Quantitative Easing

Keynesian Monetary Theory

The new term ('buzz-word') quantitative easing has been introduced. It's a classic 'Create the problem and provide the solution' scenario. Quantitative Easing is just another name for Devaluation and occurred rather like the introduction of decimal currency in the UK.

The £1 = 240 (old d penny) or 480 (old half-penny) parts (the smallest of 'modern times' currency was the farthing at 1/960th part of £1 until 31st December 1960) was changed to 100 (new p penny) and the now defunct half-new penny (December 1984) for that same £1. Instantly, (February 1971) inflation was introduced (without official devaluation) at the 'invisible' rate of 140% or worth 0.714 of the immediately prior value before decimalisation. It was a highly cynical move by Sir Edward Heath (UK PM at the time) and continued the rot that continues to this day, but has just got more rancid as it decays. Profiteering escalates at an accelerated rate.

When a 2-for-1 share split is introduced, the holding value is unchanged. Half the share value, but double the number of shares. With shares there is a balanced swap, but with money it's all one way. Away from the consumer. The quantitative easing measure dilutes the currency by dumping more into circulation. The holding of any individual is instantly devalued without ever declaring official devaluation. The shortfall is not made up as in a share split. The holding is just worth less. If a country does not subscribe to the system, then through the variation between currencies that hides the 'unofficial' devaluation, that nation suffers through trade. Exports appear more expensive and this results in less trading. There is an invisible siphon removing worth from the people. The quantitative easing mechanism through raised inflation repays finance and is all paid by the consumer who also pays other heavy taxes. Government cannot lose and the consumer  (taxpayer) cannot win. No country can remain unaffected.

Politics only ever informs the 'convenient' part of truth. It's not telling lies, but 'spinning' truth into (perceived) advantage. The transparency that government would have everyone believe is the spun term for its factual opposite.

Transparency =

Obscure + Obfuscate

But most importantly it is to confuse without telling lies* (if possible). Consider a contest using firearms between two apparently equal, in ability, duellists. The outcome is not obvious until the information is revealed that one of the weapons is not loaded. Instantly, the likely outcome is massively changed.

* Betrayal is justified by circumstances changing and not being within the 'ability' to control. Lies are never told, only the truth is 'spun' around.