Forgive my lengthy post, but there was too much material
here….
BM: An interesting interview; a lot of faith in the religion
of “we.”
DB: From our point of view, he is taking fear-based
Tavistock-elite promotions at face value and suggesting ways to ameliorate
them.
BM: Yes, Dr. Leeb offers a kind of one-stop-shop for the
elite-based promotions as relates to energy and centrally-planned “solutions.”
DSL: The only way to get anywhere is if you sit around and
you have these intuitions about things.
BM: Intuition….
DSL: …eventually we are going to need renewable energy and
we are going to need a lot of it because hydrocarbons and non-renewables are
really peaking
BM: He speaks on and on about the upcoming shortage of
energy, but not a single comment – either positive or negative – about the
revolution in gas and oil going on in the upper Midwest of the US. If it is real, how does this affect his “intuition”? If it isn’t, say so and explain why not.
DSL: When you see record level prices with no growth,
especially commodity prices, that's unheard of. The only explanation is major
scarcity.
BM: There is one other explanation. It isn’t so difficult to intuit. Even Dr. Leeb sees this later in the
interview, without stating it directly.
DSL: China right now is preparing to build out an
infrastructure that will take them through the 21st century. They think long
term. China does not think in nanoseconds. They think in 100-year-old
intervals, if you will, 20- and 30-year intervals. This country is
unfortunately complacent and it thinks very short term, quarter-to-quarter,
election-to-election, etc.
BM: Let me translate: Central planning is our only hope, and
since China has more of it than does the west, they will succeed while the west
will fail.
DSL: I am not an expert in Chinese politics, far from it,
but if you look at how they pick their current standing committee, those seven
people who are running the country, they really centralize power in two people
and I think that was done very deliberately. They know they have a lot of
things to do. They have to clean up a lot of corruption and they've got to get
this machine working so they can accomplish their goal.
BM: I will translate again: In order to combat corruption,
one must centralize power and decision-making to the maximum extent
possible. Concentration of all power in
one person is best, but one can’t condemn China for getting the number down to
two. There is no concern that this
centralized power will lead to corruption.
DSL: I believe we are headed to a world in which we are
going to have to make do with less, a world in which qualitative improvements
are going to have to count for more than quantitative improvement. We've gone
about as far as we can go with current economic analysis, whether it be
Austrian, Keynesian, etc.
BM: It isn’t clear that he understands the first thing about
Austrian economics. How can someone lump
Austrian with Keynesian when discussing “current economic analysis”? What is the one (high-level) distinction
about Austrian economics from every mainstream school of economics if it isn’t the
distinction of “qualitative” vs. “quantitative”?
DSL: …but the kinds of recessions that we are getting or
you've gotten since 1960 or maybe 1970 are probably not the kind you can apply
business cycle analysis.
BM: Yes, he doesn’t understand Austrian economics. These are precisely the types of recessions
to which one can apply Austrian economics.
The period since 1971 is one where every major currency (and the
associated credit) was fiat – tied to nothing.
This is at the root of Austrian Business Cycle Theory.
DSL: I think central bankers are doing what they can. They
are between a rock and a hard place. Central bankers cannot print silver or
copper or gold. They can just print money or take away money.
BM: Here Dr. Leeb, states the other possible cause of
increasing commodity prices at a time of slow or no growth – they can print
money, but not the stuff it can buy. This
would be called what, exactly? Too bad
he didn’t “intuit” this in his earlier reply.
DSL: Incidentally, I know you may be from the Austrian
school and I'm very agnostic about this but as a sidebar, when you look at
history very rarely do you see horrible things happening because of inflation,
even in Germany during the 1920s.
BM: Does he have the slightest idea about the absolutely
miserable life of the average German during this time?
DSL: It did not even bring down the government….
BM: I see. As long as
the government survives, there are no “horrible” consequences to
hyperinflation.
DSL: You had massive dislocations, very painful
dislocations, but the last half of the 1920s in Germany – or last two or three
years of the '20s were fine.
BM: I will translate: if you ignore all of the horrific
consequences of German hyperinflation, there were no horrific consequences.
DSL: So what really happened? What brought on the horror in
Germany and a lot of other countries? It wasn't the inflation, per se. It was
deflation; it was depression. That's what led to the rise of Hitler. Hitler
never would have gotten anywhere if Germany hadn't fallen into this deep, dark
depression.
BM: Too bad he doesn’t understand Austrian Business Cycle
Theory. He might then stop to think what
it was that caused the depression. Could
it have had something to do with the inflation that preceded it?
DSL: [The Chinese] know if they have enough gold, anything
that they don't have they'll be able to get…. I think the yuan itself will
partially be backed by gold, and that's where the Chinese are headed, in my
opinion, will certainly be the critical, most important currency.
BM: I have intuited this for some time:
From that post (so you don’t have to look if you don’t choose
to): [The Chinese] are locking up resources around the world. These contracts
are likely priced in dollars -- something the Chinese have plenty of and don't
want to hold. At some point, China can declare the Yuan partially backed by
gold -- even 15% - 25% would be sufficient. This strengthens the Yuan and makes
it easier to buy those resources now priced in cheaper dollars.
DSL: At the end of the '70s you had this huge surge in
commodity and the price of oil. A lot of that was political.
BM: To the extent central banking and money printing is
political. But Dr. Leeb never peeks
under that curtain, even though this suggests he understands another possible
cause for seeing record level prices with no growth.
DSL: So [one] of the things we are going to see in the next
ten years are a harsh bear market in bonds….
BM: Sooner or later,
correct.
DSL: So, we've got to segue into something that's much
different and we've got to do it in a hurry and we've probably got to do it as
a world, not as a country.
BM: To translate, one last time: bring on global government.
People just do not see what effects the redistribution of wealth via government programs have on society. DSL doesn't obviously understand that once we came off the gold standard in 1971, because of excessive government spending during Viet Nam, the dollar depreciated so much that the rest of the world wanted it devalued, hence the 7 month oil embargo in 73' and 74', during which the Nixon Administration was forced to renegotiate the dollar’s value against other currencies and the resultant inflation. They just refuse to concede, despite fact after fact, that central planning causes a quasi fascist oligarchy, that uses government and central banking to run roughshod over society, benefiting especially the upper end of the investment class to the detriment of the majority. Hence, 47.7 million on food stamps and a true unemployment rate between 20 and 22 percent. The Keynesian model is probably currently destroying 1/3 the world’s economy. Except for a few monetary holding tanks, do you see anywhere in the world that is really better off today, except those that are increasing the invisible hand of the free market.
ReplyDelete