Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Fiat Currency Thread (merged)

Discussions about the economic and financial ramifications of PEAK OIL

Re: Fiat Currency

Unread postby TommyJefferson » Sat 20 Dec 2008, 11:27:32

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'w')hat makes gold "real money?"


Read this: http://mises.org/money/2s4.asp
Conform . Consume . Obey .
User avatar
TommyJefferson
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1757
Joined: Thu 19 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Texas and Los Angeles

Re: Fiat Currency

Unread postby smallpoxgirl » Sat 20 Dec 2008, 12:41:46

I'm with you PMS. What makes gold "money" is the same thing that does it for green pieces of paper with pictures of dead white guys wearing wigs. The answer is consensus.

As I said in another thread, it seems to me that the little green pieces of paper function far better as a medium of exchange than gold does. The problem with gold and silver is always that the rich end up hoarding them. This leads to them becoming excessively scarce and unavailable as an exchange medium(i.e. deflation). The supply of green pieces of paper can be expanded as necessary to offset the hoarding problem.
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
User avatar
smallpoxgirl
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00

Re: Fiat Currency

Unread postby TommyJefferson » Sat 20 Dec 2008, 20:25:21

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', 'T')he problem with gold and silver is always that the rich end up hoarding them. This leads to them becoming excessively scarce and unavailable as an exchange medium(i.e. deflation). The supply of green pieces of paper can be expanded as necessary to offset the hoarding problem.


I'm sorry SPG but that just doesn't make sense.

The world supply of gold is infinitely divisible when gold is represented by paper certificates or electronic ticks.

Why would there be hoarding of these divisions?
Conform . Consume . Obey .
User avatar
TommyJefferson
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1757
Joined: Thu 19 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Texas and Los Angeles

Re: Fiat Currency

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Sat 20 Dec 2008, 20:49:24

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TommyJefferson', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', 'T')he problem with gold and silver is always that the rich end up hoarding them. This leads to them becoming excessively scarce and unavailable as an exchange medium(i.e. deflation). The supply of green pieces of paper can be expanded as necessary to offset the hoarding problem.


I'm sorry SPG but that just doesn't make sense.

The world supply of gold is infinitely divisible when gold is represented by paper certificates or electronic ticks.

Why would there be hoarding of these divisions?
I think she was talking about rich people hoarding real metal gold. As for the world supply of gold being infinitely divisible, maybe you should clarify that a bit.
Turn those Machines back On! - Don Ameche in Trading Places
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There

Re: Fiat Currency

Unread postby TommyJefferson » Sat 20 Dec 2008, 21:25:18

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'A')s for the world supply of gold being infinitely divisible, maybe you should clarify that a bit.


The world supply of gold can be divided in to smaller, and smaller units infinitely.

If I have an ounce of gold, I can make one billion paper certificates for it, each representing 1/1,000,000,000th of that ounce.

The division possibility is mathematically infinite.
Conform . Consume . Obey .
User avatar
TommyJefferson
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1757
Joined: Thu 19 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Texas and Los Angeles
Top

Re: Fiat Currency

Unread postby mattduke » Sat 20 Dec 2008, 21:49:49

SPG is concerned about the rich hoarding metal. She prefers they own the printing press instead.
User avatar
mattduke
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3591
Joined: Fri 28 Oct 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Fiat Currency

Unread postby Narz » Sat 20 Dec 2008, 22:04:12

Re : salt

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'B')ut it is also essential to life

No it isn't. Not unless you're a sea creature. Why do people believe that?
“Seek simplicity but distrust it”
User avatar
Narz
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2360
Joined: Sat 25 Nov 2006, 04:00:00
Location: the belly of the beast (New Jersey)
Top

Re: Fiat Currency

Unread postby Dukat_Reloaded » Sat 20 Dec 2008, 22:32:54

Rothbard makes a point relating to gold.

"Vital to this necessary reform is the return to a money which is a useful product produced by the free market itself. In every society, people on the market voluntarily arrive at one or two commodities which are the most useful to use as money. For thousands of years, gold has been selected by countless societies as that money. The only alternative to a market commodity-money is what we unfortunately have now: paper tickets issued by the government and called "money." Since the paper tickets – dollars, francs, pounds sterling, or what have you – are issued by the government, the government can issue any amount it arbitrarily chooses. Counterfeiting is built into the system, and hence so is inflation and eventual destruction of the currency."

