So the G-20 met but it seems like a great waste of time and money. They have agreed to meet later toward achieving all great buzz words: transparency, coordination, accountability, and stabilization.
Source link: http://blog.mises.org/8959/the-great-leaders-meet/
{ 14 comments }
Transparency – Austrian economists easily see right through their fallacious economic schemes.
Coordination – The catch word for hegemony.
Accountability – Without a doubt it is these ego-driven interventionists that are responsible for the injustices resulting from their economic terrorism.
Stabilization – Since these empiricists imagine that the world operates according to their fallacious models and since they assume they are at the equilibrium point (by necessity) they see stability. In contrast disequilibrium is the reality and stabilization is the sweeping force of equilibrium which will annihilate the schemes devised by their petty minds.
Well, after all the State is a god, and its high priests can create a reality like “stabilization” by merely reciting the word.
From the article:
“…and [Bush] seemed enthusiastic about one of the more arcane proposals: a clearinghouse for the $33 trillion market in credit default swaps. … A clearinghouse would back trades in credit default swaps and absorb losses if a dealer in these securities failed.”
I’m curious to know what the Austrian take is on this proposal. If the government had allowed a systematic failure in the market for credit default swaps, what would have happened? Would the courts be tied up with a ton of lawsuits, or would some sort of clearing take place? (i.e. If company A owes company B 1 billion, and company B owes company A 1.2 billion, then their debts will be settled when company B pays company A 0.2 billion)
Are the mainstream economists afraid that we won’t have any clearing in the event of a huge failure in the market for credit default swaps? Or are they scared of something else? I guess they want this ‘central clearinghouse’ to absorb losses, but why? Why can’t the individual market participants take losses (and go bankrupt if necessary)?
I have a dream. That the judgement day of fiat money is at hand, people will finally wake up and stop listening to what those baboons say, and that this will be the last such meeting anybody will pay attention to.
Hahahahahahaha!…. right.
I don’t mean to sound paranoid, but I really wouldn’t be surprised if the goal of these meetings was to move towards a one world currency, with a global central bank controlling it.
November 16, 2008
The Hierarchy Of The Worldwide Monetary Hegemony?
Ron Paul is a great educator. He speaks clearly about how the market works to coordinate the economy, shattering the fallacies of the interventionists. He speaks about empowerment of the people which can come about by removing the disruptive and parasitic practices of the government.
Another interesting point that he makes is the fact that the real meeting taking place is not the one covered by the media with the pomp of the Heads of State but rather the even more secretive summit of the leaders of the central banks where the real scheming is taking place.
I am trying to piece together the hierarchy of the world monetary hegemony. It is certain that the inner circle of the unConstitutional coup in the United States is intimately involved. Since the dollar became the world reserve currency the unConstitutional coup has extended its reach far beyond the U.S. borders via central banks worldwide.
Here is a probable description of the hierarchy: the unConstitutional coup (because of its accumulation of power) still is in the dominant position, next in line are the power elites running the central banks, then significantly farther down the totem pole are the Heads of State whose egos are stroked by the higher ups but who are specifically assigned to perpetuate the ever-expanding power grab of the unConstitutional coup.
Dear Blah,
In my opinion, what would have happened if they had a clearing house is the exact same thing. You see, when the Federal Reserve bailed out LTCM in 1998, it sent the market the messg loud and clear that there was no counter-party risk in any other bank. I don’t see anything in this scheme that would change their behavior or the reckless expansion of derivatives since then.
IMHO, what this clearing house is really about is keeping things glued together and money flowing while they pump in even more credit.
Here is a link to an interesting article in the WSJ. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122670411909729683.html titled The Meltdown That Wasn’t,
A primer on credit default swaps, the latest Beltway scapegoat.
Here are two short excerpts:
“Shattering Beltway illusions, the unregulated CDS market is holding up better than the regulated bond market. Here we are more than a year into the credit meltdown and the CDS market is offering more liquidity than the actual cash market. Eraj Shirvani at Credit Suisse notes that “over the last 18 months, the CDS market — not the bond market — has been the only functioning market that has consistently allowed market participants to hedge or express a credit view.”
“It turned out to be the meltdown that never melted. Amazing as it is to Washington ears, those greedy, crazy people running large financial institutions did a decent job of managing their exposures to Lehman. When large banks and insurance companies were vulnerable to Lehman, many had offsetting trades that paid off when Lehman went bust. The net amount of $6 billion owed by sellers of credit protection on Lehman was far smaller than expected and was arrived at through the same orderly settlement auction process that has smoothly managed about a dozen such failures — and all without government regulation.”
Please read the article and comment.
Of course they are plannning something. It may not become reality, but you can be certain that they are proposing plans.
If I were to tell my neighbor that I saw a local developer meeting a township trustee for lunch and hypothesized that the developer was looking for some advantage, my neighbor would readily accept my proposition.
Change the locale to the state capital and the schemers and the issue to the state-level, and my neighbor would still accept my proposition.
Step up a few levels — to the federal or international ones — and all of a sudden my hypothesis is written off as just another conspiracy theory.
Does anyone really believe that human nature — which drove a local developer to rent a local politician — simply disappears when the rent becomes upscale?
‘Conspiracy theory’ is a simplified and derogatory label. As economists in the classical liberalism tradition, as deductive thinkers, it is natural to use logic to explore cause and effect.
Is it a conspiracy theory to recognize that there are beneficiaries to interventionism? No, it is logical.
Is it a conspiracy theory to identify the effects caused by interventionism? No, there is a cause and there is an effect.
Belittling the search for sources of the corruptions in the economy by labeling it a ‘conspiracy theory’ serves only to shelter the ones who are both deliberate in their power-grabbing and ignorant that their interventionism is actually economic terrorism.
Caleb,
For most of the economic history of the world we have a one world currency. It was called gold. It is not a one world currency we need to worry about but what it will look like.
Only in government can we have a situation where the leadership of a country that has virtually destroyed the nation’s economy through central planning call together the leaders of 20 other countries that have also destroyed their economies through central planning with the intention of centrally planning the economy of the whole world.
Jim,
I think it depends on the political affiliation your neighbor.
Whatever these bozos did, why the heck didn’t they just do it via a conference call, or a video conference? There’s no telling how many millions of dollars got blown on this silly little shindig.
Comments on this entry are closed.