quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Improving upon the law of the land? For everyone? Or for themselves? Why do you think the Constitution was so controversial? You do realize, don't you, that the Federalist Papers were written because it looked as if the Constitution was headed for the trash. It was written illegally, and did not serve to improve the lives of many average Americans at the time. Is it a good document? History says yes. But at the time, that was very much in question. I really suggest, as a constitutionalist, that you take a political theory course that delves into the formation of the actual Constitution you always cite.

With PLEASURE! I'll look for it as an elective..

___________________

Last edited by Krypton on Nov-06-2007 at 03:56

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton With PLEASURE! I'll for it as an elective..

American political history is really a fascinating subject - if you haven't already read it, I definitely recommend you also check out Alexis de Tocqueville's "Democracy in America" from 1830. It gets a bit dull in spots, but it's a very prescient take on early American governance and society.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN no, im waiting for you to at least read his post and get your own answers to the questions you asked him to summarise. is it too hard when your research involves more than an obscure youtube video?

First off, videos I've posted are limited to the front page. Videos are not my sole tool in the evidence bag.

quote:

yeah, because im not an economist. you even said yourself that so why you expect me to waltz in here with my history and politics qualifications is a bit weird. might sound weird to you, but i enjoy reading people's posts even if i don't get too deep in the argument.

I usually have a knack for trying to stick to the argument at hand and avoiding personal criticism, unless a latinloser needs a spanking, but I'm not a latinloser. In this thread, I see no reason why anyone has a need to personal criticism. Can we stop talking about me and my background in this thread, and just worry about the arguments?

quote:

but, you have at least maintained the conspiracy theorist technique of posting a bunch of sensationalist videos, then ignoring anything anyone else says about it, especially if that person appears more knowledgeable than you.

Again, I posted very informative videos with people who are smarter than all of us, and have experience in their related backgrounds. Did you not notice that at all? I'm not posting videos from 911truth.org for christ's sake!!

quote:

my argument is this: you guys that live on the "fringe" with your outlandish ideas never really display the commitment you profess to have. If the situation is as obviously bad and corrupt as you state, then you shouldn't have any problems pointing that out to someone with economics credentials, such as occrider. He went to significant time and effort to provide you with the answers you seek, yet your response equates to "COR version please". If you want your (crazy) ideas to make an impact, you have to be willing to defend them from the "adults" that know more than some BS video has to show you.

I think I provided several problems pointing out problems within the system. I'de hardly consider myself a conspiracy fringe kook as you try to make me out to be. I for the most part, believe 911 really happened, I believe the central bank does serve a good purpose, though not in its current form. I don't believe in "evil" bankers, just criminal ones. I think you pkc, misunderstand me on so many levels, but I'll keep trying to help you guys understand..

quote:

If you don’t possess an academic-like commitment to responding to reasonable criticisms or arguments, why on earth are you here? im sick and tired of those of you that love the "outside" never sticking around to adequately defend your position. its disingenuous and profoundly irritating.

Sorry, but I don't have the stamina to read that long of a copy & paste on a computer screen. I might as well print it out and take my time reading it then. Until then, I'll rather have a summary explaination for why the Jeykll Island meeting was for the best interest of the voters, and not the money changers. How simple can that possibly be? I'm still here, aren't I. So what are you talking about me leaving the argument?

___________________

The 21 evils of inflation...

[[ LINK REMOVED ]]


This professor breaks it down and gets deep about inflation.

The one evil that struck me was,

The first to receive inflationary money are the ones to benefit from inflation because prices have yet to have risen as the market becomes aware of the additional money supply. Therefore, they are able to buy more now. The first ones to receive inflationary money are the government and banks...

Also, the illusion of increased wealth. Before the market realizes the extra money supply by raising prices (which takes several months), the beneficiaries of inflation increase consumption, thus spending rises. This gives investors the illusion that markets are appreciating, when in reality, it is just extra money flowing into the system.

___________________

What I don't understand is why people only see inflation as a bad thing. It is an unavoidable symptom of a growing economy. In some cases one would say it even provides incredible benefits. As our currency becomes worth less, our goods become cheaper to buy in the global market. Other countries find them more attractive relative to goods from a country with a higher valued currency and our exports rise. As our exports rise the companies in our country realize increased profits and can expand production to meet greater demand. There is a whole host of benefits to our economy from our businesses growing that I don't feel I have to explain.

Why do you think China is keeping their currency worth so little compared to the dollar? Their goods are really cheap and the world buys from them. Their economy is, as a result growing at double digit figures.

While this is simple economic theory, it is exampled by Asian countries as we speak. Europe and the U.S. are experiencing an unbelievable trade deficit which I think is far more harmful to this country than managed inflation and devaluation of the dollar.

Look at export figures recently (while I don't have an exact figure or story for you someone else might be able to chime in on that) and you will see an increase in U.S. exports, while our dollar continues to fall.

