Europe Timeline 3 months

[InCognition]

The problem is too complex to be fixed, and too simple for people/governments to realize the EU destroyed itself before it began. It's mathematically irrefutable that the EU will collapse, and it's one of many nations that will be subject to the principles of mathematics.

As long as there's paper money, governments around the world will pull themselves into the same pit, resulting in inevitable defaults. The EU is just another fish in the barrel.

People who think that economies can remain stable indefinitely with paper currencies, simply do not understand how money works, nor do they understand monetary policy in regards to banking.

Gold is not a viable answer as an immediate/direct currency because of it's transport burden, and it's ability to be physically manipulated. A very well regulated cryptocurrency has the potential to be a very good idea, given that it's backed by a logarithmically-created asset (gold). There are many issues that could deter the integrity of a cryptocurrency though, without an extreme amount of resources directed at maintaining that cryptocurrency's integrity.

 

[newatit2010]

Don't worry the dumbasscrats president will save us all. Just give the stupid ass 10 or 15 trillion dollars more for shovel ready jobs around the world.

 

[Harrekin]

The problem is too complex to be fixed, and too simple for people/governments to realize the EU destroyed itself before it began. It's mathematically irrefutable that the EU will collapse, and it's one of many nations that will be subject to the principles of mathematics.

As long as there's paper money, governments around the world will pull themselves into the same pit, resulting in inevitable defaults. The EU is just another fish in the barrel.

People who think that economies can remain stable indefinitely with paper currencies, simply do not understand how money works, nor do they understand monetary policy in regards to banking.

Gold is not a viable answer as an immediate/direct currency because of it's transport burden, and it's ability to be physically manipulated. A very well regulated cryptocurrency has the potential to be a very good idea, given that it's backed by a logarithmically-created asset (gold). There are many issues that could deter the integrity of a cryptocurrency though, without an extreme amount of resources directed at maintaining that cryptocurrency's integrity.

The US is way further down the national debt-shitter than the EU is.

You must admit neither the US or EU is falling apart anytime soon, and your obvious copy/paste (is obvious) is just scaremongering at what could happen in the future.

Eventually the debt cycle will consume any fiat currency, but it's quite a ways off yet.

I wonder how "buddy buddy" Federal Europe and the US will be?

EDIT: You wanna know a simple solution? Let the ECB bailout the banks directly and remove that debt from sovereign balance sheets. That combined with balanced budgets through reduced welfare and as a result reduced taxation to spur aggregate demand which in turn spurs jobs and growth.

 

[billybob420]

The US is way further down the national debt-shitter than the EU is.

That's not exactly true, at all. Some countries' in the EU are rocking a 300-400% trade deficit, and that's only the deficit they admit to! What's the US's deficit? (I"m seriously not sure, lol). I think it's around 7% of GDP though?

 

[Harrekin]

That's not exactly true, at all. Some countries' in the EU are rocking a 300-400% trade deficit, and that's only the deficit they admit to! What's the US's deficit? (I"m seriously not sure, lol). I think it's around 7% of GDP though?

You're forgetting about future payments with interest on your 14 trillion dollar debt, with a currency taken from an economy that's gonna be mired by inflation through the continuous money printing.

You also forget there are countries in the EU that have huge trade surpluses, what's even produced domestically in the US these days?

 

[Harrekin]

That's not exactly true, at all. Some countries' in the EU are rocking a 300-400% trade deficit, and that's only the deficit they admit to! What's the US's deficit? (I"m seriously not sure, lol). I think it's around 7% of GDP though?

Btw, you're comparing trade deficits with budget deficits there, apples and oranges.

 

[InCognition]

The US is way further down the national debt-shitter than the EU is.

You must admit neither the US or EU is falling apart anytime soon, and your obvious copy/paste (is obvious) is just scaremongering at what could happen in the future.

Eventually the debt cycle will consume any fiat currency, but it's quite a ways off yet.

I wonder how "buddy buddy" Federal Europe and the US will be?

EDIT: You wanna know a simple solution? Let the ECB bailout the banks directly and remove that debt from sovereign balance sheets. That combined with balanced budgets through reduced welfare and as a result reduced taxation to spur aggregate demand which in turn spurs jobs and growth.

