Bitcoin forever altered the balance of power between state-run extortion and individual freedom, once it provided global citizens with unrestrained control, and instantaneous access to their capital, while rendering it impregnable to debasement, intrusion, and confiscation.

Bitcoin is so transcendental, it has already FIXED the world. Yet, to grasp it, you must download historical perspective from below.


“Gentlemen, you can’t fight in here”When Bitcoin Replaces Fiat!

“Bitcoin is the first example of a new form of life.
It lives and breathes on the internet.
It lives because it can pay people to keep it alive.
It lives because it performs a useful service that people will pay it to perform.
It lives because anyone, anywhere, can run a copy of its code.
It lives because all the running copies are constantly talking to each other.
It lives because if anyone copy is corrupted it is discarded, quickly and without any fuss or muss.
It lives because it is radically transparent: anyone can see its code and see exactly what it does.”

Ralph Merkle

The main reason I dedicated nearly two years (2015–17) to study how Bitcoin works was an intense mix of incredulity and curiosity. It was hard to believe that a mysterious hacker had found, implemented, and abandoned! Triple-Entry Bookkeeping (“TEB”), the solution, I had found (accidentally) to Systemic Financial Risk*. Or believing that, before vanishing, alias Nakamoto had left running the digital equivalent of a perpetual motion machine. Except, I had to admit that just as TEB had come along in 1989 (see bottom), microprocessors had already opened up a nonphysical reality where the absence of Newton’s “external unbalanced forces” could enable a digital perpetual motion machine to “live” on the internet, as Merkle put it. In essence, Satoshi had proven Newton right: “The laws of physics indicate that perpetual motion would occur if there were no external unbalanced forces.”

A secondary, more mundane reason is that, although I had enough informal computer knowledge to understand the basics, it wasn’t enough to understand cryptography, without taking several months of online courses to scrutinize what Satoshi had actually achieved.

*I bumped into TEB in 1994, only because one of my professors at Tepper School of Business (Carnegie Mellon) had invented it just 5 years earlier and nearly 500 years after Double Entry Bookkeeping.

Simultaneously, I had been studying Systemic Financial Risk since 1989, when the SEC’s Paul Mulford unilaterally changed decades of FSAB regulations (and common sense) in order to allow banks to register Latin American Debt at FACE value, by just taking it out of our trading book and registering it into our maturity book (as if they were Treasury Bills or near maturity Bonds).

Later, when Nicholas Brady came up with his nominal face value exchange plan (versus net present value logic), did it become clear to me why they had changed our mark-to-market rules entirely. An immoral scheme that left no doubts in my mind, that financial sector regulators were fully captured by the banking cartel, who knows since when.

Thus, Bitcoin was the first time I saw a functional application of TEB, and since I considered it the final solution to global systemic financial risk, I had kept on searching for any meaningful implementation of it. Once I understood Bitcoin’s technological and historical significance, I could only wonder if Prof. Ijiri had ever seen his majestic invention at work, before he passed away.

To give you a sense of the vastness of information Satoshi handled better than others in many fields where they are experts, notice in the brief below, that just knowing the fundamentals of Prof. Ijiri’s invention would be a formidable feat for a non-financial professional, furthermore being so familiarized with its principles, as to be able to unequivocally encode them in an algorithm that has been flying solo, while interacting with millions of people and billions of transactions with a 99.98% uptime record for over 13 years. Let alone the depth of knowledge** needed to master the interactions of the myriad scientific, logical, and behavioral principles that keep Bitcoin overcoming adversarial opponents of all sizes, both in the physical and digital realms, as if such an invention had already been maturing over several decades.

** To illustrate, ignoring that Bitcoin is purposefully coded in Non Turing Complete language (NTC code), doomed ETH from the start.

Oswaldo Lairet
Fund Manager & Financial Researcher

Since Triple-Entry Bookkeeping* (“TEB”) arrived in 1989, it had been expected to eradicate our financial system’s dependence on Double-Entry Bookkeeping’s unavoidable byproduct: Centralized Trust. Thus, TEB would eventually stop our global financial system’s exponentially growing degree of Systemic Risk. Surprisingly, it was not until 20 years later, when Bitcoin’s activation validated TEB, that it became widely known. Meantime, Centralized Trust reached a point beyond which, it could only subsist, under a mantle of central bank monetary maneuvers, collusive practices, and concealed gate-keeping constraints that netted a web of hidden encroachments on privately-owned financial assets. Since then, the negative gap between real and nominal global bank capitalization has been fixed by globally expanding sovereign debt and central bank balance sheets to help GSIBs’ cover their chronically deficient Loan-to-Value ratios while compressing real interest rates. A policy that aside from conflicting with natural law, brought global Real GDP expansion to a halt.

Conversely, Bitcoin’s most transcendental innovation was to achieve simultaneous, secure, and irreversible consensus, prior to registering bookkeeping entries on a ledger, shared among innumerable, unrelated, and globally disseminated parties. In turn, Bitcoin participants receive a verified and continuously updated copy of their digital ledger that replaces every one of the constraints previously preventing them from taking full and instantaneous control of their assets, for a set of cryptographic keys that only they can access.

In this context, it becomes clear that by providing Unconstrained Access to Privately-Owned Financial Assets, what Bitcoin truly digitized and decentralized is Trust.

*Tepper School of Business Professor of Accounting and Economics Emeritus Yuji Ijiri developed TEB in 1989 ~500 years after the mathematician, Fry Luca Pacioli formalized Double-entry bookkeeping.