And anyone who wants us to return to the gold standard is a little out of touch with reality. Gold is a completely limited commodity which will restrict the growth of our economy to our ability to collect gold. Gold is just like paper in that it only has value if you value it. I don't value gold, I value assets that are always needed regardless of economic conditions. Land, food, resources that can be used to produce goods and services that are needed or wanted. Gold can be used to produce trinkets. I value the metal far less than steel because we can not use it to create a building, a tank, a car. Its uses are limited and therefor its value is too. If a catastrophe strikes, I don't want gold, I want and shelter. The ability to protect myself.

The value of a precious metal is assigned as arbitrarily as the value of a currency; however we can create more money to suit the growth of our economy, and gold we cannot.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton The first to receive inflationary money are the ones to benefit from inflation because prices have yet to have risen as the market becomes aware of the additional money supply. Therefore, they are able to buy more now. The first ones to receive inflationary money are the government and banks... Also, the illusion of increased wealth. Before the market realizes the extra money supply by raising prices (which takes several months), the beneficiaries of inflation increase consumption, thus spending rises. This gives investors the illusion that markets are appreciating, when in reality, it is just extra money flowing into the system.

It is called economic lag. There is a similar lag in the increase in wages after we see price increases. What do you expect, for everything to magically change instantly; all at the same time? One thing changes, then the markets have to readjust to the change. This takes time. There is disparity in the meantime. What we can do is try to help those suffering from this disparity until the correction is complete.

Last edited by Dieselboy_1206 on Dec-24-2007 at 14:17

quote:

If a catastrophe strikes, I don't want gold, I want and shelter. The ability to protect myself.

If a catastrophe strikes, and you don't have food or shelter, how will you acquire them? Do you really think people will trade you these things for a pile of paper and ink?

Ask the people in Weimar about that.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt If a catastrophe strikes, and you don't have food or shelter, how will you acquire them? Do you really think people will trade you these things for a pile of paper and ink? Ask the people in Weimar about that.

And do you think someone will want gold? What can my neighbor do with gold? They have food, I need food. I need to find something I have or can do that is worth value. It is called bartering. It existed before money. The trade of goods and services directly. In the threat of an extreme catastrophe, if someone wanted food or shelter that I have and hands me some gold, I will turn them away.

If they offer their physical help in planting crops with me, and managing the supply of food, they will be entitled to access to that food in exchange for their labor. It is called working together for a common good, or survival. The very basics of economics.

Gold is a universal currency and it DOES have instrinsic value by virtue of it being rare (unlike paper). Gold has been used as money for thousands of years...through the rise and fall of empires, repeated holy wars, world wars, famines, etc. Gold endures and always holds value...not because any government decrees that it should, and not not even because it's pretty and fun to hold. It has always been money for one simple reason...though 10,000 years of recorded human history, it is what people have CHOSEN as money. It is what people have always chosen as the medium of exchange. It can't be printed, and is not subject to the whims of temporary governments that men create. For this reason it will still be considered money LONG after we leave this earth, and long after the dollar/euro/yen/peso have gone the way of the dodo bird.

Oh, and if we got nuked, and I had an extra loaf of bread lying around, I would gladly trade it for an ounce of gold...but If you offered a million paper rectangles I would have to refuse.

It has always held value, true. Throughout the ages it has always been worth something to someone, great. It still limits the growth of an economy to the amount one can collect. It is also still a commodity that only has value because it is rare. It will likely always have value, however economies grow from the conversion of resources into goods and services, not the accumulation of gold.

Should we work to collect gold and other precious metals? Yes. Should our currency be pegged to gold? No. It would increase the value of our currency a great deal and make our goods relatively more expensive in the global market thereby decreasing exports. Businesses would suffer and our economy would suffer.

As it already is from the over-valuation of the dollar as it exists today.

quote:

It is called economic lag. There is a similar lag in the increase in wages after we see price increases. What do you expect, for everything to magically change instantly; all at the same time? One thing changes, then the markets have to readjust to the change. This takes time. There is disparity in the meantime. What we can do is try to help those suffering from this disparity until the correction is complete.

Did you just make up the phrase "economic lag"?

There is no lag anywhere within the chain of inflationary money. The banks get the inflationary dollars first. Everything is cheaper for them. By the time that inflationary money reaches the mainstream money supply, the market would have already realized the increased money supply, thereby making every more expensive.

It's really an observation about who really runs the show here. Inflation increases redistribution of wealth upwards. Inflation is a necessary function of the money system, but when it gets out of hand, what the professor said can be worse 10-fold.

Zimbabwe is one prime example. The government there increased the money supply thousands of time over and guess whose benefiting? Sure ain't the consumer. Only government and money institutions in Zimbabwe benefit from such rampant inflation.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Dieselboy_1206 What I don't understand is why people only see inflation as a bad thing. It is an unavoidable symptom of a growing economy. In some cases one would say it even provides incredible benefits.

This guy is seriously clued in.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt Ask the people in Weimar about that.

In Weimar Republic Germany, the value of the Mark was tied to gold reserves... but when Germany owed more in reparations than it had in gold + foreign reserves, hyperinflation resulted. The government had no choice but to print off more money to cover debts owed under Versailles, resulting in extreme hyperinflation as the value of gold/mark plummeted.

___________________