Thursday, July 24, 2014
   
Text Size

Search our Site or Google

The Continuing Mystery of the U.S. Treasuries Market

Articles & Blogs - US Commentary

User Rating: / 19
PoorBest 

The U.S. Treasuries market is currently the dominant financial mystery of the present time. Much like the proverbial “lead zeppelin” defies the laws of physics, the current status of the U.S. Treasuries market defies all of our financial fundamentals. It is a market which cannot exist, and yet it does.

Previously, my own writing has focused upon one particular aspect of this absurdity: the highest prices for U.S. Treasuries at a time of maximum supply. This in itself is an absolute financial contradiction. The highest supply in history directly implies the lowest prices in history, for every market in the world – except U.S. Treasuries.

But that is merely Act One of this Theater of the Absurd. These maximum prices are occurring at the point in history where the U.S. has never been less solvent. This also directly implies that U.S. Treasuries should be fetching the lowest prices in history – as is occurring with their Deadbeat counterparts in Europe.

No one has been able to explain this ultimate financial contradiction, and so I have previously done so myself. My solution for this conundrum was based upon the Holmesian Principle of logic asserted by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle: when you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains (no matter how unlikely) must be the answer.

In applying this principle to the logical/financial contradiction of the U.S. Treasuries market, I was left with only possibility: that B.S. Bernanke is secretly (and illegally) counterfeiting U.S. dollars – and using those bogus dollars to prop up the U.S. Treasuries market. There is simply no other viable theory for how this “lead zeppelin” continues to (supposedly) generate the highest prices in history for this thoroughly and obviously worthless paper. Thus I originally wrote Maximum Fraud in the U.S. Treasuries Market” back at the very beginning of this year. Since that time I have watched with interest to see if any competing theories would emerge.

Obviously I haven’t been watching the mainstream media. The same mindless parrots who report on this financial absurdity on a daily basis have never seen anything even slightly unusual about maximum supply and maximum prices occurring simultaneously. So I have been watching other members of the Alternative Media for such developments.

To the best of my knowledge, only one such theory has emerged. This theory holds that the financial/logical contradiction of the U.S. Treasuries market is simply a product of manipulation of interest rate swaps. Sadly, this theory appears to have been accepted by many members of this Community – despite the fact it is fatally flawed.

Understand that the mere (absurd) prices for U.S. Treasuries are the minor element of this mystery. The real question is and has always been: who is buying this worthless paper?

As an analogy, I can advertise a used car for sale, and ask $1 million dollars for that car. People all around me may (would) scoff at the “fraudulent” price I was asking for this car, but there would be no need to punish me or even prevent me from attempting to carry out such a fraud. Why? Because merely listing a (fraudulent) asking-price for the used car in no way compels anyone to purchase that car.

Here is where the explanation of interest-rate swap manipulation falls flat on its face, because it fails to explain the crucial component of this fraud: who is buying all of the most over-priced bonds in the history of the world? There is no answer for that question. We need simply delve into some additional parameters of supply and demand to illustrate this point even more vividly.

Let’s start with all of the currency-swaps in which (predominantly) China has been relentlessly engaging for more than two years. By my count, it has already eliminated somewhere between $1 trillion and $2 trillion in annual demand for U.S. dollars. This factor alone means there would be much less demand for U.S. Treasuries at any price – let alone the highest prices in history. Furthermore, most of the pre-Crash of ’08 trade surpluses which used to be “recycled” into U.S. dollars (via U.S. Treasuries) no longer exist. Yet another major plank of demand for U.S. Treasuries has evaporated at any price.

Then we have yet another absolute financial contradiction: prices for the U.S.’s fraud-bonds being at the highest prices in history, while U.S. equities simultaneously approach their own record prices. Here the alternative media has been just as comatose as the mainstream media. Where is the denouncement of yet another fraudulent set of parameters?

It has been understood since the dawn of modern markets that bond prices and equity prices always behave in an inverse manner toward each other: when the prices for one are up, the prices for the other are down. Market commentators have offered “fundamental” explanations for this reality, generally based upon the concept of risk allocation. However there is a much more basic explanation.

There is only so much capital floating around global markets. If that capital – that tide – flows into one market, then as a matter of simple arithmetic it must flow out of that other market. Thus U.S. equities and U.S. bonds could never/can never both be at “maximum prices”, since that it just as absurd as a meteorological report claiming that all the world was simultaneously experiencing “high tide”.

As a matter of simple arithmetic, the massive collapse in demand for U.S. paper globally has meant that it has been absolutely impossible to find buyers for this paper at any price. If there could not be enough buyers for all this paper – even at legitimate prices – then merely manipulating the “sticker price” on U.S. Treasuries lower through interest-rate swap manipulation is irrelevant, because that fraud cannot manufacture any buyers for this paper. It is just as ridiculous as trying to sell a used car for $1 million: one can attempt such a fraud, but will never find a Chump to execute it.

There is only one way in which the entire world can simultaneously experience “high tide”: a much greater volume of liquid would have to exist to (globally) elevate the water level. The financial analogy is identical. The only way that the gigantic U.S. equities markets and the gigantic U.S. bond market can both exhibit maximum price simultaneously is if there was a much greater volume of capital.

Where has all that capital come from?

The mainstream drones will tell us that there has been a Flight to Safety: all of the world’s lemmings simultaneously loading up on worthless U.S. paper. This explanation can be absolutely rebutted in two different ways.

First of all, the U.S. government publishes an official report on capital in-flows and out-flows into the U.S. economy. In order to prop-up both of these gigantic U.S. markets simultaneously there would have had to be a massive influx of capital into the U.S. – reflected in that official report. No such migration of capital has ever occurred.

The second absolute rebuttal to this nonsense is something which the media drones have regularly been reporting on for the past three years (out of the other side of their mouths): the “destruction of wealth” which has taken place before/during/after the Crash of ’08. Obviously the $trillions that have been destroyed (primarily through listening to the absurd financial advice dispensed by the mainstream media itself) are yet another “minus” in the demand column for U.S. paper.

All other supposed explanations for the obvious and massive fraud currently taking place in the U.S. Treasuries market fall apart because they cannot account for “record demand” for U.S. Treasuries, when literally every component of that demand has partially/totally evaporated. I repeat: there would not/could not be enough buyers for U.S. Treasuries at any price – and so merely manipulating those sticker-prices with interest-rate swap manipulation is irrelevant.

I assert yet again that there is only one theoretically possible explanation as to why the U.S. Treasuries Ponzi-scheme has not already blown up like Bernie Madoff’s fraud: B.S. Bernanke is fraudulently counterfeiting U.S. dollars (by the $trillions) to prop-up this market. It is not only the only possible explanation for the Treasuries market itself, but the only explanation for the simultaneous bubble-prices of both U.S. bonds and U.S. equities.

A lead zeppelin would require an enormous amount of lighter-than-air gases to keep it afloat. The dual-bubbles of U.S. equities and U.S. bonds similarly requires a massive amount of capital to keep them from immediately popping. As there is no possible legitimate source for such capital anywhere on the planet, then Holmesian logic dictates that these bubbles are being propped-up with illegitimate capital. Enter B.S. Bernanke, and his secret money-printing.

I remain open to other rational explanations to this absolute financial contradiction. Absent any new (and viable) proposal, my theory stands alone.

Trackback(0)
Comments (29)Add Comment
Jeff Nielson
...
written by Jeff Nielson, June 26, 2012
Jeff, I suspect that the only thing we will disagree on is who has the power to create the money supply which means we are back to Benjamin Franklin and his quote about the absurdity of having a government that can create a dollar bond but not a dollar bill, even though the former only fattens the usurer.
Are you happy to leave the control of the money supply in the hands of the nice Mr Rothschild and his good time mates or would you rather see it in a transparent linux-like structure in the hands of the elected government? Does government have a place in the money supply or should we leave it to the invisible hand of the market?


Elixer, here I think you're misintepreting me. I'm in no way DEFENDING any aspect of the status quo. Rather, I'm just pointing out that from a practical standpoint a gold standard will (ultimately) accomplish MOST of what needs to be done by itself.

For an answer to your question am I content to "leave the control of the money supply in the hands of the nice Mr Rothschild...?", I'll point out that I am THE most outspoken advocate for EXTERMINATING the Bond Parasites, and smashing the banking oligopoly (and all our OTHER oligopolies) into little pieces... smilies/smiley.gif
elixer
...
written by elixer, June 25, 2012
Hi Jeff,
You wrote:

Again we're in full agreement: ANY form of "fractional-reserve" banking is NOTHING but both a form of Ponzi-scheme and a formula for STEALING.

Jeff, I suspect that the only thing we will disagree on is who has the power to create the money supply which means we are back to Benjamin Franklin and his quote about the absurdity of having a government that can create a dollar bond but not a dollar bill, even though the former only fattens the usurer.
Are you happy to leave the control of the money supply in the hands of the nice Mr Rothschild and his good time mates or would you rather see it in a transparent linux-like structure in the hands of the elected government? Does government have a place in the money supply or should we leave it to the invisible hand of the market?
Jeff Nielson
...
written by Jeff Nielson, June 25, 2012
...Banks need to be limited to loaning the money they have, no creation of money using the fractional reserve system where I can start a bank with $100,000, deposit it at the Reserve Bank and then loan out $900,000 of newly created money. This is where the psychopathy and greed comes from, not to mention the swindle. Newly created money should be a transparent operation, even if that requires shackling it to gold.


