PDA

View Full Version : Reality Check: Do this or die?




Harris4LarouchePAC
10-09-2009, 09:06 AM
Audio Stream Relative to text below: http://larouchepac.com/lpactv?nid=12010


On these boards and in the general movement I hear a lot of things like: "end the fed" "competing currencies"...and all that good stuff.

What do you do when you end the federal reserve system? Everyone on this board knows that the federal reserve system is bankrupt and is going to eventually implode on itself. So what do you after you end it? Just let the whole country go into oblivion, because that is what will happen if you suddenly end it and nothing is done afterwords. You can't pull the plug on the fed and expect everything to be awesome the next day...hell...the next generation.

So, when i ask this question i get a lot of "competing currency" arguments followed by "free market" shouts and "less government" blah blah blah. Frankly, its all bullshit in regards to the immediate future. I've spent the last week in vent asking this question: "End the fed, then what?" All i have gotten is a bunch of bullshit in response that relates to nothing involving protecting our nation's populace from a total collapse. And it really shows the narrow-mindedness of what appears to be "The Cult of Ron Paul" forums.

The only option is bankruptcy, declare it...or kiss the constitution goodbye, and say hello to a dark-age and a fascist government. If we don't declare bankruptcy, then all the arguments about "competing currencies" and the rest of the relative bullshit in regards to the survival of our nation in the near future, wont even be able to be discussed simply b/c there won't be anything resembling The "United" States, the "personal liberty" message will become pointless, and to be rather honest IT IS POINTLESS NOW.

I say all this b/c this movement offers no clear "message" ,now, about what to do with the economic situation much less does this movement have a "message" to push once the federal reserve system finally collapses. A lot of what I see on this board is just mainstream bullshit. And it is depressing to have learned of the great achievements this board had during RP's campaign via the "For Liberty" movie, and then look at what it has become...the people who have left.

Do something.

Harris.

ClayTrainor
10-09-2009, 09:13 AM
Not saying i'm a huge fan of Glenn Beck.

Go to 7:45 of this video.

YouTube - Glenn Beck - A Mother's Challenge 9-25-09 Part 5/5 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySWyfGArKHw)

"How many of you are willing to lose absolutely everything, start all over, if there's some freedom for our children at the end of it."

*LOUD APPLAUSE*


End the Fed and replace it with nothing, is the only moral solution. Rough times are ahead no matter what, face it. The concept of individual liberty is all that's really important anymore. You're bankrupt, and your treasury bills won't hold value much longer, regardless of what action is taken. Go back to the original bill of rights, kick out all politicians who don't respect it to the core, and start amending from that point on. Reboot America.

brandon
10-09-2009, 09:16 AM
What do you do when you end the federal reserve system? Everyone on this board knows that the federal reserve system is bankrupt and is going to eventually implode on itself. So what do you after you end it? Just let the whole country go into oblivion, because that is what will happen if you suddenly end it and nothing is done afterwords. You can't pull the plug on the fed and expect everything to be awesome the next day...hell...the next generation.

So, when i ask this question i get a lot of "competing currency" arguments followed by "free market" shouts and "less government" blah blah blah. Frankly, its all bullshit in regards to the immediate future. I've spent the last week in vent asking this question: "End the fed, then what?" All i have gotten is a bunch of bullshit in response that relates to nothing involving protecting our nation's populace from a total collapse. And it really shows the narrow-mindedness of what appears to be "The Cult of Ron Paul" forums.

The only option is bankruptcy, declare it...or kiss the constitution goodbye, and say hello to a dark-age and a fascist government. If we don't declare bankruptcy, then all the arguments about "competing currencies" and the rest of the relative bullshit in regards to the survival of our nation in the near future, wont even be able to be discussed simply b/c there won't be anything resembling The "United" States, the "personal liberty" message will become pointless, and to be rather honest IT IS POINTLESS NOW.

I say all this b/c this movement offers no clear "message" ,now, about what to do with the economic situation much less does this movement have a "message" to push once the federal reserve system finally collapses. A lot of what I see on this board is just mainstream bullshit. And it is depressing to have learned of the great achievements this board had during RP's campaign via the "For Liberty" movie, and then look at what it has become...the people who have left.

Do something.

