Morality101.net

Morality is Liberty without Force

Browsing Posts tagged bailout

Tuesday, September 1, 2009

Refuting “Economic Suicide”

Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon. These are the words of Milton Friedman in A Monetary History of the United States. The meaning of those words is that no matter what, inflation is a function of the amount of money available. Inflation occurs when more money is introduced into the supply. When this happens, the real value of the money goes down. This is the reality. The face value perception is that things begin to “cost more.” Physical things actually still hold their same value, it is the money, due to inflation, that has lost its value, meaning that it takes more of that money to buy the same thing. Nowhere was the phenomenon of inflation, and indeed hyperinflation, more evident than in the Weimar Republic, where we find the famous historical incident of it costing a wheelbarrow full of money to buy a loaf of bread.

I bring up a brief discussion on the nature of inflation in response to possibly one of the most foolish articles I have seen lately. At Seeking Alpha, Henry Bee writes that Auditing the Fed is Economic Suicide. In an incredible feat of intellectual gymnastics, Bee lays down the accusation that somehow the public knowing what is happening with the money supply will be the end of the free market:

The free market understands that auditing the fed is a very dangerous line to cross. If crossed, U.S. inflation will likely skyrocket over the next decade to unseen levels. U.S. economy tanks. Bond investors lose money as interest rates rise. Stock investors earn negative real return as equity risk premium rises and aggregate PE ratio tank. The US Dollar erodes due to higher domestic inflation relative to foreign inflation. Gold and commodity prices rise.

Perhaps we can forgive Mr. Bee for being Canadian, and therefore not understanding the history of the Federal Reserve and monetary policy in the United States. Or perhaps we can direct him to the aforementioned Milton Friedman, or maybe Murray Rothbard, or F.A. Hayek, for some simple education on monetary policy. Remember, “gold and commodity prices rise” only in terms of the value of the money itself. They are physical, tangible things. They always retain the same value, and it is the value of the money itself that changes due to inflation. After beginning with the Vault, Bee continues and moves on to the Balance Beam:

How Does Auditing the Fed Cause Inflation?

Inflation is caused by a central bank that loses control of its money supply. There are two ways that a politically compromised central bank can lose control of its money supply.

I’ll interrupt Mr. Bee while he’s still doing some of his simple posing, and before he really gets going with the tumbling. Inflation is caused by a central bank that loses control of its money supply? I think not. Remember, inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon. Inflation is caused by the introduction of more money into the supply. Who introduces more money into the supply? The central bank. The Federal Reserve is our central bank. Incidentally, Mr. Bee might be interested to know that since its inception, the Federal Reserve has practiced nothing but inflationary monetary policy and, in about 100 years, has managed thereby to devalue the dollar by approximately 97%. It would seem then, that the Federal Reserve itself has been the cause of inflation all along. But I will allow Mr. Bee to continue:

Road to Inflation #1: Repeating the Political Cycle

When the central bank is not independent, politicians have historically pumped up the money supply (for temporary economic boost) shortly before an election to buy votes with a lower unemployment rate. After the election, the effects wear off, returning the economy to its natural rate of unemployment but at a higher inflation rate than before. Because it is hard to fight off inflation quickly, by the time the next election rolls around the economy has not been squeezed back to its original inflation rate. Politicians pump up the money supply again, this time from a higher base inflation. As this cycle repeats itself, the central bank loses control of the money supply.

Bee makes a good point here in defending the separation of church bank and state. However, akin to a balance beam backflip, Bee here asserts that an audit of Federal Reserve will allow politicians direct control of the money supply. Since the discussion surrounding HR 1207 has been one of simply getting a look at the books, Bee’s arguments, while valid conceptually, are unfounded in reality. Indeed, both Barney Frank and Ron Paul have agreed with Bee’s own argument, and intend to be disciplined in making the audit one that trails real time by enough that exactly what Bee purports to be the danger will not happen.

