By Mark Spitznagel
The choice for the status quo made in last week’s presidential election was
an uninformed one—at no fault of the voters—made in the fog of monetary
distortion and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke’s continuous campaign of
disinformation.
President Barack Obama managed to overtake Republican challenger Mitt
Romney on the exit poll question “Who is better for the economy?” and a strong
majority of Obama voters felt that the economy is better off than four years
ago. Indeed, anyone (particularly Bernanke) would concede that without
the Fed’s zero interest rate policy we would be experiencing a far worse
economy—the true Obama-Keynesian economy.
The danger here, as we have seen in every other bust for a century or more,
is that we can only suspend the laws of economics for so long. And
in general we are only good at considering immediate consequences, while being
very, very bad at considering later consequences. As 19th century French
economist Frédéric Bastiat observed,
“The bad economist
pursues a small present good, which will be followed by a great evil to come,
while the true economist pursues a great good to come, at the risk of a small
present evil.”