Advent of Unanimously Agreeable Philosophy and Governance and Trump Market Rally

Dr. Sankarshan Acharya[1]
Director, Academy of Unanimously Agreeable Philosophy and Governance
Founder, Pro-Prosperity.Com and Citizens for Development

February 19, 2017. Revised March 5, 2017

 

After circulation of my memo, "Advent of Unanimously Agreeable Philosophy of Governance and Trump Market Rally," dated February 19, 2017, the Deep State has raised three panic alarms:

  • The U.S. Court of Appeals promptly (on Monday, February 20, 2017) passed a 2:1 verdict in a lawsuit (which was already heard with verdict pending since April 2016) that no investor has any right to sue the government on systemic robbery of Fannie and Freddie due to the Housing Economic Recovery Act of 2008.  Two Democrat judges were in favor and one Republican judge was against this verdict.  The Court of Appeals did not mention if HERA itself is unconstitutional. Neither did it mention if HERA violates existing corporate law. The court verdict is in agreement with fundamentally unfair systemic robbery of private wealth held in two privately chartered corporations, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, based on a surreptitious Obama Administration order signed between the Treasury Department and FHFA in August 2012.  FHFA was created in 2008 to conserve F-F assets (which includes net worth), as opposed to giving away all F-F net worth for F-F to perish eventually. 

F-F are repertoires of wealth of all enterprising wealth creators that now depend, or have depended in the past and will depend in the future on home mortgage loans for their living, which is necessary for creation and production of globally competitive goods and services which, ironically, prop the judges and government attorneys who support elimination of F-F through systemic robbery.  The profits of F-F stem directly from relatively higher interest rates paid by home owners minus the relatively lower cost of funds and operation of F-F.  Siphoning off F-F profits to fund other welfare programs is a systemic government-ordained robbery of enterprising wealth creators designed to transfer the robbed wealth to indolent usurpers via surreptitious, unsustainable, fundamentally unfair, inefficient and unconstitutional rules of robbery.  Transferring F-F business to other banks will result in higher mortgage interest rates, which would effect wealth transfer from mortgage holders to indolent usurpers allied with banks. Ironically, the judges supporting such systemic robbery are hurting their self-interests, which can be promoted and protected only by a constitutional system that is devoid of even surreptitious robbery. 

Policymakers' fixation with gains or losses of investors (F-F shareholders or short-sellers) or judges' political predilection is obviously very unwise, unanimously disagreeable, unsustainable and inefficient leading to decay in competitiveness.

  • I received a circular dated February 27, 2017 from the European Economic Review publisher Elsevier to submit my research for publication in EER.  This is the first such circular I ever received from EER, to the best of my knowledge.  I promptly submitted my paper entitled, “Coalitions of Borrowers and Lenders, Government-Regulated Lender, Interest Rate and Safe Central Bank in Equilibrium.”  This paper shows that Fannie and Freddie are required for stability, efficiency and fundamental fairness which is unanimously agreeable.  The Editor of EER quickly responded by stating that my paper was unsuited for a narrow audience, not the broader audience of EER readers. 

Research on “Unanimously Agreeable Philosophy and Governance,” is for the broadest possible audience on earth, the entire humanity, which obviously subsumes the very narrow group of readers of EER. 

The EER editor, thus, is rationally irrational for claiming that a truly narrow group of EER readers is a bigger group than the entire humanity that would like to read Unanimously Agreeable Philosophy of Governance, which (a) stems not from pre-ordained dogmas of the existing literature published in journals like EER but from the most general math-econ model of the economy ever written in the literature and (b) is written in plain English. 

The EER and other such journals do not want to formally review research on unanimously agreeable philosophy and governance because none of their editors, reviewers or readers can rationally disagree with my findings and none can show errors in my theorems or unreasonableness of my axioms necessary to prove my theorems.

