The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Steve Penfield Archive
Financial False Hope
I Know You’re Lying…but I Trust You with My Life!
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Investing trust in the wrong people and policies can be ruinous. How much dishonesty does it take before the public stops putting blind faith in debt dealers, corporate crooks and the servile politicians who do their bidding? The widespread acceptance of ‘healthy’ inflation, monopoly patent rights, the ‘retirement’ trap and enslaving corporate ‘benefits’ would suggest we enjoy the abuse.

Throughout modern history, a perpetual quest among leisurely aristocrats, the entourage of corporate titans and their political suitors has been solving the mysteries of how to get paid for doing nothing and how to look good while doing it. The various means developed over the centuries by our mainstream banking industry—wearing a princely costume, shifting papers around a desk, funding corporate dominance along with ruinous wars and welfare programs, then lounging in the comfort of an expansive corner office—have neatly satisfied both elements of that royal endeavor. Enslaving the public to endless financial servitude just adds an unfortunate side-effect of the primary mission.

In America, that economic bondage presently amounts to over $80 trillion in public and private debt that thousands of businesses and millions of citizens cannot possibly pay off. Political banking privileges have also created about 4,000% real inflation (using historical government accounting methods) since the U.S. fully abandoned the gold standard in 1971—turning $100 of savings into a paltry $2.50 of original value. (From the 1790s to 1933 in America, various gold standards—poisoned with fractional credit creation—failed to prevent about a dozen major banking collapses that many still mischaracterize as emotional “panics.” But those somewhat fixed standards did provide resistance to systemic monetary debasement.)

It almost goes without saying that high-striving politicians will stretch the facts when it serves their purposes—especially on financial matters. But only within the last three or four generations has a broad segment of the U.S. population accepted this gross economic abuse—along with many related cultural distortions—as unquestionable necessities.

By this late stage in Western society’s unraveling, the falsehoods protecting the chicanery are almost too many to fathom. So for this essay I will focus on the most prominent fictions of the financial world and some associated fables that bankers eagerly sponsor.

This essay will consider the claims of “good” inflation, the natural market tendency of deflation and the reality of money multiplying that few insiders dare to admit. It will likewise expand on the issue of bank counterfeiting and introduce a suggestion for broadening that “stimulating” privilege to the rest of us. The false sense of security of trying to “regulate” corrupt banking activity will get some overdue attention. Along the way, I’ll briefly address some problems of monopoly patent “rights,” since easy bank money funds this corporate welfare racket that hurts actual innovators (noting once again, our mainstream media’s refusal to do their job on this important topic as well). Then I will venture into uncharted waters of critically reviewing the popular new traditions of relying on corporate “benefits” in lieu of intact families and financial interdependence, along with the practice of quitting your job and handing your life’s savings to empty bank vaults and Wall Street gamblers.

A condensed table of contents for the section headings of this essay is provided below.

  • A Few Experts with Something Useful to Say
  • Money Multipliers and Empty Banks
  • A Minor Fib on the Fed’s Virtual ‘Printing Press’
  • Of Course, the Feds are Lying about Unemployment
  • Five Sections on Inflationary Myths
  • Sidebar on Monopoly Patents: More Corporate Welfare that Everyone Loves
  • False Sense of Security: Trying to ‘Regulate’ Corrupt Banking Activity
  • Four Sections on Retirement
  • Corporate ‘Benefits’
  • Monetary Monotheism
  • Conclusion and Post Script

In researching and writing this three-part financial series, I frequently sat in amazement of the dismal state of economic understanding in America today. If our media did any honest reporting or our schools provided any challenging education, more people would already know just about everything to be discussed herein—as most of it is fairly easy to comprehend. But based upon our runaway debt, inflation and other catastrophic economic failures, that doesn’t seem to be the case. And it doesn’t appear to be an accident.

Catering to the desires of our insular financial, corporate and political classes, a subsidized clique of mass media and institutional soothsayers would have us believe that the system is not rotten to the core. Their false narrative maintains that private bankers did not conjure any of the roughly $80 trillion in total outstanding U.S. credit from thin air—debt that keeps the elites on top and the vast majority trapped in stagnation. The manufactured inflation that turned “penny candy” of 1913 into similar treats costing well over a dollar today gets whitewashed as either a conspiracy theory of “gold bugs” or a productive policy we need to extend indefinitely (or somehow both). The “thought leaders” of society proceed to insist that the historically and mathematically demonstrated “credit cycle” is actually a natural “business cycle” of the reckless marketplace, and that fiat “legal tender” mandates divinely write themselves, thus can never be unwritten.

On top of that, the skyrocketing cost of healthcare (a side-effect of easy money and World War II wage controls) associated with joining a corporate insurance pool is sold as “benefits”—always “your benefits”—to falsely impute personal ownership where none exists. Quitting your job, forever, and relying on altruistic Washington benefactors gets the double honorific—repeated ad nauseum—of being both “social” and enhancing “security.” Monopoly patent privileges and other barriers to market competition (medical licensing, legal guilds, teachers’ unions) must never be questioned, because they too are “beneficial” for society, we are frequently told.

Yes, there is quite of bit of mind-numbing disinformation to sort through in our daily attempt to carry on. While the general public seems to have an increasing awareness—thanks to the liberating nature of the internet—that something doesn’t quite make sense, all cylinders are not yet firing in any movement for economic progress that I’m aware of.

Part of the problem is the unnecessary distractions tossed out regularly by professional political experts—almost all of them lacking financial independence and thus prone to pandering to their base. Liberal/socialist pundits assure us that “unregulated” private-sector activity (although extinct since at least the 1970s) is to blame for every social ill; just a few thousand more rules and a few trillion more dollars for new centralized programs and we’ll be safe from those lingering free-market barbarians. Conservative/liberty types insist that the Federal Reserve is the root of all financial evil; never mind the numerous devastating banking collapses that occurred before the Fed was created (such as 1784, 1792, 1796, 1819, 1837, 1857, 1873, 1884, 1893, 1896, 1901 and 1907) and also ignore the inflationary debasement inherent to fiat banking.

Thanks to the empty nature of both partisan messages—and the many important gaps conveniently left out—politicized banking elites and fascistic corporate cartels have been corroding the social fabric of the West for centuries, with virtually zero effective opposition.

No matter how much we may claim to recognize the dishonest nature of our ruling authorities and their clandestine corporate masters, we just can’t seem to stop obeying all their foolish and harmful temptations. (Two such deceptive enticements will be explored at length in this essay, breaking tradition with conventional norms of tossing raw meat to the audience. Like most Americans, I thankfully have a full-time job outside of writing. So while I welcome any interesting feedback… I don’t need your financial support.)

In accordance with the title of this piece, considerable attention will be given to the many enduring myths that keep our financial system in its perpetual state of dysfunction. To offset part of that inevitable negativity and economic gloom, a few sections of more sensible and/or positive material have been included towards the beginning to start on a brighter note. These should also help dispel some of the false narratives I’ll be addressing later.

A Few Experts with Something Useful to Say

For a good overview on the economics profession, I’ll refer to a comment by RoatanBill in a previous article (not one of mine) published in April on this website:

It all starts with Economics. Economics is a fraudulent profession. Economics can’t prove anything, economists can’t predict anything without another economist saying the opposite and economists can’t even come up with why past events happened with a consensus OPINION.

In short, Economics is just BS OPINION spread around by people with degrees that shouldn’t exist. If you can’t PROVE something, then that ‘profession’ shouldn’t be able to hand out PhD’s. Having a PhD in an opinion is worthless to society and does real harm.

On a more upbeat note, I’ll add one of the best educational offerings I’ve found on the topic of economics. This starts with the important concept of a bank balance sheet. (Over the years, I must have read well over 100 economic essays by familiar names and from critical “outsiders” that manage to bypass this crucial topic.)

The example balance sheet below comes from an article written by Alasdair Macleod, a former stockbroker and banker who is now a Senior Fellow at the GoldMoney Foundation. I did some formatting to change his two tables into a single chart and added footnotes at the end to help explain some banking terminology. Mr. Macleod’s tables illustrate how modern banking activity results in “lending money into existence” as he aptly puts it.

Example Bank Balance Sheet

Balances at Start/End of Credit Cycle
Start of Expansion End of Expansion
Assets M.U. M.U.
Cash and due from banks 25 30
Government bonds 40 30
Corporate bonds 15 70
Loans and leases 20 120
Total assets 100 250
Liabilities
Customer deposits 60 180
Debt-bonds and interbank loans 20 50
Shareholders’ equity (SE)* 20 20
Total liabilities 100 250
Equity Ratio = Balance Sheet / SE 5.0 12.5

M.U. = Monetary Units. Above data and labels are from Alasdair Macleod, except for the “equity ratio” which is discussed in his article but not shown directly in his tables.

Additional notes by Steve Penfield:

Due from Banks = deposits from “my” bank into other banks to expedite future transfers.

Interbank Loans = short-term loans “my” bank receives from other banks for daily balancing.

Debt bonds are issued by banks and sold to investors (pension funds, etc.).

*Another way to view “shareholders’ equity” is to consider it the principal deposit.

 

His chart shows a true Balance Sheet to Equity Ratio with a proper focus on the money multiplier effect. Conversely, the politicized “reserve ratio” at the end of expansion would be 30 (cash) / 250 total = 12%, which passes the Fed’s historical 10% minimum (dropped to zero on March 26, 2020) for state-chartered banks, with federally chartered banks always allowed to hold less reserves. So under the existing labyrinth of federal regulation, the 12.5 money multiplier is perfectly legal.

Understanding a bank balance sheet also helps us recognize the common myth that only the government can create money out of thin air. Prior to the financial collapse of 2008, the only significant instances where fiat currency emanated directly from the U.S. federal government were the political rebels in 1775 who issued paper Continentals to fund their war against England and Lincoln’s Greenback stunt of the 1860s to wage battle on the South. Other than that, fiat credit creation—with its inevitable boom/bust cycles—throughout American history has been overwhelmingly accomplished by private bankers.

This manufactured boom/bust dynamic helps explain why the top 0.1% of Americans now own more wealth than the bottom 80%—an achievement suited for a banana republic led by a military dictator.

Blaming the current wealth gap on the Fed (or worse yet, “capitalism” itself) is just a cop out from people trying to attract attention to themselves or with some ideological axe to grind. Let’s recall that J.P. Morgan (1837–1913) at the end of his life had officers sitting on “the boards of directors of 112 corporations” and as of 1921 Andrew Mellon (1855-1937) served “on the board of more than 150 corporations,” as noted in my first essay of this series. Not bad for a couple of money manipulators with no useful job skills. (Fed-bashers take note: Morgan died before the Federal Reserve was created.)

For a more recent look at the riches of high finance, the ten largest banks in the U.S. have accumulated nearly $10 trillion in assets (as of December 2019)—mostly by loaning and investing “money” they never owned in the first place. Mostly by exploiting political privileges that ordinary people cannot access. Mostly from the safety of air-conditioned offices like these ones.

Of course, banks also provide the vital function of facilitating millions of transactions every day—with their check clearing, ATMs and credit card processing. Legitimate bankers can continue to play this important role in keeping consumer interactions secure and liquid without their fiat counterfeiting privileges. But why settle for an honest living when you can get rich on legalized alchemy?

Money Multipliers and Empty Banks: The Best Kept Secrets in the Financial Industry

While lingering just a bit longer on the positive side of the ledger, here’s a couple more sensible economic experts with important things to say about some rather villainous activity. These crucial topics tend to get obscured by so much heavy breathing over the Fed, the ogre of “globalism” or just vague denunciations of the “vampire squids” of finance.

It turns out, the very concept of the “money multiplier” that bankers have been using for centuries is so embarrassing to the financial industry that many simply deny it. Wikipedia provides a decent entry on the Money Multiplier concept, reflecting some of the controversy with their statement:

Although the money multiplier concept is a traditional portrayal of fractional reserve banking, it has been criticized as being misleading. The Bank of England, Deutsche Bundesbank, and the Standard & Poor’s rating agency have issued refutations of the concept together with factual descriptions of banking operations.

Legacy media, banking executives and their support staff at the Federal Reserve would much rather talk about “consumer protections” and “deposit insurance” from the minimal reserves they hold—or just prattle on about “stimulus” and “quantitative easing” to put people at ease.

Better yet, the major banks like to run advertisements in corporate media showing smiling parents walking into a sparkling new house (after signing a 30-year mortgage) or a college loan recipient clutching their precious diploma (not a care in the world over the debt they just incurred). The financial services industry spent nearly $16 billion in 2019 just on digital advertising to advance such blissful narratives. The overall theme of most financial promotions (that professional newsmen are glad to embellish) is that smothering debt equals pure joy.

Images of paid actors pretending to be happy homeowners and ecstatic college students in flowing graduation robes help distract from the shocking fact that as of December 2019, the FDIC reports a $110 billion insurance fund balance to cover $7.8 trillion in insured deposits—a paltry 1.4% reserve ratio.

For sake of completeness, their footnote #3 by the word “Fund” deals with accounting methods before 2006, thus is irrelevant for current data.

To the glaring obscenity of the naked emperors in Wall Street and Washington D.C. (as well as London, Paris, Berlin and other financial centers): their banks are all nearly empty.

As in the classic children’s story about a similarly exposed monarch, legacy media and leashed academics just tag along for the parade, pretending that the banking imperials are adorned in the finest of fashions.

Cutting to the heart of fiat credit creation, U.K. economics professor Richard Werner authored an essay in the International Review of Financial Analysis in 2016 that summarized various viewpoints on the “money multiplier,” with over two dozen prominent economists cited in lengthy excerpts. As commenter RoatanBill asserted, the professor’s essay confirms there is nothing close to a consensus within the pseudo-science of economics.

Werner’s essay investigates the three competing theories on the central question: “How do banks operate and where does the money supply come from?” In his words, with his groupings of economists into their respective categories shown in [brackets]:

  1. The currently prevalent financial intermediation theory of banking says that banks collect deposits and then lend these out, just like other non-bank financial intermediaries. [J.M. Keynes, Ludwig von Mises, Ben Bernanke and Paul Krugman support this theory]
  2. The older fractional reserve theory of banking says that each individual bank is a financial intermediary without the power to create money, but the banking system collectively is able to create money through the process of ‘multiple deposit expansion’ (the ‘money multiplier’). [Friedrich von Hayek, Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Samuelson support this theory]
  3. The credit creation theory of banking, predominant a century ago, does not consider banks as financial intermediaries that gather deposits to lend out, but instead argues that each individual bank creates credit and money newly when granting a bank loan.

The latter theory prevailed until the mid-1930s when famed economist Irving Fisher offered mild approval to that concept—and the more flamboyant Keynes sneered contemptuously otherwise. More recently, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Basil Moore and Richard Werner ignored the academic scoffing and support the credit creation theory of banking, to which I would agree.

The fact that this core question is still viewed as controversial—and not remotely settled—just reinforces how far backwards the entire field of economics has regressed since the 1930s political takeover of the U.S. economy. Since that era, fiat credit creation became a moral imperative that dare never be publicly admitted by the vast majority of professional economists, politicians and media spokesmen. In Werner’s carefully measured words:

the economics profession has singularly failed over most of the past century to make any progress in terms of knowledge of the monetary system, and instead moved ever further away from the truth as already recognised by the credit creation theory well over a century ago.

Adding to the confusion, among the more vocal critics of the credit creation theory was MIT professor and author of the most popular economics textbook since World War II, Paul Samuelson (1915–2009). In the 1948 first edition of Samuelson’s famous economics textbook, he went to great length to insist it was “impossible” for a single bank to create money through the lending process. However, Samuelson conceded (for his example 20% reserve scenario) that:

the whole banking system can do what no one bank can do by itself. Bank money has been created 5 for 1…”

Rather than dwell on which of the three monetary theories is most accurate, I’ll just reiterate that the author of the leading college economics textbook of the 20th century (with over 4 million copies sold according to Wikipedia) admitted that the “banking system” creates money out of thin air. However, I will also note the acrobatics that Samuelson and others employ to fully absolve any individual banker of guilt.

It may be a sign of progress that the home of the conservative Fed-bashers, ZeroHedge, allowed a brief moment of clarity to invade their otherwise puerile platform of pro-banking mythology. Financial pundit Travis Kimmel explained in an August posting on inflation picked up by ZeroHedge (since moved behind their paywall) that:

A dollar is ‘born’ when a loan is made against collateral on a bank’s balance sheet. Banks can issue multiples of dollars for every dollar of collateral they have. … As banks lend more, more dollars are created and the money supply increases. This multiplicative lending is the chief driver of total dollars in the system.

Simple wisdom you will never find from a federal broadcaster shilling for corporate advertising dollars. So far, this isolated exception has apparently not been repeated in any conservative or libertarian publication that I can find. (Most liberal publications are too busy raging against “capitalist greed” to offer anything sensible on financial education. But that’s to be expected.)

With the internet lowering barriers to communication as not seen since the early 1920s advent of commercial radio (nationalized in 1927), useful information is now increasingly available to any person willing to look for it. But entrenched members of state media, corporate cartels and public schooling still hold a firm grip on institutional power. Those forces continue to wield enormous sway over who may speak on coveted broadcast airwaves, who receives a platform among censorious tech utilities and who gets pushed to the sidelines.

This vast influence further dictates who receives praise as trustworthy “experts” and who gets mocked and ridiculed with pejorative slurs and epithets to invalidate their message. In virtually every case, the “winners” favor arbitrary centralized power, while the “losers” do not.

A Minor Fib on the Fed’s Virtual ‘Printing Press’

To begin addressing the central “lying” theme of this essay, I’ll ease into it with a popular distortion that maintains a nugget of truth. When it comes to pointless diversions, it’s hard to beat the incessant right-wing and libertarian denouncements of the Fed’s legendary “printing press.” Anti-government extremists need a villain with the word “federal” in its title. And conservative demagogues have milked this trope for decades to sell their books and newsletters and to fill seats at weekend seminars (while not helping the public one bit).