As the largest monetary expansion in history fails to contain the long-term debt cycle that ended in 2008 (see The 40-Year Market Distortion Unwind), while spurring unprecedented levels of moral hazard, the barely-hidden financial crisis stands as proof that Predator-Prey Resource Competition Dynamics governs mankind as it does all living things – regardless of the language constructs that power elites have been spinning over the ages. Ultimately, individual rights to property, mobility, and self-defense continue to be trampled under the 21st Century Schizoid Man’s Logic of Violence.

As the 21st Century approaches its first quarter end, it becomes ever more obvious that once the generation of US President Thomas Jefferson faded from the scene in the early 19th Century, neither “democracy” nor “individualism” had ever been truly guaranteed – and did not persist. In 1831, political philosopher Alexis de Tocqueville noted: “…having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community.” Two centuries later, his words resonate louder than ever to those of an independent mind, unshackled from the mainstream media.

Sadly, nearly a century before Jefferson’s monumental contribution to the world, the political-financial elite in England had already begun expanding unfunded credit cycles. Since 1694, the Bank of England (BOE) had been arbitrarily debasing its currency and expanding credit, knowing this would shock nominal prices higher. The BOE founders and their entourage quietly seized prime income-producing assets before real-economy asset-prices soared. Predictably, unlimited money expansion bumped up against physical inventory size, causing asset and commodity prices to soar – until aggregate demand collapsed and nominal prices crashed too. Regrettably, against Jefferson’s wishes, the BOE template – which bypassed democracy – was adopted in the USA, and the same happened. In fact, had it not been for the oil empire that made the US Dollar more dominant than Gold for several decades into the 20th Century, the expanding global adoption of the BOE template would long ago have taken G-7 nations to the dog-eat-dog world where Zimbabwe, Venezuela and other nations languish.

Unfortunately, the BOE template still prevails around the globe. Whatever actions are taken to neutralize it are almost always doomed to fail, as prescribed by the simplest differential equations ever devised: the Lotka–Volterra Predator-Prey equations, which prove why the linear-math models of Neoclassical Economics absolutely fail to describe the dynamics that govern human ecosystems. Only System Dynamics can fully validate the interactions that rule human economics and are intrinsic to all ecosystems (see Predator-Prey Economics). There is no better proof of this than the top chart, where the blue “Financial cycle” curve “kills” the red “Business cycle” curve, as the latter begins to dip irreversibly after 2008 – despite the titanic credit expansion by G-7 Central Banks to save Globally Systemically Important Banks (GSIBs), which have flooded the world in fiat currency and debt for the past 14 years. The GSIBs have used ploys straight out of the 1966 Report from Iron Mountain, which specifies, as a justification, using substitutes for war that must (1) be economically wasteful, (2) represent an apocalyptic threat, and (3) provide a credible excuse for making people serve the government’s will. What the “Iron Mountain” report written by James K. Galbraith and members of the think-tank predecessor of the WEF, failed to mention is that, except for scaring citizens into giving up their individual rights, wars rarely serve many other objectives. Instead, the most ruthless factions in a nation’s industrial-military complex are presented with a kaleidoscope of opportunities to encroach on the privacy and property rights of ordinary citizens for the sake of “national security.”

In conclusion, as the world reaches the end of the current long-term debt cycle and commodity purchases become unaffordable, regardless of how much domestic currency or sovereign debt G-7 economies issue, the global ratio of production versus consumption is likely to reverse, with interest rates moving towards their 5% nominal geometric-mean of 5,000 years. That will strip naked governments’ highly levered, illiquid and inefficient monetary scheming. Their four decades of interest rate distortion will likely not survive the onslaught of real interest rates and truly capitalist competition… Thank goodness!

Fortunately, as humanity faces the current cycle ending, we are the first generation to have access to a new monetary technology that can endure longer than ornamental rocks. Its name is Bitcoin, the only payment in specie ever invented to be impregnable to government decrees, counterfeiting, shipping blockades or the threat of violence.





Regular print: Daron Acemoglu Answers in green: Oswaldo Lairet

Money depends on trust. It is accepted in exchange for goods and services only because people can confidently assume that others will accept it in the future. 
If money depended on trust there would be no need to force it as tender under legal penalties.Trust cannot be imposed, it needs to be earned.

This is as true for the US dollar as it is for gold. 
Not true for the US dollar. On the contrary, since centralizing US dollar issuance in 1913, the FED has endlessly replicated it, at the expense of debasing the population’s purchasing power. Conversely, Gold is irreplicable, as real money should always be.

To argue that cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin are merely a confidence game – or a speculative bubble, as many economists have emphasized – is to ignore their popularity.
Bitcoin is the only decentralized digital asset there is. What you call “cryptocurrencies” are worthless copycat schemes controlled by human insiders that benefit from manipulating them at will, exactly as has been happening with fiat currencies since 1971.

Trust thus ebbs and flows, making them fragile and volatile, as Bitcoin’s wild gyrations have amply demonstrated.
Judging Bitcoin’s price-discovery based on its fiat currency pricing is just as naive, as judging the pricing of stocks, bonds or real estate based on the artificial valuations derived from forcing hurdle rates to zero. Central bank manipulation of the price of money is behind the apparent pricing stability, you are comparing Bitcoin against.

Moreover, with Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies that rely on “proof-of-work” mechanisms, transactions must be continuously verified and logged in a decentralized ledger (in this instance based on blockchain). This requires millions of computers to operate continuously to update and verify transactions – work that is incentivized by the opportunity to be rewarded with newly minted Bitcoin.
On the other hand, imposing the US dollar requires the threat of violence, implemented via arming the nation for war and submitting the citizenship by force.

