Skip to main content

Cullen Roche's Not So "Pragmatic Capitalism"

In his riveting new work Pragmatic Capitalism, Cullen Roche, founder of Orcam Financial Group, a San Diego-based financial firm, sets out to correct the mainstream schools of economic thought, focusing on Keynesians, Monetarists, and Austrians alike. This new macroeconomic perspective claims to reveal What Every Investor Needs to Know About Money and Finance. Indeed, Roche introduces the layman to various elementary principles of economics and financial markets, revealing in early chapters the failed state of the average hedge fund and mutual fund operators — who are better car salesmen than financial pundits, Roche writes —  who have fallen victim to the groupthink phenomenon, responsible for their nearly perfect positive correlation to the major indexes; and thus, accounting for tax, inflation, and service adjustments, holistically wiping out any value added by their professed market insight. 

Roche also references popular studies, such as the MckInsey Global Institute's report which shows that "emerging markets will account for 239 companies, 120 of which from China alone, in the Fortune 500 by 2025." Similar reports, such as those from The Economist, estimate that China's economy will produce more than $9 trillion in value in 2014. This research is revealing of a powerful macroeconomic trend, but even here largely ignores the inevitable appreciation of purchasing power among these mature emerging-market powerhouses, whose burgeoning marketshare of the global economy lags per-capita income and domestic standards of living. 

As indicated but clearly misunderstood by Roche and the mainstream media, Chinese holdings of U.S. debt have recently surpassed $1.3 trillion. However, as reported this week by Breitbart News and earlier this year by Bloomberg and others, the Chinese have expressed their apprehensions about further U.S. debt purchases, as announced last November at a China Economists 50 Forum at Tsinghua University. Yi Gang, a deputy governor at the central bank, declared, "It's no longer in China's favor to accumulate foreign-exchange reserves." This move signals a China wary of the risks inherent within the U.S. bond market and, more broadly, the U.S. economy and the dollar.                

While investigating Roche's many proclaimed myths, the reader must first better understand the history of money and banking. A primer is available here. In his 227 pages, including an inadequate glossary of terms, Roche clearly fails to understand even the basic causes of the wealth of nations, however frequently he seems to wish to, out of context, reference Adam Smith's treatise. Counter to his claims on the nature and definition of inflation, the United States of America experienced falling prices for most of its history prior to 1913. 

In fact, the American Industrial Revolution not only occurred amid such an environment, but it accelerated this phenomenon by discovering inexpensive and more efficient modes of production to purge prior government-induced malinvestments, public subsidies, and government-created monopolies which effectively stifled competition and crowded out investment. 

In short, inflation is not a general increase in prices, as Roche and most mainstream economists suggest. Inflation, as it was originally defined, is the expansion in the supply of money, which is most often, but not always, followed by a general increase in prices. The distinction here is crucial. Inflation is often a cause of the general increase in prices, but it is not the only cause. Furthermore, inflation can occur without an attending rise in prices. 

Today's so-called pundits, along with the modern Keynesian economists and the talking heads on CNBC, CNN, and MSNBC, reference only the headline or core consumer price index (CPI) as the superlative gauge of inflation, never paying attention to money supply, which can often predict the future course of consumer prices, production costs, and purchasing power. With the ocean of debt separating the United States from its creditors abroad, inflation is easily masked by its failure to appear in American markets, as American exports maintain untenable deficits to their overseas trading partners who have continued to export their goods for American debt, otherwise termed inflation. Furthermore, in the face of artificially low interest rates and the Federal Reserve's burgeoning balance sheet, along with loose lending standards, government-backed accounts, and government-subsidized grants and loans, the American economy has been artificially propped up on various asset classes, such as stocks, bonds, and real estate; concomitantly, other beneficiaries have been higher education, consumer credit, and the automobile industry. All the while, as these prices skyrocket and general prices continue to climb higher, disproportionately to wages, the average American is told that the economy is chugging along. Meanwhile, the federal government insists on obscuring the truth as consumer prices are falsely reported by the government's Bureau of Labor Statistics.   

