Author Topic: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2  (Read 133618 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #35 on: May 20, 2009, 03:14:13 PM »
Sounds like you're strongly in favor of more and stronger regulations. That's truly the only way to fix what's wrong in the long term.

Offline emindead

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 11053
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #36 on: May 20, 2009, 03:15:51 PM »
Sounds like you're strongly in favor of more and stronger regulations. That's truly the only way to fix what's wrong in the long term.
ĦĦĦĦQue NO!!!!

Offline ReaPsTA

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 9401
  • Gender: Male
  • Lost within a world I chose to hide
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #37 on: May 20, 2009, 03:34:13 PM »
Sounds like you're strongly in favor of more and stronger regulations. That's truly the only way to fix what's wrong in the long term.

Eh...

More regulation isn't an answer. Regulation just gives power to the government, which has proven to be incompetent, and arguably in collusion with Wall Street. Just giving them more power isn't some kind of magic pill. Also, you have to take into account how regulations can be worked around.

On the other hand, just deregulating doesn't seem to be an answer. Part of the reason we're in this mess is because deregulation allowed investors to take risks they weren't able to fully comprehend the consequences of. But then the problem becomes, what do you regulate?

The one regulation I think really might be necessary is limiting the size of these companies, so they can't get so big that it's impossible for them to fail or else the economy crumbles under them. Like I've said before, it's essential that companies be able to fail or else the free market system utterly does not work. An investment company going under should hurt the economy, don't get me wrong. It should serve as a stark lesson in what not to do in the future. But there's a difference between hurting the economy and destroying it. Right now, we're in a position where letting investors go under would actually destroy the economy. And regulation to prevent that kind of growth might be necessary. I hope not, but I don't see an alternative at the moment.
We must learn to rise above the past
Before we can at last
Begin again

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #38 on: May 20, 2009, 03:59:26 PM »


The economy is in shambles right now because Wall Street invested so carelessly and put so much money into non-value creating ventures that the system collapsed under the massive debt it incurred.


You're going to have to explain this then, becuase this was caused by a Deregulation of the economy. It's history, you can trace this and the effects it had. You agree with this, and say deregulation got us into the mess, but then don't feel that reregulating is the answer? Where's the logic in this?

Offline ReaPsTA

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 9401
  • Gender: Male
  • Lost within a world I chose to hide
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #39 on: May 20, 2009, 04:11:30 PM »


The economy is in shambles right now because Wall Street invested so carelessly and put so much money into non-value creating ventures that the system collapsed under the massive debt it incurred.


You're going to have to explain this then, becuase this was caused by a Deregulation of the economy. It's history, you can trace this and the effects it had. You agree with this, and say deregulation got us into the mess, but then don't feel that reregulating is the answer? Where's the logic in this?

Because the debate over regulation is a distraction from the debate over how to make Wall-Street create value again, something neither Wall Street or the government wants to talk about because it's a distraction from robbing and deceiving people.

I'm sure that in some cases, re-regulation would be the answer. And in some cases, more deregulation would be the answer. But the problems that make Wall-Street what it is go back before deregulation. The movie Wall Street was made in the 80's, this shit isn't new.
We must learn to rise above the past
Before we can at last
Begin again

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #40 on: May 20, 2009, 04:36:14 PM »
Don't you need to tackle each issue on it's own? Problems we have now can be traced to deregulation, so fixing those problems is logically reregulating. No one has ever said this will cure everything within the economy, but it sure as hell is a start.

Offline emindead

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 11053
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #41 on: May 20, 2009, 08:46:05 PM »
Anyone else watching AC360 right now? Look at the brutality of the police on an unarmed and unconcious suspect!!
Video here http://videos.al.com/birmingham-news/2009/05/birmingham_police_beating_vide.html
« Last Edit: May 20, 2009, 10:15:11 PM by emindead »

Offline William Wallace

  • Posts: 2791
    • My blog
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #42 on: May 21, 2009, 12:00:16 AM »
Random thought: I'm so glad Columbine was a gun-free zone. The anti-gun minions sure came through in the clutch.

