« First « Previous Comments 232 - 271 of 274 Next » Last » Search these comments
Haven't read responses till now, but to clear this up so no one looking at these messages gets bad information...
If you do that–it’s your own fault. Investing your savings in a bank is almost always a losing proposition.
It is impracticable for the average American not to use banking for most of his day-to-day financial transactions. Furthermore, it is ridiculous that a person should be forced to take any financial risk in terms of investing in stock, bonds, or other assets simply to RETAIN the value of his money rather than to grow it. Money should automatically store value without loss. That's part of the definition of money.
Real incomes always decline during a recession and rise again as the economy grows.
Your statements are empirically false. Real incomes have frequently over the past two generations failed to climb at all during economic booms while falling during recessions. Simply Google "real income of Americans over time adjusted for inflation." Furthermore, inflation has the immediate effect of lowering the purchasing power of your income. You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.
You need a lesson in cause and effect.
This is like saying, "insert counterargument here." You haven't actually said anything, so the only reply I can give to you is, never try to out logic a person who does logic 70 hours a week for a living. It's like trying to outrun a professional racer.
Oh, wait a sec. If Thomas Jefferson said it, then it must be true….
In addition to explaining exactly how inflation works to undermine economic prosperity, I have quoted the founding fathers to show to you that these facts have been well-known for a long time. However, if you really want to compare your reputation to Thomas Jefferson or Benjamin Franklin, I'll give more credence to the fathers of our country.
Who would more people trust as a source of wisdom: the author of Poor Richard's Almanac or tatupu70?
That’s part of the definition of money.
Nope. Nice try though.
Your statements are empirically false. Real incomes have frequently over the past two generations failed to climb at all during economic booms while falling during recessions. Simply Google “real income of Americans over time adjusted for inflation.†Furthermore, inflation has the immediate effect of lowering the purchasing power of your income. You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.
OK--I wasn't being literal that real incomes rise every year during a boom and fall every year during a recession. My apologies-I thought that was obvious. The point was that it's not unusual for real incomes to fall during very bad economic times and it has very little to do with a fiat currency.
You haven’t actually said anything, so the only reply I can give to you is, never try to out logic a person who does logic 70 hours a week for a living. It’s like trying to outrun a professional racer.
Well, I don't think 70 hours is enough. You imply that the reason for the success of the colonies was the "honest" currency without any supporting evidence.
However, if you really want to compare your reputation to Thomas Jefferson or Benjamin Franklin, I’ll give more credence to the fathers of our country.
Nope--Jefferson and Franklin clearly have better reputations. My point is that even the Founding Fathers were not infallable. Every word uttered by Jefferson wasn't gospel.
I realize this is "about.com" but similar sentiments can be found elsewhere:
http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/fallromeeconomic/a/econoffall.htm
Sounds like we are headed in the same direction, perhaps? For those of you who don't want to click the link:
"Nero and other emperors debased the currency in order to supply a demand for more coins. By debasing the currency is meant that instead of a coin having its own intrinsic value+, it was now only representative of the silver or gold it had once contained. By the time of Claudius II Gothicus (268-270 A.D.) the amount of silver in a supposedly (100%) silver denarius was only .02%.
This led to or was severe inflation, depending on how you define inflation."
.....
"Rome's wealth was originally in land, but this gave way to wealth through taxation.
The Cato Institute (a modern free-market think tank) says that emperors deliberately overtaxed the senatorial (or ruling) class in order to render it powerless. To do this, the emperors needed a powerful set of enforcers -- the imperial guard.
Once the wealthy and powerful were no longer either rich or powerful, the poor had to pay the bills of the state. These bills included the payment of the imperial guard and the military troops at the empire's borders."
....
"Since the military and the imperial guard were absolutely essential, taxpayers had to be compelled to produce their pay. Workers had to be tied to their land.
To escape the burden of tax, some small landowners sold themselves into slavery, since slaves didn't have to pay tax and freedom from taxes was more desirable than personal liberty."
Good point. I think we'll soon see small landowners selling themselves into slavery in the US. Maybe 2015?
Money is issued by the government as tender. Are you actually suggesting that you think it is the job of the government to store your wealth for you?
(HINT: It isn’t)
Sorry pal, but your cries for a nanny-state to shelter you from the perils of a free market will go unanswered.
Nomograph, you ignorant slut. No, I am not suggesting that government should protect people from risks in free market investments. I have no idea how you pulled that out of your @$$ from my comments. Nor am I suggesting that we should have a nanny-state. I am not even suggesting that government should be the controller of money -- and in our country, it isn't, the fed is.
What I have stated is that money should retain value as that is one of its four functions. As Peter Schiff states in his book Crash Proof, the purpose of money is
1. A medium for the exchange of goods and services.
2. A unit of accounting.
3. A method of deferred payment.
4. A store of value.
When money fails in any of these purposes, the economy suffers. Before the federal reserve was created, the U.S. dollar held its value. After the fed was created, we got the Great Depression.