The “printing press” meme grossly oversimplifies what the Federal Reserve does and distracts from the rampant counterfeiting of private fiat credit bankers whom the official Right cannot stand to criticize. As for the alleged Fed “printing,” banks conjure loans to the U.S. Treasury to buy government bonds (i.e., “financing the national debt”). When governments get desperate to spend new money they don’t have—and don’t have the integrity for transparent payment via unpopular tax increases—the Federal Reserve buys these bonds back from the banks, freeing up the banks’ balance sheets to create more loans (possibly) or buy more government and corporate bonds (more likely) or simply award lush C-suite bonuses (also likely). The latter option is exemplified in this 2009 clip from the New York Times (credit to Armstrong Economics):

The Fed’s convoluted money processing machine—problematic as it is—only amounted to a relatively small $4.2 trillion balance sheet at the end of 2019. (All of that was owned by opportunistic banks and other institutional investors, by the way. The Fed can’t “print,” or more accurately buy back government bonds, without eager bankers willing to finance that shell game.) Much worse than that, as of the same time period the banking industry had created a total of $75.5 trillion in government, corporate and household credit (same as debt). Whining about the dastardly Fed running its non-existent “printing press” isn’t just misleading, it reflects willful ignorance or intentional deception among right-wing and libertarian ideologues who apparently want private bankers to be free to fleece the public without any accountability.

Financial writer Travis Kimmel again gets it right, noting: “the Fed ‘printer’ … only increases the collateral banks have to lend against. It does not directly ‘birth’ dollars, only *potential* dollars.” But his sensible voice is presently drowned out by anti-Fed fanatics.

Of Course, the Feds are Lying about Unemployment

Warming up for more serious economic fabrications, we have the ongoing underreporting of unemployment. I’ll keep this section short since it’s pretty obvious that a country of over 330 million people, with less than 164 million civilian workers, cannot possibly have an unemployment rate of under 4% as reported for all of 2019. As is now common, some creative accounting helps make our staggering economy seem vibrant.

Since 1994, the BLS has achieved their bogus unemployment figures by omitting “discouraged workers” who have given up looking for work for more than one year. This army of the downcast has grown, thanks in part to the natural comforts of not working, and also the smorgasbord of entitlement offerings Americans can now choose from (financed mostly by debt).

For more realistic unemployment estimates that include these long-term “discouraged” Americans, ShadowStats data put the average unemployment rate for Jan 2010 through Dec 2019 at a whopping 22.4% compared to the official BLS reported rate of 6.2% for that period. That is, the entire decade of the 2010s experienced Depression-era unemployment numbers.

Even the figures from ShadowStats are generous, since they omit tens of millions of seniors who follow the tradition of permanently quitting work since the New Deal convinced them to get out of the way. Millions of college-aged students—lured into classrooms to memorize dogma while they accumulate debt—are also overlooked by employment bean-counters. Both groups were overwhelmingly part of the workforce in the 1930s.

Moving on to a much bigger pack of prevarications, we have the intentional debasement of our mandatory “legal tender” known quixotically as “inflation.” Owing to the enormity of this collection of falsehoods, I’ve broken this topic into five subsections.

Many Big Lies on Inflation

  • The myth that passive inflation ‘just happens’
  • The natural state of beneficial deflation
  • Inflation is much worse than the Feds are admitting
  • America in the 19th century: progress with no net inflation (refuting left/right extremism)
  • Why not inflation and counterfeiting for the masses?

The myth that passive inflation ‘just happens’

Any discussion of “inflation” needs to begin with an understanding of what it is. Here again, we see the spectacular success of the financial community to convince the public that inflation means rising prices. Bankers, government officials and their institutional supporters now openly espouse this risible nonsense. And it just so happens that—“oopsie”—the false definition of passive inflation conveniently masks the problem of active fiat counterfeiting. (Hat tip again to Caitlin Johnstone as cited in Part 1: this too seems to be “manipulation… not incompetence.”)

Actually, for centuries inflation was understood to mean the intentional act of pumping more government currency or bank notes into the money supply, which then caused prices to rise. As recently as 1919, the Federal Reserve was basically admitting as much:

Inflation is the process of making addition to currencies not based on a commensurate increase in the production of goods. [as quoted in “On the Origin and Evolution of the Word Inflation,” Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, 1997]

That same year just over a century ago, Cambridge economist J.M. Keynes was openly denouncing the “process of inflation [by which] governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens.” He added “There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency(longer quote available at Wikipedia). By 1936, Keynes’s influential book The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, as reviewed in my last essay, would contain no such criticism of this powerful tool.

Within a few generations of that semi-lucid 1919 Fed statement and the young Keynesian critique, our educational and media gatekeepers had debauched the language to make “inflation” into a passive result of unruly “market forces” that need to be tamed by wise central policy makers. (For a third piece of supporting evidence, the 1913 Webster’s Dictionary definition of “inflation” also focused on expansion or increase of currency, with no mention of resulting prices, as Peter Schiff recently pointed out.)

When government officials now boast of their “efforts to curb inflation,” they are deflecting attention away from their own misdeeds and the mischief of their financial overlords.

Inflationary raids on public money are nothing new, of course. When Roman emperors became aware they could issue more currency by mixing in cheap copper or iron in their valuable gold or silver coins, this was an early form of monetary inflation that we now call debasement. Economist Martin Armstrong provides a useful chart of the Collapse of the Roman Silver Monetary System from 280 B.C. to 518 A.D. that depicts this process. His chart reflects the centuries of relative monetary stability until a “waterfall event” around 250 A.D., when silver content of coins was reduced about 90%. Silver content of the Roman denarius stabilized again (to some extent) for about two centuries at the new debased levels, then finally collapsed entirely in the early 500s A.D., ushering in five or six dreadful centuries of public squalor we know as the Dark Ages.

Prior to the ultimate collapse of the Roman denarius, as more and more worthless coins flooded the markets (allowing emperors to pay for wars and “bread and circus” social programs) prices of common goods also increased. But this didn’t mean the food and clothing of the era was more valuable or that people were getting richer. It meant that people had an abundance of cheap money they were willing to part with in exchange for real stuff— as we see today with skyrocketing prices for college and medical care and major cost increases for land, housing, automobiles and other essential items. And none of this is accidental.

The natural state of beneficial deflation

Whereas inflation enriches those first in line for the debased currency (fiat bankers, corporations and bloated bureaucracies), deflating prices inherently benefit consumers or those who save and invest their own money. Nevertheless, for all the talk of “democracy” helping the little guy, you’d be hard pressed to find any public figure saying anything positive about deflation. The problem is that habitual debtors (farmers, corporations and our federal government) actually want—and beg for—constant inflation to make their debts less burdensome. Monetary or price deflation is economic poison to that unstable mindset.

While few admit this, the Fed’s magical 2.0% inflation target has little to do with “taming market excesses” or “protecting consumers” and more to do with overcoming the natural pressures of deflation, all for the benefit of wealthy debtors. If economic progress means anything at all, decreasing consumer prices should almost always be the norm. That is, every year businesses find more efficient ways of providing their products or services. In an open and competitive marketplace with a stable currency, this leads to lower (not higher) prices.

For instance, industrial efficiencies brought down the price of British steel from $80 a ton in 1873 to under $20 per ton in 1886, according to Henry Hazlitt in his book Economics in One Lesson. These innovations (particularly the Bessemer process) would be adopted by Andrew Carnegie to aid America’s booming economy at the time—causing a price drop in steel railroad rails from $100 per ton in 1873 to $50 two years later, then down to $18 per ton in the 1890s, according to the prior Wikipedia link.

America’s automotive manufactures produced similar growth and consumer savings. Henry Ford’s Model T automobile “sold for $600 in 1912 but its price had fallen to $240 by the mid-1920s” as noted in Robert Murphy’s P.I. Guide, page 71. Over at General Motors, a “Chevrolet six-cylinder touring car cost $2,150 in 1912; an incomparably improved six-cylinder Chevrolet sedan cost $907 in 1942,” according to Hazlitt.

Contrary to the notion that deflation will harm workers, Hazlitt points out that U.S. automotive employment increased from 140,000 in 1910 to 250,000 in 1920 and then 380,000 in 1930—all while car prices were declining.

Market efficiencies have driven down costs of essential products from food and clothing to computers and long distance calls—once AT&T’s patent-fueled monopoly was finally broken up in the 1980s. Financial blogger Mike “Mish” Shedlock adds other logical defenses of deflation and the sensible observation that “The very essence of rising standard of living is more goods at lower prices thanks to innovation and rising productivity.” Yet in state media and subsidized education, the myth persists that rising prices are both natural and beneficial for the public.

Inflation is much worse than the Feds are admitting

As many economic observers in alternative media have asserted, official CPI data as tracked by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) have been manipulated for decades to under-report inflation. The Chapwood Index helps provide useful background on why the BLS altered its own Consumer Price Index calculations in the 1980s, including this excerpt:

prior to 1980 [the CPI] was accepted universally as an accurate measure of how the cost of living increased. Fast forward to 1983-1984, when the government realized that the cost of living was growing more than 12% – 13% per year. It was determined that if the cost of living were lower the government would save money.

It turns out that the CPI has been around since the 18th century and it worked well when it “was a measure describing a basket of goods that defined the same items of goods applying the same weight during the same time period,” as Ed Butowsky of the Chapwood Index puts it. We could also call this using honest “weights and measures” or maybe just “responsible government.” But that’s not what we have today.

The longstanding CPI calculation went haywire soon after Nixon took the U.S. off the international gold standard in 1971, to help finance the Vietnam War and also pay for LBJ’s lingering “war on poverty” that most of Washington was terrified to scale back.

Official Consumer Price Index figures over the last two decades show average annual inflation at about 2.2%. Historically consistent (1980-based) CPI measures tracked by ShadowStats put average inflation from 2000 to present at 9.4%. This is a huge difference and also a major injustice.

For a $20 trillion economy, causing a mere 2% net inflation steals at least $400 billion from consumers and savers each year. (That ignores natural deflation, which makes the issue even worse.) At 9% real inflation, the annual theft is more like $1.8 trillion—mostly going to rich bankers and Wall Street executives, as the system was designed. It also allows deficit spending for military adventures and social programs without unpopular tax increases or Congressional accountability.

To put it mildly, politicians, bureaucrats, bankers, colleges, farmers, financial planners and public corporations all really LOVE inflation. They all enjoy the free lunch at someone else’s expense—namely those that don’t have a front row seat to the banking industry’s liquidity hydrant.

For a graphical view of recent U.S. inflation, economics writer Charles Hugh Smith provides the useful chart:

One common thread on the worst of the skyrocketing prices (college and medicine) is that the delivery systems are all politicized, with massive federal interference and mandatory state licensing cartels that minimize competition, intensify vanity and maximize cost. Home building and automotive manufacturing are also highly restricted by government rules, limiting market efficiencies and artificially raising costs in both cases.

American banking in the 19th century: progress with no net inflation (refuting left/right extremism)

Here’s an area of monetary history where Fed-bashers and Fed supporters both trip over themselves in differing ways on their missions to spin false narratives on inflation, resulting in the extremist myopia of choosing No Government or Totalitarian Socialism, no other options.

First, to solely blame the Federal Reserve for today’s persistent inflation—implicitly pushing for no banking oversight whatsoever—is both foolhardy and disingenuous for multiple reasons. Besides the inherent fraud of fiat banking itself, one powerful evidence of “End the Fed” absurdity is that U.S. inflationary booms and busts were also rampant in the 19th century during periods when there was no central bank.

Wikipedia’s entry on the “History of central banking in the United States” provides the chart below along with a description of the “free banking” era of 1837–1862:

In this period, only state-chartered banks existed. They could issue bank notes against specie (gold and silver coins) and the states heavily regulated their own reserve requirements, interest rates for loans and deposits, the necessary capital ratio etc. …During the free banking era, the banks were short-lived compared to today’s commercial banks, with an average lifespan of five years. About half of the banks failed, and about a third of which went out of business because they could not redeem their notes.

Wikipedia fails to mention that banks were free to issue bank notes many times the amount of actual gold and silver holdings—i.e., the enduring practice of counterfeiting. This careless “printing” of notes and loans caused the instability, as it does today in a more gradual fashion.

Monetary Chaos of the ‘Free Banking’ Era

The “free banking” credit sprees caused the wild up/down changes in the money supply and price levels, hurting consumers and wrecking thousands of businesses. Mere numbers on a chart don’t capture the suffering inflicted by such reckless banking behavior.

On the other hand… Fed supporters cling to the notion that their beloved central bank is actually helping to curb inflation. This too is false.

Before 1914 when the Federal Reserve came into existence, painful boom/bust credit cycles eventually leveled off to a relatively stable position—until the next cycle soon started up again. Subsequent maneuvering by the Fed and the U.S. Treasury over the last century (artificially suppressing interest rates, selling then buying Treasury bonds to and from banks, using bond proceeds for illicit government spending, creating the false sense of security with sham regulations and deposit insurance, etc.) just postpones a full correction—which will be excruciating.

Since the Fed and the Treasury Department have jointly worked to prevent a proper recovery, the cumulative inflation using original Bureau of Labor Statistics methods (as tracked by ShadowStats) for 1913 through 2019 is about 16,000%, as detailed in my last essay. This means that anyone who saved a dollar back in 1913, if they were still living today, would now have under 1 penny of equivalent purchasing power. That’s an over 99% loss of value and evidence of incompetence on the part of federal politicians as well as proof of malevolence among their financial masters.

Prior to the Fed’s creation, matters were much different. The federal agency that officially tracks inflation, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, even admits to an absence of *net* inflation during the 1800s, if you can sort through thousands of words of bureaucratic fluff. The BLS states:

The limited price data from the 19th century also show no pattern of consistent inflation; indeed, evidence suggests that there was net deflation over the course of that century, with prices lower at the end than the beginning.

I’ll note again, the above quote is from the federal government. The very same federal government now insists that persistent inflation is both normal and healthy. That informative BLS website also provides useful charts (their data, my descriptions) of what:

  1. A rapid market correction during a depression looks like…
  1. What a prolonged, politically “stimulated” non-correction looks like…

In figure 1, we see a sharp deflationary correction during the 1920-21 depression following World War I. For the next eight years, Americans experienced “roaring” prosperity across all income brackets.

In figure 2, we see the effects of massive “stimulus” spending and other market interference—precisely to avoid a deflationary correction that politicians and corporations fear. The result was more than a decade of economic squalor, business closings and high unemployment.

Why not inflation and counterfeiting for the masses?

At some point (probably reached long ago) all the data and history and charts and graphs stop having an impact on the public psyche and just fade into background noise. When businesses and politicians have a vested interest in believing nonsense—that fiat credit and inflation are somehow good for society—and diligently promote such gibberish, it becomes more practical to simply call their bluff.

If credit creation, money multiplying and price inflation are all beneficial… then why not extend those privileges to the general public? (In a “well-regulated” manner, of course.)

For instance, instead of the universal basic income that many liberals now advocate, we could just allow people in selected income ranges to periodically withdraw ten $20 bills (a responsible 10% equity stake) and add an extra zero in the corners, transforming each one into a $200 bill—a net gain of $180 for each note. Assuming roughly 200 million poor or middle-class U.S. adults, changing a stack of ten $20 bills into $2,000 would create $360 billion in new “credit” for each iteration.

This new money would then be pumped into the economy—in accordance with reasonable guidelines on proper spending (e.g., not cigarettes, junk food or alcohol, etc.)—to “stimulate” business growth and hiring, thus paying for itself according to prevailing monetary theory. We could hold such Universal Credit events a few times a year to give working families a much-deserved “hand up, not a handout” as social welfare activists often say.

Let’s remember that George Floyd was arrested and killed in Minneapolis for alleged “credit creation” involving a couple fiat $20 bills found in his possession. To commemorate this unnecessary loss of life—and enhance monetary equity—I propose that Universal Credit be established on currency designed in Mr. Floyd’s honor (with added markings left to public discretion):

Under such a program, store owners would naturally be compelled by Legal Tender statutes to accept such $200 bills at face value. To maintain order, participants would just stop by the nearest Social Security or Food Stamp office and have trained Monetary Agents scan and record the serial numbers on the altered bills to prevent too much “bad” inflation, which skilled federal workers would watch out for. Many social problems from food insecurity to lack of affordable housing to schools without band instruments could be quickly solved or greatly diminished with such an influx of liquidity.

Except, no one would fall for such an obvious display of monetary manipulation. A crucial feature of inflationary debasement has always been to obscure the damage to the greatest extent possible, in order to extend the process. After all, the #1 goal of any con-artist is not getting caught. For the last two decades, this has meant rigging the stats to pretend that 8 to 10% annual inflation is only 2 or 3%. Since long before that, inflationary graft has relied on a stable of academic cranks and pro-government journalists who adamantly insist inflation is good.

My proposed program of Universal Credit faces an even greater obstacle, in that ruling elites don’t like their special privileges being shared with the masses. So inflation and counterfeiting “rights” are fiercely guarded by the powerful banking cartels with help from their agents in mass media and politics.

Monopoly Patents: More Corporate Welfare that Everyone Loves

While on the topic of corporate banking privileges, another major form of corporate welfare worth considering is what politicians call the “patent system.” With so much misguided angst circulating about “globalism” and private-sector “greed”—and with commercial media usually shilling for corporate favoritism—I think it’s overdue to figure out how those evil “oligarchs” actually empower themselves.

In the U.S., politicized corporate boards (seldom a real “innovator” in sight) rely on monopoly patent “rights” to protect their fiefdoms from open competition. I have never heard any member of the Official Right or the Official Left even meekly question this legal monopoly scheme—arguably the second most significant example of corporate welfare after fiat banking, and a strategy that requires international policing to even pretend to function. (Hence, the fierce hatred of China, which bucks the global patent cabal and dares to compete with Western industry.)

In keeping with the old British practice of granting Royal monopoly charters to preferred members of society, aristocratic heads of the Industrial Revolution (that began around 1760 in England) succeeded in extending Royal privileges to legally block competition to protect manufacturing concepts they officially “patented.” Wealthy American Founding Fathers continued this tradition when they imposed their new national contract on the public in 1787.

In America, this particular gift from the Founders of owning an idea—somewhat like their other Constitutional handiwork of “owning other people”—allows companies to hire patent lawyers to dress up applications to convince other federal lawyers that some idea is such a novel, unique and beneficial “flash of genius” that it deserves legal protection in federal courts.

The 12,600 attorneys and support staff at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (and the cottage industry of private lawyers to help inventors navigate the process) do nothing to foster the innate creative desire of humans or to protect the “small inventor” from corporate vultures. Instead, such federal maneuvering allows corporations to claim absolute and exclusive “ownership” to the original ideas of their employees or competitors, and prevent them from starting new businesses.

The fact that every “new” innovation is built on thousands, if not millions, of prior innovations should cast doubt on this murky field of juris probity. But corporate supporters insist all human progress will come to a screeching halt if Big Business ever loses its lucrative patent protections. Anything else, they cry, is just not fair!

How well has this worked? Just great for well-financed corporations. Not so well for actual inventors. For example, the federal patent and copyright system has allowed Microsoft to clone ideas from true software innovators (Windows from Xerox, QDOS operating system, Lotus spreadsheets, Netscape internet browser) then bundle them with other monopoly products, get juiced up with Wall Street capital, surround themselves with a phalanx of patent attorneys, then crush the competition.

