Fifteen Fold Increase In Monetary Base

The fed is planning moves that would more than double its balance-sheet assets by September to $4.5 trillion from $1.9 trillion. Whether expressing approval or concern over the fed’s intentions, most commentators fail to understand the real magnitude of the projected expansion of the US monetary base because they don’t take into account the amount of dollars circulating abroad.

At least 70 percent of all US currency is held outside the country, and this means the US monetary base is considerably smaller than the fed’s overall balance sheet. Take, for example, the true US domestic money supply at the beginning of September 2008, before the fed started its quantitative easing. From the Federal Reserve’s website, we know that currency in circulation was 833 Billion. This translates as 583 Billion dollars circulating abroad (70 percent), and 250 Billion dollars circulating domestically (30 percent). Since the bank reserve balances held with Federal Reserve Banks were 12 billion, that gives us a 262 Billion domestic monetary base as of September 2008. Now compare that to the projected US domestic monetary base for September 2009 which is 3,818 billion (4,500 billion – 583 billion (dollars circulating abroad) – 99 billion (other fed liabilities not part of the money supply)). The fed’s planned balance sheet expansion results in a 15-fold increase in the base money supply.

262 Billion = US monetary base as of September 2008 (minus dollars held abroad)
3,818 Billion = projected US monetary base in September 2009 (minus dollars held abroad)

3,818 Billion / 262 Billion = 15-Fold Increase in US monetary base - Market Skeptics

End the Fed!

Walden (+Project) Sucks - Here's Why - And Here is my Solution

If you can talk about food in a book about food for about 30 pages and still go strong, you may qualify for the definition of mentally insane. I'm sure any incoming junior and senior that takes/has taken Honors English 11 will know about this book. Many define it as socialism, but in socialism the people voluntarily work for the greater good of the community, acting as one entity that helps eachother to fuel society. We all can agree that socialism, although quite the utopian ideal, is quite unrealistic. Humans do not have the programming to work together as equals, for not all humans are equals. Some are smarter than others, some are stronger, and some are less corrupt.

Instead of promoting socialism, Thoreau's "teachings" verge on anarchism. He encourages that people stop working for society to better themselves within the community, and further goes on to say how anything past minimal living is, without going further into an analysis of the book, evil. If everyone decided one day that they would not contribute to society and only care about themselves, the medical fields would not be advanced. Food would not be cultivated fast enough to supply for the mass of people. Sure, it would be ideal for everyone to grow their own crops and hunt their own meat, but unrealist, due to the fact that humans work good in groups with specialization. Instead of specializing to help the community, he advocates every man for himself, enjoying himself without regard for other people. Moreover, without such specialization and group cooperation that drives society and makes everyday life easier, there would be no government at all. If someone found enjoyment in arson, they could burn down houses as they pleased. If they liked another person, since theres no government or rules they could just very well...well, you get the point.

Opinions aside, anyone who has taken Honors English knows about the journal that is needed for Walden. That is 90 pages worth of analysis on the book, about 1:3 ratio. Absolute fail. Now, in the directions, it says to fill the entire journal, and recommends that you read 10 pages a day. That would mean about 3 1/3 pages per every 10 pages if we are to go by the ratio. I find that....unrealistic. Furthermore, the chapters are not very uniform in length, so that leaves reflections at odd times. Wouldn't it be better just to read the entire book all at once? However, that poses another problem: How can I do all of those reflections if I do the entire book all at once?

I have come up with a logical solution to this dilemma: I will read the book at once in a day, then do a near 100 page reflection/psychoanalysis on Thoreau, his methods, and why he advocates what he does. Not only will I refer back to the text, but I will also use outside sources. It will be so epic that she won't even read it, she will just look at all the footnotes and passages, and see how intense this was that I will get an A for Term 1. I will be posting the book when I am done with it, that is, my book. I do need a title though...which I'm thinking would be "On the Account of the Psychoanalysis of Thoreau through use of the textual references of Walden and others which concern it"