Election of 2012....Who ya got?

Geoforce

Geoforce

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
Decent point. I can appreciate the honesty of telling me your going to rob me up front instead if lying about it and hiding it.

The civil liberties losses are the most important issue to me and unfortunately neither party is going to fix that and it's looking like the supreme court is going to let them stand also.
Yeah, I just don't like the whole guise of small government Republicans run on. Like fricking Santorum talking about Obama wants the government to control your life. What a bunch of crap. How can these people honestly say this type of thing without doubling over in laughter? Yeah, Obama wants the government to control your life. Ok so I'll vote for you Rick...wait you want to make abortion illegal, make it to where gays can't marry, get rid of birth control, throws up over separation of church and state, etc. Sounds like control to me buddy.

I gotta get out of this thread, my blood pressure is starting to rise :)
 
AE14

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Yeah, I just don't like the whole guise of small government Republicans run on. Like fricking Santorum talking about Obama wants the government to control your life. What a bunch of crap. How can these people honestly say this type of thing without doubling over in laughter? Yeah, Obama wants the government to control your life. Ok so I'll vote for you Rick...wait you want to make abortion illegal, make it to where gays can't marry, get rid of birth control, throws up over separation of church and state, etc. Sounds like control to me buddy.

I gotta get out of this thread, my blood pressure is starting to rise :)
the parties are one in the same...big government but just in different areas of life
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Well, Barry Soetoro has commited us to Afghanistan for an official definite 12 years, which is getting closer and closer to what I predicted which was an eternity.
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Ron Paul is gaining ground on Romney, this is all far from over.

Ron Paul has apparently secured a majority of delegates in Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Washington State and possibly other states, and is on pace to officially “win” those states and do well in others, as the process moves towards the national level. Officially winning just 5 states will mean a formal RNC nomination for Paul.

 
AE14

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Ron Paul is gaining ground on Romney, this is all far from over.

Ron Paul has apparently secured a majority of delegates in Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Washington State and possibly other states, and is on pace to officially "win" those states and do well in others, as the process moves towards the national level. Officially winning just 5 states will mean a formal RNC nomination for Paul.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQMtlah4Iec">YouTube Link</a>
I did not watch the YouTube....just curious who put it out? The Paul campaign?
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
I did not watch the YouTube....just curious who put it out? The Paul campaign?
Its racheal maddow explaining how Ron Paul just won both washington and minnesota and is taking over other states as well.

This is really getting interesting, his name may in fact be officially entered in the Republican Convention, with his delegate supporters there.....

"Then what? Republicans fight it out like gladiators at the Colosseum? I love this!" RM
 
Rahl

Rahl

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Its racheal maddow explaining how Ron Paul just won both washington and minnesota and is taking over other states as well.

This is really getting interesting, his name may in fact be officially entered in the Republican Convention, with his delegate supporters there.....

"Then what? Republicans fight it out like gladiators at the Colosseum? I love this!" RM
I don't know but I would live to see that. Getting my popcorn a while...
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
I don't know but I would live to see that. Getting my popcorn a while...
I think at least he is trying to make a guaranteed major speech at the convention, and perhaps follow up as an independent after major national attention. Just my own speculation.
 
Rahl

Rahl

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
I think at least he is trying to make a guaranteed major speech at the convention, and perhaps follow up as an independent after major national attention. Just my own speculation.
I so wish the guy would run independent or at least libratarian since that's what he really is. I don't have faith that he will however.
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
I so wish the guy would run independent or at least libratarian since that's what he really is. I don't have faith that he will however.
The fact that he is the last of 2 candidates shocked me, the fact that he is even gaining ground at this stage when the entire media already declared it a victory is even more shocking.

This is a really amazing accomplishment, comparing his past 2 elections this 3rd is really stunning progress.
 
AE14

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
I think at least he is trying to make a guaranteed major speech at the convention, and perhaps follow up as an independent after major national attention. Just my own speculation.
Agreed. I think this is all for a future run as an Indy. However, all that will do is guarantee 4 more years of Obama.
 
Rahl

Rahl

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Agreed. I think this is all for a future run as an Indy. However, all that will do is guarantee 4 more years of Obama.
I'm ok with that. We need to get over this idea that only 2 candidates are running. That's the whole problem. We've already established that Obama and romney are identical. Paul may well pull it off if he could run. Of course somehow he would need to get some media coverage at some point.
 