The energy consumed in these “mining” operations now exceeds that of a medium-sized country like Malaysia or Sweden. Bitcoin’s global annual energy consumption is 189 Tera Watt-hours (TWh). That amounts to 0.1% of 160,000 TWh in global annual energy consumption. Incidentally, it is appalling to find that instead of performing comparative research, a trained economist would prefer to idly echo intentionally misleading media narratives.

Now that the world has awoken to the dangers of climate change (and to the paltriness of our response to it so far), this massive waste should make Bitcoin highly unattractive.
What is unattractive is to employ any amount of energy whatsoever, towards issuing replicable and therefore corruptible fiat currencies.

And yet, despite its volatility, fragility, and massive carbon footprint, five factors have conspired to make Bitcoin an attractive proposition to many people: its political narrative; the criminal activities it enables; the seigniorage it distributes; the techno-optimism of the current age; and the desire to get rich quick at a time when few other economic opportunities beckon. Let’s consider each in turn, going in reverse order.
What you are truly describing in this initial paragraph are the attributes of fiat money, not Bitcoin, as proven by the factual data presented below:

We live in an era of dwindling economic prospects. Even workers with a college degree can no longer count on securing a stable job with good and rising pay. When economic opportunities are so scarce, get-rich-quick schemes become especially alluring. Not surprisingly, there is now an entire industry dedicated to telling people that they, too, can strike gold by investing in Bitcoin. Money has been pouring into the cryptocurrency because millions of people in the United States and around the world think they can realize significant returns from it.
Re get-rich-quick schemes, you must be referring to either the stock market or those scheming “cryptocurrencies” you keep mentioning. Conversely, Bitcoin has been trashed, mocked, discredited and dismissed globally since 2013, by the mainstream media, the political class and hordes of economists like yourself. Yet, because self=interested narratives don’t stand a chance against the truth in the long term, none of your duplicitous narratives have been able to kill it. 

The narrative of massive returns for amateur and retail investors from a cryptocurrency is in keeping with our technology-obsessed age. We are constantly being told that technological ingenuity is creating a brighter future. And on the surface, there is no denying that Bitcoin is a marvel of technological innovation. It took genuine creativity and mastery to create such an intricate decentralized system, capable of functioning without any oversight or government enforcement.Seigniorage, or the additional purchasing power conferred (typically to governments) by control of the money supply, is another factor in Bitcoin’s appeal. When the US government puts new currency into circulation, it can use it to purchase services or pay its debt. The prospect of gaining seigniorage is very attractive, and probably helps to explain why there are now more than 1,600 listed cryptocurrencies. In the case of Bitcoin, the absence of a centralized authority means that seigniorage is distributed, thus providing an incentive for mining efforts (which are now being conducted by more than a million people around the world).
Purposely misusing the term Seigniorage in reference to Bitcoin will not confuse knowledgeable readers. Seigniorage is the difference between the face value of money and the cost to produce it. Thus, if paying Bitcoin miners for Bitcoin’s cost of issuance is Seigniorage, then paying gold miners for digging gold would count as Seigniorage in a totally absurd and misleading application of the word.

A dedicated source of demand can help a new currency establish a reliable footing. For cryptocurrencies in general, and for Bitcoin in particular, this anchor is planted firmly in the criminal world. In its early days, demand for Bitcoin was boosted by dark-web sites such as Silk Road, which enabled all sorts of illicit transactions. To this day, criminal activities account for almost half of Bitcoin transactions, by some estimates.
What is criminal is to continue trying to stigmatize Bitcoin in 2021, using the same narrative that has been thoroughly proven false, not only by specialized U.S. government contractors such as Chainalysis, whose latest report confirms 2020 “cryptocurrencies” illicit transactions totaled 0.34%, but also by properly researching why Bitcoin’s pseudonymous addressing can be easily tracked, as both the FBI and the real crooks have known since 2013. On the other hand, nothing can come from fiat currency counterfeiting, but the thick and intricate net of double standards, undeserved power, cronyism, corruption, lies, hidden agendas and criminal behavior that fiat currencies have been unleashing since 1971. As recently proven by The FinCEN Files Investigation, where such as JP Morgan Chase, HSBC, Barclays Bank, Standard Chartered Bank, Deutsche Bank and Bank of New York Mellon, were confirmed to have moved for18 years, more than $2 trillion in payments they knew were suspicious.

Each of these four factors has boosted Bitcoin artificially. Obviously, our society’s economic ills will not be solved by people making money from Bitcoin. Nor has the prevailing techno-optimist mood been borne out in the real world. And whatever benefits there are from distributing seigniorage via mining, they are more than offset by the massive waste of energy.
Again, instead of blindly following baseless and self-interested mainstream media speculation, notice why the real data linked above, proves both of your assertions wrong, categorically.