In the history of markets, people all over the world have always used gold as the #1 form of money. There's a reason for that, gold just simply becomes the money of choice when people have the freedom to choose so, and it lasts the test of time. Any type of paper ticket system is corruptable and there's never been an exception. The choice by governments to use paper money instead of gold is their intent from the outset to print too much money and cause inflation. If they truely believed that they would not over issue, then I don't see the point of using paper money because there would be no advantages for the government to use paper, no reason to have ever gone off the gold standard.
User avatar
Dukat_Reloaded
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 953
Joined: Sun 31 Jul 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Fiat Currency

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Sat 20 Dec 2008, 23:03:38

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Narz', 'R')e : salt

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'B')ut it is also essential to life

No it isn't. Not unless you're a sea creature. Why do people believe that?
You ever seen a horse go spastic for lack of salt? I saw it once. They lick up the saltlicks because their lives depend on it. People believe that because it is true. Just like horses, we have to have it. You can't live without salt, nor can your wife or child.
Turn those Machines back On! - Don Ameche in Trading Places
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Top

Re: Fiat Currency

Unread postby Narz » Sun 21 Dec 2008, 17:10:10

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Narz', 'R')e : salt

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'B')ut it is also essential to life

No it isn't. Not unless you're a sea creature. Why do people believe that?
You ever seen a horse go spastic for lack of salt? I saw it once. They lick up the saltlicks because their lives depend on it. People believe that because it is true. Just like horses, we have to have it. You can't live without salt, nor can your wife or child.

Anedotal evidence based on interpretation. Interesting.

What of me living without salt for three years? What about people who don't eat salt for dozens of years? Did the natives of your area eat salt? Do wild animals require salt for sustenance?

You're getting salt mixed up with sodium. Man needs some sodium. Man doesn't need refined salt.

The horses were probably fed some sodium deficient diet and thus had a problem.

Anyway, this is an interesting thread idea. Didn't mean to derail it.
“Seek simplicity but distrust it”
User avatar
Narz
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2360
Joined: Sat 25 Nov 2006, 04:00:00
Location: the belly of the beast (New Jersey)
Top

Re: THE Fiat Currency Thread (merged)

Unread postby copious.abundance » Fri 06 Dec 2013, 22:56:52

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'Y')ou make sound like "politicizing" is a dirty word. I'd much rather have a system in which determining the money supply is an open process, with input from the public, even if politicians grandstand and incessantly babble on.

Oh pu-leeeze!! You're so naiive! They're not just grandstanding and babbling, they're playing games in order to extract political concessions, or at least try to. If you think they won't hold the money supply hostage when it's political convenient for them to do so, you live in a dreamland.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'I') prefer that to the system we have now where a secret meeting is conducting, which we don't get any information about for months after (and then just a censored "minutes"), with no input from anybody else. And that meeting is conducted by people who are bankers (or their "economists") who's allegiance is very questionable, and who seem to make decisions that only help the largest banks (too big to fail), and very little to help the public.

Umm, hello???? We've spent weeks now discussing that the money supply increases (mostly) when banks make loans. When you, Joe, go to a car dealer to take out a car loan, it is YOU who are asking that the money supply be increased. Or when a business takes out a business loan to make some investment, THEY are asking that the money supply be increased. How many bloody f-ing times do I have to point this out???? There is no secret meeting of bankers and economists deciding when and how much to increase the money supply, it is a democratic process of The People Asking For Loans. YOU YOURSELF said that most of the money supply increase comes from bank loans (Remember? That 95% thing), now you're contradicting yourself just for the sake of arguing.

Look dude, if you're going to keep repeating the same stuff I've corrected you on over and over again, and even contradicting yourself just to make an argument, there is no point in this discussion.
Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
User avatar
copious.abundance
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9589
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Cornucopia
Top

Re: THE Fiat Currency Thread (merged)

Unread postby copious.abundance » Fri 06 Dec 2013, 23:21:52

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'U')m, please address your claim of money being "used up", thanks, I'm not sure what you're talking about with this response. You mean no national debt (which is impossible today) has nothing to do with it? To do with what? You're the one who claimed "anti-debt" teapartiers would stop fight a money supply increase.