Similar situations of corporate abuse include the notorious “current war” where Thomas Edison and General Electric used patent litigation to harass and copy alternating-current electrical developments from Nikola Tesla and Westinghouse, after failing to implement Edison’s less efficient direct current. Marconi radio stole radio transmitting technology from Tesla (Marconi got caught, then still was awarded a patent). The Radio Corporation of America filed and appealed bogus lawsuits starting in 1932 against television inventor Philo T. Farnsworth, ultimately succeeding in delaying TV’s development for over 15 years.

More recently, the world witnessed the boom in fiber optics, cellular service and other telecommunications only after the stifling AT&T monopoly was broken by Reagan in the early 1980s. For most of the prior four generations, Ma Bell and her legions of corporate R&D minions were too busy looking for small inventors to rout and guarding their own strong “patent portfolio”—with 12,500 active patents as of 2016—to think beyond their starched white lab coats.

No doubt thousands, perhaps millions, of other small inventors with less financial resources have been caught up in the buzz saw of royal monopoly charters that weaponize industry to the advantage of large corporations. A more detailed exploration of that abusive system of arbitrary justice will be left for another day. For now, suffice to say that any policy supported unanimously by both major parties in Washington along with apparently all voices in Legacy media deserves far greater scrutiny.

False Sense of Security: Trying to ‘Regulate’ Corrupt Banking Activity

To convince an “educated” populace to support a corrupt system of 16,000% monetary debasement, over $80 trillion in total debt, vast programs of corporate welfare and grotesque wealth disparities between financial elites and working Americans requires an extraordinary level of organized duplicity—but also an amazing level gullibility among the beleaguered masses. To instill such credulity amongst the public, it helps to create a false sense of security with sham “regulations” and deposit “insurance” programs that only dull the senses. Here is where the stuffed suits in Washington do the most damage (while receiving the least criticism).

Yet again, Americans continue to suffer from the chaos imposed during the disastrous New Deal. Reckless bank credit creation during the 1920s coupled with political bans against “branch banking” (to protect underfinanced small rural banks from competing with larger banking conglomerates) led to an unsustainable stock market bubble and rural land speculation, then a sudden collapse in 1929 accompanied by thousands of bank failures that left depositors and farmers broke. As a solution to this political catastrophe, rather than let consumers pick winners and losers all along (or better yet, push for state oversight to prevent fraudulent money multiplying) overzealous federal lawmakers stepped in to save the day with more banking favoritism. This instilled unwarranted confidence among the public and created an even bigger mess.

Bankers’ special rights to fleece the public got a major boost in the 1930s with the invention of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), which subsidizes sleazy business behavior and gives customers a false signal that “your money is safe here, trust us.” Like any bad idea that isn’t repudiated, instead of relying on more fair and efficient profit/loss market incentives, subsequent politicians threw gasoline on the fire and FDIC insurance coverage grew from $2,500 per depositor in 1934 to $250,000 today. It begs repeating: as of 2019, the FDIC reports a $110 billion insurance fund to cover $7.8 trillion in deposits—a mere 1.4% reserve ratio. (Don’t ask for your money back all at once.)

Following the welfare and racial revolutions of the turbulent 1960s, Washington further intervened in the banking industry with the so-called Fair Housing Act of 1968, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1974, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of 1975 and finally the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) in 1977. All of these laws catered to racial bitterness and division, while asserting that banks—for no valid reason whatsoeverrefused to loan to credit-worthy minorities although such activity is inherently against a bank’s own profit motive in the first place. Like so much else in modern times, the CRA legislation and associated rules carry the onus of “guilty until proven innocent” as bankers must satisfy a vast array of arbitrary measures to prove they are not “discriminating” or being “unfair.”

The CRA and other “fair housing” laws officially segregate people into categories of “low-income” or “moderate-income” vs. rich people who need to be punished for working and saving too much. Accordingly, these laws pressure banks to give loans to low- or moderate-income (LMI) borrowers, despite having bad or horrible credit. Legal verbiage ostensibly excludes that practice, but creditors still routinely make nonsensible loans to appease an army of FRB/FDIC/OCC/CFPB regulators who could care less if a bank loses money.

Clinton and Bush administrations abused these powers in the 1990s and 2000s to attract votes from the LMI community, triggering the sub-prime housing bubble and collapse. This fairly mild correction wiped out $14 trillion in net worth of U.S. household from 2007 peak to 2009 trough. More housing market damage is probably on the way, as many outsiders are warning.

Following the last recession, politicians crafted the Dodd-Frank Act in 2010 to further increase federal control of banking under the guise of “consumer protection.” According to the Wall Street Journal (5/30/16):

  • The 2010 Dodd-Frank financial law has led to over 22,200 pages of rules.
  • The six largest U.S. banks spent at least $70.2 billion on compliance in 2013, up from $34.7 billion in 2007.
  • The nation’s largest bank, J.P. Morgan, had 43,000 compliance staff in 2015, up from 24,000 in 2011.

All of that busywork may seem impressive, but it overlooks one core problem that WSJ failed to mention. Despite that flurry of paperwork, banks are still free to participate in fractional-reserve lending without any disclosure whatsoever to their customers. Along with “legal tender” edicts, those hidden gems are nothing less than the lynch-pins of the entire bubble financial system and our massive debt tsunami. Truly, corporate favoritism and bureaucratic irrelevancy at their finest.

Strangely enough, nearly all Democrats and most Republicans still delude themselves with the fantasy they can tame corporate counterfeiting with a few more rules, some high-profile hand-slapping, and the “right” people in charge. Almost all of them—and the vast majority of voters who support those politicians—apparently accept the fundamental flaws in the system that no amount of “regulations” can fix.

The gargantuan levels of corporate abuse and political dishonesty as detailed above are troubling enough. But the willingness of people to follow these deceptions—while demanding ever more enslaving political entitlements—is unprecedented in American history. Our choice to collectively follow corporate and political charlatans off the financial cliff will certainly spell unnecessary hardships—and probably more suffering than most people can imagine—for the tens of millions of adults caught in these traps.

With our increasingly passive, docile and regressive culture demanding endless government security blankets and deceptive corporate “benefits” (at the expense of progress, growth and independence) most people probably don’t realize just how *radical* the notion of “retirement” really is. We also don’t seem to grasp the inherent conflict of interest when our trusted final advisors suggest that we hand over all our life savings, then quit working altogether. Likewise, for the legions of corporate Human Resources administrators that insist we put our personal healthcare decisions in their eager hands, plus the hands of the thousands of medical bureaucrats and licensed professionals who all want a piece of the action.

First, I’ll address the retirement system.

Some Classical Views on ‘Retirement’

To attempt to disabuse some people of this unwise practice—borrowed from the Prussian world of central planning—I’ll start with one of the most reasonable and independent financial writers I’ve ever encountered—which isn’t necessarily saying that much, considering the nature of most professional pundits.

Daniel Lapin’s 2009 book Thou Shall Prosper – Ten Commandments for Making Money is full of concise logic and history on the virtues of productive business, along with examples of Hollywood bashing of profit. (His book is probably available for free at your local library. A more substantial review is available here from a financial website.)

For purposes of this essay, his chapter 10 – Never Retire, is of most interest to me. With nearly 100% of politicians and political writers either too gutless, dimwitted or dishonest to confront mob passions on this dangerous habit, Lapin calmly states (with ample supporting evidence) “Retirement is essentially selfish.” He proceeds to make his case that:

Losing your job is like having your tribe, your entire community, send you a telegram that reads, ‘Hello, you are no longer useful, and we have no further need for you.’

For historical grounding, Lapin—a veteran of private-sector business consulting as well as the founding rabbi of the Pacific Jewish Center in Los Angeles in 1978—points out: “No word in Hebrew exists for retirement, which indicates to devotees of ancient Hebrew that the very concept of retirement is flawed.” (So many anti-Jewish conspiracy nuts, as well as fanatical Christian Zionists, manage to overlook this important time-honored cultural aspect that explains quite a bit of Jewish financial success—along with illuminating the growing state of Gentile poverty.)

For modern American application, Lapin adds:

Prior to about the 1950s, there was no such thing as retirement, as the term is used today. A 1950 poll showed that most workers aspired to work for as long as possible. Quitting was for the disabled.

Mr. Lapin further elaborates on “The three lies of the retirement myth: 1) Work has no value in and of itself, 2) People become less productive and less useful as they age, 3) People are merely consumers, rather than creators.” (Since this essay has other matters to attend, and those salient points should be somewhat self-evident—yet remain fiercely taboo in our PC pop-culture—I’ll defer to the author for those seeking additional information.)

With “retirement” now being such a large part of American folklore, I’ll add a couple more thoughts you might not have heard. First and foremost, I always find it wise to reject the extremism of the demagogues who happen to dominate this topic. In this case, it means ignoring the false options of: A) work every week for your entire life, or B) work every week for roughly 40 years, then quit completely for the remainder of your life while living as a fiduciary of monied interests who don’t care about you.

These illegitimate choices leave out the option of working, saving, then periodically taking some time off (often called a sabbatical)—while your health and passions are still active—to pursue personal interests or time with friends and family.

My last chunk of time off—working on a mentoring program from December 2017 through May 2018—made me aware of another snare within the retirement trap. When I was ready to go back to work, after a mere 6 months off, I was fortunate to get back with my prior employer in a slightly different role and similar pay.

I can’t image the difficulty of a 70- or 80-year-old with a 10 to 20 year gap on their resume applying for a job. Anyone in that position will almost certainly be left with only options for menial work and low pay.

Presently, America has over 50 million seniors, of which around 40 million do no paid work whatsoever. I think these people are in for a rude awakening when the next bubble bursts and their paper “investments” suddenly vaporize. If that happens, as is likely, I wouldn’t want to be the last one to get up off the couch.

Since Americans of all political persuasions pride themselves on moral rectitude—most often, these days, at other people’s expense—I will mention the bizarre “ethics” of our misguided retirement craze. With the secular/pagan/atheist/self-worshipping communities suspiciously AWOL on this important topic—usually preoccupied with the euphoria of tribal warfare—I will again defer to a more interesting figure of the monotheistic society.

The Rich Fool: ‘Take Life Easy; Eat, Drink and be Merry’

A much older Jewish teaching on retirement—that one might think held sway to a supposedly Christian culture—comes from roughly 2,000 years ago by a teacher who needs no introduction. This universal teaching was recorded in Chapter 12 of the Gospel of Luke, and was delivered in the form of a parable:

The ground of a certain rich man yielded an abundant harvest. He thought to himself, ‘What shall I do? I have no place to store my crops.’ Then he said, ‘This is what I’ll do. I will tear down my barns and build bigger ones, and there I will store my surplus grain. And I’ll say to myself, ‘You have plenty of grain laid up for many years. Take life easy; eat, drink and be merry.’

In the conclusion of this well-known parable, the teacher notes that this rich man’s foolishness cost him his life. For purposes of this essay, I’ll compare the rich fool of circa 30 A.D. with the wealthy crowd of today, particular regarding the political sham of Social Security. In reading this passage from Luke (often neutered by subsidized Stage Preachers), it strikes me how profoundly our culture behaves much worse than the rich fool:

  1. The rich fool did not mooch off of others; we are always looking for someone else to pay for our desires. Furthermore, he did not join a gang intent on organized stealing; he acted alone.
  2. He expressed no sense of entitlement… as in, I deserve free food, subsidized healthcare, housing, education, etc. Along with that, he showed no sense of victimhood or bitterness.
  3. He put his trust in tangible assets (crops and barns); we put blind faith in paper money, paper college degrees, and paper retirement statements… all of which are more unstable.
  4. His laziness was temporary (“many years”); our retirement is permanent… for the rest of our lives, commonly two or three continuous decades!
  5. The rich fool told no lies; our modern “Social Security” system is full of lies:
    1. It will only cost you and your employer a total of $180 per year maximum. The “inflation” excuse doesn’t come close to justifying current tax levies.
    2. Each of us will own our “Social Security account.” The U.S. Supreme Court nullified this myth in 1937 and again in 1960.
    3. You’re not just a number. Up until 1972, a standard Social Security card stated in bold letters: “For Social Security Purposes – Not For Identification.” This broken promise has since been omitted from SS cards.

Supporting evidence for item #5 come from two essays on Social Security deceit (parts one and two) published by economist Walter Williams in 2005. Mr. Williams, who passed away in December, was one of the very few mainstream voices who dared to challenge this taboo.

For those who may seek refuge in the excuse of not entirely depending on Social Security, I’ll note that handing your life savings over to an empty bank or the Wall Street casino is no more intelligent, and possibly less secure.

The Charlatans We Trust with Our Retirement Savings

One could reasonably question anyone who quits working at the height of their career and hands six or seven figures in wealth over to a complete stranger. But our mainstream press corps—eager to pander to anyone with power while pontificating about their own virtues—can’t muster a word of caution.

Despite an abundance of history and logic pointing to the precarious nature of retirement, few seniors seem willing to resist this heavily advertised privilege. Conservatives manage to go a step further by funding their political enemies.

Investment banking powerhouse, Goldman Sachs, now mandates discrimination against male business leaders simply on the basis of sex. According to a November article in the New York Post, Goldman CEO David Solomon “publicly committed to diversifying Goldman’s executive ranks and refused to do IPOs for any company without a woman on its board.”

The world’s wealthiest asset manager, BlackRock Inc., pushes social engineering even further. The infamous “great vampire squid” with nearly $8 trillion of assets under their control was recently featured in a Breitbart article that began:

The retirement savings and investment accounts of millions of Americans are being used to pressure corporate Americans into adopting the left’s climate agenda and divisive racial politics.

BlackRock’s 2021 stewardship report boasts of pressuring over 2,000 companies (businesses where trillions of dollars of pensions and 401K’s are invested) during the prior year to adopt policies of climate alarmism and “ethnic and gender diversity” or else be cut off from financial support. Conservatives who support such corporate manipulation should at least be aware of how their money is being leveraged.

Ramblings of a Secular Stage Preacher

For the sake of balance, I’ll include the teachings of a secular Stage Preacher who had opinions on every topic from the environment to education to economic justice. This was a man with zero independence who became a multi-millionaire by pandering to his audience while acting like an angry “outsider.” In this case, I’m referring to Rev. Grumpy Pants himself, the Deep State’s favorite faux-populist—George Carlin (1937–2008).

For starters, I’ll note that—with extremely few exceptions—no honest person who challenges establishment power will ever be allowed near a broadcast microphone. Mr. Carlin, who posed as a courageous enemy of “The Man” in general and fierce critic of the Federal Communications Cartel in specific, managed to appear on broadcast TV over 130 times (just in the 1960s) plus 14 specials on HBO.

On the topic of lifetime government support for people who quit working, Carlin never failed to please his federal masters. One of his more famous bits, The Big Club, has been praised by right-wing populists at American Thinker, ZeroHedge and elsewhere despite its overt groveling to socialist dementia.

In a cynical 3-minute rant against “the real owners” of this country (faceless Big Business) who are shafting everyone with “longer hours” and “reduced benefits,” Carlin shifts into cruising speed (at 1:50) with the complaint:

and now, they’re comin’ for your Social Security money; they want your fucking retirement money… It’s a Big Club. And you ain’t in it. You and I are not in the Big Club.

As a man who was feted with four Hollywood Grammy awards and died with a net worth of $10 million, I’d say Mr. Carlin was very much in the Big Club. But, apparently, a sizeable portion of Americans like hearing a grumpy old shyster say “shit” and “fuck” a few dozen times while they sit passively and shell out $50 to $100 for that routine.

Amazingly, this guy is held up a “rebel” by mass media standards. The lead paragraph of Wikipedia’s glowing entry on George Carlin claims he was:

Regarded as one of the most important and influential stand-up comics of all time, he was dubbed “the dean of counterculture comedians.” He was known for his dark comedy and reflections on politics, the English language, psychology, religion, and taboo subjects.

Consistent with this celluloid “rebel”—but usually with less cuss words—the agents of ABC/NBC/CBS/CNN/MSNBC/Fox News and mainstream newspapers can’t even murmur sweet nothings against any wealth-destroying taboo, especially the practice of rich seniors lounging around for decades at the expense of the working poor and middle-class.

Benefits’ are for Children, the Disabled and Slaves

Of course, public policy wrapped in corporate favoritism to encourage corporate dependency (and lots of wealth destruction) doesn’t just affect seniors. With so much uproar over the high cost of healthcare, the root cause of the exploding prices is nearly always brushed aside in mainstream narratives, since it doesn’t suit the collectivist agenda.

On the propaganda front, we have one of the better examples of “words no longer have meaning,” to borrow a phrase from Justice Antonin Scalia commenting on a 2015 Obamacare ruling that twisted the language to expand federal reach. In this case, I’m talking about the corporate sales pitch (“my product is good for you!”) masquerading as a neutral object, which leads to confusion and emotional manipulation. That is, equating the high-cost group insurance pool of random sick, old and/or overweight strangers into the ubiquitous mantra of “benefits.” Your “benefits.” Company “benefits.” Family “benefits.” You’ll die penniless and starving without the safety net of our “benefits!”

I’ll skip the details on self-insurance or other private healthcare options (which were cheap and effective in the past) and just note what should be obvious. Some people find it helpful to consider the complexity and trappings of using other people’s money vs. the simpler advantages of managed personal savings and continual attention to one’s health.

I’ll also note that only a century ago, most Americans could probably recognize the proper name for a system where food, clothing, shelter, healthcare and a guaranteed job were all provided by a corporate master. We used to call that slavery. (Children and the disabled also once received these private benefits from their parents and perhaps the local community.)

So how did we collectively accept the corporate spin that their tax-free inducements were a “benefit” to all humanity? For this level of deception, only the fog of war (aided by robust fiat banking) could produce such results. And it did.

While our soldiers were off saving Churchill, Stalin and Vichy France from their own imperial desires, Roosevelt’s economic planning boards were busy selling Rosie the Riveter (and the elderly men who stayed behind) a new system of healthcare. It turns out that the seeds of socialized medicine came, not from LBJ or Jimmy Carter or Barak Obama, but from wage controls during World War II.

As of 1940, “only 9 percent of the population had any form of coverage for medical expenses.” After the war, the tax-breaks that penalize individual coverage or private savings pushed a majority of Americans into employer-based group insurance. The race for subsidized health “benefits” took off. Medical costs soon exploded. Further interference launched in the 1960s in the form of Medicaid and Medicare—now with annual budgets of $412 billion and $630 billion (FY2019), respectively—just made it worse.

