So if Gold was the new money standard then how would you buy more gold, with GOLD?
invite response
2023 Mar 26, 10:59am 14,438 views 189 comments
by Tenpoundbass ➕follow (7) 💰tip ignore
Also with digital currency, if there wasn't any fiat money how would you acquire tokens?
« First « Previous Comments 102 - 141 of 189 Next » Last » Search these comments
102
Reality
2023 Mar 29, 1:51pm
Misc says
Losing what money? The home mortgage borrowers are paying on time. The money (principle of the loan) had been created out of thin air to lend to the borrowers; it's not as if the bank had to borrow every dollar to lend out.
They don't have to, as the FED is standing at the ready to pay/"swap" at face value and hold to maturity (i.e. 5% or higher interest rate for you the real productive member of society to borrow but 0% interest rate for the losers)
Pension and retirement funds/portfolios usually have a broad mix of bonds due to their legal / fiduciary requirements
The borrowers are locked in due to the high prices that they paid for the collateral (due to the low interest rate inflating asset price) and/or the cash-out during refinancing (the latter is akin to teaser-rate predatory lending). You do realize "financial institutions" and "the Fed itself" are artificial concepts, right? For example, there is not a person named "SVB," but the people receiving massive bonuses out of "SVB" before it closed door were real people (being paid to cover up the fraud); people who withdrew enormous sums in violation of their covenant to bank exclusively with "SVB" in exchange for the massive amount of loans that they took out of "SVB" (likely where much of the hundreds of billion "deposit" came from, loans from the same "SVB", creating money out of thin air) were real people ). Likewise, people getting high pay from "the FED" and take "swap" money at face value from "the FED" for heavily discounted paper are real people (or real people hiding behind another layer of fictional entities for whom they pretend to work but in reality enriching themselves using those fictional entities). In other words, both "SVB" and "the Fed" are fictional entities in whose name some people are taking out massive amount of money for themselves, diluting the money that real workers and real entrepreneurs have in their pockets and accounts, essentially robbing real workers and real productive entrepreneurs.
These were refinancings on properties that were already purchased. The banks are losing money on them because they are paying a higher interest rate than they are receiving on their "hold to maturity" assets.
Losing what money? The home mortgage borrowers are paying on time. The money (principle of the loan) had been created out of thin air to lend to the borrowers; it's not as if the bank had to borrow every dollar to lend out.
If they sell the loans off to others, they take their loss now all at once.
They don't have to, as the FED is standing at the ready to pay/"swap" at face value and hold to maturity (i.e. 5% or higher interest rate for you the real productive member of society to borrow but 0% interest rate for the losers)
Retirement and pension funds stayed away from these MBS (instead they are more into high yield ponzis). Nope, it's the financial institutions and the Fed itself who are the bag holders. The borrowers are not "locked" in they can sell and/or rent as they please unless prices drop below what they paid for the homes many years ago.
Pension and retirement funds/portfolios usually have a broad mix of bonds due to their legal / fiduciary requirements
The borrowers are locked in due to the high prices that they paid for the collateral (due to the low interest rate inflating asset price) and/or the cash-out during refinancing (the latter is akin to teaser-rate predatory lending). You do realize "financial institutions" and "the Fed itself" are artificial concepts, right? For example, there is not a person named "SVB," but the people receiving massive bonuses out of "SVB" before it closed door were real people (being paid to cover up the fraud); people who withdrew enormous sums in violation of their covenant to bank exclusively with "SVB" in exchange for the massive amount of loans that they took out of "SVB" (likely where much of the hundreds of billion "deposit" came from, loans from the same "SVB", creating money out of thin air) were real people ). Likewise, people getting high pay from "the FED" and take "swap" money at face value from "the FED" for heavily discounted paper are real people (or real people hiding behind another layer of fictional entities for whom they pretend to work but in reality enriching themselves using those fictional entities). In other words, both "SVB" and "the Fed" are fictional entities in whose name some people are taking out massive amount of money for themselves, diluting the money that real workers and real entrepreneurs have in their pockets and accounts, essentially robbing real workers and real productive entrepreneurs.
103
Misc
2023 Mar 29, 2:13pm
The banks are paying a higher rate to savers than they are receiving from the MBS on their books. That is how they are losing money. Yes, they do have to borrow every dollar they loan out except for the stockholder's equity.
The Fed is not "at the ready" to pay/swap at face value. You are mistaken on the Fed's lending program. They will loan at "face value", but will charge current interest rates. The banks still lose money...just slower than selling at a loss all at once.
They borrowers are not "locked in". These were REFINANCINGS of mortgages taken out for properties bought years before.
People at the Fed are not super highly paid. They are on the same pay scale as other government employees.
The real people are those that refinanced their mortgages at a record low interest rate for a record amount of trillions of dollars.
The banks and the Fed are sitting on record losses. If you mark to market.
The Fed is not "at the ready" to pay/swap at face value. You are mistaken on the Fed's lending program. They will loan at "face value", but will charge current interest rates. The banks still lose money...just slower than selling at a loss all at once.
They borrowers are not "locked in". These were REFINANCINGS of mortgages taken out for properties bought years before.
People at the Fed are not super highly paid. They are on the same pay scale as other government employees.
The real people are those that refinanced their mortgages at a record low interest rate for a record amount of trillions of dollars.
The banks and the Fed are sitting on record losses. If you mark to market.
104
richwicks
2023 Mar 29, 2:15pm
richwicks
2023 Mar 29, 2:15pm
Eric Holder says
Dude, if you asked what 2+2 was, and I explained it to you, you'd pretend not to understand, so why should I bother?
You can't wake a person that pretends to sleep.
Wait, so deflation causes job losses and increase in unemployment?
Dude, if you asked what 2+2 was, and I explained it to you, you'd pretend not to understand, so why should I bother?
You can't wake a person that pretends to sleep.
106
Reality
2023 Mar 29, 2:38pm
Misc says
Do you not understand what fractional-reserve banking is? Even if there were a 10% reserve requirement, the bank paying 4% interest on $1M deposits (and they are not paying that much except for on CD's and only starting the last few weeks) allows it to lend out $10M, even at the lowest 30yr fixed mortgage rate there ever was at about 2.75%, the annual interest income would be $275k, to pay an annual interest expense of $40k on the $1M. How is that losing money? Seems there is a 273k - 40k = $233k gross profit; i.e. 233 / 40 = 582.5% gross profit margin! The real reserve requirement is much lower than 10%; currently sub-5% or near 0%, so the gross profit margin is even higher. If instead of renting money and renting out money, renting office space and renting them out could get 582.5% gross profit margin, WeWorks would be the most valuable company in the world. Too bad, office space can not be ficticiously multiplied out of thin air.
As you can see, under fractional reserve banking, operating a bank is extremely profitable (if the risk of bank run is removed). It usually takes serious incompetence and/or massive fraud for a bank to fail. The massive amount of profit a bank makes under fractional reserve banking literally comes out of the backs of real workers and real entrepreneurs.
Misc says
LOL! See the math above. Why isn't everyone offered a sub-5% loan interest rate when there is a cash shortage?
Misc says
A lot of borrowers were borrowing to buy over-priced homes due to the artificially low interest rate, and over 80% of refinances have cash-out component (i.e. fell for the teaser rate if they ever have to move).
Misc says
If they are not being paid more than they would be paid elsewhere, they wouldn't take the job . . . unless some form of bribery (consulting for the regulated corporations after working for the FED) is baked into the career compensation map.
Misc says
In exchange for not being able to transfer the same monthly payment to a comparable house elsewhere. i.e. the borrower is locked in, and subject to arbitrary raises in property taxes and insurances, as well as vagaries of job change.
Misc says
Perhaps they should be forced to mark to market and be bankrupted.
The banks are paying a higher rate to savers than they are receiving from the MBS on their books. That is how they are losing money. Yes, they do have to borrow every dollar they loan out except for the stockholder's equity.
Do you not understand what fractional-reserve banking is? Even if there were a 10% reserve requirement, the bank paying 4% interest on $1M deposits (and they are not paying that much except for on CD's and only starting the last few weeks) allows it to lend out $10M, even at the lowest 30yr fixed mortgage rate there ever was at about 2.75%, the annual interest income would be $275k, to pay an annual interest expense of $40k on the $1M. How is that losing money? Seems there is a 273k - 40k = $233k gross profit; i.e. 233 / 40 = 582.5% gross profit margin! The real reserve requirement is much lower than 10%; currently sub-5% or near 0%, so the gross profit margin is even higher. If instead of renting money and renting out money, renting office space and renting them out could get 582.5% gross profit margin, WeWorks would be the most valuable company in the world. Too bad, office space can not be ficticiously multiplied out of thin air.