That leaves the political argument for Bitcoin. Will it liberate us from undue state power over the economy? Not really.True, the US Federal Reserve sometimes acts in mysterious ways, and the Wall Street bailout during the 2008 financial crisis was rightly seen as an inside job that benefited banks and bankers at the expense of ordinary people. The desire to reduce politicians and policymakers’ excessive power is thus understandable.But Bitcoin is not the answer. It appeals to a puerile libertarian ideology in which a lone genius battles an overweening state to liberate individual excellence. Indeed, the real-world person – or persons – who designed Bitcoin and wrote its inspiring manifesto under the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto is even more deserving of the “visionary” label than the fictional John Galt (the hero of Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged). Yet the vision itself is pure fantasy. The risk of Western governments producing runaway inflation or undermining the international monetary system is vanishingly small.The real existential threat today lies in political polarization, the unraveling of democracy, and democratic political systems’ inability to keep economic elites and authoritarian politicians in check. A new currency will not solve these problems. What is needed are measures to ensure that politicians, bureaucrats, and Silicon Valley and Wall Street tycoons act responsibly. This requires democratic participation and active civic engagement. Gimmicks like Bitcoin are a distraction from the real work that must be done.
Everything you are stating and promising in this last paragraph is exactly what self-interested elites have kept offering their subjects for millennia, while harnessing as large a share of everyone’s income and resources as they can, especially, since the dawn of the twentieth century. As Mogg and Davidson’s 1997 The Sovereign Individual asserted, “Persistent make-believe” of the kind that disguised the fall of the Roman Empire [1476] is a typical feature of the decomposition of large political entities and now disguises and masks the collapse of the nation-state.”

Hence, contrary to your unfounded arguments against Bitcoin, the information society launched by the global spread of the microprocessor over the past four decades is about to start using the only digital asset there is to place resources in cyberspace, outside of the reach of its current enslavers. Through Bitcoin, private individuals all over the world, become immune to fiat-currency debasement, the premeditated theft performed by the politico-financial power elites that rob them of their private property.

Much to your chagrin and that of your enablers using rhetorical fallacies, misinformation and the omission of factual data, Bitcoin’s astonishing accomplishments against monetary corruption is destined to stop global power elites from continuing to capture at will, the population’s life-savings and their productivity’s ongoing economic value added.

The final answer then is YES! Bitcoin Fixes This!




“The study of money, above all other fields in economics, is one in which complexity is used to disguise truth or to evade truth, not to reveal it. The process by which banks create money is so simple the mind is repelled. With something so important, a deeper mystery seems only decent.”
John K. Galbraith, 1975 “Money: Whence it came, where it went”


“Capitalism is the only system of economics compatible with human dignity, prosperity, and liberty. To the extent we move away from that system, we empower the worst people in society to manage what they do not understand.” — Frederick Hayek

Venezuela epitomizes Hayek’s dictum. It enjoyed the world’s fourth highest per-capita income in 1961, when it established the political system that over the six following decades, it tenaciously expanded, until fully abolishing capitalism and destroying its economy. 

Visualizing how the progression from one wealth-extreme to the other happened, entails charting how each of the dominant economic regimes, before and after 1961, impacted Real GDP per capita (dotted line) and oil production (continuous red line), versus Oil price (continuous blue line). Below, a few more pointers:


Blue– Capitalism: GDP and Oil production grow unbounded, despite Oil price

Yellow– Socialism: GDP binds to Oil price and Oil production drops materially

Red– Communism: GDP depends on Oil price and Oil production starts a persistent descent


  1. The coloring of the labels coincides with the periods along the timeline when Venezuela, formally or not, adopted each type of economic policy. Note that GDP & Oil Production outcomes closely follow the rubric above, even for the shortest time period (89- 92).
  2. Though in 1961, Venezuela adopted central planning as the guiding principle of its economy, it continued to enjoy the same degree of economic freedom that allowed foreign concessionaires to invest capital, knowledge and technology in developing oil production to the high reached in 1970, when our new constitution began impacting it.
  3. Though constitutionally allowed since 1961, the nationalization of Venezuela’s oil business was not openly debated in Congress until the late 60s. Yet, by 1970, the certainty that the oil industry would be nationalized had pushed foreign oil companies to stop all new investments in oil exploration and production expansion.
  4. Even as oil production begins dropping sharply in 1970, GDP doesn’t follow until 1977, a year after oil nationalization. What postponed the decline was the sudden and massive inflow of petrodollars, coming from the multiple oil price increases that began in 1973.
  5. Capitalism returns in 1989, and though cut short by a military uprising that forces the president to resign, its economic-liberalization and government decentralization reforms go on to benefit Venezuela for at least a decade. Note also that, as per the rubric, GDP & Oil production begin growing, despite oil prices dropping during most of this period.
  6. Upon the return of Socialism, economic difficulties caused by years of low oil prices and a local banking crisis forced the new president to honor the previous government’s plan to reopen Venezuela’s oil business to foreign oil firms, under the Orinoco Oil Joint Ventures. Once again, Capitalism is what brings oil production back to higher levels.
  7. Communism begins under a democratically elected militaristic regime, that eventually seizes power via undemocratic maneuvers and starts an indiscriminate wave of company expropriations, FX and economy-wide price controls, and many other counterproductive economic policies that over time bankrupted Venezuela’s economy.



Only one year after measuring how much devaluation the Chavista regime had imposed on its citizens since 1999, the aggregate sum of counterfeit money the Venezuelan central bank has issued totals  6.5 million times the amount of Bolivars available in Venezuela, when Chávez came to power in February 1999.

As a benchmark of Venezuela’s purchasing power for many decades, our “4.30” represents an ideal gauge to measure the degree of embezzlement gulped down by the current regime since 1999.

In fact, the monetary dilution of the past 19 years has been so many times greater than “4.30,” we need to use a logarithmic scale to visualize it. Additionally, log scaling allows us to expose the scam, using data directly available on Banco Central de Venezuela’s web page, rather than using conversions that require any explanation.

As the chart confirms, via massively printing Bolivars, the government diluted all of the capital Venezuela had amassed until 1999, plus every resource that entered our economy since then.