Within a couple generations after FDR’s initial sales pitch of discarding personal liberties to fight the Axis of Evil, nearly 100% of corporate America, corporate media and government historians unquestioningly accept the re-branding of personal healthcare decisions into universal public “benefits.” And I’m not aware of any federal politician willing to buck this trend.

But trusting incompetent bureaucrats and corporate Human Resources mandarins with our personal healthcare has other consequences besides rising prices. Namely, the politicized “benefits” scheme necessarily comes with lots of sticky red tape.

And ambush pricing. And impersonal rapid-fire medical attention. And long waiting lines for people hooked on Medicaid or Medicare entitlements. And old folks dying in obscurity. And more signs of false security (e.g., America’s roughly $2 trillion obesity crisis that we somehow avoided—in both the prosperous 1920s and the squalid 1930s—before corporate health insurance dulled our senses). And millions of people trapped in lousy corporate jobs just to keep their overpriced “benefits.”

To get a sense of how bureaucratic healthcare—our leading “benefit”—has become since the New Deal corporate-federal partnership, CNS News printed out Obamacare regulations from the Federal Register as of October 2013. This hefty stack then came to 10,535 pages, which appeared to be at least 7 feet high—likely growing taller since then.

My kid’s not breathing… somebody get me a Medical Compliance Specialist!

Towards the end of the Obama regime, the Foundation for Economic Education provided an illuminating chart on the explosive growth in medical administrators (up over 3,000%) and total per capita medical spending (up 2,300%) compared to the tiny growth in actual physicians from 1970 to 2009.

Such a bureaucratic mess should be no surprise after turning over important personal decisions to politicians and their hired staff. Coupled with fiat banking privileges and patent monopoly rights, the underlying theme of the medial “benefits” establishment is: We Own Everything; You Own Nothing.

And most people are fine with that.

Liberals and socialists now call for a “single-payer” system, never explaining which of the 80,000 federal HHS healthcare bureaucrats (as of 2018) will be the One Great Decider on who gets what medical treatment and for how long.

Right-wing reactionaries frequently miss the root cause of exploding healthcare costs as well—wallowing in partisan rage against the Democrat’s “Obamacare,” pretending we had no socialized medicine before then. Most conservatives still can’t utter a word against their sacred killing spree of World War II and its misguided wage controls that caused so much lingering damage.

Swinging from the Chandeliers: The False Hope of Monetary Monotheism

With the rise of national socialism in America since the 1930s, it was only inevitable that our nation would immerse itself in the culture of empire worship that once plagued the Roman Empire and now fogs the minds of most ruling elites and many of its residents as well. To signal our approval of such wanton abuse from political and corporate overlords, the vast majority of U.S. citizens now accept monetary monotheism of the ONE true currency—the Yankee greenback—as a matter of established orthodoxy. This new theology fits well with the dominant public belief in the ONE true system of governance, ONE indivisible nation, ONE honorable military, ONE unflappable symbol of liberty, and ONE correct way of thinking on every issue imaginable.

While each of these dangerous superstitions warrants further attention another day, I’ll touch on monetary monotheism for just a moment. Washington’s “legal tender” policy is fundamentally misleading, since it’s really a mandate and the word “tender” means nothing to most people outside of a juicy steak. The central banking industry’s favorite rule is also expressly un-American.

America had competing currencies until Washington eroded this freedom in the 1860s, weakened it further in 1913, then crushed the concept entirely in 1933—something most Fed critics and supporters both conspicuously ignore. A picture of an 1853 bank note from South Carolina is shown here, for example. Dozens of similar “private” (actually, state chartered) bank notes can be found on the web in just a few minutes of searching.

With competing currencies, the public markets would necessarily settle on the money system that works best and maximizes stability. History reveals this to be “solid” currencies backed with gold or silver—neither of which can be conjured by the flick of a banker’s pen. With fiat dollar mandates, banks and their Federal Reserve enablers have gone on a non-stop joy ride at the public’s expense, turning the dollar into less than a penny of value in the process.

Conclusion

The basic principles of economics seem to indicate that financial collapse grimly waits on America’s doorstep, and most of Europe’s as well. The gigantic debt load, rampant inflation, empty banks and unchecked counterfeiting all reveal a culture that is blind to its own weaknesses and now resorts to grasping at gimmicks for an easy fix.

The astounding part for me is the gullibility of Americans, and most advanced societies, to accept the illusion that an inbred clique of financial, political and corporate royalty can master the ability to speak wealth into existence by simply writing the words “this is money” (or something similar) on a piece of paper or a digital token. Continuing in that belief system, we now accept as an article of faith that ritual chanting about “stimulus” and “benefits” and “security” will save us from a day of reckoning.

Who would have guessed centuries ago, that the best chance for alchemy to succeed was not rearranging molecules of base metals into gold, but rearranging words—and injecting political privilege into broadcasting and education—to convince people that repetition of empty jargon can bring real prosperity? The political marketing achievements have been tremendous. But the results have been incredibly poor.

A majority of Americans have—initially with some reluctance, now with great enthusiasm—embraced these intoxicating fantasies for the last three or four generations. And with no effective opposition pointing us to more sensible alternatives—working, saving, investing and a sound currency—we can only wait for the poison to take its toll.

Some might have predicted such general results after America largely abandoned its faith in God and moved towards faith in omnipotent government. I would just add that the pervasive confusion surprises me less than the gratuitous servility we continue to demonstrate.

Post Script: Debt Slavery or Debt Forgiveness?

As detailed in my first essay (on student debt) at Unz Review back in September 2019, I think that some form of organized debt forgiveness—not the stealth bank bailout that Democrats are pushing—would be the best possible option among only difficult choices. And if politicians can’t muster the courage to stand up to banking and corporate interests, I suspect that individuals will take such matters into their own hands, which could be more chaotic to say the least.

Conservatives, if they can get past their bitterness that “it’s not fair” and abandon their partisan zeal to opposed everything “liberals” ostensibly promote, should naturally embrace real debt forgiveness. The key is to think ahead to what comes next after such an effort.

What would likely follow any real debt cancellation would be much less willingness for shady lenders to shower the public in fresh new fiat loans, new deficit spending, new social programs, and new military conquests. Along with the elimination of easy credit comes the necessity to work, save and invest—which I thought were once traditional virtues. Or did you think it’s coincidental that NO ONE in Washington now promotes real debt forgiveness?

Come to think of it, real debt forgiveness may be the easiest “kill switch” on the Deep State that was ever conceived… if people just have the sense to reach out and grab it. This is basically an inflation dividend to return wealth (in the form of reducing payments to fiat lenders) from the financial class who conjured the debased currency back to the workers whose honest savings have been looted over the years.

Of course, any transition from phony money to stable currency would cause tremendous upheaval and result in millions of losers (at least) and hopefully many more winners. I tend to think that this difficult choice should require the more duplicitous members of society to pay the most, and the weakest members to pay the least.

The alternative (without debt forgiveness) would leave banking executives and their corporate entourage free to continue fleecing the public with their endless cycles of inflation, boom, bust, then feasting on the carnage. One more iteration of that routine and the upper crust of Wall Street may end up owning practically everything.

Owing to the bi-partisan corruption that once again saturates Washington, I have no illusion that politicians will do what’s best for the country. My biggest hope for the future is that pockets of resistance will soon organize—not for protests or political power—but for real progress on educational, business and financial independence. If that fails, it may be time for sensible people to do what America’s original immigrants did, and look elsewhere for building a new and better society.

By Steve Penfield
Email: [email protected]

Lead photo credits: (L) Wikipedia entry for Banking Act of 1935. (R) NYT photo and Dissent Magazine article on Financial Services Modernization Act in 1999. Both laws increased banking privileges.

 
Hide 115 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. gay troll says:

    Central fiat banking: the Bank enters into an agreement with a sovereign government. The bank creates a currency that need not be backed by anything of value. The government declares that the currency is legal tender and must be accepted as payment on any debt.

    The government, of course, wants to spend tons of the new fiat currency because it gives them purchasing power unlimited by their actual wealth. For example, a government might desire a fiat currency to finance a war against its neighbor. The war may cost more that the physical wealth of the government. But a central bank can supply a government with unlimited purchasing power.

    Of course, in the long run, the banks don’t profit the governments, the governments profit the banks. In the U.S. if the government want FRNs from the Federal Reserve, it sells the Fed an interest bearing bond. It is a promise that the government will pay back more “dollars” than it receives. But it is only a promise, it has no intrinsic value.

    However, the Fed counts the bonds it purchases from the Treasury as assets equivalent to gold. In the old days, banks issued currency for gold held on reserve. Currency would become debased when bankers justified fractional reserves. Instead of issuing one claim per ounce of gold, they would issue ten claims for the same ounce. Although fractional reserve banking can excite an economy, it is essentially a pyramid scheme and definitely a fraud. It invariably leads to collapse.

    So the Fed actually practices a fraud upon a fraud: fractional reserve banking hypothecated on sovereign debt instead of gold. Gold is not even involved anymore: bankers no longer put their gold at any risk. Instead they hold and accumulate it cheaply. Today each “dollar” in circulation is backed by about 11 cents worth of U.S. debt. Every time you accept a dollar in payment, you are purchasing 11 cents worth of an unplayable debt. That is why dollars are hot potatoes.

    The Fed has kept this dead horse hurtling around the track by printing trillions. But it’s like bailing water out of a boat with a big hole in the bottom.

    Namaste

    • Agree: John Wear
    • Replies: @johnm33
  2. I am past the point of placing blame–the reality is that all great civilizations collapse–and almost all of them debase their currency as part of that process.

    That is just what homo sapiens do–and they make lots of mouth noises to lie about what they are doing.

    All public figures these days are just trying to hide the ball when they should be running for the hills–because when the plebes finally figure out what has happened, the plebes will be looking for scapegoats.

    The good news–new civilizations rise from the ashes.

    The trick is to be fortunate enough to live in a civilization in the growth and success stage instead of the crash and burn stage….

  3. Single-payer medical insurance coverage,which we have here in Canada, is an excellent and practical system. No amount of grumpy-old-man ranting can change that. If you haven’t tried it, don’t knock it.

  4. Come to think of it, real debt forgiveness may be the easiest “kill switch” on the Deep State that was ever conceived… if people just have the sense to reach out and grab it. This is basically an inflation dividend to return wealth (in the form of reducing payments to fiat lenders) from the financial class who conjured the debased currency back to the workers whose honest savings have been looted over the years.

    That’s dangerous advice you’re giving there, Mr. Penfield. I’ve long concluded that this is correct advice. I paid off my student loans and long griped about student loan debt forgiveness. Then I realized I was like the proverbial crab in the bucket, keeping other crabs from escaping.

    Fiat jutizia, ruat caelum: let justice be done, though the heavens may fall. Fiat justice, let it be done.

  5. @Justvisiting

    The good news–new civilizations rise from the ashes.

    We burned all the easy hydrocarbons and mined all the easy ores to build the civilization we have today, and to get us past the Malthusian trap. If this civilization collapses, the next one will not have access to these items. Its existence will be, to coin a phrase, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.

    Fiat currency has destroyed the future of humanity.

  6. Right_On says:

    Talk of debt forgiveness always brings out my inner bourgeois nature.
    “What about moral hazard,” I cry.
    I shudder at the thought of those who dissipated their wealth in reckless living having their liabilities annulled and then sneering at worthy citizens who had always tried to husband their resources and had denied themselves in planning for the future.

    But then, I might not be the best person to comment as I always felt some sympathy for the older brother in The Parable of the Prodigal Son who had dutifully stayed home with his father and then saw his spendthrift, debauched sibling treated so royally.

    • Agree: ruralguy
    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    , @onebornfree
  7. @TomSchmidt

    Another excellent article here on Unz,I hope we all agree.
    We’re all sitting in the traffic…hating the traffic.
    we must work together to climb out and escape this “bucket.”
    However,the Shepard or Fisher of men or banksters of this “cult”
    “ure” will assassinate and ruin anyone who tries. Socrates said
    “Temei doce”KNOW THY SELF. Of course,it’s easier to just
    go along, and be a sheep until the “next life”… you’ll get paid
    in the world’s currency, devalued by the Almighty
    dollars,peso,yen,pound,mark etc. for eternity, with virgins…

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
  8. Jesus. Blah, blah. If you have a million (barely middle class) stashed with a competent manager it’s two million 2 years later and paying 80K every year during all these ‘crisis’. I’m to argue this? Really!

    • Replies: @animalogic
  9. Realist says:
    @Justvisiting

    All public figures these days are just trying to hide the ball when they should be running for the hills–because when the plebes finally figure out what has happened, the plebes will be looking for scapegoats.

    The term scapegoat implies a lack of culpability…virtually all public figures are guilty as hell.

    The trick is to be fortunate enough to live in a civilization in the growth and success stage instead of the crash and burn stage….

    I am thankful for that…I am in my late seventies and enjoyed the zenith of American history.

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
  10. My reason for bashing the Federal Reserve is because it features prominently in the machinations of the true evil, the Federal Government. I want an end to the Fed and the Fed Gov. The Fed also openly and brazenly facilitates deficit spending by creating currency to purchase the phony gov’t bonds. That the private banks create multiples more currency in their fractional reserve scam doesn’t let the Fed off the hook as the chief and primary whore for the gov’t.

    No government should have anything to do with money. There should be no such thing as a gov’t currency. Gold and silver worked for thousands of years and can’t be conjured into existence. The miners, smelters and mints could coin true money with the weight of metal stamped on the face, not some arbitrary unit of currency like Dollar, Euro, Yen, etc. Any coin from any reputable source would be accepted world wide and there would be no such thing as currency arbitrage, fractional reserve banking, central banks, etc.

    The concept of what constitutes a bank needs to be transformed into a broker business model where the banker (broker) finds people with funds to lend them to people who need the loan. The banker would get a fee for service. Banks could also store OUR gold and silver and we could use a debit card to access our funds conveniently. The bullion almost never has to leave the banks.

    All healthcare insurance should be immediately cancelled, with the possible exception of catastrophic coverage. As long as there’s a 3rd party payer there will be a constant increase in costs because it is in no ones best interests to stabilize or decrease costs. It is the availability of insurance that IS the problem with healthcare costs. When the provider of services has to accept what the patient base can afford, is when we see a reduction in healthcare costs.

  11. onebornfree says: • Website

    “…liberty types insist that the Federal Reserve is the root of all financial evil”

    So presumably you are anti- your own [and others]liberty [essentially, anti-free markets], and pro-Fed, right?

    “Financial writer Travis Kimmel again gets it right, noting: “the Fed ‘printer’ … only increases the collateral banks have to lend against. It does not directly ‘birth’ dollars, only *potential* dollars.” But his sensible voice is presently drowned out by anti-Fed fanatics.”

    So just as I thought, you _are_ pro Fed, and therefor pro a centralized [ie government enabled] banking monopoly. It figures. 😏

    And Mr Kimmel [presumably not an economist] supposedly somehow speaks the non-BS “truth”, and yet _all_ economists always speak total B.S., right?😏

    In response to which I also will cut/paste :

    “It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a ‘dismal science.’ But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.” Murray Rothbard

    Understanding a bank balance sheet also helps us recognize the common myth that only the government can create money out of thin air. “

    The government itself does _not_ create money out of thin air- however the Fed [ a government enabled/protected monopoly/agency] , consistently _does_. It [ ie monetary inflation] is part of its stated objectives [ if you bothered to read its own official pronouncements], and has been for many, many years, fer gawds sake! Long term, consistent monetary inflation is a primary,official objective of the Fed!

    Sure, a totally private bank could also create money out of thin air. But , in a free market it wouldn’t last long – the market [ie the banks customers] would, sooner or later figure out that something was up and withdraw their deposits [clue- its called a “bank run”].

    “Blaming the current wealth gap on the Fed (or worse yet, “capitalism” itself) is just a cop out from people trying to attract attention to themselves or with some ideological axe to grind. “

    So a criminal government- enabled and fully protected, [via the Federal Reserve Act 1913], exclusive monopoly criminal banking system that in turn supports its enabler [the criminal government], is capitalism, by your standards? Get a life, fer chrissakes 😎.

    “..here’s a couple more sensible economic experts with important things to say”

    I’m confused, I thought you’d previously dismissed _all_ economists opinions as “B.S.” 🤪

    “To begin addressing the central “lying” theme of this essay, I’ll ease into it with a popular distortion that maintains a nugget of truth. When it comes to pointless diversions, it’s hard to beat the incessant right-wing and libertarian denouncements of the Fed’s legendary “printing press.”

    Please see the Feds very own records [ie Monetary Base{MB}, + M1, M2, MZM], of its legendary “printing press”, in glorious technicolor,straight from the horses mouth as it were, at my financial blog site, here:

    http://onebornfreesfinancialsafetyreports.blogspot.com/2019/11/graphs-federal-reserve-money-supply.html

    And BTW, pay particular attention to the monetary base [MB] draphs.

    “Of Course, the Feds are Lying about Unemployment”.

    But they only lie about unemployment? This “just” in, kiddo[for your enlightenment]:

    “The State is a gang of thieves writ large – the most immoral, grasping and unscrupulous individuals in any society.”Murray Rothbard

    Oh, sorry he’s “just” an economist, and so his opinion is automatically “B.S.”, right ? 😎

    Well, perhaps this then:

    “Taking the State wherever found, striking into its history at any point, one sees no way to differentiate the activities of its founders, administrators and beneficiaries from those of a professional-criminal class.” Albert J. Nock,

    Or this: “Government is a disease masquerading as its own cure” Robert LeFevere

    Concluding observation: You/we are being systematically robbed/impoverished by the government and its co-conspirator, the Fed. It seems to me that it is way past time for you and other government/fed worshipping lickspittles to get a clue about the true, criminal nature of all governments and their equally criminal central bank monopolies . 😎

    “Regards” onebornfree

  12. @Right_On

    I get it. I had the exact attitude.

    The major change in my approach was reading David Graeber’s book Debt. Graeber was a lefty, no doubt, but he knew his history and the monetary systems derived on interest and money. He makes the point that they have ALL blown apart, without exception, for the reason that interest grows money exponentially, money being a claim on real assets, and nothing grows exponentially for long. The actual structure that appears exponential is the S-curve, exponential at the start, linear in the middle, and logarithmic at the end.

    We have been able to tolerate the increasing monetary claim on the real world since about 1700 because we were able to experience the exponential part of first coal production, and later oil production. Nowadays, we are still in the late exponential growth part of transistor production via Moore’s law. But all these exponential processes have either gone logarithmic, or reversed; the USA produces 2MM barrels fewer of oil per day this year than last, and it’s likely to keep droppping.

