Impossible! The deficit is falling as well as unemployment Obama wrecking economy

[twostrokenut]

Iirc they used coins, promissory notes and letters of credit/draft. cn

iirc that is right too....gold coins..... in the very beginning interest was used only for loans the bank made from their profits and not their on demand deposits. A promissory note would have been the paper receipt for the deposit ... A fee was paid in the beginning, I believe, to the bank to hold those deposits for safe keeping...against vandals and scallywags and other roughians that could beat you up, steal your gold and not get caught.... so the bank was a protection service for your wealth, cause they were big and tough too...and this is what they were paid for.

So the paper receipts start having purchasing power and are bought and sold based on what the receipt represents and can be cashed in for on demand......

When the banker figures out that he can simply write a receipt or promissory note that trades as a real deposit, then charge interest on that note, and collect; it is zero sum insofar as the note is concerned, and only if we trust the banker did not loan himself any bogus notes. It is a plus sum proposition to the banker as far as the gold is concerned is the way I can best understand it.

 

[Harrekin]

So back to Fiat currency isn't debt...

Tokenperv, do the money faeries simply "deposit" the money in the fields? (Pun intended)

 

[twostrokenut]

Don't forget what your claim was: "I am thinking because notes are debt instruments, a promise to pay. It's existence represents a debt, does it not? It only seemed there was no debt in the introduction." You were saying it must represent a debt because it's legally an obligation of the government. But since Federal Reserve Notes can be circulated without creating debt, that assertion is false. That's why I said the legal fiction is irrelevant. Functionally, the note represents value and people are willing to trade for it.

Can you give me an example of a note that does not represent a debt? Keeping in mind if I transfer notes to your account I did not create them and the ones created by the bank because of your new deposit will be loaned at interest.

Have you been listening to Ed Griffin without confirmation? House: 298 yes, 60 no, 76 not voting; Senate: 43 yes, 25 no, 27 not voting. If every absent member in the House had been there, no effect; to kill the bill in the Senate, 23 of 27 not voting would have needed to vote against it.

Your understanding of slander and libel is terrifying. When someone is a public figure, you can say anything you want about them, true and false. To even have a chance of winning, they have to prove that the author knew he was lying when he made the statements. So long as Griffin was sincere (and I believe he is--the cancer stuff just makes clear that he's a nutjob), he has absolute protection. If you can't prove that someone knew they were lying about a public figure, it's never defamation.

Are you suggesting the stockholders of the Fed are not private banks?

This is what you said: "The sad thing is all your ass had to do is keep repeating that dollars are not losing value to inflation..." This is the statement you quoted: "Inflation is irrelevant because wages have kept pace with it." I didn't say that individual dollars weren't losing value to inflation, I said the purchasing power lost to inflation had been exceeded by growth in wages. This doesn't mean that it inflation doesn't exist, only that it had no real impact on purchasing power, since people have more dollars to spend.

I don't know how I can possibly make it more clear. If steak costs 23 cents a pound in 1913 and the average wage was $750, you cannot say inflation destroyed any purchasing power if in 2013 steak is $5.50 a pound and the average wage is $27,000. The fact that the worker has more dollars to spend overcomes the loss of purchasing power by any individual dollar.

so you theorize we had 1/1 dollars to inflation, then we had 2/2 because wages kept up....now we have something like 27000/19000 because wages have surpassed inflation.....because we can buy theoretically 948 more pounds of steak now than we could then.....because of what, a bls average food price snapshot? Remember I did not limit real purchasing power to food......what of production cost of steak and why was it so expensive then? What about the invention of the refridgerator in 1913 and later the Freezer in 1947??? What of hybrid seed corn in 1920 and ever easier ways of harvesting it?? What of plasma televisions? Should our inflation not be noticed because they're (edit: their)price went down and our dollars went up? Real purchasing power considers all these as I said before, surely I cannot be more clear.

The higher the price, the more incentive people have to search. Look at what $100 oil did for oil exploration! A group of billionaires recently founded an asteroid mining venture that's trying to develop the technology to do it. I wouldn't expect any success with that for a couple of decades, at least, but I definitely think it's the future, especially if metals continued to appreciate astronomically.

Dollars only declined in value if you left them under your mattress or in some other worthless place. As has already been covered, there are a variety of ways inflation could have not only been beaten but defeated so that a person's real wealth and purchasing power actually increase.

The one commodity everyone has to trade, their own labor, is worth more in real purchasing power than it ever has been before. Obviously they aren't worthless.

