Roots of Risk

I've had the experience twice in my life.  Once was on a Hunter 45 sailing south from Sydney towards the Bass Straits and once was in an Vesper 15 kayak paddling out of the Chilkoot Inlet in Haines Alaska.  The seas were rough but manageable and the thrill of pushing the prow through the rolling spray was intoxicating.  And then, as if knowing that I was beginning to feel a sense of dominion over the wind and waves, on the horizon came the foreboding apparition of swells, vast and terrible running in a cross current to the chop I was navigating.  The impulse to turn back danced with the impulse to rise to the taunting, inviting seas and, in both instances, I had the good sense to let the latter win.  Otherwise, I couldn't write this post.  Crossing the line into that which is so evidently more powerful than one's own capacity is where you learn to dance with the cosmic forces far greater than you.  It's where all faculties are most acute making all senses palatable and incarnate into the deepest sinew.  You're alive!

My experience was harmonic with the 8th century BCE reality embodied in Homer's Rhapsody M.  Here the sea cliffs (Latin: risicum) are fitted with a olive tree root (Greek: rizikon) to which Odysseus clings to save his life when his ships are crushed.  It was the Romans who chose the "cliff" part of this Greek allegory which began framing our ontology of "risk" meaning the possibility of adversity, loss, injury, or harm.  The idea of risk intersecting with finance was born of Mediterranean, French and English traders who used the term to refer to unavoidable losses at sea.  The insurers of modernity are inextricably linked to the Lloyds of London insurers who integrated the Arabic az-zahr for dice into the French game using dice hasart and merged this into the commercial loss at sea (hazard) insurance of today.

This week I encountered financial "risk" on several occasions.  The term is thrown about most often to justify Ignorance Enhanced Usury - one of the most ubiquitously condemned practices throughout ALL human traditions - which is alive and very well today.  The reason why venture capitalists are 'entitled' to higher returns is because start-up ventures are 'risky'.  The reason why the largest 'ethical' fraud on the planet - microfinance - has to be fraudulently laundered as social responsible investing (now, politically correctly called "impact investing") is because this 'risk-distributed' financial source provides capital in 'risky' markets.  The way to understand the 'opportunity' provided by a novel business is to get one's head around all of the 'risks'.

Investing in a country other than a member of the G-20 does not involve more 'risk'.  It involves personal interaction.  That's right, when you become a trusted counter-party in any jurisdiction you: a) make more discernment-filled decisions; and, b) have others who align their interests with your own thereby stabilizing an environment in which mutual benefit is possible.  Rooted in mutual understanding and informed respect, one actually reduces the likelihood for loss and harm.  Investing in a start-up venture does not involve more 'risk'.  Demanding that a new venture yield cash sufficient to pay back effective interest rates at over 25% is lunacy and it is the capital providers - not the ventures themselves - that actually fail in their investments.  Ironically, statistics on business start-ups are horrifically misleading.  Many of them make it.  Tragically, the ones that get usury financing - the venture capital lot that are publicized and therefore counted - fail at an observable scale because the capital was asymmetric to the business productivity.  Rooted in aligned, productive focus, strategic capital actually nourishes the growth of business for greater productivity in the future.  Fear and ignorance in markets do not necessitate more 'risk'.  Providing prudential confidence derived from empirical experience in the form of insurance can root a venture confidently in an environment perceived to be filled with uncertainty.

Listening to an executive from one of the world's over $1 trillion asset banks this week, I was particularly fascinated with his use of the term 'risk'.  Without exception, one could have substituted the word 'ignorance' for every use of 'risk' with exactitude.  An intrepid group - to which this man belonged - within the bank is trying to encourage greater transparency and innovation.  Regrettably, the roots of this bank are in privacy and secrecy - insuring that deposits and transactions happen within occult discretion.  When one attempts to insert transparency and innovation into a structure whose foundation was the precise opposite, the inertial dissonance is self-evident.  Going into 'riskier' markets?  I think not.  They were just going into markets where they have institutional ignorance.  Not sure how to quantify the 'risk' and 'returns' in new assets?  I think not.  They were incapable of considering metrics that were transparency-optimized rather obfuscatory in nature.  I recalled a conversation with my dear friend and, without exception, the most enlightened member of a banking executive team (also over $1 trillion in assets and also European based).  We were sitting in the rain talking about the history of his bank - one that grew from agrarian roots - and I challenged him with the following question.

"Why is it that we don't have Chief Synergy Officers to insure borrower success in all banks where we have Chief Risk Officers to hedge against borrower failures?"

The answer is self-evident.  Somewhere between the 8th century BCE and Lloyds of London we elected one of the two metaphors given the world by Homer.  And in times of fiscal cliffs, global financial risk, and perils on every side, we are blind to the alternative - the rizikon or root.  If we saw the story for its other narrative - the one where the crushing stones done dash the boats into pieces and send hundreds of men to their deaths - we'd see the story that calls for heightened, total environmental awareness.  An awareness that lets you see the root of an olive tree to which you can cling and rise to new, epic heights.  Abandon that which you've called risk that is fear, ignorance, and in its worst, immoral usury and abuse.  See the root that feeds the succulent olives, cling to it, and truly live!