Monetary Base

Inorganic Money



Edition (Spanish)


Banco Central de Venezuela

Dólar Today

U.S. Energy Information Administration

Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries

Servicio Nacional Integrado de Administración Aduanera y Tributaria de Venezuela

Ministerio de Petróleo y Minería de Venezuela



As a benchmark of Venezuela’s purchasing power for many decades, our “4.30” represents an ideal gauge to measure the degree of embezzlement gulped down by the current regime since 1999.

In fact, the monetary dilution of the past 18 years has been so many times greater than “4.30,” we need to use a logarithmic scale to visualize it. Additionally, log scaling allows us to expose the scam, using data directly available on Banco Central de Venezuela’s web page, instead of conversions that would require further explanation.

As the chart confirms, via massively printing Bolivars, the government diluted all capital Venezuela had amassed until 1999, plus every resource that entered our economy since then.



Monetary Base

Inorganic Money

Implemented by Argentina in 91



Edition (Spanish)


Banco Central de Venezuela

Dólar Today

U.S. Energy Information Administration

Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries

Servicio Nacional Integrado de Administración Aduanera y Tributaria de Venezuela

Ministerio de Petróleo y Minería de Venezuela




Como parámetro del poder adquisitivo que disfrutó Venezuela durante décadas, el “4,30”, representa un indicador ideal para medir el grado de malversación impulsado por el régimen actual desde 1999.

De hecho, la dilución monetaria de los últimos 18 años ha sido tantas veces mayor al “4.30”, que necesitamos usar una escala logarítmica para visualizarla. Además, esa escala nos permite exponer la estafa, utilizando datos directamente disponibles en el sitio web del Banco Central de Venezuela, en lugar de utilizar métodos que requieran más explicaciones.

Como confirma la gráfica, mediante la impresión masiva de bolívares, el gobierno diluyó el patrimonio que Venezuela tenía acumulado hasta 1999, más todos los recursos que ingresaron a nuestra economía desde entonces.



Base Monetaria

Dinero Inorgánico

implementado por Argentina en el 91






Primera edición

Última edición (inglés)


Banco Central de Venezuela

Dólar Today

U.S. Energy Information Administration

Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries

Servicio Nacional Integrado de Administración Aduanera y Tributaria de Venezuela

Ministerio de Petróleo y Minería de Venezuela



If Predator-Prey Economics formally existed as a field of study, it would address human economic interactions from the perspective of Resource Competition DynamicsPredator-prey dynamics have been used since at least 1967 to model the growth cycle and more recently, Debt vs Capital, its most intuitive use considering that the former must feed on the latter to survive. This application of the model gets even more interesting when the interest from Debt accrues at a greater Internal Rate of Return (IRR) than the income accruing from Capital. In this case, their “predator-prey” dynamics produce an unstable feedback system. This is precisely the outcome that Graph 1 confirms and Hyman Minsky’s 1985 Financial Instability Hypothesis predicted: The leverage to income ratio grows exponentially in a wave of ever-larger amplitude. Yet, in a world run by hard-core Keynesians (not Post-Keynesians!), it’s only fitting that neither the chart displaying all stages of this super-Minsky cycle nor its dire prognosis for the future, shall surface until our generation’s true Minsky Moment arrives.

Minsky understood why this function (an Unstable Feedback Loop) matched exactly with the IRR “coupling” interdependence between the growth of Debt (Predator “size” population) and the growth of Capital (Prey “size” population). And more importantly, why this specific Dynamic System always ends in depression. As you will see from visualizing Ratio-Dependence or “Decoupling” in Predator-Prey Dynamics jargon.


Typically, the Minsky Long Cycle ends with Trade retreating until it reaches global scale, while present-day “Trade War Warriors” such as Trump, Le Pen, Farage and other isolationists  begin winning elections worldwide. Hence why, in my view,  we’ll see the collapse of our current Globalization economic model over 2016 and 2017.

Yet, as per the essay linked above, the crash is bad for the “predator,” but good for “the prey” …Over the long-term.


As the Steel-Dragon flies over its 2009 high, it validates our premise that China’s colossal money printing is what truly underlies the world’s economic “recovery” since 2008. Just as it created $30 trillion of Yuan-denominated debt in 7 years, China may have injected upwards of $2 trillion over the past three months.

Putting these numbers in perspective, explains how Chinese steel makers were able to produce in March (first chart), about 80% of annual US production or nearly ten times more than US steel makers over the same month. Yet, as shown on the second chart, the same money that brought steel production to a global record in March, helped fuel its price to $407/ton at the close today. That’s a 48% increase since December.

Oh well, China continues to upend the laws of Supply and Demand, as it’s been doing since 2008, when it discovered the modern central banker’s alchemy: QE Levity!
Sound familiar?

Steel Production

Steel Price vs Chinese Production



If Predator-Prey Economics existed as a field of study, it would address human economic interactions from the perspective of Resource Competition DynamicsPredator-Prey dynamics have been applied since at least 1967 to model the growth cycle and later, Debt vs Capital, its most intuitive use, considering the former feeds on the latter to survive. This use of the model is even more relevant when interest from Debt accrues at a greater Internal Rate of Return (IRR) than recurring income from Capital. In this case, their “predator-prey” dynamics produce an unstable feedback system. This is precisely the outcome that Graph 1 conveys and that Hyman Minsky’s 1985 Financial Instability Hypothesis foresaw: The leverage to income ratio grows exponentially in a wave of ever-larger amplitude. Yet, in a world run by hard-core Keynesians (not Post-Keynesians!), it’s only fitting that neither the chart displaying every stage of our generation’s super-Minsky cycle nor its dire prognosis for the future, shall surface until our true Minsky Moment arrives.

