Heat-Seeking Eddie Murphy Alpha + Ned Naylor-Leland on CNBC (video)

Trade with Dave: I missed this CNBC interview on Monday with Ned Naylor-Leland on what appears to be a U.K. version of CNBC. There are a couple of things that are notable to take away from the interview. First of all Ned seems to be putting forth the idea that gold and silver are fungible while pork bellies are not. Mortimer may disagree with Ned and claim that gold and frozen orange juice futures are as equally fungible as client #9′s Amex via Square in consideration for an evening with My Fair Lady Jamie Lee Curtis is for pork bellies during a NIRP-inspired backwardation of cash on Christmas Eve when you’re the last one standing at the Comex and still haven’t bought your G. I. Joe with the Kung Fu Grip while Ralphie is waiting at home with his Red Rider pointed at you proclaiming In God We Trust but everyone else pays cash.

What is this debate about?  It’s about who brings stability to the marketplace (the right to bear B B guns or the right to be bearish on a TBTF banker’s bonus).  This the same debate that is found in the Woodward paper offered up at the Fed yet shred by Dave and essentially the same debate that we have been engaged in for weeks now in the Fekete-Mises smackdown courtesy of Jaitly-Keiser-Woods.  Think of it this way when you consider Naylor-Leland’s argument.  Does sleeping at night on a piece of plywood provide more stability than sleeping on a Sleep Number Mattress?  That’s essentially what he is saying in regard to his comments about an underlying “bullion basis” supporting the market.  If the kids jumping on your bed on Christmas morning is in need of a solution, then Ned would be correct and an underlayment of plywood market discipline in the absence of government interventionary mattress pads is the order of the day.

Dave’s not saying that Ned is right or that Max is wrong in the attack on Mises.  What Dave is saying is that it is one thing to have a “market” economy when the wealth is widely distributed in a Joe the Plumber spread the wealth model and it’s something altogether different to hit the reset switch when all the gold is sitting in two vaults namely HSBC and JPM.  The faustian bargain that Dave senses is being debated in the real halls of false power is a deal whereby “We’ll let you spread the perceived convenience half of currency around as long as you allow us to consolidate the wealth half of the money in the sovereign divorce agreement.” 
The government’s position on this is that if we don’t get what we want out of the sovereign divorce, then we’ll outlaw gold and upstream the TBTF FDIC-based system in an orchestrated bank run.  While the shadow bankers position is that if we don’t get what we want we’ll take our marbles and go home.  It appears to Dave to be a fairly evenly balanced scale of power with one glaring exception that Dave will call the G. I. Joe difference.  If you asked the Dukes (Mortimer and Randolph not the Hazards), which side would they say holds the nukes?

If you’re one of the “young” Republicans Ned is referring to as a promoter of “disciplined” money then Dave suggests you head out to the video store and rent a copy of the movie Trading Places or head to Broadway and get tickets for My Fair Lady or head to the library and check out Pygmalion or keep flipping through your cable re-runs until you find Flip Wilson.  I just realized we don’t have “video stores” any more, but that doesn’t change the fact that to gain an understanding of the distinction between a Prince and a Pauper and which one ends up with a Million Pound “Note” and which one with a million pounds of pork bellies, you would need to uncover the connection between George Bernard Shaw and the City of London’s School of Economics. 

Source