As you can see, under fractional reserve banking, operating a bank is extremely profitable (if the risk of bank run is removed). It usually takes serious incompetence and/or massive fraud for a bank to fail. The massive amount of profit a bank makes under fractional reserve banking literally comes out of the backs of real workers and real entrepreneurs.
Misc says
The Fed is not "at the ready" to pay/swap at face value. You are mistaken on the Fed's lending program. They will loan at "face value", but will charge current interest rates. The banks still lose money...just slower than selling at a loss all at once.
LOL! See the math above. Why isn't everyone offered a sub-5% loan interest rate when there is a cash shortage?
Misc says
;
They borrowers are not "locked in". These were REFINANCINGS of mortgages taken out for properties bought years before.
A lot of borrowers were borrowing to buy over-priced homes due to the artificially low interest rate, and over 80% of refinances have cash-out component (i.e. fell for the teaser rate if they ever have to move).
Misc says
People at the Fed are not super highly paid. They are on the same pay scale as other government employees.
If they are not being paid more than they would be paid elsewhere, they wouldn't take the job . . . unless some form of bribery (consulting for the regulated corporations after working for the FED) is baked into the career compensation map.
Misc says
The real people are those that refinanced their mortgages at a record low interest rate for a record amount of trillions of dollars.
In exchange for not being able to transfer the same monthly payment to a comparable house elsewhere. i.e. the borrower is locked in, and subject to arbitrary raises in property taxes and insurances, as well as vagaries of job change.
Misc says
The banks and the Fed are sitting on record losses. If you mark to market.
Perhaps they should be forced to mark to market and be bankrupted.
107
stereotomy
2023 Mar 29, 2:56pm
stereotomy
2023 Mar 29, 2:56pm
Reality says
The really nasty thing about the depression in the 30's was that all loans were callable. So the banks called in all the loans that were almost paid off, and the debtors, who were practically paid off, had their assets seized. The banks didn't even get around to the 100% LTV people before public outrage ended the mass evictions.
Eric Holder says
But earlier in the thread somebody said that deflation is GOOD for working people w/o assets. Why these types weren't happy during high deflation either?
Were you not happy when PC price dropped from $10,000 in 1980 to $500 in 2000? or not happy when functional cellphone with a big touch screen dropped from $1000 in 2000 to $150 today? Mild deflation is what brings improvement in standards of living for the society at large. The deflation between 1929-1933 was not a mild deflation but a massive crash that had loans attached to the assets. The problem was the loans and the manipulation of loan interest rates and collateral values. If banks didn't exist to extend loans to buy real estate, and there was no margin loans for stock trading, the pain would not have been nearly as much.
The really nasty thing about the depression in the 30's was that all loans were callable. So the banks called in all the loans that were almost paid off, and the debtors, who were practically paid off, had their assets seized. The banks didn't even get around to the 100% LTV people before public outrage ended the mass evictions.
108
richwicks
2023 Mar 29, 3:04pm
richwicks
2023 Mar 29, 3:04pm
Patrick says
I heard this earlier and doubted and, I was about to say so, but I looked it up in:
https://www.wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/
This is the email they are probably talking about:
https://www.wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/6528
So it wasn't DIRECTLY about the gold dinar, it was the fact that Qaddafi could continue to pay for stuff even if he was cut off from all the world's banking system. The a-e bullet points tells you why the US attacked Libya, even if it was on France's behalf.
I heard this earlier and doubted and, I was about to say so, but I looked it up in:
https://www.wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/
This is the email they are probably talking about:
https://www.wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/6528
This gold was accumulated prior to the current rebellion and was intended to be used to establish a pan-African currency
based on the Libyan golden Dinar. This plan was designed to provide the Francophone African Countries with an
alternative to the French.franc (CFA).
(Source Comment: According to knowledgeable individuals this quantity of gold and silver is valued at more than $7
billion. French intelligence officers discovered this plan shortly after the current rebellion began, and this was one of the
factors that influenced President Nicolas Sarkozy's decision to commit France to the attack on Libya. According to these
individuals Sarkozy's plans are driven by the following issues:
a. A desire to gain a greater share of Libya oil production,
b.Increase French influence in North Africa,
UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05779612 Date: 12/31/2015
c. Improve his intemai political situation in France,
d. Provide the French military with an opportunity to reassert its position in the world,
e. Address the concern of his advisors over Qaddafi's long term plans to supplant France as the dominant power in
So it wasn't DIRECTLY about the gold dinar, it was the fact that Qaddafi could continue to pay for stuff even if he was cut off from all the world's banking system. The a-e bullet points tells you why the US attacked Libya, even if it was on France's behalf.
109
Misc
2023 Mar 29, 3:12pm
Reality says
Fractional Reserve banking is for the system as a whole and creates CREDIT.
Do you understand accounting? Where assets equal liabilities+ owner's equity. This is a requirement for banks too ! ! ! (Hint: You can look at any bank's balance sheet at any financial website)That 4% payment on liabilities is on all the liabilities not 10% of the liabilities. Currently the reserve requirement is set at 0%. The amount that can be loaned is based on the bank's equity.
Running a bank is usually profitable, but not to the extent of the make believe thought that you only have to pay interest on a fraction of the total liabilities.
We are talking about Refinancings not purchases. The homes went up in value after they had purchased with the original mortgage.
It is that way with every government job.
The rest is self-explanatory.
Misc says
The banks are paying a higher rate to savers than they are receiving from the MBS on their books. That is how they are losing money. Yes, they do have to borrow every dollar they loan out except for the stockholder's equity.
Do you not understand what fractional-reserve banking is? Even if there were a 10% reserve requirement, the bank paying 4% interest on $1M deposits (and they are not paying that much except for on CD's and only starting the last few weeks) allows it to lend out $10M, even at the lowest 30yr fixed mortgage rate there ever was at about 2.75%, the annual interest income would be $275k, to pay an annual interest expense of $40k on the $1M. How is that losing money? Seems there is a 273k - 40k = $233k gross profit; i.e. 233 / 40 = 582.5% gross profit margin! The real reserve requirement is much lower than 10%; currently sub-5% or near 0%, so th...
Fractional Reserve banking is for the system as a whole and creates CREDIT.
Do you understand accounting? Where assets equal liabilities+ owner's equity. This is a requirement for banks too ! ! ! (Hint: You can look at any bank's balance sheet at any financial website)That 4% payment on liabilities is on all the liabilities not 10% of the liabilities. Currently the reserve requirement is set at 0%. The amount that can be loaned is based on the bank's equity.
Running a bank is usually profitable, but not to the extent of the make believe thought that you only have to pay interest on a fraction of the total liabilities.
We are talking about Refinancings not purchases. The homes went up in value after they had purchased with the original mortgage.
It is that way with every government job.
The rest is self-explanatory.
110
Reality
2023 Mar 29, 3:12pm
stereotomy says
Very good point! This also reminds me why the banksters were paying WHO, Fauci, and etc. to run the scamdemic and toxxine to kill people: when people die, any home mortgage remaining effectively becomes callable! That explains why they want the working age people take the toxxine.
The really nasty thing about the depression in the 30's was that all loans were callable. So the banks called in all the loans that were almost paid off, and the debtors, who were practically paid off, had their assets seized. The banks didn't even get around to the 100% LTV people before public outrage ended the mass evictions.
Very good point! This also reminds me why the banksters were paying WHO, Fauci, and etc. to run the scamdemic and toxxine to kill people: when people die, any home mortgage remaining effectively becomes callable! That explains why they want the working age people take the toxxine.
111
HeadSet
2023 Mar 29, 5:49pm
HeadSet
2023 Mar 29, 5:49pm
Misc says
Maybe, but that does not appear to be the trend. It looks more like an old timer with a single-family home will sell to a buyer that can only afford it by living multi-generation. That is, grandparents and grown kids also live in the home and share the cost. Around here, the starting wage is about $15/hr, but 2-bedroom apartments are still out of reach for a combined earning of two making $15/hour each. Therefore, some landlords have specialized in renting rooms and pairing people up in multi-room apartments.