Harris.


The federal reserve is not bankrupt...how can you be bankrupt when you have infinite money?End the fed, replace it with nothing, let the people work out there own solutions. Central planning is what we are against, hence we aren't trying to centrally plan a "solution" for after the fed is gone.

Why are you so angry? What happened to that thread where you promised you were leaving?

PS. You said "bullshit" 4 times in your semi-coherent rant.

Imperial
10-09-2009, 09:26 AM
Audio Stream Relative to text below: http://larouchepac.com/lpactv?nid=12010


On these boards and in the general movement I hear a lot of things like: "end the fed" "competing currencies"...and all that good stuff.

What do you do when you end the federal reserve system? Everyone on this board knows that the federal reserve system is bankrupt and is going to eventually implode on itself. So what do you after you end it? Just let the whole country go into oblivion, because that is what will happen if you suddenly end it and nothing is done afterwords. You can't pull the plug on the fed and expect everything to be awesome the next day...hell...the next generation.

So, when i ask this question i get a lot of "competing currency" arguments followed by "free market" shouts and "less government" blah blah blah. Frankly, its all bullshit in regards to the immediate future. I've spent the last week in vent asking this question: "End the fed, then what?" All i have gotten is a bunch of bullshit in response that relates to nothing involving protecting our nation's populace from a total collapse. And it really shows the narrow-mindedness of what appears to be "The Cult of Ron Paul" forums.

The only option is bankruptcy, declare it...or kiss the constitution goodbye, and say hello to a dark-age and a fascist government. If we don't declare bankruptcy, then all the arguments about "competing currencies" and the rest of the relative bullshit in regards to the survival of our nation in the near future, wont even be able to be discussed simply b/c there won't be anything resembling The "United" States, the "personal liberty" message will become pointless, and to be rather honest IT IS POINTLESS NOW.

I say all this b/c this movement offers no clear "message" ,now, about what to do with the economic situation much less does this movement have a "message" to push once the federal reserve system finally collapses. A lot of what I see on this board is just mainstream bullshit. And it is depressing to have learned of the great achievements this board had during RP's campaign via the "For Liberty" movie, and then look at what it has become...the people who have left.

Do something.

Harris.

Competing currencies are good. You want something for the real world leave the Fed intact but allow competing currencies. Just reform the fed. And then it is still real world.

Harris4LarouchePAC
10-09-2009, 09:26 AM
PS. You said "bullshit" 4 times in your semi-coherent rant.

And I'll say it again too, "end it with nothing" is bullshit. The country would disentigrate and there would be nothing left, people would die by the masses. The Constitution would be gone, personal liberty would be gone.

Think outside the box already...

Epic
10-09-2009, 09:27 AM
the truth is that even RP wouldn't technically END the fed, he would just neuter it by allowing people to trade in other currencies... this means no legal tender laws, no capital gains taxes on gold, etc.

Then people wouldn't have to be tethered to the dollar.


Seriously, when people ask about how a group of people could possibly live without putting some of them in control of a central bank, I just laugh.

brandon
10-09-2009, 09:28 AM
And I'll say it again too, "end it with nothing" is bullshit. The country would disentigrate and there would be nothing left, people would die by the masses. The Constitution would be gone, personal liberty would be gone.

Think outside the box already...

Wow that's a very strong argument. I totally believe you now. :rolleyes:

TheEvilDetector
10-09-2009, 09:30 AM
Wow that's a very strong argument. I totally believe you now. :rolleyes:

He has a point. The Fed provides the oxygen we breathe and the water we drink. Its very existence also allows us to have thoughts.

RiJiD-W1LL
10-09-2009, 09:31 AM
well said! Harris4LarouchePAC



ClayTrainor - I do not understand how we can end the fed and then do nothing, how would that be the only moral thing to do?
we would have anarchy and I guarantee a military state weather its controlled by our military or a foreign military. there will always be a fight for control and power.


brandonyates- "The federal reserve is not bankrupt...how can you be bankrupt when you have infinite money?"
when you don't have any assets to back up your paper...
you also said central planning is what we are against. well I am confused who are WE? the people of the RP forum the RP supporters because right now ron paul is in the system planning.
where do you get the Harris is angry? this is the internet and I sure couldnt hear anger or yelling from him, >LOL.
and what point are you trying to make with you Bullshit, of course he used the word Bullshit because that is so far all that has been done by RP congress and our citizens.