Minsky understood why this function (an Unstable Feedback Loop) matched exactly with the IRR “coupling” interdependence between the growth of Debt (Predator “size” population) and the growth of Capital (Prey “size” population). And more importantly, why this specific Dynamic System always ends in depression. As you will see from visualizing Ratio-Dependenceor “Decoupling” in Predator-Prey Dynamics jargon,


Regardless of experiencing a 25% GDP Decay since 2007 (Table 1, Page 3 &updated graph, above), the USD has appreciated by 15% since 2011 (DTWEXM), as the US decreased its oil imports by 60%.

Recently, the US became once again, the world’s largest oil producer, while oil imports have dropped from a 2006 high of 13.5 million barrels per day (mbpd) to 5.0 mbpd in May (EIA chart). The corresponding reduction in dollar payments to foreign oil producers, created a scarcity effect that eventually, begun revaluing the dollar.

Revaluation dynamics should continue, as US companies/workers refine their unparalleled Shale Oil expertise, to ramp up production. Additionally, to the extent total US oil production surpasses other producers by an even larger margin, conditions become ideal for repealing the country’s 40 year old crude export ban.



Oswaldo Lairet – Sequoian Financial Group Research

Since our start in 2005, we have sought to keep reports entertaining, even while including the charts, links, mathematical proofs or documentation supporting our opinions.

Like our 2006 and 2007 reports, this one is meant to warn you in advance of potential market trouble. Yet, after confirming that regardless of the detailed strategies and ample lead-times, we gave our readers, before the great financial crisis, very few did anything about it, we decided it, we might as well tell this story in a lighter way.

We would much rather make you laugh, than take ourselves too seriously!

Foxy Loxy: “How do you know the sky is falling, Cheeky?”

Chicken Little: “Well, if you look at Chart 1, since Dec.11, the total amount in OTC (Over The Counter) Derivatives Notional (Notional), as published by the BIS (Bank for International Settlements) has been hovering near $650 trillion, the level it reached, heading into the Jul.08 market collapse!”.

Chart 1

Foxy Loxy: “Actually, if you had included all contracts in your slightly-outdated chart, the figure would be closer to $700 trillion by Jun.12 and that´s not counting the $300 trillion that were effectively subtracted from pre-2010 aggregates through “Notional Compression” in IRS (Interest Rate Swaps) and CDS (Credit Default Swaps).”

Chicken Little“Are you saying that, in terms of pre-2010 Notional, the Jun.12, BIS aggregate was really One Quadrillion Dollars (one thousand trillion USD)? That would be almost twice the level of Notional at the start of the Housing Credit Crisis ($586 trillion), marked by Dec.07 in Chart 1″

Foxy Loxy
: “Yes, but Notional itself doesn’t represent ON or OFF balance-sheet risk, it´s a nominal value upon which derivative-market participants compute a percentage to settle periodically, among themselves. AND …of course, it´s also “the living proof” for every fantastic legend out there, whether it´s planetary hyperinflation, gold´s inevitable rise to $5,000/oz or the “end of (take your pick) …the US dollar” …all fiat currencies” …the financial system” …modern civilization”, etc. What these sources never mention is that next to Notional, the BIS table shows GMV (Gross Market Value) and quite explicitly, the actual balance-sheet risk: GCE (Gross Credit Exposure). In fact, using the same BIS table you used to draw Chart 1, I drew Chart 2. But, note that from Dec.08 to Jun.12, while Notional hits $6 to $7 hundred trillion in Chart 1, GCE actually drops from $5 to $3.7 trillion.” 

Chart 2

Chicken Little: “Funny you´d mention that 25% drop in GCE, having just acknowledged that 30% of Notional magically disappeared from the aggregate after 2010! Also, while referring to the $5 trillion top in GCE, you forgot to mention how the world´s financial system spiraled “like a headless chicken” into that amount! Oh well, I´ll fill you in: When markets were collapsing in 2008 and net settlement obligations had reached $5 trillion, banking giants had only $3.1 trillion in collateral (at market price) plus $1.2 trillion of net worth (tangible equity as opposed to Tier 1 capital). In case you want to keep as a secret “who put up the missing $700 billion” or want the whole episode to remain unreported, as the media did “not to scare anyone”; just have one of your high-placed, furry friends reap page 20 from this sobering OECD recount.”

Henny Penny: “Sorry to interrupt Chicky pie! But, you forgot telling Foxy dearest, that Notional Compression is a lovely, but rather sumptuous manner of saying “Netting”, which in our last brush with systemic meltdown, didn’t quite work as advertised by those charming young fellows at “Sacs of Gold”! Had the Fed not intervened to save the bottoms of our beloved “netters“, just the CDS blowup at AIG (American International Group) on its own, would have many of them, furry critters from around the planet, still “netting” in bankruptcy court! Again, my apologies and heartfelt thanks for accommodating my disruption.”

Chicken Little: “Much obliged! Henny Bunch! I am glad; all of us birds are keeping track of Foxy´s unintentional slips of memory! I was about to say that if Notional is irrelevant, then: why did rollovers from Dec.07 to Jul.10 in Fed letter-soup, liquidity-programs credits reached over $16 trillion for the banks listed on page 131 of the GAO Report to Congress? And why then, is Reserve Bank Credit (short-term liquidity assistance) still rising in Chart 3, having already jumped 600% since Aug.08?”