Wages can increase until people can afford the new homes to be built.
Maybe, but that does not appear to be the trend. It looks more like an old timer with a single-family home will sell to a buyer that can only afford it by living multi-generation. That is, grandparents and grown kids also live in the home and share the cost. Around here, the starting wage is about $15/hr, but 2-bedroom apartments are still out of reach for a combined earning of two making $15/hour each. Therefore, some landlords have specialized in renting rooms and pairing people up in multi-room apartments.
112
PeopleUnited
2023 Mar 29, 8:22pm
PeopleUnited
2023 Mar 29, 8:22pm
Misc says
Cool story bro. I suppose you believe the Covid lies too?
If you work for a living and are in debt, deflation would reduced your wages until you could not make payments and you would lose whatever you went into debt to obtain.
The people with the assets would sit back and collect it all.
Cool story bro. I suppose you believe the Covid lies too?
113
PeopleUnited
2023 Mar 29, 8:31pm
PeopleUnited
2023 Mar 29, 8:31pm
HeadSet says
If the high debt folks are not able to save for retirement in a way that massively beats inflation they still lose. Besides that we are talking about a small minority who can walk that tightrope. And they are still debt slaves even if they are lucky enough to time the inflation wave and surf it into shore. They probably won’t have much to leave their kids since their house will be their main asset, which will likely be sold for end of life care, if it is even paid off. Such is the life of the debt slave. Sorry kids, we inflated away your inheritance.
I recognize the situation of inflation helping the high debt folks.
If the high debt folks are not able to save for retirement in a way that massively beats inflation they still lose. Besides that we are talking about a small minority who can walk that tightrope. And they are still debt slaves even if they are lucky enough to time the inflation wave and surf it into shore. They probably won’t have much to leave their kids since their house will be their main asset, which will likely be sold for end of life care, if it is even paid off. Such is the life of the debt slave. Sorry kids, we inflated away your inheritance.
114
Misc
2023 Mar 29, 9:14pm
Since 1913, the price of silver has gone up about 3.3% per year vs the dollar (yes that includes those crazy spending Covid years).
Do you realize the percentage of earnings that would need to be saved for retirement with a return like that?
I know ... I'm using that racist math again.
Do you realize the percentage of earnings that would need to be saved for retirement with a return like that?
I know ... I'm using that racist math again.
115
Zak
2023 Mar 29, 10:30pm
Misc says
Well here is a simple chart for you that shows that relationship:
https://www.macrotrends.net/1470/historical-silver-prices-100-year-chart
Hint: take off log scale and inflation adjustment to see the effect of inflation!!!
Funny enough, there is no need to talk about "investing" in silver/gold up until the late 1960's! This is when the government started printing dollars not backed by the metal in the bank.
So if you take your 3.3% per year, and subtract out all the flat years between 1913 and 1971, to when nixon took us off the commodity standard, you will see that an ounce of silver (which has not changed at ALL and has been NON-productive) went from $1.50 to $23 (over 14x!!!). So it's not that silver went up. The dollar went DOWN!!
this is about 5.5 ~6 % annual, not 3.3%
Is that racist math too?
Since 1913, the price of silver has gone up about 3.3% per year vs the dollar
Well here is a simple chart for you that shows that relationship:
https://www.macrotrends.net/1470/historical-silver-prices-100-year-chart
Hint: take off log scale and inflation adjustment to see the effect of inflation!!!
Funny enough, there is no need to talk about "investing" in silver/gold up until the late 1960's! This is when the government started printing dollars not backed by the metal in the bank.
So if you take your 3.3% per year, and subtract out all the flat years between 1913 and 1971, to when nixon took us off the commodity standard, you will see that an ounce of silver (which has not changed at ALL and has been NON-productive) went from $1.50 to $23 (over 14x!!!). So it's not that silver went up. The dollar went DOWN!!
this is about 5.5 ~6 % annual, not 3.3%
Is that racist math too?
116
Misc
2023 Mar 29, 11:22pm
Zak says
If you want to use the year we were taken off the gold standard instead of the year the Fed was created, you can and it ends up with the rate of about 5.5% vs the DOLLAR. If everyone was on the gold/silver standard the rate of return is ZERO.
The percentage of income that would need to be saved for retirement simply could not be achieved. Retirement is a fairly modern construct requiring fiat currency.
Misc says
Since 1913, the price of silver has gone up about 3.3% per year vs the dollar
Well here is a simple chart for you that shows that relationship:
https://www.macrotrends.net/1470/historical-silver-prices-100-year-chart
Hint: take off log scale and inflation adjustment to see the effect of inflation!!!
Funny enough, there is no need to talk about "investing" in silver/gold up until the late 1960's! This is when the government started printing dollars not backed by the metal in the bank.
So if you take your 3.3% per year, and subtract out all the flat years between 1913 and 1971, to when nixon took us off the commodity standard, you will see that an ounce of silver (which has not changed at ALL and has been NON-productive) went...
If you want to use the year we were taken off the gold standard instead of the year the Fed was created, you can and it ends up with the rate of about 5.5% vs the DOLLAR. If everyone was on the gold/silver standard the rate of return is ZERO.
The percentage of income that would need to be saved for retirement simply could not be achieved. Retirement is a fairly modern construct requiring fiat currency.
117
Zak
2023 Mar 29, 11:34pm
Misc says
Isn't this what we are saying!?! Yes. You get the point. No need for a return on cash in a savings account if your cash isn't devaluing at 5.5% per year on average!
If everyone was on the gold/silver standard the rate of return is ZERO
Isn't this what we are saying!?! Yes. You get the point. No need for a return on cash in a savings account if your cash isn't devaluing at 5.5% per year on average!
118
Misc
2023 Mar 29, 11:44pm
Zak says
There is also no way to get a return higher than ZERO because of system collapse and no way to save.
Misc says
If everyone was on the gold/silver standard the rate of return is ZERO
Isn't this what we are saying!?! Yes. You get the point. No need for a return on cash in a savings account if your cash isn't devaluing at 5.5% per year on average!
There is also no way to get a return higher than ZERO because of system collapse and no way to save.
119
Reality
2023 Mar 30, 8:56am
Misc says
The way SVB was operated, requring exclusive banking relationship in lending to banking clients that no other bank would lend to, essentially resulted in itself being "the system": both sides of a borrow-to-buy in the tech sector would be banking with SVB; the collateral "asset" was essentially measured in SVB plantation scripts pretending to be the Dollar. The SVB plantation script was not supposed to be cashed out for the federal reserve dollar to be parked at other banking institutions (per the exclusive banking agreement). When SVB lost money due to internal mismangement of funds, they allowed the clients to break the exclusive banking agreement to cash out the SVB plantation script for dollars, letting the "run on the bank" (which it wasn't as the script was only valued under the exclusive banking agreement, and was never supposed to be cashed out en masse for the federal reserve dollars at other banking institutions). Therefore allowing the mass transfer to take place was the heist! and having the FDIC stepping in to equate SVB plantation script to federal reserve notes was the second heist!
Misc says
Ironic you should make the argument that fiat central banking helps savings and retirement. You don't seem to realize that 15+% of a worker's income are forcibly taken away through payroll tax and/or self-employment tax and wasted right away (Social Security tax revenue is put into a special type of non-marketable treasury notes; i.e. a script that has no market value). i.e. government savings for retirement is entirely a Ponzi scam relying on current workers to pay for retirees, with nothing saved up. That's why the "Vaxx" toxxination was invented to kill people. That's also why wars are being fanned to kill (East) Europeans because their demographics are turning around, soon to have declining working population, therefore there public retirement "safetynet" will have negative cash flow. In reality, almost all wealth management funds are also ponzi scams after accounting for full economic cycles, as is the entire banking and financing industry. That's why banksters have been promoting wars and "pandemics" to kill people, for hundreds of years if not thousands of years. Please do not show us the stock indices, as almost all funds under-perform the indices. If someone who can consistently out-perform the indices, they'd be trading for themselves instead of allowing millions of strangers to share the pleasure of exploitng specific market inefficiencies of limited size (market profit comes from exploiting market inefficiencies; a perfectly efficient market would have no profit for anyone, and would not even continue to exist as there wouldn't be money to pay for transaction cost). The average performance of the financial industry is negative-return over the full economic cycles if we use real inflation adjustors (without hedonic adjustment, which reflects technological improvement that in a sound money system would show gradual increasing purchasing power of the sound money).