No offence to any PAC out there doing hard work and spending their time dedication and life to our great country but seriously what has been done...

At the very least LaRouche has a plan that is proven in history to work...

Epic
10-09-2009, 09:31 AM
And I'll say it again too, "end it with nothing" is bullshit. The country would disentigrate and there would be nothing left, people would die by the masses. The Constitution would be gone, personal liberty would be gone.



This isn't serious analysis.

You are just begging the question.

"The country would disintegrate"... without their currency constantly getting devalued?

You aren't being serious. You aren't even trying to understand the problem.

Ending Fed = no more money printing = US creditors really mad + forced balanced budgets +

But no one's gonna END the fed..... it really just means let people get out of the dollar.

RiJiD-W1LL
10-09-2009, 09:34 AM
Competing currencies are good. You want something for the real world leave the Fed intact but allow competing currencies. Just reform the fed. And then it is still real world.

seriously, reform the fed then it will still be privately owned and operated and it will still be a monetary system of falsely created credit

Elwar
10-09-2009, 09:36 AM
All arguments against something that involve "If we do it all of the sudden, everything will collapse!" are pointless.

Did FDR say..."ok, instead of everyone keeping what they make, we're going to tax you all at 35% and make you file your income taxes within a year."

Or..."instead of having our money based on gold, let's change to paper notes that will lose their value by 96%"...

The thing is, competing currency is currently illegal...if it's made legal at least people who actually want a choice will be able to make that choice. It probably won't catch on right away because people are stuck in their ways, but over time the better choice will win out.

Harris4LarouchePAC
10-09-2009, 09:46 AM
I'm not challenging "the problem", I'm challenging you all for a solution.

Do I have to spell out what will happen if the federal reserve system was gone tomorrow?

The Grocery Logistics system would collapse

The Agro-industrial power, what is left of it, will shut down.

Water will shut off.

That is just a few of the "obvious."

So when you say "I'm not even beginning to understand the problem" that is simply not true. I'm thinking of how to fix the problem and keep some resemblance of a nation alive that isn't starving to death.

Harris4LarouchePAC
10-09-2009, 09:47 AM
All arguments against something that involve "If we do it all of the sudden, everything will collapse!" are pointless.

Did FDR say..."ok, instead of everyone keeping what they make, we're going to tax you all at 35% and make you file your income taxes within a year."

Or..."instead of having our money based on gold, let's change to paper notes that will lose their value by 96%"...

The thing is, competing currency is currently illegal...if it's made legal at least people who actually want a choice will be able to make that choice. It probably won't catch on right away because people are stuck in their ways, but over time the better choice will win out.

You are thinking like you are stuck in a Monetarist System, and in a world where Monetarism dominates the planet. This nation was not founded on Monetarism, Hence a CREDIT SYSTEM. Learn the difference.

Socratic Method
10-09-2009, 09:52 AM
"End the fed, then what?" All i have gotten is a bunch of bullshit in response that relates to nothing involving protecting our nation's populace from a total collapse.

What does Ron Paul say? What would he replace the IRS with? Do you remember what he said back in the debates when asked this question?


And it really shows the narrow-mindedness of what appears to be "The Cult of Ron Paul" forums.

I haven't been here anywhere near long enough to get a vibe of the place, but it seems pretty friendly like Daily Paul is. Calling any Ron Paul supporter narrow minded is pretty offensive. Calling us kooks as well, or a "cult" is not cool.

Could you please withdraw that statement? Or rephrase it.


Do something.

Like what? What would your suggestion be? Does it involve force, or does it involve freedom?

Cheers,
SM.

TheEvilDetector
10-09-2009, 10:01 AM
I'm not challenging "the problem", I'm challenging you all for a solution.

Do I have to spell out what will happen if the federal reserve system was gone tomorrow?

The Grocery Logistics system would collapse

The Agro-industrial power, what is left of it, will shut down.

Water will shut off.

That is just a few of the "obvious."

So when you say "I'm not even beginning to understand the problem" that is simply not true. I'm thinking of how to fix the problem and keep some resemblance of a nation alive that isn't starving to death.

