Readers: this blog is set in the future (sometime after the year 2020). Each entry assumes there has been a 5th revolution in the US — the Revenge Revolution. More about the Revenge Revolution and author, Entry #1. List and general description of entries to date.
Note: most entries are formatted as conversations. Characters appear in a number of entries, with many entries building on previous conversations. Profile of characters (see link at top of page). You’ll catch on quickly. Thanks for your time and interest…and comments.
Scene: Jordan’s office, Washington, DC
Gelly: “Jordan, you have a call from a guy named Willie. Want to take it or should I…”
Jordan: “…I’ll take the call. You’ve never met Willie? That’s his nickname. He’s the banker and neighbor in Charlotte.”
Gelly: “Now I know who you mean. Didn’t realize his nickname was Willie.”
Jordan (picking up phone): “Willie, thanks for calling back.”
Willie: “Your voice mail said you wanted to talk about crypto-currency.”
Jordan: “Yes. Need some guidance.”
Willie: “I can help with macro issues but I’m not a technical expert.”
Jordan: “Right now not concerned with the tech side…maybe later. Really want to understand how the Federal government views…or viewed…crypto-currency. What were the perceived implications on policy decisions of crypto-currency?”
Willie: “Where do you want to start?”
Jordan: “First, is crypto-currency considered a real currency or not? From what I gather, crypto-currency is a currency, but not a currency sponsored by a government. You know, it functions like the US dollar or Euro but there’s no government behind it, right?”
Willie: “You got it right. Crypto-currency is a de facto currency created by a non-government entity.”
Jordan: “In a way, the crypto-currencies remind me of the US prior to the creation of the Federal Reserve. Lots of variation in value and no one quite sure who’s in charge?”
Willie: “Wondering who’s on first is not a bad way to look at it. Crypto-currencies are like a bunch of banks issuing their own currency…except rather than issuing paper notes its digital currency. And rather than backed by gold or silver, it’s backed by what one might term vaporware.”
Jordan: “So, if a bunch of groups issue their own currency, how do you use it? What merchant is going to accept your crypto-currency? The merchant has to get someone else to accept it, otherwise he’s screwed.”
Willie: “Another good question. A lot of the so-called crypto-currencies vanished early on. Some never got any momentum and some were never issued even after investor funds were taken.”
Jordan: “But a couple of the crypto-currencies made it big time. What I still don’t understand is where the value came from? You did say it was like vaporware.”
Willie: “Just thinking about it is somewhat baffling. The most popular crypto-currencies were created out of thin air. OK, the currencies were created using a complex computer algorithm…but essentially out of thin air.”
Jordan: “You mean there was no real value? Zippo…nada…nothing?”
Willie: “A couple of crypto-currencies were backed by some assets. One was even backed by gold, but most were backed by nothing.”
Jordan: “Who would fall for a scheme like that? Reminds me of the tulip craze in the 17th century. At least for that craze, people bought some asset, albeit a tulip.”
Willie: “Supporters of crypto-currency claimed it was no different from currency issued by governments, so-called FIAT currencies. The FIAT currencies – US dollar, for example – no longer have precious-metal backing. According to these supporters, governments just print money with no underlying value.”
Jordan: “While true that governments might have gone off the gold standard, governments do have assets…and a way to generate revenue. Governments can collect taxes. Save one or two, crypto-currencies had no assets and none had authority to collect taxes.”
Willie: “Creators of crypto-currencies claimed value was created because only so many would ever be ‘coined.’ Since the supply of coins was finite, value was created and justified.”
Jordan: “Aside from the illogic that a finite supply of something automatically creates value, what was their view of the real purpose of crypto-currency?”
Willie: “Some will claim my opinion’s biased because I’m in the banking industry. My view crypto-currency was attractive to certain groups for two basic reason: (i) help facilitate illicit transactions, especially drugs; (ii) help avoid taxes.”
Jordan: “Over the years you’ve dealt with the Federal Reserve. How did they view crypto-currency?”
Willie: “At first, crypto-currencies were viewed by the Fed as an annoyance, but not a major issue. Think of a crypto-currency as a mosquito or a gnat.”
Jordan: “Then the mosquito started to grow…like a mosquito on steroids.”
Willie: “You’re right. Once on steroids, the Fed began to look at crypto-currencies as a threat to its control.”
Jordan: “How so?”
Willie: “Two primary roles of the Federal Reserve are managing monetary policy and controlling the banking system. The already difficult job of managing monetary policy became much more difficult with the alternative-currency universe.”
Jordan: “So the more crypto-currencies were used instead of dollars…the more crypto-currencies became a larger percentage of the money supply…the more exaggerated the Fed’s actions needed to be to achieve the same desired policy effect. The Fed was dealing with a smaller pie, as it were.”
