> Forrest Bishop, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, writes:
> > In our vast understanding of macroeconomics we have lost sight of something
> > rather fundamental: What is money? Let us ask our master:
> > Responding to a question by Congressman Ron Paul (Rep., Tex.), Federal
> > Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan spoke to the subject of the nation's
> > money in his Humphrey-Hawkins testimony on February 17, 2000:
> > Question by Dr. Paul: "So it's hard to manage something you can't define?"
> > Answer by Mr. Greenspan: "It is not possible to manage something you can't
> > define."
> I think when you look at Greenspan's full analysis, his point is that
> the Fed is no longer constructing its policy strictly around attempting
> to monitor and regulate the growth of the monetary aggregates M1, M2,
> and M3. They recognize that none of these are fully suitable as a proxy
> for "the money supply", a poorly defined term whose meaning changes with
> the context.
If you cannot define money, then you cannot define real-world economics,
let alone manage it. And just when did idea of a command economy even
gain creedence? By what right does the Fed, a private corporation,
gain the ability to "keep the economy running smoothly" or roughly or
in any manner whatsoever?
> Rather, the Fed is basing its decisions on a larger set of statistics that
> reflect economic activity. They are still trying to keep the economy
> running smoothly and avoiding extremes of either growth or recession.
We are far, far past that point already. The "money" has already been
created, *quite* knowingly by the Fed (despite its propaganda to the contrary,
see above), its members, the GSE's, the monetization of ESOPs,
and no one even knows how else. It is now just a game of musical chairs, each
agent trying to find a seat as the dollar seeks its natural value, which
is zero. In this new game the Fed's actions can only change the rules in
a limited degree- they can help out their owners and the friends of their
owners, which of course is their mandate and reason for existence.
Why do I think this is so? Although past performance does not guarantee
future results, the Federal Reserve Bank/Corporation/System has acted in
this manner from its inception.
The Rothschild's were instrumental in creating
this unconstitutional abomination, let's ask their opinion:
"Give me control over a nation's currency, and I care not who makes its laws."
-- Mayer Amschel Rothschild, 1743 - 1812)
> But they recognize that with the tools we have today you can't do it
> just by looking at M1 & company.
Of course not! There are no such tools as they would require measuring the
parameters of mass hallucination and mass delusion.
ORO (11/13/99; 21:24:14MDT - Msg ID:19061) ...You may have seen the movie
Matrix. The story is of humanity being used as production plant for something,
the people live a life completely within their heads, controlled by computer
simulations. The key to the hero's survival and success is realizing that
the world around him, in which he grew up all his life, is completely false.
Walking through a room full of people trying to free themselves from the
images bombarding their brain, he crosses a kid bending a spoon. He asks
the kid, how did he bend the spoon. The kid says, it's simple, there is
What is played before us in the world is a hoax that you have been conditioned
by daily experience to accept as reality. But there is a cost to the charade
and a cost to you. But you can't bring yourself to come to the conclusion
when you watch CNBC, read the Journal or Investor's Business Daily, see
Moneyline, Ruckeyser, etc. that they are involved in a theatrical production;
that they are like well trained actors in a drama about money that never was.
Remember: There is no spoon.
I could rant on, I think I'll stop here.
-- Forrest Bishop Manager, Interworld Productions, LLC Chairman, Institute of Atomic-Scale Engineering http://www.speakeasy.org/~forrestb
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:09:50 MDT