Today's commonly-accepted form of money is fiat currency. It is easily manipulated by operators of the printing press, and it carries only as much value as the producers are able to afford to it by the merits of their production. The United States dollar, the most ubiquitous fiat currency in the history of the world, currently enjoys its unique status as the world's reserve currency, which has been largely enabled by its history of creditworthiness stemming from the international post-WWII Bretton Woods system which predicated global exchange rates upon the gold-backed U.S. dollar. Ever since the official end of the gold standard in 1971, the United States Federal Reserve has embarked upon a reckless monetary policy based on the neoclassical economic sophistries of John Maynard Keynes, whose famous words may finally find relevance today: "In the long run we are all dead."           

Referring back to Pragmatic Capitalism, it's almost comical that Roche accepts as fact his fantastical assertion that an autonomous currency issuer can never technically suffer absolute insolvency. Of course, Roche makes this assertion without any specific regard for the nature of money and the fundamentals which ultimately maintain its value: namely the growth and productivity of its producers, the attending stability of its purchasing power, and the maintenance of producer, creditor, and consumer confidence. At the macro level, in the case of debt, this necessitates the satisfaction of creditors in maintaining their expectation of future return. 

Roche fails to recognize that, without savings, there can be no consumption or deferment of consumption; the latter of which goes entirely forgotten in his work Pragmatic Capitalism. The value of any money, historically contained in the relative scarcity of intrinsically-valuable or productive assets, is tenable only through the maintenance of reliable returns: in the case of fiat currency, unlike any tangible good with useful properties unto itself, this is found in its consistent enabling of the exchange of goods and services. 

Roche remarkably recognizes that the systemic enabling of couch potatoes will invariably reduce the overall standard of living, but he fails to extrapolate this idea into the related dynamics of supply and savings. Somehow, Roche claims, savings follows from the glorious self-sustaining streams of spending and indiscriminate investment. This is, of course, false. 

Supply and production enable savings, which enable investment; and the economy governed by savings and production will properly appraise the risks of investment, relative to the opportunity for savings, and that appraisal of risk duly encourages sound investment, not just investment for its own sake. The consequent production of goods and services, chasing real returns in their own right, forms the basis upon which any medium of exchange maintains its monetary value. These are the fundamentals upon which money is truly predicated as a reliable medium, as the demand for that money (or currency) increases in order to secure, either now or in the future, the goods and services offered in that market; in the alternative case, demand for that money (or currency) declines in favor of some other mechanism by which to reliably enjoy the same. 

Absent returns in the form of real goods and services, those monetary values, as expressed, are mere cotton-paper composites or digital creations on a screen. Before anyone can tap into the value of any exchange medium, one must provide something which promises a return approximately equivalent to or greater than the opportunity of savings; and, on the other side of that transaction, there must be another party who values that quantity of money (or currency) more than he values that possession, and he must maintain confidence in that unit of account to reliably return that value. Contrary to the illusions of academic economists who believe they can sprinkle more currency upon the economy like seeds upon the soil, the note isn't born with this value; and, continuing with the analogy, the metaphorical soil, its composition and the climate eventually adapt to the change. Ultimately, people must first create value to support the money, and they must maintain sufficient confidence, by the merits of that medium, to continue nourishing those seeds with their property and the product of their labor.      

Comments

  1. "the United States of America experienced falling prices for most of its existence prior to 1913"

    That is completely false.

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/US_Historical_Inflation_Ancient.svg/1280px-US_Historical_Inflation_Ancient.svg.png

    ReplyDelete
  2. 19th century US inflation and deflation in more detail:

    http://socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/19th-century-deflation-and-recession-in.html

    ReplyDelete
  3. "Inflation, as it was originally defined, is the expansion in the supply of money, which is often, but not always, followed by a general increase in prices."

    Inflation was never defined in that way. Even Ludwig von Mises didn't actually define it in that way.

    Mises:

    “In theoretical investigation there is only one meaning that can rationally be attached to the expression Inflation: an increase in the quantity of money (in the broader sense of the term, so as to include fiduciary media as well), that is not offset by a corresponding increase in the need for money (again in the broader sense of the term), so that a fall in the objective exchange-value of money must occur. Again, Deflation (or Restriction, or Contraction) signifies: a diminution of the quantity of money (in the broader sense) which is not offset by a corresponding diminution of the demand for money (in the broader sense), so that an increase in the objective exchange-value of money must occur." (Mises, The Theory of Money and Credit).


