Become a part of the TranceAddict community!Frequently Asked Questions - Please read this if you haven'tSearch the forums
TranceAddict Forums > Other > Political Discussion / Debate > The Secret Criminal Society of the Federal Reserve
Pages (21): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 »   Last Thread   Next Thread
Share
Author
Thread    Post A Reply
Trancer-X
mutatis mutandis



Registered: Jul 2001
Location: Shambhala
but of course this is really not something that's new

Inflation in the USA has been completely out of control ever since the U.S. Treasury stopped paying D-2 dollars in exchange for dollar claims (1971), ushering in the spendthrift era of fiat money.




Inflation Is Theft

by Hans F. Sennholz

Many people know how to earn money, but few are aware of what the Federal Reserve System, acting on behalf of the U.S. Government, is doing to their money. It is inflating and depreciating the dollar at various rates – at double-digit rates during the 1970s and early 80s and at single-digit rates ever since. The present dollar is worth no more than 10 cents of the 1970 dollar and 50 cents of the 1980 dollar.

The reasons and explanations given for this loss may change over time, but the consequences are always the same. Inflation covertly transfers income and wealth from all creditors to all debtors. It dispossessed present creditors of nine-tenths of their 1980 savings and enriched debtors by the same amount. The dollar savings accumulated since then have shrunk at lesser rates but are fading away notwithstanding. No wonder, many victims readily conclude that thrift and self-reliance are useless and even injurious and that spending and debt are preferable by far. They may join the multitudes of spenders who prefer to consume today and pay tomorrow, and they may call on government demanding compensation, aid, and care in many forms. Surely, the hurt and harm inflicted by inflation are a mighty driving force for government programs and benefits.

In their discussions and analyses of various problems, economists usually avoid the use of moral terms dealing with ultimate principles that should govern human conduct. Ever fearful of being embroiled in ethical controversies they seek to remain neutral and “value-free.” They do counsel legislators and regulators on the cost-efficiency of a policy but not on its moral implications. They may offer professional advice on the efficiency of money management but not on the morality or immorality of inflationary policies. They dare not state that inflation is a pernicious form of taxation which most people do not recognize as such. Authorities of money and banking rather than taxing authorities redistribute income and wealth under cover of ignorance. Placed on every person in the form of higher goods prices, the application does not fall equally and simultaneously on every buyer. The people who receive the newly created money first may actually benefit, as goods prices readjust rather slowly. Others who receive it later or not at all will have to tighten their belts. Above all, inflation ravishes the savings of countless Americans and turns many into prodigal spenders and debtors.

The biggest debtor also is the biggest inflation profiteer. With some eight trillion dollars in debt, the Federal Government is by far the biggest winner. In fact, it gains not only from debt depreciation, which at just three percent amounts to some $240 billion every year, but also from Federal Reserve money and credit creation that enables the U.S. Treasury to suffer annual budget deficits of some $500 billion a year. Without the power to inflate and depreciate the dollar at will, the U.S. Government would be a different institution, like that which the Founding Fathers had envisioned. But endowed with the power of inflation it has become an almighty organization that redistributes income and wealth and refashions the social and economic order.

The primary beneficiaries of the new order are its own managers: legislators, regulators, and a huge army of civil servants. They are first in power, prestige, and benefits. Many U.S. Senators and Congressmen are the admired and esteemed benefactors of countless petitioners for handouts and favors. They are revered for every benefit they bestow. And there are the officials of the Department of Commerce with 7 benefit programs, the Department of Education with 34 programs, the Department of Energy with 6, the Department of Health and Human Services with 8, the Department of Housing and Urban Development with 14, the Department of the Interior with 3, the Department of Labor with 9, the Department of Transportation with 9, and various government commissions and authorities with another 10 programs. Federal politicians and agents are the wise and virtuous judges and juries of benefits amounting to more than $1 trillion every year. How “honorable” would they be, pray tell, without Federal Reserve assistance in financing the deficits and its power to print more money?

