patrick.net

bob2356 says

Ok I'll bite, how exactly did the government devalue the dollar in 1920's. The US was on the gold standard fixed at $20 an ounce until 1933. One of the bigger factors in the great depression was France and Britain debasing their currencies in the 1920's leading to a huge inflow of gold to the US that fueled a speculation bubble.

The FED kept the interest rates artificially low. Same thing China is doing now.

indigenous says

bob2356 says

Ok I'll bite, how exactly did the government devalue the dollar in 1920's. The US was on the gold standard fixed at $20 an ounce until 1933. One of the bigger factors in the great depression was France and Britain debasing their currencies in the 1920's leading to a huge inflow of gold to the US that fueled a speculation bubble.

The FED kept the interest rates artificially low. Same thing China is doing now.

The FED kept the discount rate right at 4% from 1921 to 1929, how is that artificially low?

Please feel free to explain how a low interest rate devalues a currency that is at a fixed exchange rate to gold. That makes less than zero sense to me, but i'm willing to learn.

SoftShell says

Stupidity is a pretty common trait among a large segment of the population.

For someone to still be 'amazed at stupidity' quite frankly doesn't have all his dogs barking.

I guess I don't hang in the same circles as you do.

This is damning evidence....

Call it Crazy says

SoftShell says

Stupidity is a pretty common trait among a large segment of the population.

bob2356 says

I guess I don't hang in the same circles as you do.

Aren't you here posting every day???

I've heard they all have wonky arms and can't reach the credit card in their pockets.

Call it Crazy says

SoftShell says

Stupidity is a pretty common trait among a large segment of the population.

bob2356 says

I guess I don't hang in the same circles as you do.

Aren't you here posting every day???

Stupidity on patnet is isolated to a very very small group I ignore. I didn't realize you were including yourself in that circle. I guess I'll have defer to your superior knowledge of where you feel you belong since you insist.

bob2356 says

indigenous says

bob2356 says

Ok I'll bite, how exactly did the government devalue the dollar in 1920's. The US was on the gold standard fixed at $20 an ounce until 1933. One of the bigger factors in the great depression was France and Britain debasing their currencies in the 1920's leading to a huge inflow of gold to the US that fueled a speculation bubble.

The FED kept the interest rates artificially low. Same thing China is doing now.

The FED kept the discount rate right at 4% from 1921 to 1929, how is that artificially low?

The above links state Bernanke, Rothbard, and Pettis say that the currency was undervalued.

As indicated in the Rothbard link it was done by changing the reserve rate which effected the interest rates as money became more plentiful.

To the question of how did they undervalue the currency when it is locked to a gold standard. That is a good question, I don't know.

I would guess it would have to be in how the valuation is set.

This from this:

"On the other hand the US dollar was undervalued, this contributed to a boom in US economy which led to the credit bubble and stock market crash of 1929."

So it was undervalued in the first when the gold standard was set. As the UK's was overvalued because of unions. The UK left the gold standard in 1931.

http://econ.economicshelp.org/2009/02/gold-standard-explained.html

indigenous says

Yes if they have less reserve that is allowing more government intervention. Do you see what I mean?

No, because that is completely incorrect. A reserve requirement is a government regulation. Higher requirement = more intervention. Lower requirement = less intervention.

bob2356 says

Ok, since you are incapable of actually presenting any facts what in your
OPINION preceded every depression?

Federal government surpluses.

1817-1821 debt reduced 29%, depression began 1819
1823-1836 debt reduced 99%, depression began 1836
1852-1857 debt reduced 59%, depression began 1857
1867-1873 debt reduced 27%, depression began 1873
1880-1893 debt reduced 57%, depression began 1893
1929-1930 debt reduced 36%, depression began 1929
The most recent 'great recession' that some may call legitimately or not a depression followed a surplus that occurred in late 1999-2000.

Another Monday setup to be another horrific day. I see only a few people sitting at the table of consequences. Lots more need to take their seats before any healing can actually start. In reality this is just a continuation of the problems from 2008. After almost 5 years of fumbling around we are no better off than before, actually in worse shape when this merry-go-round finally stops and everyone is sick.

When the source is NAR I should interpret it exactly opposite. Is that the case here?

The market looks like shit, ISM report sucked, and the Euro and gold are up (gold almost 2%!).

upisdown says

The most recent 'great recession' that some may call legitimately or not a depression followed a surplus that occurred in late 1999-2000.

or a bubble

tatupu70 says

indigenous says

Yes if they have less reserve that is allowing more government intervention. Do you see what I mean?