If you are sitting at the kitchen table hungry, with a bowl of cereal and a spoon, what do you do? You begin eating the cereal with a spoon.

Now suppose someone takes the spoon away, but you are still hungry, what do you do? Starve to death?

No. You tilt the bowl in your mouth and eat the cereal that way. A minor inconvenience. Later you find a new spoon.

You see men were walking around naked tens of thousands of years ago, hungry and shivering, throwing spears at animals.

Now the situation could not be more different.

Did the Fed make all that possible? Did the Fed give you the power to adapt, to invent, to learn, to teach others?

Did the Fed give you a warm blanket on a cold night, a cold drink on a hot day?

Did the Fed tuck you into bed when you were little?

Did the Fed sing you a lullaby when you wanted to sleep?

You really think without the Fed civilisation will collapse?

What were Americans doing before the Fed (and other Central Banks for that matter)?

Rolling around on the ground like babies crying their eyes out? Unable to move their hands to their mouths to feed themselves even?

Without pieces of fed monopoly paper, people will barter and precious metals will increasingly enter into bartering transactions.
(Foreign currency may fill some of the void for a time also)

Necessity is a powerful motivator.

Harris4LarouchePAC
10-09-2009, 10:17 AM
What does Ron Paul say? What would he replace the IRS with? Do you remember what he said back in the debates when asked this question?



I haven't been here anywhere near long enough to get a vibe of the place, but it seems pretty friendly like Daily Paul is. Calling any Ron Paul supporter narrow minded is pretty offensive. Calling us kooks as well, or a "cult" is not cool.

Could you please withdraw that statement? Or rephrase it.



Like what? What would your suggestion be? Does it involve force, or does it involve freedom?

Cheers,
SM.

I will not withdrawl it, specifically because several of the RPF members have even admitted to it, more than once. As to what to do, I will make another post this afternoon explaining that.

Socratic Method
10-09-2009, 10:20 AM
I will not withdrawl it, specifically because several of the RPF members have even admitted to it, more than once. As to what to do, I will make another post this afternoon explaining that.

Ok thanks. :)

When you do, could you address my other questions I asked?

Cheers,
SM.

Elwar
10-09-2009, 10:26 AM
You are thinking like you are stuck in a Monetarist System, and in a world where Monetarism dominates the planet. This nation was not founded on Monetarism, Hence a CREDIT SYSTEM. Learn the difference.

My argument had nothing to do with Monetarism vs Credit System...it is about people who use the false argument that to enact a solution too quickly makes the solution non-viable.

Legalize Drugs...then what? Surgeons smoking crack in emergency rooms, bus drivers shooting heroin while driving school children...

End the Income Tax...then what? All government workers lose their jobs and we have no way to pay the military and Mexico invades us and we all die?

End the Fed...then what? All our money becomes worthless and we all go crazy attacking people in the streets to get food and water...

Straw man arguments. When has our government ever let anything good happen over night?

amy31416
10-09-2009, 10:26 AM
Anyone think to ask how we existed prior to the creation of the Federal Reserve?

We didn't starve, we thrived.

ClayTrainor
10-09-2009, 10:29 AM
You are thinking like you are stuck in a Monetarist System, and in a world where Monetarism dominates the planet. This nation was not founded on Monetarism, Hence a CREDIT SYSTEM. Learn the difference.

Freedom is the solution, not a different type of monetary or credit control grid. Allow individuals to set up their own credit systems, and monetary functions. Standards will be set, just not enforced. Sort of like how PS3 and xbox and Wii are the standard for Videogames, and PC, MAC and Linux are standards for computers. Sega Genesis and Commodore 64 used to be the standards, but they didn't own government granted monopolies, so the competition wiped them out.

Natural Law, Natural Rights.... This means the power to tax and inflate (counterfeit) should not be legal for individuals or groups of individuals.