What the fiat money central banking system creates is the illusion of profit via understating inflation and/or setting specific time windows that doesn't capture the entire economic cycle (bubble and bust). As you admitted/agreed, people working for the FED wouldn't be working there if they could make more money in private sector unless the career compensation map includes bribery/corruption pay-back such as fat consulting pay from the regulated industries after retiring from the regulator positions. I'd add, likewise for large banking institutions too: people who have real business acumen would trade for themselves instead of working for large banking institutions or funds unless there is coercive element available through working in large institutions. So how exactly do those market manipulating regulations/coercions and corrupt payback/bribery enhance return for savings and retirement of the general public? They don't. Fiat Central Banking only create a scam robbing the masses to enrich a tiny group of Narcissistic few.
The classic intellectual defense for Fiat Central Banking actually is the opposite argument: it enables the robbing of "excessive savings" to put the resources towards new inventions and financing for wars. Well, we now know what the "new inventions" are, like Theranos, Moderna and many other "unicorns" funded by frauds like SVB and Gates fundation; because large financial institutions attract "woke" followers who misallocate resources, not independent thinkers capable of discovering real market opportunities. We also know wars are designed to kill savings/retirement/pension account holders (so as to eliminate liabilities to banks), while impoverishing the living domestic workers via tax-subsidized imports (i.e. subsidizing foreign slavers).
Under a sound money system, workers would be able to keep that 15+% for themselves as savings. Savings don't have to grow in numerical face amount if purchasing power is gradually increasing thank to technological improvement (think computers, cellphones that declined in price over decades) in a mildly price-deflationary market; total money supply will be increasing at pace with other mineral use (silver is a byproduct of the industrial mining of zinc, lead, tin and etc.) which should be slightly slower than products and services available because new technology enable better and more profitable use of mineral resources (i.e. a "sustainable society" would be built-in side benefit of a sound money system, instead of the current fiat FOMO scams promoting waste). Domestic workers would also have more stable jobs working real productive jobs instead of being enticed into zero-sum or negative-sum financial machinations and how to profit from foreign slave-labors/slavers (what the military-industrial-banking complex is, and is rapidly becoming slavers and slaves themselves).
Fractional Reserve banking is for the system as a whole and creates CREDIT.
Do you understand accounting? Where assets equal liabilities+ owner's equity. This is a requirement for banks too ! ! ! (Hint: You can look at any bank's balance sheet at any financial website)That 4% payment on liabilities is on all the liabilities not 10% of the liabilities. Currently the reserve requirement is set at 0%. The amount that can be loaned is based on the bank's equity.
The way SVB was operated, requring exclusive banking relationship in lending to banking clients that no other bank would lend to, essentially resulted in itself being "the system": both sides of a borrow-to-buy in the tech sector would be banking with SVB; the collateral "asset" was essentially measured in SVB plantation scripts pretending to be the Dollar. The SVB plantation script was not supposed to be cashed out for the federal reserve dollar to be parked at other banking institutions (per the exclusive banking agreement). When SVB lost money due to internal mismangement of funds, they allowed the clients to break the exclusive banking agreement to cash out the SVB plantation script for dollars, letting the "run on the bank" (which it wasn't as the script was only valued under the exclusive banking agreement, and was never supposed to be cashed out en masse for the federal reserve dollars at other banking institutions). Therefore allowing the mass transfer to take place was the heist! and having the FDIC stepping in to equate SVB plantation script to federal reserve notes was the second heist!
Misc says
The percentage of income that would need to be saved for retirement simply could not be achieved. Retirement is a fairly modern construct requiring fiat currency.
There is also no way to get a return higher than ZERO because of system collapse and no way to save.
Ironic you should make the argument that fiat central banking helps savings and retirement. You don't seem to realize that 15+% of a worker's income are forcibly taken away through payroll tax and/or self-employment tax and wasted right away (Social Security tax revenue is put into a special type of non-marketable treasury notes; i.e. a script that has no market value). i.e. government savings for retirement is entirely a Ponzi scam relying on current workers to pay for retirees, with nothing saved up. That's why the "Vaxx" toxxination was invented to kill people. That's also why wars are being fanned to kill (East) Europeans because their demographics are turning around, soon to have declining working population, therefore there public retirement "safetynet" will have negative cash flow. In reality, almost all wealth management funds are also ponzi scams after accounting for full economic cycles, as is the entire banking and financing industry. That's why banksters have been promoting wars and "pandemics" to kill people, for hundreds of years if not thousands of years. Please do not show us the stock indices, as almost all funds under-perform the indices. If someone who can consistently out-perform the indices, they'd be trading for themselves instead of allowing millions of strangers to share the pleasure of exploitng specific market inefficiencies of limited size (market profit comes from exploiting market inefficiencies; a perfectly efficient market would have no profit for anyone, and would not even continue to exist as there wouldn't be money to pay for transaction cost). The average performance of the financial industry is negative-return over the full economic cycles if we use real inflation adjustors (without hedonic adjustment, which reflects technological improvement that in a sound money system would show gradual increasing purchasing power of the sound money).
What the fiat money central banking system creates is the illusion of profit via understating inflation and/or setting specific time windows that doesn't capture the entire economic cycle (bubble and bust). As you admitted/agreed, people working for the FED wouldn't be working there if they could make more money in private sector unless the career compensation map includes bribery/corruption pay-back such as fat consulting pay from the regulated industries after retiring from the regulator positions. I'd add, likewise for large banking institutions too: people who have real business acumen would trade for themselves instead of working for large banking institutions or funds unless there is coercive element available through working in large institutions. So how exactly do those market manipulating regulations/coercions and corrupt payback/bribery enhance return for savings and retirement of the general public? They don't. Fiat Central Banking only create a scam robbing the masses to enrich a tiny group of Narcissistic few.
The classic intellectual defense for Fiat Central Banking actually is the opposite argument: it enables the robbing of "excessive savings" to put the resources towards new inventions and financing for wars. Well, we now know what the "new inventions" are, like Theranos, Moderna and many other "unicorns" funded by frauds like SVB and Gates fundation; because large financial institutions attract "woke" followers who misallocate resources, not independent thinkers capable of discovering real market opportunities. We also know wars are designed to kill savings/retirement/pension account holders (so as to eliminate liabilities to banks), while impoverishing the living domestic workers via tax-subsidized imports (i.e. subsidizing foreign slavers).
Under a sound money system, workers would be able to keep that 15+% for themselves as savings. Savings don't have to grow in numerical face amount if purchasing power is gradually increasing thank to technological improvement (think computers, cellphones that declined in price over decades) in a mildly price-deflationary market; total money supply will be increasing at pace with other mineral use (silver is a byproduct of the industrial mining of zinc, lead, tin and etc.) which should be slightly slower than products and services available because new technology enable better and more profitable use of mineral resources (i.e. a "sustainable society" would be built-in side benefit of a sound money system, instead of the current fiat FOMO scams promoting waste). Domestic workers would also have more stable jobs working real productive jobs instead of being enticed into zero-sum or negative-sum financial machinations and how to profit from foreign slave-labors/slavers (what the military-industrial-banking complex is, and is rapidly becoming slavers and slaves themselves).
120
Tenpoundbass
2023 Mar 30, 11:13am
Tenpoundbass
2023 Mar 30, 11:13am
Folks going on about Gold and Silver going up over time, while not mentioning the intentional precious metals manipulation on a massive scale during the RE and bank collapse under Bush and Obama are not being honest with themselves. We saw Gold go from $300 an Oz to over $1600 in the blink of an eye. And the same happened to silver, only it eventually came back down some.
Gold manipulation is a sound argument for paper currency. At least fiat money supply is more fungible than Gold. Everyone is trading the same dollars. I promise you all that under Gold, you're issued tokens or script in exchange for your labor. You can't save up those financial means to improve your situation.
You have to acquire gold. But those with the Gold will continue to make that impossible. By inflating its value. Which if you think about it, what good is placing a value on Gold if you can't buy it with fiat currency? Which is the point of this thread.
Gold made sense in a time when it was the only means. In that economy inflation through greed did not and could not exist. Only supply and demand could affect costs. To go on Gold now, we would have to roll back the economy across the board with deflation on a massive scale, just to get to where Gold could be used to operate even in the Company Store paying you script scenario I say it will create.