Scaremongering isn't scary nor mongering, when it's the truth of the inevitable future. Beyond that I haven't copy and pasted anything.... not sure where that came from? Those claiming "fear-mongering" unfortunately have the most to lose from such a situation as they do no believe it's a possibility. Given that a EU/US default is mathematically irrefutable, denying such an event is nothing more than what's called normalcy bias.

You can believe the US/EU won't fall apart anytime soon. It's just a guess at best. No one has the slightest clue as to when it will all go. It could be 2 years, or it could be 20. It will be sooner rather than later though, and that's undeniable. To think this system will continue as-is for another 75+ years is nothing more than a fantasy. One thing is for sure, when it goes, it will be a surprise regarding how quickly it unravels, and when it does so. There will be no surprise regarding the inevitability of the unraveling though, except to the oblivious (those who possess normalcy bias).

The solution you posted is not a solution, nor is a controlled reduction in welfare a likely outcome. The US along with the rest of the world is moving towards socialistic, welfare-like programs, at exponentially increasing speeds.

Slowing/Ending welfare will likely come as the result of a massive default, as one of the major issues with welfare, retaining to basic human psychology, is that people don't care how they spend money, if that money is not theirs to begin with. That facet of human psychology is a part, as to what's causing US monetary problems. The rug will probably need to be pulled out from under this country, in order to stop the monetary recklessness. When the rug is pulled out, the fallacy of central banking will attempt to regain it's power over the world's financial system, restarting the flawed monetary paradigm we see today.

As long as central banking exists, on the premise of non-asset-backed paper currency, from a federal reserve, this country and others will see defaults for as long as such a system is in place.

 

[Harrekin]

EDIT: Too high now, I'll come back to this later when I can think again, all conflustered now.

DOUBLE EDIT: It's obvious youve graduated from the Ron Paul school of economics with all the talk of asset backed currency...pray do tell good sir, name one asset that could be used in a practical real world setting to back a currency? Cos it's sure as fuck not gold anymore, the money supply is simply too large.

 

[InCognition]

DOUBLE EDIT: It's obvious youve graduated from the Ron Paul school of economics with all the talk of asset backed currency...pray do tell good sir, name one asset that could be used in a practical real world setting to back a currency? Cos it's sure as fuck not gold anymore, the money supply is simply too large.

If you're asking the question of how any one asset could be used in a practical, real world setting, to back a currency, you simply don't understand the core fundamentals of money, thus you are clueless in regards to sound monetary policy. Non-sound monetary policy is not policy at all, it's simply theft. If one doesn't understand how it's theft, well that just reverts back to the lack of knowledge, one possesses in regards to money.

Being that you lack the fundamental understanding of money and it's affiliated principles, there is little point in trying to discuss with you the logic in an obligated necessity behind an "asset-backed-money". You apparently don't recognize, that with the abundance of technology available, it's very possible to use gold in backing a currency. Apparently, you're simply too narrow minded to comprehend how such a system may be able to function. I'd correlate that argument to a cryptocurrency system, but it seems this discussion is completely out of your realm, of ability to understand.

 

[UncleBuck]

...reduced welfare and as a result reduced taxation to spur aggregate demand which in turn spurs jobs and growth.

what fantasy world do you live in that everything is to be blamed on welfare?

it's as if "welfare" were the answer to every single problem. stubbed your toe? welfare!

it's comical.

 

[UncleBuck]

is it any wonder old mcronald is doing so well with long-winded, plagiarizing, insulting, holier than thou, self-righteous douchebags like cocktechnician supporting him?

LOL!

 

[InCognition]

is it any wonder old mcronald is doing so well with long-winded, plagiarizing, insulting, holier than thou, self-righteous douchebags like cocktechnician supporting him?

LOL!

Long-winded - Nope. I just thoroughly explain common sense to those who lack it, in hopes that they will see the light. It's a lost cause, most of the time, but I do my best to help.

Plagiarizing - Nope. Everything I've typed is written by myself.