Again, if metals continue to appreciate compared to what?? Threats to curtail production of oil is what made the price do that, and stimulating exploration is a necessity of that limitation... just like mining...so we finally agree on something?

Neat the billionaires are going to mine space, must mean their efforts are pretty exhausted here....so we finally agree on something?

Dollars declined if you left them in the bank too....they also decline if you are on a fixed income as previously stated. I never said labor was worthless, check it.

 

[tokeprep]

Point is for the first 150 years the Federal Government did not get involved during recessions...including the newely formed Fed....and they all corrected themselves.... Here's another one.....the Fed left interest rates like 6-7 during recession under Harding....unemployment went from 11.7% his first year to 6.7 next year and 2.4 the next....and the recession fixed itself....new concepts like holding interest rates low and introducing such weirdness as quantitative easing to cover up for lack of capital are strange things to do given a proven track record of what actually works like high savings incentives.....

The empirical track record is shorter and shallower recessions after World War II compared to other points in American history. As far as I know, the current economic record hasn't canceled this out yet.

 

[tokeprep]

So back to Fiat currency isn't debt...

Tokenperv, do the money faeries simply "deposit" the money in the fields? (Pun intended)

If that's how you want to think about it. Crediting a reserve account and borrowing straight from the central bank by the treasury both yield currency that circulates to the public with no obligation underlying it. Likewise, if you redeem gold certificates or any other form of currency for their value in Federal Reserve Notes, there is no obligation underlying that currency.

 

[tokeprep]

Can you give me an example of a note that does not represent a debt? Keeping in mind if I transfer notes to your account I did not create them and the ones created by the bank because of your new deposit will be loaned at interest.

I've given the examples repeatedly. See the post above this one for several examples of currency existing without debt.

Are you suggesting the stockholders of the Fed are not private banks?

I have no idea where you got that implication. A private bank would be a public figure as much as the Federal Reserve, its chairman, or any of the reserve bank presidents would be.

so you theorize we had 1/1 dollars to inflation, then we had 2/2 because wages kept up....now we have something like 27000/19000 because wages have surpassed inflation.....because we can buy theoretically 948 more pounds of steak now than we could then.....because of what, a bls average food price snapshot? Remember I did not limit real purchasing power to food......what of production cost of steak and why was it so expensive then? What about the invention of the refridgerator in 1913 and later the Freezer in 1947??? What of hybrid seed corn in 1920 and ever easier ways of harvesting it?? What of plasma televisions? Should our inflation not be noticed because they're price went down and our dollars went up? Real purchasing power considers all these as I said before, surely I cannot be more clear.

We've been through this before. You cannot assume that increased production automatically should lead to relatively lower prices. In 1913, how much of the American population was still involved in agriculture? 30%? Now it's 3%, and we have three times as many people. You're right that food production has gotten more efficient, but 9 out of 10 farmers got out of the business.

For example, assume that an average farmer produced 100 pounds of food in 1913. If there are 100 people, 30 farmers x 100 pounds = 3,000 pounds of food. There's 30 pounds per person. Now, 100 years later, assume we have 300 people but only 9 farmers, with each farmer producing 1,000 pounds, ten times as much as in 1913. 9 farmers x 1,000 pounds = 9,000 pounds of good. 9,000 pounds / 300 people = 30 pounds per person. Even though food production is 10 times as efficient, the smaller number of farmers produces the same amount of food per person.

If you can mathematically show me that real purchasing power has been reduced, I will happily listen. But you cannot.

Again, if metals continue to appreciate compared to what?? Threats to curtail production of oil is what made the price do that, and stimulating exploration is a necessity of that limitation... just like mining...so we finally agree on something?

Neat the billionaires are going to mine space, must mean their efforts are pretty exhausted here....so we finally agree on something?

Dollars declined if you left them in the bank too....they also decline if you are on a fixed income as previously stated. I never said labor was worthless, check it.

Depending on when you measure. Bank deposits paying nothing is a new phenomenon unique to the past few years. But that information is readily available and should be reflected in the decisions people make.

 

[Harrekin]

Waffles!

Monkeys!

Gold teeth!

This is the response tokenperv writes everytime, well, it has the equivalent intelligence level at least.

 

[twostrokenut]

I've given the examples repeatedly. See the post above this one for several examples of currency existing without debt.

