Comments 1 - 22 of 22 Search these comments
1
SharkyP
2025 Jul 2, 2:28am
SharkyP
2025 Jul 2, 2:28am
lending standards with 50% of the loan amount on deposit in real silver, not stock.
- Redefining banking to be storage of silver for a fee, or willful participation in lending risk in exchange for interest.
Imagine the weight necessary to lug 50% of the silver to the bank for a loan. Most people don’t even have 5% to put down for a home. It’s a nice idea…perhaps with crypto.
- Redefining banking to be storage of silver for a fee, or willful participation in lending risk in exchange for interest.
Imagine the weight necessary to lug 50% of the silver to the bank for a loan. Most people don’t even have 5% to put down for a home. It’s a nice idea…perhaps with crypto.
2
Tenpoundbass
2025 Jul 2, 6:48am
Tenpoundbass
2025 Jul 2, 6:48am
Domestic productivity, and free trade.
Every country should be trying to produce as much domestically as possible. Countries should trade between themselves goods they don't produce while exporting goods they do.
There's way to much faith in the Banks and Financing systems. Who globalized and dictated, decided and mandated who could produce what and where.
I would limit what can be commoditized and businesses that can issue stocks and publicly traded.
I know, I know free trade and all. But the truth is 90% of businesses growing just so they can go public is just an elaborate pyramid scheme. And it's the dumb fuck shareholders that end up holding the bag. it's the people at the top that runs away with the spoils.
Small businesses should be encouraged and promoted. The end game for businesses should be to grow a lasting institution that serves the community, employs people, even lasts generations at the same location. Equity firms shouldn't be allowed to move into a town that has thriving local mom and pop shops that has served communities for decades, and open up Big Box stores next-door, or buy them out and close them down. As we see time and time again. When the next economic down cycle happens, those big box retailers close down, devastating those communities.
These should be general guiding goals, how a country gets there, and how they print money or back their currency is semantics, if the results are the same.
Putting all of the emphasis on how the banking and finance side is ran, is how the global banking systems has controlled, crushed and consolidated all of the world's wealth. End the worldwide reserves and make printing and managing a countries currency a government entity. Most countries should outsource their currency printing, distribution and management to countries that are good at it.
Every country should be trying to produce as much domestically as possible. Countries should trade between themselves goods they don't produce while exporting goods they do.
There's way to much faith in the Banks and Financing systems. Who globalized and dictated, decided and mandated who could produce what and where.
I would limit what can be commoditized and businesses that can issue stocks and publicly traded.
I know, I know free trade and all. But the truth is 90% of businesses growing just so they can go public is just an elaborate pyramid scheme. And it's the dumb fuck shareholders that end up holding the bag. it's the people at the top that runs away with the spoils.
Small businesses should be encouraged and promoted. The end game for businesses should be to grow a lasting institution that serves the community, employs people, even lasts generations at the same location. Equity firms shouldn't be allowed to move into a town that has thriving local mom and pop shops that has served communities for decades, and open up Big Box stores next-door, or buy them out and close them down. As we see time and time again. When the next economic down cycle happens, those big box retailers close down, devastating those communities.
These should be general guiding goals, how a country gets there, and how they print money or back their currency is semantics, if the results are the same.
Putting all of the emphasis on how the banking and finance side is ran, is how the global banking systems has controlled, crushed and consolidated all of the world's wealth. End the worldwide reserves and make printing and managing a countries currency a government entity. Most countries should outsource their currency printing, distribution and management to countries that are good at it.
3
Patrick
2025 Jul 2, 12:30pm
Patrick
2025 Jul 2, 12:30pm
SharkyP says
Most of the time it will simply be an electronic transfer of ownership.
Imagine the weight necessary to lug 50% of the silver to the bank for a loan.
Most of the time it will simply be an electronic transfer of ownership.
4
Patrick
2025 Jul 2, 12:41pm
Patrick
2025 Jul 2, 12:41pm
https://alexkrainer.substack.com/p/why-governments-cant-balance-their
So let's do away with fiat currencies and fractional reserve lending.
Why governments can't balance their books - EVER!
Without a radical reform of the monetary system, deficit spending and accumulation of public debts will continue to accelerate regardless of who is in power. The problem is systemic.
After weeks of polarizing debates, the US Senate just passed Donald Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” with opinions split almost evenly among those who want it to pass and those who believe that it will push the United States closer to its ultime bankruptcy. Elon Musk has been one of the most vocal opponents of the bill. Earlier this week, he posted the chart of US Federal Debt from 1900 through 2020 with the caption, “When are they going to flatten this curve?”
