Skip to main content

The Business Cycle

The general market is largely susceptible to shifts in demand and proclivities, and advances in production and technology can often render obsolete many of the market's prior mainstays. For this very reason, specific sectors, industries, goods, and services have been forced to improve, adapt, or assimilate, or to instead vacate the market altogether. Let us venture into an imaginary setting with a human population of 2,437. One given weekend, this town unsuspectingly receives an influx of more than 900 people. The local diners, motels, grocers, and ice cream parlors are suddenly eviscerated of stock while their respective capacities are tested by the sudden appreciation in demand. In response to the immediate explosion in demand, the businesses expand their scales of production, their staff, and the capacity of their infrastructure. One week later, that population of greater than 900 leaves the area, and the businesses are left with excess supply and staff, oversized infrastructure, and an expensive tab. This misinvestment was surely due to the failure of businesspersons' predictive models and time horizons which failed to both recognize the impetus behind the sudden surge of demand and anticipate the subsequent dissipation of demand from the market.  
The business cycle is the macrocosmic extrapolation and systematization of misguiding signals to the market which rival those created by the aforementioned scenario. Shifts and corrections are inherent in the market. However, booms and busts of the scale witnessed during the bubbles in dot-coms, housing, the bond market, higher education, and the general U.S. equities market have spawned from collectivized instruments of risk, the moral hazard of obfuscatory guarantees and grants, the perils of fractional-reserve banking, the expansion of the general supply of money, and the artificially low interest-rate environment, all of which encourages speculation and risk over savings and scrupulous lending while securing an eventuality of unavailable credit and realized substantive losses only temporarily received as nominal gains and profits.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Kaepernick Craze: Exposing the Nation's Fools One Conversation at a Time

The Kaeparnick craze and other viral movements haven't merely pressured people into becoming simpler caricatures of their prior selves, but they have manifestly exposed people for how foolish and uninformed they've been all along. 



In his final year in the NFL, Kaepernick ranked 17th in passer rating and 34th the year before that. 

He played through an entire season in only two of his six years in the league, and his best full-season performance ranks far outside of the NFL's top-250 single-season passing performances in the league's history. 

For reference, the oft-criticized Tony Romo posted a career passer rating of 97.1, as compared to Kaepernick's 88.9. 

Romo's passer rating dipped below 90 for only one season of the eleven seasons he played, whereas Kaepernick failed to eclipse the 90 mark on three of his six seasons, a full 50 percent of his time in the NFL. 

In fact, Kaepernick accomplished this feat only once if we are to discard those other two seasons in …

America's Civil War: Not "Civil" and Not About Slavery

Virtually the entirety of South and Central America, as well as European powers Britain, Spain and France, peacefully abolished slavery — without war — in the first sixty years of the nineteenth century. 

Why, then, did the United States enter into a bloody war that cost over half of the nation’s wealth, at least 800,000 lives and many hundreds of thousands more in casualties? 

The answer: the War Between the States was not about slavery. 

It was a war of invasion to further empower the central government and to reject state sovereignty, nullification of unconstitutional laws, and the states’ rights to secession. 

It was a war that would cripple the South and witness the federal debt skyrocket from $65 million in 1860 to $2.7 billion in 1865, whose annual interest alone would prove twice as expensive as the entire federal budget from 1860.

It was a war that would blur the lines and jurisdictions between sovereign states, that would indiscriminately sacrifice the founding principles etched …

Institutional Racism: The Sasquatch of Political Folklore

A great confusion has arisen out of the clamor of political debate, one which presupposes that any dismissal of the merits of “institutional racism” somehow equates to one’s rejection of personal struggle. 

Whereas the struggle of any individual remains always and everywhere unique and wholly personal, his common bond of complexion with others who have struggled serves inadequately as the basis for any argument which regards this commonality as the cause, or as the reason, for that veritable struggle. 

To condemn the unidentifiable and nebulous abstraction, then, by castigating an unnamed institution which persists beyond our specific capacity to recognize its power, serves only to absolve individuals of their personal responsibility, to shift blame and culpability to a specter which exists only by the creative designs of our imaginations, which exists as the scapegoat for all outcomes popularly maligned as undesirable. 

This unactionable practice, then, swiftly and categorically excuses…