Para quienes les interese el tema y puedan leer inglés, les recomiendo este
artículo.
En síntesis describe técnicamente como ha sido posible que el gobierno de
los EU se haya endeudado hasta la ignominia pasando la factura a la sociedad
de ese país y del mundo.
El Dr. Martenson explica como esta situación lleva al necesario desenlace
del Fin del Dinero como existe actualmente.
La opción del uso de moneda social que varios impulsamos en diversas
regiones y países representa una vía para lograr que el mundo se deshaga de
una vez por todas de este inmoral sistema monetario sustituyéndolo por un
sistema que respete a las personas y cuide cultura y medio ambiente. Al
menos es nuestra esperanza y espero provocar aquí el tema para la discusión
al respecto.
Como referencia deseo mencionar que el actual sistema monetario mundial,
como lo conocemos en la actualidad, comenzó a funcionar en el siglo 18
impulsado por A.M. Rotschild y símiles. Parte de la creación de dinero a
partir de la monetización de los activos que mediante vales o prenda
suscriben los deudores. Este dinero de primera generación, sirve para avalar
la creación de más dinero en generaciones subsiguientes, que nada tienen que
ver con la emisión inicial. El requerimiento de pago de intereses sobre los
vales así emitidos sólo extraen energía (en forma de más vales llamados
moneda fiduciaria, trabajo, tiempo, etc.) de la población productora y
verdadera generadora de riqueza. Esa exacción constante de energía y poder
enriquece a los pocos sin retribución para los muchos. Por ello se hace
indispensable el cambio del sistema monetario por otro donde el medio para
realizar transacciones sea neutral respecto a la fijación de valor de lo
intercambiado. Una moneda que sirva para intercambio, no para acumulación,
que no se multiplique a sí misma sin contraparte de valor real.
En espera de sus críticas y comentarios, se abre a debate.
Saludos
JL

www.FinancialSense.com/FSU/Editorials/Martenson/2007/130.hrml

BANKERS WARN OF IMPENDING FISCAL CRISIS
by Dr. Chris Martenson
The End of Money
January 30, 2007

This past week, Ben Bernanke warned the US Congress that our nation faces a
‘fiscal crisis' if the out of control spending habits of Washington aren't
soon curbed. I suspect he used the word ‘curbed' quite deliberately as the
politicians starting back at him probably looked like a row of dogs
listening to white noise. Can't you just picture it? A bunch of
congressional heads all tilted to the side with studious expressions on
their faces, but a stylized question mark floating in a little text balloon
over each of their heads?
As the author Upton Sinclair famously remarked; "It's difficult to get a man
to understand something, when his salary depends on him not understanding
it."
Which is a fancy way of saying that roughly zero congressmen "understood"
what Bernanke was saying, although at least a few probably possessed the
requisite intellectual candlepower to ‘get it'.
Bernanke began his testimony by restating what we already know:
"Dealing with the resulting fiscal strains will pose difficult choices for
the Congress, the administration, and the American people," Bernanke said.
"However, if early and meaningful action is not taken, the U.S. economy
could be seriously weakened, with future generations bearing much of the
cost," he added.
Breaking out our handy-dandy central banker decoder ring we can decipher his
statement as follows:

1. "You guys are gonna have to either break your past entitlement
promises and face an angry electorate or you're going to have to raise taxes
to hurtful levels and face an enraged electorate".

2. "Unless you do one (or both) of these things, the future looks mighty
bleak".