No, because that is completely incorrect. A reserve requirement is a government regulation. Higher requirement = more intervention. Lower requirement = less intervention.

whatever but this is where they wreak their havoc

Call it Crazy says

Looks like it's going to be a wonderful day!!!

DOW down triple digits.

Ford and GM January car sales tumbled by 7.5% and 12% respectively, on expectations for a decline of only 2.3% and 2.5%.

ISM Manufacturing dropped by its most since 2008 to levels not seen since May, missed by the most on record, and new orders collapsed at the fastest pace since December 1980.

...and it's only breakfast time...

Don't worry all we have heard in the last 12 months is recovery forward. Maybe the litmus test is here.

He should be billed for the airtime opportunity that he saw and took.
I think the average second of sponsorship was going for $130K last night, he took at least 5.

That kind of "word out" isn't cheap. He didn't admit to trespassing he's admitting to theft.

Interesting. Looks like the NFL's tax exempt status is finally being used for a worthwhile purpose.

This is like trying to close the barn door after the cows have immigrated to the next state.

When the US signed off on NAFTA and maintained high taxes in Tech, R&D and manufacturing by a man more popular than experienced in industry.

The man responsible for passing NAFTA had no experience building anything, or in any experience in Private Sector. The man who built an Electronics firm said that the US citizens would experience "a giant sucking sound of jobs".

Not letting people buy homes here is like saying "we regret that we have 90% of our society as pencil pushers and humanity majors" but that "we dont want people who build things coming to the US".

If there is any large group dumber than liberal democrats - and any with more myopia or short term memory, - could someone enlighten?

indigenous says

upisdown
says

The most recent 'great recession' that some may call legitimately or not a
depression followed a surplus that occurred in late 1999-2000.

or a bubble

LOL, your nickname ought to be 'bubbles'.

I guess that's better than reading one of your usual circle-jerk of an answers that would never make sense anyway.

sbh says

At least RFHTC has promised 500-800 dow points with this move.

I thought he said that was what we would see LAST week.

upisdown says

LOL, your nickname ought to be 'bubbles'.

I guess that's better than reading one of your usual circle-jerk of an answers that would never make sense anyway.

And yours ought to be I don't have anything else relevant to say

What are you saying not for profit people shouldn't have to pay their "Fair share"?

Would you feel the same way if some Teaparty "Activist" ceased that opportunity to spout off his agenda and nonsense?

indigenous says

The banks failing was something that people remember and to this day don't trust banks, putting money in the mattress etc. But it was resolved

Your version of history never ceases to amaze me. It was "resolved"??? What the hell does that even mean?

Call it Crazy says

The Obama administration has not made public the fact that the appeals system for the online marketplace is not working. But at the moment, “there is no indication that infrastructure . . . necessary for conducting informal reviews and fair hearings has even been created, let alone become operational,” attorneys at the National Health Law Program said in a late-December letter to leaders of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

It's all smoke and mirrors and "Do Nothing" buttons.

I know the types that designed this system with little regard to the actual requirements, and the developers who did the work, that pushed slick do nothing forms. I mean, when you have a system that is so convoluted. How can you possibly and accurately test it, and cover all of the variables?

"Hey that form that appeals enrollment decisions is finished."

Their boss probably just said...
"Well eh, O.K., alright then, carry on!"

I mean it's live sensitive data, how can you test it? Where's all of the plumbing back from the providers, to gather all of the sensitive information that they collected on that applicant, what's the standard. How can Obamazon, possibly parse those decisions, when each insurer has their own set of parameters on why or how they reject or approve an applicant.

But I bet it all sure sounded Slick in the requirement gathering meetings.

The Baby boomers didn't get as well off as you folks claim they are, by collecting Keynesian nickles.

The problem with Keynesian economics is, that fantasy is great for those who make the policy and the beneficiaries of it, but those who are not on the receiving end of all of that imaginary money. Unfortunately are bound by Austrian economics, and are forced to pay for that party.

Yeah but last time there was no taper on the table.

I love days when the Dow takes a 200 point shit.

Although tomorrow is a POMO day. You can thank your economic central planners for that.

sbh says

Martha Stewart was an Austrian. "Bank failure: it's a good thing

Is she? She is very admirable.

Entitlemented says

When the US signed off on NAFTA

Are you trying to say Ross Perot had it right all along? "What I hear now is a big sucking sound." The guy came off a little whacky, but compared to Obama he is and was solid gold.

sbh says

Bigsby says

sbh says

At least RFHTC has promised 500-800 dow points with this move.

I thought he said that was what we would see LAST week.

