My 100th Post!! – America’s Superiority Complex May Have Precipitated the Next Great Depression

EurAmerica has created a banking bubble that will be very difficult to unwind. We allowed the bubble to evolve because we have never relented from our grander perception of the European civilization in the community of civilizations. As such, after mercantilism resulted in the slave trade, industrialization ended in colonialism, and Bretton Woods preceded post-colonial national indenturement via the IMF and the World Bank, it seems EurAmerica boxed ourselves into an aggrandized monetary corner.

America singularly fell into the superiority trap when we assumed that our obsessive post war desire for a military to overwhelm all other militaries was desired of us by the rest of the world as well. At the end of WWII, America found herself having to fund our re-establishment of our international commerce by rebuilding the rest of the world including vanquished and allies alike. As we built our communist protectorate, it seemed infeasible that we could collect payments from other nations to both pay for our policing powers and for the Marshall plan, for earlier post war reparations beget Weimar Germany and WWII.

Yet America had most of the gold and the world had not yet let go of the concept of gold backed currency so all other nations needed gold backed dollars post war. It seemed only natural for a superior minded America then to charge other nations a fee through a debasement of our dollar. As a logical next step, when America desired to fund our Great Society and Vietnam, it was easy for our superior government to rationalize borrowing through additional money creation.

This exuberance and arrogance of easy money printing finally gave way to a misguided concept held by America’s central bank that perhaps the world’s first worldwide dollar reserve currency could actually be inflated to curb the $50 trillion dollar credit default swap bubble that dwarfed the worlds $15 trillion dollars of trading currency by comparison. We have now seen that this superior thinking was just folly.

America lost sight that money is just a place holder for people’s commitment to create real value in the future to offset the creation of money today. By our superior actions, we now risk causing even the first world reserve currency to hyperinflate. If by chance, the world is able to sustain stability of this current superior monetary system a bit longer even with a weakened Yen, a weakened Euro, and a weakened Dollar, the Yuan will likely emerge to complement the global mix.

Asia has already developed into a center of commerce within itself and the Yuan will easily surpass the dollar there. China has been wildly accumulating gold as a precursor to that eventuality. She recognizes that her strategy of keeping the value of the Yuan low to ease interest rates in America has run its course and that at a point, a strengthened Yuan will benefit hegemonic relationships more than continued reliance on exports to an overly debt ridden America. Therefore, the Yuan may soon take its position center stage in a sharing of reserve currency status with the other global currencies.

However, if something like a Greece default thrusts EurAmerica and thus the rest of the World into the Greatest Depression, our credit will be ruined for the foreseeable future. This mountain of credit default swaps will collapse, the current structure of banking and insurance industries will be awash. An accounting of which individual financial companies will continue to remain solvent will take time. Hard assets in America will quickly revert to true or even severely depressed values. A new American currency may evolve.

Asia will return to strength much more quickly than EurAmerica, and we may emerge in a more hegemonic subservience to Asia. A return to bilateral trading contracts backed by gold stores may be inevitable. The exponential growth of debt derived money creation will be reset to a slower slope of escalation. Nations will once again separate money and credit formation functions from investment banking, perhaps creating a non-profit incentive for central and commercial banks to curb the escalation of debt required to feed interest payments.

China’s concept of money creation will endear itself to the world with the idea that money is created by the commitments of emerging countries, not the supply of hegemonic capital. The promise of the emerging nation creates money, and that promise is solidified by the emerging nation’s ability to create laws, infrastructure, and education to support it. Without causing nations to be indentured solely to the needs of the empire, China may emerge from the Greatest Depression spawning a new monetary system that grows healthier worldwide communities in which money is truly a unit of commitment to future value created and not a political tool to indenture the world to a perceived EurAmerican superiority.

America’s Future – Building Block #1: U.S. Debt – Do we increase, decrease or default?

One of a few critical building blocks of American policy that will be required to right our ship of state is stabilization of America’s debt. The seeming annual deadline to vote on raising the debt ceiling is set for August 2nd. While the Republicans have threatened to default unless the ceiling increase has corresponding cuts to the budget, and while the world anticipates corrective action, we may only see hollow political chatter without material cuts because it is not yet America’s season for freefall from treasuries default.

However, it should be the season for reason. Some economists tell us that recent fear of historic deficits comes only from those ignorant of economics. They say we can print money at will without retaliation because of our sovereignty and world reserve currency status, that we owe this debt to ourselves, and that we can inflate the debt away. They surmise that we are nowhere near an insurmountable debt maximum. But how can they be so confident that America’s ballooning debt is not an issue?

Learned pontifications have confounded us through continued clamoring of countering arguments since 1990, when the debt ceiling was raised 33% to 4.1 trillion to contain our previous housing bubble, the savings and loan crisis. We have just exceeded our latest federal debt ceiling of $14.29 trillion dollars. Total American obligations of all public and private debtors are over $55 trillion, and including government’s unfunded liabilities, we owe $168 trillion. Even if we could balance the budget today, each working American is already obligated in some form to pay the world one million dollars. Who is right? How much American debt is too much debt?

