FREE: JOIN 100,000+ READERS   
≡ Menu
SOVEREIGN MAN

The most dangerous woman in America

christina romer The most dangerous woman in America

Christina Romer is the most dangerous woman in America right now. As an economics professor at the University of Berkeley, she’s charged with educating the next generation of productive citizens. She also formerly chaired the Council of Economic Advisors under President Obama.

One would think that a person with that level of influence would have a bit of sense. One would think. Yet Romer rarely fails to disappoint.

In a recent New York Times editorial entitled, “Dear Ben: It’s Time for Your Volcker Moment,” Romer publicly tries to goad Ben Bernanke into doing MORE to fight the great contraction.

It’s not enough that Mr. Bernanke has expanded the money supply by an amount never before seen in the history of the world. It’s not enough that he’s nearly exhausted every policy tool at his disposal. It’s not enough that global confidence in the dollar is fading rapidly.

Romer wants Bernanke to take things to the next level.

In her editorial, Romer draws comparisons to past economic difficulties and expresses admiration for those who employed extreme tactics to deal with them. She praises for FDR for abandoning the gold standard and allowing the dollar to depreciate.

She also erroneously recounts economic history, suggesting that Roosevelt’s actions led to “the most impressive [economic] swing the country has ever seen from horrible contraction to rapid growth.”

Swing? That’s a bit revisionist. The Great Depression languished for years. And years. Perhaps if we’re speaking in terms of a geological timeline in which millions of years are a drop in the bucket, the recovery could be characterized as a rapid ‘swing’.

Furthermore, to credit any economic ‘recovery’ on a policy of currency debasement is simply idiotic. The path to prosperity is not paved in paper currency, but rather hard work, productivity, efficient capital allocation, savings, and technological innovation.

Roosevelt cannot be credited with supporting any of these economic foundations.  Yet Romer holds him up as an example of grabbing the bull by the horns and making the tough choices that led to an unequivocal recovery.

In Romer’s world, paper is wealth. And hey, why should she believe anything else? She’s been in academia and politics for her entire life. She’s never actually had to DO anything and has been free to live inside a consequence-free Keynesian bubble throughout her entire career.

The scary thing, though, is that this woman has VIP access to the halls of power in Washington DC. She advises the decision makers who set policies affecting hundreds of millions… even billions of people. And she has no clue how the world actually works. This is incredibly destructive for the rest of us.

When I was in the African wild about six-weeks ago, I witnessed a skirmish between a couple of kudu– this is a type of antelope with long, spiraled horns.  They’re exceptionally aggressive.

When kudu fight each other (which happens a lot), they lock horns. Once this happens, the pair is stuck… forever entwined and defenseless until they both starve to death or get eaten by predators.

Needless to say, the kudu are rapidly dying off; nature has a way of weeding out self-destructive species.

What’s happening right now in the western world is an economic version of natural selection; self-destructive economies are imploding, while countries with thoughtful, healthy balance sheets are rising.

The nice thing is that WE can CHOOSE whether we associate with the destructive ones, or diversify internationally to the healthy ones. And the more people like Christina Romer praise currency devaluation and capital controls, the more obvious international diversification becomes to anyone paying attention.

Rational, thinking people need to heed these warning signs and take decisive action to safeguard their livelihood. There is no honor in being an eternal victim of political and economic turpitude, or suffering continued financial indignity at the hands of people like Romer.

(If you’re looking to get started quickly and need a crash course in international diversification, complete with full contacts to some of the world’s most qualified experts in things like offshore banking, trusts, second passports, and more, I really want to encourage you to think about our Offshore Workshop DVD Kit.)

Remember, whatever you need in your life– whether it’s asset protection, profitable business prospects, more compelling investment opportunities, affordable high-quality healthcare, privacy, lifestyle perks, or simply a well-paying job, chances are you can find what you’re looking for overseas.

About the author: Simon Black is an international investor, entrepreneur, permanent traveler, free man, and founder of Sovereign Man. His free daily e-letter and crash course is about using the experiences from his life and travels to help you achieve more freedom.

Want more stuff like this?

Our goal is simple: To help you achieve personal liberty and financial prosperity no matter what happens. Click below to join our community of 100,000+ sovereign individuals.

