patrick.net

Nomograph says

DO think it’s the government’s job to watch over your wealth.

Wait, no did I just say that. No actually it was you. However it may be governments job to protect its citizens from theft. Rather than being the boss crime lord.

Nomograph says

NEWSFLASH: It’s your job to acquire, protect, and grow your wealth, not the government’s.

and who will protect me from "my" government?

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them (around the banks), will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." Thomas Jefferson, Letter 1802 to Secretary of the Treasury.

Welcome to the future Mr. Jefferson.

AdHominem says

tatupu70 says

AdHominem says

Yeah, your probably right. Joe the plumber has the upper hand in earning and preserving wealth over Harriet the Heiress.

OK–quick quiz for you Ad Hom. Which class has more wealth to store–upper or lower? And the followup-does inflation hurt people who save or people who live paycheck to paycheck more?

Ok quick quiz for you TAT.

1. Who benefits most from the complicated tax code combined with an inflationary monetary policy; the guy who can afford a tax attorney and financial advisor or the guy who is trying to just save a hundred bucks a week for retirement?

2. If a guy with a million dollars loses ten percent, and a guy with 100 dollars loses ten percent, who is going to suffer the biggest loss in standard of living?

You still think the little guy benefits from inflation?

AdHominem says

Ok quick quiz for you TAT.
1. Who benefits most from the complicated tax code combined with an inflationary monetary policy; the guy who can afford a tax attorney and financial advisor or the guy who is trying to just save a hundred bucks a week for retirement?
2. If a guy with a million dollars loses ten percent, and a guy with 100 dollars loses ten percent, who is going to suffer the biggest loss in standard of living?

1. Didn't know we were discussing tax code. Where did you come up with that??
2. The million dollar guy for sure. $100K is definitely going to hurt him. I doubt that $10 is going to hurt anyone.

AdHominem says

Money isn’t an investment? Are you kidding me? It is not only an investment it is one that we are essentially FORCED to make or at least accept, for all debts public and private.

No--not kidding. Money is a currency. We are forced to accept it for debts, but we aren't FORCED to hold it. Most people keep some of it to pay the bills, and then invest the rest of it in whatever instrument they believe will give them the greatest return. If you believe inflation will erode the value of your dollars--then I recommend investing in an inflation hedge. You could invest in China or Europe, buy gold, buy real estate, etc... I just wouldn't hold a bunch of dollars, if I were you and believed what you believed.

There is fraud and waste in both the private sector and in government, but there is much more fraud and waste in government for the simple reason that that government workers lack the incentives to avoid wasteful decisions. If the Census bureau decides to spend/waste money on a Superbowl ad as they did last Sunday, there are no repurcussions, whereas in private industry, overspending on advertisements that don't provide a return means losing one's job, or forfeiting a bonus. As an example, many cities hire and pay workers to go to restaurants in order to harass the owners to display "our wines have sulfates" signs. Is that a good use of city resources? Of course not, yet those who make such decisions in government almost never pay a price, and in many cases they are rewarded with larger bureaucracies and more $$. Bad private sector decisions typically have negative consequences that govt. workers would not have to face. Hence, more wasteful, crappy decisions are made by government. Despite the poor economy, there is a federal jobs boom in DC, because they're spending other people's money.

Even worse, government legislates a different set of rules for themselves. Accounting rules followed by govt. would land a private sector company in jail for accounting fraud. Off-budget items such as Fannie/Freddie losses are commonplace throughout govt.

World improver's and do-gooders will always be with us. They spend more than they have, push and boss other people around and generally make the world a worse place to live. Paper money is a handy tool for world improver's. They use it like politicians use civil service jobs and generals use heavy bombers - to get what they want. Paper money is irresistible to morally corrupt politicians. It doesn't take much to increase the money supply by a factor of 10, or even 100 - simply add zero's. But adding zero's does not add value.

No paper currency has ever held its value. Politicians and central bankers (THE FED) want money they can debase. Gold on the other hand doesn't cooperate. Gold turns its back on world improver's, empire builders and do-gooders. Thats why morally corrupt people like paper "money" and hate gold or gold backed real money.

Recommended Reading: Empire of Debt, Bill Bonner. Also look up: Inflation, the effects of. And one more thing to drive "progressives" nuts...The Constitution.

