The Fed: Dishonest or Incompetent? [Archive]

View Full Version : The Fed: Dishonest or Incompetent?

08-25-06, 06:42 PM

The Fed: Dishonest or Incompetent?

by Eric Janszen

August 26, 2006

Today's Quick Comment notes the recent epiphany experienced by the mainstream press: the Fed has been lying (http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/epr/04v10n3/0412mcca/0412mcca.html) about the housing bubble for years by claiming it didn't exist, just as it lied about the stock market bubble when Greenspan and company claimed that bubble didn't exist. Well, the mainstream press are not exactly stating that the Fed was lying. But they are running stories about the housing market that can only be true if the Fed had either been lying -- again -- or if the Fed was, collectively, dumber than a bag of hammers -- again.

You decide.

Get ready for a good six months of "It's just a house, stupid" stories like those below, reminiscent of the "There's no New Era, stupid" articles about tech stocks that came out of the mainstream press in 2001 a year after the collapse of the NASDAQ bubble and a basket case NASDAQ made it apparent that the bubble wasn't coming back. To wit: Forget the Mansion: Why Buying Bigger Doesn't Guarantee a Rich Retirement (http://biz.yahoo.com/weekend/bighouse_1.html)
August 25 2006 (Wall Street Journal Online)

It's among today's most popular retirement-savings strategies: Buy the big house, hope the real-estate boom continues and then trade down at retirement, thus freeing up home equity that will pay for years of early-bird specials.

Sound appealing? Trouble is, you will fork over a heap of dollars -- and you'll end up with a surprisingly small nest egg.
and Getting real about the real estate bubble (http://money.cnn.com/2006/08/24/real_estate/pluggedin_tully.fortune/index.htm)
August 25 2006 (Fortune)

Fortune's Shawn Tully dispels four myths about the future of home prices.

For the past five years, the housing bulls have been trotting out one rational-sounding argument after another to explain why the boom made perfect economic sense.

Forget about a crash, they assured homeowners. Expect a "soft landing" where your three-bedroom colonial in Larchmont or Larkspur not only holds onto its huge price gains, but keeps appreciating at a "normal," "sustainable" rate of 6 percent or so into the sunset.

Americans wanted to believe, and they did. Now, the giant popping noise you're hearing is the sound of yesterday's myths exploding like balloons pumped up with too much hot air.
Why do the common sense articles that dispel obvious bubble myths come out each time a bubble ends? The answer is that the publishing business becomes an unwitting participant, dependent on the advertising revenue generated by the companies that are the "producers" in asset bubbles, along with everyone else involved: the CEOs, management and employees of the companies that are "producing" the object of speculation; the banks that finance them; the lawmakers who rely on the capital gains tax revenues from sales of securities; and the industry of brokers, consultants, advisors and so on that grow up both to make money off the bubble and who act as boosters to re-enforce and perpetuate it.

It's important to note that during the tech stock bubble, the object of speculation was not the products that the high tech companies produced -- the computers, software and services -- but the securities that the companies issued. At the time, iTulip.com as a parody of a tech stock company made light of this by creating no products at all except bogus stock certificates (http://www.itulip.com/productsnew.htm#Stock), of which we sold hundreds. It's just as important to note that in the case of the housing bubble, products were built -- housing -- but again the object of speculation is not the house itself -- the product -- but the underlying security, the mortgage paper that is traded.

Anyone who was part of the high tech industry and lived through the aftermath of the collapse of the NASDAQ bubble can tell you how devastating the collapse was to the high tech industry. There is still debate on how badly the collapse of the housing bubble will hurt the US economy. My position is that the damage will be slower but more extreme and widespread because, as Greenspan himself noted, housing represents 70% of household wealth, consumption which accounts for 2/3 of economic actitivity is closely tied to housing, and housing generated between 20% and 43% of private sector employment since 2002, depending on whose statistics you believe (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,,1859024,00.html). By contrast, stocks represented less than 20% of household wealth and the high tech industry itself represented less than 2% of economic activity at the peak of that bubble.

I doubt anyone seriously believes that the Fed did not see a housing bubble forming in nearly all regions of high population density around the US, creating from the standpoint of aggregate national economic impact a national housing bubble. Why did the Fed allow a housing bubble to form? A friend who runs a public company said it best, "Did they have a choice?" Meaning, the alternative following the stock market bubble collapse was a harsh recession, perhaps a deflationary depression like Japan's. I believe this is the reason, but still wonder, once the housing bubble got out of hand, why not at least speak to it publically and try to talk it down?

One theory is that the Fed has decided that it can no longer constructively engage asset bubbles once they are underway, that the Fed winds up doing more harm than good when it tries.

The last time the Fed moved actively to end an asset bubble and said so was in 1994. As discussed in The Bubble Cycle is Replacing the Business Cycle (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?t=360), Greenspan is quoted in the FOMC minutes saying, "When we moved on February 4th, I think our expectation was that we would prick the bubble in the equity markets." The results were less than delux, "...while this capital gains bubble in all financial assets had to come down, instead of the decline being concentrated in the stock area, it shifted over into the bond area. But the effects are the same. These are major capital losses, which have required very dramatic changes in the actions and activities on the part of individuals and institutions." He went on, "So the question is, having very consciously and purposely tried to break the bubble and upset the markets in order to sort of break the cocoon of capital gains speculation, we are now in a position—having done that and in a sense succeeded perhaps more than we had intended—to try to restore some degree of confidence in the System."

The Fed quickly reversed course in 1995 by changing reserve requirements and other rules as documented in What (Really) Happened in 1995? (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?t=360) by Aaron Krowne.

Since then, you will find no mentioned of asset bubbles in any FOMC meeting notes, with the single exception of President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, Cathy E. Minehan, saying during the June 4, 1999 meeting, "We recently held a meeting of the Bank's Academic Advisory Council which, as you all know, includes two or three Nobel Prize winners and people from Harvard, MIT, Yale, and so forth. The discussion focused on issues related to productivity growth, labor market tightness, and asset market bubbles. The group was lively, to say the least. But some consensus was reached on the need for action that might take the wind out of asset markets, even in the absence of tighter monetary policy, perhaps through increased margin requirements or increased supervisory oversight on credit extended, particularly in the day trading operations."

Nonetheless, the Fed did raise interest rates in 1999 and those rate hikes, by intent or not, did precipitate a collapse of the stock market bubble, and a series of 16 quarter point rate hikes up until last month have collapsed the housing bubble. The result will be worse than most expect.

http://www.itulip.com/images/waterout.jpg

Remember the pictures of tourists walking out onto the drained ocean floor before the Asian Tsunami hit in 2004? They were lured by the miracle of a surprising opportunity to walk out onto the exposed ocean floor. Fish flopped on the surface. All you had to do was reach out and pick them up.

http://www.itulip.com/images/waterback.jpg

Intuition might tell you, "Well, this can't been good. Whatever force has sucked the ocean away from the shore is probably going to send it crashing back in with equal positive force later." The sudden, peculiar appearance of the ocean floor that had for a thousand years been covered in 100 feet of ocean water says: head for higher ground. Those who failed to do so drown when the water surged back, and when it receded again it left heaps of destruction and human loss in its wake.

http://www.itulip.com/images/missing.jpg

Asset bubbles are like tsunamis except they are man-made, out of money instead of water, and instead of lasting for a few minutes they last for years. They draw people in, lured by apparently risk-less money. Just bend over and pick it up. What iTulip.com has been telling you for eight years is this: when you see apparently risk-less money -- financial fish flopping on the bare ocean floor -- head for higher ground. If you have the means and the risk appetite, maybe grab a few fish first. But in any case, head for higher ground. Don't stay too long and financially drown (http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/creative_mortgages_02.html).

http://www.itulip.com/images/creative_mortgages.jpg

During the stock market bubble, that meant heeding my warning to sell in March 2000 (http://www.bankrate.com/aolcan/news/investing/20000321l.asp) that the tech stock bubble was going to pop. In that case, you could run slowly to high ground, as stock markets are liquid and give you plenty of opportunities to exit. During the housing bubble, that meant heading my warning in 2004 that housing markets end by seizing up (http://www.itulip.com/housingnotlikeequities.htm), and that you can get trapped, like the tourists on the beach. And I could not have been more explicit about how the collapse of the housing bubble (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?t=132) was likely to unfold. (Apologies to long time readers for all this past history... this is for new members of our community.)

When the tsunami of money recedes it leaves behind heaps of economic destruction within the industry that is the focus of the bubble. The technology industry has never recovered from the collapse of the NASDAQ bubble. The real estate industry won't return to normalcy, that is, to grow at the rate of inflation, for ten years or more.

http://www.itulip.com/images/dreamhomes.jpg

The US appears to be on a continuous treadmill of asset bubbles. The Fed needs to allow them to happen and can't stop them, can't even admit that they exist and has to lie about them. Bill Gross in his August 2006 article The End of History and the Last Bond Bull Market (http://www.pimco.com/LeftNav/Late+Breaking+Commentary/IO/2006/IO+August+2006.htm) appears to think this series of bubbles, of which housing is only the most apparent, will terminate with the end of the current bubbles, creating one last bond bull market, a period of deflation presumably followed by a crushing inflation, much in line with our Ka-Poom theory.

There is a darker explanation than either mere Fed dishonesty or incompetence. A reader recently pointed me to the web site (http://dunwalke.com/) of Catherine Austin Fitts (http://dunwalke.com/catherine_austin_fitts.htm), the founding director of Solari, Inc. (http://www.solari.com/) who previously served as Managing Director and Member of the Board of Directors of the Wall Street investment bank, Dillon, Read & Co., Inc; served as Assistant Secretary of Housing/Federal Housing Commissioner at HUD in the first Bush Administration; and was the President and Founder of The Hamilton Securities Group, Inc., a broker-dealer/investment bank and software developer. In a long series of writings, she states:

"The supremacy of the central banking-warfare investment model that has ruled our planet for the last 500 years depends on being able to combine the high margin profits of organized crime with the low cost of capital and liquidity that comes with governmental authority and popular faith in the rule of law. Our economy depends on insiders having their cake and eating it too and subsidizing a free lunch by stealing from someone else. This works well when the general population shares in some of the subsidy, grows complacent and does not see the “real deal” on how the system works. However, liquidity and governmental authority will erode if the general population becomes aware of how things really work. As this happens, they begin to understand the power of innovative technology and re-engineering of government resources to create greater abundance both for themselves and other people. As this happens, they lose faith in the myth that the current system is fundamentally legitimate. This jeopardizes the financial markets that depend on fraudulent collateral and practices to continue to work. It also jeopardizes the wealth and power of the people who are winning with financial fraud."

Her take on the series of asset bubbles can be summed up as follows:

"This consensus is made all the more powerful by the gush of growing debt used to bubble the housing and mortgage markets and manipulate the stock, gold and precious metals markets in the largest pump and dump in history — the pump and dump of the entire American economy. This is more than a process designed to wipe out the middle class. This is genocide — a much more subtle and lethal version than ever before perpetrated by the scoundrels of our history texts."

Strong words, indeed. I'm still digesting the contents of her web site (http://dunwalke.com/) and am interested to hear comments from the iTulip community on it. Give yourself an hour to read it.

Join our FREE Email Mailing List (http://ui.constantcontact.com/d.jsp?m=1101238839116&p=oi)

Copyright © iTulip, Inc. 1998 - 2006 All Rights Reserved

All information provided "as is" for informational purposes only, not intended for trading purposes or advice. Nothing appearing on this website should be considered a recommendation to buy or to sell any security or related financial instrument. iTulip, Inc. is not liable for any informational errors, incompleteness, or delays, or for any actions taken in reliance on information contained herein. Full Disclaimer (http://www.itulip.com/GeneralDisclaimer.htm)

Charles Mackay

08-26-06, 12:32 PM

Many of us are educating people at an "alarming" rate (alarming to the elites). I am absolutely amazed at how fast the word is taking hold. Many "common man on the steet" types already are aware of Aaron Russo's msg in "America: From Freedom to Fascism" even before it's release. The Elites are fighting a force they've never had to contend with before and it's called the Internet. Therefore you can expect a full court press to control and then subvert the internet. Jeff Chester of The Nation puts it well here:

"The nation's largest telephone and cable companies are crafting an alarming set of strategies that would transform the free, open and nondiscriminatory Internet of today to a privately run and branded service that would charge a fee for virtually everything we do online.