Offline Jobe

  • Market Connoisseur
  • Posts: 1453
  • Gender: Male
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #43 on: May 21, 2009, 01:39:11 PM »
Reap, your forgetting a little thing in your analysis of the economy called

































The Federal Reserve!


Hot damn, when will people realize that the excesses of wall street debt were made possible by the vast money creation of the fed?
No fed = no bubble
Also,

No implicit government bailouts plus no GSE's = no "too big to fail" bullshit, although it's even false now.
<br />While I agree in general, there are a couple of big differences.  Targeted marketing is a far cry from the suspension of Habeas Corpus.   Private companies don\'t generally toss people into unmarked Gulfstreams and send them off to Jackfuckistan to be \"questioned.\" 

Offline emindead

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 11053
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #44 on: May 21, 2009, 01:55:52 PM »
Jobe, no Federal Reserve = no central bank, right?
So with the absence of a central bank, many banks appear and they create their own currency based on the amount of gold or metal they have on their vaults? Is there a good book that explains how the market in a country works with the absence of a central bank?

Offline Jobe

  • Market Connoisseur
  • Posts: 1453
  • Gender: Male
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #45 on: May 21, 2009, 02:21:19 PM »
Jobe, no Federal Reserve = no central bank, right?
So with the absence of a central bank, many banks appear and they create their own currency based on the amount of gold or metal they have on their vaults? Is there a good book that explains how the market in a country works with the absence of a central bank?

I kinda made a topic on this.  To answer though, yes.  A good book? There's a good website with hundreds of books, yet you know what the address is already.

I might support a law requiring 100% reserves, since for a bank to offer loans drawn from demand deposits is defrauding the depositors.  All checking account type moneys cannot be lent out, though time deposits are just fine. 

Bank's are the only business where not only is fraud legal, but mandated by the government.  Grain silo's get in trouble if they start producing duplicate notes for the same deposit, why do banks enjoy special privileges? 

Is that 100% free market? No, though it's well within the purpose and intent of the constitutional responsibilities of the government.  Take away the government and I won't ask for a 100% reserve law.

<br />While I agree in general, there are a couple of big differences.  Targeted marketing is a far cry from the suspension of Habeas Corpus.   Private companies don\'t generally toss people into unmarked Gulfstreams and send them off to Jackfuckistan to be \"questioned.\" 

Offline Disappear

  • Posts: 3500
  • It's hard to beat a person who never gives up.
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #46 on: May 21, 2009, 06:13:56 PM »
RNC = Rush-Newt-Cheney

Just saw that headline. Thought it was cute. :coolio
"Not by wrath does one kill but by laughter."

Offline emindead

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 11053
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #47 on: May 21, 2009, 06:52:04 PM »
Jobe, no Federal Reserve = no central bank, right?
So with the absence of a central bank, many banks appear and they create their own currency based on the amount of gold or metal they have on their vaults? Is there a good book that explains how the market in a country works with the absence of a central bank?

I kinda made a topic on this.  To answer though, yes.  A good book? There's a good website with hundreds of books, yet you know what the address is already.

I might support a law requiring 100% reserves, since for a bank to offer loans drawn from demand deposits is defrauding the depositors.  All checking account type moneys cannot be lent out, though time deposits are just fine. 

Bank's are the only business where not only is fraud legal, but mandated by the government.  Grain silo's get in trouble if they start producing duplicate notes for the same deposit, why do banks enjoy special privileges? 

Is that 100% free market? No, though it's well within the purpose and intent of the constitutional responsibilities of the government.  Take away the government and I won't ask for a 100% reserve law.
Where? Remember this site crashed and everything was lost!

I could look at mises.org... sure.... apparently the topic is more complicated than it seems...

...

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #48 on: May 22, 2009, 02:02:33 PM »
So Jobe, I have a few questions:

How do you imagine a transition to the gold standard would work?

