What To Do With All This Money?

Having to much money is a problem when it is not going anywhere!
Big players with big money have a big problem!

Big problems present big opportunities for solution!
Slick solutions make even more money, get more power.

Banks created the mortgage crises.  They set up a situation that passed the risk from them to someone else.  Bets were taken that the mortgages designed to fail by giving them to people that could not pay.  Of course, to get the mortgages they could not pay, the house buyers had to pay fees that were pocketed by all those making up front money on the sale.  The brokers of the deal.  The greedy brokers cut out others that would have also benefited from the sale so they could make more.  They avoided local government recording fees by registering the mortgages with MERS.  That is just a sideline on the the problem.

The result was that there was a ton on money made on the front end of the sale of houses in the boom.  Much went to the sellers due to inflated prices.  They bought low, sold high to a bigger sucker that thought it would go on forever.

Ah, but for people clever with money there is much more to be made on the back end of the crises they created.  There is no end to playing with Other People's Money.  After the houses were sold, The debt created by the bank was sold, quickly.  It was a hot potato.  Maybe more like a stick of dynamite with the fuse lit.

The mortgage debt was sold to middle men.  It was sliced, diced and lipstick was put on the pig by credit rating companies.  The pig in the poke was sold as a good investment.  The sellers that held on to them insured them against failure.  That is called hedging a bet.  When they failed, the insurance company like AIG could not pay.  The banks could not pay.  There was not enough money to pay.  Money had to come from somewhere to pay.  The government made up the money to pay by borrowing money from the banks and then loaning the money back to banks and AIG so they could pay off the bets they had made to those that had bet that what they had designed to fail would fail.

All of this was not a break even game.  Money was made by some sector. Money was lost by another.  In addition, there was more money created as money supply overall.

Additional money in the money supply is inflationary if it exceeds an equal growth in productivity.  It is inflationary only if it gets spent.  Banks have money but they are not loaning it.  Business has money but they are not investing it to increase production and hire workers to do that.

But somehow we believed that small business is the bedrock of commerce.  Get small business back in business.  The solution seemed to be all in the hands of small business.  Give small business a tax break.  They will invest in expansion, hire workers.  Put money directly in the hands of workers to spend at small business creating demand for small business to sell.  The economy gets back on its feet.

So, the economy is still laying on the ground gasping.

Making money on this whole scheme, is not over yet.

While attention was being directed at what one hand was doing by shouting look at small business.  The other hand of big business was stealthily moving.  Don't forget, there was a lot more money in its hand as a result of the mortgage scam. 

What to do, what to do??  Money does not sit idle.  What can it buy cheap and sell dear?  With an immense amount of money what is big enough to buy??

Food.

Food is big.  Everybody eats.  The problem is that all the food for sale today to eat today is for sale only to the consumer or in the chain of supply close to the consumer.  Food is perishable.  The only thing to buy is future food.  All future food could be bought.  It can be bought in terms of food commodities to be delivered at a purchase price in a future time frame.  All of the world's food could be bought on those terms.   It would cost a lot of money.  On the other hand it would be an investment that could make a lot of money if future food bought today became much more valuable when the time comes to sell it.

If I could buy food futures cheap today, then sell them in a short time frame like tomorrow, next week or next month as the price for the value of that future food rises then I make money.  Climate crises is making that future food more valuable.  There is a natural climate constraint on production.  If I can add more factors to make that food more valuable in the future it means more money to me.  Simply speculating on the future value of food today increases the competition in speculation by driving future prices up and thereby increasing what is paid today.  It does this only if there is a lot of money around with which to speculate with.  There is a lot of money around and believe it or not, a lot of money on hand that is not doing anything is a problem to the holder.  The money is not making any money.  For the speculator, the business is making money on money.  Or, making money by betting on money in terms of prices.  This is justified by the social value of stabilizing future prices.

How can futures be manipulated for great reward and leave someone else holding a bag of nothing but risk and loss?

So tell me:  How did that work for ya on your mortgage?

Can you say manipulation?