The only people who are pro-inflation are debtors and the big bankers.
Before the federal reserve was created, the U.S. dollar held its value. After the fed was created, we got the Great Depression.
Still haven't figured out the whole cause/effect thing yet, have you?
Before the federal reserve was created, the U.S. dollar held its value. After the fed was created, we got the Great Depression.
Still haven’t figured out the whole cause/effect thing yet, have you?
Insert argument here.
> Wow–thanks professor. Now it takes $1 to buy a candy bar instead of $.30. But the average income is $30K instead of $10K. So what?
OK, smart-ass. Here's the point. Say you put 20% of your income in a savings account that offers 2% interest, but inflation is running at 5%. You are actually paying a 3% annual fee to the bank for storing your money. You pay a 5% tax if you keep your money in cash. That's damn significant to anyone who has savings including retirement plans. Factor in the fact that you will keep adding to your savings, and the amount of real wealth you lose each year grows every year. That's the point.
Furthermore, the real median income of U.S. households has decline over the past ten years. This may be masked by inflation, but its effects are not.
Inflation also makes it more difficult to meaningfully compare the change in value of assets over long periods of times. This is especially true since the Federal Reserve stopped reportin...
Dan8267 says
Nomograph says
Money is issued by the government as tender. Are you actually suggesting that you think it is the job of the government to store your wealth for you?
(HINT: It isn’t)
Sorry pal, but your cries for a nanny-state to shelter you from the perils of a free market will go unanswered.
Nomograph, you ignorant slut. No, I am not suggesting that government should protect people from risks in free market investments. I have no idea how you pulled that out of your @$$ from my comments. Nor am I suggesting that we should have a nanny-state. I am not even suggesting that government should be the controller of money -- and in our country, it isn't, the fed is.
What I have stated is that money should retain value as that is one of its four functions. As Peter Schiff states in his book Crash Proof, the purpose of money is
1. A medium for the exchange of goods and services.
2. A unit of accounting.
3. A method of deferred payment.
4. A store of value.
When money fails in any of these purposes, the economy suffers. Before the federal reserve was created, the U.S. dollar held its value. After the fed was created, we got the Great Depression.
The only people who are pro-inflation are debtors and the big bankers.
How many apples can I buy with 70 grains of silver? How many cars?
Ever heard of a monetary reset? I suggest one is coming soon to a "democracy" near you.
What is to prevent people from trading with each other in silver or gold?
A man named Bernard von NotHaus created gold, silver, and copper coins which he called "Liberty dollars". He was sued by the Federal Government as a terrorist for doing this.
Federal prosecutors successfully argued that von NotHaus was, in fact, trying to pass off the silver coins as U.S. currency. Coming in denominations of 5, 10, 20, and 50, the Liberty Dollars also featured a dollar sign, the word "dollar" and the motto "Trust in God," similar to the "In God We Trust" that appears on U.S. coins.:[13]
Privately, nothing. Publicly, all business's must accept federal debt notes.
What is to prevent people from trading with each other in silver or gold?
NuttBoxer says
Privately, nothing. Publicly, all business's must accept federal debt notes.
No they don't. Some places literally refuse to take cash.
There's some freakiness in the precious metal markets. The price of silver (official paper price of silver) is less than half of what it was in 1980.
Gold and silver are currently used as money but there is a middleman (your local gold/silver shop or website) that gets a cut when buying or selling.
This is one dollar:
Inherited from Old Spanish peso, from Vulgar Latin *pēsum, from Latin pēnsum, from pendō (“to weigh”).
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has shifted from using the US dollar to local currencies in its oil trades.
•This move aligns with the broader de-dollarization efforts of the BRICS economic alliance, which the UAE recently joined.
•The UAE’s decision could significantly impact the dominance of the US dollar in the global oil market.
Back to the original thread "What is a Dollar?"
A Dollar, as of 5/14/2010 was 1/1237 of one Troy ounce of Gold.
NOTE: as of today, 11/29/2023, the dollar is 1/2044 of one Troy ounce of Gold.
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has shifted from using the US dollar to local currencies in its oil trades.
There is some good news about a weak dollar: It will help us manufacture for export again.
There is some good news about a weak dollar: It will help us manufacture for export again.
Show me where a sound dollar and capitalism causes anywhere near the pain, suffering, tragedy, misery and number of deaths that a fiat currency and a powerful socialistic central government has caused.
from pendō (“to weigh”).
« First « Previous Comments 232 - 271 of 274 Next » Last » Search these comments
http://mises.org/daily/4149
Are you aware that a Federal Reserve note "dollar bill" is not a constitutional dollar? Perhaps you are, but if so, do you know what a constitutional dollar literally is? Is it gold? Is it silver?