    Inflation has never been defined as simply 'an expansion in the money supply'. The term has been used to refer to 'excessive' increases in the money supply which lead to a fall in the purchasing power of money, however.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Death by Inflation http://t.co/nRucbSjAOu

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Roche fails to recognize that without savings, there can be no consumption or deferment of consumption"

    LOL. Of course you can have consumption without savings. And deferment of consumption is a form of saving.

    "Supply and production enable savings, which enable investment"

    LOL. Production is simultaneously investment and saving. Investment creates savings, both in real terms and in financial terms, because investment IS saving.

    Yes, you can't have real investment (production of real things) without real savings (real resources). However, you do not need to accumulate or save pre-existing amounts of money before you can commence real investment. All you need is people and available real resources; money can be (and is) created out of thin air.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Summarizing the “Separation of Church and State”

There is much confusion surrounding the concept of the “separation of church and state”; much of it likely born out of the steep secular decline in religious affiliation across recent generations, with particular emphasis among atheists and anti-deists.  While many have hastened to leverage this language (“separation of church and state”) in order to condemn or censure religious values — particularly those which are Christian — where they have carried influence in public life (i.e. prayer in schools, teachers covering lessons from the Bible, government representatives appealing to God, coinage bearing the words “In God We Trust”), the truth is that this “separation” was never expected to completely eliminate religious practice or religious sentiment from all matter of public life. In fact, religion was so deeply enmeshed in American life during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries that the French magistrate and prison reformer Gustave de Beaumont, during his nine-month tour of A...

The Deal with Tariffs

Over the course of President Trump’s two terms, there has been much talk around the matter of tariffs — taxes on imported goods. However, much of the talk seems to miss the point. After all, for those of us who seek the truth, it’s not really a question of whether tariffs are ‘good’ but whether they are preferable to other kinds of taxes — assuming, of course, that taxes are the rule, as certain as the eventuality of death. First, let’s establish the theory: beyond the generic purpose of revenue generation for the state, the institution of tariffs ordinarily serves to  reduce (or discourage) imports by making them artificially more expensive, while encouraging domestic production by making domestic products more appealing on a relative price basis. In the realm of foreign affairs, tariffs are instituted or threatened in the course of international trade negotiations in order to signal dissatisfaction with existing trade barriers and to push for more favorable trade terms; or in ord...

The ‘Values’ Problem in the NFL

Every year, there is talk across the major sports leagues about which players are due for contract extensions and huge paydays. The chatter is seemingly endless, and it often seems to cast a shadow over the sports themselves — talking heads arguing and debating, insisting that so-and-so is going to ‘reset the market’ or so-and-so is demanding the ‘market rate’ for his position.  This is where the conversation goes awry, economically speaking.  The truth is that players  are not commodities: they are neither fungible nor interchangeable. Each player brings a distinct skill set, and each team operates within a unique scheme, meaning that each player’s value is situational rather than universal. There is, thus, no ‘market rate’ for any player or position; contracts exist in relation to each team’s particular situation, and every dollar spent on one player (in a salary-cap league) directly reduces the resources available for others — where ‘overspending’ in any case necessari...

Their Lives, Their Fortunes, and Their Sacred Honor

A  recent YouTube post by the political organization PragerU betrays the truth about the American Revolution. It goes as follows: “Britain spent a fortune defending the colonies in the French & Indian War. America’s response? Boycotts, protests, rebellion. Ingratitude that sparked a revolution.” This description of history is not just a reductive reframing of the issues; it is a crude and provocative statement insulting the intelligence of Americans who remember their history and disrespecting the men who staked everything in their noblest of causes during the American Revolution.  One commenter in the comments section even sided with PragerU, taking to task any who dares criticize the post: “Are you incapable of creating scenarios from the opposite side?” Unfortunately for this commenter, true history isn’t about “creating scenarios”; it’s about understanding what actually happened — the totality of the circumstances. So, let us do just that: let’s get straight to the fac...