  • Goldman Sachs now agrees with my claim made in the following memo, dated February 19, 2017, submitted to President Trump, about the ulterior source of Trump Market Rally. Goldman Sachs tacitly prescribes others to sell short so that MMs like GS could cover their massive short positions cheaply (Bloomberg News, dated March 3, 2017)

Challenge to the DEEP STATE

The only crucial axiom in my research on Unanimously Agreeable Philosophy and Governance is Fundamental Fairness. I claim that Fundamental Fairness - defined as non-usurpation of private or public wealth, even surreptitiously, by anyone including the government - is unanimously agreeable because even usurpers (robbers) do not want to be usurped (robbed). I have proved that this axiom itself attains in general equilibrium within a rational, comprehensive, cpntemporary, dynamic, game theoretic, micro-economics model of the macro economy. I challenge anyone (including the following) to publicly disagree with this axiomatic artticulation of fundamental fairness:  

  • The current and retired US judges, government/academic/industry leaders who directly or indirectly support the surreptitiously passed Obama Administration executive order to sweep away all profits of two privately charted corporations, Fannie and Freddie.
  • All political leaders including President Trump and members of the Senate and House.
  • The editors and reviewers of all top economics and finance journals like American Economic Review, European Economic Review, Econometrica, International Economic Review, Journal of Economic Theory, Journal of Finance, Review of Financial Studies, Journal of Financial Economics, etc., and their publishers who have directly or tacitly supported the established system of robbery by surreptitiously rejecting publication in their journals of my fundamental fairness axiom-based research papers.  I have published other research in some of these journals.  The Journal of Financial Transformation which has 18 Nobel Laureates as authors has in 2013 invited and published a paper that proves unconstitutionality of the established system of money and finance and presents an alternative constitutional system.  The Academy is no longer unified in its support for the established system of robbery, thanks to triumph of my self-less research on unanimously agreeable philosophy and governance.          

If no such challenge is forthcoming, my axiomatic articulation of fundamental fairness becomes the epistemic truth.  This would then mean that all my research on Unanimously Agreeable Philosophy and Governance is unimpeachable epistemic truth.  This also means (a) all the existing laws which are antithetic to this epistemic truth should be repealed, (b) no future law that transgresses this epistemic truth should be enacted and (c) court judges, academic-media pundits (editors and reviewers, officials in government, academy and politics) be held accountable for transgressing the epistemic truth.  

-------------------

To:  Honorable President Donald J Trump

Cc: Every interested individual. Please feel free to circulate. This is available and updated at http://pro-prosperity.com/Advent-of-Unanimously-Agreeable-Rules-of-Governance-and-Trump-Rally.html

Date:   February 19, 2017

Subject:

(1) Mother of all deregulations to uplift the US economy from the mess: Unanimously Agreeable Safe Central Banking Act which subsumes restoration of GSEs as government-regulated-guaranteed lenders with a mandate to not fund politicians and to shun all forms of shadow banking.[1], [2]

(2) The ulterior rationale for stock market rally since November 9, 2016: Panic buying by the established American DEEP STATE due to its rational fear of a potential unanimously agreeable policy agenda of the Trump Administration.

Dear President Trump:

Why is the Stock Market rally since November 9, 2016 inexplicablethe elite academic-media punditry?The elite pundits have been anointed and reared by the American DEEP STATEcomprising the Masters of the Universe (Robber Barons) and powerful allies in politics, media and academy.Before the electoral verdict, the elite punditry had unabashedly bloviated about its omniscience thatyou would destroy the economy and, hence, never become the president.

My inference about why the stock market has beenrallyingsince Nov 9, 2016 is based on three decades of research on Unanimously Agreeable, Fundamentally Fair (Constitutional), Rational, Efficient and Stable Rules of Governance of Financial Markets, which is not anopinion, but a rationalgeneral equilibrium within a dynamic game-theoreticmodel of the economy.[3]

My inference:the DEEP STATE since November 9, 2016 has been grappled byrational panic due to potential forthcoming “unanimously agreeable” Trump Rules designed to restructure financial markets, fundamentally fairly, constitutionally and unanimously agreeably:

  • Why,after November 8, 2016, would the DEEP STATE buy US stocks (leading to an unexpected bull run), sell Treasury securities (resulting in rising yields) and transfer funds from abroad (making the dollar stronger)?  The elite academic-media punditry has termed such heavy stock buying inexplicable.  The elite murmurs that any benefit (accruable to stocks) of potential income tax cuts cannot outweigh the negative impact of border tax, potential trade war and reluctance of Republicans to borrow/print new money for increased spending.    
  • The elite academic-media punditry haspromoted the established system (rules, policies and institutional organizations) according to the diktats of the DEEP STATE as quid-pro-quo of sharing the systemically robbed loot.  Now, the established elite is blinkered.  It does not know (because it is not told) if the DEEP STATE – that had reigned supreme as the Masters of the Universe till at least 2008 –couldbe panicking after Trump victory on November 8, 2016.
  • Observe that after declaration of presidential election results in the evening of November 8, 2016, the DOW Jones market futures index dropped more than 1000 points due to an initial fear (of unprivileged investors dissociated from the DEEP STATE), thanks to elite punditry,that you would derail economic growth, despite the promise by your team to cut taxes and increase infrastructure spending. 
  • How did the stock futures dramatically reverse by the morning of November 9, 2016 and result in a dramatic rally, thereafter?  This reversal is obviously not due to sudden rise in the wherewithal of virtually bankrupt ordinary American households to buy stocks.  It must be due to incessant buying by the DEEP STATE driven by rational panic

How could the DEEP STATE be panicking rationally to buy stocks incessantly?