Currency should be based on what the consumers would prefer to use, not an enforced central plan, even if it is democratic. Voting with your hard earned wealth gets more done than scratching names and rules on pieces of paper. We need more consumer control of money, and less central control. No more enforced monopolies, please!

wizardwatson
10-09-2009, 10:37 AM
There is already a decentralized payment clearing algorithm out there. That is all you really need to replace is the ACH system, not the Fed system. Most of what the Fed does, as has been said on this thread already, doesn't need replaced it just needs to be gone.

hugolp
10-09-2009, 10:42 AM
And I'll say it again too, "end it with nothing" is bullshit. The country would disentigrate and there would be nothing left, people would die by the masses. The Constitution would be gone, personal liberty would be gone.

You sound like Bush trying to convince the people to invade Irak.

constituent
10-09-2009, 10:51 AM
This thread is just silly.

Zippyjuan
10-09-2009, 12:11 PM
Some of the main reasons cited to get rid of the Fed is becasue they promote inflation and bubbles and contribute to the debt of the country. Somebody will still be creating money. Who? The Tresasury Department literally prints currency. They will still be around doing that job. Who decides how much they print up? The Treasury (non-elected officials often from the banking industry)? The banks- placing orders through the Treasury for how much money they think they need? Congress? Imagine them with the ability to decide how much money we should have. Let banks issue their own money and allow them to compete against each other? Chaos from so many currencies to deal with. Enron dollars. Bank of America dollars. What backs up their money- or is it fiat as well?

Does debt go away? Congress can still borrow money to pay for things they don't have the money for. That does not go away.

Let's use competing currencies agaist the fiat Federal Reserve Notes. How do you get one established? It would have to have an advantage over fiat money to encourage people to use it instead of what they have become used to using for transactions. IT must have enough value that people are willing to accept it in payment and yet not have too much value which causes people to hoard and not spend it. This is why you would not use gold and silver coins (assuming you had access to enough gold and silver to make the coins). So how do you get one out there?

Backed by gold? Again assuming you have enough gold to have a believable support for your currency. Can I trade my currency for gold from you? How is the price of your gold determined? If gold goes up or down the value of your currency will change- perhaps daily. This makes it impractical as a currency since the value of it is constantly fluxuating and prices in it must be constantly changed. When we had a national gold-backed currency the price of gold was fixed.

Just asking more questions about "then what" if you end the Fed.

RM918
10-09-2009, 12:24 PM
Fortunately the government isn't nearly efficient enough to simply make something 'disappear' in an instant. I'm sure there'd be plenty of time before and after, but folks would adapt regardless. Voluntarily ending the reserve will be far less devastating than when it implodes on itself, taking the rest of us with it.

RiJiD-W1LL
10-09-2009, 03:07 PM
did anyone actually listen to the clip,

if so did you understand it?

ClayTrainor
10-09-2009, 03:33 PM
ClayTrainor - I do not understand how we can end the fed and then do nothing, how would that be the only moral thing to do?
I didn't say do nothing, i said don't grant any more monopolies on money, and don't grant specific monopolies the ability to commit fraud (inflation). Re-read what i said.

Replace the fed with nothing, because the FED has been nothing but a destructive entity throughout it's history. The evidence is so freaking clear at this point. You do not need monopolies on money.



we would have anarchy and I guarantee a military state weather its controlled by our military or a foreign military. there will always be a fight for control and power.



Oh really? you guarantee it?

The burden of proof is on you my friend. I've heard enough of larouche in the past, i don't feel like listening to more audio of him.

Mini-Me
10-09-2009, 03:41 PM
Audio Stream Relative to text below: http://larouchepac.com/lpactv?nid=12010


On these boards and in the general movement I hear a lot of things like: "end the fed" "competing currencies"...and all that good stuff.

What do you do when you end the federal reserve system? Everyone on this board knows that the federal reserve system is bankrupt and is going to eventually implode on itself. So what do you after you end it? Just let the whole country go into oblivion, because that is what will happen if you suddenly end it and nothing is done afterwords. You can't pull the plug on the fed and expect everything to be awesome the next day...hell...the next generation.

So, when i ask this question i get a lot of "competing currency" arguments followed by "free market" shouts and "less government" blah blah blah. Frankly, its all bullshit in regards to the immediate future. I've spent the last week in vent asking this question: "End the fed, then what?" All i have gotten is a bunch of bullshit in response that relates to nothing involving protecting our nation's populace from a total collapse. And it really shows the narrow-mindedness of what appears to be "The Cult of Ron Paul" forums.
The real answer is simple: Rather than ending the Fed, we should push to legalize competing currencies without restrictions (legal tender laws, capital gains tax, etc.). That would allow for a GRADUAL shift. The correct way to end the Fed is to allow competition and watch the Fed slowly fade into oblivion.