Evil acts tend to breed more evil acts. Inflationary policies conducted for long periods of time not only foster the growth of government but also depress economic activity. Standards of living may stagnate or even decline as growing budget deficits thwart capital accumulation and investment that are sustaining the standards. Inflation misleads businessmen in their investment decisions, which causes much waste and many bankruptcies. In fact, it is the root cause of the boom-and-bust cycle which wreaks havoc on economic activity. Indeed, inflation breeds many evils of which most Americans are unaware.

Since 1971 when President Nixon abolished the last vestiges of the gold standard and repudiated all obligations to meet international obligations with payments in gold, the U.S. dollar has been the dominant world currency. It enables Americans to buy massive quantities of foreign goods and services, suffering annual trade deficits of more than half a trillion dollars now, and making payment in ever-depreciating dollars. Foreign central and commercial banks as well as many foreign individuals are using their dollars with the hope that they will retain their purchasing power in the long run. Asian creditors are holding more than $2 trillion in claims, Japan and China alone an estimated $1.5 trillion between them. A dollar depreciation rate of just 3 percent strips Japan and China of some $45 billion in purchasing power every year. They undoubtedly are suffering such losses in silence because they are mindful of the many benefits they are receiving from amicable relations with the United States. American capital is rushing into China, building many plants and introducing modern technology while some 20,000 young Chinese are studying at American colleges and universities. At the same time Japanese and Chinese companies are investing surplus dollars in the United States, assuming control over American corporations. If the United States government should ever disrupt this peaceful relationship with discriminatory trade restrictions and painful barriers, the Asian creditors may dump some dollar holdings. The dollar crash would be heard around the globe.

There is no conscience in politics. Economic policies may be changed, reformed, and readjusted because they are ineffective, unproductive, and unpopular, but rarely ever because they are immoral. Debt may be a grievous bondage to an honorable man, but it may be a “national bond” which, in President Roosevelt’s words, “is owed not only by the nation but also to the nation.” Surely, politicians have a code of laws to observe and obey, but honesty in matters of debt and money is not one of them.

If it is true that we cannot do wrong without suffering wrong, we must brace for more grief to come.

June 24, 2005

Dr. Hans F. Sennholz was professor and chairman of the department of economics at Grove City College.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/sennholz6.html




Inflation and the Federal Reserve:
The Consequences of Political Money Supply


by Lawrence H. White

Lawrence H. White is assistant professor of economics at New York University.


Executive Summary

Lately the supply of money has become, even more than usual, an object of considerable concern and indignation in Washington. The supplier of money, the Federal Reserve System, has come under heavy fire from all sides.

Treasury Secretary Donald T. Regan opened the barrage last summer by criticizing Fed money creation as too meager. In January he complained that money supply growth had been excessive in past weeks, and too volatile overall in past months. In December, Sen. Howard Baker expressed personally to Federal Reserve Board Chairman Paul Volcker the opinion of some congressional leaders that overly restrictive Fed policy was worsening the recession. At a January press conference President Reagan complained that excessive monetary growth, as experienced in the previous month, "sends, I think, the wrong signal to the money markets," undermining business confidence that inflation will slow down, though he has since spoken more positively of Volcker's policies. Rep. Jack Kemp, the leading congressional supply-sider, has gone so far as to demand that Volcker step down, on the grounds that the Fed has been overly devoted to slowing inflation through tight money.

There indeed has been much to criticize in Federal Reserve behavior. It is clear from the numbers that the Fed's policy has been both expansionary and erratic. The basic M-1 measure of the money stock (cash plus checking accounts) rose at an incredible 26% annual rate between December 1981 and January 1982, even when we average the M-1 figures for the four weeks preceding December 23 and January 20 to include the decline in M-1 in the week preceding January 20. This monetary explosion began back in late October 1981.

For last year as a whole, M-1 (then called M-1B) grew by the less extreme but still price-boosting rate of 4.6%. This included a burst of 23.8% annualized growth between early February and late April, in addition to the recent increase, with some weeks of actual shrinkage intervening. Going back a bit further, the Fed expanded M-1 interruptedly for seven months from late April to late November 1980 at an annual rate of 15%.[1]

Few of us need to be reminded what has happened to the value of our cash holdings in recent years. The numbers are dismaying. In the three months prior to September 1981, consumer prices for all items except food and energy rose at a 15.2% annual rate. During the 12-month period ending last October, the purchasing power of the dollar -- as measured by the 10.2% rise in general consumer prices -- shrank by a tenth. In the year prior to that period, consumer prices rose 12.2%. Since 1967 the dollar's value has shrunk to less than 36 cents.[2]

Why have overall prices behaved in this way? The basic immediate cause is evident: The value of the dollar has been diluted by progressive additions made to the number of dollars (the stock of money) in circulation. The M-1 money stock was expanded at an average annual rate of 6.1% between 1970 and 1975; prices rose at a 6.5% rate. Money averaged 7.1% annual growth between 1975 and 1980; prices grew at a 7.2% rate [3]

Blame for our nation's erratic inflation, then, belongs squarely on the shoulders of our nation's monetary authority. The Fed's actions are responsible for the rate of growth of the total stock of dollars, and hence are responsible for the rate of dilution of the purchasing power of each existing dollar -- the rate of price inflation. Changes in the willingness of the public to hold onto various forms of dollars, or changes in banking practices, may temporarily divert the rate of inflation from its appointed path, but over the longer haul (say, six months to a year) the predominance of the Fed is virtually complete. Other explanations of persistently rising prices simply do not wash.

Why has the Fed behaved in this way? There is not wide agreement among economists as to the best answer to this question. The answer differs depending on whether the analyst wants to explain the Fed's actions taken last week, or a pattern of actions taken week-to-week over the past few years, or, more fundamentally, the overall behavior of the institution in the decades since its inception. We address ourselves here to this last concern. If we wish to understand the root cause of our erratic inflation, we must ask why the Fed is fundamentally prone to pursue a policy of uneven monetary expansion. There is a serious danger in focusing myopically on the monetary growth rates of last week, last month, or even last year: We may lose sight of the more important and enduring trends in money and prices. Also, we may overemphasize such cosmetic changes as the October 1979 guidelines emphasizing monetary targets over interest rate targets.

It is the institution of the Federal Reserve System that is responsible for our monetary disorder. Monetary trends cannot be explained merely by the personalities of the Fed chairman, the Board of Governors, or the Open Market Investment Committee. Personnel changes in the last decade have had no perceptible impact on Fed policy, whatever the changes in rhetoric. Monetary trends cannot be corrected, despite Rep. Kemp's apparent wish to believe the contrary, merely by substituting new faces for old. Nor are we likely to accomplish much by bestowing yet more free advice on those now in charge. In order to understand what has happened to our money, and especially to find a remedy, we must look to the incentives and constraints effectively acting upon the suppliers of money.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa008es.html

Old Post Jan-25-2008 01:38  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for Trancer-X Click here to Send Trancer-X a Private Message Visit Trancer-X's homepage! Add Trancer-X to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
shaolin_Z
Hei Hu Quan



Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Austin, Texas, USA: TXTA #102

quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
yeah, because virtually every economist on the planet is also "ignorant"

Most peole are pretty ignorant, regardless of status and degrees. Infact, the 'intellectual' elite are the most indoctrinated class in today's 'democratic' societies. Knowing a whole lot about nothing might impress your average wannabe 'intellectual,' but not everyone is obsessed with class, status, and superficial recognition. Since you seem to respect Chomsky so much, perhaps you should give more thought on this point where we are in agreement.


___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

Old Post Jan-25-2008 01:43  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for shaolin_Z Click here to Send shaolin_Z a Private Message Add shaolin_Z to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Trancer-X
mutatis mutandis



Registered: Jul 2001
Location: Shambhala
economists? lol

May 1998
Volume 16, Number 5

Perils of the Dollar Standard
by Jeffrey M. Herbener

Winter's economic crisis in Asia was blamed on "go-go capitalism" and "crony capitalism," but those explanations don't get to the root cause. The Asian meltdown stems from structural defects deep within the world monetary system itself. These are defects that no amount of bailouts, exchange controls, IMF power, or even U.S. monetary discipline can repair.

Crushing price inflation in Indonesia most dramatically illustrates the monetary dimension. From the summer 1997 to early 1998, the rupiah lost 75 percent of its purchasing power against the dollar and domestic prices for basic necessities skyrocketed. Rice was up 36 percent, cooking oil 40 percent, milk 50 percent, and electricity 200 percent. This sparked runs on stores, a drought of investment, growing exodus of businesses, a collapse of the banking system, massive layoffs, violence and riots, soaring interest rates, and sinking stock and real estate markets.

The Suharto regime froze prices for basic foodstuffs, mandated wage increases, allowed a few bank mergers, sent troops into the streets to quell unrest, and suggested a debt moratorium. The IMF pressed Indonesia to raise taxes to balance its budget, adopt American-style bankruptcy laws, and bail out bad debt to the tune of $43 billion. But this Suharto-IMF onslaught only aggravated a desperate situation by short-circuiting market forces.

If it hasn't helped Indonesia, what is the point of the IMF plan? It is designed to enforce the international dollar-reserve system deemed essential to U.S. interests. U.S. banks and companies will be relieved of some of their losses by the massive bailout. But more importantly, the IMF is part of the attempt to maintain American monetary and economic hegemony by ensuring that the ravages of price inflation stay far from America's shores.

This is no mean feat considering the massive monetary and credit expansion engineered by the Federal Reserve in the 1990s "global" boom. From the end of 1990 to the end of 1996, the Fed used its open market operations to increase the monetary base (MB), which is currency plus bank reserves, by 55 percent. Currency itself increased 60 percent.

Only a corresponding increase in money demand can forestall price inflation once monetary inflation of this magnitude has been set in motion. But growth rates of the American economy--not high by historical standards--have been insufficient to absorb this monetary inflation and bring about the current low, and even falling, rates of price inflation. The greater money demand has come overseas as the U.S. has asserted the dollar's status as the world's reserve currency.

The dollar-reserve system of the "global economy" of the 1990s is the resurrection of the Bretton Woods system without gold. Under the "gold-reserve" system of Bretton Woods, each country's currency had a fixed exchange rate against the dollar and foreign governments could redeem the dollar at the U.S. Treasury for gold at the fixed rate of $35 an ounce.

The arrangement forced a coordinated monetary and credit inflation among the member countries at a rate determined by the Federal Reserve. Any rogue nation intent on excessive monetary inflation would be punished by devaluation and domestic price inflation, and the attendant problems now being suffered by the Indonesians. Just the threat of such a catastrophe was normally sufficient to induce the profligate nation to curtail its liberal monetary inflation.

The linchpin of the Bretton Woods agreement was the fixed rate of redemption between the dollar and gold. The Fed broke this link by accelerating monetary inflation in the 1960s to help finance expenditures for the Great Society and Vietnam war.

From the beginning of 1960 to the end of 1964, the Fed increased the money base 3 percent per year, but from the beginning of 1965 to the end of 1970, the Fed more than doubled the rate of increase to 6.3 percent. The average annual rate of price inflation went from 1.3 percent in the earlier period to 4.2 percent in the latter one.

Recognizing that the monetary inflation was reducing the purchasing power of the dollar sufficiently to make the fixed rate between the dollar and gold untenable, foreign governments began to cash in dollars at the U.S. Treasury for gold.

When Nixon reneged on the U.S. promise to exchange dollars for gold to foreign governments at $35 an ounce in 1971, foreigners dumped dollars in anticipation of an official devaluation to bring the dollar's official exchange rate in line with its, much lower, market-determined purchasing power.

The sudden reduction in money demand brought devaluation and, as the dollars were repatriated, domestic price inflation. By 1973, the dollar had devalued 18 percent and annual price inflation rates averaged 6.8 percent from 1971 to 1974. As the dollar lost its purchasing power, interest rates rose to compensate lenders for the reduced value of dollars they would receive in the future. The 3-month Treasury bill rate went from 4.1 percent in 1971 to 7.9 percent in 1974; the 10-year Treasury bond rate jumped from 6.1 percent in 1971 to 8 percent in 1975.

Higher interest rates caused capital values to collapse and the ensuing losses led to bankruptcies and rising unemployment. From late 1972 to late 1974, the Dow fell 45 percent; unemployment rose from 3.5 percent in 1970 to 8.5 percent by late 1975. The Nixon administration responded to the crisis with price controls, changes in bank regulations and bankruptcy laws, and more Fed inflation.

After increasing the monetary base 8.7 percent per year from 1971-1974, the Fed accelerated the rate to 10.4 percent from 1975 to 1981.But after the debacle of the first half of the 1970s, it was difficult to convince foreigners to hold more dollars as reserve. Accelerating monetary and credit inflation by the Fed led immediately to severe domestic price inflation (average annual rates of 11.2 percent), soaring interest rates (peaking in 1981 at a 14 percent 3-month), collapsing capital values (from 1976 to 1982, the Dow lost 22 percent and stood at 774 in 1982), and higher unemployment (peaking at 9.7 percent in 1982, a rate not seen since 1941).

This entire scenario is precisely the reverse of the American economy in the 1990s. From 1982 through 1990, the dollar began to regain its status as the world's reserve currency. The Fed expanded the monetary base 11 percent per year in the 1980s, but the demand to hold dollars overseas helped soak up the monetary inflation and the American economy experienced economic growth with low levels of price inflation. The annual rate of price inflation was only 5.9 percent. But the improved performance of the economy in the 1980s was only a foretaste of the renaissance of dollar dominance in the world.

American supremacy in the wake of the collapse of communism allowed the Fed to fully exploit the international dollar reserve system. The new system opened up a vast new vista for overseas dollar holdings. From Russia and Eastern Europe to China and East Asia, the governments of former communist countries began to soak up dollars to hold as official reserves as they became part of the American, "global" system. From the beginning of 1991 to the end of 1996, the Fed increased the MB 9.1 percent per year, while price inflation ran only 3.6 percent annually.

The new regime differs from Bretton Woods in the absence of a link between the dollar and gold. Without the fetter of gold reserves and redemption commitments of dollars for gold binding it, the Fed has no objective constraint in determining the rate of dollar inflation.

But like Bretton Woods, the new regime depends on foreigners' willingness to hold dollars and use them as the basis for their own domestic monetary inflation and credit expansion. Only with harmonized monetary policies can the system survive.

Any country trying to take advantage of the fixed exchange rate of its currency against the dollar by excessive domestic monetary inflation and credit expansion will be punished, as under Bretton Woods, with devaluation and domestic price inflation.

But therein lies the great danger of the system to the American economy. A rogue nation will be tempted to defend its currency, and stave off devaluation, by spending its dollar reserves. Any significant disgorging of dollars would threaten to ignite price inflation in America if the dollars were repatriated. Significant domestic price inflation would, at best, bring a repeat of the 1970s, and, at worst, a hyperinflation.

This danger explains the U.S. interest in promoting IMF austerity policies and bailouts. The bailouts are intended to soften the blow of devaluation and price inflation. In exchange for taxpayers subsidizing banks and large corporations, and other key beneficiaries of the system, the IMF can use the bailout money as leverage to impose conditions favorable for the future of the dollar-reserve system.

One condition the IMF has imposed across Asia is for the recipient country to establish an "independent" central bank, i.e., one independent of local political control, and therefore at liberty to harmonize monetary policy with the Federal Reserve. Other conditions concern fiscal policy consistent with much lower rates of domestic monetary inflation, ones that allow stable exchange rates between domestic currencies and the dollar: raising taxes, restricting spending, balancing budgets. The remaining conditions address the hemorrhaging bankruptcies and collapsing financial systems across Asia.

In the last three years, the system has faced a $50 billion bailout of Mexico, a $57 billion bailout of South Korea, $43 billion for Indonesia, $18 billion for Thailand, for a total of $118 billion in Asia (some estimate that it will eventually rise to $160 billion) to fend off its own destruction. But by delaying the day of reckoning with bailouts, the international mountain of dollars and debt grows, making the inevitable collapse all the more devastating.