Verizon, Comcast, Bell South and other communications giants are developing strategies that would track and store information on our every move in cyberspace in a vast data-collection and marketing system, the scope of which could rival the National Security Agency. According to white papers (http://www.democraticmedia.org/issues/netneutrality.html) now being circulated in the cable, telephone and telecommunications industries, those with the deepest pockets--corporations, special-interest groups and major advertisers--would get preferred treatment. Content from these providers would have first priority on our computer and television screens, while information seen as undesirable, such as peer-to-peer communications, could be relegated to a slow lane or simply shut out.

Under the plans they are considering, all of us--from content providers to individual users--would pay more to surf online, stream videos or even send e-mail. Industry planners are mulling new subscription plans that would further limit the online experience, establishing "platinum," "gold" and "silver" levels of Internet access that would set limits on the number of downloads, media streams or even e-mail messages that could be sent or received.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060213/chester

08-26-06, 02:51 PM

1. re the internet: with senator ted stevens, famous for his observation that "the internet is not a dump truck; it's a series of tubes," in charge of net neutrality, why worry?

2. i came across references to catherine austin fitts a year or two ago. if you search for her name along with the phrase "enemy of the state" you get, e.g., http://www.ratical.org/co-globalize/CAFmrl.html , and http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0208/S00055.htm , and
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0203/S00066.htm . [the first two are mirrors, and i list both in case one goes down - you never know.] i read her story with fascination and alarm. you don't get e.g. former undersecretaries of housing writing conspiracy theory. [i take that back- i recall that pierre salinger, former white house press secty, got into the idea that a twa flight that exploded was deliberately shot down over long island.] but getting back to fitts' story: it scared me silly. it so threatened my view of the world as a relatively organized, relatively understandable if very complex place in which impersonal processes govern at the highest level, that i put it aside. the alternative was to bring out the tinfoil hat that bart likes to refer to. frankly, it makes me anxious [nervous, not eager] to contemplate reopening my mind to these matters, but i am prepared to do so with a forum such as this in which to discuss it.

put on your tinfoil hats and read what's at those web sites.

[for other articles, see http://www.solari.com/gideon/articles_about.html .]

Charles Mackay

08-26-06, 03:15 PM

bart

08-26-06, 04:38 PM

I already have my tinfoil hat on so it didn't take much.

Basically, I agree with her views and documentation, even though I can't comment on the 100% accuracy of a number of the specifics. It aligns quite well with other sources and my own research, as well as a number of the public charts on my site.

John Perkins and his "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" book covers similar areas.
Here (http://www.financialsense.com/Experts/2005/Perkins.html) is an interview that Jim Puplava did with him last year. http://www.commondreams.org is Perkin's site.

The bottom line for me is that most people are good folk, and to have stuff get as messed up as it is today doesn't happen by accident or coincidence... it takes intentional actions. And "evil" people do exist, in spite of what some namby pamby dilettantes, etc. want folk to believe.

If that makes me a real tinfoil hat person in all the negative senses to some, then so be it. I see what I see, and its not pretty. Most of this stuff does not involve smoke filled rooms and Snidely Whiplash type evil laughs but rather is about a few "very best people" - who aren't.

And yes, it has been very upsetting at times to me over the last two years as I've been looking and researching - despair has not been an unknown state.

But to have isolated things like the very high correlation between various actions of the Fed and the level of the US stock market - well, I just don't view it an unrelated and do view those Fed actions as causative. Other central banks, to the degree that I've reseached them, show similar actions. My web site is my own vehicle for exposing a few of the actions of the small group of anti-social control freaks, and is something I can actually do about it.

More power to Catherine Fitts and others like her!

One of my favorite sound bites:
http://www.nowandfutures.com/grins/oz_curtain.wav

fogger

08-26-06, 05:34 PM

We've been conditioned to fear the phrase "conspiracy theory" and associate it with social ostracism. Once you get over that emotion and look at things logically and rationally it becomes obvious that events are designed. It's foolish to believe the world is accidental.

Unlimited power and money are available to the smart, patient, and ruthless. With tools like control over the money supply, planning and implementation is near trivial. The only difficulty is in keeping the masses asleep.

You're a fool if you believe there aren't people actively working to control the masses.

You're a fool if you believe the most powerful institutions on earth (central banks) are left to be run by idiots.

Far too much at stake.

Some videos:
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=century+of+the+self&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=power+of+nightmares&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=federal+reserve&hl=en

Books:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0882791346/
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/074532309X

This battle has been fought for hundreds of years. The one difference today is the Internet and the ability to share ideas freely without censorship.

08-26-06, 06:34 PM

Right!

There are people in high places now coming out, willing to risk a lot in order to expose this corruption. Lee Hamilton the co-chair of the 911 commission came out last week with a stinging critique of the 9-11 report and disclosed new information about Pentagon coverups and malfeasance that the "commission" chose not to publish.

Oddly enough it may take a bunch of women the likes of Catherine Fitts who finally create a loud enough rallying cry. For some reason men are quite asleep and afraid these days. We aren't talking about solutions... just which investment vehicle will enable us personally to survive while the country burns.

Although the site covers investment suggestions with disclaimers, being an ex-investment banker and finance expert with more than 25 years' experience, her Solari Portfolio Strategy (http://solari.com/outreach/2006/SolariPortfolioStrategy0605.ppt) (PowerPoint presentation) for asset allocation is very specific. Some of the items in it are mysterious.

She breaks them up into four types: local liquid, local non-liquid, global liquid and global non-liquid. She uses a $1 million total net worth in her example, which reads as though this is how she has her assets allocated, although one gets the idea she has a significantly higher net worth...

Local Non-Liquid $550k
$300,000 - 30 acre farm in farm community with improvements (no debt)
$95,000 - Mortgages financing homes for my sister and a neighbor
$5,000 - Refinancing of cousin's credit card debt (warning/disclaimer)
$150,000 - Reserved for direct local investment and to pool with Solari Investor Circle:
Financial investments
Networking, lobbying, asset mapping/databank
Learning and intellectual mastery
Donations/tithesLocal Liquid $75k
$5,000 - Checking account/money market at well managed local community bank
20,000 - CDs at well managed local community bank
10,000 - Cash, silver and gold coins in deposit box 10,000 Cash, silver and gold coins at home
25,000 - Publicly traded stocks for companies based in my area or region with leadership and products personally known to me or to people I trust
5,000 - Local tax-exempt bonds of municipal agencies run by people we know and respect doing things that we believe raise our Popsicle Index*

Global Non-Liquid $200k
$100,000 - Gold and silver bullion in depository in Europe
$90,000 - Investment in land and cottage next to cousin's in-law's farm in Central America (High Popsicle Index, Low Cost)
Expected - $25,000 Reserve for improvements to land and cottage (Currently held and counted in interest bearing accounts under Global Liquid)
Expected - $25,000 Micro equity – Reserve to invest in cousin's in law's business and local businesses (Currently held and counted in interest bearing deposits at local bank in Central America under Global Liquid)
$10,000 - Angel investment in college roommate’s wind farm company

Global Liquid $175k
$25,000 - Digital Gold and Silver
$75,000 - High Popsicle Index Places
$25,000 - Basket of Local Stocks and Local Bank CDs
$50,000 - Small and Mid-Cap Stocks – Focus On:

Decentralizing, sustainable solutions
Products & services that lower monthly expenses and/or increase self-sufficiency, promote good health, save time, make fresh food more available/affordable
Operations that are excellent on sustainable basis
Stocks of above available on an economic basisI get the money and PMs in the EU bank accounts but what's with the land and cottage in Central America? Where? Costa Rica? Why? A place to get away to if the shit hits the fan?

* Note on Popsicle Index: (http://www.solariactionnetwork.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=3036#3036) To help people understand how the global financial system affects their neighborhood, I came up with a very simple quality of life index based on one question:
“What percentage of the people in your place believes that a child can go to the nearest place to buy a popsicle or other treat, and return home alone safely?” Your answer gives you the Popsicle Index or Solari Index of your place. For example, if you think 50% of your neighbors believe a child in your neighborhood would be safe, then your Solari Index is 50%. The Solari Index is based on gut level feelings of the people who have intimate knowledge of a place, rather than facts and figures.

08-26-06, 08:37 PM

The Newspaper Industry has been happy to have the Real Estate Bubble - it is the only positive Revenue story in the Newpaper Industry. Can you imagine the Classified section of the Newspaper without Real Estate....will the Death of the Real Estate Bubble deliver the final blow to a dying Industry.

Or perhaps the Page Six Girls of the UK will be appearing regularly in the New York Times, Boston Globe, and the Washington Times. Got to give the folks some reason to by this by-gone News distribution paper.

People and Organizations happily tolerate myths that allow them to succeed/make money. Neither the Federal Reserve nor the Mainstream Media had any economic interest to shine light on the Real Estate Myth of the last ten years. Both organizations had incentives to keep it going.....and going...

Spartacus

08-26-06, 08:53 PM

You're a fool if you believe the most powerful institutions on earth (central banks) are left to be run by idiots.

Even if they're the biggest geniuses in the world, if their models and understandings are eff'dup they will do no better than idiots.

EDIT: what I'm saying is they're not lying or incompetent or idiots - for reasons that appear good to them, they've made the wrong choice of models to use, a la LTCM.

hope your models break, bet that beard is fake. I LOVE that.

bart

08-26-06, 11:43 PM

I get the money and PMs in the EU bank accounts but what's with the land and cottage in Central America? Where? Costa Rica? Why? A place to get away to if the shit hits the fan?

My best guess - yes, its a SHTF fall back position primarily and an investment secondarily. And either Costa Rica or Panama.

Jim Nickerson

08-26-06, 11:46 PM

The Fed: Dishonest or Incompetent?

by Eric Janszen

August 26, 2006

There is a darker explanation than either mere Fed dishonesty or incompetence. A reader recently pointed me to the web site (http://dunwalke.com/) of Catherine Austin Fitts (http://dunwalke.com/catherine_austin_fitts.htm), the founding director of Solari, Inc. (http://www.solari.com/) who previously served as Managing Director and Member of the Board of Directors of the Wall Street investment bank, Dillon, Read & Co., Inc; served as Assistant Secretary of Housing/Federal Housing Commissioner at HUD in the first Bush Administration; and was the President and Founder of The Hamilton Securities Group, Inc., a broker-dealer/investment bank and software developer. In a long series of writings, she states:

"The supremacy of the central banking-warfare investment model that has ruled our planet for the last 500 years depends on being able to combine the high margin profits of organized crime with the low cost of capital and liquidity that comes with governmental authority and popular faith in the rule of law. Our economy depends on insiders having their cake and eating it too and subsidizing a free lunch by stealing from someone else. This works well when the general population shares in some of the subsidy, grows complacent and does not see the “real deal” on how the system works. However, liquidity and governmental authority will erode if the general population becomes aware of how things really work. As this happens, they begin to understand the power of innovative technology and re-engineering of government resources to create greater abundance both for themselves and other people. As this happens, they lose faith in the myth that the current system is fundamentally legitimate. This jeopardizes the financial markets that depend on fraudulent collateral and practices to continue to work. It also jeopardizes the wealth and power of the people who are winning with financial fraud."

Her take on the series of asset bubbles can be summed up as follows:

"This consensus is made all the more powerful by the gush of growing debt used to bubble the housing and mortgage markets and manipulate the stock, gold and precious metals markets in the largest pump and dump in history — the pump and dump of the entire American economy. This is more than a process designed to wipe out the middle class. This is genocide — a much more subtle and lethal version than ever before perpetrated by the scoundrels of our history texts."

Strong words, indeed. I'm still digesting the contents of her web site (http://dunwalke.com/) and am interested to hear comments from the iTulip community on it. Give yourself an hour to read it.

It took me about FOUR HOURS to read Ms. Fitts' story, but it was worth it and supports my opinion, that took me 40 years at which to arrive, that to accept the notion that voting in the US is a privilege and duty, or that participation in politics with hope for the commom good is pure horseshit.

FRED

08-27-06, 07:46 AM

It took me about FOUR HOURS to read Ms. Fitts' story, but it was worth it and supports my opinion, which took me 40 years at which to arrive, that to accept the notion that voting in the US is a privilege and duty, or that participation in politics with hope for the commom good is pure horseshit.

