Paradigms usually change before people realize they have. Those who can see a trend are usually thought of as gurus for this reason. They are the people warning of a bad winter. They are the ones who know what will happen next, and how to prepare.
When it comes to economics, nothing has changed for decades. Economics has become a science taught at Universities that use textbooks of the policy makers. People pay a lot of money to learn what is thought of as an infallable study. Finance has used this study to base business on. The concepts have been discussed at length here, such as fiat currency, the rational consumer, and others. SOme of these theories are accurate enough to use in simplistic terms, such as supply demand, but any thoery is just that: a thought, an idea. There really is nothing concrete about economics.
I like to think of economics as a study of philosophy. Something that has a lot of merit, worth, and use, but is not and can never be nailed down. It can be proven given certain paradigms, but when the paradigm changes, the study should change with it. With philosophy, we have grown from not needing to use god as giving the laws to understanding the philosophy of science. It isn't that god may or may not exist, but with science we can deduce certain rationale. We can do this by the philosophy of logic as well.
Yet with all of the great ideas of recent study in philosophy, the likelyhood that these ideas will too change is great. As a culture we are always learning, and thus we must not constrain ourselves inside old paradigms.
Neo-Keynesian economics constrains us. And it the dialectic should not put up the Austrian School as an absolute, or else we are caught in the Hegelian dialectic (another philosophy proven to have holes). But what we need to do is understand that times have changed, and we need to use new theories, or old ones we are not currently using, to make sure a paradigm shift does not catch us off guard.
My worry is that this is happening now. The economy, and finance with it, has changed drastically in the last 40 years. Wee have moved off a gold standard to creating an insurmountable debt that will never be paid in full, and the answer is too continue down this path like it is the only way. We must stand back so as to see the forest through the trees because the forest may be much larger and complex than we thought.
Or maybe the forest is a simple forest. One where we could create orchards and use the rivers and lakes to create a utopia. WHo knws? But we should not focus on absolutes, for the forest, as nature, will continue to change, and we should change with it and not against it.
Monday, July 30, 2012
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
Dr Bernanke and Mr Chairman
The crux of the economy lies on the fundamental theories of economics: the rational consumer theory that declares all consumers rational and that the consumer will save money during good times and spend during bad, the debt/fiat money theory that the metric of the dollar is sound, and other such theories. Finance uses these theories to run money, so it is important for economics to use theories that are susceptible to the financiers wishes. It was of course bankers, and not economists, who created the Federal Reserve system when a group met at Jekyll Island. Basically the "science" of economics is a bastard child of finance, and has no more to do with science than baseball.
When Dr Ben Bernanke, a highly esteemed professor of economics, became the Fed Chairman, he did so knowing full well he was about to become the world's most powerful banker. About 7 years later he relishes in the role. He understands the banking system like Dimon and Blankfein do, and as an economist second. He wants to bail out the banks. He wants to keep the racket going. He wants to make money.
Whatever good intentions exist in the "science" of economics are done away with once bankers and corporate financiers get ahold of the metrics. What policy has helped unemployment? There hasn't been one. The only policies used have kept the Fed's proxy banks afloat so to keep the status quo in line.
Many PhDs in economics are useful patsies. There are math problems that can show demand and price constraints, and "look we can do this and that" and then they go home for coffee and collect their paychecks. Bernanke may have been like this before he was Fed Chair, but once he tasted the power of the bank, he accepted his role and now funnels trillions of dollars to the banks and wipes his hands clean of any other work. Call it economics, call it finance, but more than anything, it is a control system that keep the finance class high on the hog at the expense of everyone else.
His mandates are much different than what is told. The first is to confuse the "rational" consumer. Remember, the market will stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent. Look at the gold miners. How can they be going down still while the bullion has been rising? It is not rational. How can stocks be up? Bernanke is using the dollar to buy into stocks. An economist would have lowered the value of the dollar to increase exports. Bernanke the banker is spending his dollars buying corporate stock.
