containing the rapidly rising, as in not rapidly falling (as if that really needs to be said), rate of inflation. Glad to know your trades are doing good but the discussion is in the brooooooooad sense. But WTI is much higher this morning and guess what that does to inflation? Don't you realize we had very high crude/gasoline prices back in the 70's when we also had very high inflation? At a certain point and in a particular economy, such as currently, high WTI is not ........ good. Other than for those who only care about their return.
Even the IMF (aka the world loan shark) is warning about inflation and its "high uncertainty". The point is, however, you need to tighten the noose before it spirals out of control (eg. before it becomes so apparent that everyone is talking about it like what's happening NOW). By then, it's too damn late. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/12/imf...ers-should-be-prepared-to-tighten-policy.html
Meanwhile Warren is right behind all the other Dems in regard to the trillions for infrastructure and reconciliation bills. Guess mopping up tRump's trillions spent isn't so bad after all. Because likely The Fed will have to do the same once current boondoggle money is passed and disbursed. No free lunch - ever.
For governments like the U.S. government, what it buys, how it's paid for, and the ultimate consequences of the spending are far more important than the nominal amounts spent. In this regard, there are striking differences between Trump Administration expenditures and those proposed by the Biden Admin. The net Biden deficits may end up somewhat smaller then is now projected and yield substantially greater benefits compared to those realized from the Trump deficits. I am not inclined to go into reasons why outcomes should be very different, but I will offer a hint. It has to do with the affects on middle class incomes of these two diametrically opposed economic visions for our country. I do understand why the media focus is more on nominal amounts, rather than tedious discussion of what is to be bought, how it will be paid for, and what benefits and problems will accrue. Focus on gross amounts of spending seems inevitable. It's simple, politicians find big numbers conveniently misleading, and these outsize numbers make for eye opening campaign sound bites. A trillion dollars is incomprehensibly huge for most of us... And five or six trillion, or whatever, well, "that's obviously just way too much!"
Good then you be able to afford the higher cost groceries, autos, homes etc. Many won't. But that's not your problem. Except taxes will go higher to pay for entitlements and jail cells. Pay me now, or pay me later. Broken record - no free lunch