The Stakes

The stakes are driving the "unthawing" of credit markets more than the action of coordinated central banking.

Commanding capital markets (top-down, trickle-down management) falsely suggests that management of the capital in a concentrated, centralized state is the solution and not the problem.

The capital that has been consolidated is detecting siginificant pressure to retribute the value. For concentrated capital, retributing the value is a cost to be minimized. Much better to lend the capital for a return on the accumulated private equity and lobby for keeping a regressive tax code to pay it than to allow the retributive value to accumulate with a credit deficiency. The cost, and benefit, however, is an increased debt burden.

The trick is to be sure you do not end up with the debtor (the payer) assignment, and with the regressive tax code we have now, that would be The People experiencing crisis.

The markets are sensing the sensitivity of policymakers to manage the retributive value with a quick turnaround. Another stimulus package in the U.S. (a bottom-up measure) is being floated and is likely. However, without a more progressive tax code, a bottom-up stimulus is inflationary because it swells the deficit.

Another stimulus package without a more progressive tax code, like the previous stimulus package and temporary middle class tax cuts, will not recapitalize the benefit toward a stable recovery. It reinvests the benefit to relieve the pressure for retributing the value, the power, of the benefit (accumulation of the capital) to its source, The People, without an economic rent (the interest on the debt The People pay through a regressive tax code).

The best another stimulus without a more progressive tax code will do for The People will allow for a very short-term recovery of financial assets that will likely be sold (shook out, or consolidated), still well below their highs.

Since Republicans can't win with an appeal to reason and logic, there is an emotional appeal to fear the logical tendency to a more progressive tax code as that scary monster, "socialism."

The obvious need for a more progressive tax code is not a call for socialism. The capital and means of production is not owned by the state, but is more apt to be reinvested for a more competitive multiplicity of the marketplace, pluralism, instead of consolidation of wealth and power.

If you want socialism, and you need something to fear, just stay the course of the last eight years and vote for McCain. If you want free enterprise and the fullest capacity for choosing what you want to produce and at what price: recapitalize with a more progressive tax code the high accumulation of capital that is causing, commanding, liquidity crisis, and pluralize the marketplace.

Not sharing the wealth, not "spreading the wealth around," not having an equitably distributive ownership of the capital, results in liquidity crisis and massive debt--what we have now. Stop and reversal of the deflationary trend in a timely and equitable fashion REQUIRES that the wealth be shared--recapitalized from the benefit of the last eight years. That is not socialism!

Capitalism does not require the capital be owned by a privileged few elits unless, of course, you want to deprive The People through the indirect means of crisis by establishing and maintaining a cycle of boom and bust in which The People's assets are devalued and consolidated--the business cycle.

If we are going to have socialism, it won't be because we have free enterprise, it will be because we don't. If you want the lack of free enterprise that results from consolidated capital, industry and markets causing crisis of liquidity and overwhelming debt, if you want to cause socialism, vote conservative, vote for McCain.

Obama/Biden 2008!