Well, I can offer a qualified answer to that question: NEVER. The qualification: unless you enact a radical reform of the monetary system. Under the prevailing monetary system, no government can give up escalating debts and deficit spending. ...
The monetary system, in fact, predetermines the outcome with certainty: conservatives AND socialists will descend along a similar trajectory to the system’s ultimate collapse. Government sector of the economy will gradually displace more and more private enterprise, the government’s role will expand, along with debts and deficit spending. All these symptoms stem from an obscure economic effect called the deflationary gap. ...
Today, in many of the “capitalist” nations, government spending accounts for almost half of the GDP and in some cases significantly more. In the UK, the mothership of capitalism, the government's share of GDP is 44%. In France it's over 58%.
In the United States, for over a century now we've been treated to periodic reruns of the “debt ceiling” Kabuki theatre. When public debt reaches the “debt ceiling,” free-spending socialists call for more government spending and a raising of the debt ceiling. The conservatives enjoy grandstanding about fiscal conservatism and balancing budgets, but regardless of which side controls the Presidency or the Congress, for over a century now the debt ceiling has been raised every time. The only exceptions have been periods when the ceiling was simply ignored and the public debt continued its accelerating upward trajectory...
Averting depressions and achieving economic growth necessitates government intervention and guarantees an accelerating rise in deficit spending with the corresponding rise in public debt regardless of whether we are talking about a “capitalist” or a “socialist” economy. This should be obvious, as the evolution of public debt in the U.S. illustrates...
There’s no point railing against “socialism” and dreaming about a small government, private capital utopia which doesn't, and cannot exist so long as our economies are based on fiat currencies with fractional reserve lending. Even if we start with zero public debt, the pursuit of economic growth will drag the whole system along the same trajectory to ruin.
So let's do away with fiat currencies and fractional reserve lending.
5
stereotomy
2025 Jul 2, 12:42pm
stereotomy
2025 Jul 2, 12:42pm
Patrick says
Like Bullionvault - electronic transfers between owners of vaulted and insured good delivery (central bank grade) gold. They also do silver, platinum.
SharkyP says
Imagine the weight necessary to lug 50% of the silver to the bank for a loan.
Most of the time it will simply be an electronic transfer of ownership.
Like Bullionvault - electronic transfers between owners of vaulted and insured good delivery (central bank grade) gold. They also do silver, platinum.
6
Patrick
2025 Jul 2, 1:50pm
Patrick
2025 Jul 2, 1:50pm
Yes, though there is some risk of fraud at places that store gold and silver.
One way to mitigate that is to put a serial number of each coin or bar, and explicitly list the serial numbers on account statements.
Then double-counting the same silver or gold would be harder, especially if the ownership records were made public.
One way to mitigate that is to put a serial number of each coin or bar, and explicitly list the serial numbers on account statements.
Then double-counting the same silver or gold would be harder, especially if the ownership records were made public.
7
stereotomy
2025 Jul 2, 4:06pm
stereotomy
2025 Jul 2, 4:06pm
Bullionvault has public audits posted on their website with anonymized owner information. If you can afford the plane fare, they'll take you on a tour of their vaults and show you exactly which piece of 400 troy ounce bar is yours.
8
DeficitHawk
2025 Jul 2, 4:45pm
DeficitHawk
2025 Jul 2, 4:45pm
Patrick says
First, I am all for fiscal discipline and balancing the budget. So I think that is absolutely a worthwhile objective.
But, even if you have a silver standard, the government can still borrow. It can promise to pay back in silver or whatever the monetary standard is. I think the question of fiscal restraint is different from the question of monetary policy. You are addressing monetary policy, but not fiscal restraint. Monetary policy is not our biggest problem. Our problem is Fiscal policy.
Currently we have Trump yelling at Powell, asking Powell to print money... as of today Powell isnt doing it. Nevertheless BBB passes and the deficit spikes... so how does monetary policy fix fiscal poicy?
I see no evidence that turning the money printer off will stop congress from spending beyond its means.
So let's do away with fiat currencies and fractional reserve lending.
First, I am all for fiscal discipline and balancing the budget. So I think that is absolutely a worthwhile objective.
But, even if you have a silver standard, the government can still borrow. It can promise to pay back in silver or whatever the monetary standard is. I think the question of fiscal restraint is different from the question of monetary policy. You are addressing monetary policy, but not fiscal restraint. Monetary policy is not our biggest problem. Our problem is Fiscal policy.