In placing their faith in the pseudoscience of modern economics, our scholars fail to mention that the majority of currencies in history no longer exist. Hyperinflations do occur with regularity, 21 countries in the last 25 years. Debt levels do collapse governments, small (Zimbabwe) and large (USSR). Unfortunately, by the time societies recognize they have reached the beginnings of hyper-inflation, their currencies are already on a glide path to extinction. How close are we?

Prior to WWII, America paid down its debt between wars but our perception of debt changed in 1945. Backed by 70% of the world’s gold, the dollar was the world’s hope for rebuilding, and hence became its reserve currency. In 1944, the architects of Bretton Woods envisioned the dollar as the lynchpin to a system in which central banks maintained stable exchange rates to support balanced trade between industrialized countries, with minimal international indebtedness. They did not foresee the corrupting power they entrusted to the United States that would later subjugate the emerging world to a devaluing dollar.

Control of the world’s reserve currency proved too powerful an elixir for America. Perhaps we convinced ourselves that exporting inflation was a fair trade for granting Europe and Japan seed capital, and for our supplying our trading partners with military security. Nonetheless, for the past six decades the U.S. taxed the world $15 trillion through devaluation, and borrowed another $14 trillion, diverting substantial growth capital from emerging countries to fund America’s sustenance.

Without a realistic alternative, the world reluctantly accepted losses of their reserve currencies, but devaluation has not been without cost to America. The collapse of Bretton Woods spurred the growth of a $300 trillion FX market that has quickened the demise of the dollar’s reserve currency role. FX arbitrage and speculative volatility also precipitated the Asian crisis, causing the Asian monetary zone to closely align, lessening a need for dollar reserves. Including Europe’s drive to a common currency and China’s rise, all reduced the dollar’s power and made the possibility of an alternate monetary system possible. And America’s choice to drastically export dollar devaluation to provide investment banks buffer for unwinding of credit default swaps has brought the world to the brink.

While largely diminished, the dollar still yet dominates but for how much longer? After $2.6 billion of quantitatively eased dilution, Bernanke has fatefully claimed an end to QE, but only after President Obama announced a decade long expansion of trillion dollar budget deficits, replacing QE in name only. Is there no limit? If a limit is reached and the world fully rejects the dollar, history has shown that its fall will be too rapid to save. We now have imminent signs of that moment’s approach:

• China rejecting the dollar – For eight years, China purchased 20% of the U.S.’s deficit, buying 50% in 2006. However, for the last year, China has been a net seller of U.S. debt, reducing its total holdings 30%, and dropping its treasuries 97%. China has signaled that its risk of holding U.S. debt is greater than its risk of causing U.S. interest rates to rise, which will limit our investment in China, and will cause us to purchase less Chinese goods. Their risk equation has pivoted.

• Fed’s acquisition of treasuries – In 2011, the Fed has been the chief buyer of U.S. treasuries, purchasing over 70%, as opposed to 10 % during the last decade.

• Private investment shies away from the dollar – Investment firm Pimco, managing the largest bond fund in the world, cut its holdings of US government-related paper from $237 billion to zero for the first time in the history of the firm, stating the U.S’s problem is worse than Greece’s.

• Regionalization of reserve currencies – Asian, European, and Middle Eastern trading blocs all are all moving away from dollar denominated trades. As an example, China’s and India’s central banks agreed to direct currency exchange as of 2011.

• Commodity inflation – While the U.S. government quoted core inflation is up a mere 0.4 percent, Americans have felt the results of a real 12% inflation and much higher commodity inflation.

• Debt rating concerns – As of June, 2011, Moody’s has threatened to reduce the U.S.’s debt rating unless imminent progress is made on reducing America’s deficit

• American public losing faith – Most telling is the behavior of the American people. With 28% of home prices lower than the underlying mortgages, record numbers of Americans have chosen strategic foreclosures. 25% of foreclosures are from those that have chosen to walk away from debt obligations even though they still have the wherewithal to pay them. Feeling betrayed by America’s financial institutions’ “contract” with Americans for stable money, stable employment, and stable pricing, Americans increasingly no longer feel compelled to honor their financial contracts. The underpinnings of the dollar are on shaky grounds.

Our political and financial leadership now have choices to make. The Fed has signaled no more QE and the President has signaled a decade of continued historic deficits, but those announcements are political balloons that have been lofted toward their constituents. What should America’s true strategy be for our mounting debt?

We have but limited choices. 1) Debt can continue to increase at historic rates, perhaps preserving our banking system in its zombie state, but risking the loss of world credit, a spike in interest rates, crowding out of government services, and the march toward hyperinflation. 2) The rate of increasing debt can be reduced by either budget cuts or tax increases, but either measure may precipitate a return to America’s recession, increasing unemployment, decreasing GDP, and without substantially austere measures, continuing down a path toward loss of world reserve currency status. Or 3) America can take drastic measures to eliminate the deficit and to begin reducing the debt, most likely causing a rapid downward spiral of GDP which, similar to Greece’s predicament, will create an imploding cycle of further austerity measures and GDP reduction.

