Believe the hype in hyperinflation
Extremely high price increases are not produced by central bankers but are the result of a total failure of the political system
Despite fringe commentators shrieking about imminent hyperinflation, it has failed to appear. The Fed’s announcement last month of further quantitative easing can be interpreted as an attempt to promise inflation tomorrow in the hope of getting people to spend money today. Rather than creating far too much inflation, the Federal Reserve is struggling to create much inflation at all.
Unexpected inflation moves money from to debtors to from creditors. It creates a variety of minor costs associated with redrafting contracts and rewriting menus and price lists; but it creates some benefits, too, by eroding stubbornly high wages and promoting job creation.
Hyperinflation, though, is a different beast from ordinary inflation. Hyperinflation shreds every monetary contract, makes much of modern economic life impossible, and all but guarantees that a totally different form of money, anything from foreign dollars to cigarettes, will be pressed into service. Yet the historical record is in some ways encouraging.
A new Cato Institute working paper tries to document every hyperinflationary episode in history. Getting the numbers isn’t easy, as the authors, Steve Hanke and Nicholas Krus of Johns Hopkins University, are at pains to point out. Hyperinflation is a time of civic dysfunction. By the time the price level is doubling every couple of months, or days, people have often stopped collecting credible statistics.
Hanke and Krus report 56 episodes of hyperinflation. A 57th, in North Korea in the past few years, is excluded for lack of sound data. Given that the authors were able to scrape together price indices for the Free City of Danzig in 1923 and for the Japanese-occupied Philippines in 1944, the failure to establish facts about present-day North Korea tells you something about Pyongyang’s attitude to statistical outreach. Hanke says that since the paper was released, the hyperinflation club has a new member: Iran.
A few facts leap out. First, hyperinflation is a phenomenon of the modern era: with a single exception, every hyperinflation has occurred since the end of the first world war. The outlier is revolutionary France, where monthly inflation passed 300 per cent in the summer of 1796.
Second, three-quarters of these hyperinflations – 43 out of 56 – occurred in one of three clear historical clusters. The first cluster is central European states after the first world war. It provides the most famous hyperinflation in history: Weimar Germany. The second cluster is during or immediately after the second world war, and it includes history’s worst: Hungary in 1946. Those inflation rates defy comprehension – 41,900,000,000,000,000 per cent a month, compounded, is (I believe) an annual inflation rate with 178 digits. It makes more sense as 207 per cent a day.
The third cluster is that of Eastern bloc countries as the Soviet Union disintegrated, and it comprises over half of all the 20th century’s hyperinflations. These are all examples of hyperinflation going hand in hand with an extremely stressed political and social system. Most of the remaining examples, from Zimbabwe to late revolutionary France, exhibit that same stress.
There’s a lesson here: regardless of the fears of some US Republicans and German hard-money fans, hyperinflation is not produced by central bankers. It is the result of a total failure of the political system.
There are a few people who are simultaneously buying gold in expectation of hyperinflation in western economies and stockpiling bullets in anticipation of a calamity for western civilisation. I will give the survivalists this much credit: the scenarios are consistent. But calamity arrives first, and hyperinflation follows.
Also published at ft.com.





12 Comments
Colin Docherty says:
“A few facts leap out. First, hyperinflation is a phenomenon of the modern era: with a single exception, every hyperinflation has occurred since the end of the first world war. The outlier is revolutionary France, where monthly inflation passed 300 per cent in the summer of 1796.”
Is this really true? Currency debasement was a past time of many war starting European Kings.
20th of October, 2012Andy Hudson says:
Yes and it caused inflation, but not hyperinflation. I would have thought hyperinflation is impossible without a paper currency.
20th of October, 2012Owe Jessen says:
Hyperinflation is only possible in a fiat money system, which only became fashionalbe in the last 200 years or so. Most feudal european states – to the best of my knowledge – did depend on gold based money till their end.