Value of anything is not intrinsic it's inert. So therefor the money supply must inflate and deflate to accommodate the exuberance when people can't tell the difference. Les you end up with Monopolies and Robber Barons.
Gold manipulation is a sound argument for paper currency. At least fiat money supply is more fungible than Gold. Everyone is trading the same dollars. I promise you all that under Gold, you're issued tokens or script in exchange for your labor. You can't save up those financial means to improve your situation.
You have to acquire gold. But those with the Gold will continue to make that impossible. By inflating its value. Which if you think about it, what good is placing a value on Gold if you can't buy it with fiat currency? Which is the point of this thread.
Gold made sense in a time when it was the only means. In that economy inflation through greed did not and could not exist. Only supply and demand could affect costs. To go on Gold now, we would have to roll back the economy across the board with deflation on a massive scale, just to get to where Gold could be used to operate even in the Company Store paying you script scenario I say it will create.
Value of anything is not intrinsic it's inert. So therefor the money supply must inflate and deflate to accommodate the exuberance when people can't tell the difference. Les you end up with Monopolies and Robber Barons.
121
Reality
2023 Mar 30, 11:43am
10lbs says:
All the short-comings of a gold-only monetary standard are about a monopoly manipulating the prices/values of the warehouse receipts (Comex and London Gold Fix are about trading warehouse receipts, i.e. paper gold, not real gold). The Fiat Central Banking system is an even more thorough (i.e. unaccountable to public) monopoly supporting the Robber Barons unless you want to allow everyone to print their own paper money and journal entries and call it dollar like SVB was doing and FDIC would step in to back up every single privately printed "dollar" the printer's friends have deposited back into the printer's journals. It would be as if FDIC stepped in to back "Tether" or all other crypto "dollar-equivalent"; that's more or less what FDIC did when it stepped in to back up all the SVB-dollars that SVB had lent out to its banking clients (that no other bank would lend) on condition that they bank exclusively with the bank (i.e. requiring the seller to deposit all proceeds into the same bank that the buyer had borrowed from, essentially removing check-and-balance in lending standards and grossly inflating value of collateral "assets" being purchased; it's a Ponzi Scheme relying on participants not cashing out at par value into outside dollars).
If you are worried about gold-only monetary standards being manipulated by banksters hoarding gold and giving the people only warehouse receipts and fake warehouse receipts to manipulate the ups and downs of inflation/deflation, then advocate the return of the original Bimetalism of this republic.
Gold manipulation is a sound argument for paper currency. At least fiat money supply is more fungible than Gold. Everyone is trading the same dollars. I promise you all that under Gold, you're issued tokens or script in exchange for your labor. You can't save up those financial means to improve your situation.
All the short-comings of a gold-only monetary standard are about a monopoly manipulating the prices/values of the warehouse receipts (Comex and London Gold Fix are about trading warehouse receipts, i.e. paper gold, not real gold). The Fiat Central Banking system is an even more thorough (i.e. unaccountable to public) monopoly supporting the Robber Barons unless you want to allow everyone to print their own paper money and journal entries and call it dollar like SVB was doing and FDIC would step in to back up every single privately printed "dollar" the printer's friends have deposited back into the printer's journals. It would be as if FDIC stepped in to back "Tether" or all other crypto "dollar-equivalent"; that's more or less what FDIC did when it stepped in to back up all the SVB-dollars that SVB had lent out to its banking clients (that no other bank would lend) on condition that they bank exclusively with the bank (i.e. requiring the seller to deposit all proceeds into the same bank that the buyer had borrowed from, essentially removing check-and-balance in lending standards and grossly inflating value of collateral "assets" being purchased; it's a Ponzi Scheme relying on participants not cashing out at par value into outside dollars).
If you are worried about gold-only monetary standards being manipulated by banksters hoarding gold and giving the people only warehouse receipts and fake warehouse receipts to manipulate the ups and downs of inflation/deflation, then advocate the return of the original Bimetalism of this republic.
122
Zak
2023 Mar 30, 3:11pm
Misc says
This is laughable. You really have zero concept of what generating a return means.
First, lets look at increase in the (metal) commodity supply. Miners. Miners will be bringing new metal into the market. The US mint would directly exchange raw input material for coined currency. Thus new money is created. Lets say the miner gets 20 coins.
Second, some entities will be buying metals and converting them into finished products or portions of finished products. the consumers of those products
will be paying a higher amount of metal for the output product than goes in as input to the product. Thus here is 1 provable method of "generating a return" on a loan of physical metal. MORE concretely: if you give a jeweler a 1 oz gold coin, they might give you a 1/3 oz gold ring!
Therefore, the jeweler could borrow 10oz of gold from the miner to create 30 rings, sell them, pay his lender 11 gold coins, and still have 19 oz of gold remaining. Thus generating a 19x return on his 1 oz interest fee.
A miner, after mining his new gold, now has 10 1oz coins from his work, and a 10oz loan to the local jeweler. He goes to the merchant and buys some digging equipment. Now the equipment dealer has some of the newly minted gold, and from there it circulates further into the economy. Probably to some of the people buying those gold rings.
You act like this system didn't work for millenia. It's really weird.
There is also no way to get a return higher than ZERO because of system collapse and no way to save.
This is laughable. You really have zero concept of what generating a return means.
First, lets look at increase in the (metal) commodity supply. Miners. Miners will be bringing new metal into the market. The US mint would directly exchange raw input material for coined currency. Thus new money is created. Lets say the miner gets 20 coins.
Second, some entities will be buying metals and converting them into finished products or portions of finished products. the consumers of those products
will be paying a higher amount of metal for the output product than goes in as input to the product. Thus here is 1 provable method of "generating a return" on a loan of physical metal. MORE concretely: if you give a jeweler a 1 oz gold coin, they might give you a 1/3 oz gold ring!
Therefore, the jeweler could borrow 10oz of gold from the miner to create 30 rings, sell them, pay his lender 11 gold coins, and still have 19 oz of gold remaining. Thus generating a 19x return on his 1 oz interest fee.
A miner, after mining his new gold, now has 10 1oz coins from his work, and a 10oz loan to the local jeweler. He goes to the merchant and buys some digging equipment. Now the equipment dealer has some of the newly minted gold, and from there it circulates further into the economy. Probably to some of the people buying those gold rings.
You act like this system didn't work for millenia. It's really weird.
123
Zak
2023 Mar 30, 4:17pm
Tenpoundbass says
Again, such weird thinking. You can produce literally anything. What you produce is what you "buy" gold with. You give out your goods and services, and people give you gold for it. Then you give out the gold for other people's goods and services. You are constantly producing through your daily output. How is this not sensible?
Also, you don't HAVE TO wait to take gold for your goods/services. You can take other goods/services, you can take silver, you can take promises of something in the future. But if someone wants to pay you a debt in minted gold, you HAVE TO take it.
Which if you think about it, what good is placing a value on Gold if you can't buy it with fiat currency? Which is the point of this thread.
Again, such weird thinking. You can produce literally anything. What you produce is what you "buy" gold with. You give out your goods and services, and people give you gold for it. Then you give out the gold for other people's goods and services. You are constantly producing through your daily output. How is this not sensible?
Also, you don't HAVE TO wait to take gold for your goods/services. You can take other goods/services, you can take silver, you can take promises of something in the future. But if someone wants to pay you a debt in minted gold, you HAVE TO take it.
124
Reality
2023 Mar 30, 4:49pm
And adding to what Zak was saying in comment 127, just in case you the borrower had taken out a loan when the market had been flooded with (fraudulent / over-issued) gold warehouse receipts and subsequently having to pay back the loan when the banksters have withdrawn much of the fraudulent / over-issued gold warehouse receipts so such paper-gold is nearly as hard to come by as real gold, under Bimetallism you'd be able to pay back the loan via silver at 16:1 weight ratio.
Silver is a (more abundant) byproduct during industrial mining (of zinc, tin, lead, etc.), and silver is abundant enough for carrying out transactions in normal daily life (and it is a natural germicide! unlike paper / linen cash being accused of spreading disease; banksters would love to ban cash using any excuse). The Hunts brothers' failed experiment in the early 1980's proved that it's impossible to corner silver, as there is just too much silver out there and industrial production of other far more common metals yield silver as byproduct.
