Skip to main content

Calling Bullshit on the US Dollar

I recently experienced another moment reminiscent of The Big Short, which I thought I might document for purposes of comic relief and added insight into the psychology domestically governing the world’s reserve currency, one still — after nearly half a century —  “temporarily” irredeemable in that precious commodity which originally rendered it worth holding in the first place. Living in a world of articulate illiterates, we often find ourselves conned into false senses of security or even those of conventional wisdom. 

Whether it's a seemingly-successful salesman in a shiny new Mercedes-Benz, an impassioned activist with a megaphone and a boatload of buzzwords, or an intergenerational tradition that's escaped scrutiny, the narratives around us form quite a compelling tale; but if we bother to endeavor just beneath the surface, between the lines and into the details, we just might find what they've all been avoiding: the truth. 

In the case of the salesman, his shiny new Mercedes is his way of suggesting he's better than you, and he knows you'll see it and think so, too. In this twisted psychological trick, in convincing you, he also convinces himself. And so it goes. 

In the case of the impassioned activist, her megaphone helps silence her doubt and make her feel more powerful than she feels inside; her endless chatter drowns out the doubt and keeps her safe from change, criticism and, above all, reality. In this sense, her megaphone serves herself just as much as her audience, as she silences her doubters and lulls herself into believing ever strongly in what she is saying; through this, she worships her own voice and builds herself up beyond reproach. 



But after it is all said and done, each of the great cons in our world will look in awe at the inimitable US dollar, the intergenerational fraud thrust upon the world's unsuspecting workers, who, in the face of tradition, couldn't possibly help themselves by picking up a book or thoughtfully considering why in the world they would ever toil for hours each day for these filthy pieces of paper or, in the modern context, mere digital abstractions on a ledger. 

Why, they couldn't possibly fathom having it any other way. Their mothers and fathers, and even their mothers and fathers, have long done it this way. 

Why would they ever need to change? What could possibly go wrong? Well, as it turns out, the average person needn't journey far to find another who feels the same way. 

Indeed, I recently shared this fact with somebody in the course of explaining an important feature, or rather an inherent flaw, in the modern economy: “Most people don’t realize that the United States, through the Federal Reserve, pursues an official policy of inflation of two percent per year.” 

This elicited the following response: “Even in my bank account?” The manner in which people view savings and money is wholly inconsistent with reality; whereas dollars serve merely as a medium of exchange, no longer backed by gold, they are neither a dependable store of value nor a form of sound money. And where they have been reliable, it is in the course of reliably losing value every year since the inception of the Federal Reserve.



What’s more, wherever any individual “has money” in a bank account, whether Chase Bank, Wells Fargo, Bank of America, or wherever, that person doesn’t “have money in the bank”; he has an IOU, a promise of future repayment from that bank. 

Wherever anyone is said to “have money in the bank,” he is a creditor to that bank, nothing more. 

Moreover, while the creditor, otherwise known as a depositor, will seldom witness a quantitative loss in his account — indeed, he is likely to even accrue nominal interest — the qualitative value of that account is all but certain to decline in real terms. And this is where gains and losses truly matter; not in the quantity of digital or paper sums, but in the quality and quantity of goods and services they can actually afford.

Unfortunately, the modern worker is so thoroughly hypnotized by ersatz wealth after generations of successful hypnosis, he will hardly notice what has happened when his deposits have all but disappeared, leaving him with the quantitative value he expected, but without the purchasing power he had never considered. 

If only he understood the difference, he would have, like Mark Baum in The Big Short, taken the time to call bullshit

But just as the Leftist speaks incredulously about the risks of tyranny, so too will the average worker fall victim to his own incredulity in managing the risks of inflation

As Henry Ford observed, “It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.”

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Into the Wild: An Economics Lesson

The Keynesian mantra, in its implications, has its roots in destruction rather than truth: “In the long run, we’re all dead.” If this is your guiding principle, we are destined to differ on matters of principle and timeline. While it is true that our fates intersect in death, that does not mean that we ought to condemn our heirs to that view: the view that our work on this planet ought only to serve ourselves, and that we ought only to bear in mind the consequences within our own lifetimes.  The Keynesians, of course, prefer their outlook, as it serves their interests; it has the further benefit of appealing to other selfish people who have little interest in the future to which they'll ultimately condemn their heirs. After all, they'll be long gone by then. So, in the Keynesian view, the longterm prospects for the common currency, social stability, and personal liberty are not just irrelevant but inconvenient. In their view, regardless of the consequences, those in charge tod

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 whose total cost, including pensions and the burial of veterans, was an estimated $12 billion. Likewise, it was a war that would

There's Always Another Tax: The Tragedy of the Public Park

In the San Francisco Bay Area, many residents work tirelessly throughout the year to pay tens of thousands of dollars in annual property taxes. In addition to this, they are charged an extra 10 percent on all expenses through local sales taxes. It doesn't stop there. In addition to their massive federal tax bill, the busy state of California capitalizes on the opportunity to seize another 10 percent through their own sizable state income taxes. But guess what! It doesn't stop there. No, no, no, no.  In California, there's always another tax. After all of these taxes, which have all the while been reported to cover every nook and cranny of the utopian vision, the Bay Area resident is left to face yet an additional tax at the grocery store, this time on soda. The visionaries within government, and those who champion its warmhearted intentions, label this one the "soda tax," which unbelievably includes Gatorade, the preferred beverage of athletes