Offline Jobe

  • Market Connoisseur
  • Posts: 1453
  • Gender: Male
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #49 on: May 22, 2009, 10:47:44 PM »
So Jobe, I have a few questions:

How do you imagine a transition to the gold standard would work?

Eliminate legal tender laws and any taxes on the transfer of gold and silver.

That's all you need to do, Gresham's law will take care of the rest.  I don't trust the government not to debase the currency.... I'm beginning to doubt a gold standard where the standard is maintained by the government.  There's nothing special about money that benefits from lack of competition. 

Reducing the federal budget and eliminating the income tax would help also, but aren't necessary.
<br />While I agree in general, there are a couple of big differences.  Targeted marketing is a far cry from the suspension of Habeas Corpus.   Private companies don\'t generally toss people into unmarked Gulfstreams and send them off to Jackfuckistan to be \"questioned.\" 

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #50 on: May 23, 2009, 02:41:49 AM »
So no transition? How am I going to get money then? My employers won't be able to get it - they're money is going to be just as useless as mine. Sure, there will be a market still for our money, as necessity will force people into it. But have you studied the American Revolution? With a gold standard, especially as you desire it, it will be extremely hard for me to get gold. Why? Because the people who HAVE gold won't have much reason to give it to me. Eventually, this could easily stabilize according to curve you're describing (though I just heard of it), but I don't see it as a perfect guarantee. Additionally, how long would this take? I think the overall consequences would be quite drastic, and need to be considered.

Offline Jobe

  • Market Connoisseur
  • Posts: 1453
  • Gender: Male
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #51 on: May 23, 2009, 08:42:06 AM »
So no transition? How am I going to get money then? My employers won't be able to get it - they're money is going to be just as useless as mine. Sure, there will be a market still for our money, as necessity will force people into it. But have you studied the American Revolution? With a gold standard, especially as you desire it, it will be extremely hard for me to get gold. Why? Because the people who HAVE gold won't have much reason to give it to me. Eventually, this could easily stabilize according to curve you're describing (though I just heard of it), but I don't see it as a perfect guarantee. Additionally, how long would this take? I think the overall consequences would be quite drastic, and need to be considered.

People would issue, banks or other companies, gold or silver backed currencies.  Several do already.  If anyone did not redeem their certificates for the gold or silver they promised, their value would drop, and dishonest companies would go out of business. 

Why is it so hard for you to get gold?  You can buy it today.  You could under the system I'm describing, eventually request to be paid in gold backed notes.  USD wouldn't depreciate to zero overnight.

What curve, Gresham's law? ???

How long would it take? Years, maybe decades, maybe months.  Depends on how much the government debases the little value left in dollars.  It's not the point though.  It's about restoring people's freedom to choose what they use for money. 
<br />While I agree in general, there are a couple of big differences.  Targeted marketing is a far cry from the suspension of Habeas Corpus.   Private companies don\'t generally toss people into unmarked Gulfstreams and send them off to Jackfuckistan to be \"questioned.\" 

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #52 on: May 23, 2009, 12:57:24 PM »
You're forgetting something rather big: I can buy gold right now because of legal tender laws.

*Edit*

And I still gather that Gresham's Law would provide a smooth transition between the two currencies? I don't care to figure out what variables to use, but over time this would mean a general curve if modeled correctly.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2009, 01:21:09 PM by Scheavo »

Offline Jobe

  • Market Connoisseur
  • Posts: 1453
  • Gender: Male
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #53 on: May 23, 2009, 05:38:04 PM »
You're forgetting something rather big: I can buy gold right now because of legal tender laws.

*Edit*

And I still gather that Gresham's Law would provide a smooth transition between the two currencies? I don't care to figure out what variables to use, but over time this would mean a general curve if modeled correctly.