  • The mega bank holdings companies(Robber Barons)and the Federal Reserve with commandover the money printing press (thanks to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913) have virtually controlled American political leaders (presidents and lawmakers).  They have become invinciblyprivileged and powerful especially after (a) repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act in 2000 to facilitate bets against unprivileged enterprising wealth creators based on federally insured deposits, (b) enactment of the Housing Economic Recovery Act of 2008 paving the way for usurious interest rates after shutting down Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and (c) becoming systemically important (i.e., too-big-to-fail BHCs run by too-big-to-be-jailed bankers) due to Dodd-Frank Act of 2010. 
  • How is the privileged powerful DEEP STATE inefficient, fundamental unfair, unstainable and unanimously disagreeable?The DEEP STATE uses federally insured deposits under its purview to wage highly leveraged bets for surreptitiously robbery ofthe enterprising wealth creators by using valuable real-time information from (i) orders for trade from the unprivileged flowing toembedded market makers and (ii) market clearing house data on asset holdings of the unprivileged.[4]
  • Since no one including the DEEP STATE would agree to be robbed, any system (policies and rules) of even surreptitious robbery is unanimously disagreeable.
  • The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 had separated commercial banking from investment banking.  This act had effectively disallowed the unanimously disagreeable and fundamentally unfair privilege to MMs and their BHCs mentioned above.  Repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act in 2000 restored the privilege of MMs, their parent BHCs and associated political allies to surreptitiously rob unprivileged enterprising wealth creators. 
  • You have promised to reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act during the election.  In a recent WH press conference, media pundits asked if you would reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act.  The WH Press Secretary unambiguously affirmed that you would keep all promises made to voters during election.  The media did not publicize this significant WH response, even though some reporters have cursorily talked about you keeping his promises. 
  • The prospect of reinstating the Glass-Steagall Act must have rationally frightened the DEEP STATE.  Why?  The DEEP STATE sells securities short when unprivileged investors buy based on media-orchestrated euphoria.  The DEEP STATE then uses the embedded media to spread gloom and doom while pulling down the market to orchestrate panic sale by unprivileged investors.  Market Makers are legally required to clear the market without taking short or long positions.  The FBI had once nabbed and successfully prosecuted dealers of commodity contracts at CBOT pits for trading ahead of their clients.  Market Makers likewise play the role of dealers of financial securities, but they are not penalized for taking short and long positions to facilitate trading by their patrons, thanks to the established system promoted by the DEEP STATE. 
  • My inference is that MM subsidiaries of mega BHCs under the purview of the Federal Reserve now hold large net short positions.  Mr. Obama tried to pressure the BHCs to dismantle their MM short interests.  ButPresident Obama faced stiff resistance from vested interests. 
  • BHCs deflected President Obama’s pressure by claimingthat MMs’ short interests match their long positions.  This means, for survival, mega BHCs mustaccrete their net-worth, which they can do (without raising funds through secondary offerings) bybidding up the prices of over-valued long positionswhile bidding down prices of under-valued short interests.  The mega BHCs can easily sway the market through embedded media propaganda and highly leveraged bets (on bid or ask) based on enormous federally insured deposits under their control, facilitated by eavesdropping of trades and positions of unprivileged traders.  This results in perpetual panic-driven loss to unprivileged short-sellers of overvalued stocks and long owners of under-valued stocks.  The DEEP STATE, thus, almost always bets against and robs the unprivileged traders, namely, the enterprising wealth creators who save, invest and trade for retirement.  More importantly, the recent Fed Chief’s comment that mega banks now have $500 billion more of net-worth than the level prevailing before 2008 is specious at best because the increased net-worth is due to marked-to-market accounting of over-valued long positions and under-valued short positions.  It is artificial because market values are controlled by the mega BHCs.  Unanimously agreeable system of reorganization and governance of financial institutions and markets will undo the specious rise in the net-worth of mega banks. This must be why the mega banks are rationally panicking.
  • Thecurrent system of governance of financial markets is unsustainable because indolent surreptitious robbery by the DEEP STATE leads, ultimately, to a thorough decimation of hard-earned wealth of enterprising wealth creators.  This is inefficient because (a) the wealth transferred to the DEEP STATE is miniscule as compared to the massive destruction of wealth and income of enterprising wealth creators, (b) the tax revenue of the state shrinks dramatically, and (c) the human ‘animal spirit’ to work hard, innovate, create and produce is irreparably imperiled.  Such inefficiency and unsustainability caused the Great Depression of 1930’s.  What is being experienced since 2008 is a ‘modern’ form of the Great Depression with the government printing and distributing welfare checks, as opposed to breads. 
