Skip to main content

Counter-Cycle Theory of Exchange


The brilliance of the current political structure is found in its constructive conning of lower-income individuals into paying for the salaries and benefits of persons who claim to possess the acumen and authoritative leverage to administer such positive change as to avail them overnight of their lot in life, all while perniciously extinguishing those opportunities by systematically monopolizing the funds which might otherwise be available to incentivize their creation. This is all part of the soft despotism which has palatably replaced the more blatant and physical form of slavery which is indelibly etched into the minds and texts of nearly every student of history. Let it be known that this form of slavery, more conspicuous and systematic, will surely become the next subject of great scrutiny in the annals of future texts covering this history.

The counter-cycle theory of exchange proposes that the systemic means by which purchasing power, here defined as the relative average value at which goods and services are exchanged with money, is either overtly transferred through taxation, forfeitures, or subsidization, or covertly dispersed through inflation or its counterparts of quantitative easing and artificially-low rates of interest, consequently causes antithetical resistance to and disproportionate, transformative advantages within already-imbedded market expectations and schemes of incentivization. 

In the case of government interference in the market, whereby measurably-ambiguous, dubious depths of social “good” are channeled by heartwarming campaigns in the zero-to-negative-sum social forum, private investment is then crowded out to pave the way for phases of consumption-focused public policy, the totality of which obstructs the progressive cycle of profits chasing and incentivizing market advantages, which have historically materialized through auditable, market-sensitive modes of production to satisfy effective demand which spawns from the credit, ultimately from savings, generated by consistently-productive counterparts within the cycle: the consistency of this production generates a standard for purchasing power from which basis all transactions may be predictably priced, and through which dimension of expectations transactions may be predictably encouraged. Government work, subsidies, and cash transfers disrupt this inter-cyclical advancement of personally-defined wants, effectively unilaterally redefining the objectives not only of the marketplace but of human existence. 

The eventual tide of incentives will overwhelmingly justify the distribution of both physical and human capital to unsustainable, regressive ends, matching the former with an ever-unproductive, relatively unmotivated — toward the pursuit of value-added commerce, that is — latter. These phenomena are reproduced and reinforced over time to further institutionalize these regressive expectations of counterparty responsibility. 

The systemic redistribution of purchasing power to unimaginative ends of consumption, or to inherently (based upon the calculated, replicated reluctance of individual persons to pay for or to be incentivized by these abstracts, i.e. by homeless people they do not know) unwanted ends in and of themselves, will across time deplete the market of real savings, leading to the incidental decline in the real value of money, effectively completing the counter-cycle phenomenon of exchange. This counter-cyclical intervention, which resists the inherent propensity of market appreciation, requires time to purge misallocations of invested efforts, skills, and resources, and the foregone cycle of advancement leaves only to the imagination an unknown quality of progress, a unique quantity of time in space the world will never again possess, and the palpable consequences of negative payout attending the pursuit of the unscientific, unpredictable ends of an abstract political agenda.      

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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. Likewise, it was a war that would witness a five-fold increase in the number of civilians employed by the federal government, as federal gove

Into the Wild: An Economics Lesson

There is a great deal of substance behind the Keynesian motif, “In the long run, we’re all dead.” If this is your prerogative, your axiom, we are destined to differ on matters of principle and timeline. Surely, any quantity or decided cash figure is relevant exclusively to the available produce yielded by its trade. The current valuation thereof, whilst unadulterated, corroborates a rather stable, predictable trend of expectations, whereas its significance wanes once reconfigured by a process of economic, fiscal or monetary manipulation.  Individuals, vast in their interests and their time preferences and overall appetites, are to be made homogeneous by an overarching system which predetermines the price floors, ceilings and general priorities of life. Of course, all of this exists merely in abstract form. However, the supposition proposed by those who champion the agenda of “basic needs” fails to complement the progress achieved by the abolition of presumed guilt by the sole mis

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 group think phenomenon, spawning the 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 supposed market insight.  Roche also references popular studies, such as the MckInsey Global Institute's report whi