Wednesday, April 9, 2014

Wednesday, April 9, 2014

AUSTRIANS UNDERSTAND THE ROLE OF ENTREPRENEURS:  For capitalism to work requires catalysts.

REVIEW OF A BOOK ABOUT THE SIMILARITIES BETWEEN LIBERALISM AND PROGRESSIVISM:  This sounds like a most interesting read.


AND SO HOW DOES EVERYTHING SEEM TO 'KEEP ON TRUCKIN'?  Good question.  My friend Jim was predicting the system's collapse for 20 years or more before his death in 2008, based on his extensive research (he was for years the Director of Research of a leading NYSE brokerage firm.  He was also acquainted with Alan Greenspan, whom he hired as a consultant to his firm long before Greenspan became the FRS Chairman.  One has to wonder what's going on in a financial world in which speculators (George Soros, et al) can make millions, billion on various "bets" on currency movement and the like  Do they know something the rest of us don't?  The answer to that question is undoubtedly, yes, but what but what that is not many seem to know.

The Death of Money

Wednesday, April 9, 2014
The prospect of the dollar failing, and the international monetary system with it, looks increasingly inevitable. The dollar nearly ceased to function as the world’s reserve currency in 1978, and similar symptoms can be seen today.

Few Americans in our time recall that the dollar nearly ceased to function as the world’s reserve currency in 1978. That year the Federal Reserve dollar index declined to a distressingly low level, and the U.S. Treasury was forced to issue government bonds denominated in Swiss francs. Foreign creditors no longer trusted the U.S. dollar as a store of value. The dollar was losing purchasing power, dropping by half from 1977 to 1981; U.S. inflation was over 50 percent during those five years. Starting in 1979, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) had little choice but to mobilize its resources to issue world money (special drawing rights, or SDRs). It flooded the market with 12.1 billion SDRs to provide liquidity as global confidence in the dollar declined.
We would do well to recall those dark days. The price of gold rose 500 percent from 1977 to 1980. What began as a managed dollar devaluation in 1971, with President Richard Nixon’s abandonment of gold convertibility, became a full-scale rout by the decade’s end.
The efforts of Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker and the newly elected Ronald Reagan would save the dollar. The dollar did not disappear as the world’s reserve currency after 1978, but it was a near run thing.
Now the world is back to the future.
The parallels between 1978 and recent events are eerie but imperfect.
A similar constellation of symptoms to those of 1978 can be seen in the world economy today. In July 2011 the Federal Reserve dollar index hit an all-time low, over 4 percent below the October 1978 panic level. In August 2009 the IMF once again acted as a monetary first responder and rode to the rescue with a new issuance of SDRs, equivalent to $310 billion, increasing the SDRs in circulation by 850 percent. In early September gold prices reached an all-time high, near $1,900 per ounce, up more than 200 percent from the average price in 2006, just before the new depression began.
The parallels between 1978 and recent events are eerie but imperfect. There was an element ravaging the world then that is not apparent today. It is the dog that didn’t bark: inflation. But the fact that we aren’t hearing the dog doesn’t mean it poses no danger. And from the Federal Reserve’s perspective, inflation is not a threat; indeed, higher inflation is both the Fed’s answer to the debt crisis and a policy objective.
The Death of MoneyThis pro-inflation policy is an invitation to disaster, even as baffled Fed critics scratch their heads at the apparent absence of inflation in the face of unprecedented money printing by the Federal Reserve and other major central banks. Many ponder how it is that the Fed has increased the base money supply 400 percent since 2008 with practically no inflation. But two explanations are very much at hand — and they foretell the potential for collapse. The first is that the U.S. economy is structurally damaged, so the easy money cannot be put to good use. The second is that the inflation is coming. Both explanations are true — the economy is broken, and inflation is on its way.
The world economy is not yet in the “new normal.” Instead, the world is on a journey from old to new with no compass or chart. Turbulence is now the norm.
Danger comes from within and without. We have a misplaced confidence that central banks can save the day; in fact, they are ruining our markets. The value-at-risk models used by Wall Street and regulators to measure the dangers that derivatives pose are risible; they mask overleveraging, which is shamelessly transformed into grotesque compensation that is throwing our society out of balance. When the hidden costs come home to roost and taxpayers are once again stuck with the bill, the bankers will be comfortably ensconced inside their mansions and aboard their yachts. The titans will explain to credulous reporters and bought-off politicians that the new collapse was nothing they could have foreseen.
While we refuse to face truths about debts and deficits, dozens of countries all over the globe are putting pressure on the dollar. We think the gold standard is a historical relic, but there’s a contemporary scramble for gold around the world, and it may signify a move to return to the gold standard. We greatly underestimate the dangers from a cyberfinancial attack and the risks of a financial world war.
Regression analysis and correlations, so beloved by finance quants and economists, are ineffective for navigating the risks ahead. These analyses assume that the future resembles the past to an extent. History is a great teacher, but the quants’ suppositions contain fatal flaws. The first is that in looking back, they do not look far enough. The second flaw involves the quants’ failures to understand scaling dynamics that place certain risk measurements outside history. Since potential risk is an exponential function of system scale, and since the scale of financial systems measured by derivatives is unprecedented, it follows that the risk too is unprecedented.
The economy is broken, and inflation is on its way.
While the word collapse as applied to the dollar sounds apocalyptic, it has an entirely pragmatic meaning. Collapse is simply the loss of confidence by citizens and central banks in the future purchasing power of the dollar. The result is that holders dump dollars, either through faster spending or through the purchase of hard assets. This rapid behavioral shift leads initially to higher interest rates, higher inflation, and the destruction of capital formation. The end result can be deflation (reminiscent of the 1930s) or inflation (reminiscent of the 1970s), or both.
The coming collapse of the dollar and the international monetary system is entirely foreseeable. This is not a provocative conclusion. The international monetary system has collapsed three times in the past century — in 1914, 1939, and 1971. Each collapse was followed by a tumultuous period. The coming collapse, like those before, may involve war, gold, or chaos, or it could involve all three. The most imminent threats to the dollar, likely to play out in the next few years, are financial warfare, deflation, hyperinflation, and market collapse. Only nations and individuals who make provision today will survive the maelstrom to come.
In place of fallacious, if popular, methods, complexity theory is the best lens for viewing present risks and likely outcomes. Capital markets are complex systems nonpareil. Complexity theory is relatively new in the history of science, but in its 60 years it has been extensively applied to weather, earthquakes, social networks, and other densely connected systems. The application of complexity theory to capital markets is still in its infancy, but it has already yielded insights into risk metrics and price dynamics that possess greater predictive power than conventional methods.
The next financial collapse will resemble nothing in history. But a more cleared-eyed view of opaque financial happenings in our world can help investors think through the best strategies.
This article is adapted from “The Death of Money: The Coming Collapse of the International Monetary System” by James Rickards, in agreement with Portfolio, an imprint of Penguin Random House. Copyright James Rickards, 2014.