CDB

CDB

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
Agreed. I think this is all for a future run as an Indy. However, all that will do is guarantee 4 more years of Obama.
Which would be different from 4 years of Romney... how?

People in the US need to get over this BS 'wasted vote' and 'lesser of two evils' crap. The only wasted vote is one you disagree with, and the lesser of two evils is still evil. A vote for Paul as an independent candidate isn't what guarantees Obama a victory, it's the nutless and vapid and outright malign who vote for Obama or Romney that guarantee that.

I view the two major parties in the US as equal opportunity rapists. During election season they both hold up a dildo and a tube of lube and explain how they're going to cornhole you, and when one of them wins somehow people take pride in having voted for the guy who is going rail them up the ass, and look down on those who 'wasted' their vote on an independent when in reality, even though those people may still get screwed, at least they had the balls and fortitude to say No to their rapist. Meanwhile those who vote for one of the two major candidates get busy pulling their pants down and bending over preparing to get ass raped, all the while gesturing over their shoulders with their thumbs while looking at us independents as if we're the fools, and saying to us, "I chose this guy..."

Way to go. Don't waste your vote, kids. Make sure you pick the ass raping you'll find more agreeable. Maybe they'll give you a reach around with a toilet paper tube lined with sandpaper as a bonus if you're nice. But don't do anything foolish like vote for someone who isn't going to screw you up the ass against your will. That'd just be strange.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ax1
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Which would be different from 4 years of Romney... how?
I dont speak for AE, but judged on most of his posts I dont think he meant that it that way, just who to expect to see on TV and read teleprompters the next 4 years.
 
CDB

CDB

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
I dont speak for AE, but judged on most of his posts I dont think he meant that it that way, just who to expect to see on TV and read teleprompters the next 4 years.
Fair enough, and I didn't mean it to come across as a condemnation of him personally. It just keyed off the need to rant agains that particular position in my head because I've heard it a lot recently. And there is at least one difference between the two. Obama is .0000000001% less likely to start WWIII in our lifetime. Though with people in congress bitching about sanctioning China for their human rights issues, my guess is we may see that war sooner rather than later. I wonder what China's reps said behind the scenes about our latest requests that they keep buying our debt ad infinitum that keyed off this latest 'outrage' over their human rights issues.
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Fair enough, and I didn't mean it to come across as a condemnation of him personally. It just keyed off the need to rant agains that particular position in my head because I've heard it a lot recently. And there is at least one difference between the two. Obama is .0000000001% less likely to start WWIII in our lifetime. Though with people in congress bitching about sanctioning China for their human rights issues, my guess is we may see that war sooner rather than later. I wonder what China's reps said behind the scenes about our latest requests that they keep buying our debt ad infinitum that keyed off this latest 'outrage' over their human rights issues.
I dont think there is any interest to go to war with China in any way and especially over human rights issues.

Its all about business, and China is all about business.

Look how Obama went to war with Lybia for "human rights issues" and afterwards when Al Queda was waiving their flags all over Tripoli and Genocide on the Blacks living in Lybia was taking place it was all declared a huge success. Thats what we call "freedom." As Obama has declared, "War is Peace"

I can see China accepting the USA go to with with Iran (and pretending to be against it) after China gets all their contracts established to make money on that soil and get a piece of that pie.
 
AE14

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Which would be different from 4 years of Romney... how?

People in the US need to get over this BS 'wasted vote' and 'lesser of two evils' crap. The only wasted vote is one you disagree with, and the lesser of two evils is still evil. A vote for Paul as an independent candidate isn't what guarantees Obama a victory, it's the nutless and vapid and outright malign who vote for Obama or Romney that guarantee that.

I view the two major parties in the US as equal opportunity rapists. During election season they both hold up a dildo and a tube of lube and explain how they're going to cornhole you, and when one of them wins somehow people take pride in having voted for the guy who is going rail them up the ass, and look down on those who 'wasted' their vote on an independent when in reality, even though those people may still get screwed, at least they had the balls and fortitude to say No to their rapist. Meanwhile those who vote for one of the two major candidates get busy pulling their pants down and bending over preparing to get ass raped, all the while gesturing over their shoulders with their thumbs while looking at us independents as if we're the fools, and saying to us, "I chose this guy..."