Considering that credit agencies have already fired lowered debt rating shots hair-raisingly close to America’s bow, the first option of continuing down our current path of printing money to fund our federal deficit is daring fate to draw us into the abyss. The world is quickly shutting off America’s Fed spigot of money printing. If we continue printing money, we risk paying higher interest on existing debt, crowding out needed government services and shocking America back into recession. The EU’s prescription for Greece has enlightened us that the third option of severe austerity is a prescription for thrusting America into obscurity with little hope of return. Therefore, we must now immediately embark down the second path of significant but directed deficit reduction. Sound choices of which reductions to make is a topic for a near future building block post and would be an interesting response from readers.

While the middle choice of materially lowering the rate of increase in our debt and over time reaching balance is our hope of recovery, it risks sending America into a double dip recession. If we reduce public spending without subsequently increasing private spending, demand will decrease, most certainly causing a downturn. Increasing taxes, without correspondingly increasing earnings of those paying them, will crowd out private spending, also decreasing demand. To successfully navigate our debt hazards, any decrease in government spending must be accompanied by a similar increase in private spending.

To increase private spending, either consumer demand must be increased with corresponding availability to credit, or private business spending must be increased with a corresponding potential for demand for its goods or services and a corresponding availability of credit. To keep this post to a reasonable limit, these issues are items for a future building block post.

Consumer credit is maxed out. Historic consumer debt combined with loss of housing and stock market equity and lowered prospects for employment have dried up any chances of a consumer led recovery. Loosening of credit without a corresponding increased demand for employees is unwarranted and spurring demand for employees is unfortunately another building block topic.

State and local governments are operating outside of constitutional authority in the red, and foreign governments have reduced credit to the federal government. Therefore, deficit reduction must initially be accompanied by increased domestic business spending if we are to avoid a recession. Increased spending must have the potential for successful creation of new profits. Sources of new spending must come from private providers of debt and capital, bank debt in combination with private business equity. America can no longer allow our banks to set the agenda for the path forward. The current prescription of repairing bank balance sheets while limiting credit is no longer feasible. These issues are also a subject for another building block discussion.

Some in Congress suggest we have a fourth option, that of initially maintaining the deficit by cutting taxes to spur growth while reducing government spending accordingly, eventually growing tax revenue through increased growth of the economy. While the idea has much conceptual merit, its implementation in previous Congresses was spurious. Private capital from lowered taxes was siphoned into overseas investments with little if any net benefit to the domestic economy. Much work from Congress, the courts, our executive branch, including trade negotiators and national strategists, business and labor must be done together as a community if we are to establish the real environment that can actually benefit from reduced taxes. (yet another building block discussion)

Initial prescription: Material reductions in government spending with corresponding highly incentivized, private investment that directs spending to domestic projects and increases domestic employment. Ultimately, in a timeframe considered realistic by world markets, the deficit must be eliminated through combination of reduced spending and increased GDP that strategically grows the domestic economy, creates full employment, and retains innovation. (More meat in future building block discussions)

Will EurAmerica Enter a Cold Financial Winter? (Revised)

When China announced to the world that it would open its doors to foreign investment, multinational corporations from both Europe and America rushed to stake a claim to a unique gold rush opportunity of historic proportions. China offered EurAmerican MNCs that agreed to share trade secrets and intellectual capital, that had capital to expand China’s manufacturing infrastructure, and that could open their own countries to China’s goods, the opportunity to participate in China’s newly opened special economic zones, with the hope of marketing to their 1.3 billion people.

Requiring massive investment to capitalize on the opportunity, MNCs sought the support of international investment banks and lobbied home governments to provide looser, deregulated capital markets as well as to submit to opening home markets to “free trade”. MNCs then began a three decade long extraction of wealth, factories, and jobs from EurAmerica to build China’s manufacturing infrastructure and GDP.

At the beginning of China’s historic rise, American politicians freed capital for China investment by reducing taxes of the investment class of Americans; through a reduction of the top tax income rate from 70% to 50%, through reduction of capital gains tax from 28% to 20 %, and through tripling of estate tax exemptions. As more and more capital was needed, America’s baby boomer retirement investments were developed for ease of use in China. In America, 401Ks, started in 1980, and IRAs, made available to all citizens in 1981, siloed middle class investments into the stock market that directed a majority of retirement funds toward China.

Later in China’s growth cycle, EurAmerican banks devised ways to extract even more capital through debt instruments from their citizens. EurAmerican interest rates were set low, creating the credit to extract maximum capital to fund the growth of China’s manufacturing infrastructure through home equity and business development loans. Yet, to meet China’s capital needs in the exponentially growing latter stages of growth, extreme capital extraction through maximum borrowing of a majority of private citizens and public entities was required.

Investment banks created a method of extracting maximum capital from EurAmericans’ main investments, their homes. To accomplish this, Investment banks restructured the banking industry. They first created methods of incentivizing consumers to take as many and as large of loans as possible through risky, low interest, no income verification loans and other, more predatory loans. They also rid commercial banks of their traditional, credit restricting roles by incentivizing them to make as many loans as possible, with minimal risk because they could simply resell the mortgages to the investment banks for a profit. Finally, they developed complex, (and unfortunately faulty) derivatives to buy mortgages from commercial banks and repackage them for profits.