Willie: “Most people did not fully appreciate how crypto-currencies forced the Fed’s hand. Crypto-currencies took a bigger and bigger slide out of the Fed’s monetary pie. In order to achieve the same result as before crypto-currencies, the Fed was forced to exaggerate changes in interest rates, both up and down. The exaggeration also affected Wall Street. As a result, the Fed was unhappy, Wall Street was unhappy, many investors were unhappy and the general public was unhappy.”
Jordan: “Anything else?”
Willie: “Two other critical issues. A key reason the Fed was created was to help facilitate trade. Many of the crypto-currencies fluctuated wildly in value, which created uncertainty and slowed trade.”
Jordan: “What’s the second issue?”
Willie: “Federal revenue. While the Fed is not responsible for collecting taxes, in order to manage monetary policy, the Fed needs to have a good idea of sources and uses of Federal funds.”
Jordan: “Because the flow of crypto-currencies was hard to track and therefore hard to collect taxes on that flow, forecasting Federal revenue became even more uncertain. Right?”
Willie: “You got it. From the Fed’s perspective, and a lot of other people agreed, crypto-currencies were a cancer that was restricting trade, making monetary policy more difficult to manage and reducing potential government revenue. The solution? Ban crypto-currencies. Send crypto-currencies to the crypt. Does that help explain crypto-currencies?”
Jordan: “Yes, very much so. Thanks. Willie, as always, nice to chat. Let’s get together soon.”
JC: “Grande, medium roast.”
JC: “And, so what?”
Sandy: “Hi, Jordan. If I recall, it’s JC, right?”
Sandy: “Sure you did. You wanted to ban the sale of all assault weapons…and even make owning one illegal.”
JC: “You’re right. I don’t understand. The assault ban still allowed ownership of all kinds of hunting rifles, shotguns, pistols. I’m not a hunter but why would you need an assault rifle to kill a deer? Where’s the sport in that? Maybe we should arm the deer. That would make it more fun.”
Sandy: “So why have a ban on owning assault weapons?”
First, it appears more and more people are realizing what the military and gun enthusiasts have known for some time – the AR-15 is not a sport rifle, is not a hunting rifle but is an assault weapon designed for killing as many people as possible in as short a time as possible.
Why such a harsh recommendation? First and foremost, these type weapons are not needed outside the military. For those who insist on firearms to protect self and/or property, hunting rifles, shotguns and pistols are more than adequate. For hunters, using AR-15’s is hardly sport, even if hunting elephants, lions, tigers or bears, which you shouldn’t be doing anyway.
Banning assault weapons is not unprecedented. Beginning in 1994 Federal law banned the sales of newly manufactured assault weapons. Former presidents Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and Ronald Reagan, wrote to the U.S. House of Representatives in support of banning “semi-automatic assault guns”. The law passed with bi-partisan support. Congress let the law expire in 2004.
ll not be infringed.”
In that context, the Second Amendment seems perfectly logical. Guys, get it? The regular citizens of the country made up the military when the Constitution was written. And, if you’re a strict “Constitutionalist” and interpret the Constitution as originally written, the weapons were single-shot flint locks, not AR-15’s.
Get serious conservatives. If you understood government, you might realize that you already live in a country where the government allows you basic rights. That piece of property you think you own? Your right to ownership is a function of government. The freedom to travel? That freedom is a function of government. Hate to burst your conservative bubble, but the freedoms that you have are because the government lets you have those freedoms.
I hope these students ask their grandparents to coach them about how the grandparent protested the Vietnam War. Then the kids can go to Washington, march in front of the White House and chant, “Hey, hey, Donald J! How many kids did you kill today?”
Gelly: “JC, I’ll get you some coffee, then I need to get back and work on a project.”
JC: “Greenie, is this info for your articles about the causes of the Revenge Revolution?”
Greenie: “Mmm, you thinking the military culture is that much different?
Greenie: “What still gnaws at me is the behavior of John Kelly when he was chief of staff for Trump.”
Greenie: “What galls me even more is Trump’s press secretary Ms. Congeniality Susan Huckabee told the press they should not challenge a 4-star Marine general. BS Sarah.”
Jordan: “OK, we’re even. I think the military culture started to change with the elimination of the draft.”
Jordan: “With the draft there was a reasonably good cross-section of ethnic groups, backgrounds and education. Yes, some wealthier guys chickened out of the draft and bought off doctors to get an exemption…”
Greenie: “I’ll go with 13 years…finished one year college.”
Jordan: “Nope. Just regular guys like me. I don’t recall many of us being really gung-ho, rah-rah types. We were in the Army doing our time.”
Greenie: “What about the SEALS and those Special Forces guys? Aren’t they really professional?”
Greenie: “Yikes. Not good. Know anyone else?”