Currently we have Trump yelling at Powell, asking Powell to print money... as of today Powell isnt doing it. Nevertheless BBB passes and the deficit spikes... so how does monetary policy fix fiscal poicy?
I see no evidence that turning the money printer off will stop congress from spending beyond its means.
9
Patrick
2025 Jul 2, 5:05pm
Patrick
2025 Jul 2, 5:05pm
DeficitHawk says
Yes, there will still be debt. Deposits of silver in a bank will merely be a debt the bank has to you. This is slightly risky, but facilitates the movement of money because debts can be transferred without moving anything physical.
Indeed, governments could still make promises they cannot fulfill, but a silver standard would at least tether their promises to earth. Interest payments from the government would actually get fulfilled in silver or not, continuously.
But, even if you have a silver standard, the government can still borrow. It can promise to pay back in silver or whatever the monetary standard is.
Yes, there will still be debt. Deposits of silver in a bank will merely be a debt the bank has to you. This is slightly risky, but facilitates the movement of money because debts can be transferred without moving anything physical.
Indeed, governments could still make promises they cannot fulfill, but a silver standard would at least tether their promises to earth. Interest payments from the government would actually get fulfilled in silver or not, continuously.
10
DeficitHawk
2025 Jul 2, 5:13pm
DeficitHawk
2025 Jul 2, 5:13pm
Patrick says
Yeah, I think the government would spend spend spend as much as it could and just run its debt up. When people begin to question the governments ability to repay, they will demand higher interest rates, and the government will simply borrow borrow borrow at higher interest rate... rinse soak repeat... Soon, interest payments will be 99.9% of budget.... and the government response will be borrow borrow borrow to pay for it... Eventually it would collapse. That is what will happen with paper money. That is what would happen with commodity-backed money.
I don't think commodity-backed money will change that dynamic at all.
In order to change that dynamic, the voters would need to actually want a balanced budget and hold their representatives accountable to making one... but there is little hope for that in the foreseeable future. Every administration tries to outdo the previous one with fiscal irresponsibility and the voters trip over themselves to encourage this behavior again and again.
One of the few things the left and right both agree on is to abandon fiscal discipline.
Interest payments from the government would actually get fulfilled in silver or not
Yeah, I think the government would spend spend spend as much as it could and just run its debt up. When people begin to question the governments ability to repay, they will demand higher interest rates, and the government will simply borrow borrow borrow at higher interest rate... rinse soak repeat... Soon, interest payments will be 99.9% of budget.... and the government response will be borrow borrow borrow to pay for it... Eventually it would collapse. That is what will happen with paper money. That is what would happen with commodity-backed money.
I don't think commodity-backed money will change that dynamic at all.
In order to change that dynamic, the voters would need to actually want a balanced budget and hold their representatives accountable to making one... but there is little hope for that in the foreseeable future. Every administration tries to outdo the previous one with fiscal irresponsibility and the voters trip over themselves to encourage this behavior again and again.
One of the few things the left and right both agree on is to abandon fiscal discipline.
11
DeficitHawk
2025 Jul 2, 5:24pm
DeficitHawk
2025 Jul 2, 5:24pm
I suppose another way would be to modify our constitution to disallow borrowing by the government... that would be another way. Though I dont see much support for that either.
My honest expectation is for fiscal irresponsibility to continue unabated until interest payments become a larger and larger share of government budget, forcing a debt spiral and eventual collapse.. The collapse with paper money would be hyperinflation. (If we had commodity backed money, the collapse would be a depression). I don't know when this will happen, but I dont plan to be invested in all-cash when it does.
My honest expectation is for fiscal irresponsibility to continue unabated until interest payments become a larger and larger share of government budget, forcing a debt spiral and eventual collapse.. The collapse with paper money would be hyperinflation. (If we had commodity backed money, the collapse would be a depression). I don't know when this will happen, but I dont plan to be invested in all-cash when it does.
12
Patrick
2025 Jul 3, 11:26am
Patrick
2025 Jul 3, 11:26am
I like the idea of a constitutional prohibition on government debt.
Not only would we avoid interest payments, but by saving money on advance of projects, the government would earn interest. And there would be no possibility of government default.
Not only would we avoid interest payments, but by saving money on advance of projects, the government would earn interest. And there would be no possibility of government default.
13
DeficitHawk
2025 Jul 3, 12:26pm
DeficitHawk
2025 Jul 3, 12:26pm
Patrick says
I think its too restrictive since I'd want the country to be able to borrow if it were attacked or in some crisis.. but i dont trust the executive or a simple majority in congress to decide whether we are in a crisis since they always will...