Chart 3

Foxy Loxy:”You really are …the ultimate Chicken Little! Why would anyone add up the nominal size of rollovers? The only conceivably useful information from that report page is the relative amount of assistance received by each of those banks! Regarding Chart 3´s significance, just answer one question for me: Has any of you birds, experienced anything close to a 600% increase in Real Economy prices since Aug.08? By the same token, take a good look at Chart 4 and note that not even doubling public debt to $16 tillion (in red) since Aug.08, has kept Money Velocity (in green) from falling to a 67-year low! Oh, and BTW, notice how the banks you criticize so much, have actually slashed $3 trillion of their own debt over the same period (in blue).”   

Chart 4

Turkey Lurkey: “Foxy dear, you really need to get out of the woods more often! Banks didn’t stop borrowing out of self-restraint! What keeps decimating the aggregate balance of US financial debt is brutal interbank-lending attrition! Remember that following the world´s “Lehman Momentthe TED spread spiked 500% because banks worldwide stopped lending to each other and didn’t budge until central banks intervened? Well, from that point on, as shown on Chart 5, interbank lending has continued to implode as much of the maturing bank debt is being repaid by central banks. That´s why Chart 4’s $3 trillion drop in financial debt, coincides with Chart 3’s $3 trillion top in Reserve Bank Credit.”

Chart 5

Foxy Loxy: “Darling, you obviously skipped the chapter on Fisher´s equations in your Econ.101 elective! But, never mind, just Google up “MV=PQ=GDP” and be sure to check what each letter means! If you still don’t get it, here is what´s really happening: Banks have generally trimmed down on interbank borrowing, not only to diminish their dependence on wholesale funding, but also, because they can’t start lending massively to unqualified borrowers a la “pre-housing crisis” style, while qualified borrowers have been repaying debt and decreasing new borrowings. So, while money turnover (lending) decreases and Monetary Base (M) increases, Money Velocity (V), which is the quotient between the two (turnover as dividend and M as divisor), must drop in value! In effect, what´s behind the drop in interbank lending is a drop in Economic Demand, which in turn, affects Output (Q) and Price (P) and thus, GDP.” Check out Chart 6!

Chart 6

Chicken Little: “Wow Foxy, that´s quackery only Ducky Lucky would understand! That is…until Chart 5 confirms to him, that domestic orders (green) and imports (red) are up 26% and 29%, respectively, over their 2009 lows! So, your argument that “demand contraction” is behind the drop in Money Velocity is probably unfounded! Regarding Fisher´s monetary interpretation of Mill’s equation of exchange, you should know that it’s meaningless in the absence of interbank lending. Again, I’ll fill you in: In the centuries after the arrival of central banking, most observers had posited that fractional banking had a measurable effect on M and therefore on GDP. By the time Fisher formalized that relationship, using Mill´s formula, he realized that although you can control M, through central banking, V needs to be an unbound (independent) variable. That is possible, only if “fractional lenders” (private banks) have “unconstrained” access to funding from other fractional lenders (the interbank market).”

Turkey Lurkey: “That might explain why $3 trillion of incremental Fed liquidity plus $8 trillion of incremental public debt have not been enough to outweigh $3 trillion in financial debt reduction. Obviously, public debt has none of the“fractional banking” power of financial debt, but the Fed’s money printing does! If the power of fractional banking is not working for the Fed, could it be, because much of its newly-created liquidity assistance has gone to repay the creditors of under capitalized banks? If so, then a substantial part of incremental Fed liquidity is not available for bank lending.”

Foxy Loxy: “WHAT? What do you mean?”

Turkey Lurkey: “Well, Foxy, let’s say Bank ABC lost its capital during the credit crisis, as the value of its assets dropped below the sum total of its capital plus liabilities. But, then Lehman happened and regulators decided that, to avoid “financial catastrophe”, banking system losses should go temporarily unrecognized (A la Japan circa 1990). Since ABC’s debt was mostly short-term and from wholesale lenders, it needed to borrow funds quickly against the registered-value of its value-impaired assets. Since only the Fed can create money from thin air, this was the only entity that could lend against ABC’s assets at registered-value. Next, the Fed took ABC’s assets onto its balance sheet and lent it the funds to repay its creditors in full.”

Ducky Lucky: “It gets even worse Foxy! By lending against the registered value of ABC´s credit portfolio, the Fed not only extinguishes interbank lending (which could still occur at some price below registered value), but eliminates the possibility of negotiated renewals, which would preserve some of the interbank debt outstanding. Over time, as each new dollar of repayment, unwinds a geometric multiple of credit-dollars created over three decades of unconstrained interbank lending, Money Velocity approaches its historical minimum.”

Foxy Loxy: “So there is no bank hoarding of excess reserves, as much of the 600% increase in short-term liquidity assistance provided by the Fed since 2008, has gone to repay pre-crisis debt on the books of bank-creditors! In the process, capital markets have not been allowed to clear prices for pre-crisis financial assets, effectively suspending interbank lending and with it, the astonishing amount of leverage that fractional banking could be providing to the underlying growth potential of the US economy.”

Chicken Little: “Exactly why THE SKY IS FALLING!”


  • Why central bank “assistance” and not inflationary expectations, is the reason behind the post-2008, price-rise in Currencies, Commodities, Stocks and all other types of “Marginable Securities”. 
  • Why Inflation and Deflation are determined by Central Banks, NOTHING ELSE!
  • How RWA (Risk Weighted Assets) and other Tier 1 Capital allowances are promoting “London Whales”. 
  • The launching date for Systemic Risk Averse Funds (SRAF), developed after years of research on which are the key strategic, operational and legal systemic issues to hedge for.