Good lord, you are really being bloody dense. Let me spell it out for you. PLEASE don't make me repeat this:

Step #1: Your proposal is enacted today. The latest data for the M2 money supply (to use one measure of the money supply for discussion sake) is $10,934.5 billion.
Step #2: Congress decides to add another, say, $1,000 billion to the money supply. IOW there will be a defacto limit at $11,934.5 billion. Once M2 gets near that number, Congress will need to increase it again.
Step #3: The population grows. The economy grows. More money is needed to service that.
Step #4: Because of #3, at some point in the future, M2 will approach that $11,934.5 billion.
Step #5: When that $11,934.5 billion limit comes near, as mentioned above, Congress will have to approve a new M2 increase. This is where it can get messy. Maybe there is a President in office who is disliked by parts of, or most of, Congress. They want to extract some political gain from him, either making him sign legislation he doesn't really want, or making him rescind some other legislation he would like to keep. You live in a fantasy world if you think this isn't going to happen. So, while Congress and the President are playing poker games with each other, the money supply, and thus the whole financial system, becomes basically frozen - people cannot take out loans, or use their credit card, and businesses will not be able to use lines of credit, because banks are unable to access new money.

Now, this only needs to happen once in order to destroy your entire system. As soon as it happens once - and it WILL happen at least once - people and banks will devise their own currencies, which will become increasingly accepted, because they have learned they cannot trust a monetary system and currency which is subject to political whims and game playing. Before you know it, all these alternative currencies will surpass your own currency in usage, completely subverting everything you, joewp, tried to accomplish.

Your idea contains the seeds of its own destruction. End of story. Don't make me have to repeat this predictable scenario again.
Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
User avatar
copious.abundance
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9589
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Cornucopia
Top

Re: THE Fiat Currency Thread (merged)

Unread postby joewp » Sun 08 Dec 2013, 01:11:55

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('copious.abundance', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'Y')ou make sound like "politicizing" is a dirty word. I'd much rather have a system in which determining the money supply is an open process, with input from the public, even if politicians grandstand and incessantly babble on.

Oh pu-leeeze!! You're so naiive! They're not just grandstanding and babbling, they're playing games in order to extract political concessions, or at least try to. If you think they won't hold the money supply hostage when it's political convenient for them to do so, you live in a dreamland.


Well gee, what the hell do you think politicians are supposed to do other than extract concessions from the majority if they're in the minority? They're supposedly representing their constituents, aren't they? What would you expect them to do, go along and get voted out?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'I') prefer that to the system we have now where a secret meeting is conducting, which we don't get any information about for months after (and then just a censored "minutes"), with no input from anybody else. And that meeting is conducted by people who are bankers (or their "economists") who's allegiance is very questionable, and who seem to make decisions that only help the largest banks (too big to fail), and very little to help the public.

Umm, hello???? We've spent weeks now discussing that the money supply increases (mostly) when banks make loans. When you, Joe, go to a car dealer to take out a car loan, it is YOU who are asking that the money supply be increased. Or when a business takes out a business loan to make some investment, THEY are asking that the money supply be increased. How many bloody f-ing times do I have to point this out???? There is no secret meeting of bankers and economists deciding when and how much to increase the money supply, it is a democratic process of The People Asking For Loans. YOU YOURSELF said that most of the money supply increase comes from bank loans (Remember? That 95% thing), now you're contradicting yourself just for the sake of arguing.

Look dude, if you're going to keep repeating the same stuff I've corrected you on over and over again, and even contradicting yourself just to make an argument, there is no point in this discussion.


Oh, so the Federal Reserve's raising or lowering whatever interest rate doesn't influence how many loans are originated? Then what the hell are they doing it for? Heck, tomorrow the Fed could issue regulations that banks must keep a minimum of 20% reserves on all accounts, even time deposits. What would you think that would do to the mortgage market? Geez, fundamentally, interest is the "price" of money. If you increase the price of any commodity, the demand for it inevitably goes down. Talk about economics 101...
Joe P. joeparente.com
"Only when the last tree is cut; only when the last river is polluted; only when the last fish is caught; only then will they realize that you cannot eat money." - Cree Indian Proverb
User avatar
joewp
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2054
Joined: Tue 05 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Keeping dry in South Florida
Top

Re: THE Fiat Currency Thread (merged)

Unread postby Rod_Cloutier » Sun 08 Dec 2013, 01:17:47

Bitcoin volatility news:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... 4BedQI#t=0

(Seemed relevant to this thread)
Rod_Cloutier
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1448
Joined: Fri 20 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Winnipeg, Canada

Re: THE Fiat Currency Thread (merged)

Unread postby joewp » Sun 08 Dec 2013, 02:08:35

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('copious.abundance', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'U')m, please address your claim of money being "used up", thanks, I'm not sure what you're talking about with this response. You mean no national debt (which is impossible today) has nothing to do with it? To do with what? You're the one who claimed "anti-debt" teapartiers would stop fight a money supply increase.