Again we're in full agreement: ANY form of "fractional-reserve" banking is NOTHING but both a form of Ponzi-scheme and a formula for STEALING.

What more than 200 years of modern history (i.e. post-Industrial Revolution) has taught us is that while other THEORETICAL schemes have been devised to RESTRAIN bankers from stealing (and politicians from ALLOWING them to); the only one which has actually WORKED is the gold standard - specifically because Golden Handcuffs are an ABSOLUTE constraint upon their monetary depravity.
elixer
...
written by elixer, June 24, 2012
Hi Jeff,
You wrote:
Elixer, I'm in full agreement that ideally we need BOTH good money AND full control of the currency-issuing process. However, I think you underestimate the potency of the Golden Handcuffs. Regardless of WHO is issuing the currency, a gold standard puts a HARD limit on currency creation - effectively ending the banksters' favorite game: theft by currency-dilution.

Banks need to be limited to loaning the money they have, no creation of money using the fractional reserve system where I can start a bank with $100,000, deposit it at the Reserve Bank and then loan out $900,000 of newly created money. This is where the psychopathy and greed comes from, not to mention the swindle. Newly created money should be a transparent operation, even if that requires shackling it to gold.
Jeff Nielson
...
written by Jeff Nielson, June 24, 2012
The money must be both asset based and it must be free from private usury, the second is as important as the first.
Simply moving to gold backed money without tearing the power of money creation away from a private cartel will accomplish nothing, even though this might threaten the personal philosophies of those who want only the ‘free market’ and ‘drowning governments in a bathtub.'...


Elixer, I'm in full agreement that ideally we need BOTH good money AND full control of the currency-issuing process. However, I think you underestimate the potency of the Golden Handcuffs. Regardless of WHO is issuing the currency, a gold standard puts a HARD limit on currency creation - effectively ending the banksters' favorite game: theft by currency-dilution.

Robbed of their most lucrative opportunities to steal, the financial sector would cease to attract MOST of the world's pyschopaths into its ranks. As the numbers of these financial terrorists steadily dwindled, so would the amount of financial carnage left in their wake.

P.S. With respect to your gripe about the Aussie government, you're certainly not alone. OUR government engaged in precisely the same madness, for precisely the same reason - throwing away $10's of BILLIONS simply to provide political/financial "cover" for the insanity the U.S. was engaging in at the time.
elixer
...
written by elixer, June 24, 2012
I wrote earlier:
The money must be both asset based and it must be free from private usury, the second is as important as the first.
Simply moving to gold backed money without tearing the power of money creation away from a private cartel will accomplish nothing, even though this might threaten the personal philosophies of those who want only the ‘free market’ and ‘drowning governments in a bathtub.’
And yes, as an aussie, Steve Kean is an interesting voice, and I am still sore at the Aussie government who during the global financial crisis received the phone call from the BIS to spend 4% of GDP to stimulate growth and then promptly threw 50 billion dollars at lunatic projects and free give aways. The Germans and the Kiwis received the same phone call and told them to get stuffed. The politicians here are just mindless servants of the private bankers.


Jeff Nielson
...
written by Jeff Nielson, June 24, 2012
My explanation is actually pretty simple, although it doesn't exclude direct "QE". Banks "borrow" money from the Fed at near 0% interest rates, with a side condition that they must spend a certain percentage of that "borrowed" money on T bills.

Why would banks be willing to do this?
1. It's free money anyways
2. It's now listed as an "asset" of the bank


Rroush, the Fed has already offered these banksters a MUCH sweeter deal, so why would they take on any debt that had STRINGS attached?

Currently they can "borrow" at 0% (i.e. free money) and then DEPOSIT it with the Fed and collect over 1% interest. Just imagine if YOUR banker offered to lend YOU money for free - and then pay YOU interest on that loan???

LOL !!!!!!!!!
Jeff Nielson
...
written by Jeff Nielson, June 24, 2012
My first step would be a debt jubilee, we have to get back to the financial services being 3% of the economy rather than the economy being 3% of the financial services. If every person and company was freed from the debt yoke then we would have breathing space to create a new system. I am not against a solely gold backed system but I would want to see its control open and transparent, something like the Linux open source system so that everybody can see what is going on. No rehypothecation, securatisation, etc, no shares which are not numbered and honestly traded, etc.
And one of the most stunning things in the universe is that a banker will create a debt bond from nothing and everybody feels as though they must pay it back, even if the bankers do pretend that they borrow it from someone at 3% interest and then loan it to a punter at 6% to create their spread. In our legal system all profits from criminal enterprises, such as pyramid and ponzi schemes, are confiscated. The bankers should share the same fate.
Who loses in a debt jubilee? Especially if you honoured the $6 trillion in pension assets and any bond, etc, in an individual’s name? At least you would remove the trillions of dollars of fraudulent debt, the dark pools, the trillions of dollars of derivatives, etc. Does anyone know of anybody who has created a financial model for a jubilee?