SIGN ME UP FOR FREE

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • Debris

    right, ‘Simon’ .. a former Navy Seal, who uses a fake name online (for some reason) is of course MILES ahead of a woman who has spent her life studying economics… just give Mr. Pseudonym your money and he’ll give you all that ‘inside info’ … your ‘history’ of Roosevelt is absurd, your observation/conclussions re. african kudu are more than absurd… I continue to subscribe to your newsletter however, as it does provide me with information… but not in the way you envision… good luck with New Jonestown in Chile, by the way… I await the grotesque headlines in 10 years

  • Your Name

    Where, exactly, is the University of Berkeley? I’ve heard of the University of California at Berkeley–in fact, I hold both an MSME and an MA from that institution–but I can’t seem to find anything, anywhere about the University of Berkeley.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tom-LaMar/100000130159177 Tom LaMar

    Go ahead and “expate”; you mean as an X-patriot ?  I think so, if you follow these people, including Romer.  Go ahead and desert the country that gave you your standard of living and your rights that you won’t find elsewhere; the greatest country the world has ever known, flawed as it always has been, but better than all the rest put together and now being destroyed by so many forces it will be truly the greatest if it survives…apparently without you ? Just imagine the degenerate world without America…you won’t last long abroad once that happens IMO, because if the world falls apart, it’ll be that America does so last…we ARE the military power that is needed by those in control, and they need stalwart soldiers at a minimum, which is what our nation is becoming…and much less of everything else.

    • Jax Teller

      Tom, there are peaceful people in peaceful places all over this globe that don’t give a rat’s a** about America and who live in resilient communities where they provide for their own needs independent of anything that happens in the USA. If you think for a moment that America is the glue that holds every single country on the planet together, you are a bit deluded. And I mean that kindly.

      The plain fact (and I’m not American, I only visit regularly) is that your country is rapidly becoming a police state. Its stunning the level of surveillance, intrusion and corruption that is visible in most major cities of America. 100 years ago, America was the greatest place the world has ever seen – back when you had almost no government. 20 years ago there was still a large degree of freedom, relative to other larger countries in the world.

      Now, however, you are the vanguard of state control of every possible thing. Maybe you have been living there all your life, and like the frog in the boiling pot, it isn’t evident to you. But take it from someone who has visited every year for the past two decades. The change is shocking. I used to breathe a sigh of relief when I flew into a US airport – the sense of freedom was palpable. Now I breathe a sigh of relief when I’m on the plane out of your country – back to a place where nobody is surveilling and recording every innocuous action.

      If guns are your thing, there are other countries where you don’t need half the government permits, record checks, waiting periods or other statist handcuffs on your ability to protect yourself. 

      You can choose to stay where you are and work for political change. Good luck with that. I really hope it works for you, but I wouldn’t hold my breath. As some wise man said, if you want to walk comfortably its better to to buy shoes than to try and cover the world in leather.

    • Madknine

      Tom, did you listen to Rod?  Also listen to yourself … you are both talking about “ideas” & “concepts” like “freedom” & “liberty”.  I am an American.  But I have come to realize: that which made her great isn’t her shores, her borders, her mountains, fields, factories or people.  That which makes her great is the pioneering spirit that inspired our founding fathers to resist tyrany, die for freedom, and immortalize these ideals in our Constitution.  When I leave the USA for a country, a government, and a people – that are more “american” in spirit and commitment – then MOST “entitled” Americans are – I will remain a “patriot” to that Constitution and the God she kneels before.  The explorers, revolutionists, and pioneers of the last 200-400 years were no stranger to finding new land to carve out new ideas. 

      Perhaps, I am the “Patriot”, and you are the frog slowly boiling to death.

    • Jcrowe

      Interesting assertion on rights. I am assuming that you are conflating country with government. Governments do not grant rights. In the U.S. the Bill of Rights nominally limits the federal government’s powers to infringe certain rights but from a constitutional PoV, those rights derived from being a free human being. Self ownership is/was the ultimate property right, and from that the rest logically flows. What the U.S. federal government has become is the latest world stage bully and the suffering is borne by both citizens and residents of other countries. But, this is all collapsing before our very eyes….first the EU, next the U.S.A. and then the rest of the places where fiat currency is sapping the wealth of the people.

  • Mhouhuabob

    She as dangerous as the greenhouse gasses that emanate from a Cow’s ass!

  • JdL

    By “University of Berkeley”, I assume you mean University of California at Berkeley?  