  • President Obama tried but did not succeed to enact unanimously agreeable, fundamentally fair, constitutional, efficient and stable reorganization of financial marketsand governance.  He must have at least warned, though,federal regulatory agencies like the Federal Reserve about the serious systemic problem afflicting the US economy, especially after receiving my October 2010 memo.[5]  The Fed must have, however, soft-pedalled the issue of restructuring the financial markets by resting itself assured that the DEEP STATE candidate Mrs. Clinton would win the 2016 election. 
  • During the campaign, Mr. Trump had sought major changes at the Fed.  The Fed and the mega BHCs regulated by it must have been, therefore, frightened by the Trump victory on November 8, 2016. 
  • Fearing audit and reorganization of the Fed and restructuring of the financial markets, the Fed must have rationally pressured the mega BHCs to cover their massive short positions in the wake of Trump victory since the Trump Administration could not be undone by Piccadilly of “alternative facts.”  This must have boosted markets without the elite pundits of systemic robbery deciphering deadly Trump-undercurrents financially undercutting the top layer of the DEEP STATE. 
  • Recapitalization, release and relisting of Fannie and Freddie – indicated by the new Treasury Secretary - must have frightened the mega BHCs as well as the Fed, who had actively canvassed for elimination of Fannie and Freddie, and have massively short-sold F-F stocks. The true short interest in F-F is not available for the unprivileged to see after F-F were pushed tothe OTC Bulletin Board to perish as pink-slip stocks.  Before takeover of F-F, I had seen institutional holdings of 140% of Fannie Mae stocks.  With individual holdings, the true short interest in Fannie Mae stock could be as high as 100% of the shares outstanding 1.2 billion shares.  The two bluest of all blue chip American companies that form the bedrock of enterprising American households have been, thus, mercilessly robbed and short-changed by an indolent DEEP STATE.  The DEEP STATE, propped by the same enterprising American households, is ironically biting the hand that feeds it.  This can be rationally argued as deliberately perpetrated anti-national activity because the enterprising wealth creatorstruly constitute the nation, rationally.[6]
  • President Obama orchestrated an executive order signed between his Treasury Secretary and FHFA Director in August 2012 to take away the massive expected future profits of Fannie and Freddie with a view to (i) voidingthe existing F-F stakeholders, (ii) transferringthe very valuable F-F loan portfolios freely to the Robber Barons after dismantling F-F, and (iii) erasing every trace of the systemic robbery.  TheF-F stocks were delisted from NYSE.  F-F prices nose-dived to pennies. 
  • My relationship with F-F starts in 1988, when the US Congressional Budget Director asked me (while I was a professor at NYU) to research on optimal policies for governance of F-F.  The CBO director called me in the wake of my writing an optimal bank foreclosure rule, co-authored with J.F. Dreyfus, and published the same in the Journal of Finance, which was immediately noticed by the US Congress and subsequently adopted as law by the US Congress (FDIC-IA 1991).[7] The bank foreclosure rule was unprecedented in the history of banking because, before this act was passed, only the banks had enjoyed the privilege of foreclosing defaulting non-banks and households, while citizens had no right to foreclose failing banks.  That this act was surreptitiously transgressed by mega banks and that I had challenged the largest US bank’s management about the transgression in 1994, when I was a Fed economist, with a warning that this would cause a financial crisis costing taxpayers trillions of dollars, which indeed happened, is well-documented and published in pro-prosperity.com.[8]
  • Until late April 2013, I could not formulate a general equilibrium model-based rule for governance of F-F. Even my experience at the Fed (190-1995) did not help me.  I was perhaps still subconsciously working on F-F policy:  I suddenly woke up on a day in Match 2013while dreamingstill about a real dynamic general equilibrium model of governance of F-F.  I wrote this in a paper and circulated it with a copy sent to President Obama thereafter, when F-F were trading at $0.20-25 per share.  The F-F stock prices rose to more than $5 per share by the end of May 2013.  Later on I discovered that Hedge Fund Manager Bill Ackman and others have acquired 300 million shares of F-F.  They must have been convinced by my research showing that U.S. economic stability necessitates existence of pure government-regulated-guaranteed lenders not engaged in financial shenanigans and political funding unlike the mega BHCs. 
  • How could some hedge funds acquire so many F-F shares at an average cost of less than $3 per share, i.e., without a dramatic appreciation in the price?  They could be very astute buyers.  Or, more likely, they are connected to some privileged MMs who surreptitiously transferred the shares collected in their institutional inventory account during the dump after F-F were taken under conservatorship in 2008.
  • The DEEP STATE has publicly opposed release of F-F from conservatorship.  It has used the Bush Administration to shut down F-F through Housing Economic Recovery Act of2008.  It has then used the Obama Administration to sweep all profits of F-F in a surreptitious Net-Worth Sweep (NWS) agreement between the Treasury and FHFA created under HERA so that F-F automatically enter receivership in 2018.  There is no rational explanation to shut down F-F, as proved in my general equilibrium model, which is obviously agreeable to even some mega BHCs that transferred 300 million F-F shares from their institutional inventory accounts to privileged private hedge funds. Yet, the Obama Administration designed a policy scheme in 2012 to sweep illegally all of the huge ensuing F-F profits to Treasury, as opposed to legally retaining the profits for at least self-capitalization of F-F needed for stability of the economy.