Good lord, you are really being bloody dense. Let me spell it out for you. PLEASE don't make me repeat this:


If you do, you're delusional...

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')Step #1: Your proposal is enacted today. The latest data for the M2 money supply (to use one measure of the money supply for discussion sake) is $10,934.5 billion.


Yeah, well since the Fed stopped reporting M3 (aka Eurodollars, or dollars held in foreign accounts) you kind of have to.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')Step #2: Congress decides to add another, say, $1,000 billion to the money supply. IOW there will be a defacto limit at $11,934.5 billion. Once M2 gets near that number, Congress will need to increase it again.


Of course, you don't understand. In either a fiat money or government issued commodity backed money, Congress is the one creating the money to spend for infrastructure, social needs or salaries, which is influenced by what they decide is needed. One would imagine that they'd already agreed on a budget, with money supply increases built in, and then be "surprised" or something that the money supply is increasing more than they spent is ludicrous. Please keep in mind that frb is outlawed.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')Step #3: The population grows. The economy grows. More money is needed to service that.

Wrong. More money is not needed. Given ample supply of goods, services and labor, salaries and prices will merely deflate. What you don't seem to understand is that the main impetus for growth in prices and wages is inflation of the money supply and the accompanying interest charges associated with money creation from debt. That's why "Helicopter Ben" was so adamant about lowering interest rates and bailing the big banks out of bad loans, to prevent deflation. Deflation is only bad for the working man when he has to repay loans of created money with interest attached. If he is debt free, deflation isn't that much of an issue.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')Step #4: Because of #3, at some point in the future, M2 will approach that $11,934.5 billion.

Yeah, most likely during the next budget negotiations.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')Step #5: When that $11,934.5 billion limit comes near, as mentioned above, Congress will have to approve a new M2 increase. This is where it can get messy. Maybe there is a President in office who is disliked by parts of, or most of, Congress. They want to extract some political gain from him, either making him sign legislation he doesn't really want, or making him rescind some other legislation he would like to keep. You live in a fantasy world if you think this isn't going to happen. So, while Congress and the President are playing poker games with each other, the money supply, and thus the whole financial system, becomes basically frozen - people cannot take out loans, or use their credit card, and businesses will not be able to use lines of credit, because banks are unable to access new money.

Obviously, you have no idea what a money system where money is created by government (either fiat or commodity-based) is about. Banks wouldn't lend "new money", they'd lend money from a pool of cash available because they promised certain depositors who would commit their money for a period of time to a certain interest rate and loan based on that. In that capacity, they'd merely consolidate monies put at risk by agreement with some depositors and lend that money out to qualified borrowers. Merely loan brokers, for a fee.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')Now, this only needs to happen once in order to destroy your entire system. As soon as it happens once - and it WILL happen at least once - people and banks will devise their own currencies, which will become increasingly accepted, because they have learned they cannot trust a monetary system and currency which is subject to political whims and game playing. Before you know it, all these alternative currencies will surpass your own currency in usage, completely subverting everything you, joewp, tried to accomplish.

Your idea contains the seeds of its own destruction. End of story. Don't make me have to repeat this predictable scenario again.
Your stupid scenario is totally false. Banks wouldn't lend "new money", only existing money agreed by those depositors who wish to put their money at risk for a return.

And since alternative currencies like bitcoins and Liberty Dollars would flourish now, if it wasn't for governments suppressing them, illustrates that what you claim would happen to a government issued currency is happening you your treasured FRNs. Perhaps you should look in the virtual mirror.
Joe P. joeparente.com
"Only when the last tree is cut; only when the last river is polluted; only when the last fish is caught; only then will they realize that you cannot eat money." - Cree Indian Proverb
User avatar
joewp
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2054
Joined: Tue 05 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Keeping dry in South Florida
Top

Re: THE Fiat Currency Thread (merged)

Unread postby joewp » Sun 08 Dec 2013, 02:19:22

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Repent', 'B')itcoin volatility news:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... 4BedQI#t=0

(Seemed relevant to this thread)


Thank you Repent. It seems Bitcoins are also subject to the problem of exponential growth. That's a severe design flaw in the currency. Not to mention that China has already outlawed them, and the US can't be far behind.

