Frank Shostak's Confused Analysis
He for example asserts that "It is not possible for increases in the price of oil to set in motion a general increase in the prices of goods and services without corresponding support from the money supply."
But this overlooks the question as to just how this oil price increase happened in the first place if it wasn't caused by a higher money supply. Presumably, such an autonomous increase in the price of oil would be caused by falling supply for the home market (either in the form of falling total oil production or increase in foreign demand, which in the latter case means that the available global oil supply is diverted to foreign bidders). And since that falling supply of oil isn't cancelled out by any increase in the supply of other goods and services, this means the total supply of goods and services will fall. Lower supply of goods and services will given a certain money supply always raise the average price level.
Shostak's insistence on ignoring non-monetary factors is all the more puzzling since his money supply definition asserts that money supply have been stagnant since late 2004. While monetary factors usually tend to work with a time lag, the time lag is growing implausible long for Shostak to be able to explain the doubling of the oil price and general acceleration of price inflation with monetary inflation. This in turn implies that either his money supply definition is wrong or his analysis of the connection between money supply and prices is wrong. Or as a more likely third alternative, both of his theories are wrong.