Given your reference to "Debt Jubilee", and noting that your profile indicates you're from Down Under, it looks to me like you've been reading some of the work by the eminent Aussie, Dr. Steve Kean.

Indeed, his work has heavily influenced my OWN views on this subject, and I've become an outspoken advocate for some old-fashioned "bond-burning" myself!

You're quite right that these bond debts are fraudulent - on multiple levels. One that you missed was the PROMISES these banksters made when they were goading on Western governments to load-up on more debt.

They told these political simpletons that they could PERMANENTLY lower borrowing/interest costs on their debts - thus (magically) allowing them all to carry much higher debt levels.

It was all LIES, meaning that ALL the $trillions of debt which governments added BASED ON THOSE PROMISES is fraudulent - and legally unenforceable.
rroush
...
written by rroush, June 23, 2012
My explanation is actually pretty simple, although it doesn't exclude direct "QE". Banks "borrow" money from the Fed at near 0% interest rates, with a side condition that they must spend a certain percentage of that "borrowed" money on T bills.

Why would banks be willing to do this?
1. It's free money anyways
2. It's now listed as an "asset" of the bank
elixer
...
written by elixer, June 23, 2012
Hi Jeff

You said:
If Hugo Salinas Price can (and has) devised one means of escape from this "trap" then there are likely others as well (although one is all we need). Any PRACTICAL objections to a transition away from this fraudulent system of fiat-paper ARE surmountable!

As our NATIONS begin a transition to a collective financial system backed by gold, INDIVIDUALLY any/all of these economies can begin INTERNAL transitions away from fraudulent paper and INTO valuable silver.

My first step would be a debt jubilee, we have to get back to the financial services being 3% of the economy rather than the economy being 3% of the financial services. If every person and company was freed from the debt yoke then we would have breathing space to create a new system. I am not against a solely gold backed system but I would want to see its control open and transparent, something like the Linux open source system so that everybody can see what is going on. No rehypothecation, securatisation, etc, no shares which are not numbered and honestly traded, etc.
And one of the most stunning things in the universe is that a banker will create a debt bond from nothing and everybody feels as though they must pay it back, even if the bankers do pretend that they borrow it from someone at 3% interest and then loan it to a punter at 6% to create their spread. In our legal system all profits from criminal enterprises, such as pyramid and ponzi schemes, are confiscated. The bankers should share the same fate.
Who loses in a debt jubilee? Especially if you honoured the $6 trillion in pension assets and any bond, etc, in an individual’s name? At least you would remove the trillions of dollars of fraudulent debt, the dark pools, the trillions of dollars of derivatives, etc. Does anyone know of anybody who has created a financial model for a jubilee?

Jeff Nielson
...
written by Jeff Nielson, June 23, 2012
If one examines the facts, it is difficult to dispute Jeff's conclusion.
On this day in 2008, the US national debt stood at $9.9 trillion.
Today it is $15.8 billion, an increase of $5.9 trillion.
The top 300 pension funds in the US hold a total $6 trillion in assets, so they obviously could have bought only a fraction of this increase.
Globally, pension funds hold $20 trillion, and it is certainly not all invested in US treasuries, is it?
The Fed claims a balance sheet of $2.85 trillion, $1.66 trillion of it in treasuries, so they could not have (publicly) been the buyer.
In the wake of the financial collapse, the Fed lent out $9 trillion in eight months, a fact which the Inspector General of the Board of Governors of the Fed was unable to account for, or audit, in testimony before Congress.
Where did that $9 trillion come from?
Electronic computer entries, just like BS is doing to buy treasuries secretly.
By the way, does anyone remember Donald Rumsfeld telling Congress that the Department of Defense was missing $2.3 trillion?
That was on Sept 10, 2001.
It was all forgotten the next day.
Everyone seems to be in on the Ponzi scheme.


