EPI’s Josh Bivens says that the last rate hike does not align with objective reality. The Fed, however, contends that its policy program is reactive, not proactive.
Again, keep in mind, what we have here is an inverse-identity game. The game is played to obfuscate causal identity, which aligns with directing who is put in line to encounter the rewards and deprivations associated with application of the risk, typically transacting with manipulation of currency valuations, credit-default risk, and swaps markets.
Like I’ve been telling you, HR 10, now in the Senate, is all about the means of swapping the risk. Transacting “the swap” is so complicated it is hard to tell who is in control of how it plays out, which by no accident determines the liability naturally associated with determination of the risk by default.
Bivens states that the Fed’s action is autonomic. That means, as I contend, the Fed’s reactive description of not intending to direct the probable risk is a false identity. Since currencies react to the on-command attributes of central banking, it is not really hard to see there is a proactive intent that is actually more autocratic than autonomic.
Free-market mechanics (the logic of collective action, resulting in the free formation of a natural self-assembly) is autonomic but (existing on demand) it is not autocratic.