Way to go. Don't waste your vote, kids. Make sure you pick the ass raping you'll find more agreeable. Maybe they'll give you a reach around with a toilet paper tube lined with sandpaper as a bonus if you're nice. But don't do anything foolish like vote for someone who isn't going to screw you up the ass against your will. That'd just be strange.
I dont speak for AE, but judged on most of his posts I dont think he meant that it that way, just who to expect to see on TV and read teleprompters the next 4 years.
Ax is right...this is where I was going. It will make little different if its Obama, Romney, or Paul. Nothing will change. I know the Paul fans here will go crazy with this, but he is nothing different. Here is a 3 decade politician, who has gotten what accomplished? He has shown himself to be naive on foreign affairs, the thoughts of Austrian economics as this time (based on where we are) wont work and is short sighted.

Either way.....they are all the same
 
fueledpassion

fueledpassion

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
Ax is right...this is where I was going. It will make little different if its Obama, Romney, or Paul. Nothing will change. I know the Paul fans here will go crazy with this, but he is nothing different. Here is a 3 decade politician, who has gotten what accomplished? He has shown himself to be naive on foreign affairs, the thoughts of Austrian economics as this time (based on where we are) wont work and is short sighted.

Either way.....they are all the same
So basically there is no hope and we should just leave the country now if we don't like the path that America is taking?
 
AE14

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
So basically there is no hope and we should just leave the country now if we don't like the path that America is taking?

Wow...talk about putting words in ones mouth ;)

I never even implied leaving the country. My point is, the corruption of our political system and its representatives is too far gone. There needs to be a system overhaul if we truly want "change". I dont care if its Romney, Obama, Paul....or anyone. They are all the same and will do nothing of benefit for the people. However, "the people" will not bring about change. We are too fat, stupid and content to truly do anything. The masses by and large are ignorant, and as long as they can get by for the most part, they will continue to do just that.
 
CDB

CDB

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
I dont think there is any interest to go to war with China in any way and especially over human rights issues.
There was no interest in going to war with the south over slavery either. Human rights is or will be the bull**** cover used to go to war for a different reason, likely because of their refusal to help us debase our currency further. If I recall correctly the only country we've put sanctions on that we haven't bombed is Cuba. Not a great predictor should they proceed with sanctions.
 
CDB

CDB

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
It will make little different if its Obama, Romney, or Paul. Nothing will change. I know the Paul fans here will go crazy with this, but he is nothing different.
If you believe that, you haven't seen his record or followed his career.

Here is a 3 decade politician, who has gotten what accomplished? He has shown himself to be naive on foreign affairs, the thoughts of Austrian economics as this time (based on where we are) wont work and is short sighted.
Austrians have a horrible tendency to be right for people who are supposedly so wrong and off base. And the naivety on foreign policy is with those who think we can simply bomb our way to peace and not piss off a major portion of the foreign population while at the same time taxing ourselves into oblivion. The fact that Paul hasn't 'accomplished' anything is what's in his favor; I don't want government 'accomplishing' anything because even if they do something useful it's at twenty times the cost, funded by some who want nothing to do with it, and with a billion unintended consequences. People and markets accomplish things, the government just sucks off those accomplishments and debases them. As a politician he has consistently voted to keep the government dildo away from my *******, and that all I want any politician to 'accomplish', ever.
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Wow...talk about putting words in ones mouth ;)

I never even implied leaving the country. My point is, the corruption of our political system and its representatives is too far gone. There needs to be a system overhaul if we truly want "change". I dont care if its Romney, Obama, Paul....or anyone. They are all the same and will do nothing of benefit for the people. However, "the people" will not bring about change. We are too fat, stupid and content to truly do anything. The masses by and large are ignorant, and as long as they can get by for the most part, they will continue to do just that.
How can this be true? Burger King is testing a new ice cream sundae with 2 strips of bacon in it, who wouldnt want that? And Pizza Hut's new hot dog stuffed pizza crust should be mandated in schools.
 