I'm trying to be generous with the boy.

I wouldn't be generous with any of your money now. You will need it all to keep the lights on after this train comes to a stop. Down we go! All fools aboard!!!

indigenous says

Very good Tat you are smarter than you look

Uh--how do you know what I look like?

I've been seeing a lot of falling hockey sticks on prices in the local market.

John Bailo says

I've been seeing a lot of falling hockey sticks on prices in the local market.

I see it here too. I guess, SFBA is the only special place.

hrhjuliet says

Buy up America. Great idea. Who needs a war to take us over? How clever. I have a group of friends and colleagues working on a legislation to create limitations on foreigners buying American real estate.

They are dumber than a bag of bricks. Real estates do not come with votes or any other political power. They only come with liability to pay real estate taxes. If you want to protest "the buying up of America," protest the selling of government bonds to foreigners (and Americans alike). Those bonds do come with promises to tax you, me and your friends in the future to pay the interests on the bonds.

Reality says

Boom-bust is the largely the result of, and exacerbated by, government monetary interventions disrupting the price signals of money and misleading the businessmen.

Huh--that's not what indigenous believes....

And contradicted by history as well.

Reality says

People starve when you forcibly keep un-deserving businesses in business. The fat cats live at the expenses of the rest of the people. In other words, ideologues like you are perpetrating the looting and famine.

lol--when did I ever state that I'm in favor of forciby keeping undeserving businesses in business? I most definitely am not. I hated the bailouts. Or more appropriately--I hated that the bailouts were necessary.

But I'm not naive enough to believe that's why people starve. I know you love free markets but they do not optimize societal well-being.

Reality says

The disease was the uneconomic behaviors and actions leading to the failures. The failure itself was the cure: so resources and labor could be redirected to different combinations.

What you don't seem to understand is that there are other ways to treat the sickness rather than letting the patient die.

John Bailo says

I've been seeing a lot of falling hockey sticks on prices in the local
market.

Here in Houston, prices have been falling a bit, but what I'm REALLY noticing is the lack of inventory. About 20% of what is hitting the market are foreclosures. Not sure if it's old foreclosures that the banks are finally releasing to the market; or new ones recently foreclosed on.

tatupu70 says

Reality says

Boom-bust is the largely the result of, and exacerbated by, government monetary interventions disrupting the price signals of money and misleading the businessmen.

Huh--that's not what indigenous believes....

And contradicted by history as well.

by what history? You are living through a classic period during which government intervention has been exacerbating the boom-bust:

FED bailout of LTCM led to the NASDAQ bubble
FED bailout of the 2000-2003 stock market bust caused the housing bubble
FED bailout of the 2008-09 housing bust is causing the current echo bubble.

Reality says

Who was the President of the US when the Depository Institutions Deregulation
and Monetary Control Act was passed and signed into law on March 31, 1980?
.
. .
. . .
. . .
Jimmy Carter!

Nice try. What did that have to do with deregulation of S&Ls?

Or check out:

The Garn–St Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982

tatupu70 says

Reality says

People starve when you forcibly keep un-deserving businesses in business. The fat cats live at the expenses of the rest of the people. In other words, ideologues like you are perpetrating the looting and famine.

lol--when did I ever state that I'm in favor of forciby keeping undeserving businesses in business? I most definitely am not. I hated the bailouts. Or more appropriately--I hated that the bailouts were necessary.

There you just exposed your lie. By insisting that bailouts were necessary, you favored baiouts, which is precisely forcibly keeping undeserving bussinesses in business.

But I'm not naive enough to believe that's why people starve. I know you love free markets but they do not optimize societal well-being.

Of course it is the reason why people are starving. Businesses are unable to hire because the overall debt burdens and tax burdens are too high. The government bailouts were what kept the bad debts alive, to be serviced by taxes.

People's liberty and freedom (that is what "free market" is) allow room for improvement by people continuing to live in and exercise liberty and freedom. The control freaks' advocated forcible "government solutions" would only make the situation worse.

control point says

Reality says

Who was the President of the US when the Depository Institutions Deregulation

and Monetary Control Act was passed and signed into law on March 31, 1980?
.

. .
. . .
. . .
Jimmy Carter!

Nice try. What did that have to do with deregualtion of S&Ls?

Or check out:

The Garn–St Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982

The 1980 Depository Institutions Deregulation Act was the center piece of banking deregulation and how banking deregulation got underway. The 1982 "An Act to revitalize the housing industry by strengthening the financial stability of home mortgage lending institutions and ensuring the availability of home mortgage loans" was only a minor adjustment.