I have no reason to question Fitt's assertions and her story does explain quite a lot about Fed policies toward asset bubbles that otherwise do not make sense. But it does raise several questions.

The end of housing booms have always resulted in serious economic consequences, such as documented in this piece A Look At The Collapse Of The 1980's Real Estate Bubble Through The Eyes Of The New York Times (http://www.youdovoodoo.com/80sbubble.htm). That housing correction lasted from 1988 through 1995, the year I bought my first home, at the bottom of the market. Two years in, we started to see bank failures...

Savings Agency Ordered to Sell Real Estate Fast
January 4, 1990, Thursday
By NATHANIEL C. NASH, SPECIAL TO THE NEW YORK TIMES (NYT); Financial Desk
Late Edition - Final, Section A, Page 1, Column 2, 1779 words
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F30614FB385D0C778CDDA80894D8494D 81
The new agency created to manage the huge savings and loan bailout was instructed today to sell the real estate it inherited from hundreds of insolvent institutions as quickly as possible. The directive from the Bush Administration raised concerns among bankers that the properties could be ''dumped'' in...

And that boom was almost imperceptable compared to the bubble that we have seen over the past five years, as this piece Menace of an Unchecked Housing Bubble (http://www.cepr.net/columns/baker/2006_03_30.htm) by Center for Economic and Policy Research points out.

One of the other points I make in The Big Bet (http://www.alwayson-network.com/comments.php?id=13133_0_24_0_C) is that The Boys are once again taking it too far, as they did in the 1920s, and that after the Dump that comes follows the Pump, the US may find itself with as many people unemployed and angry as in the 1930s, forcing a regime change. The worry, of course, is that the regime will change from the merely greedy and corrupt to something considerably worse, if the anger of the bankrupt and unemployed can be channelled away from constructive approaches like Fitt's (albeit impractical... we can't all live on a farm and own a home in Costa Rica) to something even more fascistic and oppressive.

Given that the money will all be in the hands of the guys running the Pump and Dump, it's not unreasonable to expect that they alone will have the means to control the crowd, much as they have convinced working class families to send their kids to Iraq and Afghanistan to fight for freedom while their kids attend Harvard and Yale. Presumably if the families of the kids attending Harvard and Yale really felt that the nation was in a fierce battle for its survival, they'd be lined up outside the local armed services recruitement office along with everyone else. You may have noticed that, overt expressions of patriotism and nationalism is now largely related to class; the more likely you or your kids are to be a called up to fight in war, the more likely you are to have a flag across the back of your pickup truck. How often do you see an American flag across the back of a Mercedes-Benz GL450?

The successful suppression of even a nascent class-based political movement in the US is a stunning achievement by The Boys and one you can expect to continue if not intensify following the Dump. I'm not sure Fitt's agenda has a prayer.

FRED

08-27-06, 07:51 AM

p.s. It's Sunday. My turn to be "Fred". -EJ

Jim Nickerson

08-27-06, 10:04 AM

Global Non-Liquid $200k
$100,000 - Gold and silver bullion in depository in Europe

Global Liquid $175k
$25,000 - Digital Gold and Silver

How does one here own gold and silver bullion deposited in Europe?

What is "Digital Gold and Silver"?

08-27-06, 10:18 AM

What is "Digital Gold and Silver"?
there are a number of outfits, e.g. goldmoney.com , where you can buy gold over the internet, such gold stored in some depository. i haven't dealt with any of these because it isn't clear to me whether you can trust any of them. i'd appreciate info from anyone on this board who feels they've done a reasonable due diligence on any of these outfits. similarly, i too would appreciate info on buying/owning/storing pms in europe. [iirc we've had a discussion here touching on this. search for "perth mint" to get the correct thread.]

bart

08-27-06, 10:48 AM

Given that the money will all be in the hands of the guys running the Pump and Dump, it's not unreasonable to expect that they alone will have the means to control the crowd, much as they have convinced working class families to send their kids to Iraq and Afghanistan to fight for freedom while their kids attend Harvard and Yale. Presumably if the families of the kids attending Harvard and Yale really felt that the nation was in a fierce battle for its survival, they'd be lined up outside the local armed services recruitement office along with everyone else. You may have noticed that, overt expressions of patriotism and nationalism is now largely related to class; the more likely you or your kids are to be a called up to fight in war, the more likely you are to have a flag across the back of your pickup truck. How often do you see an American flag across the back of a Mercedes-Benz GL450?

The successful suppression of even a nascent class-based political movement in the US is a stunning achievement by The Boys and one you can expect to continue if not intensify following the Dump. I'm not sure Fitt's agenda has a prayer.

In an odd way, this thread has added some hope for me even though the subjects and outlooks are quite dark (and realistic too in my opinion).

In another odd way, it will be interesting to see the machinations and spin to come - who and what will be targeted for the blame? The GSEs like Fannie are a large probability, and the Fed "overshoot" is also likely even though by my calculations real interest rates are still negative due to all the CPI fiddling & lies.

I do agree that the Fitts approach is not exactly a high probability short term scenario... but it sure has more sanity than most. Great link, and thanks!

The more I study the history of the economic track along with the various anti-social elements and their effects, the more I see the ebb & flow between the "good guys" and the "bad guys", and that the cycles do eventually turn... and that helps during my inevitable darker moments. Frameworks like the ka-poom theory also help to keep things in perspective as we ride the idiocy of Fed and other central bank created waves.

And to actually answer the thread question - the Fed is primarily dishonest, and incompetent too - as well as unethical.

On a lighter and perhaps excessively cynical note, I wish I knew a Photoshop maven - it would be a hoot to see a Mercedes 450 with a flag showing and a gun rack in the rear window.

08-27-06, 11:43 AM

My best guess - yes, its a SHTF fall back position primarily and an investment secondarily. And either Costa Rica or Panama.

I've been to Costa Rica. Lovely place. But if you use a Driver Fatality Index vs the Solari Popsicle Index to measure personal safety, you're not going to come out ahead. Here's a recent story...

Tico Times
San José, Costa Rica, August 25 - August 31, 2006
Roadway Safety
Plan Announced
(bschmidt@ticotimes.net)
Alarmed by an escalating death toll on the nation's perilous roads, the Arias administration jump-started a campaign this week to overhaul the nation's traffic system by improving law enforcement and refurbishing roadway infrastructure.

So far this year, the number of deaths from traffic accidents has surpassed 180, including three in a four-vehicle collision Monday on the Inter-American Highway near the Pacific port town of Puntarenas.

Public Works and Transport Minister Karla González said the “barbarity” on the nation's highways, coupled with a growing number of cars and people using a road network run thin, is a “time bomb.”

Traffic accidents are the leading cause of violent deaths in Costa Rica, claiming on average more than 600 lives a year for the past five years and driving up costs for the nation's public health system. After a couple years of coasting then slowing down, the death toll and number of traffic accidents are speeding up again, according to statistics from the Roadway Safety Council (COSEVI).

I recall reading similar stories there 20 years ago. Don't hold your breath waiting for a solution. You are four times more likely to die in a car crash in Costa Rica as in the US (1:925 Costa Rica vs 1:4080 US annually).

We can complain here in the Boston area about the corruption that led to the problems with The Big Dig, but it beats driving in a tunnel in Russia (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1938450866063840452&q=DEATH&hl=en), no matter how well built. The problem? Same as in Costa Rica, lousy drivers and law enforcement.

There are certain things about the US that we take for granted, such as a relatively well educated and civil society and a professional police force. The culture and institutions that make these possible take generations to build.

To me, the whole "drop off the grid, move to Central America" idea is a romantic and impractical solution to the problem. I'm more sympathetic with Catherine's asset allocation approaches, and many seem simply prudent from a diversification of risk point of view. She'd probably be surprised at the extent of alignment she'd see between her allocation model and that recommended by a lot of high net worth money managers these days.

Going over the Solari forums this morning, I noted a thread that one of the forum members describes as "probably the most important one on this whole board."

When I read the thread (http://www.solariactionnetwork.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2791) I get the impression that Solaris are not exactly catching on like wildfire, although it appears that many groups have tried and there is a lot of interest in the idea. My sense is that the Solari concept is too complex to be practical, requiring a level of understanding of finance, corporate structure and governance, and organizational skills and experience that few possess. In short, the Solari concept appears grandiose.

Jeff

08-27-06, 11:58 AM

Thank goddess and Eric- I sold my last US equity in June 2000, and just unloaded the majority of my residential real estate in July 2006. The unwinding of the US housing market will be so devastating to so many people, finally opening their eyes to the income and opportunity disparities in this country that I imagine we could have nearly revolutionary political upheaval.

Rather than how to benefit personally and financial, how can an individual act to better the situation? Prosper.com is a start, but how else?

tree

08-27-06, 12:53 PM

Jeff asks: What can we do?

1) Continue thinking out loud on iTulip, read and respected by mainstream media employees. Tell friends and family about www.itulip.com.

2) Defeat--with $$, signing petitions, calling elected representatives, etc.--congressional attempts to hike Internet-related consumer fees.

3) Make common cause with consumer activists and critical observers of influential government contractors/advisers such as universities and foundations.

bart

08-27-06, 01:10 PM

There are certain things about the US that we take for granted, such as a relatively well educated and civil society and a professional police force. The culture and institutions that make these possible take generations to build.

To me, the whole "drop off the grid, move to Central America" idea is a romantic and impractical solution to the problem. I'm more sympathetic with Catherine's asset allocation approaches, and many seem simply prudent from a diversification of risk point of view. She'd probably be surprised at the extent of alignment she'd see between her allocation model and that recommended by a lot of high net worth money managers these days.

Indeed - I did a personal analysis last year regarding going the expat route and although there were many plusses, on balance it didn't seem all that workable and also seemed like a cop out. Both Costa Rica and Panama were considered but the #1 country for me was Chile.

Her allocation approach looks pretty sane to me too, but mine has some testosterone poisoning since I trade futures.

Going over the Solari forums this morning, I noted a thread that one of the forum members describes as "probably the most important one on this whole board."

When I read the thread (http://www.solariactionnetwork.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2791) I get the impression that Solaris are not exactly catching on like wildfire, although it appears that many groups have tried and there is a lot of interest in the idea. My sense is that the Solari concept is too complex to be practical, requiring a level of understanding of finance, corporate structure and governance, and organizational skills and experience that few possess. In short, the Solari concept appears grandiose.
[/LEFT]

I'll be very interested to see the "how to" she's working on and that's supposed to be available later this year. There's little question that she has good understanding of the very formidable issues involved... and that the Pollyanna set can blow it too.

I do have hopes - and there weren't many who were really involved in the 1770s... and that many of the wealthiest folk in the colonies were involved too. The plot thickens...

Finster

08-27-06, 01:56 PM

I already have my tinfoil hat on so it didn't take much.

Why am I not surprised … ;)

Seriously, this is a topic right down your alley. I don’t know quite what is going on inside central bankers’ gray matter, but if you just look at the objective results you sure have to wonder. Just for starters, what about the 35,000 foot view? Has the economic progress of the United States been better since the advent of the Fed in 1913?

Not hardly. Virtually every advance that has really materially enhanced our standards of living can be traced to roots before that, whether its railroads, electricity, telecommunications, data recording and storage, etceteras. The US went from a ragtag group of colonies to world power without the "benefits" of a central bank.

There has been progress since then, of course, but by comparison, the improvement in living standards has been pathetic, and now seems like to spend some time in reverse, as the weakness stimulated by the Fed’s policy of production-free consumption becomes increasingly evident.

bart

08-27-06, 03:33 PM

Why am I not surprised … ;)

Seriously, this is a topic right down your alley. I don’t know quite what is going on inside central bankers’ gray matter, but if you just look at the objective results you sure have to wonder. Just for starters, what about the 35,000 foot view? Has the economic progress of the United States been better since the advent of the Fed in 1913?

Does this mean that we can look forward to an FDI based economic progress chart? ;)

We have indeed had amazing progress since 1913 and before too - but the economic side of it has been loaded with so much spin and Kool Aid (invented in 1927 by the way, an interesting "commentary") that focus has been diverted from where progress actually comes from.