If the value of the USD dropped to zero overnight, you might have a point.  The removal of legal tender laws isn't going to make that happen.  Basically, we need to allow what's known as Gold Contracts, which legal tender laws make impossible.  You do something for me, and at some future time I must pay you X amount of gold, or sheep, or whatever.  What a legal tender law says that all things have a dollar value, and if a party can't settle a debt make in XYZ, he can give the equivalent dollar amount.

The dollar has value, as does every fiat currency, because people know others will take it.  You'd surely be able to buy gold with it.  Also, what are all these gold holders going to do with it all? Sit on it?  They need to eat too.  Gold holders would spend it, putting it into circulation.  Even if they're making more gold, there's still exchange going on. 

Maybe the fed could actively destroy the monetary base of dollars to maintain their value during the transition.  Either way, it's not an argument against allowing people to use other things for money. 

Did you know there are several alternative currencies in America now?  Interestedly enough, several are labor-theory-of-value marxist based ones, like Ithaca Hours.  http://www.ithacahours.com/intro.html

The problem is Gresham's Law prevents their widespread adoption. 
<br />While I agree in general, there are a couple of big differences.  Targeted marketing is a far cry from the suspension of Habeas Corpus.   Private companies don\'t generally toss people into unmarked Gulfstreams and send them off to Jackfuckistan to be \"questioned.\" 

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #54 on: May 23, 2009, 05:42:38 PM »
I don't doubt that gold would eventually get out, I just doubt the ease of which this transition would occur. Without legal tender laws, if I have gold, and you have paper money, why on earth would I trade you for the paper money? Again, I point to the 1760-1790's as historical reference. There woudl be some trading done, but most people would be harmed by such a transition.

Offline Jobe

  • Market Connoisseur
  • Posts: 1453
  • Gender: Male
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #55 on: May 23, 2009, 05:59:13 PM »
I don't doubt that gold would eventually get out, I just doubt the ease of which this transition would occur. Without legal tender laws, if I have gold, and you have paper money, why on earth would I trade you for the paper money? Again, I point to the 1760-1790's as historical reference. There woudl be some trading done, but most people would be harmed by such a transition.

What are you going to do with your gold, eat it?  If you're not spending your hoarded gold, that means you're spending something else, i.e. dollars, and if I gave you more dollars than you think that coin is worth, you'd be a fool not to take them.  I've had to sell gold for worthless fiat dollars before, and you know how much I love gold.  Besides, it's not even about that, it's about allowing people to use what they think best for money.
<br />While I agree in general, there are a couple of big differences.  Targeted marketing is a far cry from the suspension of Habeas Corpus.   Private companies don\'t generally toss people into unmarked Gulfstreams and send them off to Jackfuckistan to be \"questioned.\" 

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #56 on: May 24, 2009, 01:01:33 PM »
I don't doubt that gold would eventually get out, I just doubt the ease of which this transition would occur. Without legal tender laws, if I have gold, and you have paper money, why on earth would I trade you for the paper money? Again, I point to the 1760-1790's as historical reference. There woudl be some trading done, but most people would be harmed by such a transition.

What are you going to do with your gold, eat it?  If you're not spending your hoarded gold, that means you're spending something else, i.e. dollars, and if I gave you more dollars than you think that coin is worth, you'd be a fool not to take them.  I've had to sell gold for worthless fiat dollars before, and you know how much I love gold.  Besides, it's not even about that, it's about allowing people to use what they think best for money.

Seriously, I'm not doubting that such transactions would occur and that it coudl eventually even out. I'm doubting the efficiency of such a measure and I'm looking at historical events which back this up. You had British Merchants in America who woudl refuse to accept paper-money becuase they felt it was useless. This fomented economic stagnation NUMEROUS times as people couldn't pay off their debts and they couldn't get gold becuase they didn't have the resources to acquire it.


Offline emindead

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 11053
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #57 on: May 25, 2009, 10:19:09 AM »
"9/11 Conspiracy Thread" got locked. Doesn't that prove already that it clearly was an inside job and the mods just are trying to hide it?

Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 27160
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #58 on: May 25, 2009, 10:20:45 AM »
"9/11 Conspiracy Thread" got locked. Doesn't that prove already that it clearly was an inside job and the mods just are trying to hide it?


Bosk is the mastermind behind 9/11.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline emindead

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 11053
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #59 on: May 25, 2009, 11:12:49 AM »
"9/11 Conspiracy Thread" got locked. Doesn't that prove already that it clearly was an inside job and the mods just are trying to hide it?
Bosk is the mastermind behind 9/11.
It all makes perfect sense.

Offline MetalMike06

  • DT.net Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1549
  • Gender: Male
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #60 on: May 25, 2009, 03:51:26 PM »
"9/11 Conspiracy Thread" got locked. Doesn't that prove already that it clearly was an inside job and the mods just are trying to hide it?
Bosk is the mastermind behind 9/11.
It all makes perfect sense.

DUN DUN DUNNN

O_o

Offline ReaPsTA

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 9401
  • Gender: Male
  • Lost within a world I chose to hide
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #61 on: May 25, 2009, 04:27:40 PM »
Reap, your forgetting a little thing in your analysis of the economy called

The Federal Reserve!

Hot damn, when will people realize that the excesses of wall street debt were made possible by the vast money creation of the fed?
No fed = no bubble
Also,

No implicit government bailouts plus no GSE's = no "too big to fail" bullshit, although it's even false now.

Utterly wrong. No Federal Reserve doesn't change the fact that people on Wall Street are more about satisfying their own greed than creating value.
We must learn to rise above the past
Before we can at last
Begin again

Offline emindead

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 11053
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #62 on: May 25, 2009, 05:08:33 PM »
Reap, your forgetting a little thing in your analysis of the economy called

The Federal Reserve!

Hot damn, when will people realize that the excesses of wall street debt were made possible by the vast money creation of the fed?
No fed = no bubble
Also,

No implicit government bailouts plus no GSE's = no "too big to fail" bullshit, although it's even false now.

Utterly wrong. No Federal Reserve doesn't change the fact that people on Wall Street are more about satisfying their own greed than creating value.
But they do that because the Federal Reserve keeps pumping money into the market. Bush said: "Wall Street is drunk". Yeah, because the Federal Reserve poured the alcohol. No back up money, not so constant stupid and greedy risks.

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #63 on: May 25, 2009, 05:35:45 PM »
Reap, your forgetting a little thing in your analysis of the economy called

The Federal Reserve!

Hot damn, when will people realize that the excesses of wall street debt were made possible by the vast money creation of the fed?
No fed = no bubble
Also,

No implicit government bailouts plus no GSE's = no "too big to fail" bullshit, although it's even false now.

Utterly wrong. No Federal Reserve doesn't change the fact that people on Wall Street are more about satisfying their own greed than creating value.
But they do that because the Federal Reserve keeps pumping money into the market. Bush said: "Wall Street is drunk". Yeah, because the Federal Reserve poured the alcohol. No back up money, not so constant stupid and greedy risks.

That's why it worked rather well until the same banks lobbied and got the regulations taken away....

Offline emindead

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 11053
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #64 on: May 25, 2009, 05:39:22 PM »
Reap, your forgetting a little thing in your analysis of the economy called

The Federal Reserve!

Hot damn, when will people realize that the excesses of wall street debt were made possible by the vast money creation of the fed?
No fed = no bubble
Also,

No implicit government bailouts plus no GSE's = no "too big to fail" bullshit, although it's even false now.

Utterly wrong. No Federal Reserve doesn't change the fact that people on Wall Street are more about satisfying their own greed than creating value.
But they do that because the Federal Reserve keeps pumping money into the market. Bush said: "Wall Street is drunk". Yeah, because the Federal Reserve poured the alcohol. No back up money, not so constant stupid and greedy risks.
That's why it worked rather well until the same banks lobbied.
You should have stopped right there. Banks can lobby because apparently is legal over there. BIG MISTAKE. And they can also get away with it because Government is too big; their demands have to pass some how with big manoeuvres.