    Ancient rulers regularly declared a jubilee, restoring land and freedom to tenant farmers and slaves, because the security of the state was dependent on those people to serve as cannon fodder. I wonder if that still holds, with drone warriors, and more importantly with the financial backers being more important to the politicians than the people who vote for them. The debt will continue to immiserate the majority of people, and they’ll be happy to throw their support to anyone who eliminates it.

    One reason Islam did so well in the areas of non-Greek settlement was the simple promise that Islam would not enforce usurious debt contracts, so becoming a Muslim led to a material improvement. That sort of tipping point is near in the West now, and if a Western populist isn’t smart enough to do it, the Muslims are.

  13. @goldgettin

    What do you think of the logic of Calvinism? Some are saved, some are damned, and the surest way to know that someone is saved in the next life is his success in this one?

    • Thanks: ruralguy
    • Replies: @goldgettin
  14. @RoatanBill

    This would put the parasites out of business; we’ll never see it.

    But if you are optimistic, you can thank the parasites for an improved gene pool courtesy of Covid.

    Of course, this is just one facet of the NWO nirvana we are now entering.

  15. The economy motors happily along. Lots of money in circulation to fund citizen’s day to day living expenses. Then the borrower’s stop taking out loans and start paying off their debts. The repaid debts remove money from circulation and the economy crashes. In a debt based economy, it really is that simple.

    Americans are quite right to be concerned about this monetary system and the (((parasites))) that manage and control it. But there’s political and cultural debauchery happening today in the US that should be of far more concern to Americans.

    In his first day in office President Biden ended the national emergency declared by President Donald Trump concerning the Mexico/US border. A border which has a clear crisis in relation to security, humanitarian and Covid-19. But Biden would have you believe that all is fair and dandy at this international gateway.

    When Biden had Americans put right that no national threat was posed by the Mexican border, he decided that a small backward country in Asia poses a grave national threat to the US Republic.

    There was a bit of a melee with arms in Burma on February 1. This melee might even be defined as a coup, depending on what dictionary you looked it up in.

    That’s not a typo, Burma is what I wrote. Biden declared this melee in Asia to be a national emergency in the United States. He stated that the situation in Burma poses an “unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States”.

    On February 11, having addressed the grave threat Burma posed, Biden renewed the declaration of national emergency concerning Libya. According to Biden the “the diversion of assets or other abuse by persons hindering Libyan national reconciliation” poses very serious threats to US national security.

    I have to say, this sounds fantastic coming from the leader of a country that brought about the military upheaval in Libya in the first place, by bombing it and murdering the leader that had kept it stable for decades.

    According to Biden, the US/Mexican border with it drug/terrorist cartels, coyotes, drug smugglers, sex traffickers, sexual violence and Islamist terror cells is no threat whatsoever to the United States. But a backward Third World country in Asia having a leadership dispute, and tribesmen battling each other in North Africa are.

    This insane rolling out of national emergencies isn’t new, nor is it a Biden creation. In the US there are currently 38 national emergencies in effect. It’s basically US Presidents ruling by decree, by the stroke of a quill, like medieval kings did.

    Check the “Congressional Research Service” for interesting info on national emergencies: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/98-505.pdf

    Then we have American cultural debauchery.

    “Snapchat Is A Transgender Propaganda And Grooming Machine”: https://thefederalist.com/2021/02/27/snapchat-is-a-transgender-propaganda-and-grooming-machine/

    Follow the link, read the article and see that Satan himself couldn’t have designed a more disgusting child destroying tool than Snapchat. WARNING: Don’t read the article if you have recently had a meal because you will probably throw-up.

    How dedicated are the (((destroyers))) of American society, and how much are they prepared to spend on a single propaganda tool to achieve their aims? Well over $2 billion and counting, is the answer.

    Not many are aware that on February 29, 2016, ten years after its launch, Twitter had lost more than $2 billion. Twitter lost $520 million in 2015 alone: https://time.com/4241716/twitter-losses-twtr/

    Today this loss has grown exponentially. Wall Street experts are on record as stating that Twitter will never turn a profit due to the nature of its platform.

    But (((someone))) has to be funding it. The vast amounts of money it costs to run explains why they so easily kick conservatives off it. And considering it’s about propaganda and not profit explains why they can keep the disgusting Dorsey as its CEO.

    Ireland, a small country with a tiny population, took on the British Empire and eventually forced it to withdraw. One aspect of the Irish freedom fighters campaign against the British was psychological.

    There was never a morning when a British politician could exit his home, or an evening when he could egress his office, when there wasn’t in the back of his mind the knowledge that an Irish sniper or bomber would send him to his maker.

    British PM Thatcher huffed and puffed when the Irish bombed a hotel she was staying in. But, nonetheless, she’d have been aware they might well bomb another one she’d be in. Then there would have been the knowledge that if her security couldn’t protect her in a 5-star hotel, could they also fail her in 10 Downing St?

    Americans have oppressors at work on them. A good start to counteracting them might be to do as the Irish did to the British. Hit them where it hurts, have them thinking about you all the time.

  16. @traducteur

    Then why are there some many Canadians in the lobbies and waiting rooms at places like Duke Private Diagnostic Clinic? (over 750 miles from Hamilton, Ontario in the case of Duke PDC)

    • Agree: ruralguy
    • Replies: @HdC
  17. @TomSchmidt

    Good point.However,This system is rigged. It is no sign of great success
    to be well adapted to a sick society.Work/achievement is hard,
    welfare/theft isn’t. Simply the path of least resistance…cheating.
    Consider this article is only about economics/currency…

    Now consider all other arenas of the corruption…

    the political spheres-the educational unions-corporatism
    the military graft, pharma-medicine,patents,foundations,
    charities,THE LAW,pollution,waste,real-estate etc.ETC.etc…

    G Carlin said religion was on the bottom,in the dirt of the FRAUD
    and he was right. Trillion$ of currencies,Trillions of debt
    Trillion$ of assets and no body has enough? The SWAMP
    is being manufactured by something, is it not ?

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
  18. onebornfree says: • Website
    @Right_On

    “Forgiving Student Loans: Not The Great Idea You Think It Is”:
    https://www.aier.org/article/forgiving-student-loans-not-the-great-idea-you-think-it-is/

    Regards,onebornfree

    • Thanks: Right_On
    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  19. @RoatanBill

    Fed-bashing is a cop-out. Letting bankers run wild in the 1800s was a total failure.

    The extremist, zero-oversight approach to banking just leaves the public with little other choice but to listen to the totalitarian socialists who seem to care. You say:

    No government should have anything to do with money.

    That’s as simplistic as saying there should be no gov’t oversight at gas stations (state bureaus of Weights and Measures do just fine). Hardly “socialism.”

    Your approach would let gas stations dilute gas with water and (over time) claim that an 8-oz. cup is really a “gallon.” It’s just natural inflation…

    Fraud is not “free markets.” In the case of money, someone needs to prevent persistent (and largely invisible) “credit creation” which is no different than counterfeiting. Gold/silver and 100% reserve (no fiat) is the way to go.

    According to the “liberty” zealots, I suppose counterfeiting should be legal too – right? Y’all say that gov’t rules are always wrong. Seems like foolish dogma to me.

  20. @Steve Penfield

    I had trouble penetrating your word salad. Why not take a deep breath, consolidate your thoughts and then state something cogent according to you.

    Fed bashing is absolutely legitimate. It in no way detracts from banker bashing. Both are definitely needed. The Fed is the backbone of the current fraudulent currency system. The Fed is the bankers bank and therefore well worth our scorn.

    Using modern technology, gold and silver coinage and bars could easily circulate without gov’t interference. Any attempt at dishonest weights and measures would be discovered in short order and the issuing mint would go bust. The “market” would quickly discover any attempt at fraud.

    As for your gas station idea, you are correct – there should be no gov’t oversight for gasoline or any other commodity as the market will discover cheats and in the absence of a fraudulent justice system, the cheats would be hung from the nearest telephone pole. Gov’t protects the cheats in the society.

    You apparently were not educated in the sciences as anyone who was would know that adding water to gasoline would mean that the vehicle wouldn’t get out of the gas station as the engine would sputter and quit. Your 50% example gives you away as someone bereft of a scientific education.

    Credit creation out of noting is prohibited by using a commodity as the source of backing for true money. When gold and silver are money, the frauds in the economics faux profession and the banker scam can’t create the metals on a whim. If people are stupid enough to once again accept some form of paper or digital representation of the gold and silver they have stored in a vault as their wealth, then they have fallen prey to the age old bankers scam.

    Your last two paragraphs are an unintelligible rant, so I have no comment.

  21. Miro23 says:

    3. The credit creation theory of banking, predominant a century ago, does not consider banks as financial intermediaries that gather deposits to lend out, but instead argues that each individual bank creates credit and money newly when granting a bank loan.

    There’s nothing intrinsically wrong with this if it’s working correctly. The problem is that the credit creation process gets subverted:

    WORKING CORRECTLY – A private bank gets presented with a project needing investment. They evaluate the project’s likely success using their experience of similar projects/opinion of the abilities of the entrepreneur/opinion on the commercial environment. They decide that the project is viable (can return interest and capital over the life of the loan). They award the loan making a book entry that “creates money”. For example mid 19th century loans to build railways that opened up the US MId-West.

    WORKING INCORRECTLY – A private bank gets presented with a project needing investment. Problem that the project either 1) doesn’t generate any return e.g. typical consumer spending loan or 2) is purely speculative – also doesn’t generate any real return e.g. stock bubble or share buy-backs. IOW this “money creation” will likely destroy wealth (not be paid back) and destroy the money that has been created.

    Over an economic cycle, the typical sequence seems to be good credit creation (often driven by a new technology and enabling fast adoption), morphing into later stage speculative credit creation. Likely it’s the same technology (with the same story) but everyone can see it now and it converts into the usual pyramid scheme where excitable speculative valuations lose touch with reality (e.g. Tesla).

    You could call it the Human Nature (Greed) Cycle.

  22. @Justvisiting

    With the planet’s life-support systems all in full decay or near enough to, there’ll be no phoenix-like rise from the ashes this time. Perhaps after a few million years, a race of intelligent cephalopods-perhaps.

  23. @ForeverGone

    The transgender lunacy is the surest sign that the US has the sickness unto death. It’s some sort of deranged divide and rule tactic, and heavily financed by the usual suspects, but the lunatic manner in which it is accepted by so many, and so many quake in fear as the ghouls of the ‘transphobia’ industry commenced screeching, like harpies, is even more bizarre. Germs Greer stood up to them, years ago, but after she was roundly slandered for speaking the truth, she retired from the field. I wonder how she thinks now.

    • Thanks: Showmethereal
  24. GeeBee says:
    @RoatanBill

    there should be no gov’t oversight for gasoline or any other commodity as the market will discover cheats and in the absence of a fraudulent justice system, the cheats would be hung from the nearest telephone pole.

    I see very few ‘cheats’ hanging from telephone poles here in Europe. Is it really such a commonplace sight in the USA (or indeed in Honduras)? I need, I hope, scarcely add that the entire edifice of Western Modernism consists in governments colluding in the multifarious scams and schemes, usury and exploitation, cheating and swindling of untold billions from ‘the people’ by the parasites that control our lives each and every dismal year, until at this juncture that once proud edifice is now so hollowed out that the great majority can scarcely lay their hands upon a few hundred dollars to meet an emergency.

    This nightmare – this ‘clown world’ as I and others put it – has all been brought about by the successful – nay, the triumphant – imposition of ‘the market’ by those who know it as their friend and who have so thoroughly infiltrated and captured all Western governments that they have become nothing more than the enablers of this tiny oligarchical elite, whose rule now appears beyond any kind of assault on the part of the lamentably and demonstrably cheated people.

    The market can go to hell. Government must play its part in regulating affairs, but by no means the sort of institutionally corrupt and decadent form of governance that we call ‘democracy’. I know it’s unfashionable, but I am in agreement with Hobbes. What he did not – could not -see, was that his dismal portrait of life outside the confines of a strong state headed by a sovereign, which he famously described as ‘solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short’ could thrive within a state, provided that this state existed solely for the benefit of the masters of the market.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  25. @RoatanBill

    Let’s give ONLY the land owners with mines the
    power over worldwide currency

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  26. @ForeverGone

    Burma is of precious little consequence – it´s all about Chinese access to the ocean
    outside the first island chain and the harbour facilities they are building in
    Arakan. The “Rohingya”(actually illegal Bengals dumped there by the British; with
    160 or so legitimate minorities the Burmese have no time for that crap) troubles
    were CIA-instigated and failed so they ramped up the pressure, leading to,erm,
    reactions.

    Expect to hear more from that corner.

    • Replies: @Showmethereal
  27. onebornfree says: • Website

    “You apparently were not educated in the sciences ”

    And unfortunately, neither Mr Penfield, nor yourself [nor 99% of “economists”, let alone the average individual 😎], seem to be aware of the fact that the applied methodology of the physical sciences [eg chemistry, physics and similar] has almost nothing to do with the applied methodology of the [social] science of economics.

    Please see: “The Ultimate Foundation of Economic Science” by Ludwig von Mises
    [free download]: https://mises.org/library/ultimate-foundation-economic-science

    regards, onebornfree

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  28. @GeeBee

    Government is in the business of picking winners and losers via the laws and regulations it creates. There hasn’t been a free market in almost anything since the early 1900’s. What we have today is gov’t corruption masquerading as a free market.

    To want more of what clearly is the primary problem makes no sense.

    • Replies: @Ugetit
  29. @goldgettin

    Precious metal miners sell their product into the market just like oil companies and any entity that trades. When gold comes out of the ground, lots of people and ancillary businesses are involved and they each get paid for their labor or service. That’s precious metal flowing into the market. The precious metal that remains as profit from the mining operation is just like the profit from any other business, so the metal miners have no particular sway over what the world uses as money, not to be confused with the bullshit created out of thin air currency.

  30. @goldgettin

    Carlin died worth over $15million, I recently read. It seems like it was a big club, and he was in it.

    I cannot disagree: it seems so much is corrupt. As James Howard Kunstler puts it, a series of rackets. It ends when we cannot even begin to fake it anymore.

    That’s happening more and more now.

  31. @traducteur

    Many countries enjoy similar – but different – types of systems. And many – like Canada also have better healthcare results than the United States. Key is of course not allowing lobbyists to keep costs sky high. “Obamacare” in the US wasnt really going to solve the problem of costs in the US system. All it was going to do is guarantee everyone access to insurance. Just like the ridiculously exorbitant cost of a university education in the US. Student loans and financial aid for everyone actually helps bloat the cost because there is no incentive to keep costs manageable.

    Consider yourself fortunate to live in Canada. I have a relative in Canada who had a serious injury. Didnt pay a dollar out of pocket. Since it wasnt life threatening he had to wait a little while. But the extra month or so of pain is better than a potential bankruptcy he might have faced had he lived in the United States.

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  32. @Realist

    I am in my late sixties and retired–and now is when I take a look in the mirror and ask the hard question–could I have made a difference?

    The truth (and at our age it is time to speak the truth to ourselves) is that I could have been more ambitious and could have become a public figure and someone who influenced public policy.

    I saw the trends were going in the wrong direction and did not believe I could make a major contribution to fixing it–so I chose to keep a low profile.

    I am convinced that thousands of people like me made the same choice–so the very worst of us now drive public policy. Together we probably could have made a difference, though individually it would have been unlikely we could have done so.

    That is why I am losing interest in placing blame–there is so much of it to go around….

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @animalogic
    , @Ugetit
  33. Realist says:
    @Justvisiting

    I am in my late sixties and retired–and now is when I take a look in the mirror and ask the hard question–could I have made a difference?

    Perhaps we may have, but I feel I made some difference through my work as a scientist, as I am sure you did in your vocation.

  34. @ForeverGone

    Good points. Especially about Burma/Myanmar being an “emergency” for the US. You also made a good point not just regarding Mexico but I extend it further. I disagree with the Trump crowd and people who base immigration on race… But Trump was absolutely correct to shut down migration in a pandemic. I do agree with those also who say economic downturns are a time to slow or stop migration. It simply doesnt make the slighest bit of sense unless to hope to secure votes for their party in a few years. That is one of the few things I agree with Trump about (but not the racial aspects).

  35. @nokangaroos

    You have a point. So the first job of the media machine was to say China caused the coup. People even believe it – which is stuoid since their elected leader was leaning on China as the west turned against her regarding the Royingha. But sheep are easily led astray.

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  36. @Showmethereal

    The ruthless, parasitic and infinitely cruel US ‘medical’ system is proof positive of the truly pitiless Evil of the Merkan ruling oligarchy, and the system they have created, and wish to impose, by hook or by crook, on the rest of humanity.

  37. @Showmethereal

    If Ang Saun etc came to power, the Rohingya imbroglio would be forgotten in a trice, and US military would commence building their new bases, to add to their 400 others ringing China.

  38. @ForeverGone

    You mention the situation between the Irisb and the UK government with UK personnel having to be constantly aware and afraid.
    I figured around 1 year ago that we were headed to that in America. I’m surprised though at how fast it is playing out. I dont know when, but at some point, it is going to get bloody. Soon. There are 120,000 Feds- armed and with arrest powers. That is huge. They did a no knock warrant on a guy with a 12 year old assault charge who posted on bit chute. He had guns so the old charge must have been a class c felony. Once they found the guns he is done but I bet the warrant was a joke: ‘insulted Uncle Bidet’- our glorious leader. At this point they are just making it up as they go.
    Personally, I don’t want to be here for this part. I’ve already seen enough violence, blood and death. I’m aging. I Iost some very close family since 2001. It’s not cowardice and it isn’t about running away. I just can’t watch this play out from close quarters anymore.
    I’m cashing out and leaving before Christmas and I don’t plan on coming back. I’m going to get some cows and do dairy. It’s a grind but I love animals.
    I’m sick of this shit.

  39. Schuetze says:

    A 12,800 word screed describing numerous aspects of money-changer usury without once naming the jew. Shame on you, Steve Penfield.

    Penfield also failed to mention the IRS and Taxes. Income taxes, inheritance taxes, capital gains taxes, wealth taxes and expatriation taxes are a fundamental building block of this multi trillion dollar edifice of judaic usury. It is from these taxes that the jew further finances his rape and looting of the goy societies to which they are parasites.

    Through its control over tax deductability and things like 503 “charities” jews warp all tax deductions to their own advantage. Joined at its hip to Treasury and the FED, the IRS has a giant lever it uses to swing national elections and policies. The dreaded “Tax Audit” threat, where one is presumed guilty unless proved otherwise, is the bludgeon used destroy lives and force submission. This tax audit canon is now pointed at Trump.