And as far as Fed and central banker gray matter, methinks its closer to dark matter or anti-matter... :) and :mad:

Charles Mackay

08-27-06, 03:49 PM

Jeff asks: What can we do?

1) Continue thinking out loud on iTulip, read and respected by mainstream media employees. Tell friends and family about www.itulip.com (http://www.itulip.com).

2) Defeat--with $$, signing petitions, calling elected representatives, etc.--congressional attempts to hike Internet-related consumer fees.

3) Make common cause with consumer activists and critical observers of influential government contractors/advisers such as universities and foundations.

Catherine Fitts hinted at a solution in her introduction. By the time she got to the middle of her essay it was obvious that she was struggling with her own topic as much as we are...

If we want clean water, fresh food, sustainable infrastructure, sound banks, lawful companies and healthy communities, we are going to have to finance and govern these resources ourselves. We cannot invest in the stocks and bonds of large corporations and governments that are harming our food, water, environment and all living things and then expect these resources to be available when we need them. Nor can we deposit and do business with the banks that are bankrupting our government and economy.

http://dunwalke.com/images/introduction.jpg
Surviving and thriving as a free people depends on creating and transacting with currencies and investments other than those printed and manipulated by Wall Street and Washington to the eventual end of our rights and assets.
What I found in Montana, however, was what I have found in communities all across America. We are so financially entangled in the federal government and large corporations that we cannot see our complicity in everything we say we abhor. Our social networks are so interwoven with the institutional leadership — government officials, bankers, lawyers, professors, foundation heads, corporate executives, investors, fellow alumni — that we dare not hold our own families, friends, colleagues and neighbors accountable for our very real financial and operational complicity. While we hate "the system," we keep honoring and supporting the people and institutions that are implementing the system when we interact and transact with them in our day-to-day lives. Enjoying the financial benefits and other perks that come from that intimate support ensures our continued complicity and contribution to fueling that which we say we hate.
Sitting in the rich dirt among the beautiful vegetables and flowers, I was facing the futility of trying to craft solutions without some basic consensus about the economic tapeworm that is killing us and all living things — while we blindly feed the worm. In a world of economic warfare, we have to see the strategy behind each play in the game. We have to see the economic tapeworm and how it works parasitically in our lives. A tapeworm injects chemicals into a host that causes the host to crave what is good for the tapeworm. In America, we despair over our deterioration, but we crave the next injection of chemicals from the tapeworm.

Jim Nickerson

08-27-06, 04:30 PM

Below is a link to Shadow Government Statistics that I had not prevdiously noted.

http://www.shadowstats.com/cgi-bin/sgs/datao

Who do you believe?

If you believe John Williams, M3 growth is at 9.1%. Consumer inflation is at 11% (which is worse than Finster's 10%). GDP is less than 0%

08-27-06, 05:02 PM

If we want clean water, fresh food, sustainable infrastructure, sound banks, lawful companies and healthy communities, we are going to have to finance and govern these resources ourselves. We cannot invest in the stocks and bonds of large corporations and governments that are harming our food, water, environment and all living things and then expect these resources to be available when we need them. Nor can we deposit and do business with the banks that are bankrupting our government and economy.
if this means founding small communities of the like-minded, it doesn't seem a likely solution. it reminds me of the people who dropped out to live on communes in the late '60s-early '70s.

an alternative interpretation is finding enough people to affect the political process which is currently misgoverning the country. that's the most hopeful interpretation i can come up with.

there's a book, "what's the matter with kansas?" which speaks to the problem [i believe it's a problem, anyway] of people voting on the basis of abortion or gun ownership while ignoring the economic issues. this takes us back to eric's assertion that it will take a financial crisis to get any significant changes in the current system.

since everyone around "here" is pretty convinced that we're going to get that crisis, it might be worth discussing how we imagine the politics will play out. also, how we would like the politics to play out, and whether any current politicians are saying things consistant with our hopes. this discussion will then segue into what we as individuals can do to foster a good outcome, or at least avoid some of the worst outcomes to which we have alluded in these discussions.

bart

08-27-06, 05:17 PM

Below is a link to Shadow Government Statistics that I had not prevdiously noted.

http://www.shadowstats.com/cgi-bin/sgs/data (http://www.shadowstats.com/cgi-bin/sgs/datao)

Who do you believe?

If you believe John Williams, M3 growth is at 9.1%. Consumer inflation is at 11% (which is worse than Finster's 10%). GDP is less than 0%

I submit its doesn't matter very much since all of them are closer to reality.

My M3 is running at an average of 8.8% lately and is weekly:
http://www.nowandfutures.com/images/m3b.png

My inflation stat is running at about 9% without assets and 12% when including an asset inflation estimate:
http://www.nowandfutures.com/images/predict_inflation.png

I'd probably trust John Williams GDP a bit more than mine since mine is just a single adjustment and his goes deeply into other GDP fiddling. My main one also has a different intention behind it and doesn't show rate of change:
http://www.nowandfutures.com/images/real_gdp_williams.png

But here's my alternate GDP showing rate of change which is close to his:
http://www.nowandfutures.com/images/real_gdp2.png

WDCRob

08-28-06, 12:00 PM

Cheap Money Didn't Fuel Housing Boom, Chicago Fed Says

A couple of economists at the Chicago Fed have this to say in a new research report ... basically, don't blame us:

"It appears that the housing boom has not been driven by unusually loose monetary policy. This is not to say the monetary policy has not been unusually loose, but that to the extent it has been loose, this is not what has been driving spending on housing.

"Second, the current levels of spending on new housing are largely explained by technology-driven wealth creation over the previous decade.

"Third, changes in the demographic, income, educational, and regional structure of the population account for about one-half of the increase in homeownership. That is, without any other developments, the homeownership rate is likely to have gone up anyway, but not by as much as it has done. The last finding is that substitution away from rental housing made possible by developments in the mortgage market, such as subprime lending, could account for a significant fraction of the increase in residential investment and homeownership. We view our findings as supporting the view that the current housing boom may be a temporary transition toward an era with higher homeownership rates in which spending is temporarily higher than historical norms but will eventually return to such norms.

"While we have so far mostly avoided discussing housing prices, our findings do suggest that to the extent that house prices have grown considerably in recent years, this is not due to unusually excessive speculation in the housing market, such as would occur in a bubble. Instead, our findings point toward the high prices being driven by fundamentals."

bart

08-28-06, 12:30 PM

Cheap Money Didn't Fuel Housing Boom, Chicago Fed Says

A couple of economists at the Chicago Fed have this to say in a new research report ... basically, don't blame us:

...

Indeed - and I wonder why I thought of Dicken's Artful Dodger when I read this...and right after that had this tune come to mind:
Kool Aid (http://www.nowandfutures.com/grins/KoolAidToTheRescue.mp3)

Perhaps its time to re-read Twain's A Pen Warmed in Hell so I can tune up my commentary...

WDCRob

08-28-06, 12:37 PM

bart

08-28-06, 12:59 PM

Wouldn't the 'significant fraction' here...

"The last finding is that ... developments in the mortgage market, such as subprime lending, could account for a significant fraction of the increase in residential investment and homeownership."

...be due to the Fed's loose money?

Very much so.

That paper, in my opinion, is simply designed to divert attention away from what the Fed actually did in their over reaction in 2001-2... and what they have been doing for decades (applying positive feedback and causing inflation and rewarding "finance games").

1. They lowered interest rates to 1% and mortage rates went way down,
2. They did not loudly decry the continuing lowering of credit standards (Greenspan actually encouraged ARMs - but that wasn't mentioned),
3. They printed money like at a very high rate during that period after having dropped it in 1999-2001
http://www.nowandfutures.com/images/m1m2m3_base_credit.png
4. They always come in and "clean up" problems by printing more money (the "Greenspan put")
5. They don't publicly acknowledge any bubbles of their own creation (except with references in FOMC meeting that are only available 5 years after the fact)

Then they disclaim responsibility... wow...

08-28-06, 03:27 PM

Wouldn't the 'significant fraction' here...

"The last finding is that ... developments in the mortgage market, such as subprime lending, could account for a significant fraction of the increase in residential investment and homeownership."

...be due to the Fed's loose money?
actually i think the subprime, option arm, no doc mortgage is not a product of the low rates, but reflects an abdication of regulatory responsibility. this parallels greenspan's refusal to begin to address the stock bubble by raising margin requirements as far back as 1996. the fed is supposed to oversee, and thereby guarantee the integrity of, the banking system. there have been noises of late that the regulators are beginning to look askance at these "creative" mortgages, but it could have been cut off much earlier, and many fewer people would have been hurt.

this makes me think about the conspiracy theories running through various threads here. do we believe that the fed, or greenspan as an individual, really saw all these loans as creative products of a derivative cushioned world, and didn't want to rock the boat or get people annoyed with him while everyone seemed so happy? or did he have a "libertarian" leaning against acting as a regulator? or did he consciously choose to look away because to do otherwise would threaten the tremendous profits his friends on wall street were generating by securitizing, slicing and dicing cdo's, etc.?

bart

08-28-06, 04:32 PM

...

this makes me think about the conspiracy theories running through various threads here. do we believe that the fed, or greenspan as an individual, really saw all these loans as creative products of a derivative cushioned world, and didn't want to rock the boat or get people annoyed with him while everyone seemed so happy? or did he have a "libertarian" leaning against acting as a regulator? or did he consciously choose to look away because to do otherwise would threaten the tremendous profits his friends on wall street were generating by securitizing, slicing and dicing cdo's, etc.?

Thanks jk, I was sort of hoping somone would bring this up.

The simple answer is - "so what?". What I mean is that it doesn't matter what the reasons were, the actions that Greenspan and the FOMC took or didn't take were incorrect as witness the actual effects.

Also compare them with, for example, Volcker or a Swiss or German central banker before roughly 1985-1990. There's also the infamous line "follow the money" as well as the issues surrounding that "evil" intentions and people do and have existed. Where does the buck actually and ever stop?

It really gets dicey in tinfoil hat land with conspiracy approaches and views, and my personal answer is to judge by what is done, not what is said.
In a more mild view, one can also look at conspiracy by an alternate defintion - "A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design: a conspiracy of wind and tide that devastated coastal areas"... although it doesn't work well for me due to my beliefs in personal responsibility and that one must be aware of long term consequences. And just in case you or anyone else might think I'm trying to place all the blame at the Fed's feet. I'm not - its nowhere near that simple.

There is another set of partial answers and of course the ones you note are all true to a greater or lesser degree.

In the housing bubble area for example, I recall a Greenspan speech in Jan or Feb 2005 wherein he described the housing market as "frothy" and frothy means "having small bubbles". And at Jackson Hole last year, he basically said in as clear a way as a central banker speaks that housing would be sacrified for the international value of the dollar.

But... the Fed's avowed purpose and objective, as stated in many laws including the Federal Reserve Act or 1913 and the Humphrey-Hawkins Act of 1978, is "economic growth in line with the economy's potential to expand; a high level of employment; stable prices (that is, stability in the purchasing power of the dollar); and moderate long-term interest rates."
Source (http://www.federalreserve.gov/pf/pf.htm)

Talk about an abject failure, especially on stable prices...

Finster

08-28-06, 06:20 PM

...

But... the Fed's avowed purpose and objective, as stated in many laws including the Federal Reserve Act or 1913 and the Humphrey-Hawkins Act of 1978, is "economic growth in line with the economy's potential to expand; a high level of employment; stable prices (that is, stability in the purchasing power of the dollar); and moderate long-term interest rates."
Source (http://www.federalreserve.gov/pf/pf.htm)

Talk about an abject failure, especially on stable prices...

You got that right. That one phrase embodies as much economic ignorance as can possibly be found in a whole passel of politicians. The very idea that monetary policy could somehow achieve that package of goals is pure idiocy. Even Ben Bernanke has suggested as much in saying that the way to achieve sustainable economic growth and moderate long term interest rates is to have stable prices. In other words, there is no way that Fed policy can achieve economic growth and high employment per se, and that really the only thing the Fed can do is limit inflation and let the rest take care of itself.

The problem comes in when the Fed overlooks inflation in some prices, asset prices in particular - where inflation usually shows up first - and pursues an unduly expansionary monetary policy predicated on the false assumption that stability in other prices - consumer prices in particular - means that inflation is low. As we have just witnessed, the asset price inflation of the past ten years is now showing up in consumer prices, leaving the Fed now to deal with the consquences of inflation created years ago. This cannot be accomplished without some pain and discomfort.