Rahl

Rahl

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
How can this be true? Burger King is testing a new ice cream sundae with 2 strips of bacon in it, who wouldnt want that? And Pizza Hut's new hot dog stuffed pizza crust should be mandated in schools.
Pizza sauce is a vegetable after all. Only the government could purée a fruit and magically turn it into a vegetable by adding food coloring and sugar. :D
 
EasyEJL

EasyEJL

Never enough
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
There was no interest in going to war with the south over slavery either. Human rights is or will be the bull**** cover used to go to war for a different reason, likely because of their refusal to help us debase our currency further. If I recall correctly the only country we've put sanctions on that we haven't bombed is Cuba. Not a great predictor should they proceed with sanctions.
the war on the south was over their plan to secede and the north had relatively crap for good farmland to support their population. Sure they had iron and coal mines, but not enough farming space to meet the cities needs.
 
AE14

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
If you believe that, you haven't seen his record or followed his career.

Austrians have a horrible tendency to be right for people who are supposedly so wrong and off base. And the naivety on foreign policy is with those who think we can simply bomb our way to peace and not piss off a major portion of the foreign population while at the same time taxing ourselves into oblivion. The fact that Paul hasn't 'accomplished' anything is what's in his favor; I don't want government 'accomplishing' anything because even if they do something useful it's at twenty times the cost, funded by some who want nothing to do with it, and with a billion unintended consequences. People and markets accomplish things, the government just sucks off those accomplishments and debases them. As a politician he has consistently voted to keep the government dildo away from my *******, and that all I want any politician to 'accomplish', ever.
Couldn't disagree more. Looking at 2012 economically and Austrian school coupled with the gold standard Paul wants will only benefit one group. Here's a hint, it's not us.

Also, I am going to make an assumption (not a good ideas know) but if you are using the computer and living in this country, you are probably still doing better than over 90% of the rest of the world. So evidently, it's still not too bad.

I know the Paul fans will tell me he is a man of principle, but I am curious how well people know him to truly make that statement.
 
AE14

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
the war on the south was over their plan to secede and the north had relatively crap for good farmland to support their population. Sure they had iron and coal mines, but not enough farming space to meet the cities needs.
Exactly....slavery was a non issue for Lincoln. Look at his speeches on the subject. All he wanted was to preserve the union. They needed the land, there was a reason the north was industrialized.....crappy farm land
 
Whacked

Whacked

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
WHO THEN?

Couldn't disagree more. Looking at 2012 economically and Austrian school coupled with the gold standard Paul wants will only benefit one group. Here's a hint, it's not us.

.
 
EasyEJL

EasyEJL

Never enough
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Couldn't disagree more. Looking at 2012 economically and Austrian school coupled with the gold standard Paul wants will only benefit one group. Here's a hint, it's not us.
in what way does a stable currency whose value isn't artificially manipulated by "the man behind the curtain" ie the Fed not benefit us all?
 
AE14

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Think who would have the financial backing to manipulate it and clean out the supply? The same people that can manipulate it now.
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Think who would have the financial backing to manipulate it and clean out the supply? The same people that can manipulate it now.
Phasing out the federal reserve is a part of it as well.
 
EasyEJL

EasyEJL

Never enough
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Think who would have the financial backing to manipulate it and clean out the supply? The same people that can manipulate it now.
but you can't manipulate the amount of gold in circulation
 
Rahl

Rahl

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
While I'm concerned about the federal reserve I'm more concerned about the ever building police state.

One thing I wonder about without the fed is this. Without the ability to intentionally debase our currency while the rest of the world continues to do so what happens to our ability to export? Europe is not heading for a gold standard that's for sure.
 
carpee

carpee

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
While I'm concerned about the federal reserve I'm more concerned about the ever building police state.

One thing I wonder about without the fed is this. Without the ability to intentionally debase our currency while the rest of the world continues to do so what happens to our ability to export? Europe is not heading for a gold standard that's for sure.
the global government is right around the corner anyway...

as much as I want limited govt and sovereignty for our nation, it wont happen.

he who has the gold (wealth) makes the rules...and unfortunately most of those people are globalists
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
While I'm concerned about the federal reserve I'm more concerned about the ever building police state.

One thing I wonder about without the fed is this. Without the ability to intentionally debase our currency while the rest of the world continues to do so what happens to our ability to export? Europe is not heading for a gold standard that's for sure.
America is heading towards a cashless society, forget real currency. Everything will be digital at one point and entirely eliminating the black market and all purchases will be tracked (carbon taxes anyone?)
 
