21. NECRONOMICS NOMENCLATURE

To confront necrotic laws, more apt nomenclature is needed for correcting the misdescriptions of the necronomists. While some of the following words may crop up in everyday usage, the intent of this chapter is to compare capitalism and decapitalism through the use, at times, of some tongue-in-cheek assessments of necronomics. Armed with the comparisons and possibly the corresponding terms, one will not fall prey to economic policy-makers who banter positive words when describing necrotic events.

Necronomic policy-making thrives because it parades itself under the banner of fair and free capitalism, yet many examples can be found in which the justification boils down to "life is not fair", e.g, inflationary returns for price-gougers. Fair and free capitalism only exists in a production system free of inflationary returns, that is, when people are neither overpaid nor underpaid for their goods and services. Existence of inflationary gains initiates a free-for-all that is neither free nor fair. Pursuit of inflationary returns involves the rule of the jungle using sophisticated examples of might-makes-right: political, corporate and financial corruption. Corruption begets a recession of not only production but of society.

Necronomists are wrong in referring to their conceptual models as examples of fair and free capitalism. As argued elsewhere, they are wrong in using the contradictory phrase "inflationary profits". Inflation involves regression of a production system, and profit means progression or advance. In a similar vein, necronomists mix the use of the words speculation and investment.

Speculation is gambling, spending one's time trying to beat the odds by guessing. While the odds are fixed in Las Vegas, the odds are not so clear in speculation when speculating on stocks or bonds, but the principle and effects are the same. With inflation, people bet or speculate where shortages are going to be relative to the future demand. With most speculation, people bet where future shortages of production are going to be relative to demand. Such gambling only generates production shortages, directly and indirectly.

Speculation within a system of production constitutes a civil dichotomy; while producers seek profit from increased production, speculators naively, overtly or covertly try to retard production, at the same time. For instance, what will the speculating Hunt brothers, with their 63 million ounces of silver and political connections, attempt to do: increase or decrease the productivity in mining silver? Or, consider the actions of the oil-tanker owners, who speculate in future contracts on carrying crude. In order to create shortages and higher prices, they want to stop production of new tankers and scrap tankers that haven't used half their expected sealife., The financial killing in contrived shortages would not be so great or marginally inducing if it were not for the tax write-offs for scrapping useful tools of production. Not only do the politicians allow speculators to contrive shortages, but there are legal laws that compensate the speculators through tax write-offs.

The range of productive words expropriated and misused by the necronomists as banners of capitalism are numerous. Fortunately, most of the words can be seen for what they really are by prefixing them with an "n-" thereby noting their negative or necrotic nature on the production system. For instance, industries engaged in pursuit of inflationary returns should be called negative or necrotic industries, nindustries for short. Nor should businesses be called industries which are indirectly sustained by inflationary income, that is, businesses which cater to the inflation chasers. For example, if stock and commodity brokers use their inflationary returns to buy chic Mercedes then the import businesses would be nindustries. Another nindustry necrosing the economy is the price-gouging financial system.

When modified or corrected with a prefix indicating negative or necrotic, many of these misused or abused terms have homonyms that are analogous in meaning. For instance, an economy beset by negative services and necrotic goods could be described as a "nervice economy with nogoods". An example of a "nervice" is a cakemaker when the people don't have bread to eat. Non-essential businesses--cakemaking or auto imports--are industries or nindustries based on the vitality or state of the essential industries. Cakemaking is a nindustry when bread bakers are unemployed and so is a florist when fresh vegetables are in short supply. Neither are nindustries in nature when the economy is balanced with a good foundation of production essential to basic biological survival.

When financial services become nindustries through their necrotic transactions, they no longer offer financial securities. Ideally, a financial security is a scribbled-on paper product which is a symbol of production to promote production. When paper symbols of production impede production, they are negative securities which are no cure for an ailing system of production. Private examples of nocurities are old stale stocks that distract from production or new stocks that don't capitalize new production (E.F. Hustle). Public examples include the Treasury and Savings Bonds used to finance the federal deficit of the modern politicians.

Commodity Markets: Productive Or Destructive

A system of production needs a market to trade commodities between the producer and the consumer, e.g., silver and oil. Means are needed to produce a growing stockpile of products against the bad times when producers cannot produce, e.g., droughts or old age, but no nation, including the U.S., needs a speculative and counterproductive commodity system.

Does any economy need a single individual betting on a depletion of commodities? Tolerance, or worse, encouragement, of such gamblers will generate a country burdened with people betting on short-falls in production. Over a period of time, speculation for shortage inflationary returns will slowly squeeze and strangle an economy: necronomics.