The example you used of cashing in a gold certificates would be exchanging the certificates for notes that are already borrowed into existence and thus created from debt....your other example of borrowing fractionally created funds, starting a business then turning a profit and repaying the interest is neglecting the fact that interest was paid back with others notes they also earned, which were also borrowed with interest. Like I said, if I shuffle notes from this account to that account, no debt is incurred....if I send credits to your PayPal I have incurred no debt, I am not arguing that. The credits I use to send to your PayPal were created from debt, but not by me or you.

I have no idea where you got that implication. A private bank would be a public figure as much as the Federal Reserve, its chairman, or any of the reserve bank presidents would be. If I get paid in notes

You are obviously reading this http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_14986.htm

The fed is supposedly a compromise between public and private interests...for the greater good of all......the people running it are appointed not elected you can say we elected them that appointed, but literally half of us didn't, considering half of us don't pay taxes it's not hard to figure out which half voted which way.....

in fact the very purpose of the Fed is to balance private interests of banks and centralized responsibility of government....you are simply implying this balance is in perfect harmony and without error

We've been through this before. You cannot assume that increased production automatically should lead to relatively lower prices. In 1913, how much of the American population was still involved in agriculture? 30%? Now it's 3%, and we have three times as many people. You're right that food production has gotten more efficient, but 9 out of 10 farmers got out of the business.

For example, assume that an average farmer produced 100 pounds of food in 1913. If there are 100 people, 30 farmers x 100 pounds = 3,000 pounds of food. There's 30 pounds per person. Now, 100 years later, assume we have 300 people but only 9 farmers, with each farmer producing 1,000 pounds, ten times as much as in 1913. 9 farmers x 1,000 pounds = 9,000 pounds of good. 9,000 pounds / 300 people = 30 pounds per person. Even though food production is 10 times as efficient, the smaller number of farmers produces the same amount of food per person.

If you can mathematically show me that real purchasing power has been reduced, I will happily listen. But you cannot.

It's not an assumption that increased production at a cheaper rate lowers prices in the presence of competition...it is law. In a free market this happens very quickly resulting in ridiculously low prices while maintaining income, wages and buying power.......even in a central planning environment that is anything but free it happens........I can only compete by offering similar quality at lower prices or better quality for the same price...

I wonder how many people lost their jobs due to the invention of the combine harvester......but you cannot deny it made prices cheaper on the retail level for that which was harvested.......this fact is simply left out of your calculations and rationalized as the Fed doing its job when it is the Market that is doing the work.

Your math leaves out crucial details like agriculture being waaaay more than 10 times more productive than it was.....have you any clue that food prices are subsidized to keep prices high so that the farmers wages don't decrease? Have you any clue of why Sugar is not imported into this country??? These factors simply cannot be ignored because they don't fit your simplistic scenario of how you think people lived back then because they are heavy factors.

The data you give for 1913 vs now is a guess at best.....the 1955 example of hourly wage vs hourly wage today at least can be measured with certainty.

Depending on when you measure. Bank deposits paying nothing is a new phenomenon unique to the past few years. But that information is readily available and should be reflected in the decisions people make.

Yes depending on when you measure and what you measure against. Indeed if I measure a length of board to cut, I have measured a tape measure vs a length of board.....

 

[cannabineer]

Waffles!

Monkeys!

Gold teeth!

This is the response tokenperv writes everytime, well, it has the equivalent intelligence level at least.

I'm not convinced.
People want money to be simple. It isn't, and here is a case where I sit back because I acknowledge my ignorance.

All money is a matter of shared faith, an agreement. Gold is valuable only because we all agree that it is so; its value isn't intrinsic.
So other instruments of credit (it shares an etymological root with faith) are held to the same non-standard. If enough people trust them, they're money.
Gold will hold its perception of value when things go bad, and so it is an excellent instrument to rescue wealth. But building wealth (if you don't have a fleet of ships going to this amazing new place awash in silver and gold) in times when the economy isn't blue in the face, when the trust in the system of value and payment is in acceptable health ... is so much easier in the world of paper. ALL money is indirect afaik. cn

 

[twostrokenut]

But this is a weed forum and I am stoned as fuck. I am afraid this thread will end up like USC Title:26............everyone will simply get bored reading it and participating in it....and its compilation will continue in the absence of sensibility.

 

[twostrokenut]

I'm not convinced.
People want money to be simple. It isn't, and here is a case where I sit back because I acknowledge my ignorance.