In the process, a majority of consumers that could afford it were lured through ease of access and Ponzified greed into their debt web. Greed played its part with commercial banks as well, as most became willing accomplices of the role that investment banks created in transforming them into maximum credit authorizing, debt creating factories to feed the raw commodities of capital that China needed for her later growth stages. As beneficiary of EurAmerica’s capital, China became a strategic partner to the process by supporting low EurAmerican inflation and interest rates through:

• Accepting free flow of manufacturing infrastructure into her economic development zones
• Funding infrastructure debt payments through sales of low costs goods back to EurAmerica
• Mitigating international demands to revalue the Yuan higher by maintaining historic trade imbalances with EurAmerica and reinvesting Yuan back into EurAmerica
• Keeping internal inflation low through internally enforced savings of wage controls and removing excess Yuan from circulation through funding trading countries deficits
• Managing external commodity inflation through aggressive development of international Greenfield commodity projects to supplement absorption of long term international commodity contracts and relationships that were left unattended by EurAmerica.
• Reinvesting surplus capital into EurAmerica, keeping world interest rates low to extract last vestiges of EurAmerican capital through historic levels of corporate and private debt

When this historic, debt driven, extraction of two great empires’ wealth reached its zenith, like all financial bubbles finally do, public, private and corporate debt had stretched beyond its ability to pay, exceeding $50 trillion dollars in America alone. The financial herd had stretched so thin that it simply required a few debt ridden gazelle to nervously default to start the whole herd stampeding frenzily toward the bank runs that inevitably follow peak excess. This time in history, it was the unraveling of the predatory American home loans that toppled EurAmerica’s financial house of cards. Nonetheless, if not for this gazelle, another would have jumped to take its place, for no exuberant and irrational credit binge ever stands in the longer term.

When this Rube-Goldberg loan scheme supporting the massive capital transfer from EurAmerica to China finally collapsed, investment banks were pushed to the precipice of default. Acting independently of government mandated goals, central banks, with the Federal Reserve out front, stepped in to protect the banking industry by providing liquidity to those investment banks most at risk. They did so claiming that not providing liquidity would have caused domestic businesses and private citizens to default through massive foreclosures, bankruptcies, layoffs, financial and operational restructuring.

Unlike previous historical investment bubbles, in which many investment banks failed, EurAmerican central banks temporarily saved the vast majority of investment banks through simultaneous, massive expansion of the money supply, staving off a rapid disintegration of public, private and corporate debt, recorded as assets on their balance sheets. Recognizing further monetary support was required, the Federal Reserve attempted to mount another widespread EurAmerican expansion of money supply but Europe, intent on preserving its courtship of unification and now dealing with the crisis of PIIGS deficits, did not concur. Without palatable alternatives, the Fed embarked on a Romanesque fait accompli of reserve currency monetary expansion, attempting to reverse the entire world’s contraction of money supply through what they termed Quantitative Easing.

It appears that temporarily at least the Fed’s Quantitative Easing policy have strengthened EurAmerican banks’ balance sheets, transferring some toxic assets to sovereignties, and have girded them to endure the coming double dip recession. However, it failed to accomplish their stated long term debt stabilizing goals. Unemployment is once again increasing, housing prices have reversed and are falling, and while some European countries have begun to institute austerity programs, America is projecting trillion dollar deficits for the remainder of the decade.

Unfortunately, the Fed does not have the magic bullet to repair the only ways to truly provide long term stabilization of massive EurAmerican debt supporting their balance sheets. To do that, EurAmerica must stabilize the underlying ability and desire of their debt holders to make debt payments. This can only be accomplished by:
• Maintaining and growing EurAmerican economies
• Reducing real EurAmerican unemployment
• Increasing the nominal values of EurAmerican Housing or restructuring housing debt
• Eliminating public deficits
• Reducing non-value generating debt
• Maintaining minimum interest on existing debt while incentivizing its reduction and saving

Without immediate and urgent prescriptive measures to meet the above objectives and to mitigate the impact of EurAmerica’s retreat from previous financial investment and consumption patterns, a cold, worldwide economic winter most likely ensue. American direct foreign investment has already begun its inevitable descent. Europe’s protectionism has kept available resources flowing to China but EU will soon follow with fewer investments in China as well. China will react with less support for EurAmerican deficits, severely restricting EurAmerica’s monetary managment options.

If we do not act soon, our political systems will be forced into severe austerity measures. The world will enter a deep and disruptive recessionary cycle from which countries and entire regions will eventually emerge in an entirely new trading pattern; one that is China centric, developed around its newfound industries that were funded by EurAmerica at the turn of the 21st century. China will emerge first, building on its excess modern manufacturing capacity and hegemonic commodities relationships. When at last EurAmerica exits from the long winter of debt riddled recession, it will follow the path to the Asian economies.

Prescriptions to follow…

QE2 Has Precipitated the End of Post-Bretton Woods Money

The worldwide economy runs on a Post-Bretton Woods concept of money. Central banks create enough new currency out of thin air to provide adequate money velocity. This new money is then inserted into the banking system that then lends it out according to the public’s credit potential to pay it back with interest. The public then multiplies money through purchases of goods and services that create economic output and that redistribute currency back into banks for relending to other members of the public who demonstrate a viable ability to repay.

When an economic shock stalls the money engine, it must be restarted while the economy is on a glide path prior to freefall. When money supply is temporarily pulled from the economy, loan creation that multiplies money is temporarily halted, shrinking the supply of money required to pay back existing loans. When this occurs, although the public still has the skills required to create value to pay back loans, it loses access to money to repay the loans.

