Gab standard

Or, should we say 'Gab as standard' which we do see a lot?

The title came from a WSJ opinion article but struck me as funny. Some earlier posts in this and the related blog talked about things like this. For instance, in finance we can look at the relative rankings of marking. Such as, is to model better than to market? Well, it turns out that it depends, like anything, upon who wins and who loses (it's near-zero, no matter what the richer and smarter say, folks). Of course, some have been marking to myth (Note to Cal Thomas: yes, we're in a 3rd-world dictatorship where the 'dictator' is not the 'decider' (whatever) but the group whose mindset is that their success is a divine-right and that their use of a gaming ontology, which is stacked in practice somewhat, is okay).

Too, on the engineering side, we can go on about 'gab' versus progress, where we know that the latter is hard to measure though it can be done. The former is always problematic, probably by necessity.

We also can look at the lowering dollar. How can this have come about when the US (Uncle Sam) talks (brags about) the 'capitalist' game? Well, we've talked about that, too, as mainly an issue more related to keeping the coffers of the few full. Turns out, though, that we've done so in the US using extracts from the pockets of many others. For how long can this be sustained?

Judy Shelton (see also Stable money) in the WSJ article (The Weak-Dollar Threat to World Order) looks at various reasons and the consequences of the current status. It's not pretty, folks. Anyway, the article is full of clever turns of phrase, such as things like "sleight-of-hand monetary policy" and like what we see with the title. In that case, the question is what is better, a gold standard (Note: 'gold' is being used since that was the standard [albeit erroneously] at one time; we could use anything, such as an element -- the key issue is what is a sustainable growth rate -- medical metaphors [morbidity, for one] may very well be apropos) or a gab standard? Some actually think that this is a foregone conclusion.

Oh, one sees that those who fell for the abstractionistic advances of the 20th century have really caused a lot of grief.

One case in point is that the supply-chain idea of globalization can fail in more ways than we've allowed ourselves to consider. Okay, we've seen both engineering and financial failings.

Now, let's look at agriculture. Has anyone ever thought about having a garden (or did so)? Seems almost to be a human right. Also, remember the idea behind the Victory Garden? Well, the World Bank and others have been telling others, of the developing mode, that they (the super rich) will supermarket-chain food to them. These countries were told not to have their own effort; consequently, many places cannot even do any type of sustenance farming in a reasonable fashion now.

What silly notions these are, all of this stuff. It has been 'rich' and supposedly smarter people telling everyone else what to do. Oh, I know, that's not new. It's just that technology and mathematics has allowed us to spread pain faster and further now.

See the WSJ for an article titled, Food Crisis Forces New Look at Farming. Makes one wonder what other ways the 'smart' set will be screwing it up for those who, in many cases, have no champion. By the way, of what is a CEO champion of?

There is a lot more to cover. It's interesting that the subprime problem has precipitated some of this review, yet that a whole house of cards has had such a very shaky basis portends what?

Remarks:

01/15/2015 -- One of the most-read, of late, as things do look unsettling. Did we learn anything?

06/23/2013 -- Ben sure has talked up (gabbed to) the investors; a recent downturn offers a lot to think about.

03/23/2012 -- Ben is doing a series of four lectures on his, and the FED's, role.

11/08/2009 -- The gigantic chimera needs proper attention.

09/08/2009 -- Heterodox covers several things, but here the suggestion leans towards the energy-based approach to money and value.

08/24/2009 -- Last year, Ben blinked and panicked. He frantically pulled out all stops as if with no thought for tomorrow. Now, he has no use for 'mea culpa' big daddy that he is. Ben, start to unwind now. The Vienna School's view that these things are undecidable (which is a computational issue) is right on.

08/17/2009 -- As promised, FEDaerated is here.

06/15/2009 -- Globalization, and capitalism, now a dirty word, according to one in private equity.

04/27/2009 -- The IMF who sits on a lot of gold got about $1T more to play with.

03/30/2009 -- Near-zero will be looked at more closely.

02/13/2009 -- Debate continues.

12/16/2008 -- Shoes continue to drop, but they are of several types.

10/20/2008 -- It got even worse throughout the year, from Ben's blink, through spitting in the face of savers, to bailouts (what?) of those touting capitalism.

07/31/2008 -- It's not enough to rant and spout off. So, let's start something constructive by looking at money and what it is.

Modified: 01/15/2015