That said, I would like to ask Mr. Bee a simple question. What makes you suppose, Mr. Bee, that the Federal Reserve is not already unduly influenced by politicians? As I have explained in the past, the Fed is largely a conglomeration of private banking institutions, overseen by a Board of Governors, headed by the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, currently Ben Bernanke. The Board of Governors is a seven-member panel appointed by the President of the United States. This means, Mr. Bee, that seven people who, through their appointment, answer to the President, and the President alone, control all that is our monetary policy, all that is our money supply, and therefore all that is our inflation. If Ben Bernanke and six others answer only to the President, how exactly is the Federal Reserve not influenced by politics in the manner you suggest already?

Bee goes on to discuss a second road to inflation:

Road to Inflation #2: Financing Government Spending

A central bank that lacks independence from politicians makes it tempting for the government to finance an inappropriately large portion of its spending through printing money. A central bank that promises to finance too much government spending also loses control of the money supply.

Now honestly, there is only just so much we can forgive of Mr. Bee for his being Canadian. This really represents a complete lack of attention to current events. Inside of a four month period, the Federal Reserve just financed a $700 billion bailout of the US Financial industry through TARP, an effort, mind you, that resulted in all that money going to the noble purpose of, well, nobody really knows, followed by the $800 billion stimulus package. Based on Barney Frank’s admission in the video found in this post, Ben Bernanke indicated to him when the bailouts began with AIG, that he had $800 billion to play with. Well that covered TARP. The only logical inference then is that the Fed printed the rest to finance the stimulus. Our central bank is already following this road, Mr. Bee. The only question is, how much have they inflated the money supply?

Well the answer from the Fed has been, to this point, simple. Silence.

When seven men who answer to one man control the entire money supply, and hold no accountability, they can do as they please. Adding a check to this highly centralized power by making their actions transparent to the public cannot be a bad thing.

Deflation Vs. Inflation: The Great Debate Rages On – Marc Courtenay — Seeking Alpha.

As we celebrate the 4th of the July in the USA we find ourselves at a tipping point that will impact our financial conditions and quality of life for many years to come.
Most of you know I don’t create or sell any of my own trading services and I’m known for fiercely independent analysis. If I were selling a product or a service in the western world in the summer of 2009, would I be able to keep my prices at current levels? Would I have to lower them in order to keep up with the competition and/or accommodate the sinking incomes of my customers?
Robert J. Samuelson wrote an insightful article in Newsweek magazine recently titled “Deflation and Inflation? The Fed Could End Up Facing Both”.  What he wrote speaks to the confusing and paradoxical nature of the bizarre times we are living in.
“To make sense of today’s most perplexing economic debate–whether we’re flirting with inflation or deflation–it’s worth recalling what happened after WWII. Under intense political pressure, President Truman lifted wage-price controls. All heck broke loose.

“Suppressed during the war, wages and prices exploded. Autoworkers, steelworkers and others went on strike for higher pay. In 1946 and 1947, consumer prices rose 8.5% and 14.4%, respectively.

“What’s instructive,” writes Samuelson, ” is that prices then stabilized. There was no wage-price spiral as occurred in the 1960s and 1970s. True, a mild recession in late 1948 and 1949 helped temper price increases. But inflation subsided mainly becuase people dindn’t expect it to continue.
They’d lived through the Depression, when prices declined. Except for wars, American prices were usually fairly stable.
The lesson for today: psychology matters [that is why consumer confidence, or the lack thereof, is so important]. What economists call “expectations” shape how workers, managers, investors behave. If they fear inflation, they act in ways that bring it about.
“The converse is also true, as the late 1940s show. The lesson provides context for today’s debate. Are the Federal Reserve’s easy-money policies laying the groundwork for higher inflation?
“Or, will these policies prevent deflation–a broad decline of prices–that would deepen the economic slump?” Samuelson goes on to give the numbers we have all read a hundred times including “…to lower long-term interest rates, it’s [the Federal Reserve] pledged [to buy] $1.25 trillion of mortgage securities backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and $300 billion of long-term Treasury bonds.”
We all know these steps are without modern precedent. We also have been told that the billions and billions of bailout dollars that have been “loaned” to the banks have not made their way into the US economy yet. continue reading…