As scary as economics is, considering it is used as a science but is more of a philosophy, the banking system is worse. The banking system uses economics to get what it wants, and it wants total control of the monetary system. Bernanke has switched from being Dr Bernanke to Mr Chairman, and as a banker, the world's most powerful, he will bring in the system of total banking control.
When Dr Ben Bernanke, a highly esteemed professor of economics, became the Fed Chairman, he did so knowing full well he was about to become the world's most powerful banker. About 7 years later he relishes in the role. He understands the banking system like Dimon and Blankfein do, and as an economist second. He wants to bail out the banks. He wants to keep the racket going. He wants to make money.
Whatever good intentions exist in the "science" of economics are done away with once bankers and corporate financiers get ahold of the metrics. What policy has helped unemployment? There hasn't been one. The only policies used have kept the Fed's proxy banks afloat so to keep the status quo in line.
Many PhDs in economics are useful patsies. There are math problems that can show demand and price constraints, and "look we can do this and that" and then they go home for coffee and collect their paychecks. Bernanke may have been like this before he was Fed Chair, but once he tasted the power of the bank, he accepted his role and now funnels trillions of dollars to the banks and wipes his hands clean of any other work. Call it economics, call it finance, but more than anything, it is a control system that keep the finance class high on the hog at the expense of everyone else.
His mandates are much different than what is told. The first is to confuse the "rational" consumer. Remember, the market will stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent. Look at the gold miners. How can they be going down still while the bullion has been rising? It is not rational. How can stocks be up? Bernanke is using the dollar to buy into stocks. An economist would have lowered the value of the dollar to increase exports. Bernanke the banker is spending his dollars buying corporate stock.
As scary as economics is, considering it is used as a science but is more of a philosophy, the banking system is worse. The banking system uses economics to get what it wants, and it wants total control of the monetary system. Bernanke has switched from being Dr Bernanke to Mr Chairman, and as a banker, the world's most powerful, he will bring in the system of total banking control.
Saturday, July 21, 2012
The Set Up: Corporate Vs. Federate
Whether the economic and thusly the financial system were set up to fail at this point could be a moot topic; the fact is both will fail. The triggering event could also be discribed as irrelevent, as almost anything could destroy these fragile systems. Yet to know where we are going, we should look to the past.
The people that set up the system, that payed for it and paved its way, were corporate types. They were men who wanted to shield their business with corporate personhood. They had an agenda, and their agenda was to create a system which they would have complete control over. Every beginning has an end, and so these men likely knew they would need a plan on how to move into their final system.
So what will the trigger point, the Black Swan, be? Could it be a war in the Middle East? Could it be a war in the Far East? Could it be the Libor Scandel? If anything, all of these problems could break at once, setting in motion the destruction of the economic and financial paradigm that has existed since around the Civil War, when corporations were thought to have equal rights as men do, because the system is built on faulty logic at best, as it is also built on lies and deceit.
There are likely two factions of what some call the power elite, some call the Illuminatti. There is one faction who wants a Federated Government controlled system. The other side of the coin wants a corporate controlled system. So far these two systems have shared power and have done it well according to the New World Order agenda. But I think that both control systems imagine a New World Order where only one reigns supreme.
We have witnessed a failure of the "government" by way of the Federal Reserve system, but how many people think that this is the truth? Universities are still teaching Keynesian economics and the Fed Chairman is still seen as saving the economy. It is the Private Banking Houses that have been taking the blame. The fact is, both act in cordination. So is the Central Bank system setting up the Private Banking Houses to be the scapegoats for the coming economic collapse? Or will the Central Banks be seen as using policy that lacks logic and have the paradigm of economics change to favor capitalism when the corporate banks are ready to rise?