Thanks for the numbers Bobbbny! I'll have to file some of those away for future reference (lol)...
bobbbny
...
written by bobbbny, June 23, 2012
If one examines the facts, it is difficult to dispute Jeff's conclusion.
On this day in 2008, the US national debt stood at $9.9 trillion.
Today it is $15.8 billion, an increase of $5.9 trillion.
The top 300 pension funds in the US hold a total $6 trillion in assets, so they obviously could have bought only a fraction of this increase.
Globally, pension funds hold $20 trillion, and it is certainly not all invested in US treasuries, is it?
The Fed claims a balance sheet of $2.85 trillion, $1.66 trillion of it in treasuries, so they could not have (publicly) been the buyer.
In the wake of the financial collapse, the Fed lent out $9 trillion in eight months, a fact which the Inspector General of the Board of Governors of the Fed was unable to account for, or audit, in testimony before Congress.
Where did that $9 trillion come from?
Electronic computer entries, just like BS is doing to buy treasuries secretly.
By the way, does anyone remember Donald Rumsfeld telling Congress that the Department of Defense was missing $2.3 trillion?
That was on Sept 10, 2001.
It was all forgotten the next day.
Everyone seems to be in on the Ponzi scheme.
Jeff Nielson
...
written by Jeff Nielson, June 23, 2012
...our current governments are caught by the private money makers. In 1692 the Bank of England was created with a charter to create money from nothing, to charge compound interest for it and to charge people taxation to pay for the interest. England’s debt went from 4 million pounds in 1692 to 14 or so million pounds by 1696. Three percent compound interest when it moves through all the levels of production becomes 40% of GDP. If we live in a transparent democracy then why are the core money makers hidden and the very topic taboo – oh, I forgot, 14% of the BIS is in private hands, let me see, the usual suspects, Rothschilds, Warburgs, Loebs, etc.
The central banks of each country in this usury system are simply medieval machines for monetizing the assets of a country and converting them to debt held in the hands of a private cartel.
The question is not simply creating a gold backed currency, you must also restore the power of money creation to an authentic and transparent system run by the people, transparent so that the shadows of ego cannot come to play their games. The money must be both asset based and it must be free from private usury, the second is as important as the first.



Elixer, NEVER under-estimate the capacity of human ingenuity. In this case I defer to the brilliant Hugo Salinas Price - and his proposal for using silver as a PARALLEL CURRENCY.

If you have not previously been exposed to the brilliant argument/system he constructs, this is "must reading". Here's one of his efforts in this area:

http://www.plata.com.mx/mplata/articulos/articlesFilt.asp?fiidarticulo=185

If Hugo Salinas Price can (and has) devised one means of escape from this "trap" then there are likely others as well (although one is all we need). Any PRACTICAL objections to a transition away from this fraudulent system of fiat-paper ARE surmountable!

As our NATIONS begin a transition to a collective financial system backed by gold, INDIVIDUALLY any/all of these economies can begin INTERNAL transitions away from fraudulent paper and INTO valuable silver.
Jeff Nielson
...
written by Jeff Nielson, June 23, 2012
...I appreciate the near-mathematical appeal of your argument, Jeff. If the size of the US Treasury universe is grossly expanding, then any bond allocation changes inside a shrinking pension fund sector would likely only make the slightest difference when answering the question "where does all the new Treasurys demand come from?".

Could it be that the US government/western banking complex, in exchange for China's very discreetly ramping up its purchases of US Treasurys (where we'd anticipate that the dollars deployed would eventually converge on worthlessness, anyway), is aiding China in the draining of western bullion banks and ETFs to the tune of hundreds of tons of physical gold per month, and at discount prices? If this scenario is true, the primary victim, once again, is the shareholding public who have been led to believe that their shares, or their depository receipts(!), represent holdings of real physical metal.

This might not only be a simple quid pro quo with China, but a clear gesture towards future financial stabilization, since it would lead to the formation of a new multi-polar global monetary system, with all major currencies now backed substantially by sovereign gold.


Chesterfield Davenport, that is certainly a reasonable suggestion. However, it ignores the reality that China has essentially STOPPED purchasing U.S. Treasuries...FROM the U.S. government.

In fact China HAS been accumulating Treasuries - as it engages in currency-swaps with other nations, in order to PERMANENTLY remove U.S. dollars from these trade relationships. China is committing VAST amounts of money to this process, and so it would be absolutely impossible to also do what you're suggesting.

Think of what China is currently doing as "draining the swamp". It is REMOVING these putrid U.S. dollars from the global financial/trading system, and REPLACING them with (slightly) less rancid forms of paper.
elixer
...
written by elixer, June 23, 2012
Hi Jeff,

You said:
Elixer I think you misinterpreted my reply to some extent. I wasn't arguing AGAINST governments taking control of their own money supply. Rather what I was pointing out was that with our (worthless) fiat currencies that our governments have created a TRAP for themselves.

If they simply attempt to print their OWN fiat currencies which are NEITHER a unit of value or a unit of obligation, then that will almost certainly expedite the collapse of this paper to zero.

I agree Jeff, but our current governments are caught by the private money makers. In 1692 the Bank of England was created with a charter to create money from nothing, to charge compound interest for it and to charge people taxation to pay for the interest. England’s debt went from 4 million pounds in 1692 to 14 or so million pounds by 1696. Three percent compound interest when it moves through all the levels of production becomes 40% of GDP. If we live in a transparent democracy then why are the core money makers hidden and the very topic taboo – oh, I forgot, 14% of the BIS is in private hands, let me see, the usual suspects, Rothschilds, Warburgs, Loebs, etc.
The central banks of each country in this usury system are simply medieval machines for monetizing the assets of a country and converting them to debt held in the hands of a private cartel.
The question is not simply creating a gold backed currency, you must also restore the power of money creation to an authentic and transparent system run by the people, transparent so that the shadows of ego cannot come to play their games. The money must be both asset based and it must be free from private usury, the second is as important as the first.
Chesterfield Davenport
...
written by Chesterfield Davenport, June 23, 2012
Thanks Dylan and Jeff. With no background in economics, I am sorry that I'm unable to fully keep up with my end of the discussion. Nonetheless, before I go, may I try to hurl at least one more monkey wrench to see what happens?  smilies/smiley.gif.  