AE14

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
but you can't manipulate the amount of gold in circulation
of course you can....when it is controlled (purchased) by a small group, they will be able to control any supply out there. It will yield the same results we currently have, or at least moderately similar
 
EasyEJL

EasyEJL

Never enough
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
of course you can....when it is controlled (purchased) by a small group, they will be able to control any supply out there. It will yield the same results we currently have, or at least moderately similar
no, not even close. they can't suddenly out of nowhere triple the amount of gold in the treasury, like they've done printing paper bills in the last handful of years.
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
of course you can....when it is controlled (purchased) by a small group, they will be able to control any supply out there. It will yield the same results we currently have, or at least moderately similar
The small private group controls it alright. This would work better if the small group had oversight and our elected officials would be able to run audits.

We have no idea what they do, how much they print, how much they tranfer digitally.

What we do know is that Ron Paul's long fight for the audit the fed movement led to a partial audit (and a very small time frame) and revealed 16 trillion in secret overseas transactions and bailouts. What else is this small group hiding?
 
CDB

CDB

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
Couldn't disagree more. Looking at 2012 economically and Austrian school coupled with the gold standard Paul wants will only benefit one group. Here's a hint, it's not us.
Here's a hint: you're wrong.

Also, I am going to make an assumption (not a good ideas know) but if you are using the computer and living in this country, you are probably still doing better than over 90% of the rest of the world. So evidently, it's still not too bad.
Rhetorical BS.

I know the Paul fans will tell me he is a man of principle, but I am curious how well people know him to truly make that statement.
I've met and spoken with him at length twice. Do I know him? Not in depth. However your claim that there's no difference between he, Romney, and Obama is what's at issue, and your claim is dead wrong.
 
AE14

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
no, not even close. they can't suddenly out of nowhere triple the amount of gold in the treasury, like they've done printing paper bills in the last handful of years.
Based on your thoughts...let's think.....what happens when the supply is purchased in its entirety? Who has control?

Do you think the purchaser will be any different from those that currently manipulate the market?
 
AE14

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Here's a hint: you're wrong.

Rhetorical BS.

I've met and spoken with him at length twice. Do I know him? Not in depth. However your claim that there's no difference between he, Romney, and Obama is what's at issue, and your claim is dead wrong.
Opinions vary. I could speak to Romney twice, and throw my support to him. Doesn't make it a good choice.

I love the rhetorical comment. :rolleyes:

I guess it can't be true because you wouldn't want it to be. ;)

That's fine you think I am wrong on the Austrian school based on our CURRENT situation. There re countless economists on both sides...so take your pick
 
CDB

CDB

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
of course you can....when it is controlled (purchased) by a small group, they will be able to control any supply out there. It will yield the same results we currently have, or at least moderately similar
And exactly how does that small group corner the entire, or even a significant portion, of the gold supply? Such 'cornering of the market' is a myth. As they bought it and supply in circulation dropped it would command a commensurately higher price for one, making buying up the entire supply an impossible goal, especially since as the price goes up sellers will become more scarce. Second, unless they have the legal authority to stop people from using other means of exchange then once it becomes useless in that regard other metals and/or commodities can be monetized at will. Or in other words, the idea that one group will control the supply of gold assumes government control where none is being proposed, and seriously misunderstands the nature and origins of money to begin with.

And even if they managed it, unless they used that gold for something, there would no use in having it to begin with. So it would have to be recirculated, unless of course these hoarders plan to eat it instead of corn or meat, or drive it to work instead of a car, or use it to whack off with. Their needs would eventually force the recirculation of the metals anyway, because it's only useful as money if it's used as money. If they manage to hoard it and then swim in it like Scrooge McDuck, it gets spontaneously demonetized anyway.

Based on your thoughts...let's think.....what happens when the supply is purchased in its entirety? Who has control?
See above. How do they get control over the whole supply? With the government that's easy: The Fed. That's what it's for. Without legal authority to force sellers to sell and to control the price there's no way to corner a market on a specific commodity, and then one would also need legal authority via legal tender or other laws to stop any competitive product from being used. Not to mention that even with a controlled price there would be a black market and this would spur production of more gold anyway. So this worry is largely a load of crap.

