Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: elmatador who wrote (34737)	5/14/2008 2:44:15 AM
From: Nikole Wollerstein	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217617

The Twilight of Irredeemable Debt by Antal E. Fekete, Gold Standard University Live April 28, 2008 Wagner’s opera Gotterdämmerung is about the twilight of pagan gods. The most powerful of the latter-day pagan gods that has been guiding the destinies of humanity for the past two-score of years is Irredeemable Debt. Before August 14, 1971, debts were obligations, and the word “bond” was to mean literally what it said: the opposite of freedom. The privilege of issuing debt had a countervailing responsibility: that of repayment. On that fateful day all that was changed by a stroke of the pen. President Nixon embraced the woolly theory of Milton Friedman and declared the irredeemable dollar a Monad, that is, a thing that exists in and of itself. According to this theory the government has the power to create irredeemable debt ? debt that never needs to be repaid yet will not lose its value ? subject only to a “quantity rule”, e.g., it must not be increased by more than 3 percent annually. This idea is so preposterously silly that “only very learned men could have thought of it”. If the thief is thieving modestly, then he will not be detected. It never occurred to the professors of economics and financial journalists that a modest thief is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms. How did they get to believing in irredeemable debt? The explanation is most likely found in Schiller’s dictum: “Anyone taken as an individual is tolerably sensible and reasonable. But taken as a member of a crowd ? he at once becomes a blockhead”. Economics professors and financial journalists are no exception. For a time it appeared that Milton Friedman was right. The world has become dedicated to the proposition that it is possible, even desirable, to expand irredeemable debt in order to make the economy prosper. Never mind the default of the U.S. government on its bonded debt held by foreigners. Never mind people victimized by theft. Thanks to the quantity rule, they will never notice the difference. For all its seductive attractiveness Friedmanite economics is ignoring the effect of irredeemable debt on productivity. It watches debt per GDP and is happy as long as this ratio stays below 100 percent by a fair amount. However, what should be watched is the ratio of additional debt to additional GDP. By that indicator the patient’s condition could be diagnosed as that of pernicious anemia. It set in immediately after the dollar debt in the world was converted into irredeemable debt. The increase in GDP brought about by the addition of $1 of new debt to the economy is called the marginal productivity of debt. That ratio is the only one that matters in judging the quality of debt. After all, the purpose of contracting debt is to increase productivity. If debt volume rises faster than national income, there is big trouble is brewing, but only the marginal productivity of debt is capable of revealing it. Before 1971 the introduction of $1 new debt used to increase the GDP by as much as $3 or more. Since 1971 this ratio started its precipitous decline that has continued to this day without interruption. It went negative in 2006, forecasting the financial crisis that broke a year later. The reason for the decline is that irredeemable debt causes capital destruction. It adds nothing to the per capita quota of capital invested in aid of production. Indeed, it may take away from it. As it displaces real capital which represents the deployment of more and better tools, productivity declines. The laws of physics, unlike human beings, cannot be conned. Irredeemable debt may only create make-belief capital.