Insulting - Yes. I don't respect right-violating-ignorance, nor the justification of such ignorance, based off the premise and/or facade of "policy/law". If something doesn't make 100% rationale sense, I will call it for what it is, and that's stupid. Insulting? Sure, but only to those with a weak mind, who consider truth as an insult.

Holier than thou - Nope. A disrespect towards right-violating-ignorance on my behalf, shouldn't lead one to the presumption that I think I'm "holier than thou". It's a disrespect towards such ignorance, and nothing more... don't look into it too deeply.

Self-Righteous - Nope. Refer to "Holier than thou".

In case you have't realized, there is a touch of hypocrisy once again in your accusations. That's to be well expected though.

 

[Balzac89]

EDIT: Too high now, I'll come back to this later when I can think again, all conflustered now.

DOUBLE EDIT: It's obvious youve graduated from the Ron Paul school of economics with all the talk of asset backed currency...pray do tell good sir, name one asset that could be used in a practical real world setting to back a currency? Cos it's sure as fuck not gold anymore, the money supply is simply too large.

It is actually plausible, but the price of Gold would have to be something liek 20,000 dollars an oz? I think I might buy an oz lol

 

[Harrekin]

It is actually plausible, but the price of Gold would have to be something liek 20,000 dollars an oz? I think I might buy an oz lol

Its totally impossible, and who holds all the gold currently?

Think about it.

InCognition, you can spout your "sound policy" all you want, Im still waiting for you to name an asset that could be used to back a currency in the REAL WORLD, not your Rawn Paul fantasy world.

 

[InCognition]

Its totally impossible, and who holds all the gold currently?

Think about it.

InCognition, you can spout your "sound policy" all you want, Im still waiting for you to name an asset that could be used to back a currency in the REAL WORLD, not your Rawn Paul fantasy world.

Sound currency flies right over your head apparently. You have no comprehension of money or how it actually "should" work. Without this basic understanding you are absolutely unable to comprehend "sound" currency. Thus attempting to explain it to you is a lost cause.

If a currency is not backed by a logarithmically created asset, it will never be sound, thus that non-sound currency simply shouldn't be a currency. If a currency is not sound, it's not a valid currency, period. The only thing a non-sound currency is, is theft.

Gold can very well back a currency in today's day & age, if it was to be intertwined with a crypocurrency system. Again, the "hows" in regards to making this system work, are not worth explaining to you, as you simply & ignorantly shut it down as "not-doable".

Using gold or any other logorithmically created asset as a backing to sound currency is the opposite of "totally impossible". It's in fact totally doable, without our current system of monetary corruption.

Paper money based of the promise of debt is not money, it's a lie, theft, and nothing more. If you understood how money works, you wouldn't make the statements that you make. Most people don't understand how money works, so it's not a surprise to see that you fall under the same ignorance.

 

[UncleBuck]

Sound currency flies right over your head apparently. You have no comprehension of money or how it actually "should" work. Without this basic understanding you are absolutely unable to comprehend "sound" currency. Thus attempting to explain it to you is a lost cause.

If a currency is not backed by a logarithmically created asset, it will never be sound, thus that non-sound currency simply shouldn't be a currency. If a currency is not sound, it's not a valid currency, period. The only thing a non-sound currency is, is theft.

Gold can very well back a currency in today's day & age, if it was to be intertwined with a crypocurrency system. Again, the "hows" in regards to making this system work, are not worth explaining to you, as you simply & ignorantly shut it down as "not-doable".

Using gold or any other logorithmically created asset as a backing to sound currency is the opposite of "totally impossible". It's in fact totally doable, without our current system of monetary corruption.

Paper money based of the promise of debt is not money, it's a lie, theft, and nothing more. If you understood how money works, you wouldn't make the statements that you make. Most people don't understand how money works, so it's not a surprise to see that you fall under the same ignorance.

you sure have a lot of gripes about theft for a professed tax cheat.

too bad you're just some kid going through that insufferable "just read ayn rand" phase.

 

[Harrekin]

Sound currency flies right over your head apparently. You have no comprehension of money or how it actually "should" work. Without this basic understanding you are absolutely unable to comprehend "sound" currency. Thus attempting to explain it to you is a lost cause.

