Dans le vieux temps, il y avait des tas de métiers qui ne produisaient rien, aucune richesse, mais qui étaient très rémunérateurs pour ceux qui en avaient le monopole. L’écrivain Georges Bataille a bien décrit et expliqué que toute société produisait une sorte de « part maudite », une sorte de surplus qui était affecté au gaspillage, au don gratuit, à l’entretien des élites  ou à la reproduction de l’ordre social. Avant c’était les hierarchies religieuses qui se l’attribuaient. Maintenant la part maudite est plus partagée, elle va ainsi aux stars, aux sportifs, elle se démocratise ! Aux USA par exemple, c’est la classe des gérants des mystères du droit qui s’octroie l’essentiel de la part maudite avec la classe des financiers. Tous ces gens sont en quelque sorte les Grands Prêtres du système, ils en sont les pythies, non par ce qu’ils savent, connaissent l’avenir, mais parce qu’ils habitent un corpus de faux savoirs magiques qui tire sa valeur de la confiance du Prince qui en profite. Il y a pour que cela marche, complicité et collusion avec le politique. Mais attention, il faut que ce soit évident, fumeux et tautologique.
Ceux qui attirent à eux cette part maudite, ce surproduit sont bien souvent les gérant les Mystères de nos sociétés. Et la finance, la monnaie, la communication , ce sont les grands mystères de notre époque. Ils sont complexes, fumeux, reversibles, puisque l’on peut tout dire et son contraire . Ils sont également peu vérifiables. Les fausses prophéties sont vite oubliées, ces gens habitent un monde de rêve, un monde ou la sanction n’existe pas pour eux, la sanction étant … supportée par les autres, tous les autres. Et même si les sanctions existaient,  cela ne changerait rien car la mémoire des masses ne dépasse pas quelques semaines au pire et quelques mois au mieux. On se reportera au travail du prix Nobel francais,  Allais , sur ces questions. Ce sera une occasion de lire de la vraie économie, et non pas du Diafoirus.

Nous avons développé depuis longtemps une thèse selon laquelle les grands prêtres attiraient à eux, par leur gestion des Mystères, les richesses, les honneurs, les femmes et maintenant les hommes ne l’oublions pas. Nous sommes dans Faust, il y a des gens qui ont vendu leur âme au diable avec qui ils ne mangent qu’avec une toute petite cuiller ; ces gens ont, comme nous l’expliquons souvent, favorisé la séparation des ombres et des corps ; et eux, ils gèrent les ombres ; le thêatre d’ombres.

Le réel, il est ce qu’il est, inatteignable pour eux, comme pour ceux qui ont précédé Galilée. Il suffit de voir à la fois leurs opinions divergentes et leurs échecs ! Mais le monde des signes, pas de problème, ils connaissent. Le génial économiste alternatif Steve Keen écrivait il y a quelque temps que l’économie était une science exacte, elle ne se trompe jamais, … à condition de penser et faire l’opposé de ce qu’elle préconise. Nous rappelons que Keen est l’une des 12 personnes qui a correctement prédit la crise de surendettement de 2008, par écrit et avec modèles démonstratifs à l’appui. Et qu’une grande parte de ses travaux a été validée par les équipes de la Bank Of England dans des écrits que l’on peut qualifier de Coperniciens. Ce qui crée la monnaie, ce sont les crédits accordés par les banques et ce n’est pas la création de monnaie qui crée les crédit contrairement à ce que pensent les fans des QE. Le crédit est ce qui est premier. Les QE poussent sur une corde et les soi disants résultats qu’on leur attribue ont une toute autre origine. Ces résultats comme le démontre Taylor (Economic/ One Stanford) , le père de la fameuse règle, seraient même supérieurs avec une autre politique , sans les QE.
Lisez le texte qui suit, c’est ce que nous appelons de la Glose, c’est le commentaire des Mystères que l’on ne comprend pas. La magie, c’est la magie du mot , sacré, « dovish ». Nous sommes dans les discours circulaires dont les auteurs ne perçoivent même pas les contradictions quand elles sont éloignées de plusieurs paragraphes. Mais la meilleure de toutes c’est quand même celle-là ; il faut faire des QE parce que cela marche et il faut en faire plus parce que cela ne marche pas : l’inflation n’est pas au rendez vous et il y a grand risque que la croissance déjà quasi nulle, ralentisse encore . Ah les braves gens .

.

By Perspectives Pictet Published: Thursday October 22 2015
« The ECB’s increasingly dovish tone continues to support our expectation of a 6-month QE extension to be announced at the 3 December meeting.