If temporary money supply disruption is allowed to fester, enough unpaid debt cycles accumulate to create collapsing credit, toxic debt, shrinking money supply and deteriorating markets. When the economy stalls, one of two government interventions must occur to reverse the trend and right the world’s money growth. Either credit limits must be loosened to allow for borrowing to cover unpaid debt plus future growth, or demand must be increased to create enough credit under existing credit conditions to cover unpaid debt plus future growth. Which process is most viable depends on the extent to which the markets have been allowed to fester.

In the first days of the Great Recession, banks knee jerked in response to collapsing real estate and slammed the credit market shut. Worldwide central banks quickly responded by attempting the first of two interventionist tools. By infusing currency from thin air, they hoped to provide cover for free-falling real estate prices, and to re-establish credit into the market. Had banks re-established loose credit, businesses would have bet on an increasing economy and would have used the new credit to increase production, thereby maintaining employment and multiplying money. However, the toxic asset load from the housing Ponzi was of such historic proportions that central bank loans did not repair bank balance sheets enough to incentivize re-establishment of credit. Without forgiving insolvent bank debts that would have correspondingly collapsed the world’s money supply and depressed world markets, governments indefinitely stalled the traditional banking engine of money growth.

Each month that banks remained functionally insolvent, increased business risk. As money supply collapsed, demand decreased correspondingly decreasing the willingness of businesses to bet on producing supply before demand. When the risk chasm became too great, the economy stalled and then collapsed.

Government Keynesian central planners then attempted a correction through the second of their interventionist tools. However, the stimulus packages they devised to attempt to bridge the demand gap created artificial demand in too concentrated pockets of industry and created too small an artificial demand to restart an economic engine that requires the credit and faith of every able consumer, worker and business in the world pulling on the ropes of credit derived money multiplication.

Both traditional methods of reversing money collapse, central Keynesian planning and central bank capital infusion, proved ineffective. Without effective worldwide government and central banking tools, festering turned parts of the world’s economy gangrene. No single government had the ability to re-start the world’s engine, and no worldwide consensus of political will existed to simultaneously and aggressively create the size of artificial stimulus required.

In desperation, the United States Federal Reserve has embarked on an unrealistic attempt to float the entire world’s money collapse by inflating the world’s Post-Bretton Woods reserve currency through what it coined “Quantitative Easing”. However, any attempt by one country, even the United States, to singlehandedly recover the world’s economy, even with an untried policy as aggressive as quantitative easing, has fluidly dissipated to fill the world’s credit gap without the desired stimulus effect. The temporary momentum created through massive QE creation of dollars out of thin air allowed for a temporary, mild upward glide of the economy, but anticipating the June, 2011 end of QE2, the world adjusted its glide path and its real economy is beginning another freefall.

The Post-Bretton Woods system of worldwide money supply being introduced through fiat currency backed by the simultaneous introduction of credit enhanced value creation has, in effect, been severed. Now that the United States has raced ahead of the world’s traditional money supply, the Fed must either continue down the slippery slope of additional quantitative easing leading ultimately to the collapse of the dollar, or revert to an alternative, non-traditional, never before tried fiscal or monetary tool, to escape from its trap. Any alternative tool will invariably destroy the world’s faith in the dollar as the reserve currency, and will mark the end of the Post-Bretton Woods concept of money.

How Could America Have Squandered the Gold of Ancient Egypt and the Incas?

Gold has been the store of human endeavor since ancient times. While each ounce of gold can hold only a finite amount of labor, perhaps 1,000 hours in non-industrialized nations, some of the gold locked in Fort Knox has touched millions of hours of labor from civilizations untold. For gold’s greatest benefit, as with all money, is not its storage of value but its lasting ability to temporarily hold value in the exchange of non-coincidental barters.

For millenniums, money was the interchange commodity for simple trades as between farmers and herders. The farmer gave the herder a coin in winter for meat, and the herder returned the coin at harvest time for a bushel of vegetables. Farmers and herders relied on the value of gold because precious metals took effort to mine and purify, were tested for weight and purity, and could be stamped, coined and carried. With such a universal appeal, precious metals became synonymous with storage of value and dominated the world’s choice for money.

At one point, America held within its coffers 70% of all the gold that has ever been purified from ancient Egypt and the Incas through modern times. But it was our misjudgment as to the true value of gold that robbed our forts of ingots and brought America to the precipice of ruin. As history’s greatest superpower, why did America not learn from ancient empires that tumbled down the path to insignificance, and why did we allow our government to amass more debt than has ever been owed by every other soul that has ever lived?

1964 marked an accelerating turning point in America’s misfortunes. In 1964, President Johnson was elected to enact Great Society reforms just as America was increasing her involvement in Viet Nam. Baby boomers were entering the work force just as multinational corporations were beginning an upsurge of direct foreign investment and the transfer of jobs to overseas markets. America’s use of oil was peaking just as political undercurrents were coalescing around oil as a geopolitical force.

Six simultaneous assaults on the American dollar joined to fuel the American financial malaise; a lack of fiscal adherence to a gold standard, military excursions in support of American interests, funding of the great society, a lack of will to respond to oil cartels, multinational corporate indifference to the plight of the American worker, and a financial industry gone wild.