Diet Pepsi and Twinkies

In December 2007 as the U.S. and global economies were careening off the cliff, Fed Economist Dave Stockton reportedly stated that the economic outlook for the U.S. economy was "benign…[and projections were] unimpaired and on nothing stronger than many late nights of diet Pepsi and vending-machine Twinkies."  What a prophetically ironic metaphor seeing as Diet Pepsi has succumbed to PepsiCo's collapsing market relevance in the face of their arch-rival Coke and Twinkies, the preservative laden fluffy pastry, is bankrupt.  Add to that the Center for Science in the Public Interest's report in March 2012 that 4-methylimidazole (that caramel coloring that makes cola's their distinctive donkey urine on a Grand Canyon hiking trail color) is a carcinogen with the average soda can containing over 500% of the State of California's public safety benchmark and it's not really surprising that we neither diagnosed the condition leading to the much ballyhooed Global Financial Crisis (GFC) nor have we taken any meaningful corrective actions to fix it.

While most of the Eastern seaboard was dealing with the almost storm that almost happened to almost dump a bunch of snow on us here in Charlottesville (yes, I wanted a bit more than the dusting we received) the Federal Reserve set a new record with U.S. Treasury and mortgage holdings at a whopping $2.946 trillion (with a "t")!  And with Atlanta Fed President Dennis Lockhart's dire prediction that "large scale asset purchases" are likely to be necessitated due to the sluggish economy in 2013, this all-time intervention record is likely merely the qualifying line for records that will be smashed throughout the year.  In the Olympics of financial intervention, we've got our Usain Bolt without the Jamaican charm.  Let the games…begin?...continue?...whatever!

Two wrongs don't make a right.  That goes for Twinkies being sloshed down with carcinogenic Diet Pepsi; a GFC manifest in mortgage debt abuses being resolved with mortgage debt abuse; and the architects of a disaster being entrusted with its remedy.  And while I'd love to delve into the precise economic policy issues illuminated in Fed's January 16th record setting 'asset purchase' report, I thought it might be informative to land this commentary a bit closer home.  The intervention of the past few years (suppressed interest rates and Fed purchase of mortgages) actually have grave implications for all of us.  The penny of pain deferral in the moment comes at a pound of agony later.  And, ironically, this pain will respect no asset class being felt more in its magnitude by those with the horded most.

Many of us hear about the foreign ownership of U.S. debt representing about 1/3 of the total public debt - with popular demonization of certain large Asian holders.  The Federal Reserve and U.S. public institutions including Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSE) hold just over 40% while the individual consumer / investor (represented by pension funds, insurance companies and mutual funds) hold about 12%.  On the present trajectory, we could see the Federal Reserve owning about 1/3 of the mortgage market by 2014 (if it continues its current purchasing policy) and about 2/3 of the longer maturity debt issued by the Treasury.  Unlike investors who invest earned dollars and seek investment returns for actuarial income required in their projection of the monetary future needs they'll face, the Fed's 'asset purchasing' behavior is based on its ability to buy using its own whimsical capacity to buy.   Far from a 'fair market' buyer, the presence of a fiat buyer actually alters price dynamics. 

Imagine the following scenario.  You and I go to the grocery story to buy a $1 loaf of bread (o.k., seriously, we know that it's not even a muffin at today's prices but work with me!).  When you pay for your bread, you use a dollar from your wallet.  When I pay for my loaf, I use a dollar from a Monopoly game.  Both 'dollars' are accepted by the grocer who, in turn, deposits both in the retirement account for her employees.  By having non-par 'dollars', the immediate effect on the asset (the bread) is that I have effectively devalued it.  But worse than that, when, in the future, the employees withdraw their retirement account, they'll have far less than expected.  In fact they'll have not just half but the half less the unearnable return that they did not receive on the non-par dollar.  And this is the good news.  The bad news is that the Monopoly money actor - not investing for retirement or future returns, will liquidate their non-investment as a function of their extenuating need - not as a function of the asset appreciation.  This yield decoupled sale could artificially flood supply onto the market and drive down the price.  In the case of the Fed, there is the added complexity in that they have competing financial instrument interests.  Depending on the timing of their sale of Treasuries or mortgages, their sale of one (given the fact that they are holding long-dated Treasuries and long-dated mortgages - both 30 year), the price drag of their sales will decrease the book value and liquidity of pensions, insurance payment capacity, and other cash flow considerations of the average citizen.

In the Panic of 1893, President Grover Cleveland turned to J.P Morgan to loan gold to the U.S. Treasury to keep it from collapsing in exchange for 30 year bonds with a 4% interest rate.  Twenty years later this private capital means of financing the public debt was institutionalized with the formation of the Federal Reserve.  During this tumultuous time, private investors wielded considerable advantage as they not only owned the operation of the government but they also controlled the means of production and commerce (the actual productivity of the U.S. economy).  Setting aside the morality of this dynamic - I know, that's a bit hard to swallow, but bear with me - the good-old-days model concocted by J.P. Morgan and his allies was far more robust than the unimaginative approach taken by the Fed today.  Morgan could actually insure his repayment by aligning his self-interest to the industrial production of the country.  By purchasing competing, non-productive assets at equivalent durations, the Fed is doubling down on the exact same factors that triggered the GFC in the first place.  Remember that the GFC - mislabeled a 'mortgage crisis' - was the consequence of pairing consumer debt (accessed through cheap money second mortgages) actuarial risk with real estate asset risk.  While the symptom showed up looking like mortgage influenza, the actual virus was unsustainable debt fueled consumption.  By suppressing interest rates through contrived purchases and by effectively undermining real asset value, we're actually building a bigger risk than the GFC of 2007-2008.