08-28-06, 07:21 PM

Thanks jk, I was sort of hoping somone would bring this up.

The simple answer is - "so what?". What I mean is that it doesn't matter what the reasons were, the actions that Greenspan and the FOMC took or didn't take were incorrect as witness the actual effects.

Also compare them with, for example, Volcker or a Swiss or German central banker before roughly 1985-1990. There's also the infamous line "follow the money" as well as the issues surrounding that "evil" intentions and people do and have existed. Where does the buck actually and ever stop?

It really gets dicey in tinfoil hat land with conspiracy approaches and views, and my personal answer is to judge by what is done, not what is said.
In a more mild view, one can also look at conspiracy by an alternate defintion - "A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design: a conspiracy of wind and tide that devastated coastal areas"... although it doesn't work well for me due to my beliefs in personal responsibility and that one must be aware of long term consequences. And just in case you or anyone else might think I'm trying to place all the blame at the Fed's feet. I'm not - its nowhere near that simple.

i'm not a fan of conspiracy theories, i.e. hidden hands, when phenomena can be explained by systemic features, i.e. invisible hands.

bart

08-28-06, 08:11 PM

i'm not a fan of conspiracy theories, i.e. hidden hands, when phenomena can be explained by systemic features, i.e. invisible hands.

I do understand, which is why I've tried very hard to avoid pounding the table with the "smoke filled room" picture even though what I think the Fed does and has done is heinous at best. I'm still in mid stream on the entire picture too.

Probably the most damning set of facts in the conspiracy area is how they manipulate the various markets, especially the stock markets (and I can prove it with their own data), and don't fess up to it as witness the hemming and hawing that Bernanke did very recently when Ron Paul asked about the PPT.

That's slicing the hidden vs. invisible hands issue exceedingly fine.
And do note that a primary definition of manipulation is "Shrewd or devious management, especially for one's own advantage."

bart

08-28-06, 08:20 PM

As we have just witnessed, the asset price inflation of the past ten years is now showing up in consumer prices, leaving the Fed now to deal with the consquences of inflation created years ago. This cannot be accomplished without some pain and discomfort.

And most likely here we go again - basically the ka-poom theory in action. Rather than truly bite the bullet, the easy way out will most likely be taken on the intermediate term and the presses will be turned up yet again - maybe in a few weeks or months and maybe sometime next year.

And the whole stupid cycle repeats with even a wider oscillation that will likely end up with hyperinflation... *sigh*... and if this weren't a public board, I'd cuss up a storm.

Catherine Austin Fitts

08-28-06, 09:35 PM

I'm sitting in a tiny seaside cottage (known as a "batch") outside of Wellington in New Zealand. The waves of the South Pacific are crashing against the rocks and the shore on a windy day. Winter is just about over, the smell of spring coming through.

I had finished up my work last night and decided to check the webstats at www.dunwalke.com. Hmm...a sudden increase on a weekend when they usually drop. What gives? So I check the referrals and there is a website called iTulip. I head on over. The homepage reads like I have come upon a place of sanity and critical thinking. How nice. Then I see Eric's article. Good stuff. I start to laugh. It was strenuous day. Can't believe someone has me laughing this hard. So I decide to check out the thread. Pretty soon I am laughing so hard, I am crying. Great conversation, great graphs. OK, I want to stick around. I go to register and sign up for e-mail updates.

Thanks for your clarity and intelligence. Delighted to "meet" you.

Down Under,

Catherine

bart

08-28-06, 10:53 PM

Jim Nickerson

08-28-06, 11:58 PM

Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by EJ Regarding asset allocation of Ms. Fitts, post #7 above

Global Non-Liquid $200k
$100,000 - Gold and silver bullion in depository in Europe

Global Liquid $175k
$25,000 - Digital Gold and Silver

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

How does one here own gold and silver bullion deposited in Europe?

What is "Digital Gold and Silver"?

Catherine Fitts,

I previously asked the above questions to which there has been no satisfactory reply.

If you have time, I would appreciate your answers.

Thanks,

Catherine Austin Fitts

08-29-06, 05:34 AM

Jim:

Delighted to try as a generalist, not an expert.

To buy physical gold and silver and have it placed in a seperate vault or safe deposit box in a depository or bank requires traveling to Europe, buying the bullion and arranging for and placing it in the box. Anything else typically involves being part of a pool, including unallocated pools. You can arrange that as an investor by phone and fax. However, I believe you are usually arranging for a "put" to a large institution that is essentially their credit as opposed to a tangible that you own and control because the probability is that the total holdings of pool precious metals owners is greater than what the institution has in the vault.

Digital gold and silver was designed to address, among other things, the illiquidity of having it in a box (and to a lesser extent in some pools) and the expense of traveling to and fro. I remember sitting in the print store in Hardeman County, Tennessee when the owner said wistfully, "wouldn't it be wonderful if someone like me could have my own offshore account" to which I replied, "You shall have it in ten minutes. Let's go to www.goldmoney.com."

Here is what wikipedia says about digital gold:

Digital Gold Currencies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_gold_currencies

I use Gold Money as I know and hold in very high regard the founder James Turk as well as some of the management and investors:

Gold Money
http://www.goldmoney.com

At Gold Money, I can open an account and within a weeks time (if I want the certified rate, which of course I do) I can buy gold and silver that is deposited in a vault in the UK that I legally own and which I can use to transact digitally. Using digital allows near instant payment in quite precise, including small, amounts.

Ultimately the integrity of whether the gold or silver is there or not and whether your legal ownership is perfected often comes down to picking the people and institution that is trustworthy. I trust James and his team and the structure they have designed best of those I have seen. Again, I don't consider myself to be an expert in this area. My view of all these options is that each has their pros and cons and ultimately diversification continues to hold out the most promise.

In a balanced precious metals portfolio, there are advantages to having some in the box, some buried behind the barn, some digital and some in stocks.

We just changed the provisions for our Solari Circle partnership guidelines to allow us to treat precious metals vehicles as cash equivalents. Here is a copy of the motion to amend:

==========================================

To amend the Circle guidelines to allow investment in equity interests in a trust or other vehicle that invests soley in gold and/or silver bullion (such as Central Fund of Canada), certificates representing an interest in gold and/or silver bullion (such as Perth Certificates) or repositories of gold and/or silver bullion (such as Gold Money) to be used as alternative to cash. Such a strategy would be used to hedge against devaluations in the value of the US dollar. This means that the 10% rule in #6 of the Circles Guidelines would not apply to these investments.

==========================================

This points out the benefits of having precious metals vehicles such as Gold Money that provide liquidity. If we are holding balances in cash during inflation....well you know all about that.

If you have not read or listened to Turk, I would recommend it. He has interviews on line at http://financialsense.com. We have a precious metals audio seminar that is an interview with him and an introduction to digital gold. Also, a great one on investing in silver and gold coins with Franklin Sanders. If these are of interest to you or anyone else who has posted on this thread to date, send me an e-mail at catherine@solari.com and I will e-mail you links to access them.

Whew! That was probably more than you ever wanted to know....

Catherine

Catherine Austin Fitts

08-29-06, 06:27 AM

Jim Nickerson

08-29-06, 10:40 AM

Jim:

Whew! That was probably more than you ever wanted to know....

Catherine

Excellent, I appreciate your time and your sharing what you know. I believe a number of members and visitors will benefit from your comment.

Thank you very much, Catherine Austin Fitts.

Finster

08-29-06, 11:24 AM

And most likely here we go again - basically the ka-poom theory in action. Rather than truly bite the bullet, the easy way out will most likely be taken on the intermediate term and the presses will be turned up yet again - maybe in a few weeks or months and maybe sometime next year.

You already know from my previous writings that my views and the KaPoom theory are quite compatible. Something resembling the 1970's - a broad and deep inflationary cycle with an embedded deflationary countertrend separating the two inflationary thrusts (see chart below).

The only quibble is with what is probably not an essential element, and that is the particulars of timing. I think we may already be at the cusp of that intermediate deflation/disinflation. On the other hand, given that the Ka-Poom chart (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2163&highlight=Ka-Poom#post2163) uses the CPI as its inflation bogey, that may be more form than substance, too. As a lagging indicator, the CPI is likely - to continue to register higher inflation even after the underlying cycle has turned.

And the whole stupid cycle repeats with even a wider oscillation that will likely end up with hyperinflation... *sigh*... and if this weren't a public board, I'd cuss up a storm.

Sounds like you are describing this:

http://users.zoominternet.net/~fwuthering/Posts/StockGoldTrend.png

Oddly however, we can get ourselves into some semantic trouble if we don't exercise care with our terms. In a very real sense, the 1970s were hugely deflationary. That decline on yonder chart represents a collapse in the normalized volume of real credit. From the point of view of the Austrian school, that is deflation. The only reason we don't recognize it as such is the dollar was devalued so fast that it outran the pace of credit collapse.

This is very much the kind of environment we've been in for the past four years.

Catherine Austin Fitts

08-29-06, 07:27 PM

Jim:

Just realized that you are down the road from Bill Murphy, our fearless leader of www.gata.org and www.lemetropolecafe.com. He was the fellow who put me on to Turk and many other wonderful people.

I am not sure who from iTulip will be at the New Orleans precious metals investment conference in November -- it is one of the places Murphy, Turk and the swarm from GATA of which I am a faithful and devoted member meet and greet. Great place for everyone from newcomer to advanced to learn more.

Catherine

Charles Mackay

08-29-06, 07:40 PM

Welcome Catherine,

I just finished watching Russo's film this afternoon and noticed you were interviewed. This movie will be hard to place in mainstream theaters I imagine? Still, one has to start somewhere... it will get a great circulation on the internet and was certainly a breath of fresh air to me.

I noticed in the credits that Robert Prechter was a "special consultant" ... I always viewed him as apolitical so that surprised me. Although Harry Browne was apolitical most of his investment life also until he stumbled upon the Libertarian Party. I think Russo's final message at the end of the film is that none of us can afford to be apolitical anymore.:)

CM

Charles Mackay

08-29-06, 07:46 PM

EJ, I am not getting notified of threads unless I've answered a specific subtree of this topic. Is this really the best way to do this? It seems like all replies within a topic should be linear rather than subtee upon nested subtree. I'm getting email notification only if I happened to have answered within a given subtree. I have to sort of surf the threads in order to find the ones that I'm not notified on.

Is anyone else bothered by this?

CM

bart

08-29-06, 08:10 PM

bart

08-29-06, 08:16 PM

The only quibble is with what is probably not an essential element, and that is the particulars of timing. I think we may already be at the cusp of that intermediate deflation/disinflation. On the other hand, given that the Ka-Poom chart (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2163&highlight=Ka-Poom#post2163) uses the CPI as its inflation bogey, that may be more form than substance, too. As a lagging indicator, the CPI is likely - to continue to register higher inflation even after the underlying cycle has turned.

Very likely on the cusp, but the boys at the Fed also have quite the ability to confound... I have the account losses to prove it... and there is an election coming up too.

There is likely enough horsepower on this board that any major turn will be noticed soon after it occurs (he says as he keeps his fingers crossed).

Sounds like you are describing this:

http://users.zoominternet.net/~fwuthering/Posts/StockGoldTrend.png

Oddly however, we can get ourselves into some semantic trouble if we don't exercise care with our terms. In a very real sense, the 1970s were hugely deflationary. That decline on yonder chart represents a collapse in the normalized volume of real credit. From the point of view of the Austrian school, that is deflation. The only reason we don't recognize it as such is the dollar was devalued so fast that it outran the pace of credit collapse.

This is very much the kind of environment we've been in for the past four years.

Can you develop that concept of a "collapse in the normalized volume of real credit" a bit more?
I think what you're saying is that credit issuance grew slower in the '70s than inflation?

bart

08-29-06, 08:35 PM

Bart:

I visited your site before I signed up. It's terrific. So you have me blushing.:)

I am in New Zealand for six weeks. It is a way to get away to focus on redoing www.solari.com to reflect what we have learned from prototyping. What's up now is quite stale.