Bankers don't like competition.

"Competition is a sin." - John D. Rockefeller
Joe P. joeparente.com
"Only when the last tree is cut; only when the last river is polluted; only when the last fish is caught; only then will they realize that you cannot eat money." - Cree Indian Proverb
User avatar
joewp
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2054
Joined: Tue 05 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Keeping dry in South Florida
Top

Re: THE Fiat Currency Thread (merged)

Unread postby copious.abundance » Sun 08 Dec 2013, 21:28:41

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'W')ell gee, what the hell do you think politicians are supposed to do other than extract concessions from the majority if they're in the minority? They're supposedly representing their constituents, aren't they? What would you expect them to do, go along and get voted out?

At this point you're agreeing with me your proposal would politicize the money supply, and that congress, given this power, would play political games with it.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'O')h, so the Federal Reserve's raising or lowering whatever interest rate doesn't influence how many loans are originated? Then what the hell are they doing it for? Heck, tomorrow the Fed could issue regulations that banks must keep a minimum of 20% reserves on all accounts, even time deposits. What would you think that would do to the mortgage market? Geez, fundamentally, interest is the "price" of money. If you increase the price of any commodity, the demand for it inevitably goes down. Talk about economics 101...

*sigh* Where to start? I guess I should start by repeating again something I already posted: :badgrin:

EXHIBIT #1:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('copious.abundance', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'A')nyway, it seems the banks are putting those reserves to work, since this Bloomberg article states they are losening lending standards..
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-0 ... shows.html

This says absolutely nothing about whether banks are using their excess reserves. In fact, your own article states exactly what I've been trying to tell you:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')anks reported “on net, weaker demand for prime and nontraditional mortgage loans” while demand for business loans “experienced little change,” according to the report.

IOW, there is not enough DEMAND for loans. The fact that they're reducing their standards indicates they're trying to get more businesses and people to borrow from them, because, as of right now, there aren't enough businesses and people borrowing from them.
Interest rates are near historic lows - correct? Well then how come demand for loans is so low?? According to your theory, ultra-low interest rates should be spurring mega demand for loans ... but it is not. FAIL.

EXHIBIT #2
Contrary to your belief, demand for loans does not necessarily go down when interest rates go up. In fact, rising interest rates are often a sign that demand for loans is going UP. There are tons of examples of the economy getting better (and thus, demand for loans increasing) when interest rates were much higher than now, and often while they were rising. In fact ... every recovery besides this one has occurred when interest rates were higher than they are now. Gee, how can this be? :roll:

For example, let's look at 1978, a great example of what I'm talking about. Here is the yield on the 10-year during 1978 (this, of course, is reflected in mortgage and other interest rates, which are tied to the yield of the 10-year).

Image

UP, UP and AWAY!!! Did this result in a depressed economy? Contrary to popular belief about the 70's, no. At least not in this year.

Here is monthly job creation in 1978:
Jan: 187K
Feb: 353K
Mar: 513K
Apr: 702K
May: 346K
Jun: 442K
Jul: 254K
Aug: 276K
Sep: 137k
Oct: 336k
Nov: 437K
Dec: 283k

Those are some pretty darn good numbers - all occurring while interest rates were rising! 8O And if that weren't enough, here was quarterly GDP growth in 1978:

Q1: +1.4%
Q2: +16.5% (!!!)
Q3: +4.0%
Q4: +5.5%

Not bad! All this happening while interest rates were rising! 8O Imagine all the new car, house, boat, business and other loans that had to be taken out to create all that growth. Amazing! :shock:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'Y')eah, well since the Fed stopped reporting M3 (aka Eurodollars, or dollars held in foreign accounts) you kind of have to.
More paranoid conspiracy ramblings. I could have picked M1 if I wanted, it makes no difference.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'O')f course, you don't understand. In either a fiat money or government issued commodity backed money, Congress is the one creating the money to spend for infrastructure, social needs or salaries, which is influenced by what they decide is needed. One would imagine that they'd already agreed on a budget, with money supply increases built in, and then be "surprised" or something that the money supply is increasing more than they spent is ludicrous. Please keep in mind that frb is outlawed.
Breaking news: The US government isn't the only entity that requires new money. :roll: Good lord I don't believe I have to point that out! :roll:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'W')rong. More money is not needed. Given ample supply of goods, services and labor, salaries and prices will merely deflate ...
Oh boy, this is a great example of how your proposal is bound for failure ....