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_JY5PD5WY7KUBVLHVOQ6NF7I4YY Choohader

    Look at her picture!  How can one not think immediately, “STUPID FAT BITCH!”

    • guest

      Ill bet her and napolitano scissor fight… 

    • Todd H

      And how can someone read your comment and not think you are an idiot with nothing substantive to say?

  • scottindallas

    “It’s not
    enough that Mr. Bernanke has expanded the money supply by an amount
    never before seen in the history of the world. It’s not enough
    that he’s nearly exhausted every policy tool at his disposal.
    It’s not enough that global confidence in the dollar is fading
    rapidly.”While the ten year t-note is at 2%?  Do your rants lean on any facts?  I called the peak of gold, and you know why, in Austerity budgets, inflation doesn’t occur.  Gold pays no dividend, a shrinking economy doesn’t produce real inflation, gold is a hedge against inflation–Kind of like using a ratchet both ways.   If we see gov’t spending increase, then we will see inflation.  The elections could go either way.  You know, when we were on the gold standard, it didn’t prevent manipulation of commodities, gross mis-valuations of stocks and other speculation.  There are centuries of economic swings when we were on commodities backed currencies.   In fact, the post WW2 era represents one of the longest, most stable and enduring era of growth history has known. 

  • scottindallas

    However, I do appreciate your comments on civil liberties, and those sentiments I imagine we share on foreign policy.  I don’t think you really have a considered or challenged opinion. 

    For instance, there isn’t “A Free Market,” rather, there’s at least three markets–
    There’s the free market (restaurants, residential contractors) where the customer enjoys both alternatives (cook at home or DIY) and competition.  Here the customer is always right and gov’t role is simply to provide courts where simple fraud, or theft are the the only sins against the public. 

    Then, there’s the professional market (police, lawyers) where the customer has no alternative than to deal (not always a choice) with a trained professional, though they usually have a choice of competitors.  Here the customer is often not capable of knowing if he is well served, it’s expertise he’s presumably buying.  While many of these professions are created to deal with gov’t, the gov’t here should seldom regulate, as a board of the professional’s peers generally test whether the professional fulfilled his Fiduciary responsibility.  Courts may test this question of fiduciary duty, and award damages, though again, we have a whole market where indeed, gov’t should stay out.

    Finally we have the utility market, here there is neither alternative nor choice, and the customer is powerless, particularly in inelastic, essential markets.  Gov’t is often needed to expedite these markets, through easements, eminent domain and other powers that don’t and shouldn’t be brought to bear lightly.  Gov’t often issues bonds, or guarantee loans so that infrastructure might be installed more cheaply.  The very nature of these markets means gov’t must regulate, even sometimes owning them outright (think Water and sewage versus electricity and phones)

    Finally there’s one other amalgam that is the half breed offspring of the latter two, the professional-utility.  I can think of only two important examples, (retail) commercial banking and major trauma health care.  Here we’ve divorced the client from paying, be it the Fed or FDIC in banking, or, insurance, heirs or Medicare paying/directing care.  Again, I’ll remind you that Hayek supported nationalized healthcare. 

    There is more than a black and white analysis.  There are differences in markets, and in the role of gov’t.  No one has offered so clear a delineation of where gov’t has a role, and where it doesn’t as I have here, based on the role of the consumer.   I hope you will consider my paradigm. 

    Perhaps farming/food should be returned to the free market, as we are in no way compelled to buy from a providers.  Or, certainly, gov’t needn’t protect us from restaurants, we’ve no compulsion there.  But, we can’t boycott electricity, demand isn’t fickle at all here.  Deregulation of electricity has cost consumers everywhere it’s been tried.  A more subtle and nuanced view of the world is needed than what libertarians, conservatives, or liberal/progressives offer.

