'Money' A Political Construct

I heard a fascinating phrase on a radio program this morning in relation to a quite separate issue - and that was 'political construct.'

The issue being talked about was whether carbon credits were anything other than political constructs at the moment. A fair enough point.

It's snowing in New South Wales right now,
very heavily.

But it drew me to thinking about the present Euro-zone disturbances in the general harmony in terms of the euro currency being a political construct. There is no advantage in arguing about the relative practical usefulness of the euro as money - it is an adequate kind of money for quite a number of purposes, even though it is terribly and possibly terminally flawed.

And then again, yesterday, there was Peter Schiff on an RT panel talking about the gold standard and if it might ever again be adopted somewhere. 

Today, in 2015, what does any Western or developed government really need to buy? Only the support of, and protection from, its own citizens. It doesn't need to go out to some far flung foreign land and buy anything it needs. America owns effective supply of oil and energy via its military hegemony, and China supplies everything else and doesn't need to buy anything for the welfare or wealth and lifestyle of its people. Thus, anything will do as a general government currency because there is no actual trade or mercantile-ism.

We individuals, however, are not governments and we have no means of exerting equivalent power to those bastions of institutional power in the world today - there are no principles by which such bastions are guided which empower the individual. And that is why we, the individuals, need gold. It's for ourselves and our own trading, especially any individualistic, exotic, trading.

What does the messenger carry?

There will never be a day when governments enforce a law against private ownership of gold, and people fail to perceive that when it was attempted in the USA in the past, there was a massive, one again, political construct going on, that the wider population bought into that permitted the restriction, to do with freedom and liberty against European colonial essays or otherwise, various fascist tyrannies and ideologies. 

The world is entirely too wide now, for that kind of thing to be successful anymore.

A lot of the discussion over precious metals is very misleading. It might occasionally be a good investment but that is not the main point of owning them. Buffett tried to compare owership of gold with ownership of some productive financial asset - showing once again, that he is not his mentor Benjamin Graham. The insane risks being invited upon today's investor, to buy into Microsoft or Walmart or Uber-lite or some other fanciful financialised idea presented as a business, are way beyond what is rational. Despite the appearances of high gains, these investments are diabolical. They do not compare in any way with what small individual money can buy or trade on an old-school merchant basis, and make a profit on. 

Seriously, WTF

I think the recent - or current - media interest in whether or not (in my view when) Greece will Grexit the Euro-zone and euro-money system, is overstating the importance and the possible side-effects or consequences of the matter.

"Ask da bagman, where did he put da money..."

Yes there could be a complete destruction of the whole entire Euro edifice including the euro currency system itself because of the Greek template for the re-assertion of national sovereignity and democracy but fundamentally even that in itself is not going to stop the issuers and the creators of the 'euro' currency from doing whatever they please in financial markets. Which was and is the issuing of large nominal amounts of 'money' with debt as its backing and the supposed production capacity of Germany as its 'credibility.'

Money with credibility

The word being used to excess by the Euro Committee is 'credibility.'

What I mean by 'overstating' is that none of us should worry the least about any personal consequences. Governments cannot afford for problems to trickle down to the voting masses to the extent that their own existence is called into question as to its relevance. Governments are needed to stave off the rising tide of islamic extremism, religious intolerance, pandemic disease, guns in the hands of lunatics and truthers and doomsday preppers who have gone 'the full Johnnie Rambo...' Oh and of course not to forget the havoc climate change is about to unleash on those not protected by BB.

In short, nothing of any greatly negative import is going to happen to any of us.

Not from a Grexit. Not from BRICSA. Not from a nuclear conflict near Israel. Not from an arms race involving Iran and Russia.

Nope.

A bubblegum token

These are all just essays in trying to make the sale. Selling something, anything, is the lifeblood of enterprise capital, and I wish them all good luck. Not a lot IS actually selling these days. Anyone who can make a real sale gets my approval.

Trust, credibility, security, financial solidity - all these things spring from principles and ideas, not from bureaucrats or technocrats and the media's dribble.

Science comes from understanding the origin of the triangle, not the origin of the Universe...