A non-inflationary commodity system could be easily instituted by combining the functions of the commodity market and the pension funds of America, especially Social Security. As envisioned, the constant deductions for retirement would be used to promote growth of production and productivity and growth of a national stockpile of all commodities. The non-inflationary nature of the system would be FIFO (first-in, first-out) with the selling price being the same as the initial purchase price.

The system would be administered independent of federal bureaucracy. The democratically elected directors of the many regional pension funds would pool the retirement funds to promote investment into production that would lower the cost of a production, to raise productivity, ergo, productive deflation. The envisioned "Consumers' Commodity Corps" would be democratically structured like the Savers Mutual Fund proposed in the chapter on productive deflation.

Over time, the lower cost of production would show up as a lower cost of living when the "investors" retired. Unlike the present commodity market, which is a functional pursuer of production reduction, a producer's/retiree market would pursue production multiplication. It would be looking for the people who could improve productivity to lower the human cost in producing an item.

Unlike the present retirement systems, especially Social Security, there would be more than mere "scribbled-on paper products" behind the necronomists' and politicians' promises to productively manage retirement savings. With a producers/retiree commodity system, there would be real, useful and essential products behind every pension dollar. Such cannot be said of pension funds today, for if it were the case, the politicians would not be passing laws guaranteeing federal support for most of the present pension systems, private and public.,,

Stockflation: A Cheapened Capitalistic Tool

As with the concept of a commodity market, a system of production needs a market by which people can pool their money to promote new or expanded production, i.e., a "capital" formation market. However, Wall Street is failing in this function, a failure which the head of the Security and Exchange Commission during the Carter administration voiced warnings about. According to Harold Williams, Wall Street is "diluting" its role of raising funds for new production.

Of the stocks presently traded on Wall Street, five percent or less represent new investment in the capitalization of new production. The vast majority of stock transactions (95%) involve the trade of "stale" stocks issued long ago to capitalize the production of America's antiquated production system. Under this present system, the capitalist's tool of stocks has been cheapened: stockflation.

Financial Hydrocephaly

Campaigning on the lecture circuit in 1979, Ronald Reagan netted $300,000 by preaching "liquidity" rather than long-term investment. True to his word, he converted his long-term investments into short-term "liquid" assets. Similarly, big institutions in 1982 shifted from long-term to short-term issues in pursuit of liquidity.

Increased short-term investment means economic instability, for more resources will be consumed in the analysis and manipulation of scribbled-on paper products--sopps. America is saturated with the multiplication of liquid paper in place of essential goods and services. A president who preaches liquidity is no cure for a "soppy" economy plagued with an avoidance of long-term investment into jobs.

American production recessed and depressed in 1929 because too many people had an intellectual disease that can be best described as "financial hydrocephaly." Then, as now, too many inflation chasers pursued liquid symbols of production instead of concrete production itself. More likely than not, a president possessed of this soppy syndrome will tell the jobless to cash a security when told that they have no money.

Ninformation

Most possessors of financial hydrocephaly are not crooks so much as being victims of what could be called misinformation; however, and more properly, the negative or necrotic information behind speculation and inflation is "ninformation." Ninformation is purveyed by ninformaniacs--nincompoops who consciously or unconsciously prostitute their knowledge in wanton pursuit of inflationary returns. Like their homonymic namesakes, ninformaniacs are screwing others for no productive reason.

The ballyhooed productivity gains promised in many mergers and takeovers is an example of ninformation, for no distinction was made between the per capita and per worker measurements of productivity. Beware of necronomists' urgings that ignore "per capita" productivity. The necrotic effects of not distinguishing the two concepts of productivity are provided in the answers to the following questions:

Is it wise to allow one farmer to double his productivity, if it puts nine other farmers out of business and if it results in a drop in the per capita production/productivity?

Is it wise to maintain and subsidize a commodity market system that allows a speculator to have a higher productivity of income per hour of work or bushel of corn than the farmer?

Is it wise to allow one hunter to have a record level of productivity by robbing all the other hunters when they come home from the hunt?

Is it wise to allow speculators and gamblers to compete with farmers and producers for the finite amount of money that is available for loans at any one time?

Is it wise to cut down the yield per acre by planting only one stalk of corn so that one can have a record yield per plant? Or, how about closing all the food processing plants, industrial plants and services except for the most efficient example in each group so as to have a higher efficiency or productivity per worker, regardless of the per capita effects.

Is it wise to seek a silver dollar and nine washers instead of ten half dollars?

The answers to these questions should be obvious to the necronomists, but are not. While productivity per remaining farmer, hunter, worker, acre and coin might be higher, the average yield per capita has been reduced. Necronomists don't increase productivity, they catalyze reductivity with their ninformation.