Mario Draghi was unsurprisingly dovish at today’s policy meeting, bearing our view that more monetary easing is in the pipeline, effectively signalling a move at the 3 December meeting. By saying that “the degree of monetary policy accommodation will need to be re-examined in December” and that the ECB was not in “wait-and-see” but in “work-and-assess” mode, Draghi went as close as possible to making a pre-commitment. He added that “some members” favoured more stimulus as soon as today.
Overall, we still believe that the ECB will announce, at its 3 December meeting, an extension of its QE programme of at least 6 months, until March 2017 “or beyond”. The monthly pace of asset purchases could be increased by EUR10-20bn (from EUR60bn currently) and their composition could be broadened to encompass corporate bonds or other riskier assets, in the event of the economic outlook deteriorating further.
Crucially, a deposit rate cut was “discussed” at today’s meeting for the first time since it had been lowered to -0.20% in September 2014. Draghi struggled to justify this U-turn, given that the Governing Council repeatedly said that policy rates had reached their lower bound. As we suspected, this communication shift is likely aimed at weighing on the EUR. We believe a 10bp deposit rate cut would be implemented in H1 2016 if and only if the euro’s trade-weighted exchange rate appreciates more significantly from here, say by another 5% or more, for instance if there is evidence of the first Fed hike being delayed beyond March 2016. Therefore, a rate cut is still not part of our baseline scenario at this stage.

Reinforcing ECB’s dovishness and flexibility
The ECB’s rationale remains essentially unchanged: downside risks to inflation have risen, largely due to external factors (weaker commodities and a stronger trade-weighted EUR) which should translate into lower inflation projections by the staff in December (currently projected at 1.7% by the end of 2017), thereby forcing the ECB to ease further.
At the same time, domestic demand is strengthening, unemployment is falling, credit transmission is improving and evidence is accumulating that investment spending – the missing link – might be about to pick up as well. Above all, the ECB is seeing mounting evidence that QE is producing the intended effects as more banks are planning to use new liquidity capacity to grant new loans or purchase assets. All this will provide the ECB with the fundamental justification for more easing, if and when needed, as QE is working its way through the real economy.
More specifically, the ECB’s introductory statement and press conference clearly conveyed the impression of an even stronger dovish bias, if not a firm commitment to act in December.
Concerns over the outlook for EM growth and commodity prices were said to “continue to signal downside risks to the outlook for growth and inflation” in the euro area. On the positive side, the ECB added that domestic demand remained supported by lower commodity prices, loose financial conditions and improvement in the credit cycle. Structural reforms, while not ambitious enough in the ECB’s mind, should be helpful as well.

On inflation, Draghi did not echo Nowotny’s comments according to which “the ECB is clearly missing its inflation target”, which would have made the justification for today’s status quo more difficult. Instead, Vice-President Constancio took some time to explain how negative inflation or “low-flation” were different than deflation, adding that the ECB never changed its mandate. Draghi did, however, insist on downside risks to inflation again, hinting at likely downward revisions to upcoming staff projections in December .

The ECB still expects inflation to bottom out in Q3 2015 before a large base effect plays out and pushes headline HICP inflation above 1% in Q1 2016, as per our projections. The main risks include the weaker outlook for external demand and commodity prices, together with the recent appreciation in the trade-weighted exchange rate. Inflation expectations should play a key role as well. The ECB’s quarterly Survey of Professional Forecasters (SPF) is due to be published tomorrow for Q4, and much of the focus will fall on longer-term inflation expectations once again. Despite a challenging environment and weaker commodity prices, the latter have actually risen in the previous two quarters, from 1.77% to 1.86% in Q3. Any relapse would provide the ECB with another justification to ease.
How to deal with more negativity?
In the end, Draghi left all his easing options open, including an expansion “in the size, composition and duration” of the QE programme as well as “other policy instruments”. Asked whether the latter could include a cut in the deposit facility rate, Draghi said that this option had been discussed at today’s meeting.
As we wrote earlier, a deposit rate cut should be specifically targeted at offsetting any further currency strength at a time when uncertainty prevails about the timing of the first Fed hike and the outlook for EM growth. This would be in line with Draghi’s important speech in Amsterdam in April 2014 when he outlined the “contingencies” for ECB action. A further cut in policy rates was then described as the appropriate tool to tackle any “unwarranted tightening of monetary policy stance”, including through the exchange rate.
Arguably, the ECB could find new ways to mitigate the collateral damage of a deposit rate cut on the money-market industry, in particular, for instance, by applying a limit to the level of excess bank reserves to which the more negative deposit rate would apply. For instance, Denmark’s central bank manages excess reserves and short-term rates based on such a system of banks’ current-account limits. Still, we see more cons than pros to a deposit rate cut, and we doubt it will be the ECB’s first port of call.

In the end, our view remains that the ECB will refrain from cutting rates provided that the Fed finally hikes rates in March 2016 as per our central case. Other factors might influence its decisions in the coming monthstimeline. If we are proven wrong and the trade-weighted EUR appreciates much further from here, say by more than 5%, with the EUR/USD crossing the 1.20 mark, then the ECB might be forced to deliver eventually. In turn, this may force central banks in Denmark, Switzerland or Sweden to ease policy further, most likely through rate cuts themselves.
Meanwhile, we stick with the view that the ECB will announce an extension of its QE programme of at least 6 months, until March 2017 or beyond, at its 3 December meeting, possibly alongside a EUR10-20bn increase in the monthly pace of asset purchases and some targeted changes in their composition.

The ECB’s increasingly dovish tone continues to support our expectation of a 6-month QE extension to be announced at the 3 December meeting.