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'D')eflation is only bad for the working man when he has to repay loans of created money with interest attached. If he is debt free, deflation isn't that much of an issue.
... since you make the bizarre and impossible assumption that nobody will ever need to take out a loan for anything!!!! :lol:

That latter point illustrates that you live in such a complete fantasy world I'm not sure why I'm wasting my time. So, everybody is going to buy a house 100% cash down. Little doubt most people will finally get around to saving enough money for such an endeavor ... oh, maybe some 10 years or so after they die. :lol: In addition they'll have to save money for a car, in which case they might finally be able to afford one maybe sometime when they reach their 30's or 40's (remember, they're trying to save money for a house, too!). Not to mention trying to save money for a dishwasher, plane trip to aunt Selma for Christmas, and so on, and so forth.

I think your society would end up looking like Cuba, where everybody's driving around 50-year-old cars because nobody can afford a new one. :lol:
Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
User avatar
copious.abundance
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9589
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Cornucopia
Top

Re: THE Fiat Currency Thread (merged)

Unread postby joewp » Mon 09 Dec 2013, 02:19:31

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('copious.abundance', '
')At this point you're agreeing with me your proposal would politicize the money supply, and that congress, given this power, would play political games with it.


I didn't think I ever disagreed. I just think it's much better than some shady characters with questionable motives managing the money supply, and mostly only helping their banker masters and screwing the working class.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')*sigh* Where to start? I guess I should start by repeating again something I already posted: :badgrin:


Yeah, whatever. Point being that they're trying to loan the money, even to the point they're reducing the (extraordinarily stringent) lending requirements to get more customers. Making it inflationary. Banks have been eliminating a lot of demand because of more stringent requirements for loans compared to even 2000. The demand is still there, even if it's on the disqualified list. And when you loosen the requirements, you get more loans. Inflationary.

EXHIBIT #1:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('copious.abundance', '
')EXHIBIT #2
Contrary to your belief, demand for loans does not necessarily go down when interest rates go up. In fact, rising interest rates are often a sign that demand for loans is going UP. There are tons of examples of the economy getting better (and thus, demand for loans increasing) when interest rates were much higher than now, and often while they were rising. In fact ... every recovery besides this one has occurred when interest rates were higher than they are now. Gee, how can this be? :roll:

For example, let's look at 1978, a great example of what I'm talking about. Here is the yield on the 10-year during 1978 (this, of course, is reflected in mortgage and other interest rates, which are tied to the yield of the 10-year).


Listen, vacuum man. You can't compare a period where the official inflation rate was 7-9% to today, when it's officially less than 2% (contrary to my experience in the supermarket, that's for sure). You have to look at the REAL RETURN on the interest. At 10% interest, that's only 2-3% real return. Very comparable to today, don't you think? Also, you picked a year when oil prices were declining, a big impetus to the economy, hence the job recovery from the doldrums of a few years prior. So actually, the rise in interest rates was caused by the inflation rate, which was caused by the '73 oil embargo prices percolating through the economy. Of course, the next year, all hell broke loose, during which interest rates and inflation almost doubled and the economy tanked. You might have heard the term "stagflation" before. I lived through it, it wasn't fun.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'Y')eah, well since the Fed stopped reporting M3 (aka Eurodollars, or dollars held in foreign accounts) you kind of have to.

More paranoid conspiracy ramblings. I could have picked M1 if I wanted, it makes no difference.