Sophism

Most of the criticism of economic policy-makers has been directed toward the supply-siders. This orientation should not be taken as indirect support for "demand-side" economics. Historically, demand-side economics are associated with John Maynard Keynes who is often viewed as a benefactor of the poor. Bull.

Keynes never dealt with the "something for nothing" 1929 inflationary pyramid of stock returns that impoverished the working man and that nearly collapsed production. Keynes' theories did not recognize the necrotic effects of inflationary returns, of getting something for producing nothing. He could never be expected to productively and permanently deal with recessed production, since he himself was a great player of the stock markets, becoming a millionaire.

Rather than policing inflationary returns out of businesses, Keynes fabricated a new system of getting something for nothing, namely, money with even less productive backing: The money either came from the printing presses or was borrowed from those who were major recipients or chasers of "something for nothing" inflationary returns. The latter are those who derived their income from previous "something for nothing" schemes.

Keynes' solution was really fantastic sophism using scribbled-on paper products--sopps--in a new way. His sopphism, a special case of sophistry, allowed the gamblers, who had acquired wealth during the preceding speculative bubble of inflationary gain, to have another source of non-production gain to play against the existing ones. The new or expanded field was increased use of Treasury Bonds which finance the federal deficits.

Keynes' sopphism increased the number of options for the inflation chasers to play or to not play. This can be seen frequently in how sales of Treasury Bonds have to be bought by the Federal Reserve System. Keynesian necronomics allowed the nindividuals to have their cake and eat it, too, while others lack bread.

Keynes' intellectual justification of deficits gave him an additional way of gaining income without doing more than manipulating paper. The economic problems which Keynes glossed-over have been compounded by the problems that he generated with his sopphism--a massive, unprecedented public debt. The solution to inflationary suffering--prices and unemployment--is to tax the inflation chasers who disrupt, imbalance and vivisect production with their soppy manipulations. Rather than allowing the speculators to shelter their inflationary returns in the various bonds behind governmental deficits, the returns should be taxed for providing the needed government revenues.

As Keynes examples show; necronomists work their deviltry through the various forms of scribbled-on paper products that are only symbols of production. The extent of this confusion is reflected in the many new and wonderful band-aids that are supposed to correct the short-comings of the previous soppy intervention, e.g., Certificates of Deposits, money funds, All-Savers, I.R.A.s and Series EE Savings Bonds. All these Grand Teton Dams of soppy assets will one day collapse. The financial deluge will wash away the people who repaired a leaking reservoir by raising the water level so as to maintain liquidity.

With their soppy machinations, necronomists are all wet. Ennobled with accolades and positions, these drips stand out in the rain. Naively, foolishly, or ignorantly, the rest of us catch a chilling dampness, since we assume the necronomists have good reason for leading us into the drenching storm.

The height of necronomists' semantic cheapening or inflation is their audacity in calling themselves "economists". For them, their dismal science is the production, distribution, and consumption of wealth. What a narrow restricting usage of the original Greek meaning of economics: environmental (eco-) laws (nomos)! A modern "economist" who argues for raping, polluting, and ravishing the earthly sphere in pursuit of an over-consumptive lifestyle for a few human beings has no right to use the word "economist". More to the point is necronomist; better to the point is ninformaniac.

At face value, and based on their habitual camp following, necronomists are highly paid intellectual lobbyists. They attempt to bend or warp the economy so as to inflationarily benefit a small part of the environment--their employers. In other words, they basically will sell their ninformation to the highest bidder. As a whole, they are intellectual prostitutes who screw up the physical, social and human environment.

They have no right to call themselves economists. Nor should any one flatter them with such an undeserved accolade. Call 'em necronomists. Remind them of why they are the practioners of the dismal science whose social disease affects everyone, call 'em ninformaniacs.

Summary

The existing study known as economics is two different subfields with opposite effects upon the human environment. One subfield approximates the meaning of the economics, that is, environmental laws that promote a viable country of, by and for the populace. The other, larger division of economics is best characterized as necronomics, that is, necrotic laws. Unfortunately, the latter rules are subjugating the laws for a viable environment.

In part, necronomics thrives because it uses the same words and concepts of economics which allows thieves and wolves to parade as creators and sheep. In an attempt to distinguish the two fields presently summated under the same name and nomenclature, this chapter offers what could be called the budding terminology of necronomics. The longevity of any of the terms, however, is unimportant compared to the realizing that so-called economics is mostly necrotic. Called it what you wish, but know it for it is and will be: necrosis.

Warning: Anyone found stealing lifehours will be forever banned from participation in and rewards of Better Democracy and Capitalism.
 Homepage
 Index