I appreciate the near-mathematical appeal of your argument, Jeff. If the size of the US Treasury universe is grossly expanding, then any bond allocation changes inside a shrinking pension fund sector would likely only make the slightest difference when answering the question "where does all the new Treasurys demand come from?".

Could it be that the US government/western banking complex, in exchange for China's very discreetly ramping up its purchases of US Treasurys  (where we'd anticipate that the dollars deployed would eventually converge on worthlessness, anyway), is aiding China in the draining of western bullion banks and ETFs to the tune of hundreds of tons of physical gold per month, and at discount prices? If this scenario is true, the primary victim, once again, is the shareholding public who have been led to believe that their shares, or their depository receipts(!), represent holdings of real physical metal. 

This might not only be a simple quid pro quo with China, but a clear gesture towards future financial stabilization, since it would lead to the formation of a new multi-polar global monetary system, with all major currencies now backed substantially by sovereign gold.
Jeff Nielson
...
written by Jeff Nielson, June 23, 2012
...My approach is that the first power of a government is to create an authentic and transparent money supply – all the philosophies of capitalism and communism are simply justifications for private or state creation of the money supply.
The trick is to ground the money supply into the real market place – like Hitler did in the 1930’s, when faced with an impossible situation of war debts and world depression he created the greatest military force of the time, built the autobahns and ports and had full employment, simply by creating his own money supply. (We won’t worry about the ending!)

The trick is to create the money supply as the waters behind a dam and then release it with awareness and skill.

It seems to me that the citizens of the United States especially have swallowed the hook that government has no place in banking, like they have swallowed the hook that there should be no general medicare, even though almost every other western nation has this medical model, and then they swing upon a meat hook in the wind.

Further, to limit the monetization of a nation’s assets to simply gold and silver is a trap – that is where the original games of fractional reserve began. There needs to be a wider scope of assets included in the monetary mix – what would you do if you lived on a planet with no gold or silver?



Elixer I think you misinterpreted my reply to some extent. I wasn't arguing AGAINST governments taking control of their own money supply. Rather what I was pointing out was that with our (worthless) fiat currencies that our governments have created a TRAP for themselves.

If they simply attempt to print their OWN fiat currencies which are NEITHER a unit of value or a unit of obligation, then that will almost certainly expedite the collapse of this paper to zero.

Thus the solution I proposed in a previous commentary: switch to a PAPER renminbi as reserve currency (a more STABLE currency), and then once that switch has been accomplished BACK the renminbi with gold.

No, you are incorrect in suggesting a wider monetary base. Indeed ONLY gold can comprise the monetary base - not even silver. Silver could be part of our CURRENCY, but not part of the monetary base.

The reason? It's large-scale industrial usage means the market is easier to distort/manipulate than with a monetary asset which is hardly used at all. And even if there was no intentional manipulation, anything used industrially is generally subject to large fluctuations in demand (and thus price). Gold is the only hard asset STABLE enough to comprise our monetary base.

Yes, it DOES limit the scope of government action. As I pointed out in my previous 3-part series; our governments (and bankers) MUST be restrained by the Golden Handcuffs of a gold standard. It is the ONLY way to limit the consequences of their incompetence.
elixer
...
written by elixer, June 23, 2012
Hi Jeff,

In reply to my comment you said:

I'm going to focus on the last part of your remarks. You're quite right that we MUST return to currency which is a unit of VALUE rather than a unit of DEBT. However, that transition cannot occur directly/immediately - because the banksters have weakened the entire financial system to the point of total collapse.

The debt game is like one of those inflatable gorillas which float above supermarkets as a promotion, scary from afar, ridiculous up close. To remove the evil, simply, with a stroke of a pen, declare a jubilee with all debts voided and all assets remaining in their present owner’s hands. When the debt supply is a 1000 times the asset supply then we can see that almost everybody, apart from a few bankers, wins. The assets are then restored to the people in a zero sum game and we begin again, like a reset on the computer. I know there are lots of monetary beliefs that say this cannot be done but I have yet to hear a plausible one.

Secondly you said:

However there is ANOTHER issue here. There is a growing clamor to have GOVERNMENTS issue their own currency - and not the central banks. The whole purpose of this is to AVOID having DEBT attached to all this paper-creation - since that is one of the primary means for enslaving us with debt (the banksters' Master Plan).