Markets are born of interaction, one party never gets to dictate terms unless they're holding a gun to the other party's head. Consequently if a whole bunch of rich people bought up all the gold, so what? We can use silver. Or copper. Or palladium. Or ****ing artichokes if we need to. Money is merely a third commodity used to facilitate exchange. And if gold is money and someone hoards it all, unless they can stop everyone else from using something besides gold, all the hoarders just did was ensure a solid supply of gold teeth for themselves.

I guess it can't be true because you wouldn't want it to be.
A simple look at their voting records and what they have and have not done while in office shows Romney is a statist war mongering prick, so is Obama, and Paul is a legitimate believer in peace and small government. So to the extent you ignore reality and evidence, yeah, they're the same.

That's fine you think I am wrong on the Austrian school based on our CURRENT situation. There re countless economists on both sides...so take your pick
I have. I used to be one on the other side in a manner of speaking. Like I said, Austrians have an annoying tendency to be right way more often than not. And opinions may vary but there is this annoying thing mentioned previously called reality that you do occassionally have to check your opinions against in order to gauge their worth.
 
EasyEJL

EasyEJL

Never enough
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Based on your thoughts...let's think.....what happens when the supply is purchased in its entirety? Who has control?

Do you think the purchaser will be any different from those that currently manipulate the market?
the huge difference is they can't manipulate what a dollar is worth by priting more money, and they can't manipulate interest rates by using that freshly printed money to buy long term government bonds. Those two make a huge difference. A pound of gold is always a pound of gold, paper is just paper.

Look this is the amount of money in circulation (and i'm betting these #s are ridiculously low)



This has created artificial inflation. A dollar today is worth half of what a dollar in 2000 was worth. Our industry size hasn't doubled not nearly, our workforce in #s is lower today than in 2000, exports, etc are all pretty stagnant.

If you look at the CPI
uk-inflation-rpi-index.gif


pricing hasn't gone up by as much. But you know what that means? Had they NOT printed that much money and devalued the US dollar because it was a gold standard, prices would have gone DOWN over the last decade instead. People would be able to have a better standard of living on the same income, rather than a worse one as has happened.

If you look at inflation, guess when inflation totally ballooned?
Cumulative_Inflation_by_Decade.jpg


the fiscal strain of federal expenditures for the Vietnam War and persistent balance of payments deficits, led President Richard Nixon to end the direct convertibility of the dollar to gold on August 15, 1971, resulting in the system's breakdown (the "Nixon Shock").
right after we withdrew entirely from the gold standard. Funny huh? no. because now there was no pegged value for the US dollar, and the amount of dollars in circulation could vary at the unaccountable whims of the Fed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ax1
Rahl

Rahl

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
the huge difference is they can't manipulate what a dollar is worth by priting more money, and they can't manipulate interest rates by using that freshly printed money to buy long term government bonds. Those two make a huge difference. A pound of gold is always a pound of gold, paper is just paper.

Look this is the amount of money in circulation (and i'm betting these #s are ridiculously low)

This has created artificial inflation. A dollar today is worth half of what a dollar in 2000 was worth. Our industry size hasn't doubled not nearly, our workforce in #s is lower today than in 2000, exports, etc are all pretty stagnant.

If you look at the CPI
<img src="http://anabolicminds.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=57081"/>

pricing hasn't gone up by as much. But you know what that means? Had they NOT printed that much money and devalued the US dollar because it was a gold standard, prices would have gone DOWN over the last decade instead. People would be able to have a better standard of living on the same income, rather than a worse one as has happened.

If you look at inflation, guess when inflation totally ballooned?
<img src="http://anabolicminds.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=57082"/>

right after we withdrew entirely from the gold standard. Funny huh? no. because now there was no pegged value for the US dollar, and the amount of dollars in circulation could vary at the unaccountable whims of the Fed.
If prices went down so would wages as companies struggled to adjust to lower income and stationary outflows. Deflation. Job losses.
 
EasyEJL

EasyEJL

Never enough
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
If prices went down so would wages as companies struggled to adjust to lower income and stationary outflows. Deflation. Job losses.
price have gone down because of reduced cost of production due to more and more automation. compare automation levels of anything in 1970 to automation levels today. The number of employees would not have changed any differently. There is nothing wrong with deflation on its face, inflation is far worse.

