Hide and Seek

We have plenty of savings hidden away, we just have to seek it.

Seek and you will find value hidden in the measured effects. GDP, for example, has missing value to be found elsewhere if you look hard enough for it.

There is more than one-quadrillion dollars hidden away in dark (unregulated), derivative markets. Since the mass majority of citizens do not operate in dark markets, because they do not own enough of the reserve, they cannot demand its use or consume its benefit--an effect essentially measured as GDP.

Remember that in dark, unregulated markets, the more capital vested in them the more likely default will appear in the light of day. By simply not investing the probability of growth, default is "put" in the money. It is a classic self-fulfilled prophecy that Wall Street explains away as "risk" ontologically derived by means of free-market mechanics when, by organizational design and practice, there is no free-market, alpha risk in operation. It is all gamma risk--risk consolidated into sovereign debt--by design.

The ontological valuation is an outright fraud that goes unprosecuted because there is not only the shadow of doubt, the evidence is in the dark.

All the CEO of MF Global had to say is, "I don't know" when asked over and over, "where's the money?" Determining the legitimate value of the risk, if not the actual quantity of principal at risk, becomes a game of hide and seek using "risk-transfer vehicles" known as "swaps" in a market structured not to hedge the risk of default, but to cause it.

Also keep in mind that losses are characteristically described as vaporized--as if the value no longer exists, so it cannot be retributed. This, too, is a fraud in every case.

Paper losses result in real risk being transferred to other parties. Sovereigns, for example, print money to cover the short interest, which then presents as late-order effects that rob average incomes of purchasing power--the means to self-determine without government intervention.

The value still exists, but it has become entangled--hidden away, structured into an empirical, quantum value to, supposedly, prevent contagion.

Quantum entanglement, however, is engineered by Wall Street "quants" to prevent the value being retributed by the free market or by government intervention. The value is stored in complex, risk-transfer vehicles, both public and private, to protect the value from the fully assumed risk of loss.

Notice that we have a shortage of engineers to innovate new products, which creates jobs, being employed by Wall Street to engineer the risk that makes the probability of default all but uncertain, which creates unemployment.

Keep in mind that the loss creates value--risk-value--that is added as GDP and supports, for example, equity prices. Economic growth is not supporting equity valuations considering that equity, for most participants, is effectively negative. Instead of investing for growth, the accumulation of capital supports equity shares by buying them up, which pushes GDP, and demand for employment, down.

We see, then, GDP being added by subtracting it. The differential (this contradiction falsely described as a natural paradox--an undirected, risk ontology) is the equation that quantifies and entangles the risk. It is the beta volatility (on command) that arbitrages the risk to produce the value in the form of capital gained (the carried interest--economic rent collected--that is being taxed at the lowest possible rate).

Organizing to command the risk, through market processes that operate on-demand, produces risk-value. It does not, understand, add risk and it does not add supply, but it does add detriment (it turns equity into debt). It accumulates risk into a crisis proportion and converts the value produced into private property by design (by default).

Keep in mind that the value lost is capital gained in the form of risk-value and does not add enough revenue to cover the public debt that finances the value added at the margin if it is taxed at a low rate. The quantum missing--hidden--in the entanglement results in policies and programs that are classified as "needed austerity measures," which are nothing but a way to expropriate value through late-order effects fraudulently pitched as self-determined and ontologically derived.

We are told that we get the government we deserve and nature is to blame for the value that derives from the risk. All Goldman Sachs and Bank of America has to do, so they claim, is time the market (buy and sell with benign objectivity) to capture the benefit--the value--of the risk, meaning that they do not make the market to take the profit, and so taxing it away illegitimately confiscates their private property, legitimately derived.

Government then, so conservatives claim, needlessly adds risk by trying to add the lost value. The result is inflation of the value, not caused by bankers conspiring against us with our own money, and what they claim to legitimately be theirs, but by interfering with the free-market mechanism that naturally fills, or retraces, the missing value with economic growth through productivity gains.

The missing value, you see, is the hidden risk that is supposedly lost. Its value is transferred--transformed in the dark into productivity gained: working for nothing to pay off an increasing debt burden, which produces negative equity that is sure to result in a financial crisis. By design, the opportunity is created to consolidate the value of your assets, not prevent it, with economy-of-scale efficiency.

The value is not "lost," the risk is simply no longer attached to the reward. Risk is transferred--put--to a counterparty set up to hold it by default. The quantum value of risk-reward is separated and managed in reserve to position it for its classified consumption.

Right-wing conservatives react to "class warfare" as divisive and dysfunctional because we eventually come to realize that risk is being manipulated for class consumption with a fraudulent, free-market legitimacy. For reactionaries, the worst thing that can possibly happen becomes the most probable: occupation of free-market space with value that has been supposedly lost, but found to cultivate organic growth by seeking profit, and since keeping as much of the value you produce is the American Revolutionary way, it is likely to happen.

Now, as it was then, The Revolution is more likely to proceed from the right, determined to defend conservatism, than from the left, determined to offend it.