    Nathaniel Rothschild’s famous quote, “give me control of the supply of money and I care not who makes the laws” explains how this money-changer take over of the entire economy took place. Through perfectly timed shorting and longing of booms and busts, these money changers have used the ratchet effect to continually usurp more wealth, control and power over its victims.

    Now, on the eve of the great reset, the money changers, through their control of government and corporation HR departments, have Americans by their gonads. Forced compliance to HR, IRS, US Military and County, State and Federal Government has turned all Americans into serfs, even if they have no debt.

    To anyone paying attention, the fact that all the traffic cops and all the owners of these roads of serfdom are jewish should be sufficient proof that all roads lead to Solomon’s Temple in Jerusalem.

    • Thanks: GMC
    • Replies: @Robert Dolan
  40. anon[202] • Disclaimer says:

    I’m sure this endless jeremiad has some value but the part that piques my interest is the bank issuance of money. The distinction between theories 2 and 3 in particular reproduced below.

    2. The older fractional reserve theory of banking says that each individual bank is a financial intermediary without the power to create money, but the banking system collectively is able to create money through the process of ‘multiple deposit expansion’ (the ‘money multiplier’). [Friedrich von Hayek, Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Samuelson support this theory]

    3. The credit creation theory of banking, predominant a century ago, does not consider banks as financial intermediaries that gather deposits to lend out, but instead argues that each individual bank creates credit and money newly when granting a bank loan.

    One must remember that the basic function of money is to facilitate transactions. This means that issuance of money is not complete until a 3rd party transaction takes place which severs the obligation to repay any particular sum of money. One could argue that a bank could create an account and loan money to a customer upon condition that the customer never spend the money but simply give it back to the bank when the loan comes due. Such loans could be infinite in scope but they would hardly be money; credit, perhaps, but hardly money.

    A loan issued or credit granted becomes money when it is spent. At that point the seller acquires money free of any obligation to repay the credit obligation to the bank while the buyer gives up credit which he is still obligated to repay. In liu of accepting that obligation the receiver transfers a good or service to the payer who is the bank’s debtor and who remains responsible for the dollar value of the loan. The credit issued by the bank then becomes money for it is separated from the obligation of the original obligation to repay.

    The reverse is also true. Money becomes credit when it becomes subject to a legal obligation to repay. Thus money accepted into demand deposits becomes credit. A good or service must be offered to turn it back into money in a manner which removes the obligation to repay. Thus banks absorb money and issue credit. Money is created by public interaction with the banks. Banks create credit and issue it to the public and absorb money from the public turning it into credit.

    Banks can issue as much credit as the public is willing to turn into money, but the banks must also hold as credit as much of the money the public will entrust to the banks. If the money in circulation outside the banking system is stable then the banks issue as much credit as they absorb as money from the public. However, the total size issued and absorbed is scalable depending on public demand for credit to be turned into money.

  41. @TomSchmidt

    Depends — on how many humans are left after the collapse, doesn’t it?

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
  42. @Jim Christian

    George Carlin had 10 MIL, well nice for him, but in the greater scheme of things? Big-fucking-deal.

    • Replies: @Jim Christian
  43. Ugetit says:
    @Steve Penfield

    Letting bankers run wild in the 1800s was a total failure.

    So was the fact that “we” let similar classes co-opt the American Revolution by imposing (illegally, I might add) on the rest of “us.”

    As a matter of fact, it was never a “people’s Constitution”, as has been so frequently claimed in Fourth of July celebrations, at Presidential elections, and on other similar
    occasions.
    They, the people, were never very much interested, either in the project itself or in the ratification of a form of national government. They did not particularly want anything of the sort and they did not like what came out of Philadelphia, but this distaste was not strong enough to overcome their natural lethargy, so only about five percent of the white male population voted as to whether the Constitution should be accepted or rejected. As it was, it only got by by the skin of its teeth and by some very clever management on the part of its proponents. The whole thing, in conception, formulation, and realization, was the work of a small group of enthusiastic young men of property and position, with wiser heads on their shoulders than their years would argue as rationally possible, though they were not wise enough to foresee the unimaginable — but inevitable.

    -Ralph Adams Cram, Nemesis of Democracy – PDF – , The American Review, December 1936, pp. 129-141

    http://www.unz.org/Pub/AmericanRev-1936dec-00129

    We are living the inevitable and there are several options available, but they all involve risk, work, sacrifice, and most of all the willingness to question everything, challenge “authority,” and to maintain vigilance continuously. Nothing to cry about; that’s just the way it is, and yeah, I know, it’ll never happen.

  44. Economics New Deal critics or bashers both miss the ship…
    Here is the secret to economics, and FDR made it Law on the books now, and you might beg for it as if you were begging for food when none is around as that is around the corner due to not following the laws of nature…
    =where wealth proceeds money, and thus determines the value of money, not money valuing wealth by money=.

    http://www.normeconomics.org/parity_table_45-16eb.pdf

    • Replies: @Ugetit
  45. @RoatanBill

    “Credit creation out of noting is prohibited by using a commodity as the source of backing for true money. When gold and silver are money, the frauds in the economics faux profession and the banker scam can’t create the metals on a whim.”
    No, Bill, you are correct. The only trouble is there is way-WAY insufficient valuable metals etc to run a 60 trillion $$$ a year world economy.
    Nice as your view is it guarantees recession, maybe depression.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  46. Ugetit says:
    @RoatanBill

    Government is in the business of picking winners and losers via the laws and regulations it creates.

    True as far as it goes, but I think Mother Nature does that and she’s apparently a nasty old hag because she loves to see her kids fight among themselves and doesn’t give a damn to sit back and watch the most disgusting of them take control.

    In other words, we’re trapped in a system that sucks from our point of view and forever doomed to struggle. As waves of freedom wash over the lands, forces are in play that spell an end to that happy state of affairs and the worst among us take advantage of it in endless ways to put themselves in positions of advantage. They call it government and it lasts a while, but even it’s temporary, and “freedom” reigns again until another set of fools imposes themselves on the rest of us.

    With or without government and with or without “freedom,” there will be winners and losers.

    In that sense all of us are free while at the same time we’re all slaves in one form or another. From our point of view, Mom is a nasty ol’ thing; nurturing us to torture us.

    But hey, God loves ya, Babe! 😉

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  47. onebornfree says: • Website
    @Steve Penfield

    “Y’all say that gov’t rules are always wrong. Seems like foolish dogma to me.”

    And so: Mo’ gubmint! Mo’ gubmint! Mo gubmint! 🤣

    And so it goes…

    “The kind of man who wants the government to adopt and enforce his ideas is always the kind of man whose ideas are idiotic” H.L.Mencken

    “Taking the State wherever found, striking into its history at any point, one sees no way to differentiate the activities of its founders, administrators and beneficiaries from those of a professional-criminal class.” Albert J. Nock

    “Everything government touches turns to crap” Ringo Starr

    “Government is a disease masquerading as its own cure” Robert LeFevere

    “Government doesn’t work” Harry Browne https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Why_Government_Doesn%27t_Work

    “Regards” onebornfree

  48. Fred777 says:

    Let’s more accurately remember that Floyd overdosed on his Apache stash.

  49. @animalogic

    You’re looking through the wrong end of the telescope. You have a currency worldview when you should instead have a money outlook. Stop thinking in terms of artificial currency units invented by banks and gov’ts and think in terms of universal weights.

    The value of the metals rises as the economy rises. It falls as the economy falls.

    During good times, the miners are encouraged to bring more into production. In bad times, mining isn’t economic so no new money is introduced into the economy. New money creation is a function of market activity, not the whim of some asshat banker or politician.

    Even under the phony currency systems of today, if the US still has its 8000 tons of gold, which I doubt, revaluing an ounce of gold to equal the US Dollar supply divided by the US gold supply provides a 100% backing for the dollar.

    What no longer works are the rehypothecation schemes, derivatives, bond auctions and the other machinations that produced the current mess of gov’t spending and constant inflation to steal the public’s wealth via the inflation tax.

  50. @Justvisiting

    Thank you “just visiting”. Your experience is I suspect, quite common.
    What to do?
    What to do?
    I should know the answer, but I don’t. I know – in theory what’s right, but not how to affect things.
    Perhaps I can make an excuse – knowing they are for children?
    The last 40 years people have been near psychotic for the “good life” for a great “life style” [spit! ]
    What chance did it APPEAR we had? NO one has wanted change, let alone radical change. And, yes, the last 10 years have been different. There is space SLOWLY opening.
    I hope we both get a chance to better things. Kind regards AL.

  51. @Ugetit

    Given your outlook, you should be an anarchist like me where anarchism is defined as rules but no rulers.

    The way to get rid of corruption in high places is to get rid of high places.
    Frank Chodorov

    Gov’t is always and everywhere a kakistocracy. It may start out with some reasonable people, but quickly becomes a cesspool of graft and corruption because it is a monopoly on power. Get rid of the single point of control, the gov’t, and the people that want to wield power have no convenient vehicle.

    In the US’s case, get rid of the Fed Gov and along with it the Federal Reserve and the bloated ineffective military as a start to having 50 states compete for how to govern and allow people to vote with their feet. Very soon, winners and losers will self identify as states with ridiculous policies lose population to states with a better idea.

  52. Mike Tre says:
    @traducteur

    You guys are still 80% white. Let us know how single payer works (or any system, for that matter) when whites drop to 65% in the next 20 years, and 40% of your population is on welfare.

    It is amazing to me that people still think policy matters more than the people implementing it.

    • Agree: Mis(ter)Anthrope
  53. Ugetit says:
    @Steve Penfield

    I suppose counterfeiting should be legal too –

    It is, and that’s a huge part of the problem. Why do you think the no doubt intentionally misnamed Federal Reserve exists?

    Juvenal, as usual, is right again.

    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

    • Agree: ChuckOrloski
    • Replies: @Timothy Madden
  54. @RoatanBill

    Yes to which to extend the line of reasoning a bit, then upon the notion of weights one takes the bushel measure of total annual production and then through the Secretary of Agriculture, purchase all such production through commodity loans at 90% of parity, then one increases the circulation of unearned income into the economy by a factor of 60% increase in earnings to the producers…that then will multiply into the economy with an annual multiplyer upon such earned income is not interest, but the work done through the economy into that which was once measured, national income.

    See my comment 44 above and appropriate link.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  55. @Abdul Alhazred

    I don’t live inside your head, so I have no clue what you’re trying to convey.

    • Replies: @Abdul Alhazred
  56. Ugetit says:
    @Justvisiting

    …I could have been more ambitious and could have become a public figure and someone who influenced public policy.

    Nah.

    The best one can do is forget about saving the world. In any case, public figures can’t even do much. Trump was proof.

    Once again, Juvenal was no juvenile; he got it right.

    “…nobody is going to be a thief with me as his accomplice,
    and that right there is why I’m going in no governor’s entourage.”

    Juvenal, Satires, Volume 3, (3.41-48) ~100 AD

    • Replies: @Dumb4asterisks
  57. @TomSchmidt

    I have also flipped on debt forgiveness. Trump for all his warts, accidentally opened a crack into the deep state for me to get a peak on how rotten things are. Also how the deep state really works solely for the banks and their corporate pets. Debt forgiveness would be a direct hit into the deep state and its bankster owners. Something they would have a difficult time in dealing with and likely not see coming (who could blame them?). Covid 19 is a great excuse for a good old debt jubilee. Exclude those who had missed payments prior to Feb 2020. Use there reset against them. Now if we had some real leaders with power. Oh well….

    • Replies: @Ugetit
  58. Realist says:
    @RoatanBill

    You’re looking through the wrong end of the telescope. You have a currency worldview when you should instead have a money outlook. Stop thinking in terms of artificial currency units invented by banks and gov’ts and think in terms of universal weights.

    The value of the metals rises as the economy rises. It falls as the economy falls.

    An intelligent, accurate, and correct explanation…so hard for many to understand.

    • Thanks: RoatanBill
  59. @Schuetze

    Yeah….how can you write about the FED and not NTJ?

    To this day the best book on the FED is “The Creature From Jekyl Island.”

    • Agree: Schuetze
  60. Hibernian says:
    @traducteur

    We have it for veterans in the US, it’s called the VA, and it’s a disaster.

  61. HdC says:
    @Jim Bob Lassiter

    Because of “A fool and his money…?”

  62. @traducteur

    When the gov’t pays for things is when you get $800 hammers, $18,000 coffee makers, millions spent on a pen that can write in zero gravity while the Russians used a pencil, military planes that cost billions and are obsolete when the last one rolls off the assembly line, etc.

    Whatever you subsidize, you get more of. It is the availability of a 3rd party payer that guarantees that costs will continue to ratchet up because it is in no one’s best interests to reduce costs. If you stop all 3rd party payment schemes, the only payer is the patient. Patients as a group can only afford a certain amount for any given illness and therefore the medical mafia would have to accept that amount arrived at by market forces since there is no other possibility.

  63. @Ugetit

    Also heard,

    “The people are applauding me. What have I done wrong?”

    • Thanks: Ugetit
    • Replies: @Ugetit
  64. Ugetit says:
    @Old and Grumpy

    Debt forgiveness would be a direct hit into the deep state and its bankster owners.

    I have recently begun to suspect that one of the key ills of the system is that those in the clique not only manufacture money from nothing, but that they “loan” it to their buddies with low interest, if any, and with the understanding that they really never have to repay it as long as they work for the system. Another really “cool” thing from their perspective is that any costs incurred are backed by the taxpayers, from stimulus packages to bailouts, military action, and other forms of debt forgiveness as well as asset acquisition.

    You and I can expect to be excluded from that gravy train until the bitter end, and by then they’ll own everything and there’ll be little or nothing left for us. Third world status has always been baked into that cake, and that’s why debt forgiveness while a good thing overall, will be crumbs come late. Very late. Trickle down economics in a nutshell.

    I’m convinced that has to be another way the game is rigged. How else could malevolent dimwits (I’ll give ’em “clever”) parasites like Gates, Soros, Schwab, and the bulk of corporate, “academic,” and government scum get and retain power?

  65. Ugetit says:
    @Abdul Alhazred

    Here is the secret to economics…

    The big secret to economics is to steal as much as you can get away with. And anyone who gets in the way gets crucified. It’s an old lesson.

    • Replies: @ChuckOrloski
  66. Agent76 says:

    The Vaccines, The Plunder, and the Arrival of the Great Reset

    Oct 28, 2020 World Economic Forum: “You’ll own nothing, and you’ll be happy”

    All video and audio content belong to the respective owners and creators.

    Dec 16, 2020 Markets of Tomorrow | Jobs Reset Summit 2020 by The World Economic Forum is the International Organization for Public-Private Cooperation.

    An inclusive and sustainable reset of our economies is needed. How can we combine technological and institutional innovation to create “markets of tomorrow” to deliver the new services and products our societies need?

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  67. Emslander says:
    @RoatanBill

    The value of the metals rises as the economy rises. It falls as the economy falls.

    I knew that the above article was mindless blather when I saw its glorification of your mindless post of some time ago. You clearly confuse “value” with “price”. The purpose of pegging money to precious metals is that the value of precious metals, especially gold, is virtually constant.

    Mining of gold does increase when the cost of mining is measured in inflating dollars, but a dollar pegged to gold will not inflate and mining will be profitable only if it is truly cost-effective. It will be cost-effective only if the newly mined gold can pay for its production as measured by gold-backed dollars. In other words, not much.

    What the article leaves out is that a single bank will lend only to the extent that interest it derives from the loan will cover risk of loss and its own need to make a profit. Lending by a single bank will be entirely dependent on the health of the economy in which it operates. The true value of the collateral put up for the loan will affect the risk and affect the interest required.

    The FED, however, pays no attention to risk or return. It has taken to creating more debt in a poor economic environment. That creates the self-reinforcing process of flooding the economy with bad debt, which further weakens the economy.

    Banking isn’t the culprit. The government-created Federal Reserve is the culprit and it has ruined us. Maybe that’s not apparent to screwy old guys living on isolated islands.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  68. @Ugetit

    Hey Ugetit!

    Iran is in the Jew way, and Bitcoin is booming in Iran. See Press TV below. Will this finally free the world from the Federal Reserve?🤔

    https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2021/03/04/646511/Iran-unveils-CRYPTO-ATM-amid-growing-public-interest-in-cryptos

    Thanks for your luminous comments.

    • Replies: @Ugetit
  69. How many have read this whole screed, raise your hands? Not many, I bet. I read part of it and since I have trouble balancing my check book it is gobbledook to me.

    Coming to UNZ is not about going back to college.

    My take on this is about the American Dollar and the Petro-Dollar which I believe are one and the same.
    Let us imagine every country as an atoll just rising above the surface with a circular and placid pool in the middle. The country’s size of the central pool is dependent on its GDP.
    So countries like the Maldives, Montenegro or Mongolia have a small central pools and if you throw in a large rock , the ripples are going to cause a tsunami. I.e. inflation
    The rock being QE or Quantitative Easing, which is a fancy word for printing the national currency. The more QE you have or the more you print, bigger the ripple and waves that wash over you.
    This is known as Inflation.
    America has overcome this problem to a large extent as the Dollar was made the chief currency to purchase oil.

    Saddam changed over to Euros for oil and Qaddafi was trying out the gold backed dinar.

    Do not listen to those that say inflation is coming to the USA. The American pool is the ocean. America can print to infinity and is doing so.

    Aided by the oil rich Arab Sultans asking for dollars, its money for nothing and more printed paper.

  70. @Ugetit

    I suppose counterfeiting should be legal too –

    Actually – in Canada it is legal – or rather “not illegal“.

    ____

    Why are you poor?

    For the majority in Canada the short answer is because in 1990 the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously ratified the decision of a group of ex-bank-lawyers calling themselves the Ontario Court of Appeal that criminal-law violations and racketeering offences committed by financial corporations are not illegal, because:

    1. The criminal law only provides that offenders will be severely punished but does not otherwise directly state: Don’t do it;

    2. Financial corporations are not among the class of persons to whom the criminal law was intended to apply; and

    3. The financial corporation had been counselled and assisted (aided and abetted) by “two leading Toronto law firms” / members of the BAR.

    But the decision wasn’t just clinically insane by existing medical and psychiatric standards – it was also what the lawyers call precedent. Virtually all commercial crime sections of the Criminal Code are of the same form – none of them directly state – Don’t do it.

    Thirty years later, a typical mortgage in Canada today has between 14 and 24 prima facie domestic criminal law and international-treaty-law racketeering violations / offences.