All money is a matter of shared faith, an agreement. Gold is valuable only because we all agree that it is so; its value isn't intrinsic.
So other instruments of credit (it shares an etymological root with faith) are held to the same non-standard. If enough people trust them, they're money.
Gold will hold its perception of value when things go bad, and so it is an excellent instrument to rescue wealth. But building wealth (if you don't have a fleet of ships going to this amazing new place awash in silver and gold) in times when the economy isn't blue in the face, when the trust in the system of value and payment is in acceptable health ... is so much easier in the world of paper. ALL money is indirect afaik. cn

Dude, I think industrial applications of gold def put it in the intrinsic category. It is not a perception of value when it is used for electronics/computers, dentistry, medically to diagnose and treat things, in aerospace to reflect radiation and absorb heat...........

Even paper money has intrinsic value but it is very small..........wallpaper or confetti for example. Collective faith gives it numismatic value well beyond the intrinsic because there is no value otherwise, that is NOT to say notes don't facilitate exchange in the absence of capital to send ships to look for gold......but anyone with their own capital will surely use that in lieu of borrowing at interest.....unless they want to minimize risk to their own capital and use the collective wealth instead.......near as I can figure.

 

[cannabineer]

But this is a weed forum and I am stoned as fuck. I am afraid this thread will end up like USC Title:26............everyone will simply get bored reading it and participating in it....and its compilation will continue in the absence of sensibility.

At least it's free. ~giggle~ cn

 

[cannabineer]

Dude, I think industrial applications of gold def put it in the intrinsic category. It is not a perception of value when it is used for electronics/computers, dentistry, medically to diagnose and treat things, in aerospace to reflect radiation and absorb heat...........

Even paper money has intrinsic value but it is very small..........wallpaper or confetti for example. Collective faith gives it numismatic value well beyond the intrinsic because there is no value otherwise, that is NOT to say notes don't facilitate exchange in the absence of capital to send ships to look for gold......near as I can figure.

I'm not arguing against that, but as a carrier of value, it's still a matter of agreement on that value. I don't think that there exists "absolute" value, while I agree that there are shades of relativity. Commodities > currency > promissory notes. cn

 

[twostrokenut]

I'm not arguing against that, but as a carrier of value, it's still a matter of agreement on that value. I don't think that there exists "absolute" value, while I agree that there are shades of relativity. Commodities > currency > promissory notes. cn

I don't think its a matter of agreement when there is a real market demand for what serves best as capital....the demand set the value....and agreement sets the value in the presence of regulation and restrictions, usually by an ever encroaching government......

Disclaimer: I am not an economist or lawyer lol

 

[cannabineer]

Same disclaimer here. cn































But I slept at a Holiday Inn Express!

 

[twostrokenut]

The empirical track record is shorter and shallower recessions after World War II compared to other points in American history. As far as I know, the current economic record hasn't canceled this out yet.

I have no clue what you are saying here and how it shows that intervention in the economy other than what worked in the past....which was doing nothing....fixes it or makes it better.

 

[Harrekin]

I'm not convinced.
People want money to be simple. It isn't, and here is a case where I sit back because I acknowledge my ignorance.

All money is a matter of shared faith, an agreement. Gold is valuable only because we all agree that it is so; its value isn't intrinsic.
So other instruments of credit (it shares an etymological root with faith) are held to the same non-standard. If enough people trust them, they're money.
Gold will hold its perception of value when things go bad, and so it is an excellent instrument to rescue wealth. But building wealth (if you don't have a fleet of ships going to this amazing new place awash in silver and gold) in times when the economy isn't blue in the face, when the trust in the system of value and payment is in acceptable health ... is so much easier in the world of paper. ALL money is indirect afaik. cn

I buy silver mostly, it's undervalued and much more valuable to industry than gold. (And there's only 1/5 of it in reserve compared to gold)

I only buy gold cos it's "pimp"

 

[cannabineer]

I'm into liquidity. cn

 

[twostrokenut]

I like saving the buffalo's............

And I really dig Liberty.....

I do more silver than gold as well, historically it has a lot of catching up to do compared to gold, then factor in the extra industrial apps on top of that like Harrekin said...

 

[Harrekin]

I like saving the buffalo's............

And I really dig Liberty.....

I do more silver than gold as well, historically it has a lot of catching up to do compared to gold, then factor in the extra industrial apps on top of that like Harrekin said...

Austrian Philharmonics or Canadian Maples are my favourites.

The Maples having the 4 9's is just a nice touch considering they've one of the lowest premiums.

Must say, the Buffalos are a nice addition to my collection recently tho