There's a 'real value' super-storm brewing.  While the leading bands of the storm will be filled with the windy bluster of debt ceiling posturing, the real eye of the storm is brewing around the paired devaluation effect of Fed balance sheet intervention.  If unaltered, the resulting illiquidity for pensioners, the insured, and investors alike will directly harm the economy for the actuarial debt maturity horizon - the next 30 or so years.  Once again, it's time for each of you, and those about whom you care, to become more conscious about the harm being done by passivity in your investment management and start aligning the capital you steward to things that actually unleash the productivity of yourself and others.   The last time the private banking sector managed this process, we got a Great Depression and a World War.  If a few self-serving actors can co-opt the system for their nefarious purposes, it's reasonable to assume that a few actors with good intent can achieve equal effect with a more laudable outcome.

Illumination Becoming Dark

Archimedean Theorem VII

I am indebted to the intersubjective signal encoding of language and the metaphoric abuse of the global patent system for the title of this post and for the portal it affords this week's commentary.  In Asahi's U.S. Patent 6,001,058 issued in December 1999, Hiroshi Sano and his colleagues claimed to invent an interchangeable power supply for a surgical endoscope.  In their patent, they describe the dimming of a light when the battery dies with the following embellishment:

 there are cases where the battery runs down, and hence the illumination becomes dark

In a week where Aaron Swartz ended his tormented life at the age of 26 partially as a consequence of his exasperation at a system that locks information behind contrived economic monopolies after being funded by public research; and, in the same week that public officials seriously discussed defrauding the world with a platinum coin, I'm sympathetic to the prophetic irony in this Japanese patent.  Contemporaneously, I was delving into the works of several philosophers in a quest to disentangle my inexorable conviction that our present manic systemic failure is entirely a function of the optics with which we observe ourselves and the world in which we live.  And, courtesy of the platinum coin option (the legality of which hinges on the fact that our laws only govern coinage limits on gold, silver, and copper) I was struck by the irony that our moral and financial default could be 'solved' courtesy of the periodic table.  

Whether we give Empedocles or the Babylonian Enûma Eliš credit for the notion of essential elements (fire, air, water, and earth) or expand our view to include the Buddhist and Hindu insight of the animating fifth aether or akasha, our present thinking is inextricably linked to the work of Russian scientist Dmitri Mendeleev.  Mendeleev began classifying elements based on their atomic mass in 1869 and presented his findings to German scientists who appreciated the quantifiable discipline of his approach.  But it's English physicist Henry Gwyn Jeffreys Moseley's X-ray spectroscopic analysis in 1913 that actually illuminated the path to our precise understanding of elemental differentiation by understanding the diffraction of energy through crystals.  Regrettably for Moseley, his inquiry was abruptly ended on August 10, 1915 when Atomic Number 29, propelled by a rapid interaction between Atomic Number 8 and Atomic Numbers 16, 6, 19, and 7, ripped through his body in the Battle of Gallipoli.  Another bright 20-something communicator and scientist, like Aaron, exterminated for the noble cause of…?  It's not the guns that kill people, right?

Now by now you're probably wondering what this meandering missive has to do with the economy or the usual InvertedAlchemy fare.  Bear with me my intrepid friend.

Somewhere around 1668 we began segregating light with greater fervor than the 15th century early Renaissance glass and paint masters who allowed life to reflect in their expressions through a deeper understanding of light.  Newtonian optics, inspired by nearly three centuries of inquiry, sought to understand stellar light by enhancing the powers of observation.  While Himalayan masters aspired to cosmic reunion through ascension, European occultists sought to reel the light in.  Ironically, both introduced a common Archimedean obstruction - dimension.  Essential Light, both literal and metaphoric, does not transform when we obstruct it through geometric forms.  By placing a prism in a coherent flow of energy, we don't understand light more fully.  In fact, through diffraction, we actually create the illusion of uncommonality and by segregating perceptible boundaries, we actually more clearly apprehend less.  Christiaan Huygens 1678 postulate that spectral waves travel "forward", and Francesco Grimaldi's (the progenitor of the term "diffraction" in the 1660's) notion of directionality discerned through interference entirely ignore the persistence and dynamics of the energy of that light (or other energy) that is not subject to our introduction of obstructions.  

Here's where I hope a few of you have the 'ah-ha' moment.  Those places where we're drawn into the complexity of our 'problem space' are likely also those places where we've introduced obstacles of segregation which, when removed, also render the problem ephemeral.  Swapping out prisms, while more precisely clarifying the pathetic segregating dissociation of ourselves to our ecosystem, is actually not the solution.  Further contributing to our confusion is our incapacity to observe phenomenon in motion.  I am sympathetic to Max Karl Ernst Ludwig Planck's lifetime effort to rationalize action quantum into static representation ultimately representing his insights with a precisely infinitesimal number 6.62606957(29) x 10^-34 J•s.  When taking the periodic table elemental atomic stasis and turning it into the animated motion picture called reality, you need the Planck constant shutter speed to see life happen.  Talk about I-MAX, Dolby-Surround Sound!  It would be virtually reality!  Or you could just walk out of the theater of illusions and experience…wait for it… REALITY!