20th of October, 2012K says:
Unexpected inflation moves money from debtors to creditors? i don’t understand. maybe the reverse?
20th of October, 2012Julien Couvreur says:
“it creates some benefits, too, by eroding stubbornly high wages and promoting job creation.”
This matter-of-fact statement encapsulates the mainstream views of economists. But how well established are those two points, when considered rigorously?
What is the evidence that wages are stubbornly high? We had multiple historical examples of sharp declines in nominal wages, such as the 1920-1921 depression with over 30% wage adjustment in some industries. Clearly wages don’t have to be sticky, so why would we take it as universal truth?
Sure, printing money creates an illusion of wealth which affects employment, but are the jobs created sustainable, the right kinds of jobs, and what will those workers do when those bubbles have to adjust?
20th of October, 2012In my mind, the biggest problem with printing new money is that it has to be injected somewhere (as opposed to uniformly everywhere, in which case it would have no effect if it is expected). This printing favors early recipients over later recipients (Cantillon effect) and it props some sectors over others not as a result of consumer preference or demand, but as a result of policy.
Finally, this printing creates perverse effects by inviting rent-seeking for the privilege of receiving this politically favored money. Banks happen to be on the front lines.
Julien Couvreur says:
“hyperinflation is not produced by central bankers”
Really?! How exactly do you get hyperinflation without central bankers keeping creating additional money and expand new credit?
“These are all examples of hyperinflation going hand in hand with an extremely stressed political and social system.” [...] “calamity arrives first, and hyperinflation follows.”
There surely are non-monetary factors which contribute, but have you considered that prior increases of the money supply has destabilizing effects on the economic and social system?
Would you re-evaluate your causal analysis if political money printing contributed to both the calamity and the hyperinflation, as the Mises/Hayek Business Cycle theory predicts?
Note that the modern measure of inflation (price indices) as opposed to money supply hides relevant information. The baseline inflation indexes are not zero. 1% increase in price levels could be low, but it could be high, for instance in an otherwise deflationary period.
20th of October, 2012In a developing economy, increased productivity through capital accumulation should bring falling prices (if it were not for expanded money supply). So those indexes do not reveal the extent of the negative effects of the increase in money supply.
Nichol Brummer (@Twundit) says:
Can you explain what is the meaning of more than 100% inflation, compounded, over any period of time? Wouldn’t that mean that money would have to turn into negative money, ie debt?
22nd of October, 2012Tim Harford says:
Inflation of 100 per cent means prices double. 200 per cent means prices treble. 100 million per cent means prices rise by a factor of about a million.
22nd of October, 2012Andrea Silver says:
Any inflation or hyperinflation in the future will be informed by more historical perspective and a better informed public than any in history, so things will develop more quickly and the resolution will come quickly as well. It is planned better than any major event of the past.
22nd of October, 2012Fred says:
A gold coin, no matter whose picture is engraved on it and how irresponsibly he acts (wars, corruption, a revolution leading to his beheading) has NEVER dropped below the melt value and hence cannot suffer hyperinflation.
22nd of October, 2012Friedman was correct when he said inflation (of which hyperinflation is by definition a subset) is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon.
Vincent Cate says:
I have a “FAQ for Hyperinflation Skeptics” that you might find interesting.
http://howfiatdies.blogspot.com/2012/10/faq-for-hyperinflation-skeptics.html
23rd of October, 2012California Bob says:
You’ve been listening to the Keynesians again. The Government Mints and Central Banks are so closely connected that any attempt to blame one instead of the other is pure straw-man logic. Yes, the collapse of the bubbles that have been blown in the past decades leads to problems for creditors as the risk of defaults increases. This is the standard precursor to hyperflation in every example you listed. The Governments and/or Central Banks print money to bail out there friends (corporate campaign donors, govt employees, the military, the Praetorian Guard, etc.) I hope it doesn’t happen here, but if you say there’s no possibility you’re just whistling in the dark.
24th of October, 2012