If a currency is not backed by a logarithmically created asset, it will never be sound, thus that non-sound currency simply shouldn't be a currency. If a currency is not sound, it's not a valid currency, period. The only thing a non-sound currency is, is theft.

Gold can very well back a currency in today's day & age, if it was to be intertwined with a crypocurrency system. Again, the "hows" in regards to making this system work, are not worth explaining to you, as you simply & ignorantly shut it down as "not-doable".

Using gold or any other logorithmically created asset as a backing to sound currency is the opposite of "totally impossible". It's in fact totally doable, without our current system of monetary corruption.

Paper money based of the promise of debt is not money, it's a lie, theft, and nothing more. If you understood how money works, you wouldn't make the statements that you make. Most people don't understand how money works, so it's not a surprise to see that you fall under the same ignorance.

Ok so where you gonna magic all this gold out off to back a currency large enough to support a country? Invade Italy?

Name the asset, Im still waiting, no more Rawn Pawl economics please tho, the Gold Standard is deader than a dodo, Old Mac Ronald only wants it back cos it'd make him a very rich man...given he holds so many shares in Gold Mining firms.

Name the asset and then tell me how it couldnt be undermined by a foreign power devaluing it, for example, flooding the gold markets to make your magic "solid" currency into a much much lower valued "limp" currency.

You name the asset brother, and Ill stop saying it "not-doable" (thats a fucking dumb word you made up btw).

 

[InCognition]

Ok so where you gonna magic all this gold out off to back a currency large enough to support a country? Invade Italy?

Name the asset, Im still waiting, no more Rawn Pawl economics please tho, the Gold Standard is deader than a dodo, Old Mac Ronald only wants it back cos it'd make him a very rich man...given he holds so many shares in Gold Mining firms.

Name the asset and then tell me how it couldnt be undermined by a foreign power devaluing it, for example, flooding the gold markets to make your magic "solid" currency into a much much lower valued "limp" currency.

You name the asset brother, and Ill stop saying it "not-doable" (thats a fucking dumb word you made up btw).

All assets can be undermined by governmental powers... that is one of the many things the government is great at doing. It's a matter of making an asset or currency less susceptible to overall manipulation. Paper currency is highly susceptible to government manipulation, which is why they love it so much.

Again there is little point in discussing "doable" assets with you, as the philosophy of logarithmically created assets/money does not register with you, so your simply unable to comprehend what a "doable" asset is. You have a blatant obliviousness as to how money can, should, and would work.

Your comment on "flooding the market" in regards to gold, is just further demonstration on your behalf, that you lack monetary intelligence. If gold was intertwined with a cryptocurrency system, you wouldn't have enough gold in the world to "flood the markets".

 

[Harrekin]

All assets can be undermined by governmental powers... that is one of the many things the government is great at doing. It's a matter of making an asset or currency less susceptible to overall manipulation. Paper currency is highly susceptible to government manipulation, which is why they love it so much.

Again there is little point in discussing "doable" assets with you, as the philosophy of logarithmically created assets/money does not register with you, so your simply unable to comprehend what a "doable" asset is. You have a blatant obliviousness as to how money can, should, and would work.

Your comment on "flooding the market" in regards to gold, is just further demonstration on your behalf, that you lack monetary intelligence. If gold was intertwined with a cryptocurrency system, you wouldn't have enough gold in the world to "flood the markets".

Cryptocurrency, you mean a currency backed by absolutely nothing is going to form part of your "sound currency"?

I know you're excited cos you just discovered Rawn Paul and Bitcoins, but you still havnt come up with an asset that has a real world value to back your "sound currency", you just keep telling me I don't understand while offering nothing of value.

 

[desert dude]

EDIT: Too high now, I'll come back to this later when I can think again, all conflustered now.

DOUBLE EDIT: It's obvious youve graduated from the Ron Paul school of economics with all the talk of asset backed currency...pray do tell good sir, name one asset that could be used in a practical real world setting to back a currency? Cos it's sure as fuck not gold anymore, the money supply is simply too large.

What would you personally rather own: $100,000 in US dollars (or Euros, or Yen, or you choose), or $100K worth of gold?