Quote of the day—kam

Without Central Banks this market wouldn’t exist. All the algorithms today are but spin off of linear regression. Boats rising with the tide.

Earnings can be replaced with Central Bank cash/credit, but not over the long run. And that day could be tomorrow, or in 10 years. Who could have thought that easy money would have created so many walking corpses.

June 15, 2017
Comment to What Happens When the Machines Start Selling?
[H/T to Brett.

Who? I’m not sure about “walking corpses” being explicitly predicted but there were many people who thought it was a really bad idea.

The lessons learned in the next few years will be remembered for probably a generation or so before “the new kids on the block” believe they are smarter and/or times are different. The best fix would probably be when the lesson is visible world wide as burned out ruins of cities for governments to be prohibited from trying to “manage the economy”. But I put the odds at 50-50 that will happen on even one continent.—Joe]


2 thoughts on “Quote of the day—kam

  1. So the question might be presented thusly; how do we plan central planning out of existence without engaging in central planning?

    Yes, that’s sort of tongue-in-cheek. It is of course impossible to centrally plan a system of non-central planning. Any such effort misses the point. Maybe that’s the fundamental flaw of the United States.

    It has often been said that the people will get what they want. What many people want is something for nothing. We want to be consumers without being producers, which means we want to be thieves.

    Getting what we want is only part of the problem. Equally important to understanding the situation; we get what we tolerate. We tolerate thieves to such an extent that the thieves come to believe that they’re the ones in charge, that we belong to them. So long as we tolerate that arrangement, we’ll get it.

    Thus the thieves are always in charge. They’re clever enough to worm their way into dominance by convincing the rest of us that they have some degree of legitimacy. Before we know it, they’re telling us what to do, and we tolerate it because we want peace.

    A system of looting can exist only so long as there is enough production going on, in spite of the looting, to feed the producers and all the looters. Eventually it has to break down into chaos and war. As Thatcher put it; the problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.

    And, contrary to universal belief, it not the money at all. It’s the goods and services and you can’t make those up out of thin air.

    We either tolerate the central planners, who ultimately have nothing in mind but looting, or we don’t tolerate them. It’s A or B.

    Our problem is that we always, no matter what, always end up getting fascinated by, mesmerized by, and caught up in, the excuses, the rationalizations and fake assertions of the looters. We seldom talk about anything else. The lies become our main focus. Thus they win.

    The central planners/looters know to a certainty that we’ll chase the shiny object in one hand, while the other hand picks our pockets. They know that having let them pick out pockets is so deeply disturbing to us that we”ll continue to chase the shiny object (the looters’s assertions) rather than face up to the fact that we’re being robbed.

    If we face up to that fact, then we’re obliged to do something about it. That’s too scary, so we’ll pretend that coercive redistribution on a global scale isn’t really all that bad. Any maybe all we have to do is vote Republican, they’ll fix our mess for us.

    No, Young Grasshopper; the human race is doomed to cycles of war and chaos until it quits tolerating organized crime (any system of central command and control). As it is, we ask for it. We dream of it and we love it. We practically (and in some cases, literally) worship the crime bosses, and we always do what they tell us so long as the threats are clear in our minds but understated. Therefore we deserve everything that results.

    “What do we want?”
    “Who’s gonna give it to us?”
    “What don’t we understand?”

    • Power is freedom (and wealth, a form of power was explained by Ben Stein some years ago as the ability to say “No!”).
      I forget what book it was published in the Sixties, but one of its postulates was that power is never given, it must be taken. Our power as free men and women has been stolen from us for so long in return for free stuff, most Americans think that freedom can be given just like money for welfare. .

Comments are closed.