Striker101I have wasted most of this past 13 months on Digg.com, in futile jousting with immoral collectivists who do not and will not understand the morality of the personal right to life of each individual on this planet, who seek to use the Force of government to negate our right to property, and don’t give one rip about the objective of happiness.  Our right to property is now diverted from sustaining our life and enhancing our happiness, and is now instead being ripped from our hands (stolen) toward furthering the immoral goals of collectivism via Force.

Much time was simply wasted, trying to avoid reading trivia completely irrelevant to the ongoing economic collapse, and even more trivia wading thru irrelevant comments often nothing more than ignorant abusive blurbs consisting of nothing more than FU, FTW.  While we still hang onto the thread of freedom of speech, having to deal with such ignorance wastes everyone’s time and energy for naught.

During this period we have been clobbered by the burst housing bubble, bailouts serving only to increase the national debt, to the election of a non-citizen communist who now purports to be the president of this new USSA, to an infinitely broad “stimulus bill” which we have now seen serving only to increase the already impossible mountain of national debt.  This cannot be funded because the Federal Reserve cannot find buyers for the T-bills and T-bonds, thus Government cannot pay it’s bills nor even fund the bailouts and stimulus.  This is a GOOD thing, although we doubt the liberals and socialists and collectivists will not understand this just yet!

So what has this to do with Digg?  Well, just yesterday Digg ended it’s Shout feature, which was the way we could pass good articles to our friends.  Digg now suggests Facebook and Twitter be used to compensate.  Now I don’t know that you feel this way, but having to play KissyFace and Tweeting is not my idea of useful productive time on the internet, so you’ll not find me there.  If someone knows an equally active social website devoted to active and serious discussion of philosophical political issues and ideas, PLEASE comment and let me know.

But worse with Digg is it’s now blatant attempts to promote bleeding heart crap and to conceal or even delete anything relevant to true Liberty and the current actions of Government seeking to destroy that last vestage of Freedom. For that reason alone, I am done with Digg.com.  I may submit more (of Morality101) articles to Digg, but will not be otherwise participating.  I see no compelling reason that Digg will survive these fatal mistakes.  Leave that to the collectivists to have a mutual admiration society and continue to scheme how to gain more powers to Force.

I hope to convert this blogger into THE major forum for the serious ongoing discussion mentioned.  I wlll need your help to accomplish this, there is too much for me to learn about doing this and so I need the collaboration of others.  I barely know how to “Submit” an article here via WordPress, much less to set up the tools for good interaction between us.

So, requested action(s)

  • My email address is available only  to my Friends who know me as Striker101 on Digg.  If you are one of those, please either use your Digg handle or else email me so I know who you are.  You will be authorized as Authors and thus allowed to Post and to Submit.
  • To others, you will find my eaddy at the root website of http://morality101.net.
  • ONLY to those who understand the foundations of Objectivist or Libertarian philosophy, REGISTER here at  Morality101 so that you can participate, and then DO participate.
  • We are not here to argue with collectivists, who are wholly without virtue.  We are here to expand upon the likes of Ayn Rand and Ludwig von Mises.  We are here to destroy collectivism before it destroys Capitalism, the free market and Liberty.

Leave your comments HERE, don’t even bother with Digg anymore.

Nobody wants to mention tax rises just ahead of the elections,” said Thorolfur Matthiasson, an economics professor at the University of Iceland. “But if the budget deficit is 10 percent of GDP and the official debt is approximately what the nation can produce in one year, then the politicians will have to raise tax and reduce public spending.