So here comes Archimedean Theorem VII (for those counting):

The greater the segregation of diffracted categories in an observation of intractable problems, the more dimensional obstruction is being placed in the path of unconstrained energetic emission.

Charles II was King of England, Oliver Cromwell was posthumously executed, the Qing Dynasty was dealing with small pox with vaccination technologies, the Hudson Bay Company was making 'lasting treaties' with the North American tribes, and we formalized the breaking of light for its understanding nearly 350 years ago.  As I consider the present situation, I could infer that, to quote my Japanese inventor, the "illumination becomes dark."  We are, in fact, in Plato's Allegory of the Cave.

Plato wanted a philosopher to come into the cave to enlighten the prisoners who were chained to the wall and forced to watch the illusion of reality played out in shadows on the blank wall.  But herein lies the irony.  The shadows in Plato's cave are now actually cast by the prisoners and, if one casts light into the cave, we'll have to come face-to-face with the reality that we've been blocking the light and projecting our own illusions.  Our separations, our conflicts, or struggles are of our own animation.  When we want the drama to end, we merely need to stop the show.  That would involve accountability.  That would involve each of us acknowledging the role we've played in deceiving ourselves and others into thinking that crisis and resolution is the mandatory cyclical monotony of life.  It isn't.  Let there be Light!

Color of Poverty

 King of Beers, Lords of Litter, what's up with Blue?

I ride my bike on the back roads of Virginia as many days as the weather and my crazy schedule permits.  On these rides I frequently contemplate life's puzzles and today was no exception.  As the icy cold air pierced my pulmonary epithelial lining…o.k. I'll keep it real.

I had barely turned down Old Lynchburg Road to climb the first 100 ft of the 1,000 ft. of undulating grades I'd traverse today when the bright blue litter of a Bud Light can caught my eye.  A few feet further, another Bud Light can.  Over the past several years, I've been intrigued by the proliferation of roadside litter and I've been puzzling over why it seems that Bud Light cans, with their bold blue blaze, seem to outnumber all other forms of litter by a considerable margin.  So today, after my ride, I enlisted my environmentally aware son to do a little roadside recycling cleanup and litter research.  The results (now in our recycle bin) were staggering.  Bud Light is far and away the favored litter for drivers who drink while driving on our local roads.  Check out the cool graph below!

 But what was more cool than confirming my hypothesis was where my brain had gone as I rode past miles of Anheuser-Busch artifacts of moral bankruptcy and sociopathy.  I was intrigued by the fact that the blue of the Bud Light can - a remarkably unnatural blue when strewn among leaves and grass - bears an uncanny proximity to the blue of another symbol of moral bankruptcy and collective sociopathy.  The blue polypropylene tarpaulin.  If you've traveled around the world as I have, you undoubtedly have observed the ubiquitous blue that provides shelter to hundreds of millions of people around the world.  The blue tarp, a legacy of the 1954 innovation by Italy's Giulio Natta and Germany's Karl Rehn, has become the iconic shelter for those who society has thrown to the side of the proverbial road.  From Mumbai to Cuzco, from Cape Town to Ulaanbaatar, you can learn a lot about a nation by the approach into the international airport.  When you look out the window and see the blue tarps, you know that global economic injustice is alive and well.  (I think that's it ironic that the Federal Reserve used the acronym TARP to name its response to the persistent financial crisis given the euphemism of tarps being transient shelter in times of disaster).

Why blue?  Well, according to David Hudson, Vice President of Government Affairs at Strategic Materials Inc, "…blue is perceived by consumers as being a premium in the marketplace."  This, among other reasons, is why Anheuser-Busch selected blue as their iconic (and easily identifiable in roadside litter) color.  Blue in polypropylene serves as a nucleating agent and actually assists in the mechanical properties of tarps giving them more elongation and UV-resistive properties.  For beer, blue is better.  For keeping the elements off suffering humans, blue is better.  But in both instances, blue is not the natural blue of water or sky.  It's an industrial contrivance that says, "I'm not natural."

But that's the interesting bit that I pondered while I rode off the last of the holiday calories during my frigid ride.  The tarps that provide fleeting shelter from the sun, the cold, the rain, and the snow can be seen as an aesthetic assault on the landscape.  They can trigger a judgmental, "There but for the grace of God…" faux sympathetic impulse as we speed to our more suitable confines in hotels and homes.  Or, like the litter on the side of the road courtesy of consumers of Anheuser-Busch's products, they can invoke a call to action.  They can animate an impulse that acts to bring genuine shelter to those who storms of nature or storms of economic injustice have harmed.

Bud Light cans and Bombay tarp slums are more alike than one might think.  Both remind us of the unnatural malignancy of indifference.  A can thrown from a car window and a family huddled against the monsoon both exist in a broader consensus neglect of a conscious engagement with humanity and the environment in which we live.  Both evidence a personal disregard for the consequence of consumption at all cost.  Both are discarded in a moment with, at best, the fleeting thought that somebody else will clean up the mess.  But both of them are… blue.  Blue, the color associated with serenity, sadness, peace, aloofness, contemplation among western psychologists and social scientists, serves in Himalayan and Asian traditions as the color of sky and heaven for sutras and prayers.