Silver is a (more abundant) byproduct during industrial mining (of zinc, tin, lead, etc.), and silver is abundant enough for carrying out transactions in normal daily life (and it is a natural germicide! unlike paper / linen cash being accused of spreading disease; banksters would love to ban cash using any excuse). The Hunts brothers' failed experiment in the early 1980's proved that it's impossible to corner silver, as there is just too much silver out there and industrial production of other far more common metals yield silver as byproduct.
125
Tenpoundbass
2023 Mar 30, 5:54pm
Tenpoundbass
2023 Mar 30, 5:54pm
Zak says
If you are employed then you are not a producer, how hard is that to understand? People pretend working for fiat money is a trap, but in reality working in a Gold economy would be a bigger trap. Especially if the modern times had to reinvent a gold standard.
Everyone worries about banks devaluing money, but the thing is it happens around the world so everything stays equal. And since Money isn't a finite commodity like Gold is. .It's not Pie, that fat cats can't eat it all. At the end of the day after all of the banks have manipulated the money and the robber barons have consolidated all of the goods. The printer still goes Vrrrrrrroooooommmm and more money is created. Those on the bottom can scrap and save and still manage to produce in spite of the banks and Monopolies best efforts.
Look at all of the world economies in the 2000's. I witness first hand what happened to Peru in just a decade. In 2002 when I visited Lima with my wife. It was such a destitute hellhole, I was depressed at the sight. There was no good tourist section imo, as everywhere you went, there were the same destitute desperate poor. It sucked balls and made me ashamed to be vacationing flaunting what little bit I had, as they could never dream to achieve that.
But between 2002 and 2010, Peruvians worked hard and saved their money, and there was a lot of opportunity with the emerging Latin markets in that time.
By time I went back in 2010, those same folks in my In-laws neighborhood were a strong middle class(relatively to 10 years earlier). Everyone had a cell phone, internet, cable TV, LCD tvs. Their grocery stores were like a mega Walmart's with everything we have, and they were buying it. They turned into capable consumers.
But when you see poor in third world counties, it's always perpetrated by warlords, and greedy corrupt poltiicians and there's zero opportunity.
Countries don't need natural resources, just the mere changing money for employment, goods and services. Those that have a bank printing money and is available for small entreprenuers they thrive. But you see in countries where rare earth and precious minerals are mined. They are intentionally cut out from participating. They are poorer than my Lima 2002 impression. They must not be allowed to prosper and buy into the natural resource production or offer an althernative to the slave labor needed to mine those resouces. So even though those countries are dirt poor, they have riches beyond their wildest dreams.
That's a gold ecconomy.
Again, such weird thinking. You can produce literally anything. What you produce is what you "buy" gold with. You give out your goods and services, and people give you gold for it. Then you give out the gold for other people's goods and services. You are constantly producing through your daily output. How is this not sensible?
If you are employed then you are not a producer, how hard is that to understand? People pretend working for fiat money is a trap, but in reality working in a Gold economy would be a bigger trap. Especially if the modern times had to reinvent a gold standard.
Everyone worries about banks devaluing money, but the thing is it happens around the world so everything stays equal. And since Money isn't a finite commodity like Gold is. .It's not Pie, that fat cats can't eat it all. At the end of the day after all of the banks have manipulated the money and the robber barons have consolidated all of the goods. The printer still goes Vrrrrrrroooooommmm and more money is created. Those on the bottom can scrap and save and still manage to produce in spite of the banks and Monopolies best efforts.
Look at all of the world economies in the 2000's. I witness first hand what happened to Peru in just a decade. In 2002 when I visited Lima with my wife. It was such a destitute hellhole, I was depressed at the sight. There was no good tourist section imo, as everywhere you went, there were the same destitute desperate poor. It sucked balls and made me ashamed to be vacationing flaunting what little bit I had, as they could never dream to achieve that.
But between 2002 and 2010, Peruvians worked hard and saved their money, and there was a lot of opportunity with the emerging Latin markets in that time.
By time I went back in 2010, those same folks in my In-laws neighborhood were a strong middle class(relatively to 10 years earlier). Everyone had a cell phone, internet, cable TV, LCD tvs. Their grocery stores were like a mega Walmart's with everything we have, and they were buying it. They turned into capable consumers.
But when you see poor in third world counties, it's always perpetrated by warlords, and greedy corrupt poltiicians and there's zero opportunity.
Countries don't need natural resources, just the mere changing money for employment, goods and services. Those that have a bank printing money and is available for small entreprenuers they thrive. But you see in countries where rare earth and precious minerals are mined. They are intentionally cut out from participating. They are poorer than my Lima 2002 impression. They must not be allowed to prosper and buy into the natural resource production or offer an althernative to the slave labor needed to mine those resouces. So even though those countries are dirt poor, they have riches beyond their wildest dreams.
That's a gold ecconomy.
126
Zak
2023 Mar 30, 7:13pm
Tenpoundbass says
It's beyond ridiculous. If workers don't produce anything, then why do employers employ them!?!?
The fact that workers trade their output for a period at a fixed rate for that period, rather than for the volume output of that period, (and not even universally!) leads nowhere near to the claim that if a person is employed, then they are not a producer!?!? Wow. Your basic foundation of reasoning on this topic is completely shattered and unstable.
Define employment. Try as hard as you can to make the case that employment is something new since 1971, before which when people were paid in "gold" they somehow didn't produce anything(good/service/labor to employer). And please explain why they were given gold then!!!
Then, please tell me about how the US was a third world country in 1969 since we were on the gold standard.
If you are employed then you are not a producer, how hard is that to understand
It's beyond ridiculous. If workers don't produce anything, then why do employers employ them!?!?
The fact that workers trade their output for a period at a fixed rate for that period, rather than for the volume output of that period, (and not even universally!) leads nowhere near to the claim that if a person is employed, then they are not a producer!?!? Wow. Your basic foundation of reasoning on this topic is completely shattered and unstable.
Define employment. Try as hard as you can to make the case that employment is something new since 1971, before which when people were paid in "gold" they somehow didn't produce anything(good/service/labor to employer). And please explain why they were given gold then!!!
Then, please tell me about how the US was a third world country in 1969 since we were on the gold standard.
127
AmericanKulak
2023 Mar 30, 7:26pm
AmericanKulak
2023 Mar 30, 7:26pm
Tenpoundbass says
Yup, that's the dangerous part of the Gold standard.
As I've said before, the fat cats vacuum up all the gold, and give Banknote paper in return, usually far in excess of the gold backing it up. Bank panics galore in the 18th and 19th over too much paper fronting too little metal.
Even the well off would deposit 300 ounces of gold with the Bank of the Holy Ghost and Commerce in Valencia, and go back a month later to get 30 ounces for a trip, and they'd tell Lord d'Agentan-Rodgrieuz-deValdez they could only give 3 ounces of gold and 27 in paper.
Cheap silver with a mandatory minimum in metal for wages/contracts or a GDP/Land Value (avg. over 10 years) is the way to go.
Everyone worries about banks devaluing money, but the thing is it happens around the world so everything stays equal. And since Money isn't a finite commodity like Gold is. .It's not Pie, that fat cats can't eat it all. At the end of the day after all of the banks have manipulated the money and the robber barons have consolidated all of the goods. The printer still goes Vrrrrrrroooooommmm and more money is created. Those on the bottom can scrap and save and still manage to produce in spite of the banks and Monopolies best efforts.
Yup, that's the dangerous part of the Gold standard.
As I've said before, the fat cats vacuum up all the gold, and give Banknote paper in return, usually far in excess of the gold backing it up. Bank panics galore in the 18th and 19th over too much paper fronting too little metal.
Even the well off would deposit 300 ounces of gold with the Bank of the Holy Ghost and Commerce in Valencia, and go back a month later to get 30 ounces for a trip, and they'd tell Lord d'Agentan-Rodgrieuz-deValdez they could only give 3 ounces of gold and 27 in paper.
Cheap silver with a mandatory minimum in metal for wages/contracts or a GDP/Land Value (avg. over 10 years) is the way to go.
128
PeopleUnited
2023 Mar 30, 8:22pm
PeopleUnited
2023 Mar 30, 8:22pm
Tenpoundbass says
The monopolies and robber barons run the world.
