Wednesday, November 18, 2009

The Grand Wobble! Part 2.1

  • It has occurred to me that putting my recent post on hyper-inflation in some sort of context would be useful. There is a method to all the madness of (what may be characterized in general terms as) "money destruction". Here is my brief, but I hope not overly reductive analysis of what is happening and why.

The Fed and Wall Street Banks, who are puppeteering D.C.'s sickening charade from behind what amounts to a sheer curtain, are engaged in a time honored practice known in military circles as "The Pincer Movement".

There are two sides to the pincer movement. In this appalling example, one side of the pincer involves the entire alphabet soup of banker bailout rip-off programs, while the other side of the pincer involves some modicum of stealth, and focuses on the debasement of the U.S. currency. Both sides of the pincer serve the banker's ends, which are to eradicate their indebtedness at our expense. Their success depends on the complicity of the political class, maintained through well documented carrot and stick actions, MSM misinformation and propaganda, and last, but certainly not least, (drum roll, please) ignorance and cowardice on the part of "We The People."

The already enacted side of the pincer (TARP, TALF, etc. etc.) amounts to a particularly thuggish robbery perpetrated on the public in broad daylight, while the other side of the pincer movement might be likened to the sort of villainy engaged in by a skimming criminal accountant/money manager against a too trusting client who wakes up one day, only to find that, where their assets are concerned, there is no there there.

Why are they doing this? Well, let's start with the most obvious answer-but not necessarily a wrong answer for being so obvious- "they" are sociopaths, all genuine gangsters-and if they are anything, Wall Street bank(st)ers are that-are sociopaths to a greater or lesser degree. And so, being without a sufficient helping of conscience or empathy, these public predators have no compunction about ruining tens of millions of lives. The second answer to the question posed, which follows on from the "sociopath thesis", is that they are doing it, because they can.


Toby said...

Hi Edwardo,

as you can probably well guess, I think you're barking up the right tree here. I even think we have a sociopathic socioeconomic system, or rather one that tends, over time, towards sociopathy, particularly in conditions where its fundamental assumptions -- scarcity, perpetual growth and labour -- are under profound attack. Economics is largely to blame, but economics is an inescapable manifestation and almost custom-designed tool of the status quo. I don't mean this as some grand conspiracy, but logically and organically. The core assumptions touched on above kind of give rise to our far from accurate economics.

Most likely we agree the system needs a shake down and good going over. I'm all for open, cross-discipline debates, as you know. Are you still up for working on that idea?


(I caught Glenn Beck via Karl Denninger's blog yesterday and he made me feel sick. Not sure what to do with this...)

Edwardo said...

Toby wrote:

"Economics is largely to blame, but economics is an inescapable manifestation and almost custom-designed tool of the status quo. "

Yes, it's why the economics of Keynes and Friedman have held sway for so long; they comport entirely with the agendas of the political and banking class. In short, they are not empirically valid, merely convenient.

The two aforementioned branches of the economics trade amount to one giant data fitting fraud that have been foisted onto the body politic whether we like it or not. And now, their manifest failure is being veneered over- and this has been the case for over a decade -by official economic metrics that distort the raw economic data to the point-and this is the point- that the actual condition of the U.S. economy appears merely unwell as opposed to terminally sclerotic. Hence the need for "The Pincer Movement."

Gil Heron-Scott famously said, "The revolution will not be televised". Well, that remains to be seen, but what is clear to me is that the attempts to cover up and paper over this nation's steady economic disintegration-along with other sorts of failures- will go on right up to the point that it is no longer possible to do so. When that point is I don't know, and I'm not looking forward to its arrival.

I like the open, cross discipline debates. I thought you were honing some questions. Is there something you would like me to do?

Regarding Glenn Beck, was it what he said regarding the dollar carry trade that made you feel sick, or something else?

Toby said...

Hi Edwardo,

I agree entirely with your response. The question it raises is whether the coming collapse is viewed by some as right and proper in that they want a two tier world of the haves and have-nots. I don't like to worry, but the thought of that does actually frighten me more than sociopaths being loose in the asylum.

It seems something got lost in the mix regarding our debate discussion. I posted my polished list of themes with their attendant questions a while back; it is comment #31 under whichever thread that was.

What made me nauseous about Glenn Beck was his romantic attachment to a system -- which is by many seen as somehow divorced from where we are now -- which worked just fine in the good old days. This romantic attachment, which comes in many flavors, is too naive and patriotic for my taste, leaving me feeling more anxious than reassured that at least someone out there is doing the right sort of analysis. As you know, I think the way out of this will prove to be a global process, not a national one. America's current fixation with some mythical America of the past is in the way of recognizing this important fact.

Edwardo said...

Okay, my bad on the Questions/debate topics. I know what you are referring to without even looking. So what next is the question.

As for Beck, yes, he does, in some way, shape, and form, represent those who traffic in the nonsensical "we must return to a pristine and rustic past" argument. However, he is not, by any means, all bad. After all, he did give voice to the Reverend Billy
who I featured a few posts back.

I have my sympathies for the part of "vision" that frets over the dismantling of The Bill of Rights, but not much else.

Toby said...

"So what next is the question."

I've put my thinking hat on.

In that you did not comment on the polished list, does this mean that we'll leave them as they are for now? Including the rather heavily pencilled Moore/Beck deadly duo?

Edwardo said...

Yes, leave them as they are for the time being.