And exchange - monetary means thereof - stems from universal liquidity of the token, instant and unimpeded and un-conditional transferability and real market risk pricing of the purchasing of debt.

But when the snow falls, and the stagecoach is still up on the high mountain pass, there is a reason why Werner Herzog had the miasma mark the point of separation between the lower earth and the upper ether of Count Dracula's world.

Snow is falling in Tenterfield, Australia right now

Never a truer word was spoken than that those who fail to learn from history are condemned to re-live it.

This time, it will be more than six million Jews. But it will be at least that many and people should mark my words. This is where we are heading, there is no way back now, and any thin smile on the face of some fool in the Euro-zone ought to be seen in the fading light of common sense, as the usual thugs in black flack-jackets and boots buttress the same evil that takes centre stage time and time again. The worst, the worst villain - is the man or woman inside that black uniform. Without them there would be no criminal elite trying to pretend a bubblegum token is money.

Follow The Money

Okay this is another one of these posts that has to be rather obtuse.

What I simply want to do is point out one of the handful of billionaires in the world today, who are part of a pretty select group of people. These are the minds who were able to make, quite literally, hundred of billions, and over all, trillions, of dollars from around 1997/8 through till about 2008, when Lehman Bros., collapsed.

Kind of like a real life Gordon Gekko,
this is the billionaire Noam Gottesman

Bearing in mind that even from as early as just after the '89 Stock Market Crash (which was a real one), many markets had closed and never re-opened. Many types of financial market closed. People now tend to forget also, the so-called, at the time, 'Big Bang' in Europe, during which national Exchanges gave up their sovereign rights of management and issuance of capital through equities listings, to a Brussels and Frankfurt central committee. You would have been hard pressed to find an authorized market 'hedge' against an as-yet non-existent capital market and currency. In other words, Soros held what, exactly, versus the GBP? Not gold certainly. There has never been a published report anywhere suggesting which investors he bet against, which funds lost to him, and in which brokerages any trades were done. Surely such a brokerage would have reaped some fees. He wasn't a floor member of the LSE. How did it all happen? Presuming it happened at all.
  
But one of the striking things about the people who made billions around this time, is that they are all generally referred to in the media as 'hedge fund' managers or proprietors. The plain fact is, when you look at any of the data and available information about what positions they ever held, or what investing strategies they had, none of them hedged anything. The actual real hedges for their locations did not even exist in the first place at that time. I know. There were silent capital controls all across the world, even in the United States via massive and complex documentary requirements, that prevented any kind of rapid transmission either of investment position or cash and liquidities. 

What was really being talked about, when it comes to the 'successful' funds, was that on the surface, all of them were able to have massive leverage from some source no one ever talks about. And by that I mean that no actual leverage was ever reflected in audited statements - what happened was financial paper, usually contractual, was held over some 'asset' and this contract became the financialized item, and the mechanism through which a value was assigned to something on a balance sheet, most of which balance sheets were actually completed and signed off well after proforma accounts were reported and which were permitted to serve as the accounts for a very long time until some future event turned the 'asset' into a realized financial position.

In the case of Lehman Bros., or for instance, the insurance contract on the World Trade Center, only after a formal bankruptcy of Lehman's, did someone walk away with a set of clients who originated from Lehman - and then absorb at no cost, that client list into their 'fund' - and after the insurance court case many years later, did a multi-billion dollar financial asset turn up on the books of someone with no other asset or means and reason of business.

So it is not correct to call any of these groups and people hedge funds or hedge fund managers. They did not hedge any base capital against some adverse movements of a market or market condition, and in most cases they never had any capital at all of their own to hedge in the first place nor any client' capital either.

No, they merely walked away with the furniture after the bomb hit.

Well, no. Actually, they started walking away well before the bomb hit. 

Now I'm going to enter upon very problematic territory here, because what I am about to say, were it generally to be seen by the ordinary media and the large spectrum of public commentators - and that includes anyone too now who can post onto a YouTube response section - would be seized upon with a force.

For reasons that are unknown to me at this present moment, this body of genius hedge fund manager has been directly financially involved in sponsoring the recent 'gay equality' rights process which unfolded in the United States, though not all of the people are themselves gay, but I would say, easily ninety per cent of them are by self-claim.