However IF governments simply start printing their own paper, and it is NEITHER a unit of debt OR a unit of value, then how do they pretend the paper has ANY value at all?

This is the Catch-22. Printing paper out of thin air and allowing debt to be attached to it is an insane form of STEALING. However, trying to run this Ponzi financial system without this debt-slavery would likely only make the system collapse SOONER...

My approach is that the first power of a government is to create an authentic and transparent money supply – all the philosophies of capitalism and communism are simply justifications for private or state creation of the money supply.
The trick is to ground the money supply into the real market place – like Hitler did in the 1930’s, when faced with an impossible situation of war debts and world depression he created the greatest military force of the time, built the autobahns and ports and had full employment, simply by creating his own money supply. (We won’t worry about the ending!)

The trick is to create the money supply as the waters behind a dam and then release it with awareness and skill.

It seems to me that the citizens of the United States especially have swallowed the hook that government has no place in banking, like they have swallowed the hook that there should be no general medicare, even though almost every other western nation has this medical model, and then they swing upon a meat hook in the wind.

Further, to limit the monetization of a nation’s assets to simply gold and silver is a trap – that is where the original games of fractional reserve began. There needs to be a wider scope of assets included in the monetary mix – what would you do if you lived on a planet with no gold or silver?

Finally, why are we having this debate hundreds of years after the ‘Rothschilds’ began their medieval swindle of debt from nothing, it is as if we are all starting afresh again, with basic financial modeling, even as the tower of Babel is about to topple. Surely we can create a clear financial model in which the basics can all be agreed upon? There is something pitiful and depressing about this!



Jeff Nielson
...
written by Jeff Nielson, June 22, 2012
...there are rules imposed on many pension funds and other institutions that control large pools of "other people's money" that dictate:

a) a large percentage of their respective portfolios stay invested at all times. And,

b) as a "fiduciary duty" to the pension-holders, only "investment grade" stocks and bonds are allowed inside this portfolio.

According to many pension funds investment guidelines, holding physical gold inside these portfolios would be just as forbidden as to hang on to a junk bond. So, technically, what is classified as either "good" or "bad" is mostly up to the ratings agencies.



Yes Chesterfield, there ARE requirements for pension-fund buying - at a time when all of those benefit plans are shrinking. Also, this never comprised a majority of Treasuries buying - even during the "good times" before the Crash of '08.

So not only is this another DECLINING source of funding for the U.S. government, but it doesn't fill the gap for the INCREASED supply being dumped onto the market.

Also, interest-rate swaps have no bearing on whether U.S. Treasuries are "investment grade". Perhaps you're thinking of credit default swaps - which INDIRECTLY affect credit ratings?
Dylan
...
written by Dylan, June 22, 2012
You are spot on there Chesterfield,
The pension funds and mutual funds seem to play the role of vast herds of buffalo that the smaller but better connected hedge funds drive over the edge of the cliff, after taking prior positions of course. This wouldn`t occur without inside help from the people responsible for those herds - the fund managers.
This even happens with the trading desks of the big investment banks, although they know they will get bailed out.
But as Jeff points out, this is more than shifting existing dollars about, it is counterfeiting pure and simple, probably involving something like the mysterious "Exchange Stabilisation" fund or the "Working Group on Financial Stability" the "Plunge Protection Team" read "COUNTERFEITING/EXTORTION/PROTECTION RACKET" or maybe a new catchy term like "QUANTITIVE SLEAZING"
Chesterfield Davenport
...
written by Chesterfield Davenport, June 22, 2012
Hi Jeff. Your understanding is certainly deeper than my own, but I heard an explanation of the above some weeks ago that rings true  - not to say that your conclusion of "counterfeiting" is any less true. 

Namely there are rules imposed on  many pension funds and other institutions that control large pools of "other people's money" that dictate:

a) a large percentage of their respective portfolios stay invested at all times. And,

b) as a "fiduciary duty" to the pension-holders, only "investment grade" stocks and bonds are allowed inside this portfolio. 

According to many pension funds investment guidelines, holding physical gold inside these portfolios would be just as forbidden as to hang on to a junk bond. So, technically, what is classified as either "good" or "bad" is mostly up to the ratings agencies. 

So, looking down the road a ways, the pension funds will end up losing most of their investors' money or spending power. But this is the intended outcome, right?
Jeff Nielson
...
written by Jeff Nielson, June 22, 2012
...when are we going to create asset based money, not debt money, money which exists like the water behind a hydro dam, to be released in the correct amounts to nourish the land, water which is owed to nobody and which is not bound by compound interest and which can be passed to the following generations, not as the burden of debt, but as a latent power to charge their destinies.
At the moment however we have the absurd situation of having no money and only debt held within the hands of a cartel of private bankers, debt which is being used as a tool to steal the treasures of our planet and the life forces of its inhabitants.