Maybe a constitutional amendment that increases the level of consensus to create a deficit of higher % GDP...
0% GDP Deficit: Congress standard rules
0-2% GDP Deficit: Congress requires 60% house and senate
2-4% GDP Deficit: Congress requires 75% house and senate
>4% GDP Deficit: Requires constitutional override, same requirements as passing a constitutional amendment
I like the idea of a constitutional prohibition on government debt.
I think its too restrictive since I'd want the country to be able to borrow if it were attacked or in some crisis.. but i dont trust the executive or a simple majority in congress to decide whether we are in a crisis since they always will...
Maybe a constitutional amendment that increases the level of consensus to create a deficit of higher % GDP...
0% GDP Deficit: Congress standard rules
0-2% GDP Deficit: Congress requires 60% house and senate
2-4% GDP Deficit: Congress requires 75% house and senate
>4% GDP Deficit: Requires constitutional override, same requirements as passing a constitutional amendment
14
MolotovCocktail
2025 Jul 3, 1:21pm
MolotovCocktail
2025 Jul 3, 1:21pm
DeficitHawk says
They'll just change the formula on how they count GDP.
Maybe a constitutional amendment that increases the level of consensus to create a deficit of higher % GDP...
0% GDP Deficit: Congress standard rules
0-2% GDP Deficit: Congress requires 60% house and senate
2-4% GDP Deficit: Congress requires 75% house and senate
>4% GDP Deficit: Requires constitutional override, same requirements as passing a constitutional amendment
They'll just change the formula on how they count GDP.
15
clambo
2025 Jul 3, 3:00pm
Not to nitpick, just a bit of clarification about the 1929 stock market.
In 1929, margin was vastly more generous than it is today.
Margin=credit to buy stocks using your owned stock as collateral.
Today, margin is limited; if you own $5000 worth of a stock, you can buy another $5000 worth.
If the stock you buy on margin starts to fall, the broker just sells your stock to cover it, a "margin call."
In 1929, you could buy much more on credit=margin, thereby amplifying your loss.
Banks were allowed to trade in the stock market using depositors' money. They engaged in stock speculation which is not allowed today.
People and banks were both wiped out by the stock market crash in 1929; however, few Americans owned stocks in 1929.
The real reason for the Depression following the 1929 crash was too few banks left surviving. Without enough banks, the economy slowed down.
Why did they freak out in 2008? Because Citibank, Bank of America would fail. If there are no banks left, the economy will be very slow for a while. So, they decided a few banks should be "too big to fail."
Some banks were not "too big to fail" and they were allowed to die; Wachovia Bank is an example I know well since my father lost a bundle from shares he had inherited (our ancestor was an early founder of Wachovia).
Years previously I had advised him to sell his bank shares and buy a mutual fund, but he listened to other people who said banks were "safe investments" etc.
In 1929, margin was vastly more generous than it is today.
Margin=credit to buy stocks using your owned stock as collateral.
Today, margin is limited; if you own $5000 worth of a stock, you can buy another $5000 worth.
If the stock you buy on margin starts to fall, the broker just sells your stock to cover it, a "margin call."
In 1929, you could buy much more on credit=margin, thereby amplifying your loss.
Banks were allowed to trade in the stock market using depositors' money. They engaged in stock speculation which is not allowed today.
People and banks were both wiped out by the stock market crash in 1929; however, few Americans owned stocks in 1929.
The real reason for the Depression following the 1929 crash was too few banks left surviving. Without enough banks, the economy slowed down.
Why did they freak out in 2008? Because Citibank, Bank of America would fail. If there are no banks left, the economy will be very slow for a while. So, they decided a few banks should be "too big to fail."
Some banks were not "too big to fail" and they were allowed to die; Wachovia Bank is an example I know well since my father lost a bundle from shares he had inherited (our ancestor was an early founder of Wachovia).
Years previously I had advised him to sell his bank shares and buy a mutual fund, but he listened to other people who said banks were "safe investments" etc.
16
Glock-n-Load
2025 Jul 3, 5:12pm
Patrick says
The government would never do this because it would be a national security threat. Think about it. Any country that’s willing to go balls to the wall on debt wins. Think about it.
I like the idea of a constitutional prohibition on government debt.
Not only would we avoid interest payments, but by saving money on advance of projects, the government would earn interest. And there would be no possibility of government default.
The government would never do this because it would be a national security threat. Think about it. Any country that’s willing to go balls to the wall on debt wins. Think about it.
17
Glock-n-Load
2025 Jul 3, 5:14pm
MolotovCocktail says
Yep, there really is no fix.