Poverty exists in dimensions far outside of monetary status.  It is not merely a lack of material possessions.  Its yawning jaws stretch around lack of sensitivity, human awareness, environmental intelligence, self-care, and engagement.  And as we reflect on the parable of today's ride, I trust that you allow the blue of neglect to become your chromatic signal to engage with humanity.  Rush headlong into action - building houses for those without, inviting the homeless into your shelter, recycling refuse from the roads you transit - and in so doing, you'll be the richer!

Haunted Forest of Bretton Woods

What if we never were the economic power we thought we were?  What if the dollar really held up on its own?  What if the three largest economic powers of the past 60 years all suffered from failing one of wisdom's oldest admonitions recorded as the words of the Patriarch Moses.

"… And it will be, when the Lord, your God, brings you to the land He swore to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give you, great and good cities that you did not build, and houses full of all good things that you did not fill, and hewn cisterns that you did not hew, vineyards and olive trees that you did not plant, and you will eat and be satisfied.  Beware, lest you forget the Lord, Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage."  

Devarim 6:10-12.  The Fifth Book of the Torah (Deuteronomy for Gentiles).

In July 1944, it was not certain that the Allies were going to win the Second World War.  The winds were blowing in their favor to be sure.  The Allies were regaining territory on the west with France and on the east in Russia.  One month earlier, the success of D-Day had buoyed confidence that the German juggernaut was vulnerable and that the Allied powers may indeed prevail.  The U.S. economy, barely functional save the frenetic ultra-nationalist industrial orgy supporting the war machine with a dollar untested since the Great Depression, had no evidentiary power save the aspiration wafting on the breezes of imagined victory.  U.S. Secretary of State Cordell Hull pleaded with is colleagues for free trade as a remedy for a world at war.  Thinly veiled post-colonial score settling placed the U.S. dollar above the British pound in large part due to the linking of the British Parliament accession to Bretton Woods one year after its negotiation as a condition of $4.4 billion in much needed reconstruction aid.  A similar inducement forced the Franc to bow to the Dollar in exchange for a Dollar denominated billion dollar loan for French reconstruction. 

A cunning convergence of levers conspired to create the illusion of U.S. dollar hegemony.  The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD, later the World Bank) were carefully constructed to reinforce what, at the time was merely an illusion.  The great concession - linking the U.S. dollar to a gold rate of $35/oz - was half the commodity illusion; the other being the growing global demand for oil conveniently financed with dollars.  But, to reclaim the prophetic warning referenced above, we must consider the Marshall Plan and the U.S. occupation and MacArthur administration of Japan.  The fiat currency - in the form of the U.S. dollar - was instrumental in rebuilding Europe and Japan and building infrastructure (and dollar trade dependency) for the manufacturing base of the subsequent economic booms in both regions.  By August 15, 1971, President Nixon realized that the illusion could be maintained no longer.  Slamming the gold window closed and, with Executive Order 11615, instituting a last gasp effort to preserve the Adam Smith inspired economic employment doctrine, Nixon sealed a fate that would have come fully due in the early fall of 2001 had it not been for a certain distraction.

Without the world's credit tolerance - a much ignored though vital policy that Nixon crafted to allow expansion of foreign ownership of our dollar-denominated debt -  we would have lost our Bretton bet long ago.  With Treasury Secretary Geithner's recent announcement that we are once again at a debt ceiling - one side or the other of $16.394 trillion - we continue to bet that the foreign 'others' and our pensions will keep us going.  But what we seem to overlook is the $1.26 trillion in debt that we have to repay this year!  That's in addition to the new debt we have to raise. 

Now, I'm warning you, I'm about to introduce a concept that you may think is entirely unrelated; but please indulge me. 

In 1993, Richard M. Auty introduced the term "resource curse" to describe the phenomenon in which countries rich in natural resources were typically locked in grinding poverty.  He and hundreds of economists and social scientists have pretended to be puzzled over this phenomenon in faux sincerity.  But this "curse" is an illusion derived from disingenuous monetary myopia.  While Bretton Woods broke the literal colonial trade controls of Britain, and to a lesser degree France, by imposing the U.S. dollar reserve and trade dominance, it merely traded a sovereign colonial force for a monetary one.  To participate in the global economy, a single currency hegemony insures that local collateral (in the form of extractable resources) will be denominated in a debt-based currency (the dollar).  The country capable of selling resources, unable to develop them with direct investment in local denomination is pressured to debt-finance its minority equity participation in its OWN resource development thereby forcing two monetary inefficiencies from which escape (sans corruption and despotism for the few in power) is impossible.  The natural resource, which in the ground could serve as the basis for sovereign wealth, becomes the alienated collateral for international financiers who, with no thought for development, extract rents in excess of the resource commodity sales yield insuring instability and ultimate unrest.  By removing domestic enterprise and commodity optionality through compulsory dependence on a debt-denominated currency financial utility, the country is incapable of sustainable development. 