Will the system be able to prevent disgorging of dollar reserves to fend off Asian-style financial debacles in China, South America, Russia, and a repeat performance in Mexico? If the euro becomes the common currency of the EU, what will happen if its members replace their dollar reserves with euros? And if Japan recovers, what will happen if the yen becomes the reserve currency across Asia?

The Fed has overseen the best of times for the American economy in the 1990s, a period of rapid monetary inflation and credit expansion with current benefits of low interest rates, high earnings, soaring capital values, low unemployment, and steady economic growth. It has come courtesy of foreigners who have absorbed enormous quantities of dollars and, in so doing, kept U.S. price inflation at bay.

If Fed and Treasury officials seem tired and hypersensitive about their every remark these days, maybe they realize the worst of times must be the future cost to be paid when U.S. dollar hegemony wanes.
-----------------

Jeffrey Herbener teaches economics at Grove City College.

http://www.mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=81

Old Post Jan-25-2008 01:44  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for Trancer-X Click here to Send Trancer-X a Private Message Visit Trancer-X's homepage! Add Trancer-X to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
pkcRAISTLIN
arbiter's chief minion



Registered: Jul 2002
Location:

good articles, but neither seem to advocate the return to a gold standard.

and neither address the problems a gold standard creates either.

quote:

Most peole are pretty ignorant, regardless of status and degrees. Infact, the 'intellectual' elite are the most indoctrinated class in today's 'democratic' societies. Knowing a whole lot about nothing might impress your average wannabe 'intellectual,' but not everyone is obsessed with class, status, and superficial recognition. Since you seem to respect Chomsky so much, perhaps you should give more thought on this point where we are in agreement.


well then, who DO you think should be commenting on economics matters if its not economists? if you went in for surgery would you want a doctor or cleaner doing the work?

asides from its anti-inflationary prospects, i see nothing that is good about a gold standard. there are many other things that can go wrong with an economy asides from inflation. and nobody has even attempted to address them here.


___________________

Old Post Jan-25-2008 01:48  Australia
Click Here to See the Profile for pkcRAISTLIN Click here to Send pkcRAISTLIN a Private Message Add pkcRAISTLIN to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Lebezniatnikov
Stupidity Annoys Me



Registered: Feb 2004
Location: DC

quote:
Originally posted by Trancer-X

3. and require the Fed to televise its meetings.


I'm looking in my Pocket Constitution for where this is mandated, and I can't seem to find it. Could a Ron Paul supporter help me out here?


___________________

Old Post Jan-25-2008 01:51  United Nations
Click Here to See the Profile for Lebezniatnikov Click here to Send Lebezniatnikov a Private Message Add Lebezniatnikov to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
shaolin_Z
Hei Hu Quan



Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Austin, Texas, USA: TXTA #102

quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
good articles, but neither seem to advocate the return to a gold standard.

and neither address the problems a gold standard creates either.



well then, who DO you think should be commenting on economics matters if its not economists? if you went in for surgery would you want a doctor or cleaner doing the work?

asides from its anti-inflationary prospects, i see nothing that is good about a gold standard. there are many other things that can go wrong with an economy asides from inflation. and nobody has even attempted to address them here.

I'm not proposing a gold standard since I haven't done much research about it's stability and feasability. In fact, I'm not proposing any alternative at the moment. What I am proposing is that fiat currency in combination with an intereset based banking system, particularly fractional reserve banking, will always perpetuate increasing debt and devalutation of currency. The costs are imposed socialy and gets worse generationaly.


___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

Old Post Jan-25-2008 01:55  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for shaolin_Z Click here to Send shaolin_Z a Private Message Add shaolin_Z to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
pkcRAISTLIN
arbiter's chief minion



Registered: Jul 2002
Location:

quote:
Originally posted by shaolin_Z
I'm not proposing a gold standard since I haven't done much research about it's stability and feasability. In fact, I'm not proposing any alternative at the moment. What I am proposing is that fiat currency in combination with an intereset based banking system, particularly fractional reserve banking, will always perpetuate increasing debt and devalutation of currency. The costs are imposed socialy and gets worse generationaly.


oh, i wasn't saying that you were. just that most of the talk in here does relate to returning to a gold standard and im still waiting for those to defend the problems inherent with it.


