From: A Functional Monarchy. - By Joshua A. Moore On the Topic of Financial investments, Financial services, Risks to the nation state ,profiting with out production and profiteering from war. It has long been my observation that something has been profoundly sick about our financial services sector. In truth, the wealthiest of our population not just the 1% but the 1% of the 1% are people who make their money off automated trades calculated by a computer. Obscene amounts of money generated with no production- no labor. These automated trades where not bad enough by them selves- the financial interests that use them do so with a mechanic called leveraging is most easily explained like credit card purchases. Many financial giants in the United States are leveraged in the 100s to 1, simply meaning they are controlling 100s of dollars worth of market transaction for every 1 dollar they are actually worth. Scale that up into a Financial industrial giant worth 10s of Billions of dollars and do the figuring. Trillion of dollars of private debt that has national ramifications are being created by people whos only lot in life is to make numbers on a balance sheet more impressive. There are currently no limits to the amount of debt a private capital bank can create. Starting in 2000 after the Commodity futures modernization act, there are not even limits set to prevent conflict of interest trading on complex financial vehicles. If all of this seems confusing to you, bare with me. The Important part is in our current system, the Capital engine of the Capitalist system has gone rogue. The current Republic government is largely rogue in the sense that it is occupied by or sponsored by these same rogues of the Capital engine Also.Known.As, Wall street. The reason being is that Republic government is occupied in largest part by people who are like wise in debt to these financial agencies. Few of them would have even gotten i view of a congressional or presidential seat with out the blessings of these financial institutions. The lack of limits on the ability of a private banker to damage the larger economy is none Sensible, by any standards and its allowed because of the conflict of interest I just mentioned. Because of the conflict of interest between monetary policy and election expenses. This results in a Self regulated market... Powerful agencies who essentially control-and-support. Both parties in American politics, are free from any regulations effectively besides those they give their blessings too. This is really the wet dream of Libertarians. Deregulation. Business powers with no effective state authority to have to answer too. On all levels of government- state and federal. Many powerful business industries have ignored regulations or gotten regulations repealed for the sake of monetary benefit to the business and a promised benefit to local people. They sometimes deliver on the later, but always at the expense of living conditions over all. For the last 2 decades regulation has been on the decrease but standard of living has fallen. Libertarians how ever are not happy. They are seeking more.. further deregulation. its commonly justified by pointing to the fact that the corporate powers that be are intimate with the state so there fore the market isnt a free market, they say this while ignoring the pragmatic side of what has occurred in the markets curing the earliest years of this century. II So the solution is straight forward in one sense, market them selves even desire regulation- via their desire for stability and constancy. From all levels of the current government structure, we need change and there for we need an agent, a Sovereign who is not beholden to the financial interests. An agent who understands that the financial services and the wealth they create is a healthy thing, but it is a double edge sword. Like eating too much or drinking too much... giving too much power to people who nearly worship numbers on budget sheets... is not only not healthy but it is directly destructive. In the days when Adam Smith wrote the wealth of nations, it was inconceivable that so much wealth could be attained by people who do not produce anything, who amass fortunes by moving money from one place to another and on that note, do so by means of an automated computer program. Adam Smith would shocked and apauled at the financial system as it exists today and I would wager any capitalist advocate it would have had a dramatic effect on the way he viewed the potential dark side of Capital markets. I propose a hard cap of 6.5% on the Interest rates that can be made on high capital loans and 8% on mid and low capital loans that includes the extension of credit. Financial institutions further be barred from the creation of complicated financial vehicles with out the express authorization of a regulator Ministry. In a Functional Monarchy, institutions dealing in finance should retain very high degrees of autonomy how ever. The concept of requiring regulator approval for the creation of financial vehicles serves an important fire wall, ensuring that banks do not create financial contracts or vehicles which ONLY serve the interest of that institution. Common people doing business with a bank should not have to do so in fear that a wrong move will void a contract which was designed to fail or designed to work in such a way that a bank could take position of a property for far cheaper than they could by buying it. These kind of penny on the dollar land grabs have real historical bases not only int he 2007-08 collapse and the subsequent and often dirty mortgage foreclosures and defaults on the part of common people. It also has basis in history reaching back far through time. The end all be all truth is that strong and impartial regulation is key to a vibrant economy. How ever, a word of balance is needed here. It is not about How much or how little regulation is on the books but about how effective and efficient that regulation is. The great deception in the post 2008 environment is that more regulation means good regulation, as was the way Dodd-Frank was submitted. Though it had a lot of regulations it did very little, so it can be said Dodd-Frank bill said much and did little. Its important when speaking of regulations we look to the big picture, not the issues we are dealing with today and tomorrow but issues that will be with us on the scale of a decade or more. This kind of long sighted Ministry approach is ideal. Especially when compared with an environment like we have today where things change radically every couple of years. III Its this consistency and long sighted approach that gives Monarchy its strength when dealing with economics at a national level. Regulations in general should be briefly worded but specific to a function they are designed for. The direct,actionable power of a monarch lends it self to pushing aside regulations that have served their purpose and are now obsolete or have exceeded their function unacceptably. Moving on to the final part of this topic, Profiteering from war is flatly unacceptable. Defined by deliberately using a state of war for financial gains be it through unnecessary price hikes, deliberate with holding of domestic goods and-or-attempts to corner a market on a necessary good during war time. because of the vast amounts of Resources expended during war both in terms of Natural resources and Human resources, Profit margins above and beyond what a business would make during a time of peace is unacceptable. The bottom line, War should never be good for business.
Posted on: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 00:53:13 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015