America did not Steward Its Gold

Even though, for 600 decades of recorded history, gold was the stable base of transactions, the world has temporarily abandoned this gold standard for the last 5 decades. Our abandonment was not because of the world’s enlightenment that gold is an unnecessary physical impediment to the electronic age of finance. It is because, with no viable alternative, the world has clung to the hollowed out American dollar that inflated beyond the discipline of the gold standard.

In the 20th century, industrialized nations twice attempted to redistribute wealth through great wars that left all of Europe bankrupt. Afterward, America held 70 percent of the world’s processed gold, and became through Bretton Woods the gold-backed, paper money guarantor of the free world. During the next 15 years, America squandered her gold to cover currency imbalances, until by 1960 the dollar lost its legitimacy. Interestingly, it took Spain over a hundred years to squander its 20,000 tons of Inca gold.

From 1971 until now, America and the rest of the world have had little choice but to allow our currencies to float, giving up the imperfect discipline imposed by a gold standard. As a result of America’s freewheeling monetary policies, it is now encumbered by a spend drunk Congress and an obliging central bank that have conspired to reduce the value of America’s 1971 fiat dollar to a mere 17 cents today.

Scholars suggest that the reason for the dollar’s fall was the inevitable Triffin dilemma which requires America to carry a current account deficit to provide the world with reserve currency. Yet debt financed trade imbalances are not required to provide reserves. Reserves could just as well have been sold to other countries as given to them through trade shortfalls. No, America’s post war monetary policies quickly gambled away the historical hegemony that was bestowed on us at the end of two world wars.

This five decade hiatus from a gold standard will prove only temporary. Gold’s appeal as the engine of financial growth has not been lost on China. At the end of World War II, U.S. gold reserve was over 18,000 tons but has since reduced to 8,000 tons. China is executing a strategy of purchasing approximately 250 tons per year and, as the world’s largest producer of gold, producing 320 tons per year, and now has surpassed all but the U.S. as the second largest holder of gold with 2,000 tons.

Military Excursions Drained America’s Coffers

Without the ability to borrow vast moneys, earlier civilizations relied on warring, exploration and conquest to quickly expand their stores of gold. This strategy was not without consequences. To fund war, Rome engaged in coin clipping and smelting with lesser metals to reduce size and value of denarius in attempts to pay soldiers with coins of veiled value. After 200 years, the Roman denarius reduced from 100 percent silver to only 5 percent just prior its army leaving Rome unprotected from invasions and fall. Interestingly, it has taken less than 100 years for America’s dollar value to plunge that amount.

As all empires have before, America found that its wars must be financed with inflation. The Fed supported an excessive expansion of the money supply (dollar clipping), creating debt to fund each of America’s wars. The Civil War added 2.8 billion. WWI added another 21 billion. WWII created another $216 billion. The Korean War was financed with taxes. Viet Nam increased the debt $146 billion. Cold war expenditures cost 1.6 trillion. The first Gulf War cost a mere $7 billion. In contrast, Iraq cost $786 billion and Afghanistan cost $397 billion. Not including the 700 foreign soil U.S. military bases that contribute greatly to America’s balance of payments deficit, her major wars added a total of $3.4 trillion dollars of carried debt.

The Great Society Became the Broke Society

President Johnson outlined The Great Society in his State of the Union Speech on January 4, 1965, saying “The great society asks not how much, but how good; not only how to create wealth but how to use it.” Notwithstanding the good that was done by these programs, they drained America’s future potential GDP growth and the money that would fuel her economic engine.

46 years later, Great Society initiatives touched education, health, urban renewal, transportation, arts and culture, Medicare and Medicaid, the Food Stamp program, Project Head Start, The National Endowment for the Arts, The Corporation for Public Broadcasting and federal aid to public education for a total expenditure of $9.5 trillion dollars.

America’s Addiction to Oil Made Us Slaves to the Oil Cartel

Oil enabled powerful nations to create a world order that flowed money from agrarian nations to those that controlled hydrocarbon powered machines. Oil was the catalyst that propelled the 20th century’s world leaders into fortune and thrust the world into war. Oil is a finite fuel, controlled by a few nations that are barely separated geopolitically and have common ancient civilizations and modern goals.

Already struggling from Viet Nam and Great Society debts, America found herself the object of a politically motivated oil embargo in 1973. Fuel prices soared and supplies tightened to cause the 70’s stagflation in America. From then until now, America has not found the political will through fluctuating fuel prices to organize an intervention away from oil dependence.

Since the embargo, America has consumed 250 billion barrels of oil at a total cost of $11 trillion dollars. This debit line in our national budget has only one trade, oil for dollars. Had America given our energy war a smidgeon of the effort of placing a man on the moon, we could have easily reduced energy consumption by 20 percent for the same productive output, transportation, and environmental comfort, and saved 2.2 trillion dollars. Surely, the costs to achieve such a modest conservation would have to be netted from the gross, but those costs could have been internally generated and added to America’s GDP.