Thanks for the comment Elixer!

I'm going to focus on the last part of your remarks. You're quite right that we MUST return to currency which is a unit of VALUE rather than a unit of DEBT. However, that transition cannot occur directly/immediately - because the banksters have weakened the entire financial system to the point of total collapse.

I suggest how we make such a transition (in TWO steps) in an older commentary:

http://www.bullionbullscanada.com/gold-commentary/7711-after-the-peg-a-golden-future

However there is ANOTHER issue here. There is a growing clamor to have GOVERNMENTS issue their own currency - and not the central banks. The whole purpose of this is to AVOID having DEBT attached to all this paper-creation - since that is one of the primary means for enslaving us with debt (the banksters' Master Plan).

However IF governments simply start printing their own paper, and it is NEITHER a unit of debt OR a unit of value, then how do they pretend the paper has ANY value at all?

This is the Catch-22. Printing paper out of thin air and allowing debt to be attached to it is an insane form of STEALING. However, trying to run this Ponzi financial system without this debt-slavery would likely only make the system collapse SOONER...
elixer
...
written by elixer, June 22, 2012
Love your work Jeff, you seem to be one of the true geniuses on the net!
The following writers are also tackling this topic at the moment. Ellen Brown http://globalresearch.ca/index...&aid=31505
and Jim Willie http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article34819.html
and Rob Kirby. http://news.goldseek.com/GoldSeek/1339766400.php

If the US was buying its own treasuries to maintain its status as the world currency then it would explain the motivation for the seemingly incomprehensible trillions of dollars of currency swaps and interest rate swaps, but what then too is the nature of the dark pools of money which seem to exist like the shadows of ghosts or the fields of dark matter?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_liquidity
It seems that in following these dark trails one enters the labyrinths of fractional reserve banking which are designed to defeat the intellect and to make one believe that there ‘is no other way.’

However, when are we going to create asset based money, not debt money, money which exists like the water behind a hydro dam, to be released in the correct amounts to nourish the land, water which is owed to nobody and which is not bound by compound interest and which can be passed to the following generations, not as the burden of debt, but as a latent power to charge their destinies.
At the moment however we have the absurd situation of having no money and only debt held within the hands of a cartel of private bankers, debt which is being used as a tool to steal the treasures of our planet and the life forces of its inhabitants.

apberusdisvet
...
written by apberusdisvet, June 21, 2012
Jeff: An excellent post on why it's pure delusion to conceive of US paper as any sort of safe haven. Your theory is very sound and quite obvious when you see the consistent ramps to the close on down days. They don't call it the Plunge Protection Team for nothing. As far as all of the financial media is concerned, I am sure that we can both agree that real journalism died a while back; today's financial media contains more purposeful disinformation than fact. For those in the know, certainly worth a few laughs.
Jeff Nielson
...
written by Jeff Nielson, June 21, 2012
Jimha, it's like we're dealing with something out of Ripley's "Believe It Or Not". An entity which is LITERALLY able to create money out of thin air is able to go through a 100-year existence without ever ONCE having any outside scrutiny.

And the unbelievable audacity in "challenging" the right of the media to even find out to whom it was handing out $TRILLIONS in 0% "loans"...
jimha
...
written by jimha, June 21, 2012
Opps that should have been trillion.
jimha
...
written by jimha, June 21, 2012
I agree. The +/- 2.8 billion is probably a phoney number.
Jeff Nielson
...
written by Jeff Nielson, June 21, 2012
I don't follow your article. I thought it is common knowledge that the Fed is the buyer of the majority of U.S. treasuries. Are you saying that there are additional dollars created that are not showing up on the Fed's balance sheet?


Yes Jimha, that's EXACTLY what I'm saying: literally "counterfeit" currency, which is being illegitimately/secretely created - and then LAUNDERED through the purchase of U.S. Treasuries.

P.S. What exactly do you mean "showing up on the Fed's balance sheet" when you speak of an entity which has NEVER had an outside audit in its 100-year existence?

Are you referring to the OFFICIAL "books" (and offical balance sheet) OR the unofficial books they have been HIDING from the world for 100 years...?
jimha
...
written by jimha, June 21, 2012
I don't follow your article. I thought it is common knowledge that the Fed is the buyer of the majority of U.S. treasuries. Are you saying that there are additional dollars created that are not showing up on the Fed's balance sheet?

Write comment
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy

Latest Commentary

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12

Latest Comments

Disclaimer:

BullionBullsCanada.com is not a registered investment advisor - Stock information is for educational purposes ONLY. Bullion Bulls Canada does not make "buy" or "sell" recommendations for any company. Rather, we seek to find and identify Canadian companies who we see as having good growth potential. It is up to individual investors to do their own "due diligence" or to consult with their financial advisor - to determine whether any particular company is a suitable investment for themselves.

Login Form