  • Are the mega BHCs heavily short in Fannie and Freddie stock–within their portfolios given to the Fed as collateral for discount-window borrowing in 2008?  The Fed takes relatively riskless portfolios as collateral for lending under the discount window.  Short interest in F-F could obviously be construed as riskless value in 2008 when it was a foregone conclusion of the DEEP STATE to shut them down by voiding all existing F-F stakeholders.  If so, the Fed must have been frightened by the Trump Administration and then pressured the mega BHC shorts of F-F stocks to cover. 
  • The F-F stocks have not moved up sharply to reflect their true capitals because the Treasury Department has swept away and still sweeps their profits based on the 2012illegal, unconstitutional, inefficient, fundamentally unfair and unstable Obama Administration NWS rule. 
  • The Obama Justice Department had exercised its privilege to not release F-F-related documents on conservatorship and NWS with a specious justification that doing so would cause a financial upheaval (for the DEEP STATE?).  My analysis shows that the mega BHCs that are short in F-F stocks would face a crisis which might wipe out all the allied politicians’ accounts.  This will be very salutary for the US economy, even if it may be financial upheaval for a few account holders who have allied with the Robber Barons and elite academic-media pundits of systemic robbery of enterprising wealth creators. 
  • After the bank foreclosure rule was enacted in FDICIA-1991 and the US banking industry became stable as a result, the market indexes quadrupled.  This time, enactment of “unanimously agreeable, fundamentally fair, efficient and stable financial market reorganization” policies would surely pull the US economy out of the rut of the “modern” on-going Great Depression.
  • The DEEP STATE perhaps had hoped (before November 8, 2016) to push F-F to receivership as per Obama NWS ruleand to wipe out F-F stakeholderswith tacit support from Mrs. Clinton as president.  Clinton victory would have wiped out the unprivileged F-F stakeholders and hedge funds as well as some potentially privileged hedge funds.  It would have raised mortgage interest rates usuriously. The economy crashed due to usurious home mortgage interest rates prior to 2007.  It would have crashed again in 2017. 
  • The Trump victory must have frightened the elite academic-media pundits, embedded within the DEEP STATE.  These punditsare now clueless about the potentially unprecedented ramifications of the Trump victory.  Or, they are being tacitly burnt by self-inflicted wounds caused by their irrational support for an unsustainable, inefficient, fundamentally unfair, unconstitutional and unanimously disagreeable system of robbery of enterprising wealth creators. 
  • Mega BHCs are panicking rationally because the new Treasury Secretary could refund all the swept profits back to F-F to recapitalize and release F-F to operate safely as private government-regulated-guaranteed lenders, needed for stability, efficiency, fundamental fairness and constitutionality in the economy.                   
  • Incidentally, the mega BHCs are also government-regulated lenders with their debt and deposits guaranteed by the federal government.  The crucial differencesbetween mega BHCs and FF are as follows: (a) mega BHCs are not pure lendersunlike F-F; (b) mega BHCs’ mortgage lending since 2009 has been negligible as compared to 100% of new mortgage lending by F-F; (c) mega BHCs, not F-F, operate privileged private hedge funds – to privatize profits and socialize losses piled up in publicly protected banks – to enrich allied politicians and pundits of systemic robbery; (d) mega BHCs, not F-F, trade all kinds of derivatives as bets against enterprising wealth creators by using publicly insured debt and deposits with a guarantee (by the Federal Reserve Act of 1913) that, whenever they fail, the Fed would print more money only for them to survive to perpetuate such systemic robbery eternally.
  • It is fundamentally fair and unanimously agreeable that F-F get back all the fines collected by the Treasury Department from mega banks for mortgage frauds,which caused erosion of F-F equity,plus all profits ($255 billion) swept away by the Treasury (due to Obama NWS Rule) minusany actual lending by the Treasury to F-F.These F-F profits swept away by the Treasury represent transfers from enterprising wealth creators to indolent usurpers (mega BHCs and their political and elite pundit allies) who would (without such transfer) have paid higher taxes.  Shutting down F-F to transfer their loan portfolios will be a windfall gain for the mega BHCs and their political and pundit allies.  Shutting down F-F would also result in usurious interest rates, causing perpetual transfer of wealth from the enterprising wealth creators to the indolent DEEP STATE.
  • Above all, presidential candidate Trump has emphasized to restructure US debt.  This means a major part of the wealth of the DEEP STATE, now held in form of US Treasuries, would shrink dramatically by a new Trump executive order to restructure US debt.  I saw and scripted such resolution of the ballooning of US debt in a 2003 book.[9]  [The Cambridge University president declined to have this book in his collection after the Cambridge U economics editor, Chris Harrison, accepted it for publication because it was written in a “campaign” style meant for reform. This book was published in 2005 by Citizens Publishing.  Incidentally, I came to a robust conclusion in 2003 that the economy would crash, costing taxpayers trillions and leading, eventually, to a restructuring of the unsustainable debt holdings of the government and households for the system to gravitatetowards equilibrium peacefully, if not painfully.  The economy crashed[10] in 2008 and the US debt has almost doubled since 2003.  Will the Trump Administration restructure US debt?] 
  • Anticipating US debt restructure by a president who is not inclined to listen to the failed(failed according to FCIC) elite pundits of systemic robbery, the DEEP STATE had to rationally sell off Treasuries to buy stock since November 9, 2016. 