See the only reason prices went up is because the fed keeps the printing presses running. The difference had it been a gold standard still would be that you'd still be earning 7% interest on your checking account, and yes, paying 20% on your credit card, 8-9% on mortgages, and 10ish on car payments. And the money you put into savings and investments wouldn't be getting devalued year by year by the very group that purports to be protecting that.
 
CDB

CDB

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
the huge difference is they can't manipulate what a dollar is worth by priting more money, and they can't manipulate interest rates by using that freshly printed money to buy long term government bonds. Those two make a huge difference. A pound of gold is always a pound of gold, paper is just paper.

Look this is the amount of money in circulation (and i'm betting these #s are ridiculously low)
They are. AMS and various other more reliable indicators are available.

This has created artificial inflation. A dollar today is worth half of what a dollar in 2000 was worth. Our industry size hasn't doubled not nearly, our workforce in #s is lower today than in 2000, exports, etc are all pretty stagnant.
Careful, you don't want to upset people with a hint of the truth. Which is if you assume a relatively static money supply then pressively increased production would mean falling prices should be the norm. And they should be, as that's one of the major ways wealth is created. The more raw stuff there is for people to buy relative to the money supply, the lower prices go. That prices have not only stayed stable but risen over the last 100 years, and when you consider how massively our productive output has increased over that time, is a testament to how insanely and massively people are being ****ed.

right after we withdrew entirely from the gold standard. Funny huh?
Pure coincidence. of course.
 
ax1

ax1

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Opinions vary. I could speak to Romney twice, and throw my support to him. Doesn't make it a good choice.

I love the rhetorical comment. :rolleyes:

I guess it can't be true because you wouldn't want it to be. ;)

That's fine you think I am wrong on the Austrian school based on our CURRENT situation. There re countless economists on both sides...so take your pick
They got it all wrong up above, no paying attention to that.

It all starts off with this and you will understand the rest.

 
CDB

CDB

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
If prices went down so would wages as companies struggled to adjust to lower income and stationary outflows. Deflation. Job losses.
Misunderstands the process. Yes, prices for labor go down, but not for all labor and the buying power of the dollar is the issue, ie real wages. Would you rather earn a billion dollars a year if a snickers costed you half a billion, or ten thousand a year if it costed a penny?

Prices have to fall because they were inflated to begin with and that leads to several conclusions: one, there was already under employment of labor and resources in sectors that weren't inflated; two, the increased wages come at the cost of someone getting less of something because there is no free lunch in this world; consumers weren't getting their desired mix of goods and services anyway because the people who were getting the new inflated money soonest were exercising artificially high buying power skewing the economy toward their wants as opposed to genuine feedback from consumers.

The crucial difference is you generally don't see the people who are getting screwed on the uptrend of a bubble, just on the downside.
 
Rahl

Rahl

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
price have gone down because of reduced cost of production due to more and more automation. compare automation levels of anything in 1970 to automation levels today. The number of employees would not have changed any differently. There is nothing wrong with deflation on its face, inflation is far worse.

See the only reason prices went up is because the fed keeps the printing presses running. The difference had it been a gold standard still would be that you'd still be earning 7% interest on your checking account, and yes, paying 20% on your credit card, 8-9% on mortgages, and 10ish on car payments. And the money you put into savings and investments wouldn't be getting devalued year by year by the very group that purports to be protecting that.
My argument was with this.

"People would be able to have a better standard of living on the same income, rather than a worse one as has happened."

That's absolutely not true. The "people's" incomes would have to contract with the overall price structure. Less people would have jobs also as companies sought out more automation to control cost in a deflationary environment. As incomes contract so does purchasing power further exacerbating the cost structure for companies.

As our money becomes more valuable relative to foreign currency exports would suffer. More jobs would begin to be pushed overseas to lower price producers.

In this scenario it's difficult to see the standard of living becoming better.

I don't entirely disagree with your principle argument that the gold standard is a better system. However you have to look at the reality of such a move. It will not produce a libertarian utopia as some would suggest.

Automation is what I do for a living so I fully understand its effect on employment.
 

Similar threads


Top