Death By Cop

A  recent post from a popular YouTube channel has provided more evidence of that which is blatantly obvious in modern America, at least to those who are willing to face the truth: the fact that cops, as with the governments they serve, are the enemy to goodness, justice, and American liberty.  This latest post is from The Civil Rights Lawyer, a channel (by a practicing civil rights lawyer) documenting police misconduct and civil rights violations since the year 2020. This time, it is a case of an elderly man, a former pastor suffering from dementia, murdered at the hands of “ the very people who were supposed to protect and care for him”: “Officers were dispatched to a business to assist an elderly customer who appeared to be suffering from dementia. At the scene, officers found him extremely confused. He told them the year was 1948 and that the president was George Washington. So they call his daughter to come pick him up. So how did things go so terribly wrong that day, tha...

Fischer: Tortured in the Pasadena Jailhouse (featuring the Morals of Chess by Benjamin Franklin)

Buy your copy today of  Fischer: Tortured in the Pasadena Jailhouse (featuring the Morals of Chess by Benjamin Franklin) , available at  Amazon  and Barnes & Noble . The name Bobby Fischer reigns supreme in the world of chess, yet there was a time when it hogged headlines, struck fear into the eyes of the competition, and was on the lips of folks all across the globe. More than the face of the centuries-old game, there was a time when Bobby Fischer was synonymous with the cause and spirit of America, that his moves on the chessboard sought more than checkmate but to pit the strength of “raw-boned American individualism” against “the Soviet megalithic system” which had come to dominate the game of chess at the same time it dominated Cold War politics. Fischer’s triumph over the USSR's Boris Spassky in the ’72 World Chess Championship would ultimately be celebrated as a symbolic and diplomatic victory for the U.S., but, as time would tell, it would not mean the American...

“Stolen Land”

The claim that America was built on “stolen land” is not only a politically-loaded oversimplification, but a deliberately narrow framing that keeps America — and America alone — under perpetual moral scrutiny. It collapses fundamentally different actors, motives, and historical processes into a single accusation, thereby obscuring more than it explains. At a macro political level, land claims have  always  been in flux. Long before European contact, tribes across North America routinely warred over territory, resources, hunting grounds, and waterways. Claims were seasonal, contingent, and often overlapping, shaped by migration patterns, environmental conditions, and intertribal treaties that themselves shifted over time.  Had Europeans never settled in America, this dynamic would have continued to dominate; it was the prevailing condition of the continent. From this perspective, “ownership” has never been an abstract moral constant but a function of enforceability under a...

Taxation Without Representation

During the American Revolution, one of the most popular rallying cries was “No taxation without representation!” This came at a time when the American colonists were being subjected to progressively higher taxes — imposed on progressively greater numbers of goods — levied by the Crown with the assurance that the colonists enjoyed “virtual representation”. Of course, this “virtual representation” was no representation at all, as the “virtual representative” was not elected by the colonists nor disposed to their grievances.  Well, there are those among us who fail to recognize (or to admit) the parallels present in the modern day, where taxes on Americans are not just unfathomably higher than when the colonists decried the injustice; they are just part of the total cost imposed upon a people not present in the negotiations nor properly represented in the government which claims to have resolved the problems of the past. A recent YouTube comment illustrates the misconception: “ T...

Church Over Christ

The true “believer” is revealed by the consistency between his beliefs and his behavior. If someone truly believes that eternal destinies are at stake — that heaven and hell are real, that the consequences are everlasting, and that salvation depends upon faith or works — then the stakes are not merely high but infinite: infinite in degree and in scope, with the effects propagating into the future as humanity continues generation after generation. The number of souls at risk is not just in the billions today but expands indefinitely into the future. If that framework is taken seriously, then the rational response would seem to be an overwhelming sense urgency by those who claim to appreciate the stakes. Everything else — career, comfort, reputation, leisure — would become secondary to the singular task of “saving” as many people as possible. Yet, despite the billions who claim to be Christian — or who claim to believe in any God — there are precious few who make this their life’s purpos...