by Summary:
In a perfect world we would have a democratic government run by the people for the people, but what if understanding how to run the economy is so complicated that the bankers, who call themselves technocrats, say leave it to us, we will work it all out for you, but instead of working out for us, they rig it for the benefit of the banking class instead?It's the same with medicine; how many people in government are doctors, which means politicians have to rely on doctors for advice, but what if most of the doctors also work for the pharmaceutical industry who want to push more and more drugs onto the nation?But I'm sure there are many good people in banking and medicine who do want to work for the national interest. This can be overcome. KV. Central bankers are now aggressively playing the
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
In a perfect world we would have a democratic government run by the people for the people, but what if understanding how to run the economy is so complicated that the bankers, who call themselves technocrats, say leave it to us, we will work it all out for you, but instead of working out for us, they rig it for the benefit of the banking class instead?In a perfect world we would have a democratic government run by the people for the people, but what if understanding how to run the economy is so complicated that the bankers, who call themselves technocrats, say leave it to us, we will work it all out for you, but instead of working out for us, they rig it for the benefit of the banking class instead?It's the same with medicine; how many people in government are doctors, which means politicians have to rely on doctors for advice, but what if most of the doctors also work for the pharmaceutical industry who want to push more and more drugs onto the nation?But I'm sure there are many good people in banking and medicine who do want to work for the national interest. This can be overcome. KV. Central bankers are now aggressively playing the
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
Matias Vernengo writes Elon Musk (& Vivek Ramaswamy) on hardship, because he knows so much about it
Lars Pålsson Syll writes Klas Eklunds ‘Vår ekonomi’ — lärobok med stora brister
New Economics Foundation writes We need more than a tax on the super rich to deliver climate and economic justice
Robert Vienneau writes Profits Not Explained By Merit, Increased Risk, Increased Ability To Compete, Etc.
It's the same with medicine; how many people in government are doctors, which means politicians have to rely on doctors for advice, but what if most of the doctors also work for the pharmaceutical industry who want to push more and more drugs onto the nation?
But I'm sure there are many good people in banking and medicine who do want to work for the national interest. This can be overcome. KV.
Central bankers are now aggressively playing the stock market. To say they are buying up the planet may be an exaggeration, but they could. They can create money at will, and they have declared their “independence” from government. They have become rogue players in a game of their own.
Excluding institutions such as Blackrock and Vanguard, which are composed of multiple investors, the largest single players in global equity markets are now thought to be central banks themselves. An estimated 30 to 40 central banks are invested in the stock market, either directly or through their investment vehicles (sovereign wealth funds). According to David Haggith on Zero Hedge:
The result, as noted in a January 2017 article on Zero Hedge, is that central bankers, “who Q fiat money out of thin air and for whom ‘acquisition cost’ is a meaningless term, are increasingly nationalizing the equity capital markets.” At least they would be nationalizing equities, if they were actually “national” central banks. But the Swiss National Bank, the biggest single player in this game, is 48% privately owned; and most central banks have declared their independence from their governments. They march to the drums not of government but of big international banks.
In a paper presented at the 14th Rhodes Forum in Greece in October 2016, Dr. Richard Werner, Director of International Development at the University of Southampton in the UK, argued that central banks have managed to achieve total independence from government and total lack of accountability to the people, and that they are now in the process of consolidating their powers. They control markets by creating bubbles, busts, and economic chaos. He pointed to the European Central Bank, which was modeled on the disastrous earlier German central bank, the Reichsbank. The Reichsbank created deflation, hyperinflation, and the chaos that helped bring Adolf Hitler to power. The problem with the Reichsbank, says Werner, was its excessive independence and its lack of accountability to German institutions and Parliament. The founders of post-war Germany changed the new central bank’s status by significantly curtailing its independence. Werner writes, “The Bundesbank was made accountable and subordinated to Parliament, as one would expect in a democracy. It became probably the world’s most successful central bank.”
But today’s central banks, he says, are following the disastrous Reichsbank model, involving an unprecedented concentration of power without accountability. Central banks are not held responsible for their massive policy mistakes and reckless creation of boom-bust cycles, banking crises and large-scale unemployment. Youth unemployment now exceeds 50 percent in Spain and Greece. Many central banks remain in private hands, including not only the Swiss National Bank but the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the Italian, Greek and South African central banks.