Conclusions:

  • The failed academic-media pundits of systemic robbery cannot rationally explain the stock market rally since your election victory. 
  • The reason behind the stock market rally since your victory is very obvious to me.  It is panic-buying of securities to cover massive short positions held by the DEEP STATE.
  • The panic buying is rational because your executive actions in just one month of your presidency to fulfillelection-time promises make your Administration very credible for execution of everything else you have promised to the Americans, which essentially is“unanimously agreeable rules of governance” which is branded by the elite media as “populist.” If the truth behind unanimously agreeable rules of governance spreads, the DEEP STATE will also agree with these rules (at least not oppose publicly), though it would be stripped of its unconstitutional power to systemically rob enterprising wealth creators.
  • Unanimously agreeable rules trump even majority-supported rules.  Unanimously agreeable rules may appear to be heretic, if not dictatorial, to the DEEP STATE.  It is because the DEEP STATE is used to surreptitious systemic robbery of enterprising wealth creators by speciously spreading mythical supremacy of this system, while trying to suppress publication of the alternative antithetic unanimously agreeable system in the media it controls.  In the best interest of your mission, however, you should steadfastly continue the unanimously agreeable path you have undertaken so far.
  • Even my Mexican American students disagree with the current (tacit) system of illegal immigration from Mexico or anywhere else to USA.  Whether to restrict legal immigration to United States from any specific set of countries should be judged independently of the epistemic truth that Islam–along with Sunna and Sariah as a sacrosanct system of governance that the Islamic State seems hell-bent to impose on the entire humanity–is not unanimously agreeable.[11]  The problem facing humanity is violent and non-violent advocacy for Islam as the only unanimously agreeable philosophy of governance.  Most Muslims were haplessly indoctrinated to advocate such belief when they were children and had no ability to reason.  Ardent advocacy for any unanimously disagreeable philosophy or religion by legal/illegal immigrants/naturalized citizens cannot be the unanimously agreeable mission of any nation which pursues for unity under the umbrage of unanimously agreeable philosophy for civilized coexistence. 
  • Unanimously Agreeable Safe Central Banking Act(proposed to be enacted) subsumes (a) restructuring the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, reinstatement of the Glass-Stegall Act of 1933 to dissociate investment banking from commercial banking, (b) elimination of the Federal Deposit Insurance and dismantling the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010 for true deregulation of the banking industry, and (c) repealing the Housing Economic Recovery Act of 2008 after re-chartering Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as government-regulated-guaranteed lenders sanspolitical funding and shadow banking.  Unanimously Agreeable Safe Central Banking Policy originated in general equilibrium within a dynamic game-theoretic model presented in a paper mimeographed at the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in 1991, where I was a financial economist (1990-1995).  I proposed this policy directly to the US Congress in 2003 for stability of the system of banking and finance.  The Congress took my proposal seriously to ask the Fed to testify about safety and soundness of the banking system and tohold a conference of experts on the issue.  I was invited to the 2003 conference.  I submitted my published paper, but did not attend the conference.  The experts led by the president of American Economic Association, U of Chicago professor Robert Lucas, had then declared that the US system of banking and finance was invincible.  The US Congressional Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission found in its 2011 report that failure of the established/anointed pundits of systemic robbery, honchos of the mega banks regulated by the Fed and the Fed regulators including the Chairman caused an avoidable (manmade) crisis.
  • The US Congress, President and regulatory agencies had to ultimately adopt my proposal for safe central banking, though on an ad hoc basis, to simply stem the domino of crashing markets in 2008.  Had the proposedUnanimously Agreeable Safe Central Banking Act been enacted in 2003 (when it was first proposed to Congress), the US economy would not have transgressed to such a mess.  Even the Federal Reserve has termed the financial catastrophe of 2008 worse than the Great Depression.  You can, thus, see why my reminding of this truth to the Cambridge U economics editor, Chris Harrison, in 2009 led to hacking by the Cambridge U - and by other powerful elements of the DEEP STATE - of my computer to eliminate all my email correspondence with publishers and Congress.  Providentially, though, the data I could extractthrough ‘blind dump’ of hard drive contents, after my computer was remotely shut down by the hackers and was not bootable again, show that the history of paramount importance to humanity has not been lost. I was clandestinely but viciously attacked by the DEEP STATE in many more ways than the hacking, though it did not dent the juggernaut of my pursuit forestablishment of unanimously agreeable rules of governance for civilized co-existence of humanity. 

