posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 11:31 AM
The article (even as opinion) proved to be a very interesting and informative analysis from someone once involved in the financial world's
With capitalism, a nation has to decide if it wants a progressively stable and prosperous economy, or if it wants wealth to indicate its value. It
can't tread both paths. The former leads to a generally longer stable economy enjoyed by the majority of the nation, but requires a fiscal rectitude
of socialistic resonance (i.e., prudent management of the nations economic health), in which wealth returns uninterrupted back into the economy;
whereas the latter generates wealth for a small percentage whom then lock that wealth away from the economy, and return nothing back to it, which then
breeds a fiscal impoverishment in the larger percentage of the nation. The capitalistic choice is therefore, either one of benign positive feedback,
or one of malignant negative loss.
The choice chosen back in 1933 was that of malignant loss when Roosevelt signed in 'Fiat Currency' policy, stripping the nations's currency from
the gold reserves that gave it its true value, a value that was now passed onto the 'bearer' by virtue of promised payment. The dollar's real value
ceased to be, and became literally overnight nothing more than 'virtual'. Since then, America's wealth became tied to negative equity, which has
always been a negative image of what 'real' wealth looks like. Instead of accumulating 'real' wealth affixed to valued commodities, it simply
accumulated 'real' debt based on a 'promise' of payment only. It grew debt as if it were a measure of wealth, as if the debt WAS wealth!
America is not on its own, other western economies followed suit, and fiscal policies have been designed and implemented in order to cement global
interconnectiveness, and thus, most of the developed nations are in the same sinking fiscal boat.
The problem now is the manner in which the players (financial elite) want to begin managing the debt. They know that it is impossible to pay it back
without incurring severe financial penalty and loss to themselves personally, so they are off-setting the debt to the people of the various nations so
that they do not lose anything of personal wealth, and the governments are colluding with them and allowing it to happen, because their personal
wealth is also at risk, and they are not about to allow themselves to lose a single dime to their nefarious fiscal practices. They have to juggle
things precariously, because a real financial collapse is obviously not in their best interest. What's the point of having wealth if you don't live
in a society stable enough to allow you to enjoy it?