Soon they are going to start another world war, exterminate a bunch of useless eaters and try to bring the world population down to about 500,000,000. They might succeed
There is no reason to debate sound money, even though it is the system that our founding documents establish. A dollar was established as a rather specific amount and purity of silver. And the banksters has to get rid of that standard because it was too hard to perpetuate fraud with such a reliable and unfakable measure of honesty.
But again that doesn’t matter anymore, we aren’t going back to silver and gold as money. We are going forward to ones and zeroes in CBDC government controlled, social credit score monitoring accounts. But probably not until after a lot of people die (and disappear when the harpazo (aka rapture happens).
Les you end up with Monopolies and Robber Barons.
The monopolies and robber barons run the world.
Soon they are going to start another world war, exterminate a bunch of useless eaters and try to bring the world population down to about 500,000,000. They might succeed
There is no reason to debate sound money, even though it is the system that our founding documents establish. A dollar was established as a rather specific amount and purity of silver. And the banksters has to get rid of that standard because it was too hard to perpetuate fraud with such a reliable and unfakable measure of honesty.
But again that doesn’t matter anymore, we aren’t going back to silver and gold as money. We are going forward to ones and zeroes in CBDC government controlled, social credit score monitoring accounts. But probably not until after a lot of people die (and disappear when the harpazo (aka rapture happens).
129
Reality
2023 Mar 30, 9:03pm
Tenpoundbass says
The poverty you saw in Peru in 2002 had nothing to do with gold-based money. Peru didn't have gold-based money; they had hyperinflation (of their fiat money) in the late 1980's. Peru was in the throes of Maoist guerilla warfare less than a decade before you visited (Alberto Fujimori and his draconian military handlers put an end to Shining Path guerilla movement circa 1993-1994); in the year 1989 Peruvians became so desperate that they voted for a man of Japanese descent to be their President (remember, back in 1989, all the western media were saying Japan was so well run that it was going to take over the world), more than 1/4 of the districts in the country were not able to vote (no living candidate) due to armed guerillas disruption and over 100 politicians were killed by guerillas in that year alone! in a country that had only about 21 million people (i.e. about twice the population of NYC). Can you imagine 50 politicians running for office in NYC being killed in one year the election year?
The observation that countries without natural resources tend to do better than countries whose economy reply primarily on natural resources is correct, however the corollary you drew from it is exactly the opposite of reality. Countries where economy rely primarily on natural resources export give rise to government-controlled monopolies and dictatorial governments that can rely on control of natural resources export income without having to consult the population at large; whereas in countries that have no natural resources, their governments have to derive cash flow from a hard-working domestic population (e.g. Japan, Taiwan) that is competitively employed by competing enterprises in order to maintain productivity. So what do you think a Fiat Central Banking money printer is? It's the equivalent of a giant gold/oil/diamond/cobalt mine owned by the government (bureaucrats)! The governing elite's ability to print money is precisely the reason why American voters are being ignored.
Countries don't need natural resources, just the mere changing money for employment, goods and services. Those that have a bank printing money and is available for small entreprenuers they thrive. But you see in countries where rare earth and precious minerals are mined. They are intentionally cut out from participating. They are poorer than my Lima 2002 impression. They must not be allowed to prosper and buy into the natural resource production or offer an althernative to the slave labor needed to mine those resouces. So even though those countries are dirt poor, they have riches beyond their wildest dreams.
That's a gold ecconomy.
The poverty you saw in Peru in 2002 had nothing to do with gold-based money. Peru didn't have gold-based money; they had hyperinflation (of their fiat money) in the late 1980's. Peru was in the throes of Maoist guerilla warfare less than a decade before you visited (Alberto Fujimori and his draconian military handlers put an end to Shining Path guerilla movement circa 1993-1994); in the year 1989 Peruvians became so desperate that they voted for a man of Japanese descent to be their President (remember, back in 1989, all the western media were saying Japan was so well run that it was going to take over the world), more than 1/4 of the districts in the country were not able to vote (no living candidate) due to armed guerillas disruption and over 100 politicians were killed by guerillas in that year alone! in a country that had only about 21 million people (i.e. about twice the population of NYC). Can you imagine 50 politicians running for office in NYC being killed in one year the election year?
The observation that countries without natural resources tend to do better than countries whose economy reply primarily on natural resources is correct, however the corollary you drew from it is exactly the opposite of reality. Countries where economy rely primarily on natural resources export give rise to government-controlled monopolies and dictatorial governments that can rely on control of natural resources export income without having to consult the population at large; whereas in countries that have no natural resources, their governments have to derive cash flow from a hard-working domestic population (e.g. Japan, Taiwan) that is competitively employed by competing enterprises in order to maintain productivity. So what do you think a Fiat Central Banking money printer is? It's the equivalent of a giant gold/oil/diamond/cobalt mine owned by the government (bureaucrats)! The governing elite's ability to print money is precisely the reason why American voters are being ignored.
130
AmericanKulak
2023 Mar 30, 10:18pm
AmericanKulak
2023 Mar 30, 10:18pm
PeopleUnited says
This ignores the printing of banknotes by banks.
One of the big myths of Gold bugs is how sacred and stable gold-based banking was.
It wasn't.
But silver based currency is much better, but not perfect.
The best would be a long term value that doesn't move rapidly, like a 10-year land value average currency that would gently rise with prosperity, and very gently decline (due to the 10-year rolling average) with recessions.
There is no reason to debate sound money, even though it is the system that our founding documents establish. A dollar was established as a rather specific amount and purity of silver. And the banksters has to get rid of that standard because it was too hard to perpetuate fraud with such a reliable and unfakable measure of honesty.
This ignores the printing of banknotes by banks.
One of the big myths of Gold bugs is how sacred and stable gold-based banking was.
It wasn't.
But silver based currency is much better, but not perfect.
The best would be a long term value that doesn't move rapidly, like a 10-year land value average currency that would gently rise with prosperity, and very gently decline (due to the 10-year rolling average) with recessions.
131
AD
2023 Mar 30, 11:53pm
AD
2023 Mar 30, 11:53pm
.
“Gold is the money of kings, silver is the money of gentlemen, barter is the money of peasants – but debt is the money of slaves.”
~ Norm Franz
.
“Gold is the money of kings, silver is the money of gentlemen, barter is the money of peasants – but debt is the money of slaves.”
~ Norm Franz
.
132
AD
2023 Mar 30, 11:58pm
AD
2023 Mar 30, 11:58pm
Reality says
How much self sufficient was Peru ? Did it have to import energy (gas and oil) ? How much food did it have to import ? How much building supplies did it have to import ?
Did it have to rely on imported services such as architects, utility engineers, doctors, etc. ?
One thing about the USA economy is that it is somewhat self sufficient albeit some dependency on imported manufactured goods. The economy is productive and innovative for now.
I realize another generation indoctrinated by the Woke Left will further erode productivity and innovation, as well as any other advancements. Its like what Che Guevara dreamed about with his Marxist revolution through the Americas.
.
The poverty you saw in Peru in 2002 had nothing to do with gold-based money. Peru didn't have gold-based money; they had hyperinflation (of their fiat money) in the late 1980's
How much self sufficient was Peru ? Did it have to import energy (gas and oil) ? How much food did it have to import ? How much building supplies did it have to import ?
Did it have to rely on imported services such as architects, utility engineers, doctors, etc. ?
One thing about the USA economy is that it is somewhat self sufficient albeit some dependency on imported manufactured goods. The economy is productive and innovative for now.
I realize another generation indoctrinated by the Woke Left will further erode productivity and innovation, as well as any other advancements. Its like what Che Guevara dreamed about with his Marxist revolution through the Americas.
.
133
Tenpoundbass
2023 Mar 31, 12:26am
Tenpoundbass
2023 Mar 31, 12:26am
Reality says
Peru is very rich in precious metals, but the Presidents in the 90's through the early 2000's squandered all of it to China. They were building a railway system, but one of the President's absconded with the funds, it sat unfinished for over 20 years. Eventually investors went to Lima and just started building. The more they built the more jobs and opportunity opened up. My BIL's now run a Refrigeration refurbish shop. They buy refurb and sale deli, and bakery refrigerated glass displays for food and snacks. Every other house is a bodega, and every street has 3 cafe's or pastry shops. Construction work and everything that goes with it just opened up. When they had minerals and wealth they were held down to dirt poor third world conditions. I saw it with my own eyes. It happens all over the world. I have also seen around the world when once third world countries have commerce open up and investors build and open business where none existed before. Those countries fast track to the 21st century over night.