America’s Multinational Corporations (MNC) were Indifferent Citizens

While America fought the war on poverty, her political leaders surrendered to the war on American jobs. Certainly, with the relative world peace supported by America’s military, globalization was bound to occur. With the risk of direct foreign investments reduced, the last five decades have unleashed an acceleration of money flow and intellectual capital from America to other countries.

While over 4 trillion dollars have been invested overseas by American uberwealthy, America has also been a receiver of investment, so that the net outflow has only been 0.7 trillion. However, the loss of America’s wealth and jobs has been much greater, contributing to a stagnant workforce where one in four able Americans has been idled. MNC direct foreign investment has indirectly added $4 trillion dollars to America’s debt.

The Fed Financed MNCs and Saved Banks but Failed to Keep America Employed

During most of the 17th century, Europe embroiled itself in wars that killed 30% of its population. Some of the world’s largest banking houses failed as royal debtors defaulted, including England in1672. Finally, in 1694, the king agreed to give the Bank of England authority to print all of England’s bank notes in exchange for bank loans to support his war with France. The newly created Central bank, having transferred its risk of loss to British subjects, profited simply by printing money for the monarchy. However, this excess printing did not stop the emptying of England’s coffers.

After America revolted to escape the monetary control of the Bank of England, Hamilton, the United States’ Secretary of the treasury, proposed a charter to a create a similar central bank for America. Against Thomas Jefferson’s insistence, the First Bank of the United States became the precursor to America’s Federal Reserve. Some say major banks manufactured a bank run in 1907 to destabilize the Treasury and instigate support for the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 establishing the Fed, a quasi-agency, private enterprise with a quasi-public board.

From the establishment of the Fed until today, many have argued that major Fed decisions have enriched banks at the expense of the American People. An example is the erroneous decision the Fed made to keep interest rates high for an extensive period of time as America and the World clearly were entering the Great Depression. Also of heated debate was the decision to bail out the banking industry at the start of the Great Recession.

Nonetheless, Fed decisions combined with lobbied efforts to reduce financial regulations, allowed Wall Street to orchestrate multiple financial bubbles that consecutively destroyed value in American portfolios. It cost taxpayers $88 billion to bail out the S&L crisis. The boiling and bursting of the dot.com bubble evaporated $5 trillion dollars. Notwithstanding that the credit default bubble lost the world $30 trillion in value, it has thus far cost America $51 billion in bank bailouts, $787 billion in stimulus, $1.5 trillion in quantitative easing, $5 trillion in lost property values, and with over 5 million bankruptcies and 5 million foreclosures, ruined trillions of dollars worth of wealth generating credit.

In Conclusion

Adding up the numbers versus our $15 trillion dollar debt, it is amazing that the resiliency of the American economy is thus far holding ground:

10,000 tons of gold: $0.5 trillion
Wars: $3.4 trillion
Great Society: $9.5 trillion
Lack of Energy Policy $2.2 trillion
MNC DFI: $4.0 trillion
Banking Debacles: $12.4 trillion +
Total $32.0 trillion

The idea of currencies unsupported by gold reserves is not in itself troublesome. Whether Crowley shells, tally sticks, or paper money, if the market has trust in its role as a place holder for non-incidental barter, any money will do. However without the external discipline imposed by a gold standard, America must instead substitute gold’s imposition for a President strong enough to stand for American sovereignty, a Fed subjugated to defend a stable currency, a Congress selfless enough to impose its own financial discipline, and a willingness of American businesses to defend American jobs. Otherwise, America’s five decade reign over this short lived worldwide fiat money dollar system will come to an end.

Is the Federal Reserve Harming Job Growth?

The Fed originated from a private agreement of the world’s richest bankers in 1910. Reacting to clamors to regulate the “money trust”, leaders of the world’s banking systems came together to create the plan for the Fed, that Congress enacted in 1913.

The plan did not completely turn over the power of the world’s banking system to Congress. It instead created a “partnership” intended to retain power while sharing oversight with Congress. The President recommends and Congress confirms 7 board members to the Fed from banks, and the banks appoint 5 other members from regional Fed banks that are in turn owned by private banks to the FOMC that makes Fed actionable decisions.

The Fed is subject to oversight by Congress. Yet oversight means that the Fed reports a summary of its actions after the fact. Congress cannot dictate to the Fed, and can only change its charter by statute, which has been politically unachievable, even though a bill to end the Fed has 55 congressional signatures. Members of congress cannot attend Fed meetings and cannot audit the Fed. Thus, the Fed has authorization by our government to manage the banking system free from political controls.

Even so, congress has little incentive to place restrictions on the Fed. For every dollar that Congress spends, Congress borrows 40 cents from the Fed, who essentially just has it printed. And Congress needs the banks to get re-elected. 94% of congress persons with the most election funds win their elections. 90% of election funds are given by wealthy individuals, large corporations and the banks.

It is claimed by some “conspiratorialists” that through complex stock ownership in five U.S. banks, the original stockholders of the Fed still maintain control of Fed actions. Whether or not this is true, the actions of the Fed have resulted in great wealth transfer to bank shareholders through Fed actions including engineering inflation. In the 300 years before the Fed, inflation was minimal except for the absorption of wars. In the 97 years since the Fed, inflation has increased 1,900 percent.

