Topic: Economics
MSNBC, WSJ, Usual Talking Heads Get Interest, Greenspan Wrong Again Just days before “markets” approved further interest rate reductions by the private Federal Reserve, an MSNBC newscast largely blamed Alan Greenspan for the present credit crisis.by mike montagne (PFMPE)
(libertarian)
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Just days before "markets" approved further interest rate reductions by the private Federal Reserve, an MSNBC newscast largely blamed Alan Greenspan for the present credit crisis. The report blames Mr. Greenspan 1)for his support of deregulation; and 2)for suppressing interest rates for too long.
As chairman of this privatized system of exploitation, Mr. Greenspan's direction of the exploitation certainly may be guilty of leading us into a terminal failure but if, and only if, within practical bounds, we can prove that the privatized system of multiplying exploitation is in fact sustainable.
For what then is he really guilty?
If it can truly be said that he is guilty for supporting deregulation, it must be demonstrable that the abandoned forms of regulation would have averted the present crisis.
But the very nature of the imposed currency inherently and irreversibly multiplies debt in proportion to the obligated circulation, because the irregularities of the currency force us to maintain a vital circulation by re-borrowing principal and interest as subsequent sums of debt. This of course perpetually increases the sum of debt so much as periodic interest, until the costs of servicing the ever escalating sum of debt are terminal.
Thus:
no form of regulation short of rectifying the nature of the currency would avert the present crisis; and,
if any form of regulation would have forestalled the present crisis, that regulation would have to exercise the lower rates of interest for which Mr. Greenspan is said to be guilty, for only lower rates of interest moderate the rate at which debt is multiplied into terminal debt.
He cannot be guilty either then for suppressing interest rates, because lower interest rates extend the maximum possible lifespan of any purported "economy" subject to interest.
Thus in why he did not defend himself with these arguments rests the facts of guilt, for the whole while of chairing a process which can only faster or slower multiply debt into terminal debt, the only thing for a board of "directors" to see is that they are generating ever more terminal, insoluble sums of debt. Moreover, they have nowhere but interest to look for the cause of that multiplication, because interest is the only process attached to a currency which has obviously been imposed for this purpose.
So they know this: they know that so long as the interest they intend to impose upon us perpetually multiplies profit as it is intended, debt will multiply in proportion to the obligated circulation, for this ever escalating sum of debt is the very means by which they intend to take ever escalating unearned profit.
Why then did Greenspan pretend to take blame, when, unless the so called "Federal" "Reserve" eradicated interest, then no matter how fast or more moderately Greenspan (or anyone before or since) multiplied debt, our present, terminal circumstances nonetheless were inevitable?
Shame on you, for not knowing the answer to that question:
The whole purpose of the system is multiplying exploitation by the vehicle of "interest" even if any rate of interest inherently and inevitably generates terminal sums of debt.
What Greenspan and the MSNBC talking heads are altogether to blame for then, is placing the blame in a false place, so that you might not perceive the terminal nature of their system.
Mr. Greenspan, if you remember, could not hold interest rates above the points he did, for his suppression of the rates all that while was to extend the lifespan of the pretended economy.
Why?
In the final stages of the finite lifespan of any purported economy subject to interest, reducing the rates of interest (perpetually) extends the lifespan (temporarily) by making it affordable to replenish the circulation (by, necessarily, re-borrowing further principal and interest, which results in a yet greater, otherwise less affordable sum of debt).
If the talking heads had their way with interest regulation, we would have collapsed long ago.
If they have their way with perpetuation of the system... well, we're already spiraling out of control, with the only hope of substantial extension being impossible, because we have reached the limits of what debt we can afford to service.
This is the very failure which our computer models projected long ago; and it is the very failure which you can avert, and which you can avert immediately, only by adopting mathematically perfected economy.
Today, because interest is the cause of failure, what do we have?
We have other countries following suit.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 3 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of mike montagne (PFMPE) only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. mike montagne (PFMPE) is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
This clearly demonstrates that the ongoing exploitation (enslavement via taxation) of humanity will inevitably render itself unfeasible. What then? What new form of exploitation will replace the current system? I'm not holding my breath in anticipation of a return to hard currency and individual liberty any time soon.
Master C...It is not nearly as tired and lame as the obvious fact that with the multitude of official Keynesian, Neo-Classical Econometricians, lauded for the Ph.D.s in economics, didn't have the where with all to either predict the formation of a huge bubble or see it deflating as fast as it has. It is amazing that this country places so much faith in such FED Fakirs like Greenspan and now Bernanke, along with their hosts of approved "economists", I am sure they attended the same shool of economic thought as you.
In the interview I heard, the only blame Greenspan would admit to was that of believing Capitalists would act in a way to keep their "reputation" intact. In other words, everything would have been okay if people making decisions had acted in whatever way Alan thought was the best way. He said he no longer held that as true. He never once admitted[in that same interview] to making a wrong decision when he chaired the FED. To that he answered, "none of us could have known". He was either telling a mistruth or they are all stupid? or slow witted? I have read that he claims to be a Libertarian. I think this points out how people can justify their actions with any belief. After all, it is called neo-liberal economics and it can be seen as a "liberation" from the constraints of a fixed money, therefore "liberating" people to do as they see fit rather than do what is necessary to maintain economic stability. So contrary to common thought, the Libertarian concept can be used to support the Fiat money system. A bit like using Atheism to prove the existence of God, can you not believe in something that doesn't exist? That aside, I think you make a good point, the problem is systemic, but I still believe a big excavator full of blame can be thrown his way.
Posted By: mike montagne
Date: 2008-12-27 22:17:15
Master C,
I'm the original author of the much-since-borrowed thesis that any purported economy subject to interest ultimately terminates itself under insoluble debt; and that there is one and one only integral solution to 1) inflation and deflation, 2) systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money or property, and 3) inherent, irreversible multiplication of debt in proportion to a circulation (originally published in 1979, after 10 years of speaking on mathematically perfected economy™).
If this were old hat, we'd have solution. If we should be singing a different song, *WHAT EXACTLY IS IT*? Can you disprove the thesis?
If not, THERE IS ONE AND ONE SONG ONLY; and it is only those such as yourself who fail to hear it *or* refute it that we may as well not be singing at all.
If you had an alternate solution, and anything to contribute, you would have presented that as your argument. If you can't disprove the thesis of a singular solution, who are you to cry against solution?
Posted By: mike montagne
Date: 2008-12-27 22:25:21
gene,
To be clear, a reason for this article is the many false proponents of solution who are claiming Greenspan restrained interest rates for too long. To be sure, absolutely, Greenspan is at fault for sitting in the driver's seat of the vehicle which could only take us out. A purpose of the article then is to identify the systemic cause of failure, so that we can understand the following:
1. We have to eradicate interest to avert failure;
2. Neither Greenspan or anyone else who takes that driver's seat is going to do that;
3. And the great danger of this recent class of advocate is both the lie that we profit from *elevated* interest; and the further lie which they further fail to qualify, that they somehow know better.
Anyone who remembers the limitations of the moment remembers that elevated interest rates could not be restored, because "the economy" was so faltering at the brink of caving in under the moment's debt.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