DeficitHawk says
Maybe a constitutional amendment that increases the level of consensus to create a deficit of higher % GDP...
0% GDP Deficit: Congress standard rules
0-2% GDP Deficit: Congress requires 60% house and senate
2-4% GDP Deficit: Congress requires 75% house and senate
>4% GDP Deficit: Requires constitutional override, same requirements as passing a constitutional amendment
They'll just change the formula on how they count GDP.
Yep, there really is no fix.
18
Patrick
2025 Jul 3, 5:50pm
Patrick
2025 Jul 3, 5:50pm
Glock-n-Load says
Such debt can also destroy a country.
Any country that’s willing to go balls to the wall on debt wins.
Such debt can also destroy a country.
19
DeficitHawk
2025 Jul 3, 7:45pm
DeficitHawk
2025 Jul 3, 7:45pm
MolotovCocktail says
Yeah.... Or how they estimate the deficit...
Yeah I think there is no way around just holding representatives accountable, but I also think that won't happen. No way around it. I agree.
Best to prepare for the inevitable outcome.
They'll just change the formula on how they count GDP.
Yeah.... Or how they estimate the deficit...
Yeah I think there is no way around just holding representatives accountable, but I also think that won't happen. No way around it. I agree.
Best to prepare for the inevitable outcome.
20
Glock-n-Load
2025 Jul 3, 8:47pm
Patrick says
Not if you win the war.
Glock-n-Load says
Any country that’s willing to go balls to the wall on debt wins.
Such debt can also destroy a country.
Not if you win the war.
21
Misc
2025 Jul 4, 10:57pm
Does anybody really want the government to collect more money than they spend ????
Once upon a time this happened in the US and there were protests that we had the richest government on earth, but the poorest people.
Someone here is Irish...tell your ancestors that you want to go back to the system of government being a profit oriented enterprise instead of what we have now.. The ancestors will rise from the grave to get you.
Once upon a time this happened in the US and there were protests that we had the richest government on earth, but the poorest people.
Someone here is Irish...tell your ancestors that you want to go back to the system of government being a profit oriented enterprise instead of what we have now.. The ancestors will rise from the grave to get you.
22
DeficitHawk
2025 Jul 5, 7:24am
DeficitHawk
2025 Jul 5, 7:24am
Misc says
No, I want them to collect an amount equal to what they spend.
Does anybody really want the government to collect more money than they spend ????
No, I want them to collect an amount equal to what they spend.
- Economy was very good in 1928 and 1929, so the stock market was rising rapidly.
- Lots of people borrowed money to invest in the stock market. Banks were happy to lower lending standards.
- Market crashed in Oct. 1929, and investors could not pay back the banks.
- Banks then could not pay their depositors.
- Consumers could not buy anything, since their bank deposits were gone.
- Businesses went bankrupt because consumers were gone, resulting in more bank loans defaulting.
- People who had real gold or silver metal then hid it because they did not trust banks.
- The value of real gold and silver metal kept rising because of its scarcity, encouraging more hiding.
- Roosevelt made it illegal for Americans to own gold, and required them to turn it over to the government for paper dollars.
The general clusterfuck continued until WWII gave an excuse for the government to open war supply factories and employ tons of people.
After WWII, America was just about the last industrialized country left standing, so the 1950's were great for American exports.
The FDIC was put in place to encourage people to trust banks, giving them assurances of "risk-free" interest, meaning that bank defaults would be covered by the public. So if banks make good loans, they win, and if they make bad loans, the public loses. Bankers liked it.
There was a decision made to completely decouple the US dollar from silver (1964) and gold (1971), so that that it had no real backing whatsoever. This freed up the Fed to print infinite amounts of money to cover deficit spending, resulting in an explosion of government debt, and continuous theft of money from the public via inflation.
Next step is probably the implosion of the dollar as the rest of the world realizes that the US will never pay back its bonds in full.
Let's say we go back to a system of silver by weight as money. The pound and the peso were both simply weights of silver originally. How can we avoid a repeat of the Great Depression? I think in a couple of ways:
- Elimination of the Federal Reserve so that interest rates are set by the market. High interest rates bring real money out of hiding even if they make it harder for people to borrow to start a business.
- Strict deposit lending standards with 50% of the loan amount on deposit in real silver, not stock. Private loans would be unrestricted though.
- Redefining banking to be storage of silver for a fee, or willful participation in lending risk in exchange for interest.
This would all slow down the economy relative to fiat money, poor lending standards, and pushing bank defaults onto the public. But we would have very stable growth rather than either the boom/bust cycle or inflation/government debt.