It's comforting to see that Abe dropped by to post his regular talking points. He reminds of the carpenter who only has a hammer in his toolbox--everything looks like a nail to him....

And TAt, my "friend", you remind me of one who doesn't learn from other's mistakes, let alone your own. Apparently you don't learn at all, nor bother to READ. You have no tolerance for sound money, think inflation is fine, are comfortable with the concept of bossing others around. You hate freedom, private property rights and the like. Your thoughts are always "right" and others (those with common sense and the ability or read) are always "wrong" haha, you make me laugh. Life must be beautiful in "LaLa land". Blah, blah blah.

My next post will be about the evils of THE FED, the fraud and theft that they create and how the free market is deceived by central planning. Wait, why not post all your supportive points of THE FED now. That way I can discredit all your phony comments in advance. Go ahead, list all your supportive comments and talking points about THE FED. I can't wait. Abe.

Abe--

How perceptive you are. You've got me pegged--a freedom hating, inflation loving, communistic tyrant.

But, I wouldn't want to spoil your Fed is evil post. So please enlighten us again--I won't stand in your way...

No...I asked first.

tatupu70 says

It’s comforting to see that Abe dropped by to post his regular talking points. He reminds of the carpenter who only has a hammer in his toolbox–everything looks like a nail to him….

Ad Hominem

AdHominem says

tatupu70 says
It’s comforting to see that Abe dropped by to post his regular talking points. He reminds of the carpenter who only has a hammer in his toolbox–everything looks like a nail to him….
Ad Hominem

Nice try--but it's not ad hominem at all. I was simply stating that Abe doesn't really argue the point at hand, but instead posts the same critique of fiat currency every time.

tatupu70 says

AdHominem says

tatupu70 says

It’s comforting to see that Abe dropped by to post his regular talking points. He reminds of the carpenter who only has a hammer in his toolbox–everything looks like a nail to him….

Ad Hominem

Nice try–but it’s not ad hominem at all. I was simply stating that Abe doesn’t really argue the point at hand, but instead posts the same critique of fiat currency every time.

I heard a story of a preacher who preached the same sermon every Sunday. Eventually someone complained to him about it. He said, when you get the first message I will give you another.

Abe, I'd love to hear anyone's case for the FED too. How is inflation good again? How is privatized profit and socialized risk in our best interest?

NomogrAss the elitist says

Does everything always have to be explained to you?

Be patient with me, I am not as elite as you. Sorry to waste your high intellect Dr. NomogrAss.

Did you want to make your case for the FED?

Nomograph says

AdHominem says

Dr. NomogrAss

AdHominem. Plus, Homograph would have been funnier.

perhaps, but then people would use Ad Hominem and call be a gay basher or something.

Honest Abe says

No paper currency has ever held its value. Politicians and central bankers (THE FED) want money they can debase. Gold on the other hand doesn’t cooperate. Gold turns its back on world improver’s, empire builders and do-gooders. Thats why morally corrupt people like paper “money” and hate gold or gold backed real money.

I basically agree with you...so, please don't take this in the wrong way. I am not trying to attack you. Just trying to give you some tips as to how you might better get your points across to others.

Your opinion is phrased in such a black/white type of way, as to generate suspicion of the level of thought behind the comment. That is why your posts are attracting criticism from Nomo and Tat. They aren't attacking your idea, as much as the perceived lack of a logical process.

It is important to note that Kings and governments have always been corrupt, and did find ways to debase gold coins. The most widespread way was via "clipping." There are also stories of governments minting smaller coins, and passing them off as identical to the previous version. Or they would use less pure gold, etc.

Also, if you read about the tulip mania, the dutch had the most healthy and trusted banking system at the time. They were a well regulated, 100% gold standard system. This attracted capital (gold) from around the world, even as far away as Japan. Clearly, a rich Japanese man in the 1600's was not going to be using his gold stash held in Amsterdam very often. It was around this time that the bankers started to figure out they could loan out gold they didn't have, typically to the government that needed to pay operating costs. Fractional reserve banking was born. So, between the new fractional reserve banking system, combined with the massive inflow of gold, the money suppy in 17th century dutch economy exploded, resulting in the tulip bubble.