This involves writing introductory materials on Solari Circles -- investment clubs for people who want to shift their investment of time and money away from large governments, large banks and large corporations -- and into a more diversified portfolio and networks that help them navigate the changes underway. Our areas of focus include (i) natural resources, particularly precious metals, (ii) local private and government investment and (iii) sustainable technologies. I will also rehaul our concept for Solari Venture Funds -- its still at a very conceptual level.

I was planning on doing this last year and then put it down to write www.dunwalke.com.

If you are interested, I will post a link to the next piece for comment...should be about 2 weeks from now. Having never before participated in the transformation of a planetary investment system, I am in over my head as I believe some posters in the thread noticed. :D So I would be deeply grateful for any insight and comment you would be willing to share.

Sir Peter Medawar once said, "what is relevant is what solves the problem. If we had thought through real relevancies, we would be on Sirius by now."

Bushwhacking towards Sirius,

Catherine

Now its my turn to blush - you're very kind about my site. I even have a custom icon too: http://www.nowandfutures.com/grins/smiley_blush.gif

What a delightful getaway/recharge in New Zealand - I hope to experience the beauty one day.

I have little clue or experience with investment clubs but I sure would love the opportunity to review any of your efforts and give my $.02 worth (in real copper pennies of course ;)) and then some... especially since its anti-Fed, etc.
It being a planetary effort is even better - I'm a space cadet from way back as many of my friends will attest. ;)

I like that Medawar quote - here's one of my favorites from Einstein that also seems apropos: “We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”

Hoping the Schwarz will be with us all, in non serious mode,

bart

Charles Mackay

08-29-06, 09:24 PM

I was, and I changed the behavior in the User Control Panel and no longer deal with the default tree. This board's software is pretty powerful.

ahhh, great.. I'll try that... thanks for the tip Bart

Catherine Austin Fitts

08-30-06, 06:17 AM

Charles:

Greetings as well!

Aaron is one of those people who makes everyone welcome, invites them all in. He has done a remarkable job of reaching out and drawing in from many places. I was amazed when I saw the final piece -- he pulls no punches. That took a lot of courage.

He was going to open on July 28th. He did, then pulled back to edit and I have not seen the redo. His site says they movie is going back out on September 28th. The coincidence is that this comes towards the end of a high risk period.

After labor day, Congress will return to finalize appropriations in advance of the federal fiscal year for 2007, starting October 1, 2006. The last time I said that the pig would not make it through the snake in the appropriations process was after Rumsfeld was asked about the missing money at DOD at a press conference on September 10, 2001. We know what happened the next day, and indeed the pig flew through the snake with huge increases, the Fed pumping and printing all the way.

We have a similar problem this year with getting the pig through the snake.
Now through October 1 (assuming they make it) will be a time of serious strife behind the scenes to be followed by the markets then having to digest the consequences of the pig making it through or not.

Either way it is getting harder and harder to make the system look like it has any real liquidity in it.

Enjoying and thanking you for itulip.com,

Catherine

Catherine Austin Fitts

08-30-06, 06:23 AM

Bart:

What is the ka-poom theory?

In cahoots,

Catherine

08-30-06, 07:47 AM

catherine, re ka-poom theory, see

http://www.itulip.com/retrospective2006.htm

http://www.itulip.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-102.html

http://www.itulip.com/stagflationgodzilla.htm

http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1085

http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?t=252

WDCRob

08-30-06, 08:36 AM

In a very real sense, the 1970s were hugely deflationary. That decline on yonder chart represents a collapse in the normalized volume of real credit.

What does the Y-axis on yonder chart represent? Is it a ratio of inflation/credit issued?

Finster

08-30-06, 10:01 AM

What does the Y-axis on yonder chart represent? Is it a ratio of inflation/credit issued?

I hope you won't be sorry you asked ... ;)

This is a reprise of a chart posted earlier; hence the lack of explanation. The Y-axis is the log of global stock prices in terms of ounces of gold.

Finster

08-30-06, 10:03 AM

Bart:

What is the ka-poom theory?

In cahoots,

Catherine

The post he is replying to contains a link to the chart used in that context:

Ka-Poom chart (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2163&highlight=Ka-Poom#post2163)

Finster

08-30-06, 01:05 PM

Very likely on the cusp, but the boys at the Fed also have quite the ability to confound... I have the account losses to prove it... and there is an election coming up too.

There is likely enough horsepower on this board that any major turn will be noticed soon after it occurs (he says as he keeps his fingers crossed).

...

Can you develop that concept of a "collapse in the normalized volume of real credit" a bit more?
I think what you're saying is that credit issuance grew slower in the '70s than inflation?

Something like that. The key term is real credit. I don't have actual figures for outstanding credit, but it seems quite safe to say that either real credit contracted in absolute terms, or it grew much more slowly than normal.

I'm using the stock/gold ratio as a rough proxy for the ratio between claims on stuff and actual stuff. The former is credit in the broadest sense. Claims on stuff can actually exceed the amount of real stuff, and that's the barrier central banks are always pushing against when they attempt to expand credit. Eventually people start to realize the emperor has no clothes and the market value of that credit must decline.

I was just rummaging around your site (hopefully you will find everything as you left it ;-) in search of historical data on nominal per capita GDP. Do you happen to have such a thing or know where a good place to find it would be?

bart

08-30-06, 04:39 PM

Something like that. The key term is real credit. I don't have actual figures for outstanding credit, but it seems quite safe to say that either real credit contracted in absolute terms, or it grew much more slowly than normal.

I'm using the stock/gold ratio as a rough proxy for the ratio between claims on stuff and actual stuff. The former is credit in the broadest sense. Claims on stuff can actually exceed the amount of real stuff, and that's the barrier central banks are always pushing against when they attempt to expand credit. Eventually people start to realize the emperor has no clothes and the market value of that credit must decline.

I was just rummaging around your site (hopefully you will find everything as you left it ;-) in search of historical data on nominal per capita GDP. Do you happen to have such a thing or know where a good place to find it would be?

Very interesting and also counter intuitive on real credit. I wish I had the full credit picture so I could chart it, but I only track a few of the credit measures.

I actually do track census info and thought I had a chart on one of the two massive chart pages but obviously it went astray. I just re-created it:

http://www.nowandfutures.com/download/gdp_per_capita.png

There is also a chart in the CIA Factbook that lists GDP per capita in different countries. Its in purchasing power parity terms, and for what its worth shows the US at around $42,000.

Finster

08-30-06, 05:37 PM

I actually do track census info and thought I had a chart on one of the two massive chart pages but obviously it went astray. I just re-created it:

http://www.nowandfutures.com/download/gdp_per_capita.png

There is also a chart in the CIA Factbook that lists GDP per capita in different countries. Its in purchasing power parity terms, and for what its worth shows the US at around $42,000.

Interesting... possible to download the data?

Very interesting and also counter intuitive on real credit. I wish I had the full credit picture so I could chart it, but I only track a few of the credit measures.

If it seems counterintuitive, remember part of the thesis is that inflation drove the dollar down at such a rate as to outrun the decline in real credit, so that in nominal terms there was expansion. But an even bigger issue is what I'm referring to as "credit in the broadest sense" - i.e. "claims on stuff". This includes not only credit in the conventional sense of bonds an other fixed income securities, but stocks as well. They are "claims on stuff", too. The delineation between "stuff" and "claims on stuff" I am making here is probably closer to the notion of paper versus physical assets. Here, though, I'm emphasizing the relationship between the two in such a way as to suggest there is a fundamental link and certain bounds on how far "credit" can go. It it very literally like a game of musical chairs when the amount of credit (claims on stuff) exceeds the actual stuff - when government and banks deliberately expand credit, they are actually encouraging the development of such a state of affairs - and this relationship tells us why such artifically expanded credit must eventually come back into line with physical reality.

Look again at the chart - you can almost see it happening.

http://users.zoominternet.net/~fwuthering/Posts/StockGoldTrend.png

Corporate Plebe

08-30-06, 06:20 PM

08-30-06, 08:09 PM

But an even bigger issue is what I'm referring to as "credit in the broadest sense" - i.e. "claims on stuff". This includes not only credit in the conventional sense of bonds an other fixed income securities, but stocks as well. They are "claims on stuff", too. The delineation between "stuff" and "claims on stuff" I am making here is probably closer to the notion of paper versus physical assets. Here, though, I'm emphasizing the relationship between the two in such a way as to suggest there is a fundamental link and certain bounds on how far "credit" can go. It it very literally like a game of musical chairs when the amount of credit (claims on stuff) exceeds the actual stuff - when government and banks deliberately expand credit, they are actually encouraging the development of such a state of affairs - and this relationship tells us why such artifically expanded credit must eventually come back into line with physical reality.

re claims on stuff v stuff

from goldmoney.com commentary by james turk: "Less than one year ago REFCO, a New York based financial services company, collapsed. Last week the London Metals Exchange took the extraordinary step to postpone what looks like the inevitable default of contracts in its nickel market. What do these two events have in common?

The customers of these firms who thought they owned metal in fact didn't. The defaults made clear to these firms' customers that they owned someone's promise to deliver metal to them, but they did not own the metal itself."

jimmy rogers' commodities fund thought it owned futures, but it didn't. now it is an unsecured creditor in the refco bankruptcy.

this also connects to bill gross' latest piece, http://www.pimco.com/LeftNav/Late+Breaking+Commentary/IO/2006/IO+September+2006.htm
referred to in another thread here. i've seen gross' argument in a piece some time ago by john mauldin. basically it says that demographics limit the efficacy of any financial solutions to funding the boomers' retirements. if there are only so many people working, producing only a certain amount of stuff, then all the financial claims accumulated by the boomer generation can only purchase that amount of stuff. there's no more to be had.

so one way or another, financial claims can't exceed the value of the stuff those financial claims can purchase. [this is the concrete expression of finster's obsession ;) with the value of the dollar versus the value of stuff.]

bart

08-30-06, 09:20 PM

Interesting... possible to download the data?

But of course - GDP is available already in an Excel file at http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn/gdplev.xls and census data is from http://www.census.gov/popest/datasets.html and http://www.census.gov/statab/www.

If you have trouble with them or want data going further back than what's there, holler and I'll try and yank the relevant data out of the tabs in my (now 565MB) master Excel sheet.

If it seems counterintuitive, remember part of the thesis is that inflation drove the dollar down at such a rate as to outrun the decline in real credit, so that in nominal terms there was expansion. But an even bigger issue is what I'm referring to as "credit in the broadest sense" - i.e. "claims on stuff". This includes not only credit in the conventional sense of bonds an other fixed income securities, but stocks as well. They are "claims on stuff", too. The delineation between "stuff" and "claims on stuff" I am making here is probably closer to the notion of paper versus physical assets. Here, though, I'm emphasizing the relationship between the two in such a way as to suggest there is a fundamental link and certain bounds on how far "credit" can go. It it very literally like a game of musical chairs when the amount of credit (claims on stuff) exceeds the actual stuff - when government and banks deliberately expand credit, they are actually encouraging the development of such a state of affairs - and this relationship tells us why such artifically expanded credit must eventually come back into line with physical reality.

Look again at the chart - you can almost see it happening.

http://users.zoominternet.net/~fwuthering/Posts/StockGoldTrend.png

I sometimes forget that the FDI is global in scope, and it appears on reflection that it happened again here.

Amen on the ever so slippry definitions of money too, in the credit, asset and even derivatives senses.

This just reminded me of a thread not quite a year ago where we were going back & forth on "credit demand" - here's the 3rd of 3 charts from that thread:

http://www.nowandfutures.com/download/credit_demand3.png

Finster

08-31-06, 08:47 AM

I sometimes forget that the FDI is global in scope, and it appears on reflection that it happened again here.

Happens a lot, but not this time. This chart doesn't invoke the FDI at all. It's purely stocks in terms of gold. It happens that you see somewhat of a similar pattern if you plot stocks using the FDI, but it is much more muted and elements of timing are different. This is because the FDI takes into account the prices of both assets and claims on assets into account. In this chart, gold is a proxy for just actual physical assets alone.

Amen on the ever so slippry definitions of money too, in the credit, asset and even derivatives senses.

This just reminded me of a thread not quite a year ago where we were going back & forth on "credit demand" - here's the 3rd of 3 charts from that thread:
...

Indeed. The variability in the unit (dollar) makes it hard to assess, but once real credit volume exceeds equilibrium, it takes ever-more pushing from the Fed to expand it. Eventually it contracts anyway, giving you deflation, regardless of whether it is papered over by currency dilution and inflation or not.