Striker

Striker

It’s hard to pay attention to what’s happening in such a seemingly small, remote and insignificant country as Iceland, but the parallels of retro-progress in Iceland and USA are stunning and terrifying. Think for a moment, this is a part of global collapse begun here in our USSA with the last trigger on this shotgun being the CRA. Then note our Rulers now considering renewal of the CRA to cure the problems caused by the CRA.

Please read this article and review the Digg comments.

read more | digg story

Published by Your Liberties on April 7, 2009

A domestic uprising is becoming more of a reality as our rights are threatened by the epic failure that is socialism.  It’s common knowledge that our country is struggling within its own borders.  Conservatives and liberals are at each others throats, and although there was much talk about bipartisanship we have yet to see any inclination this will happen with the democrats holding the majority.  The real question is how bad do things have to get before actions overpower negotiation.

The economy is still garbage, the unemployment rate is 8.5%, and there is active legislation to suppress rights and liberties afforded to us by our founding fathers.  This administration is an embarrassment to society, and society will only take so much before it fights back.  Attempts at negotiation with have proved fruitless, Ann Coulter said it best herself.

Political debate with liberals is basically impossible in America today because liberals are calling names while conservatives are trying to make arguments.

Its no secret that the financial stability of our country is in jeopardy.  The massive amount of money being poured into the financial sector has to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is our pockets.  Its likely going to come from pockets of Americans not yet old enough to have a voice.  Funding the bailouts is like stealing from piggy banks.  There is not an American out there who is not feeling the effect of stupid liberals trying to level the playing field.  Our country was founded around capitalism; keep your filthy hands to yourself.  Obama, in his infinite wisdom was was quoted saying

I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.

The only people this is good for is the lazy liberals who have refused to apply themselves and expect to dig in my pocket for “change”.  Try it again and you will pull back a bloody stump.

The national unemployment rate is hovering around 8.5% the highest rate since 1983.  With this many misplaced workers tension is mounting between unemployed citizens and the marxists who think its their job to run this country.  To all Karl following morons who put faith into big government and our current administration, we have news for you, we were given the right by men much wiser than all of you collectively to take you down a peg or two.

A country not focused on free enterprise is doomed to fail, and your unwillingness to admit that will be your demise.  Every public asset has roots in free enterprise, and therefor every argument you can make for socialism is weak.  If you do not stop force feeding us your agenda we will have no choice but to take a defensive stance, and by defensive I mean smear your sorry excuse for an opinion back to London where it came from.  This is not a threat, it is a promise, one that I am allowed to make if you continue to violate my rights.

I am an American, DO NOT TREAD ON ME!

Ever wondered why there aren’t more “criminals” in this whole mortgage mess? Why there aren’t more mortgage broker perp walks? After all, they were predatory lenders, right? And where are the World-wide manhunts for the Wall Street iBankers escaping extradition? What they did to Iceland was against the law… right? Right?

strikeravatar64x645For those who want the truth, rather than the evasion and excuses.
This is a MUST READ!

read more | digg story

Failure is no fun, but it does teach essential lessons. We shouldn’t miss out on those lessons simply because we think we can afford to bail people out. Instead of trying to abolish failure via bailouts, we should let markets work, let failure run its course, and be so much the wiser for it.

…There’s a great irony in bailouts, too.  The only reason we can afford to even talk about bailouts is because of the accumulated wealth brought about by centuries of capitalism…

direct link to article http://mises.org/story/3321

read more | digg story

America let these crooked politicians take her to the cleaner to give free money to their bankster buddies. Now the politicians/looters admit that we will never know if the money did any good. How’s that for accountability? I say, bring on the tar and feathers!

Striker: Please see my comment to this, then spend some time here on m101.

read more | digg story

This webpage is copied in full from fee.org.  It is a fine expression which applies to the economic collapse of today.

http://www.fee.org/in_brief/default.asp?id=2396&year=2008&month=10

October 10, 2008

by Sheldon Richman

Sheldon Richman is the editor of The Freeman and “In brief,” and a contributor to The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics. TGIF appears Fridays. Comments welcome.