The biggest deregulation and uplifting of the US economy you can and should accomplish is the proposedUnanimously Agreeable Safe Central Banking Act.  It will be the mother of all acts needed to restore constitutional governance of USA according to the dream of the founding fathers.

With profound regards,

Dr. Sankarshan Acharya, Director
Academy of Unanimously Agreeable Philosophy and Governance
(SarvagrahyaDarshan and ShasanVidyalaya)[12]

[1] Acharya, S. (2016), “Arbitrage Pricing of Total Risk of Assets, First-best Governance of Financial Markets and
Unanimously Agreeable Safe Central Banking in Equilibrium,” available at http://pro-prosperity.com/Research/moralhazardliberty.pdf
[2] Acharya, S. (2015), “Coalitions of Borrowers and Lenders, Government-Regulated Lender, Interest Rate and Safe Central Bank in Equilibrium,” available at http://pro-prosperity.com/Research/Coalition%20of%20Borrowers.pdf
[3] Acharya, S. (2016), “Arbitrage Pricing of Total Risk of Assets, First-best Governance of Financial Markets and
Unanimously Agreeable Safe Central Banking in Equilibrium,” available at http://pro-prosperity.com/Research/moralhazardliberty.pdf
[4] Acharya, S. (2012), “Economic Inefficiency and Unconstitutionality of Short Selling and Privileged Private Clearing House,” Journal of Governance and Regulation, available at http://pro-prosperity.com/Research/Sub-Optimality%20of%20Short%20Selling.pdf
[5] Acharya, S. (October 18, 2010), “Systemic Weakness in the U.S. Economy: Inefficiency and Unconstitutionality Of
The Federal Reserve Act & The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Act,” memo to President Obama, available at http://pro-prosperity.com/Systemic%20Weakness%20in%20the%20United%20States%20Economy.html
[6] Acharya, S. (February 2016), “Unanimously Agreeable, Credible Measures of Nationalism,” http://pro-prosperity.com/unanimously-agreeable-credible-measures-of-nationalism.html
[7] Acharya, S. and J.F. Dreyfus (1988), Acharya, S. and J.F. Dreyfus (1988), “Optimal Bank Reorganization Policies and the Pricing of Federal Deposit Insurance,” Journal of Finance, available at http://pro-prosperity.com/Research/Bank-foreclosure-rule-paper-Acharya-Dreyfus-Journal-of-Finance-1989.pdf

[7] Acharya, S. (April 2011), “Cause of the 2008 Financial Catastrophe:  The Experts Deceived the Academy and the Nation by Surreptitiously Rejecting Research on Economically Efficient and Constitutional System of Money and Finance, and on Optimal Holding Company Organization and Capital Structure under Constitutional Governance.
& The Academy Needs A Center of Constitutional Capitalism Founded on Rigorous Research,” available at http://pro-prosperity.com/Cause%20of%20the%202008%20Financial%20Catastrophe.pdf

[9] Acharya, S. (2005), “Prosperity, Optimal Governance, Banking, Capital Markets, Global Trade, Exchange Rate,” Citizens Publishing, available at http://pro-prosperity.com/Citizens%20Publishing/TableOfContents.pdf

[10] Acharya, S. (March 2003), “Warning to the US Congress on the Current Home Mortgage Debt Debacle,” available at http://pro-prosperity.com/Global%20Economy%20Chatterbox/Warning-USCongress-In-2003-On-Home-Mortgage-Debacle.html

]11] Acharya, S. (May 2016), “Triumph of Ancient Philosophy, Unanimously Agreeable Governance, Economic Policy and Constitution for Civilized Coexistence,” available at http://pro-prosperity.com/triumphantphilosophy%20-%20one.pdf