The poverty you saw in Peru in 2002 had nothing to do with gold-based money. Peru didn't have gold-based money; they had hyperinflation (of their fiat money) in the late 1980's.
Peru is very rich in precious metals, but the Presidents in the 90's through the early 2000's squandered all of it to China. They were building a railway system, but one of the President's absconded with the funds, it sat unfinished for over 20 years. Eventually investors went to Lima and just started building. The more they built the more jobs and opportunity opened up. My BIL's now run a Refrigeration refurbish shop. They buy refurb and sale deli, and bakery refrigerated glass displays for food and snacks. Every other house is a bodega, and every street has 3 cafe's or pastry shops. Construction work and everything that goes with it just opened up. When they had minerals and wealth they were held down to dirt poor third world conditions. I saw it with my own eyes. It happens all over the world. I have also seen around the world when once third world countries have commerce open up and investors build and open business where none existed before. Those countries fast track to the 21st century over night.
134
Tenpoundbass
2023 Mar 31, 12:28am
Tenpoundbass
2023 Mar 31, 12:28am
ad says
Peru allows cars imported into their country be converted by mom and pop shops, another start up industry. And the cars run on Natural Gas. Gasoline and Deiseal is expensive there. But NG is dirt cheap. A taxi driver told me he get's about 300 miles out of his $7 tank in his trunk.
How much self sufficient was Peru ? Did it have to import energy (gas and oil) ? How much food did it have to import ? How much building supplies did it have to import ?
Peru allows cars imported into their country be converted by mom and pop shops, another start up industry. And the cars run on Natural Gas. Gasoline and Deiseal is expensive there. But NG is dirt cheap. A taxi driver told me he get's about 300 miles out of his $7 tank in his trunk.
135
Tenpoundbass
2023 Mar 31, 12:30am
Tenpoundbass
2023 Mar 31, 12:30am
Zak says
Have you ever seen anyone's name on a pair of Nike's?
It's beyond ridiculous. If workers don't produce anything, then why do employers employ them!?!?
Have you ever seen anyone's name on a pair of Nike's?
136
Misc
2023 Mar 31, 2:20am
The total worldwide supply of gold increases at a rate of about .9% per year. The supply of silver increases at a rate of about 1.2% per year.
Without social security, let's say the savings rate would be 20% (and I'd say that is waaaaaay too low).
With people needing to save 20% minimum of what they make and the supply increasing about 1%, how long could the system survive?
Without social security, let's say the savings rate would be 20% (and I'd say that is waaaaaay too low).
With people needing to save 20% minimum of what they make and the supply increasing about 1%, how long could the system survive?
137
Zak
2023 Mar 31, 10:17am
Tenpoundbass says
This is the answer I would expect. You don't know, but you have a question that is confusing to you. Fair enough. But that should really inform you as to whether the opinion you are putting forth holds, and you should spend time arguing for it, or if you should be trying to listen to the other people explaining the economic foundations and asking questions.
Have you ever seen anyone's name on a pair of Nike's?
This is the answer I would expect. You don't know, but you have a question that is confusing to you. Fair enough. But that should really inform you as to whether the opinion you are putting forth holds, and you should spend time arguing for it, or if you should be trying to listen to the other people explaining the economic foundations and asking questions.
138
Tenpoundbass
2023 Mar 31, 12:48pm
Tenpoundbass
2023 Mar 31, 12:48pm
Zak says
You sound like a whole slew of Libs that knew it all in 2007 that argued with me about Liberal truisms, that all turned out I was on the right side of.
Are you really having a hard time grasping that as someone on my payroll, you are NOT a Producer that I AM?
I pay you for your employment, you're not even providing me with a service. Business associates and partners provide my business with "Services".
I pay them for cleaning services, in which they send over cleaning employees, I pay them for Mailing services, which they send employees to come collect my mail, sort it, weigh it, stamp it and mail it.
Perhaps one of those employees is keeping money in a shoebox with the hopes of one day buying a hotdog cart to push down by the fishing pier on sunny Saturdays. He will then get to be a producer for one day a week. But that can only happen in a fiat currency society. In a Gold society his would be customers would only have Microsoft and Ford script to pay for the Hotdog. Unless the Hotdog vender lived and shopped at the Microsoft and Ford company stores, and housing, he would have no use for it. Because his Reehm accommodations don't accept those scripts.
This is the answer I would expect. You don't know, but you have a question that is confusing to you. Fair enough. But that should really inform you as to whether the opinion you are putting forth holds, and you should spend time arguing for it, or if you should be trying to listen to the other people explaining the economic foundations and asking questions.
You sound like a whole slew of Libs that knew it all in 2007 that argued with me about Liberal truisms, that all turned out I was on the right side of.
Are you really having a hard time grasping that as someone on my payroll, you are NOT a Producer that I AM?
I pay you for your employment, you're not even providing me with a service. Business associates and partners provide my business with "Services".
I pay them for cleaning services, in which they send over cleaning employees, I pay them for Mailing services, which they send employees to come collect my mail, sort it, weigh it, stamp it and mail it.
Perhaps one of those employees is keeping money in a shoebox with the hopes of one day buying a hotdog cart to push down by the fishing pier on sunny Saturdays. He will then get to be a producer for one day a week. But that can only happen in a fiat currency society. In a Gold society his would be customers would only have Microsoft and Ford script to pay for the Hotdog. Unless the Hotdog vender lived and shopped at the Microsoft and Ford company stores, and housing, he would have no use for it. Because his Reehm accommodations don't accept those scripts.
139
Zak
2023 Mar 31, 1:50pm
Lol. So strawmans? That's your best shot?
>Are you really having a hard time grasping that as someone on my payroll, you are NOT a Producer that I AM?
I think this word for high opinion of yourself is called narcissism . You're really laying out your insecurities, and bad management policies, but not really telling me about how your workers don't produce things for you.
Btw, I'm not saying your workers have to make the same decisions as you, but it sounds like a nightmare to work for you. No autonomy, no reward for performance? I can see why you would fear your employees having a stable means to save. They would leave your crap employment as soon as possible.
>Are you really having a hard time grasping that as someone on my payroll, you are NOT a Producer that I AM?
I think this word for high opinion of yourself is called narcissism . You're really laying out your insecurities, and bad management policies, but not really telling me about how your workers don't produce things for you.
Btw, I'm not saying your workers have to make the same decisions as you, but it sounds like a nightmare to work for you. No autonomy, no reward for performance? I can see why you would fear your employees having a stable means to save. They would leave your crap employment as soon as possible.
140
Tenpoundbass
2023 Mar 31, 2:57pm
Tenpoundbass
2023 Mar 31, 2:57pm
While I'm enjoying that you think I'm a Producer, I'm a realist employee.
I'm thankful to be an employee in a Fiat currency economy. Or going on my third year in my wait and see hiatus, on which way the Commies in HR are going to take this thing. I would have been out on my ass, as I wouldn't own my house, the company store would.
Let me ask you, how old are you, and how much did you pay attention in History class. Especially on the period from about 1849 though 1945?
I'm thankful to be an employee in a Fiat currency economy. Or going on my third year in my wait and see hiatus, on which way the Commies in HR are going to take this thing. I would have been out on my ass, as I wouldn't own my house, the company store would.
Let me ask you, how old are you, and how much did you pay attention in History class. Especially on the period from about 1849 though 1945?
141
PeopleUnited
2023 Mar 31, 3:50pm
PeopleUnited
2023 Mar 31, 3:50pm
AmericanKulak says
That is a separate issue though. Bank deposits should be made at the depositors own risk.
But we should not have a quasi government agency that funds a bankrupt government by printing Trillions of dollars of money for a fake Covid panic and drive up the cost of most necessities. That is what sound money prevents,
This ignores the printing of banknotes by banks.
That is a separate issue though. Bank deposits should be made at the depositors own risk.
But we should not have a quasi government agency that funds a bankrupt government by printing Trillions of dollars of money for a fake Covid panic and drive up the cost of most necessities. That is what sound money prevents,
« First « Previous Comments 102 - 141 of 189 Next » Last » Search these comments
patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,189,155 comments by 13,845 users - 1337irr, Ceffer, Kepi, RC2006 online now