Which leads me to a couple of conclusions.  By betting the U.S.'s future not on our productivity, industry, or innovation but rather on our money, we removed our own optionality to recover from our present fiscal maelstrom.  Money, in and of itself, is not productive and has no natural yield.  It is optionality constrained.  If its flow is directed towards assets with future productivity, it can serve an important purpose.  However, if money is its own productive cycle in the form of capricious usury, it is unsustainable.  Our perpetual debt growth cycle - fueled in the U.S. and Europe by our complete unwillingness to evidence economic will to: a) live within our productive means; and, b) reduce our Federal employment and procurement market dominance; insures our dollar's ultimate demise. By financing our trade empire with a dollar backed by debt rather than by resource or productivity-linked value creation, we've cut off our own economic and wealth-creating future options.  Ignoring productivity and assets, we've implored the world to continue the illusion for its own sake.  But we've failed to recognize that our dollar was never entirely what the world wanted.  We used our power to create the mandate making it what everybody needed.  When that illusion breaks, well… let's go back and look at the Children of Israel and see how they faired in the "promised land."

Recitation of a lie, no matter how loud and often, does not make it true.  But for the Commonwealth (Anglo-Iranian Oil Company later to become BP which globalized oil production ahead of the Rockefeller's Standard Oil; Anglo-American, De Beers, Rio Tinto; etc.) the U.S. and Europe would have been incapable of enacting Bretton Woods because it was through dollar debt denominated commodity pricing and industrial production - not acclaim and desire of the nations - that the dollar had its ride.  While the World Bank's International Finance Corporation perfected the natural resource piracy still alive and well in Papua New Guinea, the Pacific Forum Secretariat nations, Southeast Asia,  South America and Africa, it did little to improve upon the debt slavery extractive industry model that was quite well entrenched by the Commonwealth and other colonial powers before the Second World War.  

So where am I going?  Very simply put: the U.S. and Europe are currently trying to fix a central bank-enabled problem hoping that, in so doing, they'll reassert their will on the world.  They're hopeful that today's pensioners-in-waiting (a polite way to say modern labor) have total financial and historical illiteracy and, as a result, continue to buy growing debt.  But that's where InvertedAlchemy seeks to be a bit of a spoiler.  The clarion call that emanates once a week from Charlottesville, Virginia (home of the fiscal incompetent but globalist Thomas Jefferson) explicitly reminds you that productivity-linked economic models are, and will be, the ONLY way for We The People to actually build sustainable systems.  If we allow indebtedness to stand as a surrogate for our unwillingness to be productive, we all lose.

Allow me to leave you with the most compelling statement made in this year's volume on June 10, 2012. 

wealth = utility x retained optionality^∞

where ∞ = ∫ of all users across all value dimensions

When one considers this formula, one can readily see that the greatest wealth is experienced when the maximum benefit can be derived (in number of participants) from the least phase and state alteration (for more on this, take a look at my previous postings on Phase and State Coherence).  And the more value (in terms of integral accounting) dimensions can be simultaneously appreciated by the more participants, the greater the momentary and residual wealth.  So use 2013 to align your assets with wealth of the form that lasts!  Happy New Year!

Waiting for the Sunrise

This morning, I saw the first rays of the sun hitting the palm fronds of richly laden coconut trees; the golden coherence dancing off the respiring branches and warming the nubile fruit clutching closely to the trunk.  The light this morning was particularly precious by virtue of the date:  December 23rd, 2012.  Regardless of the calendar employed - Mayan, Gregorian, or Lunar - today's light is the shortest and most fleeting for those of us in the Northern Hemisphere and most abundant for those of us in the Southern.  And, as with every other circumnavigation of the solar plane, we anticipate the pilgrimage to the north with spirits of our Roman ancestors who celebrated this moment religiously until, in the 4th century A.D. when a replacement "son's" celebration required the practice to be outlawed.

Waiting in line at Customs at the airport in Cancun, I was thrilled to see the Mexican economy benefiting from a host of pilgrims who had come to the Yucatan Peninsula to be present for the eschatological puzzle that was to unravel (or ravel) on December 21, 2012.  Waiting for nearly 45 minutes in that line, I reflected on the 25 years that I had been married to my wife: our anniversary on December 19th being the proximate cause for our sojourn among our friends in Mexico.  As I often do, my mind tried to piece together the marking of time (my anniversary) and the anticipation of the end of time held by many around me (the end of the Mesoamerican 13th b'ak'tun).  "Time is money," a saying attributed to Benjamin Franklin in his 1748 Advice to a Young Tradesman, appeared to have some phenotypic truth given my surroundings teaming with tourists.  Addressing his friend, A.B., Franklin wrote:

"Remember that time is money. He that can earn ten shillings a day by his labour, and goes abroad or sits idle one half of that day, though he spends but sixpence during his diversion or idleness, ought not to reckon that the only expense; he has really spent, or, rather, thrown 

away, five shillings besides."

In our collective trips to Mexico during this winter solstice, had we all "thrown away" something of value?  Was our sixpence of diversion or, in my case, sun-soaked idleness, worth our lost days' wages?  What purpose is there in marking temporal milestones - say, anniversaries of vows and covenants?  

On December 21, 2012, the History Channel's multi-year marketing march towards the solar ejection at the galactic alignment foretold by aliens visiting Mayans joined the Long Count of confident predictions of that which was not "meant to be".  And while I've commented in several preceding missives on the error of metrics, what struck me on this morning was the even greater error:  not knowing our point of departure.  Were archeologists correct in assuming that August 11 or 13 of the year 3114 B.C.E. was the beginning of the last deific punch of the stopwatch marking the race to the end of days two days ago?  Are astronomers and 'officials at NASA' more or less correct than their antiquarian colleagues in observing the precessional dynamics of the gyroscope we call our home in the incalculable expanse of the cosmos?  On this solstice, are we going to experience a "transformation of human consciousness" on a scale unseen before?