    • realestatepup

      I do have to disagree with you regarding your “professional” market example. Lawyers, if they do NOT work for the state or feds, do have a fiduciary duty to their client, Mr or Mrs Pubilc. However, police do not. They are always public sector employees, beholden on the local, state, or federal level to serve the “people” collectively and enforce laws. They have NO fiduciary duty to any individual, and many times their actions are in the name of the current laws can be in conflict with local laws and federal laws (Medical marijuanain CA). Government, in my opinion, does not belong in the private free markets of consumers, period. Abuses such as enforced work hours with no breaks, children working underrage, and the monopoly of the “big boss” owning where you live and shop, are over due to labor laws.
      The market corrects itself when abuse occurs because people will stop buying/using/eating whatever it is that harmed them. Case in point: Monsanto. Huge movement to label GMO foods, this will eventually happen due to enormous public pressure, but the government is actively working WITH Monsanto instead of the public it is supposed to serve.
      Government continues to act in it’s own best interest through politicians that run the show. They want to keep the power, money, and influence, and the highest bidder that can get them the votes wins. Anyone that thinks otherwise is fooling themselves.
      LESS government intrusion into our private lives, and that means our food, our healthcare (yup, what goes on between you and your doctor is private), where we live, what we choose to ingest as 18+ individuals, is not the domain of the government.
      You also mention eminent domain. Hmm. I agree, to better the people as a whole, eminent domain could and should be used. But far to frequently it is used to line the pockets of whatever donor wants that piece of land. There are numerous cases that have been in the news about this.
      Ok, now to the “utility market”. While these need to be overseen for safety, I cannot, for the life of me, see where price fixing by the government would ever result in lower prices. It never has, never will. The employees still need to be paid. Raw materials (coal or natural gas) still need to be procured to generate the electricity. In my neck of the woods, several towns have their own electric plants, the people of the town regulate by vote through town government. Overall, they see a better level of service, lower prices, and less outtages.
      Of course, not everyone has this option, but it’s a good example of smaller government benefitting the people rather than bloated federal oversight.
      I belive this holds true with the ridiculous Federal departments of Education, Ag,and Environment. They do nothing but gum up the works and cause more problems. And the FDA is completely the slave of big Pharma. The American public is in worse health, more overweight, and on more drugs than at anytime in history. This generation coming up has a lower life expectancy than the one before.
      Federal govt needs to be shrunk down to size, a size that cannot intrude into all aspects of citizens, which it currently does now.

  • Mad Dog

    She is such the “American Success Story”.  For 2-1/2 years she does everything wrong; every prediction was wrong; every course of action was wrong.  It was politically necessary for Obama to remove her from his economic advisory team  –  SO THEY REWARDED HER with a high paying position in the FEDERAL RESERVE (her true master – whom she had been serving all those years).

    Just like the idiots that bankrupted Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac: Get them out of the imploding disaster they were responsible for and reward them with multimillion dollar government jobs in Obama’s administration. 

    Rewarding the people responsible for the demise of the American economy, market, government, educational system, and the Constitution (which they SWORE to uphold).  Reward “FAILURE”.  Reward fiscal irresponsibility.  Reward bankruptcies.  Reward the unemployed.  Reward the promiscuous.  Reward the lazy.  Reward the “entitled”. 

    @Tom LaMar – is that the “America” you so ardently stand behind?  Come on, amigo, there’s got to be a better way.  I think I might call it “A More American Way”.

  • Kolyan Mambozo

    ” She praises for FDR for abandoning the gold standard and allowing the dollar to depreciate.”

    Pardon me, but I was under impression that golden standard was abandoned back in 1971. Btw, could someone (without pathetic ranting) provide some logical in economical sence scenario if her advise will take place.

    Is FDR is a money producer or money dealer?
    And clearly why does any country has to BORROW money from private institution instead of using its own department to control their national currency?

  • Guy Fawkes

    Where is this “University of Berkeley” at which Ms Romer supposedly teaches? Do you perhaps mean the University of California, Berkeley?

    And FDR abandoned the gold standard? I thought that was ol’ “Tricky Dick” Nixon, in 1971. FDR did sign Executive Order 6102, requiring all privately held gold be sold to the Treasury, but also raised the price from $20. to $35. per ounce — and made exceptions for jewelers, coin collectors and some others.

    If you can’t get these little facts straight, how can we trust the rest of your essay?

    Question everyone!

    • Mad Dog

      America started moving off the gold standard long before Nixon put the final nail in the coffin in 1971.  Monetary paradigm shifts like this don’t happen over night.  I personally believe we started down this road of economic-fiat disaster in 1913 when the “government of and for the people” gave fiscal control over to the Fed.

      Guy, you are right to questions everyone – but there is only so much anecdotal information, theory and conjecture that one can fit into a single article; this is not a text book in American Economic History.  If you read very much of Simon’s publications, you have either learned to trust his short-cuts and assumptions (he typically validates everything sooner or later); or you will miss the entire forest because of one trees.

