Ultimate Cost of 0% Money

[traelin0]

Since the early 1990 decade, the nation's maestros have promulgated the notion that cheap money is a beneficial factor for the sustenance of wealth, for economic development, for the standard of living, for the robust industries, in general for the American society. Nothing could be further from the truth, but even today the reckless US economists from the Keynesian Camp and their controllers from Wall Street have convinced the multitudes that cheap money is a good thing. Cheap money comes with a deadly ultimate cost. The inept professor occupying the US Federal Reserve Chairman post has gone on record claiming the US banking sector has a secret weapon in the Printing Pre$$ that it can use with zero cost, in its electronic form. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Clinton & Rubin team began the distortion of the Consumer Price Index, ostensibly to reduce Social Security and USGovt pension benefits in cost of living raises. They wanted to cause a massive USTreasury Bond bull market, and succeeded in doing so. They wished also to bring down the USTreasury Bond yields. The infamous Fed Valuation Model dictated that as rates rose, stocks fell. So the scheme to manipulate the bond market began with the venerable craftsmen of rigged markets, ruined engines, and mega-fraud schemes. They taught from their high priest pulpits that cheap money was good for the financial markets. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Many analysts have sought the underlying root cause for the systemic failure of the USEconomy, the US Banks, and the USFed itself. One can start in pursuit of answers by looking at the cause being a sequence of costly wars and the ensuing monetary inflation, followed by lost industry to globalization and price inflation. The Vietnam War had a powerful consequence of inducing Nixon to exit the Gold Standard, a linkage few if any economists or even gold analysts make. But the true singlemost cause of wreckage is the artificial low forced cost of money, the near zero cost of usury. The subtitle to that billboard is that CAPITAL IS TRASH. Imagine in a nation that developed, promoted, and exploited the fullest riches of capitalism, embarked upon a path to destroy capital without even the recognition by its best brain trusts. Their mental chambers have been totally corrupted by the justification that inflation is a positive force that must be managed. Nothing could be further from the truth. The consequences of artificially cheap money, the wrecked pricing of usury, ultimately is capital destruction and economic failure.

More here:
news.goldseek.com/GoldenJackass/1293653008.php

[ungenteel]

cheap money isn't good and that isn't the message .. cheap money is a desperate attempt to keep people spending using credit .. since wealth isn't being created via value added activities

[verrip1]

Vague generalities and conspiracy theories without proof or basis in economic metrics.

Ho hum. How the masses love their diversions.

[Deleted]

As usual, trae, your posts are all over my head-- which is why I read them and learn from them, so it is no longer over my head. Not like this is this first time I have heard it. I read lots of people in print that are as you are. Just not here.
Happy New Year, everyone.

[traelin0]

Dec 31, 2010 22:26:34 GMT -5 verrip1 said:

Vague generalities and conspiracy theories without proof or basis in economic metrics.

Ho hum. How the masses love their diversions.

With brilliant, deeply deliberated analyses like the above to counter them.

[pappyjohn99]

Trae- I don't believe I have ever seen you lumped n with the masses. Rather funny I think.

[traelin0]

LOL, what can I say pappy, I'm an Ovis Aries! ;D

[pappyjohn99]

Baaahhhh

[verrip1]

Dec 31, 2010 22:47:20 GMT -5 @traelin0 said:

Dec 31, 2010 22:26:34 GMT -5 verrip1 said:

Vague generalities and conspiracy theories without proof or basis in economic metrics.

Ho hum. How the masses love their diversions.

With brilliant, deeply deliberated analyses like the above to counter them.

Dude, there isn't anything there worth refuting. If that makes you all smug and satisfied in your opinion, that's fine with me. But don't think I'm going to pretend that the Emperor is clothed.

[verrip1]

Geez, I re-read the OP and I think, so far, I was too kind in my original assessment.

Read that thing for yourself. Find me some actual numbers, references to numbers, ANYTHING of a purely factual basis, and not simply some hot air blower barking out at Hyde Park Corner. The whole thing is like Gertrude Stein's Oakland: there's no THERE there.

George Noory would cut this guy off, even if he promised to give him Bigfoot photos.

[traelin0]

Just curious, but do you have anything of substance to post in this thread, or are you just interested in trolling? If the latter, move along or post on the subject of the link.

Ultimate Cost of 0% Money

[verrip1]

(Sigh)

Yes, I have something to contribute about my opinions about the particular writings, sentences in the OP, just as my previous comments, stinging though they were, were. I guess you consider it to be trolling if I continue to point out the failings of this diatribe, however other readers may wish to consider my content, instead of what certain people want to assign to me as my attributes.

I have asserted that the OP is 100% opinion. Not a single economic fact to support the contentions made. I notice that NO ONE has disputed my criticism of that. Don't sound like trolling to me. Sounds like a factual point, actually.

How can one demonstrate opposition to a pure opinion piece, Trae? By giving an alternative OPINION, of course! You are acting like my sarcastic dismissal of the piece was some sort of personal attack against you. Time to separate, Trae. I never said anything except how banal and vapid the OP was. I'm allowed that. I said nothing about you.

The opinion presented in the OP was more provocative than any of my posts here. When you choose to post provocative OPs, expect provocative replies or don't post them.

What's wrong with you? You aren't normally this way. If you stop jerking me around, I'll ignore your threads; how's that?

[traelin0]

Jan 1, 2011 2:19:11 GMT -5 verrip1 said:

(Sigh)

Yes, I have something to contribute about my opinions about the particular writings, sentences in the OP, just as my previous comments, stinging though they were, were. I guess you consider it to be trolling if I continue to point out the failings of this diatribe, however other readers may wish to consider my content, instead of what certain people want to assign to me as my attributes.

I have asserted that the OP is 100% opinion. Not a single economic fact to support the contentions made. I notice that NO ONE has disputed my criticism of that. Don't sound like trolling to me. Sounds like a factual point, actually.

Awesome, so there're no consequences to 0% money. Good to know, that explains why I've made a killing betting the other way.

Jan 1, 2011 2:19:11 GMT -5 verrip1 said:

What's wrong with you? You aren't normally this way. If you stop jerking me around, I'll ignore your threads; how's that?

Deal! Please ignore every single one of them in the future, and I'll quit "jerking you around" by asking you to post about the topic of the consequences of 0% money.

[verrip1]

Buh bye!