What might be even more distressing than the current buildup of the corporate state in response to the supposed economic crisis is the way some self-styled advocates of the free market are willing to cast aside the economic theory they claimed to embrace.

(Aside: I say supposed crisis because the “credit freeze” that was said to require such massive government intervention seems to be a Big Lie. All indicators, from Federal Reserve statistics to anecdotal evidence based on my phone calls to local bankers and auto dealers, confirm that ample money is available to people with good credit and/or collateral. I still see Ditech TV commercials and get credit-card come-ons in the mail nearly every day. See Robert Higgs’s “The Data Don’t Justify the Financial-Market Panic.”)

Back to theory. If you are a glutton for cable news-talk shows, you know it’s been little more than a parade of “experts” declaring the absolute imperative of government bailouts. Many of these experts preface their remarks by saying how much they hate the idea of government intervention to save business from its mistakes. “I’m a free-market, small-government advocate, but….” Jack Welch, formerly head of government-contractor GE, and columnist Lawrence Kudlow are among many who have said things like that. Since they spoke on television programs, I can’t quote them verbatim, but the tenor of their remarks is that the free market is great when things are going well, but this is an emergency and we don’t have the luxury of theory. Statements like this were most common during the frantic week between the House’s rejection of and reversal on the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP.

Where to begin? Right off the bat we can see a problem. Any bailout plan that is believed to be potentially effective must be based on a theory. Otherwise it would merely be a shot in the dark. If you asked a TARP advocate why the intervention is necessary, he presumably would explain the problem and how the bailout would remedy it. For example, he might say that when the government borrows $700 billion in order to buy banks’ bad mortgage-backed securities, it will inject liquidity into the credit markets and improve the economy. But that is a theory. (It’s a bad theory, but it is a theory.) So the apparently bold thrusting aside of all theory in the name of pragmatic action is a mere pose. The move is as theory-bound as free-market opposition to the bailout is.

Contest of Theories

The debate, then, is a contest of theories. Free-market theory can explain the cause of the crisis –  government intervention in the mortgage market through promotion of easy home-buying and implicit guarantees to lenders and underwriters, including its privileged creatures, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Given that genesis of the problems and the general theory of markets, the solution is for government to back off — way off — and to let the economy adjust to real conditions and recover without subsidy, guarantee, or regulation. What is the alternative theory used by those who have jettisoned free-market theory in “this time of crisis”? Why should we believe that things will be fine only if the government has the discretionary power to transfer resources from those who haven’t screwed up to those who have?

There’s a unattractive anti-intellectualism in the scoffing at theory. The fact is, we can’t live without it. As I’ve noted before, William Graham Sumner long ago dismissed the claim that something can be true in theory but not in practice:

That a thing can be true in theory and false in practice is the most utter absurdity that human language can express. For, if a thing is true in practice (protectionism, for instance) the theory of its truth can be found, and that theory will be true. But it was admitted that free trade is true in theory. Hence two things which are contradictory would both be true at the same time about the same thing. [Protectionism: The -Ism which Teaches that Waste Makes Wealth (1885), chapter 4, section m.]

Mises and Theory

Ludwig von Mises had a thing or two to say about theory. For Mises the theories of economics (more broadly, human action) are derived by spinning out the logical corollaries of the inescapable concept action, of which we have apodictic “a priori” knowledge. (These corollaries include among others: purpose, means and ends, value and preference, cost, time preference, and profit and loss.) We do not acquire economic theories through observation. Indeed, as Roderick Long suggests, we can’t imagine observing human behavior outside a means-end framework: “[O]ur conceptual understanding plays a constitutive role in our perceptual experience.” This is the a priori nature of Mises’s “praxeology,” or logic of action. As he wrote in “Social Science and Natural Science”:

Economics therefore is not based on or derived (abstracted) from experience. It is a deductive system, starting from the insight into the principles of human reason and conduct. As a matter of fact all our experience in the field of human action is based on and conditioned by the circumstance that we have this insight in our mind. Without this a priori knowledge and the theorems derived from it we could not at all realize what is going on in human activity. Our experience of human action and social life is predicated on praxeological and economic theory.

