Thursday, January 19, 2017

Accounting for government losses

Ask a liberal, what is more efficient, Medicaid or Medicare.  You will get a strong answer. I suspect most would pick Medicare because it does not involve state governments.

But, the point is, they choose, and by choosing they have a price curve that guides them between the two choices.  Hence, there are implied losses, the liberal can say, we would have saved some ratio of costs, had we done it my way.  Those are losses. The liberal has identified losses which should result in rapid amortization of the counter balancing debt, and/or, bond defaults (or currency devaluation).

And, in fact, liberals do acknowledge losses when they recommend devaluation.  So, the sandpit architecture gives us a method for bond default with compressible discounts.  Big data actually allows us to give the defaults names, one loss might be named the California bogus idea on Medical loss, another the Bush Texas family S&L loss, the Reagan bogus weapons program losses.

Anything rolled over twice, we make that the rule. Even the Bushes would agree, who wants to see that little Bush kid's face once again as we roll over the Texas bailout for the third time,  Just mark  it as loss, and default in the sandpit, inflating the Fedcoin.

The Senators no longer have monopoly status on the medium of exchange, just the tax dollar.  In the pit there are plenty of coins available for hedging if the Senators try to hedge their losses.  But the good news is we get better (we learn), so when a Senator from California with a bunch of reps proposes a California idea, the other Senators can point to the block chain of losses and say, "Look boneheads, you are losers, see those California losses'

No comments: