Obama's Wars

[soulsearcher]

Dr. Ron, I don't care what anybody says, you can still PREACH, dawg! Keep telling it like it is. Your posts on this thread had me "Whoop-Whooping" like L.S. Rhodes.

In the embarrassingly immortal words of the Rev. Wright, "The chickens HAVE come home to roost," and they're laying one egg after another.

[rjjunior]

Then, hopefully, the system corrects somewhat and stabilizes and then the government unloads its Citi shares at a price that restores the taxpayer's "investment".

Can someone explain a plausible scenario where this "correction" can actually happen? The systemic problems that are causing the system to crumble under its own weight seem to suggest that a system correction is not even feasible without a preceding collapse.

[Dr. Ron]

To get the real picture, you need to read Regie's blog this week. It is dead on........RegieHamm.com

[dolfan]

Then, hopefully, the system corrects somewhat and stabilizes and then the government unloads its Citi shares at a price that restores the taxpayer's "investment".

Can someone explain a plausible scenario where this "correction" can actually happen? The systemic problems that are causing the system to crumble under its own weight seem to suggest that a system correction is not even feasible without a preceding collapse.

It can't. You're right, I believe. I was speaking in caviar dream-ese, the language of bankers and politicians.

[Full Quiver]

I think it's getting high time for a grassroots coup!

[Tim Elston]

Can someone explain a plausible scenario where this "correction" can actually happen? The systemic problems that are causing the system to crumble under its own weight seem to suggest that a system correction is not even feasible without a preceding collapse.

Ultimately collapse is the correction, whether now or later. If the recovery programs manage to stave off collapse for the time being, and we see a period of slow, upward growth again, it can be only at the expense of the system's long-term viability.

I take my own shot at a solution with a grain of salt, but to my mind the only long term viable solution to our national solvency is to put our currency back under the control of the United States. It is now in the hands of the private banking system, and that system is a for-profit network which, by definition, puts its interests ahead of the interests of the United States. If the nation were sovereign over its money supply, a lot of these problems would not exist. As it is, the United States is owned and operated by the private banking system, which cares about our national solvency only to the extent that it is propped up sufficiently to continue to function as its cash cow.

But putting the national currency under the sovereign control of the United States is as practically impossible as winning a war against the United States Army with pitchforks. I have very little hope that the electorate will be smart enough to avoid self-destruction. It's too bought-in to the partisanship by which the bi-partisan plutocracy effectively blinds us.

[Tim Elston]

But, the monetary policy is a means to an end for these people, regardless of party. For them all, to the person, the end is power for themselves. The means, then, becomes an end unto itself --- use power in ever increasing proportions and by doing so, gain even more. There is no finish line. That's the problem. If it were otherwise, somebody would stand up and say, and demand to the point of jeopardizing their own safety, that enough is enough. Someone would say that government must be restrained and that the private sector must be allowed to survive or fail largely on its own.

If you look at this national economic growth rate chart, you will see that since 2000 we have averaged a 3.1% growth rate. The historic average is 3.2%. (TW, these are rough figures, as some of the data are still estimated.)

Now, if you look at chart "3. The National Debt" on this page, you will see that from 2000 to 2008 our national debt rose from about $5.8 trillion to $10.3 trillion.

What does this mean? It means that for the period, it required doubling the national debt to maintain an average growth rate that is 0.1% below the historic average.

Do a double-take on the national debt graph. Notice that it is an exponential curve. It reflects that in order to maintain the historic average growth rate of 3.2%, debt must increase along an exponential curve. This is consistent with the computation that growth must average an annual rate of increase that keeps pace with the interest charged on the interest of all debt. Since that rate compounds, an exponential curve, rather than a gently sloping straight line occurs.

The model predicts that in order to maintain the level of economic growth that the system requires, we must continue to accrue debt along the expontial curve. So, for example, by about 2017, give or take, we must incur a $20 trillion national debt to keep the economy from imploding. The monetary system demands this, and it pays no respect to who or which party is in office.

Only a different monetary system would have any chance of not facing this inevitability. Short of economic collapse we will not have the political will to change the system fundamentally. And even with an economic collapse it is unlikely that the electorate will be informed enough to know that a different system is necessary. When the collapse happens the electorate will be pointing fingers at its usual cross-aisle scapegoats and rallying for the usual wolves in sheeps clothing.

[MacUser]

Only a different monetary system would have any chance of not facing this inevitability.

I will admit I am no expert in this... but this has been a red flag for me. The radical devaluation of our dollar against foreign currencies to me seems to be key here. Are gladly accepting at the same time to devalue our dollar to simulate the growth?

If you want to see a real mess.. just saddle ourselves with the threat of a deep recession and then the fact that our saved money / and or retirements (what is left) is going to be absolutely worthless. Talk about leveling the playing field.

Then we'll need this new monetary system rescue, eh?

[Tim Elston]

I will admit I am no expert in this...

I'm not either, and I wish I were. For whatever reasons, Americans, and probably most people in the world, do not understand monetary policy or economics. I have found ChrisMartensen.com to be a helpful source of learning.

Then we'll need this new monetary system rescue, eh?

At the most basic level, money is debt. Under our current system, a loan is the creation of money. Economic growth is, by definition, growth in the money supply, and in our system growth in the money supply is growth in debt. Since growth needs to keep pace with compounded interest on all existing debt, growth--that is, debt--must race along with itself exponentially. Anything that grows at a compounded rate grows exponentially.

We need a monetary system in which the money supply is controlled along something other than an exponential debt curve. The national currency needs to be under the control of the nation instead of to be the byproduct of compounding debt. I'm not talking about the nationalization of banks, but about the nationalization of (what we have been mistaking for) the national currency.

Anyone who is interested in understanding what is happening at something deeper than the scapegoat layer may want to watch the animated video Money as Debt. Toward the end it brainstorms about possible alternatives to our current self-destructive system.

[Dr. Ron]

This morning the talk is no longer of a "New Deal" for the nation, but a "New Deal" for the world.....yep , that's right......a global leveling of the playing field......

Looks like World Domination is His goal after all. Of course it is not ethical to do it with weapons, but to do it by using the financial system......brilliant.


God help us all.