 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Anyone,
That is a link to the latest report about The Dollar Hegemony (A.K.A. U.S.A. Inc. LLC), or The Federal Reserve System operators, including Ben Bernanke, and the members of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), by Gary North, the Austrian Economist Authority - if there ever was one.
Note:
They don't know why.
Gary may be playing with the facts, nudging, or chiding, or kidding, or having his tongue somewhere near his cheek, or white lying, or whatever can communicate Gary North knowing better than he reports to his readers. If those legal criminals running The Dollar Hegemony don't know why the things they do cause the things that happen, over, and over, and over, and over gain, with unfaltering consistency, then I'll eat my hat.
I don't have a hat.
The point is made, and it matters not what I believe, or what Gary North believes, as to what those legal criminals know, or don't know, while they continue to somehow manage to retain control over nearly incalculable power, and as they continue to cause unspeakable suffering upon immeasurable numbers of victims perpetually, and with impunity.
If they are so dumb, Gary, why are they so powerful, for so long? If they are so dumb, by what measure of lack of intelligence does their victims compare - competitively - on the dumb scale?
Gary was speaking about this:
The Keynesian textbook account, including Bernanke's textbook, says that monetary expansion and low interest rates are supposed to increase economic growth. It's not happening.
Keynesian textbooks can be compared to Austrian Economics textbooks, just as Socialist textbooks can be compared to Capitalist textbooks, and if they have been authorized by the authorities who are connected to The Dollar Hegemony, the bend will be toward blind obedience, or a general scarcity of competitive information, such as can be found by people who are neither Keynesian, nor Austrian, and neither Socialist, nor Capitalist, just honest working people, who are not out to get something for nothing, as a plan, followed by the execution of the plan, to get something, for nothing, or to get something at the expense of someone else, or to trade inequitably.
Here is a quote from one of the Austrian Economics Professors who wrote the fundamental principles behind Austrian Economics, according to some of those authorities living today:
...every individual will attempt to secure his own requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of others.
http://mises.org/etexts/menger/two.asp
I've read enough of that professors work to realize that the motive is no different than every other motive dreamed up by someone planning on, and then executing the plan, to gain at the expense of targeted, innocent, victims. What is the measure of what they do, compared to what they say? Is the truth in the fine print? Do they confess, eventually?
When the pot calls the kettle black, as in the Austrian Economists calling the Keynesian Economists monetary cranks, and that "they" don't know how to do this, or that, I'm curious about the viewpoint from which the finger is pointing, as much as where the finger is pointing.
The exclusive control over the legal money power is an example of some individuals, certainly not every individual, attempting, and then gaining ground, to secure his, or their, own requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of others, right out of the Austrian Economics text book.
Karl Menger goes on to describe, in his words, not mine: how value isn't value without scarcity. Things that are abundant are not valuable, speaking in Austrian Economics speak.
What about Sunlight, or power of any kind? Power remains powerful even when it is abundant, perhaps even more so because it is cost-less, as a result of being abundant.
The fingers being pointed at the legal monopoly power, and calling them anything but legal criminals, misdirects the focus of attention away from the fact that they are criminal and focuses attention on whatever other characters are associated with the false front. Call the legal criminals Humpty Dumpty and sooner or later the victims are going to dislike Humpty Dumpty, and then it will be time to replace the old name with a shinny new one, preferably one that the victims identify as being a nice, harmless, or even beneficial name.
Absent anything good, the lesser of two evils prevails, at least Humpty Dumpty isn't as bad as Donald Duck, currently.
That last sentence leads into another quote from Gary North:
Furthermore the data above proves beyond a reasonable doubt why there has been no excess lending by US banks to US borrowers: none of the cash ever even made it to US banks! This also resolves the mystery of the broken money multiplier and why the velocity of money has imploded.
The use of the word velocity is instructive when measuring current realities. It is not merely speed, or velocity, that measures currency, in any form, the current of a river, the current flow of blood through a human body, the electric current flowing in an electric circuit, and hydraulic fluid flowing in a hydraulic circuit, all have stuff flowing at a specific rate and the rate is determined by all the forces that determine that rate, and if the rate increases, certain measurable things happen, and if the rate decreases, certain measurable things happen.
A human body can be killed if the velocity of blood slows down or speeds up too fast, there is a range where life is possible. Electric circuits are even more sensitive to changes in velocity, whereby too much velocity will render the circuit powerless to do the designed task, and injure parts of the circuit. A social network can be seen in similar light.