Um, they never announced why they stopped reporting M3 except to say it was too hard to do anymore. Yeah, right. Most people thought it was about hiding the escalating amount of petrodollars in foreign central banks. Cause you know, if those foreign central banks ever try cashing in all those dollars for assets in the US, the inflation rate would skyrocket into the Zimbabwe zone, and they don't want people knowing how bad it is.
Otherwise, please enlighten me as to why they stopped reporting a much watched number.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')Breaking news: The US government isn't the only entity that requires new money. :roll: Good lord I don't believe I have to point that out! :roll:

Oh really? I'd really like to hear who else requires "new money". Oh, if you're gonna say "banks to make loans", I will again say you don't understand the concept. Banks only loan out money that people agreed to put at risk for a time (a CD or time deposit) for a higher return. And when they issue a credit card with a $1000 credit limit, they put $1000 in reserve from the money the time depositors invested.

So who else would it be?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'W')rong. More money is not needed. Given ample supply of goods, services and labor, salaries and prices will merely deflate ...
Oh boy, this is a great example of how your proposal is bound for failure ....

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'D')eflation is only bad for the working man when he has to repay loans of created money with interest attached. If he is debt free, deflation isn't that much of an issue.
... since you make the bizarre and impossible assumption that nobody will ever need to take out a loan for anything!!!! :lol:

Of course there would be people borrowing. But way, way less. Think about it. No income tax.
Now, I don't think you could actually get your head around this particular concept, but the availability of loans for a given purpose actually drives the price of that good or service way up. It's simple supply and demand. All of a sudden, in stead of saving for few years, someone can borrow the cost of, for instance, a college education today, pledging more of their future income than had they saved. Since colleges can only hold so many students, this surge of newly created money causes the college to raise tuition, since they have to limit the number of students enrolled(and because they can). The price goes up, and more loans for a larger amount and longer term are made... causing the price to go up ad infinitum. Pretty soon, they'll be 50 year student loans, so they'll be working for the bank for the rest of their lives.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')That latter point illustrates that you live in such a complete fantasy world I'm not sure why I'm wasting my time. So, everybody is going to buy a house 100% cash down. Little doubt most people will finally get around to saving enough money for such an endeavor ... oh, maybe some 10 years or so after they die. :lol: In addition they'll have to save money for a car, in which case they might finally be able to afford one maybe sometime when they reach their 30's or 40's (remember, they're trying to save money for a house, too!). Not to mention trying to save money for a dishwasher, plane trip to aunt Selma for Christmas, and so on, and so forth.

I think your society would end up looking like Cuba, where everybody's driving around 50-year-old cars because nobody can afford a new one. :lol:

You know, I think that, while you post charts from the past in a vain attempt to support your position, you have no idea what things were actually like. I already pointed out and linked a source that showed even in the 70s, the savings rate was like 10%. PEOPLE HAD MONEY. They didn't borrow for everything. Heck, credit cards were a new invention still. New car loans were uncommon, and NOBODY borrowed money for a used car. Borrowing money for a Christmas vacation to Aunt Selma ? Unheard of.

You see, most people back then saved up for that kind of stuff. And as far as I can see, they lived better than today.
Joe P. joeparente.com
"Only when the last tree is cut; only when the last river is polluted; only when the last fish is caught; only then will they realize that you cannot eat money." - Cree Indian Proverb
User avatar
joewp
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2054
Joined: Tue 05 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Keeping dry in South Florida
Top

Re: THE Fiat Currency Thread (merged)

Unread postby Revi » Mon 09 Dec 2013, 09:15:11

Fiat currency is great until it doesn't work. I believe in it, but I hedge with a little silver just in case.

If it tanks I am back to what I paid for it.

Hopefully the economy holds up and we don't go into inflation.

If that happens the economy will be what holds me up.

If we have troubles, then it's there like a life preserver.
Deep in the mud and slime of things, even there, something sings.
User avatar
Revi
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7417
Joined: Mon 25 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Maine

Re: THE Fiat Currency Thread (merged)

Unread postby copious.abundance » Wed 11 Dec 2013, 00:16:29

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'I') didn't think I ever disagreed. I just think it's much better than some shady characters with questionable motives managing the money supply, and mostly only helping their banker masters and screwing the working class.

Except that it's not shady characters with questionable motives managing the money supply, it's The People Taking Out Loans.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'L')isten, vacuum man. You can't compare a period where the official inflation rate was 7-9% to today, when it's officially less than 2% ...

You're changing the subject. You said demand for loans goes down when interest rates go up. This is false. BTW, real interest rates in the late 70's weren't actually much different from now, so your sarcasm at my mentioning that different period to today was misdirected.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'U')m, they never announced why they stopped reporting M3 except to say it was too hard to do anymore.