___________________

Old Post Jan-25-2008 01:57  Australia
Click Here to See the Profile for pkcRAISTLIN Click here to Send pkcRAISTLIN a Private Message Add pkcRAISTLIN to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Krypton
83.798 g/6.022x10^23



Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Texas

Yea, I don't think I'm so gung ho about changing to a precious metal standard anymore...

What needs to be changed is government spending, which can cause inflation and economic calamities. I don't think the problem is so much the fiat currency itself. Fiat currency, when used responsibly, is better than a precious metal pegged currency.

Old Post Jan-25-2008 02:01  Korea-Democratic Peoples Republic
Click Here to See the Profile for Krypton Click here to Send Krypton a Private Message Visit Krypton's homepage! Add Krypton to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Lebezniatnikov
Stupidity Annoys Me



Registered: Feb 2004
Location: DC

quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
Yea, I don't think I'm so gung ho about changing to a precious metal standard anymore...

What needs to be changed is government spending, which can cause inflation and economic calamities. I don't think the problem is so much the fiat currency itself. Fiat currency, when used responsibly, is better than a precious metal pegged currency.



Bingo.


___________________

Old Post Jan-25-2008 02:08  United Nations
Click Here to See the Profile for Lebezniatnikov Click here to Send Lebezniatnikov a Private Message Add Lebezniatnikov to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Trancer-X
mutatis mutandis



Registered: Jul 2001
Location: Shambhala

quote:
Originally posted by shaolin_Z
I'm not proposing a gold standard


I'm really not, either and I've actually stated in the past that I'm not an advocate of it. I just think that it's fun to see our resident debunkers/conspiracy poo-pooists drone on and on about it.

Old Post Jan-25-2008 02:16  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for Trancer-X Click here to Send Trancer-X a Private Message Visit Trancer-X's homepage! Add Trancer-X to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
shaolin_Z
Hei Hu Quan



Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Austin, Texas, USA: TXTA #102

quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
oh, i wasn't saying that you were. just that most of the talk in here does relate to returning to a gold standard and im still waiting for those to defend the problems inherent with it.

One valid point I do recognize in their argument is that gold actually has value (for a variety of reasons) where as fiat currency is nothing but mere paper that isn't worth anything depending on socio-economic economic conditions. It's only worth anything as long as people "beleive" in it's value, basically. To and extenet that's true for everything ofcourse, but historically speaking, I don't consider binary digits and paper to have any inherent value to themselves.


___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

Old Post Jan-25-2008 02:34  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for shaolin_Z Click here to Send shaolin_Z a Private Message Add shaolin_Z to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
shaolin_Z
Hei Hu Quan



Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Austin, Texas, USA: TXTA #102

quote:
Originally posted by Trancer-X
I'm really not, either and I've actually stated in the past that I'm not an advocate of it. I just think that it's fun to see our resident debunkers/conspiracy poo-pooists drone on and on about it.

Well, you gotta love the stawmen and ad hominems that are so generouslly used as arguments .


___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

Old Post Jan-25-2008 02:36  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for shaolin_Z Click here to Send shaolin_Z a Private Message Add shaolin_Z to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message

TranceAddict Forums > Other > Political Discussion / Debate > The Secret Criminal Society of the Federal Reserve
Post New Thread    Post A Reply

Pages (21): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 »  
Last Thread   Next Thread
Click here to listen to the sample!Pause playbackplease ID this track [2007] [0]

Click here to listen to the sample!Pause playbackBrancaccio and Aisher - "Lovely Day" [2004]

Show Printable Version | Subscribe to this Thread
Forum Jump:

All times are GMT. The time now is 18:11.

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
 
Search this Thread:

 
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict

Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
Support TA!