Speculation is a big business sector.

Ponzi schemes to make money on money purely on loans and speculation and the added money that makes through manipulation.

What are they to do with all that money?

Set the situation up by leveraging the existing money crises past the tipping point by granting tax benefits to new industry in the state.  All this does is rob another state in a zero sum game that benefits big business.  What else can you do then Governor Scott Walker?

Ah but there is more!

The governor might aggravate the crises to his advantage and agenda by giving tax breaks to business and reduce income. Business gets him in the end.  The state is going broke and it has to privatize its public assets.  Sell cheap today something the public owns that will cost them more in the future when it has to buy the services from the new private owner.  The Koch brothers?   If not them then someone else with money looking for a profitable home.

Look at this:

Chicago Scores!  What a deal!  Chicago sold the revenue from its parking meters for 75 years. For that they got more than a billion dollars!  Sold to A Sub LP and Morgan Stanley.  City gets to solve its money crises!  A report issued by Chicago's Office of the Inspector General said the city could have gotten almost $1 billion more for the meters.  It was later learned that a substantial amount of money behind the buy was from the middle east.

More here on Chiago's great "Score".

Wisconsin:  It is always in the fine print!  Koch Brothers!  They must have a lot of money and want to buy cheap with it!  It their end game to be a buyer of Wisconsin public utilities without any competition?  Check it out here.   Which was taken from a comment here made by Amanda Terkel. What do you think?

16.896 Sale or contractual operation of state−owned heating, cooling, and power plants. (1) Notwithstanding ss. 13.48 (14) (am) and 16.705 (1), the department may sell any state−owned heating, cooling, and power plant or may contract with a private entity for the operation of any such plant, with or without solicitation of bids, for any amount that the department determines to be in the best interest of the state. Notwithstanding ss. 196.49 and 196.80, no approval or certification of the public service commission is necessary for a public utility to purchase, or contract for the operation of, such a plant, and any such purchase is considered to be in the public interest and to comply with the criteria for certification of a project under s. 196.49 (3) (b).


Amanda writes:


It's unclear what "the best interest of the state" is.
But if this deal goes through, one of the companies that could stand to benefit significantly is Koch Industries. Koch already has several companies in the state, including a coal subsidiary, timber plants and a large network of pipelines.
During the 2010 election cycle, Walker received $43,000 from the Koch Industries PAC, his second-largest contribution. The PAC also gave significantly to the Republican Governors Association, which in turn helped out Walker considerably in his race. Koch also contributed $6,500 to support 16 Republican legislative candidates in the state.
The Koch-funded group Americans for Prosperity has also been standing with Walker throughout his budget battles, busing in Tea Party activists and launching the site, Stand With Walker. After the election, Walker and other Republican governors received guidance from the American Legislative Exchange Council, a group that is also funded by Koch dollars and has pushed anti-union measures.


 In the bigger picture there is so much money sloshing around in the system that needs somewhere to go that will not be inflationary.  If it is taken out of the system through long term investment purchases it is not inflationary.  What to buy that has a big price tag now that will reap rewards far into the future as a sure thing cash cow once it is controlled?   

Wow!  Might we be seeing here an example of the Total Business Strategy at work? 

Food.

Public Owned Infrastructure.

The new gold?  The new gold rush to mine it?

Public Owned Infrastructure is now like a fixer upper house.  Neglected by someone that could not or would not maintain it.  Cheap at the price considering its under laying value.  Worth much more in the future than it is now.  Worth even more if its ownership is a monopoly.

This explains the giveaway of public assets to private business.  "This is tantamount to selling the family china only to have to rent it back in order to eat dinner"

Big business has probably always admired bankers for capturing control of money and owning the printing press that creates the money.  That is the biggest privatization of a public utility that was ever done.  It was done almost a hundred years ago by the Federal Reserve Act.  Debt Money set the stage for everything to follow in business.  Now big business will follow the same model to capture a new license to print money.  They will own what we once did.  We once owned the money system.  Our Constitution says that Congress has the power to create money.  We once owned that power.  It was ours.

