Tuesday, September 9, 2014

The Burden Of RE$ERVE $TATU$

Of interest today is this article, written by former White House chief economist Jared Bernstein. And my interest in it stems from FOFOA's overarching principle of the inevitability of a "clean floating" free market in gold. I think that overarching principle has been forming over the past two years, then was recently summed up as:
It's not a proposed change of rules or anything like that. Instead, it is the recognition that this is where things are heading on their own, without any further rule changes. It's not a system that will require a clean (FX) float or punish a dirty float. Instead, it is the observation that a clean float is what everyone who matters now wants. It is the direction they are all heading today, including the US, Europe and China, and that once a fresh starting point is reached, the rationale behind it will be obvious to everyone and exchange rate manipulation will, for the most part, become a thing of the past.
Things do have a way of going "on their own" beyond the manipulation and control of the powerful few. And once this realization takes hold in your mind, it becomes "the lens" through which you view articles like Jared Bernstein's above.

But there is a larger truism at play here, regarding the "global superorganism" and the primacy of it's slowly, but always swinging, always struggling pendulum of opposing wants and needs.

Indeed, the exorbitant privilege of dollar reserve status has been reacted to, and slowly acted upon over recent decades, by the "rest of the world's" component superorganism - gradually overwhelming the status of exorbitant privilege, until it has indeed become an inordinate burden.

Though Bernstein does not mention the role of gold, he certainly appeals to the ideal of a clean float (not something that the die hard conspiracy goldbugs would ever expect to hear from the USG) ... but then again, I ask the question: is it manipulation? Control? Something else?

I submit that this "something else" is the inevitability of millions of intelligent organisms striving for financial freedom across the planet. Some few have great power no doubt, and a good many have some lesser but substantial impact ... and then collectively, "the many" slowly but steadily grind away at the status quo - a realization that our central planners may have, though their actions are no indication of it (as they buy time).

Perhaps it is this common "inevitability" of organic, self-interested "action-reaction" on a global scale that not only explains how "this is where things are heading on their own", but also the "privilege to burden" dollar equilibrium.

It does indeed shine a light on what has been sacrificed, aside what has been gained - for both the Giants and the little people alike.


  1. The answer to your question is "something else".
    You might find more clues on my blog...

  2. Ahhh, Dr. Paul, it is a rhetorical question - meant to provoke much thought beyond reaching for an immediate answer.

    There wll always be nefarious forces at work, within NATO and elsewhere, but as the chess board becomes more complex, so do the consequences of each move.

    Behold the almighty US consumer, manipuated (yes?) to believe he is "rich with home equity (debt)" and yet today's consequences (e.g. upon China) have a more far reaching impact than even the most Roacheforquesque contrivances could predict. The same holds true for the "almighty dollar".

    There is a macro force which ultimately prevents even the most diabolical intentions from reaching any great consequence being "going on its own".

    Giants have striven to understand that macro for centuries, and a given few act "very passively" who do.

    1. Mr Cafourchette, you seem to imply only wealth giants have try to understand that "macro". For millenniums, men of all social classes have tried that. Some of them have invented philosophy. Because the answer is not in religions, not in (financial) technics. The answer is given using wisdom. The answer is known as the human spirit.

      BTW I take note you mentioned "the most diabolical intentions".