    That is why, as just a relatively minor example, your nominal mortgage is most likely in the form of a wager or game-of-chance. Virtually every mainstream mortgage includes a provision to the effect:

    8.11 The Borrower agrees that neither the execution nor registration of this mortgage …will oblige the Lender to advance any…money hereunder but the advance of money from time to time will be in the sole discretion of the Lender. [This provision allows the bank to charge off the lead-underwriter’s [pretended-borrower’s] assets as an entry-fee for a wager to account for the bank’s otherwise unearned (unaccounted-for) gain (i.e., so that it does not have to pay-back the secured credit that it receives from the note-issuer / pretended-borrower / creditor-in-fact)].

    In plain English, and reduced to its essential and material elements, a typical nominal mortgage transaction is:

    “First, legally and unconditionally convey to us all of the assets (everything real or financial and specific to this nominal transaction), and then maybe we will agree that we owe you something in return, and maybe we won’t.”

    The scope and scale of criminal and international racketeering law violations is simply mind-boggling, and all hiding-in-plain-sight. It is not about whether you subsequently win the wager or game-of-chance – it is about the bank instantly doubling its accounting (capital) gains and vastly boosting real profits by putting the alleged transaction into the form of a wager. From there on it’s all about leverage leverage leverage.

    That is why the owners of the private banking system own virtually everything, even though they do not produce anything tangible.

    The former bank-lawyers, who are directly appointed as judges by the former bank-lawyer or bank-director normally occupying the prime minister’s office at any given time, are masters at pretending that they don’t understand why these practices are illegal and criminal even as the nation itself is systematically financially-harvested in violation of literally dozens of laws against precisely those practices.

    As an ultimate failsafe they add general disclaimers to their securities that the parties agree to disregard the criminal law and all other laws:

    NOTWITHSTANDING the provisions of any Statute [any lawful Act of Parliament including the criminal law] relating to the rate of interest payable by debtors this contract [and security] shall remain in full force and effect whatever the rate of interest received or demanded by [the Bank – (SUN LIFE FINANCIAL in this particular case)].

    Seventy-five years ago, at the end of WW II, we in Canada were fewer than twelve million people in possession of about one-tenth of the world’s broadly-defined diverse natural resources. Today we have an embarrassing level of widespread poverty, while a relative handful of elites and elite families, domestic and foreign, own virtually everything.

    They will tell you that I don’t know what I am talking about because I am not a lawyer. They will tell you that I am not capable of understanding their process of reasoning, which regardless stands on its own (res ipsa loquitur – the thing speaks for itself):

    [T]here is no doubt that the corporate plaintiff [directly funded / reinsured by the CIBC (Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce)] committed an offence under s. 347(1)(a) by entering into an agreement or arrangement to receive interest at a criminal rate” [also via front-loading ($45,000 kick-back converted-in-advance) contrary to s. 347(1)(b), (and also forgery / falsified-securities and money-laundering) to conceal it] [and] “The parties…acted on the advice of their solicitors” [described elsewhere by the trial judge as “two leading Toronto law firms”]

    and / but

    “…[The criminal law [Section [347(1)(a)], … provides only for punishment of persons agreeing to receive interest at criminal rates but does not prohibit agreements providing for such rates….”

    “The purpose of [the criminal law [s. 347(1)(a)]] is to punish everyone who enters into an agreement or arrangement to receive interest at a criminal rate. It does not expressly prohibit such behaviour, nor does it declare such an agreement or arrangement to be void. The penalty is severe, and designed to deter persons from making such agreements. … It is designed to protect borrowers … It is not designed to prevent persons from entering into lending transactions per se…. Therefore the agreement [which the Court / judges have found and acknowledged to be contrary and offensive to the criminal law, and which criminal law is a designated racketeering offence] is not fundamentally illegal.” (Thomson, (William E.) Associates Inc. v. Carpenter [1989] 34 O.A.C. 365).

    Lawyers are trained in the art of deceiving humans by stringing together statements that are not categorically false.

    Eventually they lose not just the ability to perceive reality, but even the ability to understand that there is such a thing as reality.

    Since 1990 the implementation and then massive expansion of this racketeering-based business-model (basically a double-cross-leveraged double-counting device), and their ability to get away with it, has allowed the private financial system in Canada to harvest at least an extra / bonus $10 trillion of unearned wealth / unjust enrichment ($10,000,000,000,000), or an average of about $1 million from each of ten million Canadian households.

    But it’s ok because they made sure that we never even saw it, so how can we miss it?

    If you can capitalize interest in advance, or even just sufficiently contrary to GAAP, and get away with it, then you can near literally buy the Earth with proceeds of crime in a single generation.

    And that is precisely what we have.

    • Thanks: Ugetit
    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  71. @Emslander

    Aside from attacking me personally, you’re all over the map.

    The banks rely on the Fed for their survival in the current system. If the Fed is the problem, as you say, and I agree, then the banks compound the problem with fractional reserve magic.

    Gold doesn’t care about any particular currency or any currency at all in the final analysis. It’s true that merchants don’t transact in gold for the common needs to survive, but gold can trade for any currency on the planet to then get those necessities. Your mistake is allowing the currency tail to wag the gold dog. It’s what’s been hammered into everyone for decades that paper rules. That is only true until sanity returns and paper currencies return to their toilet use status.

    Gold and silver have been money for millennia and will likely remain so after the Dollar, Euro, Yen, etc are just historic references. Gov’ts will always come up with a new currency after the old one fails because that’s their and their bankers greatest scam that not one in a thousand can properly comprehend.

    The Fed, the Fed Gov and the entire financial industry, especially the banks are culprit for absolutely everything that’s wrong with the US in particular and the world in general.

    BTW – if you think my ideas and comments are wrong headed, why not debate me. No balls?

    • Agree: showmethereal
    • Replies: @Emslander
  72. @Steve Penfield

    “No government should have anything to do with money.

    The FED moved $11 trillion into Blackrock without even a fake approval from ZOG. Ergo the US government has nothing to do with money other than paying for non-electronic currency to be printed.

    • Replies: @Ugetit
  73. @RoatanBill

    Basic Raw Materials Economics

  74. Ugetit says:
    @ChuckOrloski

    Thanks for your luminous comments.

    I thought they were humorous, and unquestionably others consider them ridiculous! 🙂

    The brotherly love is mutual, my friend!

    And regarding Iran, I do not know, but have heard that they’re at least somewhat independent of the shekels and that’s surely a ticket to shackles.

    • Agree: ChuckOrloski
  75. Ugetit says:
    @Alfred Muscaria

    Brilliant observation.

    Private banks or public ones, our role is to bend over so they can pick our pockets while they shaft us. And no squealing allowed…

    Lovely.

  76. Emslander says:
    @RoatanBill

    Aside from attacking me personally, you’re all over the map.

    What’s that, if not a personal attack.

    I think that this is a debate. I’m only on one point of the map, the relationship of metal to currency. You have it backwards. Currency doesn’t give gold any value. Gold has inherent value. When you assign to a currency a value in some amount of precious metal with a constant value (gold), then the only thing left is the relationship of the values of goods and services to each other.

    Currency shouldn’t have any effect on the value of goods and services or on the health of the economy. That’s where all of us have been misled. Currency or money mean the same thing when used properly, as a means of exchange. Until the advent of fiat currency, a man could measure the economic worth of his beet or rutabaga in time by looking at his grandfather’s records, to see what a beet or rutabaga brought in a gold-backed currency at that earlier time. He could measure his financial worth in terms of gold. He wouldn’t be deluded by government fiddle-faddle.

    It was the fiddle-faddle started by people like William Jennings Bryant who convinced poor farmers that their financial prospects could be improved by ceasing to measure their product in real terms, by the products’ relationship to some other good or service. That’s how we got the FED. That’s why we’re living in a dying system.

    I beg forgiveness for implying personal failings to you. I thought I was simply characterizing your arguments as twaddle.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  77. @Steve Penfield

    Some time ago I advised onebornfree to cool it on his anti-government mantra otherwise people will begin to suspect that he is a shill to deflect blame from corporate interests, but I have since come to realize that it is a purely Pavlovian response which can invariably be triggered by, “I’m from the government and I am here to help.”

    Roatan Bill is extremely clever (STEM training) and his perceived “direct” style should not blind one to a softer side to him, as with a humble friend of mine whom I asked, “How can it be that all the people in the world are wrong – only you are right?”
    Friend: “It amazes me too.”

    • Replies: @Steve Penfield
  78. @Emslander

    Aside from your first sentence, which is a real stretch, I agree with almost everything you wrote and therefore have nothing backwards.

    Currency and money are the absolute opposites of each other. Currency is a debt instrument whereas money is wealth. Currency and money are the same thing only in the minds of people that have been propagandized to believe that black is white.

    Money’s characteristics: durability, divisibility, portability, acceptability, limited supply and fungibility are not the same as any currency on the planet. The limited supply trait is what the banks, central and corporate, fiddle with to guarantee that currency is never money.

    • Replies: @Emslander
  79. Emslander says:
    @RoatanBill

    Currency and value aren’t the same, but I don’t agree that money represents value, necessarily. If the money is stable, it can, but no money is now a stable commodity.

    The measurement of value of a thing is what it represents in exchange for some other thing of value. A thing has actual value, though, as it stands. That’s gets a little more philosophical, but I still insist that you get money and value backwards.

    With all due respect.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  80. johnm33 says:
    @gay troll

    “The government declares that the currency is legal tender and must be accepted as payment on any debt.” Not just that, it demands that you pay your ‘debts’ to it in said currency thus creating demand.

  81. frontier says:
    @Steve Penfield

    I skimmed over your poorly written magnum-opus looking for the inevitable “debt-forgives” propaganda. Virtually every econ article on Unz is a tearful call to end “debt slavery” with gracious, generous and ah so altruistic “debt-forgiveness” which amounts to nothing other than a blank check bailout of the perpetrators and a full fledged default for the people. You didn’t disappoint…

    The dishonesty of calling a defaulty bailout “debt-forgiveness” is astounding but let’s not go into morals now and look at econ. A government default would ruin every 401K and every retirement account that holds bonds, next, the resulting sellout is going to ruin the stock market too along with what’s left of the middle class, we will be all poor as Haitians except… the government, banks and corporations who caused the economic ruin we are in – they are going to keep their assets in US and China and start the debt cycle again

    It used to be, most bonds were held by China and other countries, but they sold them to US mutual funds and the Fed… which gave them the cues and the time to do it. So that debt is now property of the American people, and you are asking them to give it up to bail out their beloved government and China-rich corporations? How generous of you… always generous with the money of the poor public, just like the government.

    Here is a useful hint: Make educational institutions pay off the debt of those who they overcharged. Same for medical facilities. Tax rich corporations to pay off government debt, downsize the government and stop borrowing. That’s much more of a market solution than phony “debt forgiveness”.

    • Agree: Thomasina
  82. @Emslander

    Currency and value aren’t the same

    Absolutely true.

    I don’t agree that money represents value

    Absolutely false.

    You keep confusing money with currency. Right now, there’s hardly any money in the entire world. Almost everything is currency and is why things are going downhill fast.

    I read years ago, that the gold required to purchase a suit of clothes hundreds of years ago is about the same amount of gold required to purchase a modern version today. That’s long term stability in purchasing power. The currency Federal Reserve Dollar, on the other hand, has lost 96% of its purchasing power since it was created by fatwa.

    • Replies: @Emslander
  83. @RoatanBill

    “revaluing an ounce of gold to equal the US Dollar supply divided by the US gold supply provides a 100% backing for the dollar.”
    This “revaluing” appears to be a massive government intervention. Many private people hold real gold…. I wonder whether they’ll come out way richer or poorer. Has overtones of FDR’s gold confiscation thing too….
    Sadly, as the reserve currency, the US doesn’t have the complete luxury of alone reverting to gold. Trillions of “dollars” flow outside the US. Your doubt as to US gold reserves is well founded. Personally, if the US is willing to go on gold, & go off the great free lunch of reserve currency then I wouldn’t complain. But they’d try to do both…. with devastating results for all.
    Agree with you on rehypothecation derivatives etc.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  84. Emslander says:
    @RoatanBill

    Bill, I think we’re seeing the results similarly. Your mention of the same gold value to a suit of clothes being the same through the ages is exactly what I was saying about beets.

    Currency isn’t money because no currency is tied to something of constant value, like gold. Money used to mean gold. People carried their gold, silver or copper around in money bags. Paper came along as a convenience, nothing more. Then governments started printing and ordering people to use only their currency. The governments are what have confused money with currency, to our everlasting detriment. They can manipulate their currency for their mostly evil purposes. If we still used money (gold), they’d have a tougher time of it.

    I’ve never confused money with currency at any point, but I’m repeating myself.

  85. @animalogic

    I’m not suggesting that the US will try to tie some commodity, probably gold, to the dollar as it was before Aug 15, 1971 when Nixon closed the gold window. All I’m saying is that it is arithmetically possible. That FDR did it decades ago suggests that it is an option.

    Now, should some visible player decide to put even partial gold, uranium, oil, etc backing for their fiat (fraudulent) currency, then that would put the other nations at a disadvantage. The US has used its military and threats to back its currency for decades. That is losing its effectiveness as other players have also gained the physical might to tell Uncle Sam to piss off, Russia and China being the primary examples. They also both have seriously increased their gold stockpiles while simultaneously ditching dollars as much as possible.

    The dollars foreign gov’t no longer hold for trade settlement purposes eventually return to the US to fuel price inflation while the Fed and banks are busy creating even more funny money (currency). The US’s 8,000 tons of gold hasn’t been audited in decades and I personally doubt it exists. So, should China, for example, back its currency with gold, what would the US use if its gold has been leased largely into nonexistence?

    The only reason China won’t back it’s currency at the present time is because it wants a cheaper currency for export reasons. However, in a SHTF moment, that rationale could pivot swiftly if for no other reason but to help destroy their adversary monetarily. It’s tough to sustain a war when no one wants your script.

    People holding precious metals will have a windfall for a short time. Gov’ts will try to tax that advantage out of existence if they can. Timing of when to convert their metals to land, homes, businesses, and even stocks that have a future and a reasonable PE ratio, etc will be the key.

    • Thanks: FLgeezer
  86. @onebornfree

    One Born Free, who crawled off the delivery couch, stood up, breathed a bracing gust of air, and set off into the world, free and unencumbered.

  87. @Agent76

    Well, you don’t own anything. Try taking it with you-Jack Benny refused to go, but, in the end, he had to. To have or to be, that is the question.

  88. @Timothy Madden

    Jeez, I bet those dreadful Yellow Perils wish that they had ‘The Rule of Law’ like the Western Herrenvolk.

  89. “For example, the federal patent and copyright system has allowed Microsoft to clone ideas from true software innovators (Windows from Xerox, QDOS operating system, Lotus spreadsheets, Netscape internet browser) then bundle them with other monopoly products, get juiced up with Wall Street capital, surround themselves with a phalanx of patent attorneys, then crush the competition.”

    All that so he, Bill Gates, could get an extra enema administered every day by Melinda…

    • Replies: @Ugetit
  90. Witch doctors, bankers … what’s the difference. They both give you the medicine you believe you need. You have the hope it will make your life better.

    I used to marvel when visiting my old hometown how people I knew were earning $80k (maybe $150k as a family) and were living in (then) $600k houses with $60k SUVs sitting in the drive, stopped by to ask me how I could afford to live in expensive NYC while they sipped away on $5 Starbucks®️ coffees, but I knew it was all based on debt. My place in NY was paid for by my first two bonuses derived in part by the packaging of ABS, MBS, CDO, and CLO fantasy instruments that spread the risk that these overleveraged people posed to the banking system out of it and into their pension funds and their money market funds.

    You can take some comfort that these saps will get bailed out, but it will be with money conjured out of the destruction of their savings, and they will be grateful for the fleecing.

    Excuse me now … I need to buy some more gold while TPTB continue to suppress the price to make it look like it is not a viable competing store of wealth.

    • Thanks: Ugetit
    • Replies: @Mefobills
  91. Mark Hunter says: • Website

    … Thomas Edison and General Electric used patent litigation to harass and copy alternating-current electrical developments from Nikola Tesla and Westinghouse, after failing to implement Edison’s less efficient direct current.

    That turns the truth upside down.

    Before Edison, electric power (to carbon arc lights) was sent over a high-current, low-voltage distribution system using two wires. Power could be distributed over only short distances with this system.

    Edison was the first two realize that by using low-current, high-voltage you could distribute power over a much longer distance. He also incorporated a European scientific discovery: most of the current carried by a wire travels near the surface of the wire. He realized that by using more but thinner wires you could, up to a point, decrease the electrical resistance (by increasing the surface area while the volume of metal remains the same).

    Alternating current is “natural” current: that is what comes out of the generator, which is essentially a coil of wire rotating in a magnetic field. This type of current is very dangerous so Edison converted it to direct current before distributing it. (This also lowers the resistance due to self-inductance of the distributing wire.)

    Tesla incorporated Edison’s first innovation (high voltage instead of high current) even more by leaving the alternating current as is and using a “transformer” (the principle of which was discovered by Michael Faraday, Tesla designed an industrial version) to step up the voltage (and step down the current) even further, resulting in further efficiency, allowing distribution over even greater distances. The alternating current was dangerous but considered an acceptable trade-off. Tesla also incorporated Edison’s three wire (instead of two) system.

    Tesla worked for Westinghouse. Westinghouse stole Edison’s two innovations on which Tesla’s AC-transformer system depended. Edison (General Electric) sued for patent infringement and eventually prevailed in court.

    As they should have.

    By the way, DC eventually came into its own for long-haul distribution. The long-haul distribution of current is sent DC. The original “natural” AC is first stepped up to very high voltage AC, then converted to very high voltage DC, sent many miles, then stepped down to lower voltage AC, then before it goes to your house, stepped down further.

    The author mentions RCA and television. He is right about Philo Farnsworth, who invented a practical television system and David Sarnoff and his engineers at RCA stole it. Farnsworth more or less prevailed in court but he still got cheated. And before that, the same Sarnoff and friends stole Edwin Armstrong’s FM radio system. It drove him to suicide; his widow eventually prevailed in court.

    Note that “stole” implies ownership, that is patents, and since the author thinks patents are immoral, why should he care?

    He is wrong to oppose patents. Think of James Dyson and his incorporating cyclonic separation into a vacuum cleaner. It took him five years of relentless experimenting to get a practical working design. He deserved to be rewarded.

    • Replies: @Dave Bowman
  92. Great article! I love reading interesting stuff like this. I don’t quite agree with all of it, but most of it.