We will someday say we once owned the public assets we created.  We owned them until we could not longer pay to maintain and keep what we owned.  Then we sold it and rented it back.

We only rent bankers money today that used to be owned as a our power to create and serve ourselves.

We will only rent the public assets that were in our power to control when we owned what we had invested in to serve ourselves.

Big business is only 100 years to late to the feast on the public enjoyed at first by the banks.  The banks have opened the door to a partnership through the mortgage scam.  It was a marriage of necessity because the banks could not have lasted much longer in the ponzi scheme of the Federal reserve.

Paupers in the land that our forefathers conquered. 

We can get back from the Federal Reserve the power to create money that rightfully belongs to us in accordance with the Constitution as exercised by Congress.

We will not get back the public asset infrastructure that we sell to Big Business unless we nationalize it.

We will not have to sell what we own as public assets if we take back our power to create money and establish an asset money system in place of a debt money system.  The window of opportunity to do this is closing as banks partner with big business to avoid collapse and perpetuate their fraud and they both feast upon us and make our serfdom permanent.

The most basic and fundamental thing we have is our freedom.  What we own and benefit from and use to create our wealth, the wealth of our nation, is the  productivity of our labor.  Banks own money.  Business owns the means of production.   Labor is not one of those means, it is an external component owned by the workers and employed by business.  Business can never own workers, trample on workers rights because workers own the government because that is our freedom.  Government regulates business to keep the balance.

Government is not working as it should.  Business is assuming ownership of it.

The people of Wisconsin are fighting our battle with the government and big business for ownership.  The government there being a front for business interests.

Business wants to own labor and use forces at its disposal to do it.  Business once sent in its supervisor goons,  weak minded unpaid lackeys that were no more than workers themselves who were not smart enough to understand the situation and act in their own greater self interest,  workers "owned" to work for less money and the paid thugs that do anything for money.  It used to be that the government sent in police to enforce ownership power.  It sent in troops when the big guns and more of them were needed.

Our own Egypt?

Business found a thing to do with all that money to make more money.

At this time president Obama is talking to a Small Business Conference.  Hey mister president, keep your eye on what the other hand called big business is doing while your attention is being diverted to focus on Small Business!

Listening to a debate on TV with one ear I hear some jerk talking about all the excessive benefits that the public workers in Wisconsin get.  The woman presenting the workers position says Walker gave tax breaks to business to cause this need to cut elsewhere, then they play the clip where Walker says he will not raise taxes to offset the loss of revenue resulting from the tax breaks given to new business.  New business is a benefit to the state.  Then the woman says, if belt tightening and sacrifice is needed then let all the taxpayers undertake it.  The jerk says they get excessive benefits.  She says that their pay and benefits are equal to the public sector based on a survey done by somebody.  He says they get more benefits and therefore reduce them to what everybody else gets.

The basic logic of the entire situation is on the side of the public employees.  More than that it is on the side of the public versus the government and big business control.  Governor Walker can dictate to all the taxpayers if he wants to share the load just as much as he is dictating to public employees.  Of course, business has been loading the game by pushing the meme in the media that public employees don't deserve what they get.  Besides, we can't afford it at this time (due to the crises created by the banks).

Walker logic:  Take the money from those that are getting more than they should.  I am all for that.  However, don't get it from those that have more than they should.  Get it from those that just have more.  It is called a regressive tax.  It is a progressive idea.  If he can identify all those workers that are getting more than they should as he sees it in terms of pay an benefits then take it from them.  A waitress getting excessive tips.  A banker getting an excessive bonus.    In both cases it is getting it from a class that is making more than others in the same class.  The other way to get more is to tax a single class that just gets more.  Those with more income or property to tax.  I am not sure which Wisconsin uses but by definition, whatever it uses is de factor fair.  Use that system.  Raise taxes to pay for government operations, or take cuts on a rational prioritized basis as a function of zero based budgeting.

Walkers objective is not governance.  He has other agenda, which is the same as big business or its owned means of production called the Republican Party.