I cannot ever divorce (lol) the motivation of money with these people, from anything they do as a group, and not only that, it is usually massive amounts of money that will end up being talked about.

Some great aesthetics here, but I know
some gay males who disagree;
except not Bruce Jenner

I do not know Jan Wenn the owner of Rolling Stone Magazine personally but I have a lot of time for his integrity when it comes to his public politics - I'm not so moved by some of the magazine's aesthetics from time to time, but then, that's not the point. For I do, on the other hand have a lot of time for the aesthetic capability of Roubi L'Roubi the owner of London's Huntsman of Savile Row, whose current marriage to Pierre Lagrange places him firmly within the circle I have been referring to in the paragraphs above.

And I am going to tell you this too: not everyone whose name contains a 'le' or 'la' in it, are actually using their birth names, which can tend to be markedly less exotic. 

Her husband Jay-Z is a good friend of
Noam Gottesman

So I cannot say I am speaking against gays, as such, I am indeed not. But I am suspicious we are actually talking about gays in the first place here... Regardless of what they self-state.

And I know few will agree with me on this.

Nope. Indeed few will agree with me, I'm sure. However I would suggest that you keep your eyes opened and your wits about you over the next twelve months or so. Especially if you turn up at the wrought iron gates of a massive house in up-State New York or Hampshire, England, and you have brought along with you, for some absurd or unexplainable reason, a rented tux and cape and a domino mask or a Venetian one. 

How Do 'They' Know And The NSA Doesn't

While there were a round of co-ordinated attacks by ISIS in several different countries, at the same time a group of ISIS operators in the Chechnya Republic were intercepted and killed as they were attempting to launch deadly attacks in Grozny.

Now how is it possible that Ramzan Kadyrov - Depardieu's best mate - can know about these things and the NSA and MI5 and Europol not know about similar attacks, especially since Europol is part of the 'eyes' system under the organisation and management of the NSA?

Of course, once again, it was just another coincidence that I happened to post a few things here a few days ago... Remember?

Elizabeth Hurley in Grozny

The French, who got a touch miffed by the Wikileaks release about the NSA bugging their most senior government officials, were really roughed about with the decapitation of a factory manager in Lyon by some ISIS swine who also torched the place.

Jesus the gall of the NSA. Ex-boss General Alexander has been hanging out at some French Chateaux - but god I'm not supposed to know that! 

I can't help but get the feeling now that ISIS... well, that it IS the NSA themselves. Pretty much. With the help of some Saudi money and input. Which makes for some strange bedfellows you would have to think.

You have to ask questions when the President of the United States is sitting there twiddling his thumbs and making out like he's MLK, and ISIS is charging around the place apparently completely unimpeded. 

Kadyrov - his horse ran third in a Melbourne Cup
A damned fine performance for an old horse
Pic is courtesy of ITAR TASS NEWS AGENCY
from their report of 27 June 2015

Except for as soon as they try something inside any Russian territory or allied State.

Just plain weird, given the amount of money and technology in the hands of the US Intelligence establishments.

Just Sayin'

Huff Po told us on 24 June that the 30th June is World Asteroid Day - a day designed for people and leaders of governments to think about 'Near Earth Objects' and to get organised to fund technology that can divert in-coming asteroids (from the huge cloud of them between Mars and Jupiter) some of which can turn towards the Earth and collide at great speed and with considerable mass.

NASA thinks nuking them might do the trick.

This is the Huffington Post pic of the 24th of this month

If Wikileaks ever spread around what exists about what is really being said inside of leading Intelligence Organisations around the world about this, Wikileaks would lose all credibility overnight.

Sometimes you have to lie to the public - to lie by omission - just so you can keep credible.

I have no such problem.

CGI from a music video by:
'London Elektricity.'

There IS a possibility of such an object coming in. Would it constitute a public nuisance if I started suggesting places not to go to in case of er, incoming objects?

I'll have to look into that and check. 

"Yes, accidents do happen. Planes hitting the twin towers was no accident but meteorites hitting the MI5 buildings in London would be."

That was from my blog of 16 June.

Just sayin'. You know.