Or as he wrote in Human Action: “History speaks only to those people who know how to interpret it on the ground of correct theories.”

If our premises are true and our reasoning is logically sound, our conclusions are true. This doesn’t mean that economics is done without reference to the world. It means only that we look at the economic world, as it were, with praxeological lenses — and are powerless to do otherwise. To be sure, we must first confirm that we are observing human action in an economic context (and not, say, a game, ritual, or reflexive motion), but once we do that, our a priori understanding of economics applies.

There is never a good time to throw aside theory and just act, for such a thing is impossible. The only question is whether our theory is good or bad.

This is a followup to America is History which I wrote and submitted to Digg last week.  Our government made a surprising move which is delaying the collapse for a short while, but the collapse is beyond avoidable.  This is my attempt to warn you — protect whatever assets you have as best you can, and prepare for a long dark age.

On that day, it appeared certain that WaMu, then Morgan-Stanley, then Goldman-Sachs were going to wipe out, and the domino effect would follow.  However, right after my original post, Bush, Paulson & Bernanke finally emerged from their caves to announce we were in horrible trouble.  Hell, we knew that, and so did they (well not the sheeples).  So Dodd blurted out “meltdown” and Congress, which had surely also known disaster was coming, finally had to go to work – now that’s different!  The bailout solution presented is horrible!   If our 537 elected officials had done anything right before this housing/mortgage crisis began, this whole dilemma may never have arisen.

This I shall elaborate just a tad more.  The trigger which began the housing/mortgage fiasco was NOT caused by greedy anyone, nor by overpaid CEO’s, nor by inadequate regulation.  It was caused by The Fed manipulating interest rates, which caused first the housing boom and then, after millions of ARM’s had been stupidly signed by sheeples, The Fed raised the rates, causing ARM payments to rise to impossible and triggered so many defaults.  Meanwhile our brain-dead Congress just watched the turds roll by, as they’ve done since 1911 when they created The Fed.

By now you should pretty well know all that, but there is at least one action you should take TODAY (because time is fleeting!), an email complaint to your congressmen – this site makes it quite easy and you can/should edit their form prose to say what YOU think!  America is in collapse way beyond recovery, hell we might as well say goodbye now.

Just this morning we got a really shocking revelation started it’s rounds on Digg (if you wish to promote and comment).  THEY KNEW this was coming months ago.  Ahhhhh, NOW we get the news!

Well, Congress is now battling not only about the original language, but also trying to add all sorts of riders to the bill.  Those riders are largely from socialist Democrats, and I heard this woman on the TV insisting on even more dictatorial riders, so I went to see who the hell that was, and sho’ nuf, it was Hillary!  If a bunch of these riders should pass, the $700 billion cost-guess will mushroom to the stratosphere.  Actually, ANY bailout bill will make everything worse, not better.  For those who get hurt in the process, well gee, you did it to yourselves, deal with it!

Every time that Congress spends our stolen tax-dollars, some entity, corporate or person, gets a benefit at the your expense.  They call it transfer payments, aka robbing Peter to pay Paul.  Paul gets the benefit, while Peter gets the shaft. The only moral and Constitutional exception is defense (note that I did not say offense).

Again as I have said often, the root cause bringing our collapse is our failure to insist on basic morality — the right to life and the right to sustain that life and to maximize our happiness.  I hope you will read enough while you are here to grasp how simple it could be!  Maybe you would also like to come back from the dark age?  If there is a next time, this is the foundation to do it right.