The Keynesian dream is just that.

...(now 565MB) master Excel sheet.

In-freaking-sane!

You have out-geeked, out-spreadsheet-jockeyed, not only me, but probably the IRS, NASA, and FRB combined ...

bart

08-31-06, 05:23 PM

Happens a lot, but not this time. This chart doesn't invoke the FDI at all. It's purely stocks in terms of gold. It happens that you see somewhat of a similar pattern if you plot stocks using the FDI, but it is much more muted and elements of timing are different. This is because the FDI takes into account the prices of both assets and claims on assets into account. In this chart, gold is a proxy for just actual physical assets alone.

I consider myself partially "finned" then... ;)

Gold did do a pretty fair job during the '70s of emulating the FDI though.

Indeed. The variability in the unit (dollar) makes it hard to assess, but once real credit volume exceeds equilibrium, it takes ever-more pushing from the Fed to expand it. Eventually it contracts anyway, giving you deflation, regardless of whether it is papered over by currency dilution and inflation or not.

The Keynesian dream is just that.

Dream... and nightmare too the way it has been and is being practiced. Keynes will surely get much blame one of these days, and yet he also said things like this:
"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 can diagnose."

In-freaking-sane!

You have out-geeked, out-spreadsheet-jockeyed, not only me, but probably the IRS, NASA, and FRB combined ...

Quantified be me?
I only have about 2.5 terabytes online though, the NSA has nothing to worry about. ;)

08-31-06, 09:09 PM

I was, and I changed the behavior in the User Control Panel and no longer deal with the default tree. This board's software is pretty powerful.

We put some effort into researching the best BB software. Most are free and pretty good. This one is not free and we think the best.

Only the best for the smartest guys on the web.

bart

08-31-06, 11:14 PM

We put some effort into researching the best BB software. Most are free and pretty good. This one is not free and we think the best.

Its the best and by far the most configurable I've seen. Kudos to your research and decision.

09-01-06, 07:28 AM

The Keynesian dream is just that.

if i'm not mistaken, keynes believed that excess liquidity injected during times of stress was supposed to be soaked back up during times of strength. the soaking back up never happened in practice. it reminds me of alcoholics who use the beneficial effects of 1-2 glasses of wine as an excuse to get soaked themselves. so don't blame keynes. he was a smart guy.

FRED

09-01-06, 11:09 AM

if i'm not mistaken, keynes believed that excess liquidity injected during times of stress was supposed to be soaked back up during times of strength. the soaking back up never happened in practice. it reminds me of alcoholics who use the beneficial effects of 1-2 glasses of wine as an excuse to get soaked themselves. so don't blame keynes. he was a smart guy.

The Keynesian cure of tax cuts, deficit spending, and easy money is intended to prevent an economy from falling into a self reinforcing deflationary spiral, as happened in the US in the 1930s and in Japan in the 1990s. But, as an economy recovered, these stimuli are meant to be withdrawn; taxes raised, budgets brought back into the black, interest rates raised to neutral and money supply sufficient to support economic growth without generating high inflation. What Keynes didn't count on is that once these measures are in place, politicians will figure out a way to keep them there, inventing theories about why deficits don't matter and why, even though we're on the wrong side of the Laffer Curve, post bubble tax cuts can remain in place forever. He may not have foreseen the unique geopolitical and historical circumstances that has allowed the US to break the rules. The US economy happens to be the one that's printing the world's reserve currency, and is acting as the world's main borrower/consumer just when the world's newly minted ex-communist or ex-socialist capitalist savers/producers needed one, so the US has gotten away with leaving the Keynesian cure in place without having to pay high interest rates, at least for a while; until ex-communist or ex-socialist capitalist savers/producers start to develop more domestic consumption and trade more with each other than with the US, and start using other currencies, such as euros, other than the US dollar for trade.

No, don't blame it on Keynes. He's probably turning over in his grave.

fogger

09-26-06, 12:38 AM

Keynes provided a sellable framework that worked for those in power. He fully understood. Read more Keynes (not his economics).

why is (was) the US the richest nation?
why is the 3rd world so far behind?
how do you think the US has maintained power after bankruptcy in 1933 and then again in 1971?

Answer: money and its flow

can you name an interest-free currency in history? there are numerous successful examples, so why can't you name one?

why does a govt that has the constitutional power to "coin money" pay interest on its money?

You might remember a saying: "history is written by those who win"

know our enemy. this has been going on for 6000 years:
http://yamaguchy.netfirms.com/astle_d/astle_index.html

fogger

09-26-06, 12:52 AM

Quote from John Maynard Keynes:

"Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the Capitalistic System was to debauch the currency. . . 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 can diagnose."

A few more quotes:
http://www.fame.org/NotableQuotes.asp

fogger

09-26-06, 12:58 AM

fogger

09-26-06, 06:20 PM

some more quotes:
http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp/ArticleDisplay.php?Article=Quotes

I believe I may have identified your resistance to seeing the truth:

- The morality of Producers is the antithesis to the morality of Parasites.
- Since most people are good, you assume most people in power are good
- You extrapolate your moral/social interactions to the world at large

In short, you refuse to believe they can exist.

those who seek success in business believe in the virtue of their merit
those who seek success in politics believe in their ability to manipulate

parasites are the minority, but they tend to band together

fogger

09-26-06, 06:52 PM

if you have a problem with conspiracy, think of it as the pursuit of power by parasites. with money being the expression and representation of that power.

some parasites have become excellent at their game
they have taught their techniques to others (or others have learned them)

i believe the greatest challenge of the common man today is to remove the tools that allow the parasites to thrive. (and sadly the supposedly very smart people on this board are entirely blind to it even when it's pointed out repeatedly)

the geek/jock fairy tale misses the possibility that some people have a very different morality.

bart

09-26-06, 07:09 PM

some more quotes:
...

You'll likely enjoy these too, they were sent to me about two years ago with the actual source way down the page:

This war is a defensive war. It was forced upon us by our enemies, who wish to destroy our nation. The only thing we cannot afford to lose in this war is our freedom, the foundation of our life and our future. No one has the right to complain about limitations on his personal freedom caused by the war.

.

Why of course the people don't want war. But it is the leaders who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along.
All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

Joseph Goebbels, Sept 1943

Source:
http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goeb45.htm

fogger

09-26-06, 08:14 PM

"A few who can understand the system (check money and credits) will either be so interested in it´s profits, or so dependent on it´s favors, that there will be no opposition from that class (THE TOP, Maybe YOU.), while on the other hand, the great body of the people (THE BOTTOM, Most likely YOU.) mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear it´s burdens without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests." - Rothschild Brothers of London

Jim Nickerson

09-26-06, 10:38 PM

i believe the greatest challenge of the common man today is to remove the tools that allow the parasites to thrive. (and sadly the supposedly very smart people on this board are entirely blind to it even when it's pointed out repeatedly)

Whether or not the people who contribute to iTulip are very smart people or not depends upon where one is the the order of knowledge of economics, banking, and finance. From my position of knowledge there are definitely some smart people who contribute here, but I guess for you, fogger, your position is perhaps near the top of the order.

Personally, I dislike it when contributors speak cryptically. So that there is no misunderstanding in whatever is your opinion, please explain to the readers just what are the "tools" that allow the "parasites" to thrive. Who are the parasites? If the smart people here are blind, then please explain your comment and open their and my eyes--everybody may benefit from what you see so clearly. Thank you.

Catherine Austin Fitts

09-27-06, 02:17 AM

As we are on the topic of war, I posted this link on my blog the other day.

Army Warns Rumsfeld It's Billions Short
An extraordinary action by the chief of staff sends a message: The Pentagon must increase the budget or reduce commitments in Iraq and elsewhere.
By Peter Spiegel, Times Staff Writer
September 25, 2006
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-military25sep25,0,5555967.story?coll=la-home-headlines

If anyone is interested, I would welcome some discussion on what is really going on. Part of my interest is that I have been following money going missing from the federal government for years:

Solari -- Missing Money Article and Documents
http://www.solari.com/learn/articles_missingmoney.htm

The other part is that I am increasingly frustrated with the success of "incompetency" being used as cover for something quite competent. For more on that vein, see:

The Great “Incompetency” Heist
http://www.votesolari.com/catherinesblog/?p=8

American Theocracy
http://www.votesolari.com/catherinesblog/?p=4

I am flying home from New Zealand this weekend. Reading the news, I feel like I am flying into quite the "pea soup."

Catherine

da bear

10-06-06, 11:16 PM

Personally I like this one:

"Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money and control credit, and with a flick of a pen they will create enough to buy it back."

Sir Josiah Stamp, former President, Bank of England

I hear there is good money in banking. :)

this is my second post on itulip. interesting thread. why cant the Fed be both incompetent and dishonest?

the conspiratorial nature of this thread brings to memory another board out there in finance/investment land. :)

hopefully we will see a greater understanding of what constitutes REAL money and the real nature of inflation.

hopefully in the future someone will remark, "now we are all Austrians."

da bear

bart

10-07-06, 12:22 AM

I hear there is good money in banking. :)

this is my second post on itulip. interesting thread. why cant the Fed be both incompetent and dishonest?

the conspiratorial nature of this thread brings to memory another board out there in finance/investment land. :)

hopefully we will see a greater understanding of what constitutes REAL money and the real nature of inflation.

hopefully in the future someone will remark, "now we are all Austrians."

da bear

Trust an insouciant bear to speak sooth re: the Fed being both incompetent & dishonest. :D

You hereby are awarded an honorary wad of tinfoil, for your new hat... but beware oh furry one, that "other" board is also known as "the board whose name shall not be mentioned"... ;)
(in case anyone wonders, da bear also posts on DR and its almost completely unmoderated - and shows it frequently)

fogger

10-07-06, 05:05 PM

"These international bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests control the majority of the newspapers and magazines in this country. They use the columns of these papers to club into submission or drive out of office public officials who refuse to do the bidding of the powerful corrupt cliques which compose the invisible government....

The warning of Theodore Roosevelt has much timeliness today, for the real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over City, State, and nation... It seizes in its long and powerful tentacles our executive officers, our legislative bodies, our schools, our courts, our newspapers, and every agency created for the public protection...

To depart from mere generalisations, let me say that at the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller-Standard Oil interest and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as the international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes.

They practically control both parties, write political platforms, make catspaws of party leaders, use the leading men of private organisations, and resort to every device to place in nomination for high public office only such candidates as will be amenable to the dictates of corrupt big business...

These international bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests control the majority of newspapers and magazines in this country."
John Hylan, Mayor of New York 1927

http://www.xat.org/xat/moneyhistory.html

fogger

10-07-06, 05:08 PM

"The Federal Reserve definitely caused the Great depression by contracting the amount of currency in circulation by one-third from 1929 to 1933."
Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize winning economist

"It was not accidental. It was a carefully contrived occurrence... The international bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so that they might emerge as rulers of us all."
Rep. Louis T.McFadden (D-PA)

"I think it can hardly be disputed that the statesmen and financiers of Europe are ready to take almost any means to re-acquire rapidly the gold stock which Europe lost to America as the result of World War I."
Rep. Louis T.McFadden (D-PA)

fogger

10-07-06, 05:35 PM

I'm not anywhere near the top. I'm simply a person who repeatedly tests and challenges my own beliefs for accuracy. And I don't mean to sound cryptic. I thought I was speaking very clearly. What I'm saying must be vastly different from what you learned during your "education".

The most powerful tool of the parasites are the world's central banks, the BIS, and WMF. If we were to eliminate the bank of england and the fed and let congress print its own money, the parasites would instantly lose much of their grip.

Lincoln, Garfield, and Kennedy all had one thing in common: prior to their respective assassinations they had all issued private currency outside the bankers' control. Also read about Andrew Jackson's successful battle against the banks.

Everyone studies the markets and charts and statistics of stocks and bonds, etc, but very few ask "what is money and where does it come from?" That would be the logical place to start.

fogger

10-07-06, 05:43 PM

"To cause high prices all the federal reserve board will do will be to lower the re-discount rate..., producing an expansion of credit and a rising stock market; then when... business men are adjusted to these conditions, it can check... prosperity in mid-career by arbitrarily raising the rate of interest.