      • Guy Fawkes

        Mad:

        You need to stop taking everything so seriously. Learn to recognise satire. I’ll not take up bandwidth with further reiteration, so just read my reply to Mr Magniloquent.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QIWN3TZIAIURSNHKRNSBXPX27A Mr Magniloquent

      You fail to grasp the obvious. FDR’s gold confiscation was a massive default on the citizens of the USA. FDR devauled the currency by 75%, then removed the convertability to gold for US citizens by making monetary gold illegal. The only coins one could keep were small numbers numismatic coins which are not used as money. This did, in both theory and practice remove the US from the gold standard.

      Your comment on symantics about a university name is just noise and isn’t worth addressing beyond this. There, you too have been interrogated, and you’ve been found amiss.

      • Guy Fawkes

        Dear Mr Magniloquent,

        If you can remove your lips from the arse of Mr Black (and your nose from a thesaurus) long enough to think for yourself, perhaps you will recognise the OBVIOUS satirical intent of my post. Perhaps, had I posted in reply to Kolyan Mambozo or some of the others poking fun at “University of Berkeley,” you would have understood. Unless, of course, you are the humourless, soulless cretin you present.

        By the way, a name is not semantics (kindly note correct spelling): Harvard University certainly cannot be called the University of Cambridge, lest there arise significant confusion. A certain Miami University specifies “of Ohio” in its name. “University of Berkeley” equals semantics? No. It was an uncharacteristic and amusing, careless error on Simon’s part.

        You have been cross-examined, and found a less than credible witness. Certainly you are no expert, and you have neither physical evidence nor eyewitness testimony to contribute.

        Or, short version (for those of your bent): Interrogate this!

        PS: I rather doubt Simon wants your lips so firmly planted upon his sit-upon, anyway.

  • firstbahamas

    A) The Public: “Congress passed the Gold Reserve Act on 30 January 1934; the measure nationalized all gold by ordering the Federal Reserve banks to turn over their supply to the U.S. Treasury. In return the banks received gold certificates to be used as reserves against deposits and Federal Reserve notes. The act also authorized the president to devalue the gold dollar so that it would have no more than 60 percent of its existing weight. Under this authority the president, on 31 January 1934, fixed the value of the gold dollar at 59.06 cents.”

    B) Countries: The “standard” was established by the Bretton Woods Agreements. Under this system, many countries fixed their exchange rates relative to the U.S. dollar. The U.S. promised to fix the price of gold at approximately $35 per ounce. Implicitly, then, all currencies pegged to the dollar also had a fixed value in terms of gold.[1] Under the administration of the French President Charles de Gaulle up to 1970, France reduced its dollar reserves, trading them for gold from the U.S. government, thereby reducing U.S. economic influence abroad. This, along with the fiscal strain of federal expenditures for the Vietnam War and persistent balance of payments deficits, led President Richard Nixon to end the direct convertibility of the dollar to gold on August 15, 1971,”   Ref. Wikipedia   

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_RZ6K6YJPGKCMH7WQ7SA62P5WZU Uncle Mike

    My high school history teacher (early 1960′s) said that when FDR gave all the gold reserves to the banks he forgot to get a receipt. I do believe we are about to see history repeat.

  • Fallingman

    Christina need another jelly doughnut.

    J’accuse!

  • Owend_2001

    Romer forgets that Volker actually contracted the M-3 money supply in the late 70s. Short term interest rates shot up to 17%. Either she forgot, or she just doesn’t know. Another acedemian that has no clue about the real world. Her world truly does exist on paper. The paper of Keynesian and Socialist theory in textbooks.

  • Chris

    What do you expect from a Democrapt?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_CGPXSS6VKBXG5FEPXNXBQQFQ2Q John

    I think she should be tared and feathered

  • Game ranger

    WTF did she get that dumb information about Kudu? Firstly their horns will not lock by the sheer shape of them, and secondly they are not aggressive animals..They are certainly NOT dying off..
    It is not uncommon for local game rangers in southern Africa to have a lot of fun with gullible people who probably talk too much and don’t listen when game rangers talk…
    I am not surprised that you say this woman has her brains in a twist! 

    • Garypaulacamp

      “she didn’t say that about the kudu, it was Simon Black, in commenting about her. Can’t you follow this?

    • Todd H

      Er, she didn’t. That information about the kudu clearly came from Simon.

Read more:
Money Printing
Truth: a great holiday gift idea

Close