An online source I have come to heed goes by the name SLAWEKP, put up
by Paul Slawek who migrated to this country from Poland and now lives
in Seattle where he runs a car and truck rental business. Slawek has
demonstrated a remarkable ability to dig up seemingly unrelated clusters
of facts and combine them into new informational wholes.
17 this year he alerted his readers with the headline: "The
72-Year Cycle Crash Due Now." The 72-year cycle is of Mayan astrological
origin and last clocked on July 8, 1932 when stock prices hit their bottom
during the great depression of the 1930s. Going back from that point
72 years marked the 1858 pit of the Crash of 1857. Going forward brings
us to July 8, 2004—plus or minus 118 days, Slawek calculates.
the New Economy?
get your news from TV, you've noticed that newscasters are split on the
question of whether the economy is improving or not. Financial channels
focus on the stock market. CNN's Lou Dobbs focuses on the outsourcing
of American jobs and the growing number of illegal immigrants driving
down American wages. Economists paid by government or corporations assure
us that dramatic increases in productivity is a sure sign of a robust
recovery for "the new economy". What is the new economy? And
does it have anything to do with Slawek's 72-year cycle of Mayan derivation?
What best defines the new economy is a form of investing called derivatives. "...the
US financial derivatives market has a volume of $300 trillion
dollars. Derivatives are any financial instrument or commodity derived
from a real source of wealth such as stocks, land or gold. For example,
a gold future is a derivative. Stock options and margins are
derivatives. Derivatives have no connection to real productivity or value." (1)
If $300 trillion dollars were invested, instead, in the production of
goods and services, infrastructure and social programs, it would improve
the overall economy. But that would not return the "productivity" (profits)
that chancing the $300 trillion in derivatives produces.
this kind of investment has a new name, it's not a new game. “Speculation," as
it used to be called, was rife in the 1920s before the Crash of 1929.
It was also rife in the 1720s leading to the bursting of the South Sea
Bubble and, in Paris, the sudden unraveling of the Mississippi Swindle,
speculation in land along the banks of the Mississippi River promoted
by one John Law, a Scotsman who became the Alan Greenspan of France ,
briefly. History also records another event called Tulip Mania. The list
goes on. Get-rich-quick schemes are as old as our illustrious species,
but two things are different this time around: 1) derivatives are for
the super rich only, and 2) money is no longer on the gold standard,
it "floats free."
You can't join a respectable hedge fund (derivatives
club) unless you're a multi-millionaire. The Federal Reserve can print
as much money as it believes, in its secluded wisdom, is needed because
no one can exchange a dollar for a dollar's worth of gold. Gold is
now a commodity, bet up or down by hedge funds, using practically unlimited
amounts of e-money, numbers in bank computers.
Derivatives derive from medieval agricultural futures contracts, when
speculators bought farmers' produce months ahead of delivery. That kind
of gamble was socially beneficial because it kept produce prices from
wild fluctuations. Today's derivatives are gambles on price fluctuations.
Since the super rich use their bank's money, one bad play could rack
up a lot of computer numbers, which are counted as real money, measures
of value. And since even the canniest gambler is sure to lose once in
a while, the only questions are when and how much.
I decided to do a
Western astrological study to see if a planetary signature could be
found for the Mayan-derived 72-year cycle. There are a dozen or more
ways one could go about this. I chose what I consider the simplest and,
usually, the most telling: comparing 72-year cycle lows to a natal chart
of the USA.
to the U.S. Chart
that in 1932, the US Mercury-Pluto opposition was being hit by Pluto
conjunct the US Mercury opposite Saturn conjunct the US Pluto. In 1858,
72 years previous, the US Mercury-Pluto opposition was hit by Saturn
conjunct the US Mercury, opposite Pluto conjunct the US Pluto. This
could lead us to suppose it may be Saturn-Pluto oppositions, afflicting
the US Mercury-Pluto opposition, which we should look for in July 2004
when the 72-year cycle is due. But in July 2004 Pluto is opposite
the US Mars, and Saturn (with the Sun) conjunct the US Sun. Chiron
will be conjunct the US Pluto opposite the US Mercury. Thus in July
neither Saturn nor Pluto will negatively hit the US Mercury-Pluto opposition,
although both will be hitting economically sensitive points in the
US natal chart.
cycles do not dance to the beat of our earthly calendar and it looks
more likely that the 72-year cycle will be ripe to click in September
when Saturn will come conjunct the US Mercury and thus opposite the
US Pluto, while the Sun, Mars, Jupiter and Pluto will form a dangerous
T-square with the US Mars-Neptune square, an historic indication of
out that Mayan astrology was "rooted in the Earth's
rotation," and thus there may be no exact Western astrological equivalence
for it. The Maya put more emphasis on points in the universe surrounding
our solar system. In an email sent March 17, Slawek said:
the small rounding error in calling it a 72-year instead of the
precise 71.677 years based on a Gaia heartbeat counting 200,000
(Pi) hours, means we have a window of +/- 118 days from 72 years
from July 8, 1932. We have JUST ENTERED that window in the past
few days! (from March 17). This window is open until almost exactly
the day of the US election (November 2, 2004).
the 72-year cycle remains true to past form, it will mean something
more severe than what the term "secular bear market" means.
The financial markets are not the whole economy, however, so it's possible
for the financial system to flourish or flounder without benefiting or
damaging the whole economy. It depends on how we collectively respond.
How we are likely to collectively respond depends on who gets elected
in November 2004. If Bush is reelected, more money will likely be transferred
to the investor class (big tax cuts for the rich) in the hope that more
investment will pull the overall economy up.
Democratic candidate John
Kerry has said he will arrest the outsourcing of American jobs by removing
taxpayer-funded subsidies for big corporations to move abroad, and
incentivize companies that stay home. It hardly makes sense for American
workers to subsidize the loss of their own jobs. More jobs mean the production
of more real goods and services, stimulating investment in real things
rather than in price fluctuations. So far, neither Bush nor Kerry has
addressed the derivatives game, the production of free-floating dollar
profits without the need to hire workers.
the optimism of TV pundits remains as immutable as gold. Who should
we believe?—the "best economic minds of our time" or
the remains of long-gone Mayan astrologers, who predicted that if money
loses its moorings in physical reality—(the world's currencies now "float
free")—a major financial breakdown would be inevitable.(3)
1 & 2. Both these quotes are from the website, "From
the Wilderness" article
about an economic conference held in Moscow. The first quoted is Dr.
Jonathan Tennenbaum, Scientific Advisor to the Schiller Institute and
the Executive Intelligence Review (EIR), Wiesbaden, Germany, at an economic
conference held in Moscow in March of 2001.
3. See Mayan
Time & Money by Robert Gover.