In the realm of economic discourse, we often grapple with a mix of facts, opinions, and the troubling consequences that stem from them. Understanding the nuances of these elements is crucial for navigating today’s complex financial landscape.
To start, let’s establish some concrete truths: Water boils at 212 degrees Fahrenheit under standard atmospheric conditions. It’s impossible to square the circle using a compass and straightedge. The sun is a star.
It’s important not to conflate facts with opinions, which are subjective and based on personal observations. For instance, calling Barack Obama’s throwing style uncoordinated or declaring that the Federal Register is unhelpful are simply opinions. But are these viewpoints correct or erroneous?
The answer varies depending on the individual’s perspective. One thing is certain: opinions abound, much like bellybuttons—everyone possesses one. Furthermore, unlike the notion of free handouts from the government, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
Next, we encounter the absurd, often represented by the utterly nonsensical. This category encompasses a wide range of figures, not limited to university professors outside of the physical sciences, as well as certain editors from major publications and circus performers.
Lastly, we delve into the realm of the downright sinister. This group includes individuals and institutions such as sociopaths like Hillary Clinton and John McCain, along with many members of Congress, the Federal Reserve, and various Wall Street players. These entities do not symbolize honest labor; rather, they embody malfeasance in the realm of finance.
Nixon Casts the Die
As we proceed, our focus shifts to the profound implications of the sinister actions that have characterized financial dealings. A critical event in this narrative is President Richard Nixon’s decision to close the gold window in 1971, effectively severing the final link between currency and tangible assets. At that time, the national debt stood at under $400 billion, a stark contrast to the current figure exceeding $20 trillion. It’s now commonplace for annual budget deficits to eclipse $1 trillion.
This ballooning national debt is not isolated solely to the government; corporate and consumer debt have also skyrocketed. Since 1971, nonfinancial corporate debt has surged over 3,200 percent, while consumer debt has reached a staggering $12.8 trillion.
Despite this debt escalation, and the inflation of the money supply that accompanies it, economic growth has stagnated. One might expect that such rampant inflation would naturally lead to rising consumer prices. Yet, consumer price indices often report minimal increases.
This discrepancy arises partly due to deliberate manipulations by government statisticians at the Bureau of Labor Statistics, employing techniques like hedonic price adjustments, price deflators, and seasonal adjustments. These strategies effectively mask the reality of consumer price inflation, thus obscuring the impact of the Federal Reserve’s ongoing debasement of currency.
What good is it to secure a high-performance laptop for $500 or a pair of jeans for $20 if the majority of your income is consumed by rent and healthcare costs? Furthermore, obtaining a college education has increasingly necessitated incurring substantial debt.
The Downright Sinister Rearrangement of Riches
The disparity between affordable consumer goods and the skyrocketing costs of essential living expenses illustrates the true consequences of government actions that continually siphon resources from wage earners, student borrowers, and retirees on fixed incomes.
For those who haven’t thoroughly examined the repercussions of Nixon’s gold window closure, understanding its effects can be elusive. However, the disastrous outcomes of such policies, including pervasive debt servitude, have been evident throughout history.
Notably, John Maynard Keynes, a prominent figure in modern economic theory, acknowledged this truth. He offered insights into the detrimental relationship between currency debasement and economic stability in his 1919 work, *The Economic Consequences of the Peace*:
“Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the capitalist system was to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and, while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some. The sight of this arbitrary rearrangement of riches strikes not only at security but at confidence in the equity of the existing distribution of wealth.”
“Those to whom the system brings windfalls, beyond their deserts and even beyond their expectations or desires, become ‘profiteers,’ who are the object of the hatred of the bourgeoisie, whom inflation has impoverished, not less than of the proletariat. As inflation progresses and the real value of currency fluctuates wildly, the fundamental relationships between debtors and creditors, the foundation of capitalism, become so utterly disordered as to be almost meaningless; and the process of wealth acquisition degenerates into a gamble and a lottery.”
“Lenin was certainly right. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.”
Is there a more precise diagnosis of the current systemic theft? Given this landscape, how should one respond?
First, endure the situation with a sense of humor. Then, continue to withstand the ongoing changes. Ultimately, consider investing in gold as a safeguard against financial uncertainties.
Sincerely,
MN Gordon
for Economic Prism
Return from The Downright Sinister Rearrangement of Riches to Economic Prism