Actually, what they said was that it wasn't very useful. Perhaps they are right - it wouldn't be the first government statistic discontinued due to irrelevance. FWIW, there are people who reconstruct M3 such as this person here. Looking at the chart entitled "M3, longer term chart" about 1/4 down the page, you can see it's been bouncing up and down without any rhyme or reason for the past 3-4 years. So maybe they were right in declaring it useless. However, no doubt paranoid conspiracy theorist types will find any statistic the government ceases to publish as being part of some vast conspiracy to hide information from the public. Perhaps the fact they don't tablulate Switchboard Operators in the monthly job statistics anymore is part of some vast conspiracy!

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'O')h really? I'd really like to hear who else requires "new money". Oh, if you're gonna say "banks to make loans", I will again say you don't understand the concept. Banks only loan out money that people agreed to put at risk for a time (a CD or time deposit) for a higher return. And when they issue a credit card with a $1000 credit limit, they put $1000 in reserve from the money the time depositors invested.

Here we go yet again! :roll: I wonder how many more times I'm going to have to provide a link to this Wiki article.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'O')f course there would be people borrowing. But way, way less. Think about it. No income tax.
OK, so no income tax would reduce the amount of time your average saver would finally save up enough money to buy a house 100% cash down (no loan) from about 10 years after they die, to about 10 years before they die.

No wait - I take that back. Since you've told us wages will be falling as well, it'll still take until 10 years after they die to save up for a house anyway! :lol:

In the meantime, when your fantasy money system turns out to need even merely half the amount of loans that the money system now requires, those 50% of today's borrowers are going to find your deflation making the real cost of their loans go up, and you're still gonna have a helluva lot of really pissed off people, which means your system will last ... oh, I'll give it maybe 3 years. Tops. I wonder how many more times I'm going to end up pointing out that your system contains the seeds of its own destruction? :lol:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'N')ow, I don't think you could actually get your head around this particular concept, but the availability of loans for a given purpose actually drives the price of that good or service way up. It's simple supply and demand. All of a sudden, in stead of saving for few years, someone can borrow the cost of, for instance, a college education today, pledging more of their future income than had they saved. Since colleges can only hold so many students, this surge of newly created money causes the college to raise tuition, since they have to limit the number of students enrolled(and because they can). The price goes up, and more loans for a larger amount and longer term are made... causing the price to go up ad infinitum. Pretty soon, they'll be 50 year student loans, so they'll be working for the bank for the rest of their lives.
I don't think you could actually get your head around this particular concept, but your own system solves absolutely nothing. All you've done is reverse the problem you described above: Instead of perpetual loans creating perpetual inflation (both prices and wages), your system proposes no loans (or few loans) creating perpetual deflation (both prices and wages). Maybe when wages fall to zero, prices have also fallen to zero, and we're thus reduced to a hunter-gatherer society, it will finally dawn on you how silly your system was.

BTW, in spite of its problems, debt can be a very good motivating factor. I pay $400/month in student loans, and will do so until the year I turn 65. You can be sure I would not be as productive a member of society if I didn't have that and other debts to pay off. Being debt-free is a great excuse to live a slacker's life ... which is another reason your proposed money system would reduce us to hunters and gatherers.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'Y')ou know, I think that, while you post charts from the past in a vain attempt to support your position, you have no idea what things were actually like. I already pointed out and linked a source that showed even in the 70s, the savings rate was like 10%. PEOPLE HAD MONEY. They didn't borrow for everything. Heck, credit cards were a new invention still. New car loans were uncommon, and NOBODY borrowed money for a used car. Borrowing money for a Christmas vacation to Aunt Selma ? Unheard of.
You're a bloody f-ing liar, dude. I'm 49 and remember the 70's quite well, thank you. Most people took out a loan for a car. Every car (all used) my father bought had had to take out a loan, and he had a good paying job. The real price of airline tickets was much greater than it is now, and if people didn't borrow money for a Christmas vacation to Aunt Selma, it's because airplane tickets were too expensive to even bother borrowing money for.

Look dude, you think I'm some young naif who doesn't remember what your supposed "good old days" were like, but that's probably because you're getting senile and don't remember anymore what those days were actually like yourself.
Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
User avatar
copious.abundance
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9589
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Cornucopia
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Economics & Finance

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron