It seems that the volatility profit clicking NGDP

Nenad ladies at the Eclectic and transmits BlackRock research on returns profit clicking on certain classes (stocks, bonds, cash) of the 2006th where it is clear that holding cash actually brings negative returns after taxes and inflation. G.Bakiću is, of course, another argument on investment, probably, preferably in stocks. I really do not have much knowledge about investing, but the issue preferences of holding cash (and equivalents) is interesting because of the questions about why people are willing to loss and what it means for macro-situation. For the latter in particular I think the issue of the demand for money. What role has monetary policy in this type of redistribution?
Of course that, as an instance of which is "responsible" for inflation, which is listed BlackRock study cited as the primary cause of the loss on holding cash, the central bank may "harm" profit clicking holders of cash. Search inflation should induce economic agents to leave cash and entry into those investments that offer at least the same yield as inflation, but higher. This is consistent with Friedman's theory of money demand, but also by the fact that inflation leads to higher interest rates which is another reason to solve money and get the growing speed of rotation, ie high interest rates, contrary to conventional belief, inflacionarne.
But back to the issue of holding cash and cash equivalents. From the "flow of funds" statistics Fed can construct a share in cash, deposits and shares in money funds as a proportion of total household assets and the NGO sector (total assets I took a real estate wealth had to show no growth and falling real estate prices before and after the crisis)
With a measure of cash I put the movement of the CPI, both measures for the period from the 1951st to 2013th profit clicking We see an interesting situation where it is up to the 80's share was relatively veliih 15-23%, profit clicking and the 50's grew and ceiling was reached sometime in the first half of the 80s (excel says mid 1984th). Although one would expect a drop at a time of rising inflation and escape to some other property, it appears that households are kept relatively high cash and equivalents when inflation was higher, and when the Volcker stop excessive growth of money supply in order to lower the inflation rate.
Since 2000. Seen rapid growth after the bursting dot-com bubble, and later the 2008th due to Bernanke's small depression. For monetary policy (if the target NGDP) this growth is usually a sign that the increased demand for money, which must be settled in order to maintain the growth of nominal income. In a recession usually increases the demand for money, so that's why we have such a result in the 2000s.
Indicating that capital markets are an indicator of whether monetary policy is a good deal, that it indicates the expected income growth. Because I believe that nominal income measures in paragraph monetary policy, as well as the preferred target variable, I plotao same measure preferences of storing household compared to the growth rate of NGDP's.
A similar situation is repeated as with inflation - and high-NGDP growth, as well as low, until the early '80s, associated with higher levels of cash handling. But the measure NGDP-and we notice something else.
It seems that the volatility profit clicking NGDP's to early 80's associated with a high preference of holding liquid assets, despite inflation in the 70s and lower 80s inflation since the beginning profit clicking of the Volcker stabilization. Again, the demand for money increases in the 1999-2002 and 2008-2013 in relation to the trend of the early '80s. The following graph shows the recession during the entire period (shaded areas) where maybe a little more apparent what I mean.
It appears that the volatile growth and inflation, ie volatile NGDP from the 50s to mid-80s, profit clicking were a kind of "scare factor" that citizens poured uncertainty given that, especially since the late 60's profit clicking called "stop & go" Monetary policy has produced large fluctuations in inflation and output. The lack of stability and the inability to anchor expectations of inflation and growth (ok, they never even tried to anchor while Friedman was slightly adapted the idea of the Phillips curve that takes into account the expectations and later Lucas introduced the idea of rational expectations in general macroeconomics and monetary profit clicking theory ) were the main driver of high demand for liquidity.
The beginning of the 80s brought a slow decline in volatility and the beginning of the Great moderation when nominal income is relatively stable, growing about 5.5% per year and inflation was low. In such an environment households are safer to invest and engage in riskier investments, which bring higher yields. From the above graph is visible decline in the frequency of business cycles since the beginning of the 80s.
Of course I do not think that this is some regularity that prokriva story perfectly, but let's call it my small contribution to this topic. I want to show that monetary policy is a very important determinant of resource allocation, for holding cash, as Mr. Bakic shows, not only the loss of purchasing power and the opportunity cost that arises because in other classes could achieve better yields, but the loss