Greenie: “Your pal? Well, your something or other. But let’s be fair. You know some other guys in the military, right? I mean your top-gun buddy and some other guys in the group that designed those jet fighters.”
Greenie: “So the quality of recruits is so-so. Let’s go back and talk about the big-dog generals…specifically General John Kelly. When chief of staff for Trump, Kelly claimed that military personnel were superior and the general population should, in effect, bow down to them.”
Greenie: “So do you think to make the culture of the military more like the US population as a whole, we should reinstitute conscription?”
Greenie: “You mean about the crab barrel?”
Greenie: “Your question might be the answer?”
Gelly: “The tribes experienced more than just moving. If I understood Wolf Man correctly, he said the tribes on the reservations…apparently for many years…were prohibited from practicing many of the customs and ceremonies central to the respective tribes.”
Gelly: “If they built a new culture, would they still have a tribe?”
Jordan: “And you have an example?”
Jordan: “But why didn’t Indians keep their traditions…the glue…that held them together.”
Greenie: “Yes, independency is a real word. And your point is well taken. Have we…the victors in the Indian Wars…so restricted the tribes that the original culture has been lost? By our own actions, have we destroyed one culture and replaced it with a culture of dependency? That’s a depressing thought.”
Greenie: “Not finding the right balance between what part of a culture should melt in the US melting pot and what part of a culture should not melt might have larger impact on the cause of the Revenge Revolution than I first thought.”
Waiter delivers a round of drinks.
Gelly:
JC:
Greenie:
Greenie:
Gelly:
Jordan:
Jordan:
Economics and do my regular job. Well…”
is the primer page on the site?”
ranted and raved, asking, “Why should we use government money to bail out Chrysler and General Motors?” The comments continue, “Management at these companies has made bad decisions, UAW wages are too high and no one wants to buy their cars. Besides, Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Hyundai and Mercedes all make vehicles in the United States.”
What makes me an expert? My comments are based on some fundamental laws of economics and 40+ years in the auto business. The auto experience includes being inside a large auto company as well as starting several companies offering hybrid-electric or 100%-electric drive systems. I’ve been in technology centers, on factory floors, in boardrooms, in design centers and in dealership showrooms and service bays. I’ve been involved with some good, some bad and some ugly projects.
What makes the auto industry different from most other industries is a combination of large-scale, complex manufacturing and demands for extremely high levels of reliability and durability, especially compared to other products. Everyone I have ever met who entered the auto industry after time in another industry makes the same comment after 2-3 weeks, “The auto business is much more complicated than I realized.” And the comment usually includes several expletives.
Thus, for technology to be introduced in cars and trucks – even very expensive vehicles – cost must drop 1 to 2 orders of magnitude, or more than 90%, from cost acceptable for a defense or aerospace application.
Well, you say, “I still don’t understand why we need to bail out GM and Chrysler. Seems like the government is pouring money down a hole.” As a point of clarification, when I talk about the auto industry, I mean more than just assembly plants. The core of the auto industry is primarily component design and manufacturing. The assembly plants get all the glamour but industry guts are in components – electronics, robots, batteries, wheels, frames, tires, steering, foundries for engines and brakes and many other components.
Further, some technology breakthroughs have a long-lasting impact. An example is the effort by GM in the early 1990’s to develop and introduce an electric vehicle, known as the GM EV1. While GM was praised for introducing the car, and skewered when stopping production, the advances in technology developed for the EV1 program became the foundation for many of the electronics available in cars and trucks today, 20 years after the EV1 concept car was introduced at the Los Angeles auto show.
Finally, and let’s hope this never occurs again, but what happens if the U.S. needs manufacturing capacity for a large-scale ground war? A domestic auto industry, both assembly and component manufacturers will be critical for rapid conversion from automotive production to defense materiel. Having only assembly plants without domestically sourced components – engines, transmissions, axles, electronics, and so forth – offers no benefit for national security. (For insight into how the auto industry contributed to production of war materiel in WWII, visit 
If you still have doubts, name one country worldwide that has sustained growth in GDP and real growth in consumer incomes without a strong manufacturing base built around a strong automobile industry? Call me when you can name one.
Gelly: “Jordan, you’ve done it again?”
Gelly: “You mean the executives of the company that’s relocating. But I never though about the cost of these relocations to the people where the company left and even…”
Senior executives and sha
Many 
Taxpayers 
Do these relocations create a net gain to US societ
Gelly: “Actually, I liked the analogy. It helped me understand how wealth is created for a society rather than just an individual.” 
I’
F
of steps, the raw 
turning the corn into ce
Medical care
Retai
The reallocation is particularly true 
technology has replaced much of the labor content in manufacturing. And the use of technology to replace workers will only continue. 