The irony is that this bubble happened as a consequence of having the most well regulated, trusted, stable banking system in the world.

Also, frankly, HOW IN THE WORLD COULD WE GO BACK TO A GOLD STANDARD TODAY? Everything in our day to day economic lives is a function of a fiat fractional reserve system. Going back to a gold standard, would be like removing a brain tumor. If done haphazardly, the patient could easily die on us completely. I am a huge Ron Paul supporter, and a libertarian to boot. Still, a 100% backed gold standard is almost impossible to fathom in our modern era.

Let's do this thought experiment: If you could get rid of the FED tomorrow, how would you do it? Which organization would regulate the base money supply? Would you go to a gold standard tomorrow as well? What happens when the unemployment rate goes to 30% in 3 months due to the resulting deflationary spiral? How do you convince starving, pitchfork weilding types that they need to take their economic medicine so that things will be better one day?

None of this is by any means a black and white situation.

NomogrAss says

AdHominem says

then people would use Ad Hominem and call be a gay

I don’t care if you are gay. Your personal lifestyle choices are yours and yours alone.

are you coming on to me?

Nomograph says

CBOEtrader says

Also, frankly, HOW IN THE WORLD COULD WE GO BACK TO A GOLD STANDARD TODAY? Everything in our day to day economic lives is a function of a fiat fractional reserve system. Going back to a gold standard, would be like removing a brain tumor. If done haphazardly, the patient could easily die on us completely. I am a huge Ron Paul supporter, and a libertarian to boot. Still, a 100% backed gold standard is almost impossible to fathom in our modern era.

Exactly. I haven’t heard anyone on this site argue against the gold standard. It’s just a waste of time debating because the only way we could ever return to it is via complete monetary destruction, which may or may not happen. Come talk to me then.

I don't think we should move to a gold standard. We should however remove legal tender laws and allow people to refuse to use Federal Reserve notes. If someone wants to demand that they be paid in gold, silver or Doll Hairs, they should have the freedom to do so. Allowing competing currencies is the best way to determine whether or not the dollar is sound. We might even find that people prefer dollars to gold and silver coins.

But more importantly we need to move toward a truly stable money supply. Credit rates need to be set by market forces not a central bank in cahoots with the elites and shrouded in secrecy. And the volume of money cannot be expanded based on decree from Bernanke, it must be based on some standard, whether it be gold reserves, or amount of people involved in gainful employment. Money has to represent a unit of labor, not just a number on a balance sheet.

OK.

I will name some corporations that are according to you "effectively unregulated."

Phillip Morris-
GM-
McDonalds-
Marriot-
AT&T-
Microsoft-

I would like you to start by explaining how these specific corporations are "unregulated."

Second I would like to know how taxes are lower now than in 1945 (including gasoline, unemployment, FICA, Medicare, income, etc..). You are implying that I get more purchasing power for my labor today than my great grandfather did. I find this very hard to believe. Can I buy as many beers, on an hours work as great grand dad? (Yes I know that taxes and purchasing power are two different things. But to argue that taxes are lower now is meaningless if my hours worth of work won't buy what his hours worth of work will buy. That is the real question isn't it?)

Third I would like to know how you know the people who hate corruption don't understand corruption?

Fourth: I would like to know why you claim corruption starts with money?

Fifth, What do you mean by the statement "People who hate corruption don’t understand that corruption STARTS with money, and making the aristocracy 1000% richer over the last 30 years is the CAUSE of corruption."

Finally I wonder if you can make your answer based on evidence and refrain from the sweeping generalizations and insults that are the core of your personality?

Nomograph says

AdHominem says

Sorry, but I disagree. Only an elitist would attack an idea based on a perceived lack of logical process. So that is why Nomo attacks.

Only a victim would feel attacked because his ideas were examined under the light of logic. Unlike yourself, I don’t buy into something just because it sounds neat-o.
If you are unable to provide a logical and rational basis for your ideas, why in the world would you ever expect such ideas to be taken seriously? (HINT: They won’t be).

Burn.

Nomograss.

Nomograph says

Unlike yourself, I don’t buy into something just because it sounds neat-o.

for example, which idea do you claim I buy just because it sounds neato?