It can cause the pendulum of a rising and falling market to swing gently back and forth by slight changes in the discount rate, or cause violent fluctuations by greater rate variation, and in either case it will possess inside information as to financial conditions and advance knowledge of the coming change, either up or down.

This is the strangest, most dangerous advantage ever placed in the hands of a special privilege class by any Government that ever existed.

The system is private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other people's money.

They know in advance when to create panics to their advantage. They also know when to stop panic. Inflation and deflation work equally well for them when they control finance..."
Rep. Charles Lindbergh (R-MN)

fogger

10-07-06, 05:50 PM

"The powers of financial capitalism had [a] far-reaching [plan], nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole.

This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences.

The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations.

Each central bank... Sought to dominate its government by its ability to control treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."
Carroll Quigley, Professor, Georgetown University

http://www.xat.org/xat/worldbank.html

10-09-06, 04:30 PM

I never got this part of the critique of central banks: Yes, the Fed is a for-profit institution with oversight by Congress, to in theory make sure it operates within the law, and "independent" from all branches of government, which it is–sort of–depending on the central banker and other circumstances. Yes, it'd be cheaper for the government to print money directly. But do we really want Congress to one hand on the "spend" lever and the other on the "print" lever? Seems to me, the situation is bad enough as it is.

Greenspan said in his last hearing before Congress that he thought the continuation of Fed should go to a vote of Congress every four years, meaning, if they don't vote to continue the Fed, it just goes away.

What's your vision of a world without central banks?

fogger

11-01-06, 10:29 PM

The Fed is in partnership with the government. The spend lever and the print lever are already one and the same. They are only hidden from view.

1. Congress wants money
2. They go to the Treasury.
3. The Treasury issues bonds (ie. borrows money)
4. The bonds are sold on the open market to investors

OR

if there are not enough investors to buy the bonds, the Fed buys them directly (ie. prints money and hands it to the Treasury)

the bonds are a farce. the money is a farce. inflation just occurred. noone is the wiser. Congress just stole .0001% of that dollar in your wallet today.

Why are the central banks around the world the largest holders of US bonds? Because government and banks are in partnership.

fogger

11-01-06, 10:34 PM

In the above example, Congress stole money through inflation but they've also created a liability for the interest.

More productive work siphoned off to the for-profit bank.

What did the bank do? Created some bits in a computer, but they've also created a slave. Govt must then either borrow more to pay the interest or employ the IRS to ask for more taxes.

It's diabolical, but utterly simple.

fogger

11-01-06, 10:40 PM

The next question to ask yourself is:

If you were a banker looking to maximize profits, it would of course be in your best interest to maximize the interest you receive for printing paper and entering bits into a computer.

So what is the best way to increase your customer's debt level? By instigating a war of course! Wars are massively expensive and require lots of debt. And just imagine if you can fund BOTH SIDES!

You're naive if you don't see this. Yes there really are people in this world with an entirely different morality than you.

fogger

11-01-06, 11:07 PM

11-02-06, 10:14 AM

For ideas on a world without central banks:

http://www.mises.org/store/Money-Bank-Credit-and-Economic-Cycles-P290C0.aspx

http://www.safehaven.com/article-3426.htm
http://www.financialsense.com/editorials/hultberg/2005/0227.html

fogger,

Thank you for your response to my question. I've read more than two dozen books on the banking and money, including most of Martin Mayers' books. I get the argument for eliminating central banks. But the fact is, you can't go to any country on earth–no matter how small (e.g., Iceland or Jamaica)–that doesn't have one. Either all nations have one, or none do, or–more likely if a drastic change to the system happens–they all do but they are different from what they are today.

No central bank will unilaterally break from the rest, except in a severe crisis. It has been my contention that worse than "Poom" (defined as an approximate 100% inflation over 5 - 6 years) may happen if global re-balancing is sufficiently sudden and chaotic that one or more major central bank breaks ranks because domestic political demands take precidence over global demands; China's, Japan's, Russia's and Middle Eastern central banks may allign against the US, for example, with a few others, such as Australia's, caught in the cross-fire.

The Fed has since WWII–when it emerged as the only major, functioning capitalist power–acted unilaterally within the global central banking system, such as "suspending" dollar/gold convertability in 1971 (forever), and ten years later when Volcker plunged many countries into crisis with massive US rate hikes. That kind of unilateralism is not so easy an option given the US foreign debt status. Orderly, dollar depreciation as occured 2001 - 2005 was the result of coordinated global central banking.

A failure of global central bank coordination might cause the system to fail. Perhaps out of such a failure a radical new order may emerge, such as a Pure Gold Standard with a 100-Percent Reserve Requirement, but I don't see such a new order developing via some international effort to replace the current system, without a crisis as a forcing function. (BTW, whatever happened to the Gold Dinar? Haven't heard much about it lately.)

Jesús Huerta de Soto's "Money, Bank Credit, and Economic Cycles" looks interesting. Have you read it? At 875 pages, it makes Peter Warburton's 323 page "Debt and Delusion," with its 21 page glossary and 12 pages of footnotes, look like a quick read. I appreciate that he is proposing a clear alternative, but who will lead an effort to adopt an international agreement on a Pure Gold Standard with a 100-Percent Reserve Requirement? Not the US. Not China. Not Russia.

These ideas, however thoughtful and even profound, suffer a limitation that is common to micro-economic theory, as in the following tale.

A physicist, a chemist, and an economist are stuck on a desert island. Starving, they wander the island for days. Finally, the have the good luck to come across a carton of cans of tuna fish that has washed up on shore. But they have no way to open the cans.

The physicist proposes using his coke-bottle glasses as a magifying lens to focus the tropical sun on a can to heat it and cause it to explode, releasing the contents. After trying all day, the can never gets hot enough. The sun goes doown and they go to sleep hungry.

The next day the chemist proposes using the lens to heat and concentrate an acidic sap dripping from the bark of one of the trees. They try this all day, but the acid bearly corrodes the can. Again, they go to sleep hungry.

The next day the economist proposes, brightly, "Assume a can opener!"

11-02-06, 11:03 AM

China's, Japan's, Russia's and Middle Eastern central banks may allign against the US, for example, with a few others, such as Australia's, caught in the cross-fire......

Orderly, dollar depreciation as occured 2001 - 2005 was the result of coordinated global central banking.

with the rise in oil prices china and japan have smaller annual net reserve accumulations to direct our way, while russia and middle eastern energy exporters, and of course venezuela, are not necessarily interested in making things easy for the u.s.

even friendly middle eastern countries are trying to tiptoe out of the dollar. witness monday's news story re the u.a.e.:
"The United Arab Emirates, the second-largest Arab economy, signalled on Monday that it might cut its holdings of dollars by almost half, highlighting a recent trend of reserve diversification away from the US currency."

so many are tiptoeing away, if just one tries to make a break for it, really getting out of dollars, it might create a disorderly, waterfall dollar decline and a huge move up in precious metals. just speculating here.

11-02-06, 03:31 PM

bart

11-02-06, 04:59 PM

It's like a Chinese menu at the restaurant, if you've ever wondered: not only are the items different, so are the prices for the same items on the English menu–they're cheaper in Chinese. As Dave Barry would say, I'm not making this up.

That has been happening in the LA area for a few years now, and probably for far longer. A friend's wife is a native Taiwanese and oh my... the stories she tells.
One sidelight that I found fascinating - with gold, if its not 24k then they're not interested.

I'm interested to hear about your third scenario with the EU to see how close I'm tracking with you.

11-02-06, 07:12 PM

Ka-Poom hinges on China/US. China has been building an trade/ energy/resource block with Russia, Iran (and other middle eastern countries), and Venezuela for years. Venezuela is strategic because of its influence over the rest of LatAm. The most significant recent change in this direction is growing cooperation between Japan and China.

russia's interests seem more directed toward, on the one hand, exercising increasing control over western europe via manipulating its own role as energy supplier, and on the other hand re-asserting influence in its former dependencies - ukraine, baltics, caucasus. although there have been periodic noises about russian oil being piped to china, it's never happened. i foresee increasing competition between between china and russia for influence with iran, which in turn is growing in its own influence over the whole middle east.

Not only are various CBs tip-toeing, as you say, away from the dollar, some are forming alliances. China's made some not very subtle comments in Australia's direction, nearly as bellicose as its Taiwan rhetoric, and it will be interesting to see which way Australia chooses to go when the time comes.

So far, commentary on this subject typically has two items on the menu:

"Disorderly decline" = "Last CB out is a rotten egg."
"Orderly decline" = "We CBs must hang together or hang separately."

But there is a 3rd:

"Period X" (which I haven't said much about yet) = "Asia/EU-centric global central banking regime."

are you implying orderly coordination between asian cbs and the ecb? it's easier for me to imagine competing regional currency regimes: a euro zone, a dollar zone, a yuan/yen zone. and maybe a ruble zone, come to think of it. do you think a middle east currency will emerge? the famous gold dinar? or will the middle eastern oil exporters just accept any currency, at the right price?

or is the idea that out of such a melange would emerge the need for coordination among the various cbs, with leadership naturally flowing to the euro and yuan/yen players? such a process could take time.

jtabeb

03-03-08, 02:38 PM

russia's interests seem more directed toward, on the one hand, exercising increasing control over western europe via manipulating its own role as energy supplier, and on the other hand re-asserting influence in its former dependencies - ukraine, baltics, caucasus. although there have been periodic noises about russian oil being piped to china, it's never happened. i foresee increasing competition between between china and russia for influence with iran, which in turn is growing in its own influence over the whole middle east.

are you implying orderly coordination between asian cbs and the ecb? it's easier for me to imagine competing regional currency regimes: a euro zone, a dollar zone, a yuan/yen zone. and maybe a ruble zone, come to think of it. do you think a middle east currency will emerge? the famous gold dinar? or will the middle eastern oil exporters just accept any currency, at the right price?

or is the idea that out of such a melange would emerge the need for coordination among the various cbs, with leadership naturally flowing to the euro and yuan/yen players? such a process could take time.

I said it before and I'll say it again, first country/region to the gold standard wins, hands down. It's the chicken and the egg. There won't be one untill there is one, but if there is one, they'd all have to be.

Spartacus

03-12-08, 02:29 PM

JK, I've always had a healthy respect for this kind of story, whether it made me personally queasy or fearful.

Kafka was not writing anything new - just reporting on common experience.

Rube Goldberg did a lot of political pieces, portraying the crushing of the average man by the government machine.

I thought it was a well known fact that if someone (you or a lawyer or a cop) just plain files mistaken paperwork your life can easily become a living hell

Remember all the people put in prison by the "recovered memory" crap? Many are still in jail 15 years after all that stuff was debunked.

Nifong was an exceptional case - a prosecutor brought down by his mis-deeds. Most never are brought down.

Read William L Anderson and Paul Craig Roberts sometime on prosecutorial misconduct and on the US prison population.

Similar stuff happens in Canada.

I could go on - how many people have been freed by Barry Scheck's project?
Remember the blanket amnesty given by the departing Illinois governor for all death row inmates, after several cases were proven to have been set up by the police?

I could go on - I bet you could too.

1. re the internet: with senator ted stevens, famous for his observation that "the internet is not a dump truck; it's a series of tubes," in charge of net neutrality, why worry?

2. i came across references to catherine austin fitts a year or two ago. if you search for her name along with the phrase "enemy of the state" you get, e.g., http://www.ratical.org/co-globalize/CAFmrl.html , and http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0208/S00055.htm , and
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0203/S00066.htm . [the first two are mirrors, and i list both in case one goes down - you never know.] i read her story with fascination and alarm. you don't get e.g. former undersecretaries of housing writing conspiracy theory. [i take that back- i recall that pierre salinger, former white house press secty, got into the idea that a twa flight that exploded was deliberately shot down over long island.] but getting back to fitts' story: it scared me silly. it so threatened my view of the world as a relatively organized, relatively understandable if very complex place in which impersonal processes govern at the highest level, that i put it aside. the alternative was to bring out the tinfoil hat that bart likes to refer to. frankly, it makes me anxious [nervous, not eager] to contemplate reopening my mind to these matters, but i am prepared to do so with a forum such as this in which to discuss it.

put on your tinfoil hats and read what's at those web sites.

[for other articles, see http://www.solari.com/gideon/articles_about.html .]