James Rickards is the author of the national bestseller Currency Wars. He is a portfolio manager at West Shore Group and an adviser on international economics and financial threats to the Department of Defense and the U.S. intelligence community.
FURTHER READINGSteve Conover adds “Money Printing Isn't Always Inflationary” and Kenneth Gould explains “Sound Money vs. Stable Money.” John Steele Gordon asks “Good as Gold?” and John H. Makin offers “All That Glitters: A Primer on the Gold Standard.”


Monday, April 7, 2014

Monday, April 7, 2014

THE RECENT DARTMOUTH COLLEGE "TAKEOVER" BY FASCISTIC STUDENTS IS ONE MORE MANIFESTATION OF THIS GROUP THINK TOTALITARIANISM:

ROOTS OF TOTALITARIAN LIBERALISM

With the cashiering of Brandon Eich as Mozilla’s chief executive officer last week, we are struggling to understand what we have just seen. There is an important book that remains to be written about the totalitarian imperative at the heart of liberalism, and the insight into the nature of the larger forces at work is one of the many reasons Eich’s forced departure strikes a nerve. It is a revealing moment. This is where we are headed.
Former New York Times reporter Richard Bernstein took a stab at documenting the phenomenon in its manifestation as multiculturalism. In Dictatorship of Virtue, Bernstein writes that “the multiculturalist rhetoric has the rest of us on the run, on the run for fear of being branded…racist” and so on. “In such a way does multiculturalism limit discussion: it makes people feel afraid to say what they think and feel; it presents dubious and cranky interpretations as self-evident, indisputable truths.”
Benstein’s book was published in the glorious dawn of the Clinton administration, and yet it resonates. Its analysis extends beyond the operation of the articles of multicultural faith. Bernstein continues, describing the doctrine: “It often operates, not through the usual means of civil discourse and persuasion, but via intimidation and intellectual decree. It rewrites history.”
And not just that! “It sanctions a cultivation of aggrievemnt, a constant claim of victimization, an excessive, fussy self-pitying sort of wariness that induces others to spout pieties. And that, in turn, covers public discussion of crucial issues with a layer of fear, so that we can no longer speak forthrightly and honestly about matters such as crime, race poverty, AIDS, the failure of schools, single- parenthood, affirmative action, racial preferences, welfare, college admissions, merit, the breakup of the family, and the disintegration of urban life.” The latter is of course a phenomenon of one-party, left-wing rule in our big cities.
Bernstein was on to something. In the thesis he offered in his underdeveloped prologue, he traced the phenomenon back to the French Revolution. Yuval Levin explores the terrain most recently in greater depth in his new book on the birth of right and left in the argument between Edmund Burke and Thomas Paine over the French Revolution.
Whether or not the impulse runs back to the French Revolution, or to the Marxist tropism of left liberalism, the tendency is totalitarian. It is not just dissent that must be stifled, it is “incorrect” thought, for incorrect thought may lead to incorrect speech and incorrect speech may lead to incorrect action. The book on the roots of totalitarian liberalism that remains to be written would be an important book.
The Progressive faith of the modern American left is devoted to rule by experts, to unlimited government, to repeal of the distinction between public and private. Thus the constant erosion of the structures intended to protect us from the manipulation and control of the state. Government without end, Amen. It is, dear readers, un-American.
Kevin Williamson usefully assimilates the Mozilla moment into a larger pattern in “The Liberal Gulag.” Williamson doesn’t address Mozilla’s statement explaining itself. It is an important document in its own right, for it supports Williamson’s thesis, suggesting that we are entering the world that George Orwell wrote about in 1984, i.e., the world of the Gulag.