The paradigm shift could go either way. The faction of corporatists would likely want to see a world where corporations run everything from the money supply to the White House, and I mean they will overtly. For example, imagine a Presidential election between Phil Knight and Donald Trump, where Nike and Trump Enterprises sponsor the races. No more Blue Team and Red Team, just corporations running the governments. Imagine bing paid in stock, where if you so choose you can cash out the stock for credits to use day to day. The M.O would be to let the corporations take over the operations of the governments because the governments failed at providing, and also because we need the corporations. We need Nikes on our feet and oil provided by Exxon in our gas tanks.
On the other side we may see the Federal Government Nationalize the corporations. JPM would become a Federal Bank in a system still controlled, but even more so, by the Federal Reserve system. There would still be backdoor politics done by the corporate empires but it would be done even more so than today. If the current system is shadowy, the following policy would be dark as night.
I think that either of these systems is what has been constantly referred to as the "New World Order" by the power structure. Yet I don't think even they have known which way the cards would lie. But as everything seems to be speeding up, I think the lines are being drawn for this New World Order, and I won't be surprised if we now see some events that follow the Libor Scandel that put this NWO in place.
The Libor Scandel is interesting because many sources report that Libor has been fudged for decades. So why now? Could this be the Black Swan that takes down the financial system, setting up the New Worder Order of finance and economics?
The people that set up the system, that payed for it and paved its way, were corporate types. They were men who wanted to shield their business with corporate personhood. They had an agenda, and their agenda was to create a system which they would have complete control over. Every beginning has an end, and so these men likely knew they would need a plan on how to move into their final system.
So what will the trigger point, the Black Swan, be? Could it be a war in the Middle East? Could it be a war in the Far East? Could it be the Libor Scandel? If anything, all of these problems could break at once, setting in motion the destruction of the economic and financial paradigm that has existed since around the Civil War, when corporations were thought to have equal rights as men do, because the system is built on faulty logic at best, as it is also built on lies and deceit.
There are likely two factions of what some call the power elite, some call the Illuminatti. There is one faction who wants a Federated Government controlled system. The other side of the coin wants a corporate controlled system. So far these two systems have shared power and have done it well according to the New World Order agenda. But I think that both control systems imagine a New World Order where only one reigns supreme.
We have witnessed a failure of the "government" by way of the Federal Reserve system, but how many people think that this is the truth? Universities are still teaching Keynesian economics and the Fed Chairman is still seen as saving the economy. It is the Private Banking Houses that have been taking the blame. The fact is, both act in cordination. So is the Central Bank system setting up the Private Banking Houses to be the scapegoats for the coming economic collapse? Or will the Central Banks be seen as using policy that lacks logic and have the paradigm of economics change to favor capitalism when the corporate banks are ready to rise?
The paradigm shift could go either way. The faction of corporatists would likely want to see a world where corporations run everything from the money supply to the White House, and I mean they will overtly. For example, imagine a Presidential election between Phil Knight and Donald Trump, where Nike and Trump Enterprises sponsor the races. No more Blue Team and Red Team, just corporations running the governments. Imagine bing paid in stock, where if you so choose you can cash out the stock for credits to use day to day. The M.O would be to let the corporations take over the operations of the governments because the governments failed at providing, and also because we need the corporations. We need Nikes on our feet and oil provided by Exxon in our gas tanks.
On the other side we may see the Federal Government Nationalize the corporations. JPM would become a Federal Bank in a system still controlled, but even more so, by the Federal Reserve system. There would still be backdoor politics done by the corporate empires but it would be done even more so than today. If the current system is shadowy, the following policy would be dark as night.
I think that either of these systems is what has been constantly referred to as the "New World Order" by the power structure. Yet I don't think even they have known which way the cards would lie. But as everything seems to be speeding up, I think the lines are being drawn for this New World Order, and I won't be surprised if we now see some events that follow the Libor Scandel that put this NWO in place.
The Libor Scandel is interesting because many sources report that Libor has been fudged for decades. So why now? Could this be the Black Swan that takes down the financial system, setting up the New Worder Order of finance and economics?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)