Which is why all the congressmen resembled dogs listening to white noise.
But Bernanke was probably quite comfortable with their feigned puzzlement as
long as he was able to deliver the real message, possibly of the CYA
variety, a little later:
He said the worrisome outcome taking no action would be what over indebted
corporations call "the death spiral":
"Thus, a vicious cycle may develop in which large deficits lead to rapid
growth in debt and interest payments, which in turn adds to subsequent
deficits," Bernanke said.
Ah! Now we see. Bernanke is actually worried about what will happen to our
monetary system once the era of ‘free money for everyone' that congress has
grown so accustomed to over the years lurches to a halt. The virtuous cycle
of ‘more borrowing leading to more money chasing fewer economic
opportunities leading to lower interest rates' will someday morph into it's
evil twin the vicious cycle where (1) more borrowing leads to (2) higher
interest rates which lead to (3) higher debt payments which the lead back to
(1) more borrowing, which leads to (2), then (3), then (1,2,3 - real quick),
then (123123123123123) so fast you find yourself running to store to spend
your money only to find they ran out of wheelbarrows a long time ago.
In short, he's worried about how his particular private industry, the
Federal Reserve and its member banks, are going to fare under this scenario.
And he's not the only central banker out there hitting the pavement and
making dire statements.
First, Paul Volcker, the legendary (and deservedly so) former Federal
Reserve Chairman stated in 2005 that there was a 75% chance of a dollar
crisis in the next 5 years and that ‘we are skating on increasingly thin
ice". I know these quotes come from nearly two years ago but they set the
stage and everyone should be aware of them. When Volcker says such things,
it is best to listen. It's like the fire marshal telling you to exit a
crowded movie theater...knock people over if you have to but get out of
there!
Next, Timothy Geithner, a Federal reserve Governor, had this to say about
derivatives in September of 2006:
The same factors that may have reduced the probability of future systemic
events, however, may amplify the damage caused by and complicate the
management of very severe financial shocks. The changes that have reduced
the vulnerability of the system to smaller shocks may have increased the
severity of the large ones.
What Mr. Geithner is saying here is that derivatives have ushered in a
period of relative calm, which is a good thing, but like a geological fault
line storing up energy, this could instead translate into a larger financial
earthquake in our future. The longer the period between seismic tremors,
the worse they tend to be. Personally I'd rather have small and more
frequent tremors than one gigantic one, but I'm not calling the shots here
and it certainly wasn't my advice to lower interest rates to 1% and hold
them there for more than a year. Further, I have no say in setting
investment margin requirements, managing hedge fund leverage, or setting
back reserve or bank capital sufficiency ratios. Those would be Mr.
Geithner's job.
Then, on January 26th 2007 it was reported that Alex Weber of the European
Central Bank (ECB) sternly told the Davos participants that "If you misprice
risk, don't come looking to us for liquidity assistance" meaning that he
wanted everyone to know that the Central Bank would absolutely not bail them
out if they got into trouble, and that the wealthiest market players in the
world would have to accept their losses just as you or I would. However,
this must have been entirely too unthinkable an outcome for the Davos
participants because Alex immediately softened that harsh rhetoric by saying
that of course "systemic threats to financial stability" would be treated
‘differently' which, - let me access my banker decoder ring thesaurus
function here - turns out to be an alternative spelling for ‘to a bailout'.
While Mr. Weber took many words to convey his true message, I managed to
encapsulate it in a single short memo:
"If you'd like to be eligible for the ECB bailout program, please endeavor
to be sure that your bets are large enough to possibly ruin the system.
Thank you. A. Weber"
And finally, reinforcing the comments above was the head of the ECB
Jean-Claude Trichet who stated that conditions in world financial markets
appeared "unstable" and that participants should brace themselves for a risk
re-pricing event. Again, this is bank-speak which, translated, means
"things could get real ugly when (not if) you all figure out that you
overpaid for your junk grade assets and used too much leverage while doing
so".
And what are we to make of all this banker hand wringing? Are there any
steps we should take?
Yes.
All of this talk of systemic risk means that you need to consider your
exposure to the banking industry. Are 100% of your monetary assets tied up
in a bank somewhere? If the answer is ‘yes' you might want to consider
buying physical gold and/or silver, which you can hold outside of the
banking system. As well, I am a proponent of holding several weeks worth of
cash on hand, a lesson reinforced by the lessons of Katrina.
The theory here is that you would be able to utilize those assets for your
daily living expenses and would be able to carry on where others would
struggle if the banking system suddenly had to shut down for a while to
‘figure things out'.
On a smaller scale this happened in Argentina in 2001 (for 2 weeks), but I
remain concerned by the lessons of Fannie Mae, a single company whose
derivative books were so confusing that it took 1,500 accountants 2.5 years
and $800 million dollars to answer the simple question "How much did Fannie
Mae make/lose in 2004?"
Should the "risk re-pricing" event that is currently worrying the ECB
officials come to pass, how many accountants, years, and dollars would it
take to untangle the resulting mess? And while they were sorting things
out, how would banks know which checks to honor? In all likelihood the
system of domestic and international money transfers would have to cease
operations until we approximately knew who was bankrupt and who was not.
I would expect checks, debit cards and credit cards to be non-functional
during this period. I would expect the period to be pretty lengthy because
there simply aren't that many accountants in the world.
Under this scenario your cash would tide you over and your gold/silver would
skyrocket in (paper dollar) price as the people who lost faith in the paper
money system turned to the oldest and most trusted stores of value that
remain among the very few monetary assets that are not somebody else's
liability.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value - zero." ~ Voltaire
- 1729
As for me, I am going to bring a dog whistle to Bernanke's next
congressional hearing to see how many representatives I can get to turn my
way when I give it a toot.

All the best,
Chris


© 2007 Dr. Chris Martenson
Editorial Archive

_________________________________________________________________
Un amor, una aventura, compañía para un viaje. Regístrate gratis en MSN Amor
& Amistad. http://match.msn.es/match/mt.cfm?pg=channel&tcid=162349