My humble answer to all of the preceding questions is an unambiguous, "No".

Recognizing that I've: a) committed a heresy punishable by death under the Holy Roman Empire's Christian rules making questioning the calendar a capital crime;  b) had the unspeakable audacity to question the supremacy of prevailing 'scientific' dogma; and, c) thrown a tuning fork of dissonance in the emerging global harmonic; allow me to explain a bit more.

Together with our Mayan and Olmec sojourners, we are plagued with a disease far worse than the conquistador-bequeathed small pox and influenza.  That which defies our limited capacity to understand and our even more limited temporal inquisitiveness is relegated to our priestly classes:

-  religious 'scholars', funded by the tithes of the lost they seek to lead, who treat Greek, Hebrew, Sanskrit, Arabic, and Hieroglyphs as the infallible statement of a disembodied divine fully subject to construction by…, well,… uh, humans;

-  scientists who confidently state - through grant-sponsored research - that we understand about 2% of that which is within us and surrounds us while confidently telling us that the 98% rest is 'Dark Matter' or 'Junk'; and,

-  pop-philosophers who, with the cunning use of prefixes like "morpho", "bio", or "trans", get millions to buy their books and spend thousands of dollars to attend their seminars on emergence.

Oh, and can anyone see the thread that links each of these groups with one another?  And lest the agnostic, secular, or atheist reader thinks they've dodged the bullet, take a look at the 12.12.12 Wall Street Journal (does that date 'mean' something?) in which we were simultaneously told to have "Faith" in banks (pg. C4), ignore the Treasury's "Losses" on taxpayer funded "investments" (pg. C2), and told about the $51 trillion college of cardinals who gather every two months in Basel who are guessing their way through a financial apocalypse created and administered by the SAME individuals (pg. A1 and A16).  Oh, and the economy is obviously too difficult to understand so, thank god someone knows what they're doing.

"If the central bankers are correct, they will help the world economy avoid prolonged stagnation and a repeat of the central banking mistakes in the 1930's.  If they are wrong, they could kindle inflation or sow the seeds of another financial crisis."

For those of you who are not paying attention, that 1930s risk was resolved with a world war killing over 50 million people.  How's that for an apocalypse?  Wow, pardon me for not being impressed!  Harvard economist Kenneth Rogoff (co-author of This Time is Different) is quoted as offering the following collegial reassurance.  "Will history decide they did too little or too much?  We don't know because it is still a work in progress."  Kenneth Rogoff is a fascinating fellow.  He is Professor of Economics and Public Policy at Harvard University and was the 2011 Deutsche Bank Prize winner in Financial Economics.  In his December 4, 2102 blog post on Innovation or Financial Crisis, he acknowledges the merits of the question if we have become victims of our own innovation crisis.  While he concludes that our problems are of an economic nature rather than a secular innovative failure, he at least has the decency of contemplating a biocular perspective.  What I find noteworthy in his writing is his accessible candor and clarity.  While I find the bias of his institution and discipline embedded in much of his work, he tenaciously holds open the space for multi-disciplinarity which is a endangered attribute among many in our time.

What happened on December 21, 2012?  Did we end something or begin something new?  In fact, only you and those with whom you interact will know.  Here's why.  We're not waiting for an ecumenical convergence, an eschatological resolution, or a great unified theory that explains "it all".  Because if you're among the 'waiting' there's one thing that is certain:  until you animate yourself with purpose, your world will look pretty much the same with each new sunrise.  No winged serpent, cosmic collision, sword-wielding horse, or karmic butterfly will save you.  But if, on this winter solstice 2012, you chose to become an informed, sentient being, one refusing to allow for a surrogacy of life and accountability, then welcome to the New Age which, with each rising Sol Invictus, is ever new!

Drive By Shootings: A Call to Arms

I was driving on I-84 in Portland, Oregon on Tuesday afternoon after meetings in Beaverton.  The AM radio station - for some reason the only one I could access in my Hertz rental car - broke into the talk-radio rant with the news that a shooting was taking place at the Clackamas Town Center just a dozen miles from my precise location.  In moments, Steve Forsyth and Cindy Ann Yuille were dead, Kristina Shevchenko was seriously injured before Jacob Tyler Roberts ended his own torture.  Hours later, I boarded a red-eye flight from Portland to New York's JFK via Los Angeles.  In the early morning on Wednesday, I was met by a wonderful driver who was to drive me to business meetings in Southeastern Connecticut.  A terrible accident on I-95 forced us to divert and we traveled north.  Passing young children waiting for their school buses in the early, cold morning, I reflected on the tragedy in Portland.  We turned right at an intersection which indicated that a left would take us to Newtown.  I couldn't have known that within 24 hours, on opposite sides of the country, I would be in the immediate vicinity of two horrific tragedies.   Young children and adults at the Sandy Hook Elementary School - now 26 people we'll never meet, know and love - were within range of the Christmas vacation.  Now candle-light vigils, rants on the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and myriads of blog posts across the ideological spectrum serve as the reflexive catharsis which will wax and then wane until we're 'shocked' again.