Take an operating social network and then remove half of the legal currency that was circulating at a measurable velocity and what do you think will happen? Does it matter if that removal of that currency is done by a few people, or one person? The result is the same until such time as the currency returns into circulation. What happens if the power available in the social circuit is doubled, such as the case when the legal criminals doubled the legal number of dollars in 2008? Does it matter where the money is sent, what the money buys, or even if the money is burned, or even if the money is used to employ an army of people to dig holes, and then another army of people to fill the holes back in?
What happens if the legal money supply is cut in half inside the social network and that half of the supply of money is then added to a doubling of the money, and then both the half and the double money supply sum is sent outside the social network?
How about a look at rough numbers to get an idea of what happens.
A = Total dollars in circulation (with a known velocity) inside U.S.A. Inc. (LLC).
That is the situation before the total money supply is cut in half, and we can say that that time is roughly the beginning of 2008.
Then there is the following:
B = half of A is removed from inside U.S.A. Inc. (LLC)
Then there is added to that cutting in half the legal life blood of the U.S. economy an additional plan, with an additional execution of the plan, which amounts to the following:
C = doubling the total supply of legal dollars before it was cut in half.
Then the plan is to take the half that was taken out of circulation inside U.S.A. Inc. and add to it the doubling of the supply of money (before cutting it in half) to spend that total amount of legal money outside U.S.A. Inc.
A = 1x (where x is a number of zeros)
B = .5x
C = 1x
Before the plan is executed the Honest Productive American People have 1x to work with as the life blood of the economy.
Then the Honest Productive American People have their life blood supply cut in half and taken and what is taken is added to the doubled amount, which adds up to 1.5x, and that sum of dollars is sent, or spent, or held in reserve to be spent later, or sent to the competition as the Honest Productive American People struggle to compete.
Before the plan is executed the Honest Productive American People work with 1x as an amount of legal purchasing power flowing through the entire American Economic Body, and no one anywhere has any more Dollars to work with as far as the 2008 plan is concerned, and then 1.5 is suddenly transferred somewhere by some people.
BP (Before Plan) 1x for the Honest American People and 0x for the competition.
AP (After Plan) .5x for the Honest American People and 1.5x for the competition.
What can be expected to happen, by any reasonable person, even an Austrian Economics Professor?
Before the plan is executed the Honest Productive American People have 1x power, perhaps trillions of dollars, perhaps more, who has the most accurate number?
Then the power of the Productive American People, as world economic competitors, is cut in half, while their half cut out is added to the measure of their power before the cut (Bust), and that power is then employed by a few people, and the same few people who have the legal power to cut the power of the Productive American People in half, bust it, and the same few people who have the legal power to double the power used by the Productive American People, boom something, and the same few people who then have the power to spend the half taken from the Productive American People, and the same few people who have the power to spend the extra sum of purchasing power that they doubled, and added to the half they took out of circulation, and they can spend it outside the network used by the Productive American People, those few can actually spend that purchasing power taken, and doubled, on the competition that competes with the Productive American People; if that is what they plan on doing, then they can execute that plan. Who has the power to stop them? If the Honest Productive American People do not have the power to stop them before half of what power they had was taken, will they then have enough power to stop them after that power, and much more, is used to finance the competition?
This is not news.
This has happened before, and here is the writer who wrote about it then:
http://www.ushistory.org/paine/commonsense/sense2.htm
Here is how this story was told back then:
Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.
Double the power available, keep half of that doubling, then cut half of the power out of the circuit, keep that half and add that half to the total power taken, then that sum of power is transferred to the competition.
A. 1x
Then
B. .5x After taking half
C. 1x Taken by doubling
D. .5x added to 1x = 1.5x sent to the competition
E. .5x is what the home team has to work with after having worked with 1x, and now the home team, suffering from that loss, is competing against the competition that was just given 1.5x.
And Gary North says:
They don't know why.
They are stupid? They are hedging their bets by creating the situation to their advantage, and the few who know exactly what is being done, and why, are not likely going to be advertising those facts, because everyone can't win when the goal is to earn something at the expense of other people.
When the goal is "to secure his own requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of others" the "others" can't be clued in on the goal, they need to be clueless, or even better, they need to be paying for the whole thing and then sent a bill for all the cost of the whole thing, including expenses, and including bonuses flowing to the worst of the worst, or best of the best, whichever eye by which the measure is made.
Which explains the following link well enough:
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
I have yet to finish reading Gary North's report on the bad guys, as the bad guys are busy, lately. I'm curious about such things, but not in such a way as to find myself seeking to secure my own requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of all others, rather, I think that responsibility is individual, or there is no responsibility, and without responsibility there certainly can't be accountability, by my measure?