Offline emindead

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 11053
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #65 on: May 25, 2009, 08:19:54 PM »
I liked this thing I stumbled upon.
Quote from: CollegeHumor
New Preamble for the Constitution
by brenna on March 08, 2007
NEW PREAMBLE TO THE CONSTITUTION! The following has been attributed to State Representative Mitchell Kaye from GA. This guy should run for President one day...
 
"We the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior, and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great-grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt ridden, delusional, and other liberal bed-wetters. We hold these truths to be self evident: that a whole lot of people are confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim they require a Bill of NON-Rights."
 

  • ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.
  • ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone -- not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc.; but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.
  • ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful; do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.
  • ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes. (This one is my pet peeve...get an education and go to work....don't expect everyone else to take care of you!)
  • ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in public health care.
  • ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.
  • ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.
  • ARTICLE VIII: You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful. (AMEN!)
  • ARTICLE IX: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness, which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.
  • ARTICLE X: This is an English speaking country. We don't care where you are from, English is our language. Learn it or go back to wherever you came from! (Lastly....)
  • ARTICLE XI: You do not have the right to change our country's history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution. The phrase IN GOD WE TRUST is part of our heritage and history, and if you are uncomfortable with it, TOUGH!

If you agree, share this with a friend. No, you don't have to, and nothing tragic will befall you if you don't. I just think it's about time common sense is allowed to flourish. Sensible people of the United States speak out because if you do not, who will
« Last Edit: May 25, 2009, 10:10:20 PM by emindead »

Offline emindead

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 11053
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #66 on: May 25, 2009, 10:06:16 PM »
So Jobe, I have a few questions:

How do you imagine a transition to the gold standard would work?
Thomas E. Woods, author of the NYTimes best seller book, Meltdown, wrote recently on his website the following:

How to Return to Gold

Plenty of sensible people recognize there’s something wrong with our money, and favor a return to a commodity money as existed under the gold standard.  But how do we get from here to there?  Here are the answers of Henry Hazlitt (these are direct links) (.pdf; scroll down to pp. 58-61); Murray Rothbard, and George Reisman (mp3).

One of the difficulties with the classical gold standard is that it relied on decent, honorable, and intelligent politicians who wouldn’t just abandon the system when it suited them. Nobel Prize winner F.A. Hayek didn’t trust them. Here are his remarks on the complete separation of money and state.

Ron Paul has arguably the simplest solution, which he outlines in The Revolution: A Manifesto, his #1 New York Times bestseller: abolish legal tender laws (which are a monopolistic intrusion into the free market), do away with all taxation on gold and silver, and simply allow people — this is a free country, right? — to choose what suits them best as a medium of exchange.  In no time society would, I am certain, converge once again on precious metals, what Professor Jörg Guido Hülsmann calls “natural money.”

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #67 on: May 26, 2009, 12:48:03 AM »
What if we simly went back to backing the money we do have with gold, and other commodities? Not just gold, but a variety of them (like China is doing and like China proposed).

Also, that thing from College Humor is quite stupid. Not only is it a rather failed attempt at humor, the last two are also rather ignorant The problem with the right is they don't know comedy.

Offline Disappear

  • Posts: 3500
  • It's hard to beat a person who never gives up.
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #68 on: May 26, 2009, 12:55:17 AM »
NK just fired 2 more missiles (i.e. duds) off their east coast, per Faux News.  :\
"Not by wrath does one kill but by laughter."

Offline emindead

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 11053
Re: The P/R-side Chat Thread v.2
« Reply #69 on: May 26, 2009, 08:41:15 AM »
NK just fired 2 more missiles (i.e. duds) off their east coast, per Faux News.  :\
Nah! The big news is Sonia Sotomayor being nominated by Obama for the Supreme Court. :hat That's the real world headline.