    Some other interesting notes:

    1. Average life span in America in 1900 = 49. In 1945, 65 (so on average noboby got social security). Now, 80. I think that had a lot to do with why noone retired.

    2. From studies on Ancient Rome to Ben Franklin, apparently there is a general consensus you need work 3 hours a day to support yourself. I was never clear if that included family too. In Middle Ages Europe, apparently people only worked about half a year, longer days in summer, shorter days in winter, lots and lots of holidays.

    2. Gov’t used to print it’s own money, more when the economy needed it, which came back in when the debts were paid. Apparently it worked great. Farmers needed more at planting time, repaid it at harvest time. Gold standard not so good, restricts the money supply.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  93. @Dumb4asterisks

    Mr. D4A – thanks for the good points. Yes, I know some “liberty” folks take themselves WAY too seriously with their “No Rules / No Limits / No Gov’t!!!” histrionics. That’s too bad, because otherwise the libertarian camp makes some very valid arguments on federal drug laws, foolish wars, wasteful spending, etc.

    Unfortunately (((some))) people apparently have nothing better to do than spread their miserable outlook on everything. “YOU’RE ALL WORNG! Read my half-dozen 500+ word comments, then get educated!” Oh dear…

    One such “liberty” troll felt a need to lecture me that I’m “bereft of a scientific education” over a simple metaphor (gas diluted with water) which is actually correct. (Good grief, some people are sooooo literal.)

    Funny thing is, I actually have an engineering degree and many years of experience working in the Oil & Gas business (heavily “regulated” by the way) among other things. Yes indeed, all gasoline has some water in it. I didn’t feel a need to show off my knowledge of organic chemistry in noting other low-octane diluents. Again, good grief.

    As you likely know (and some folks overlook) there’s a world of difference between clear and objective LIMITS on harmful behavior (speed limits, blood alcohol limits, pollution limits, etc.) and the millions of arbitrary mandates of you “must” and you “shall” comply with rules on self-incrimination that the USA now suffers under. Objective LIMITS are not “picking winners and losers” as one overzealous “liberty” guy claims.

    But once again, by ranting against ALL Gov’t rules, anti-government extremists invalidate their entire message… then get more enraged that no one takes them seriously. That’s really too bad for everyone.

    The colossal fraud of fiat “credit creation” should be targeted with STATE oversight of basic weights & measures. That is, if a bank claims to hold 1,000 oz. of gold in its vaults… simply prove it. (And don’t issue loans/notes pretending to have 10,000 oz. of gold.) I’d much prefer 50 STATES experimenting with what works best than ONE Federal approach (i.e., monetary monotheism that defies all logic) or letting greedy debt dealers run wild.

    After 2,500% of admitted inflation since 1913 (actually more like 16,000%) one would hope that we can someday stop the grandstanding (“I hate the gov’t more than you do!“) and develop a working plan. Bashing the Fed is a lame cop-out and has failed since 1913. Pretending that fiat banking can “regulate itself” has failed in America since at least 1784. Time for a better plan.

    • LOL: Emslander
    • Replies: @Robert Dolan
    , @Mefobills
  94. Ugetit says:
    @Temporary Insanity

    All that so he, Bill Gates, could get an extra enema administered every day by Melinda…

    I wonder if we could figure out a way to slip some pureed habaneros into the dose! 🙂

  95. @Steve Penfield

    So….bashing the FED is a cop out?

    It’s not clear that you even know what the triple parentheses is used for.

    What kind of a “working plan” did you have in mind? You don’t want to bash the FED….and you
    don’t NTJ…… and you claim that nobody listens to anti-government “extremists.”

    Do you work for the FBI?

  96. Mefobills says:
    @onebornfree

    Low IQ drivel. Physical economy has much to do with science and improved production.

    Humans are creative creatures who transform the earth into goods and services at a money price.

  97. Mefobills says:
    @Johnny Johnny

    That’s right. Farming economies have a S curve. Seasonality requires more money during harvest to then liquidate goods as prices.

    Gold standards external to a national economy works fine to signal for exchange rates. Internal to an economy…not too smart.

    It is usurious as the holders of shiny not rusting gold outwait the producers of perishable goods and services. The producers desperately lower prices.

    The great depression farmers left food to rot in the fields.

  98. Mefobills says:
    @Steve Penfield

    All money is fiat. As soon as a gold coin got the King’s stamp it became fiat.

    Plenty of clipped coins circulated at face value.

    The real answer is legal fiat.

    Privateer banking corporations who have been given the legal privilege to hypothecate …is an obvious and provable problem at this late stage in history.

    • Replies: @Steve Penfield
  99. @traducteur

    And I am so glad my doctor left Canada 23 years ago to practive medicine in the U.S. Can’t imagine why he’d do that since things were so peachy in Canada…

    • Replies: @anon
  100. @Mefobills

    It seems like we’re in agreement on the core problems… but not on what to do about it. My concerns with public banking or “legal fiat” as you say, are the many opportunities for political chicanery along with many unanswered questions:

    – Does it allow competing currencies or is it the ONE and only currency imposed on everyone?
    – What is “legal fiat” backed with? Gold, silver, “public trust”?
    – What are the inflation targets?
    – What are the reserve requirements? (Why not 100% — thus no counterfeiting — as some suggest?)
    – Who does independent auditing to prevent fraud and abuse? Are you suggesting the gov’t honestly audits itself?

    With all those potential conflicts, I can’t imagine that (for example) a rich, white 30 yr old male gets the same credit access as a poor, black 60 yr old woman. Are you suggesting otherwise?

    Also, I don’t agree that all money, including gold, is “fiat.” Putting a king’s “stamp” on tree bark or lead doesn’t transform it into gold. The inherent fact that it takes tremendous effort to find/extract/refine gold from the ground seems to be the best natural hedge against inflation ever discovered.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  101. @animalogic

    Not so much. What will matter is concentrated energy. Certainly if there are enough forests and few enough people, you might use the wood from them for charcoal. But motive power will require concentrated fuels, and all the easy ones are gone.

    If we don’t forget how to make electricity from falling water, we could run a decent society, albeit without planes, if we radically reduce energy usage.

    So, yeah, if 1/100th of humanity remains, and has the knowledge to keep the turbines running in the hydro-electric plants (and can maintain the dams), you could run earth on them. As I recall when I last checked, something like 14% of US energy is supplied by renewables; with the caveat that some of that renewable energy will be needed to be used to maintain and repair things, you might have 10% of current energy supply left over here.

    That suggests maybe 10% can live on renewables in the land of the current USA. My guess is Africans won’t be as affected, except for the lack of food excess from the USA to bail out famines.

    Not pretty.

  102. Mefobills says:
    @Steve Penfield

    My concerns with public banking or “legal fiat” as you say, are the many opportunities for political chicanery along with many unanswered questions:

    Public banking is not the best solution, but public money is. All money is the fiat of the law.

    It is better to put a bonded third person agent between the people and the government, so banks can remain private, but are stripped of their hypothecation power. The Talley stick system of England was something like this, and it worked for about 600 years, until it was usurped by privateers. Talley sticks were gyro, and debts were settled yearly at the big fairs, like Mayfair. In those days, it only took about 3 months labor to fund a family of four, the rest of the time they had free, and they took long holidays. The Talley stick money was not “taking” and doing a rake-off for those who created it. So, prices were low and people could be productive. Also, debts couldn’t mount.

    With regards to political chicanery, sunlight is the best disinfectant.

    The best way to deal with that is have one headwater for money creation, something like the King’s Talley sticks, only it should not be the King, but a group of people sworn to an oath, and forbidden from engaging personally in the economy. The Dodge system of Venice is an example. The banking system of Venice worked pretty well, until it was usurped by the (((usual suspects))).

    So, with regards to your point about usurpations, that is a very valid point. Who watches the watcher? It has to be an aware citizenry with guns, where the guns are pointed at the monetary authority or the headwaters. All money is law, and if the MA officials break the law, they are punished. You want some sort of backing, it is the people with guns, who in turn have a well defined target to aim at.

    – Does it allow competing currencies or is it the ONE and only currency imposed on everyone?

    If you have one uniform law for a civilization, and money is used to discharge debts – say for breaking the law, then there has to be one money. It gets back to people with guns, who know where to point their guns. In a privateer money system, the money power is distributed, and nobody knows where to aim. Same goes for gold or silver, it goes off and hides in vaults.

    Also, debts mount as is their nature, and there has to be one central authority for adjudicating and releasing debts, otherwise your civilization polarizes in Oligarchy.

    What are the inflation targets?

    Money is a control system. It has type, velocity, volume, channeling among other attributes. You can stimulate or target whatever you want, and there has to be an agreement with the population about the future. Your question could be just as easily, what are the deflation targets?

    Who does independent auditing to prevent fraud and abuse? Are you suggesting the gov’t honestly audits itself?

    There has to be a fourth branch of government, which is somewhat independent, and has oversight by a public with guns. This is the headwaters, and it is open to scrutiny. All systems can have fraud and abuse. People want to make a god of silver and gold. There is no god in metal money. If there is abuse by excess money issuance, etc. then there has to be executions or penalties, as the money power is too critical to civilization. Talley sticks couldn’t be counterfeited, so this was probably closest to the ideal in history.

    In Venice, people had to turn their gold in, where it stayed in the public bank’s vault. Venice, (before it was corrupted) did a pretty good job of using ledger money for their economy, where the money that circulated was gyro… no hypothecations. Also, the Doge made sure that debt/credit at inception was not usurious. All new debt instruments were examined before they were allowed to go forth, so that the weak were not taken advantage of by the unscrupulous.

    In other words, modern humans are way behind what our ancestors knew. We have devolved in monetary terms.

    With all those potential conflicts, I can’t imagine that (for example) a rich, white 30 yr old male gets the same credit access as a poor, black 60 yr old woman. Are you suggesting otherwise?

    Douglas Social Credit has math proofs that are not debatable. There is a gap between production and what labor can buy. Injection of some credit into black 60 year old households is required. You can also use channeling to repatriate blacks to Africa. Many would choose to go provided they were given enough money to do it.

    The inherent fact that it takes tremendous effort to find/extract/refine gold from the ground seems to be the best natural hedge against inflation ever discovered.

    Solon’s reforms came about because because of the perversion of metal money. A little brown semitic Jew, who looked much different than a Greek of that day, would slide up to a bench in Greece, and then rub his hands together, and get a Greek farmer to push his stylus into the clay tablet, to make his mark. The farmer would then get silver, because it was (((international money))). The farmer could then get some luxury goods from somewhere in the Mediterranean… maybe perfume for his girlfriend. Then he might get lucky that night.

    At the time of harvest silver would be made dear, and the farmer couldn’t pay his silver debts to the Jew. Famers were impressed into slavery, many of them enslaved to the silver mines in Lydia, where they died underground. All economies have an S shape, and our (((friends))) ended up owning the mines and polarizing Greek civilization. They were so efficient at extracting the silver that very little is left now.

    Eventually, Solon had to do his reforms, because the citizens in Athens became food insecure. The Jew and his metal money induced an existential crises.

    Fiat means faith. When Rome began under King Numa, his money was bronze disks, the legal fiat of the day. Rome spread quickly because there was good law, and people could buy and sell due to well functioning legal fiat money. Numa was a contemporary of Lycurgus, who in turn was aware of Solon. The fall of Rome can be traced to the second Punic war, when Rome adopted precious metal money.

    Sorry, all money is law. Legal money is the answer. There are plenty of times in history, where gold is demonetized by law.

    • Replies: @GeeBee
  103. @Mark Hunter

    Bravo . Thank you… very much.

    I’ve learned more from your truly brilliant, interesting, clear, focussed, garbage-free comment – and a little linked reading around AC/DC (no, not them) – than I learned from 3 years of secondary education in Physics and Chemistry – or so it feels. Please stay here and comment again – we need all the learning and IQ lifts we can get.

    And I agree completely about the Patents laws – only anarchists, communists and (((nature’s free-loaders))) think they should be able to benefit free of charge indefinitely from the (almost-always lone) work of a colossally-intelligent man – whilst leaving said man penniless for the rest of his life. My views about Patents changed irredeemably at the age of 14 when I travelled on a hovercraft and discovered from my later reading that the inventor of the hovercraft died a pauper – whilst even today they are still used widely across the world on every small ferry hop and bay transfer by companies which still constantly make money from their use.

    And (((David Sarnoff ))) was a career industrial thief ? What a surprise.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  104. Mefobills says:
    @The Alarmist

    Excuse me now … I need to buy some more gold while TPTB continue to suppress the price to make it look like it is not a viable competing store of wealth.

    Read my discussion with Penfield.

    I’m not hostile to acquiring gold by weight as an asset. I’m not hostile to owning bitcoin. We live in clown world, so you have to adjust accordingly. Gold and silver is good insurance, and you are right that TPTB today are the worst types of people to be in authority.

    Also, try to buy productive assets too. Life-skills that make things that people need. Owning property that is productive is another type of asset that is better than gold.

    • Agree: The Alarmist
  105. @TomSchmidt

    Fiat currency has destroyed the future of humanity

    Absolutely correct.

    Which was precisely (((their))) wish, design and intention from the very beginning.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  106. anon[436] • Disclaimer says:
    @Not Woke but awake

    Canadians system is slow but caters and meets the needs and the demands of the citizen .It is more equitable and egalitarian. Doctors leaving Canada is like Cuban doctors leaving for USA -not to enrich medical serve but himself. In America one 70 yr old might get sex change ,or triple organ transplantation with poor cognitive reserve or an 85 yr old two hip replacements within 6 mo .

    Canadians get vaccinated, get yearly free check up and suffer less from childhood and adolescents moralities and morbidities . People in Canada usually dont use the emergency for managing chronic diseases like blood pressure or diabetes or sickle cell or asthma or peripheral vascular disease or recurrence infection .

  107. GeeBee says:
    @Mefobills

    I know I’ve said this to you before old buddy, but that book of yours needs to be written as soon as you’re able!

    • Thanks: Mefobills
  108. Mefobills says:
    @Dave Bowman

    Fiat currency has destroyed the future of humanity

    Stop using the word fiat, it makes you look stupid, especially after I have corrected Penfield.

    All money is fiat. Get over it.

    The type of money that has your shorts twisted into a bunch is called PRIVATE BANK CREDIT.

    This type of money comes into existence as a double entry ledger entry. Its came about as a function of events: First, the Italians had to invent the double entry method, Second there had to be banking corporations, and Third – the corporations had to dupe government into government handing over the money power to the them, a form of privatization of the commons.

    At that point in time the money shifted and went from being sovereign fiat, to becoming corporate fiat. It went from being legal to illegal (or easily manipulated).

    OK? Legal fiat is actually the answer, and your using Fiat incorrectly is part of clown world deception.

  109. Mefobills says:
    @Dave Bowman

    Those colossally intelligent men create a patrimony, which they want to bequeath to their kin.

    Finance capital is happy to transmit new or old knowledge, to China or elsewhere, to then monetize patrimony.

    This then short-circuits generations from their birthright, where the birthright was given to them by the genius in their midst.

    A patent is a temporary rent extraction scheme, a legal carve out in the law. The objective of which is to protect the inventor, so he can then charge higher prices, to then recoup his efforts. Anybody who thinks invention is easy, needs to look in the mirror, and say to themselves… I don’t know what I am talking about. Invention is very hard, and bringing something to market is colossally difficult.

    Things are always more complex. Patents, like Tariffs can be conditional.

    Hudson, as always helps with clarity:
    https://michael-hudson.com/2018/04/ho-hum-more-trade-threats/

    America was able to outcompete with England and other countries by having subsidized education. We built roads, we built huge infrastructure, and the Internet was basically developed by government and turned over to the private sector. America’s pharmaceutical patents basically were developed by government laboratories and turned over to the pharmaceutical companies.

    So, here is a case where the commons funded new Research and Development, and then the gains were turned over to privateers. The public which funded it, lost out twice, especially in the form of taxes and then high prices.

    If patents support rent extraction, then that is a different case than the inventor being rewarded for his efforts.

    It will take a trained elite to run countries in the future, an elite who understands these things. Russia’s Stolypin group is probably the most advanced anywhere in the world, but unfortunately Putin tends to listen to Elvira Nabiullina instead. If there is a ding against Putin, this is it. His thinking is not that monetarily advanced.

  110. bayviking says:

    Promoting the General Welfare, a constitutional mandate which is hardly ever mentioned by our fearless leaders, and denied by every conservative, requires a virtuous cycle of production and consumption. This mandate was abandoned in search of cheap labor offshore. There are only three ways to produce new wealth: farming; mining; and manufacturing. More often than not the largest wealth multipliers occur in manufacturing. Construction can be a type of manufacturing which makes conducting productive business easier. Lower health care costs makes a country’s economy more competitive. Cutting edge education opens entirely new industries for development.

    The US has relied on military force and forcing oil payments in dollars to dominate the world economically. The US also operates enormous grain monopolies around the world. Domestically our economy strongly favors Real Estate developers, the Insurance Industry which has enormous holdings in big city high rise buildings, and Finance. The acronym for this economy, developed by Michael Hudson, is FIRE.

    Like anybody that has ever played Monopoly learns, there is only one winner. While the US economy is more complicated than Monopoly, there will always be a few winners and millions of losers. The only way to correct this problem is through progressive taxation of the rich, a policy which dominated the fifties. The fifties were a time when a janitor could raise a family while owning a house and car. Those days are over. But it is within our power to stop endless war and restore progressive taxation.

  111. This article may be of some help:

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1057521915001477

    It provides an empirical evidence that, of the three theories, the last one, namely, Credit Creation Theory is the one that works in practice.

  112. 762x39 says:
    @Steve Penfield

    consensus OPINION and truth are mutually exclusive in most fields. Where there is consensus there usually is vulgarization not wisdom. On all the great questions in this short life of ours, the truth is something you must work hard for. No free lunch my friend.

  113. @animalogic

    It’s no big deal, it’s middle class. A million is nothing, given the pace of inflation. There’s serious, big, bad inflation going on unacknowledged and the new gasoline and crude oil prices are going to add to it. When in 2022/2024 gas is $4.00+ and everything is bogged down because of it, there will be a “gasoline reckoning”. We’ll see if they run on expensive gasoline price issues, pipelines, etc..

  114. After WWII ( the Big One) —the average American paid 50% of the Federal Tax intake and corporations share was 35%. Today —the average American share is 85% and corporations – less than 10%. Donald Trump lowered the Corporate Tax Rate from 35% to 21% in 2017. Today Biden raising corporate taxes from 21% to 28% —-big deal. You and I are being hosed —deliberately.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Penfield Comments via RSS