Defining insolvency

In responding to mouser, I over extended myself again. Another comment that has become a post. It also dovetails nicely with Antisthenes’s previous post.

Mouser:

Not only nobody wants to solve the problem, but almost nobody is game enough to define it, since that could lead to a specific finger-pointing.

In The Closing of the American Mind, Allan Bloom argued that the greatest Marxist triumph was destroying the public’s ability to define things, whole words even, for what they actually were. If you allow me; They sort of split reality, there are two stories here. One is real and the other is merely fiction, a spun web of memes than cannot be defined.

To define them is to destroy them.

Kyle Bass, in the video below, used the interesting word of ‘optics’. The real story is that most OECD nations are insolvent. Any one running a business like these governments would be defined as bankrupt by any man on the street.

There are ‘optics’, the memes, distorting the majority of the populaces ability to be able to asses insolvency. The majority still cling to the story that governments are different than corporations or persons when it comes to finance. They can print money, as if that is a viable solution. They can increase taxes, that is if capital and labour don’t flee first.

Reinhart and Rogoff, explained that this is simply not true, governments regularly go bankrupt through out history it was common even to have corporate debt trading at far higher premiums than government debt. Yet it is sovereign debt that trades at the premium today. Even worse banks use it as high grade collateral to extend loans and lever themselves up. That is the Euro Crisis.

There is a severe normalcy bias.

Eventually reality will assert itself at the margin as Bass says.

About Avadoro Worden

Iconoclast
This entry was posted in Euro-Bond crisis, Finance and Economics, HyperInflation, Philosophy, The EU, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Defining insolvency

  1. Mouser says:

    One could go deeper than “defining” or rather not defining the problems according to Marx for even the most erudite definition would go over the heads of the majority of the population. US National Institute for Literacy claims that over 90 million of American adults are functionally illiterate. That is about a half of US adult population. Out of these almost 20% cannot understand food labels or fill out job applications. 25% can read, but not well enough to follow five consecutive paragraphs of text. Worse, the average American spends about 1/3 of his or her waking life watching TV. I’m not sure if one can blame only the Marxists for that.

    Hence the hitlerite slogans and Pied Piper’s play on primitive emotions can get a fraud like Obama into the White House. It might even keep him there.

  2. According to John Gatto’s The Underground history of American eduction, it was deliberate. The US army had been keeping records for a century on recruit literacy rates, apparantly the literacy had been dropping since the 1900 when it was close to 98% to just under 80% by the time of the Vietnam war. The Army even hired psychologists to see if it was a simply matter of recruits faking illiteracy. It wasn’t. The key lies in the little on known fact that phonetics had been replaced by whole word learning around the early 19th centuary. Whole word learning, is equivalent to Chinese; learning the word as a symbol instead of a construction of sounds. This was deliberately done by eugenicists and progressive humanists, through boards and foundations. So no, its not exactly Marxian. But progressive humanist, it’s really splitting hairs.

  3. clearance says:

    Very well written post. It will be helpful. Keep up the good work.

  4. Pingback: Magnolia

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>