When banking investments soured in 2008, many claimed that the Fed acted in the best interests of its shareholder banks over those of the United States. With the great recession, the Fed entered into unprecedented activities. In March 2008, the New York Fed advanced funds for JPMorgan Chase Bank to buy investment bank Bear Stearns. Also, in September of 2008, the Fed gave an $85 billion loan to AIG for a nearly 80% stake in the mega-insurer. In October, 2008, the Fed acquired the ability to pay interest to its member banks on the reserves the banks maintain at the Fed. And quantitative easing has the potential to inflate the U.S. out of losing housing portfolios.

In essence The Fed’s actions have protected the wealth of international investors at the expense of small investors that are nearing retirement with life savings in fixed incomes.  By preserving this wealth, the Fed is also enabling the funding of third world multinational corporation direct foreign investment without consequence.

Will America’s lack of a Multinational Corporation Policy Bring a Resurgence of War? (Part 2)

America must cull the artificial bubble economy effects from our analysis and reassess the effect of American trade policy on our country’s wealth over the last thirty years.  To ensure we correctly right size our military, we must account all costs and benefits of having achieved world military dominance.

Through our military support of world stability, did we better America’s future?

 America’s military budget exceeds $600 billion.  For the last 60 years, we have spent more than all other countries combined to export freedom, including the stabilizing effect of more than 700 overseas military bases.   Some argue that the relative world peace our citizens have enjoyed is more than offset by the negative consequences of our military on our country’s historic debt.

 However, our military has been paid for by the world.  America controls much of the world’s reserve currency.  Through currency manipulation, we have “taxed” the world for the peaceful trade benefits they have gained.  With over $15 trillion reserve currency held by foreign governments, inflating dollars by just 4 percent each year pays our military budget.  America’s waning percentage of world trade would have caused the U.S. dollar to cease as the world’s reserve currency decades ago were it not for the perception our military created that the dollar was the best alternative for wealth storage stability.  So, at least for now, reserve currency benefits have been supported by and have paid for our military.  

 However, if other economic factors caused by our military dominance strategy are included, the net resulting benefit to America becomes less clear.  Our military dominance reduced the risks of direct foreign investments, resulting in an explosion of MNC growth.  Trade skeptics claim that MNCs are directly responsible for trade deficits of $800 billion and job losses of over 14 million, enough to re-employ all able Americans. Cumulative trade deficits, financed through government and private borrowing, have crowded out entitlements and infrastructure, and have diminished American standards of living.  In addition, our military strategy has led American wealth to be reassured of safe returns off-shore, limiting access to capital and credit for domestic businesses.  Investors transferred $6 trillion abroad to direct foreign investments, and an additional $10 trillion to offshore banks shielded from taxation.

Unfortunately, trade deficits have led the world to nearsightedly consider replacing the dollar with a world denominated reserve currency, threatening our ability to sustain our military.  As we pull our military back from the world stage, the security gap will be filled from competing sources, creating military instability that will threaten the peace the world has enjoyed for the last 40 years.  As a result, the MNC investments that precipitated these changes will be at risk of default and trillions of dollars of hard assets already invested in emerging countries, could be at risk of nationalization.   As emerging nations continue to expand, commodity exporters may be unable meet world demand.  Recognizing the threat to national security, with the world’s warring history as a guide, armed conflict could ensue.  Ironically, MNCs gutted our country of essential, strategic, manufacturing capability to mount a credible and sustainable war for commodities.

 These possibilities argue for a comprehensive review of our trade, economic, and taxation policies regarding multinational corporations.  What are your thoughts?

China’s Reserve Currency Strategy

In two previous posts, I discussed a fishing village in which some of the men in the village were required to sit on the bank and not fish because the fisherman from the other village were willing to fish for them at a lower cost.  The eastern village in that story represents the Asian economy, with its powerful core being China, which is willing to accept and some say manipulate undervalued exchange rates in order to grow through exports. But is China manipulating its currency?

Assuming China’s industry has identical productivity to the U.S. and the Chinese worker is conditioned to accept $3,000 annual wages to our worker’s $43,000, then China could conceivably sell anything to the U.S. for a lower cost than we can produce, cover the costs of direct foreign investment, and yet make a profit. If China chooses to keep its profit in hard U.S. currency and build a war chest over time, why would the Yuan need to revalue? China is setting the rate at which it will provide value to the west, and we as consumers are accepting their price. 

The world is flooding China with capital, allowing it to continue this wealth accumulation strategy at the United States’ expense. We are countering by quantitative easing to devalue their store of U.S. value but in the process are exacting payments from all countries that hold dollars as reserve funds.  And now the experiment of the Special Drawing Rights reserve currency has begun.   Countries are banding together to end America’s reign as the provider of reserve currency When that finally occurs, we will have lost a strategic advantage.

We have continued to devalue our currency over the years and holders of our currency have lost value each year as a result.  Nevertheless, developing nations have increased holdings of our dollars as a hedge against downturns in their economies.  Our continuous devaluing through the years could be argued as an appropriate payment for our military’s defense of worldwide peace that has allowed unprecedented trading wealth for all countries. But it’s a stretch to charge the world for our inability to surge real growth during the last quarter century to support the demographical spending desires of our baby boomers and our lack of regulatory oversight of the financial shenanigans of Wall Street.