Sunday, April 6, 2014

Sunday, April 6, 2014

DEMOCRAT PARTY ATTACKS ON THE KOCK BROTHERS, THEIR COMPANIES, AND THEM PERSONALLY HAVE BEEN OFF THE PAGE.  HERE'S A MODEST PUSH BACK.

Koch: I'm Fighting to Restore a Free Society

Instead of welcoming free debate, collectivists engage in character assassination.

  • By Charles G. Koch
  • Updated April 2, 2014 7:47 p.m. ET
    I have devoted most of my life to understanding the principles that enable people to improve their lives. It is those principles—the principles of a free society—that have shaped my life, my family, our company and America itself.
    Unfortunately, the fundamental concepts of dignity, respect, equality before the law and personal freedom are under attack by the nation's own government. That's why, if we want to restore a free society and create greater well-being and opportunity for all Americans, we have no choice but to fight for those principles. I have been doing so for more than 50 years, primarily through educational efforts. It was only in the past decade that I realized the need to also engage in the political process.
    A truly free society is based on a vision of respect for people and what they value. In a truly free society, any business that disrespects its customers will fail, and deserves to do so. The same should be true of any government that disrespects its citizens. The central belief and fatal conceit of the current administration is that you are incapable of running your own life, but those in power are capable of running it for you. This is the essence of big government and collectivism.
    More than 200 years ago, Thomas Jefferson warned that this could happen. "The natural progress of things," Jefferson wrote, "is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." He knew that no government could possibly run citizens' lives for the better. The more government tries to control, the greater the disaster, as shown by the current health-care debacle. Collectivists (those who stand for government control of the means of production and how people live their lives) promise heaven but deliver hell. For them, the promised end justifies the means.
    Instead of encouraging free and open debate, collectivists strive to discredit and intimidate opponents. They engage in character assassination. (I should know, as the almost daily target of their attacks.) This is the approach that Arthur Schopenhauer described in the 19th century, that Saul Alinsky famously advocated in the 20th, and that so many despots have infamously practiced. Such tactics are the antithesis of what is required for a free society—and a telltale sign that the collectivists do not have good answers.
    Rather than try to understand my vision for a free society or accurately report the facts about Koch Industries, our critics would have you believe we're "un-American" and trying to "rig the system," that we're against "environmental protection" or eager to "end workplace safety standards." These falsehoods remind me of the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan's observation, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Here are some facts about my philosophy and our company:
    Koch companies employ 60,000 Americans, who make many thousands of products that Americans want and need. According to government figures, our employees and the 143,000 additional American jobs they support generate nearly $11.7 billion in compensation and benefits. About one-third of our U.S.-based employees are union members.
    Koch employees have earned well over 700 awards for environmental, health and safety excellence since 2009, many of them from the Environmental Protection Agency and Occupational Safety and Health Administration. EPA officials have commended us for our "commitment to a cleaner environment" and called us "a model for other companies."
    Our refineries have consistently ranked among the best in the nation for low per-barrel emissions. In 2012, our Total Case Incident Rate (an important safety measure) was 67% better than a Bureau of Labor Statistics average for peer industries. Even so, we have never rested on our laurels. We believe there is always room for innovation and improvement.
    Far from trying to rig the system, I have spent decades opposing cronyism and all political favors, including mandates, subsidies and protective tariffs—even when we benefit from them. I believe that cronyism is nothing more than welfare for the rich and powerful, and should be abolished.
    Koch Industries was the only major producer in the ethanol industry to argue for the demise of the ethanol tax credit in 2011. That government handout (which cost taxpayers billions) needlessly drove up food and fuel prices as well as other costs for consumers—many of whom were poor or otherwise disadvantaged. Now the mandate needs to go, so that consumers and the marketplace are the ones who decide the future of ethanol.
    Instead of fostering a system that enables people to help themselves, America is now saddled with a system that destroys value, raises costs, hinders innovation and relegates millions of citizens to a life of poverty, dependency and hopelessness. This is what happens when elected officials believe that people's lives are better run by politicians and regulators than by the people themselves. Those in power fail to see that more government means less liberty, and liberty is the essence of what it means to be American. Love of liberty is the American ideal.
    If more businesses (and elected officials) were to embrace a vision of creating real value for people in a principled way, our nation would be far better off—not just today, but for generations to come. I'm dedicated to fighting for that vision. I'm convinced most Americans believe it's worth fighting for, too.
    Mr. Koch is chairman and CEO of Koch Industries.