AdHominem says

Nomograph says

When women entered the workplace en masse, the currency supply must be adjusted to enable the exchange of this new supply of service.

Yes, that is what I said. It is called INFLATION. (the expansion of the money supply). All of a sudden you have more money chasing goods and services and prices go up. Thank you FEDERAL RESERVE.
Since credit is another form of money, expanding credit is INFLATION too. Hence since the beginning of the 1980’s true inflation (as opposed to the government CPI fabrication) has accelerated.
We have yet to fully realize all of the effects from the creation of all this funny money.

Nomograph says

AdHominem and I are probably in about 99% agreement on most matters.

AdHominem says

In a free market, credit is expensive. Meaning risk is factored in to all credit agreements. We haven’t had a free market in years, in any part of the world, because credit was so cheap it cost you money NOT to borrow.

That is not a free market and you know it. The Federal Reserve and our fraudulent fractional reserve banking system create malinvestment, and socialize risk while privatizing profit (central banks around the world working together did the same thing). That is what the creators of the Creature from Jekyll Island wanted and that is what they got. You can argue till your beak falls off but unless we have sound money we will never have a free market let alone a sound economy.

Nomograph says

AdHominem and I are probably in about 99% agreement on most matters.

AdHominem says

Private property is the foundation of a free society. Private property includes currency. Unless we have a government that protects its currenc(ies) from debasement by the special interests and elites, the average and below average individual (the majority) will continue to lose freedom and his pursuit of happiness will be curtailed.

Nomograph says

AdHominem and I are probably in about 99% agreement on most matters.

AdHominem says

Ok, so American corporations, individuals and the government borrow money from the Chinese to purchase things we can’t afford. The Federal Reserve makes it all possible of course by expanding the money supple to meet “demand.” (where demand is demand for credit) And we need the government to protect us from this? Isn’t it the government that paved the way for this to occur? And isn’t the US Government one of the biggest offenders when it comes to deficit spending?

Nomograph says

AdHominem and I are probably in about 99% agreement on most matters.

AdHominem says

But more importantly we need to move toward a truly stable money supply. Credit rates need to be set by market forces not a central bank in cahoots with the elites and shrouded in secrecy. And the volume of money cannot be expanded based on decree from Bernanke, it must be based on some standard, whether it be gold reserves, or amount of people involved in gainful employment. Money has to represent a unit of labor, not just a number on a balance sheet.

Nomograph says

AdHominem and I are probably in about 99% agreement on most matters.

Nomograph says

...judicious regulation...

I like that phrase. I'm going to borrow that one.

Tatupu...I'm still waiting for you (or Nomograph, or Igwo, or Ellie) to tell the rest of us all the wonderful benefits which THE FED provides. HELLO ???

Abe--

Hope you've got a comfortable chair then, because us freedom hating, communistic tyrants tend not to respond to ridiculous requests...

Tatupu,

Please explain why that is a ridiculous request. Or could it be you don't know what THE FED's stated purpose and alleged "benefits" are? (Hint - its on-line...you could look it up if you don't know).

Abe--

OK, I'm tiring of this already. You are obviously fishing to try and start a discussion on the FED. Which is fine. But do it like everyone else does around here--start a new thread with your beliefs on the FED and let others comment on it. I'll be happy to point out where you are wrong if that's the case, or agree if you've got it right.

Nomograph says

the truth is that unregulated free markets lead to extreme wealth concentration and eventually a feudal system of lords and serfs followed by violent wealth redistribution via revolution or war.

I agree that we do need a measure of regulation in free markets. (By the way I never said "unregulated free markets equal freedom" though this is a true statement. Remember freedom has consequences). There need to be rules in order for a free market to run efficiently. For example, it needs to be illegal to use a scale that is not accurate with penalties for this type of fraud. There needs to be a mechanism for contract enforcement, with penalties for breach of contract. These regulations actually protect the free market.

However, I would counter your statement that unregulated free markets lead to extreme wealth concentration and eventually a feudal system of serfs and lords followed by revolution with the fact that every government and societal system has gone through collapse, revolution or hostile takeover (except maybe for a few remote tribes in Africa, the Middle East or the Amazon). Every system is eventually replaced with another. The new leaders take control, concentrate wealth and power in a few privileged elites and rule until they either collapse or are overthrown. So it is not that free markets fail, it is that EVERYTHING fails.