This month, investors absorbed some important news announcements, among them: the nationalization of the last four oil fields, a 35% drop in Central Bank Reserves, the IMF-withdrawal statement and the threat to nationalize the banking industry. Below we will try to figuratively deconstruct what these messages may mean for all “three” sides of the fence.


Suppose you are subsidizing several economies at once, including yours, but their demands keep increasing every month. Unfortunately, last July your economy’s gross monthly income suddenly stopped growing and has actually been decreasing since then. In effect, you have been running an escalating deficit that only became publicly visible when you had to pull out 35% from savings, even after issuing the largest one-day debt obligation in history. Yet, you tell creditors (especially those holding your currency) you are merely switching pockets and… they believe you. But, there is another problem, in the past few years, although you repurchased every external-debt bond submitting you to SEC surveillance, you still belong to a guild you must regularly open your financial books to. How do you get them out of your hair? Simply drop out. Foreign creditors may be a bit flabbergasted at first, but not to worry, they always come around. Finally, there is the issue of how to prevent local creditors from eventually deciding to cash in their chips and try their luck elsewhere. Easy, tell them that the tellers are just part of the casino and as such they can be nationalized anytime, together with the chips. At least you forewarned them!


All this time, no matter how obvious the direction we are going, there has been little you could do. In fact as time has passed, you have accumulated the largest amount of chips you ever had, because even after it became legal to exchange chips [through negotiable securities]; converting them would cause an accounting loss. By now the size of that potential loss is so huge; it leaves you no choice but to let balances grow and accept the puny interest rates they pay you locally. To top it all, the nationalization threat just complicated things further, because, no matter how big, well-known or international your local chip-holder is, as long as your account with him is under local jurisdiction, it just became an immeasurable risk.


Not everything is bad news though, until recently, no mechanism existed that allowed you to maintain your assets free from the risk of devaluation and/or nationalization, while keeping them in local currency. Last November, our parent company unveiled a Money Market Fund whose shares are local currency denominated, but as shown in the Bloomberg price-history graph below, they track exactly the movements of the parallel rate (shown in the next graph).  This price behavior allows you to hedge against devaluation without converting your chips to foreign currency (to avoid conversion losses). But the best feature of the fund is that it completely shields your assets from intervention: No matter what laws are changed or how many banks get nationalized, they have no jurisdiction over the fund. Additionally, as in any Money Market Fund, shares are 100% redeemable and can be liquidated every Friday in any currency you want.

If you would like to know more about the fund and why the financial service providers behind it are as large and trustworthy as your local provider, just send us a note to




Collateralized Debt Obligations, or CDOs for short can be created from many types of collateral, but the most popular lately are CDOs from MBS (Mortgage Backed Securities). The idea is to create some higher risk assets and some much safer ones, slicing up the MBS into what are called equity, mezzanine and investment-grade bonds. The equity takes the higher risk, and so it earns the higher return if things go well. But if things start to go wrong, the equity is lost first…and then the mezzanine. However, even if there’s quite a high rate of failure in the higher risk end, the investment-grade bonds still get fully paid out. In this way the bankers might, for example, convert a large package of MBS into perhaps 70% investment grade bonds, 15% mezzanine, and 15% equity. It is relatively easy to sell the high-grade investment bonds. Stamped with an investment-grade rating, these bonds are sold off to mostly respectable investment institutions. But the mezzanine, and particularly the equity, are harder to sell. In effect the 30% of the mortgages in the original MBS which were deemed on a statistical basis to be likely to fail, are concentrated into what investment insiders call “Toxic Waste”.  Enter the case of the Bear Stearns hedge funds:

Last week, increasing losses and redemptions induced the lenders of two highly leveraged (at least 10 to 1) hedge funds in “structured” instruments (Toxic Waste) to hit The Street with bid lists of CDO collateral loaded with subprime exposure.  The dearth of buyers willing to pay anything close to their “marked” prices forced the sponsor, Bear Stearns to step up and loan the hedge funds $3.2 billion. However, the specter of downgrades of similar securities and a possible contagion de-leveraging of CDO exposures throughout the market initiated a stock market plunges that is continuing today.

On the other hand, we keep telling you that 10-year US Treasuries is the only investment we believe in, no matter how much of them the Chinese may be selling. Last Friday, for the first time since the 10-year treasury yield started rising from a low of 4.602% on May 11th to a high of 5.316% on June 15th, it rose as equities dropped. This is quite significant in that it confirms a new top from which 10-year treasury yields will probably drop as they have over the past 20 years. You can check this behavior in Chart1 below. Notice that the RSI Readings over 70 (se dotted line) have marked peaks in interest rates and the current reading near 90 hints at either a pause or a pullback in rates.

CHART 1. Source:

In the meantime, the slowdown in retail sales is quite visible after peaking in early 2006, and has turned south sharply following the bursting of the housing bubble. This trend will likely continue heading if retail sales follow its historical relation to the yield curve as it has in the past, as the yield curve leads the trend in retail sales by roughly two years (advanced in chart 2 below).

CHART 2. Source: Moody’s Economy.comimage002

With such a negative housing backdrop, it’s understandable why retail sales are falling and consumers are putting off their plans to purchase big ticket items. Business equipment industrial production has clearly peaked on a year-over-year (YOY) basis and lags the shape of the yield curve by one year, indicating continued weakness for the rest of 2007.

CHART 3. Source: Moody’s

Finally, if you are going to keep some Treasury securities in your portfolio, you can either buy them from us or consider buying them yourself. It is quite easy to buy Treasury securities without a broker. Just go to the Treasury Direct web site ( and follow directions. The purchases are paid for by direct debit to your current bank account.

Shield Your Investment Risk