Iteration of Value

Analysts seek to discover iterative patterns of value causally determined. Descartes, for example, postulates that knowledge is obtained by rejecting what you already know (with the risk of being wrong fully assumed and truth geometrically propositioned), and for Kant, investigating nature confirms what you already knew (by extension of the proposition). In both cases, knowledge is an iterative feedback.

With knowledge comes power--predictive utility. Without it, determination of value is randomly chaotic and catastrophic, and when it comes to politics and economics, this is a value in itself to be exploited towards predictable outcomes without the risk of liability.

Describing the way arbitrage works, for example, derivative swaps are described as an ontological, market means of managing the accumulation of risk. If a commodity, like oil, becomes overvalued by one unit, the free market is expected to arbitrage that value to equilibrium and settle at "fair" value. The arbitrageur gains or loses capital speculated on the expansion and contraction of the spread, and the more money (liquidity) in the market, the less the spread, keeping the price as close as possible to fair market value without adding a unit of supply.

If the one unit of capital gained is not invested to cause an added unit of the commodity, the price of the commodity is expected to increase, causing a detriment. A swap then occurs based on the expected detriment, accumulating the capital gained from the detriment. As the capital accumulates, the detriment increases, causing a deflationary trend with the risk of default.

Value that deliberately iterates into a detriment incurs a risk of liability that must be reduced. If it is not reduced, the risk value is likely to be redeemed.

While the value empirically iterates into a detriment, the risk to the accumulated value will be rhetorically reduced, which continues the accumulation of the risk and deliberate iteration of the expected economic value, politically derived.

It is the job of the CFTC to manage the accumulation of risk into a political (gamma) proportion. At this point, the detriment occurs because we allow it to happen--it has redeeming social value, politically derived, mitigating (discounting) the liability (the risk of loss fully known and expected to iterate into a macro proportion).

It is no coincidence that the swaps market operates in the dark (OTC), controlled by a few large banking interests. This controlling interest iterates the liability in the marketplace, which predicts the expected value.

This is nothing but rigging the market and defines a criminal element to be prosecuted.

The criminal liability in our economy is extensive and determinant, but not being prosecuted.

Wheat prices, for example, are up 40% because big, consolidated financial firms are bidding the price into a detrimental valuation, raising prices against a declining demand, turning equity into debt instead of adding supply.

Stimulus value being politically postulated with the tax-cut compromise will be used to support a unit of demand against a unit of supply not added. Futures prices increase to support, not resist, the deflationary trend, resulting in the highest possible prices at the lowest possible cost, accumulating wealth into the top two percent with a liability that is reduced disproportionate to the extent of the risk.

Despite there being outrage over the accumulated detriment, the accumulation is allowed to continue in the name of economic growth and an efficiency of markets that occurs by allowing consolidated capital to operate in the dark and iterate the risk into a gamma, macro proportion.

The iteration of value is fully assumed by the model, knowingly and willingly applied as the expected value of the risk.

Iterative patterns that are causally determined by means of deliberate ontology have a risk of liability efficiently proportional to the detriment. If not redeemed, the expected (known) value of the risk ontology (liability) will cause a crisis in that proportion.