In other words arguing that "unregulated" free markets fail and therefore they are bad is like arguing that everyone who eats meat dies therefore eating meat is bad.

It does not follow just because a system fails that it is bad. For example, the Native Americans were overtaken by Europeans. Does that mean they are bad? The remote tribes in Afganistan have never been conquered. Does that mean they are good? Not necessarily. USSR failed, so is it bad? Ancient Israel failed, is it bad? Ancient Egypt failed, is it bad? Rome failed so is it bad? A better question to ask is WHY do certain systems fail? I think you would be hard pressed to prove that it was lack of government regulation that is causing our system to fail, when our government is larger today than it ever was. No the problems is not lack of regulation rather the fact that it is essentially controlled by the corporate lobbyists and therefore any regulation we have (and there is a lot of it) exists WITH CORPORATE APPROVAL.

My point being that it doesn't matter how much regulation you have when the people who need to BE regulated are MAKING the regulations.

And that my friends is why government must be small enough that corporations cannot use IT to THEIR advantage. This is what they are doing, and with every expansion of government the corporate lobbyists/elites power grows with it. That is why American Patriots fought the Revolution, to establish a government that would be DIFFERENT than the British Empire. The United States today is more like the British Empire it fought for independence from, than it is like the original American union of independent states.

4X says

I bet you drive a Nissan, Toyota or Honda dont you?…..always talking this arch-conservative nonsense centered around being divisive yet you dont even know how to support America.

You shouldn't bet .... you'd lose.

4X says

3. Next buy only American based computers (HP, IBM, Dell) and stay away from Lenovo products so we dont lose another industry

Too funny. Check and see for yourself where these "American based computers" are made. LOL !!!!

4X says

….lastly, stop blaming President Obama for his efforts to clean up the blowback from your party’s decisions to enter this expensive war.

Another idiotic assumption. I'm an independent. I didn't realize that was a "party."

By definition, independent would be a very lonely party. :)

RayAmerica says

4X says

I bet you drive a Nissan, Toyota or Honda dont you?…..always talking this arch-conservative nonsense centered around being divisive yet you dont even know how to support America.

You shouldn’t bet …. you’d lose.

On another thread, 4x states that his wife drives a Nissan. Pot. Kettle. Black.

RayAmerica says

4X says

….lastly, stop blaming President Obama for his efforts to clean up the blowback from your party’s decisions to enter this expensive war.

Another idiotic assumption. I’m an independent. I didn’t realize that was a “party.”

really--who was the last non-Republican you voted for?

that would not really prove anything more than a lack of choices - would it? I think the assumption that we all vote "against" the worst choice (as personally viewed) is a fair view. But on this point libs have an advantage over conservos bacause libs cling to loose guidlines for conduct and choices - thereby making it very acceptable to a lib to vote for a candidate that is not in-step with their personal view on several key points - on the other hand, when a conservo is forced to make the same stinky choice it allows the liberal left to point at conservos and scream bloody murder because a conservo is not supposed to waver from their ideals while voting ... so, the limited choices we are faced with (R or D) do not fit the template of LIB vs CONSERV at all .. but becasue the very nature of liberal is to allow for variance, they are more successful under the current system. Another GREAT reason for redistricting, eleminating the electorial college, having all voting require a voters license, have ballots be on the back side of tax return with all voting taking place on the third Tuesday in April.

Bap33 says

But on this point libs have an advantage over conservos bacause libs cling to loose guidlines for conduct and choices - thereby making it very acceptable to a lib to vote for a candidate that is not in-step with their personal view on several key points - on the other hand, when a conservo is forced to make the same stinky choice it allows the liberal left to point at conservos and scream bloody murder because a conservo is not supposed to waver from their ideals while voting … so, the limited choices we are faced with (R or D) do not fit the template of LIB vs CONSERV at all .. but becasue the very nature of liberal is to allow for variance, they are more successful under the current system.

Bap Haiku:
One long paragraph
One hundred thirty-two words
Fifteen misspellings

lmao ... guilty as charged

Still snowing?

Nope. 60 degrees, sunny & gorgeous. I miss the weather - last week it rained cats & dogs so hard I stepped in a poodle.