As I rode through frigid Southern Albemarle County this morning, I felt visited by those whose lives had been extinguished this week.  Young and old, they seemed to ask, "How long will we join the ranks of those who die for no reason?"  In the empty woods, up and down the hills marking the interface between the ancient Blue Ridge Mountains' edge and the James River, the empty cold, punctuated from time to time with a small flock of birds, one sentinel redheaded woodpecker and the odd squirrel seemed to reply, "Yes, how long?"  This experience wasn't new.  Since I was introduced to murder with the stabbing death of my then-best friend at the age of 6, I've been invited to ponder this question thousands of times.

The lives that were extinguished this week were sacrificed for ideology.  Ideology born of a legacy that stretches back at least 1,111 years.  Defenders of the Second Amendment merely recite the liturgy from the nadir of Europe's Dark Ages that citizens must both defend their king and be defended from tyranny defined by King Alfred around 886 A.D.  This good Christian King of the Anglo-Saxons edited the Golden Rule to state that, "What ye will that other men should not do to you, that do ye not to other men."  Rather than calling for elevated human morality, he defined the defensive posture that survives to this day.  Among his other elevated achievements, Alfred and Pope John IX also came up with the precedent for church-sanctioned sex trafficking of nuns with their brilliant scheme of fining 120 shillings those who take women with the revenue split between the King and the Bishop presiding over the convent!

"How long must we die?"

How long will we accept murder as a means to resolve ideological disputes?  How long will we promote murder - in the name of sacrifice - as a means to better social ends?  How long will religion insist that through murder comes love and life?  How long will we accept social systems which give preference to the lives like 'us' while blindly accepting the murder of those not like 'us'?  A classroom of kindergarten students, courtesy of our contempt for humanity, will never be able to ask these questions.  A small cadre of teachers will never be able to impart a more enlightened thinking.  Because our ideology adherence was more valuable then their lives.  And the lives of millions before. 

Today, we mark the 221 anniversary of the adoption of the Second Amendment which, for those of you who don't read the history you debate states:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

I recite this both for the informational value it serves as well as the ideology it presumes.  The infallible canonical truth infused in this amendment is that security comes with violence and the capacity to visit the same on enemies.  But James Madison's logic for the amendment had more to do with the political points scored by assuring Anti-Federalist militias that they would not be disarmed.  Against the back-drop of a rejection of a standing army, the preservation of arms by the militias was a high-stakes bluff showing that the Federalists had nothing to fear from the conspiracy soaked Anti-Federalists who were certain that they would face tyranny equal to or worse than that which they'd just rejected from Britain.

Let's dig deeper.  The Amendment assumes:

-  force is a companion to security;

-  security is a necessity of a free State,

-  armed citizens will keep and bear arms for the benefit of a secure State, and,

-  that Evangelical Christians, who place their absolute faith in God, will protest most loudly - to the point of using violence -  if the government ever steps foot on their property which they bought with their hard-earned money that came from… well, uh oh, the government… so they need their assault rifles for hunting, abortion clinics, and terrorists!

O.K., the last one was not contemplated by Madison or Jefferson, neither of whom had much use for the dogma embraced by today's Evangelicals who insist that the founding fathers were Christians like them.

These assumptions are born of fear and dogmatic adherence to our religious narrative requiring murder.  People displease God - kill them with a flood.  People live in the place that 'chosen people' would rather live - kill them with the sword.  People promote heresy like letting women read - burn them at the stake.  People question any authority - drown them, burn them, rip their flesh… and do it publicly so that there's no question that others will learn to fall in line.  And here's the pièce de résistance:  it's either the celebrated murder of a Nazarene by the Romans or your eternal death!  Oh, and that one, we actually call an act of love!

We're still in the European Dark Ages when it comes to our engagement with humanity.  Robert K. Merton, in his 1949 publication Social Theory and Social Structures brilliantly describes: 

"…a false definition of the situation evoking a new behaviour which makes the original false conception come 'true'. This specious validity of the self-fulfilling prophecy perpetuates a reign of error. For the prophet will cite the actual course of events as proof that he was right from the very beginning."

It's not arms that secure us.  They never have and they never will.  Karl Popper's Oedipus Effect explained the social and scientific effect of expectations derived from dogmatically held perspective (derived, not tacit truth) which in fact played a role in bringing about that which was the "fulfillment of it's prophecy."  If we assume armed security from certain violence as a predicate to freedom, we'll have arms, security, violence and will never achieve lasting freedom.  Why?  Because we'll observe those conditions in which our perspective-based assumptions exist (or fail to exist) and then causal links between those conditions and the events manifest therein.  We will not contemplate an alternative to Freedom, the State, Security, or Force.

Because after all, who would want a land filled with people at Liberty?  Who would want a social order in which the citizens actually understand their interdependence oblivious to ideology, race, color, or creed?  Who would want to have a society so compellingly inclusive that the impulse to horde would be replaced with the impulse to be conduits of abundance benefiting oneself and those with whom one interacts?  Who would want the grace and mercy to be the ideal to which we are striving?  Who?  Well, for starters, twenty eight of our fellow citizens who lost their lives this week.  Use your arms - I really mean your arms - and embrace someone you don't know.  Then ask yourself if a More Perfect Union would be possible if you pointed a gun in their direction.  The truth is staring us in the face.  And 28 souls are waiting for you to show up and cast off the shackles of an ideology born three centuries before we sent 30,000 children to their death in the Children's Crusade in 1212.