Of course, if the Fed collapses suddenly, the currency is shot anyway, and ANY alternative - fiat or not - is basically starting from scratch.

BTW, it's pretty silly of you to associate yourself with Lyndon Larouche and then use the phrase "Cult of Ron Paul," considering this movement is about furthering the ideas and principles of freedom, whereas the Larouche movement is about Larouche the person and will most likely not survive him. :rolleyes:



The only option is bankruptcy, declare it...or kiss the constitution goodbye, and say hello to a dark-age and a fascist government. If we don't declare bankruptcy, then all the arguments about "competing currencies" and the rest of the relative bullshit in regards to the survival of our nation in the near future, wont even be able to be discussed simply b/c there won't be anything resembling The "United" States, the "personal liberty" message will become pointless, and to be rather honest IT IS POINTLESS NOW.
While I agree with you in principle about declaring bankruptcy, you seem to be arguing about what's practical for the here and now...and frankly, declaring bankruptcy could lead to some pretty catastrophic and precipitous upheavals as well, just like waiting until the currency collapses.


I say all this b/c this movement offers no clear "message" ,now, about what to do with the economic situation much less does this movement have a "message" to push once the federal reserve system finally collapses. A lot of what I see on this board is just mainstream bullshit. And it is depressing to have learned of the great achievements this board had during RP's campaign via the "For Liberty" movie, and then look at what it has become...the people who have left.

Do something.

Harris.

Mini-Me
10-09-2009, 03:56 PM
Some of the main reasons cited to get rid of the Fed is becasue they promote inflation and bubbles and contribute to the debt of the country. Somebody will still be creating money. Who? The Tresasury Department literally prints currency. They will still be around doing that job. Who decides how much they print up? The Treasury (non-elected officials often from the banking industry)? The banks- placing orders through the Treasury for how much money they think they need? Congress? Imagine them with the ability to decide how much money we should have. Let banks issue their own money and allow them to compete against each other? Chaos from so many currencies to deal with. Enron dollars. Bank of America dollars. What backs up their money- or is it fiat as well?
LOL, assuming any companies are offering currency backed by ANYTHING, wouldn't people naturally want to choose that over Enron fiat dollars? ;)


Does debt go away? Congress can still borrow money to pay for things they don't have the money for. That does not go away.
Zippy, remember that before the Fed came about, Congress didn't even HAVE a fiat money gravy train to rely on, due to the Constitution prescribing only money backed by gold and silver. It is precisely the creation of the Fed and subsequent gradual shift away from gold (due to the Fed manipulating money while we were still supposedly under a gold standard) that gave Congress the power to incessantly borrow without limit. Now, granted, getting rid of the Fed now and handing the printing press over to Congress isn't going to fix anything, which is why the RIGHT solution is simply legalizing competition to give alternatives time to get started (i.e. before an outright collapse).


Let's use competing currencies agaist the fiat Federal Reserve Notes. How do you get one established? It would have to have an advantage over fiat money to encourage people to use it instead of what they have become used to using for transactions.
I don't think this is a problem, considering how many people are already buying into gold and silver as a safe haven from currency collapse.

IT must have enough value that people are willing to accept it in payment and yet not have too much value which causes people to hoard and not spend it. This is why you would not use gold and silver coins (assuming you had access to enough gold and silver to make the coins). So how do you get one out there?
"Hoarding" is irrelevant. What's relevant is price:size ratio, i.e. having money that has a sane value for an amount you can hold in your hand. You don't want to bring truckloads of cheap money to buy a loaf of bread, nor do you want to use a microscope to count out grocery money. Thankfully, checks, credit, and electronic debits (where banks do balance transfers of actual physical currency regularly to keep from getting screwed) solve all of those problems anyway, for the most part. Paper notes acting as proxies for bank-held gold and silver would serve the same convenience purpose...although the only way they'd ever be accepted is if people had a reason to accept them, which would pretty much guarantee demand for an industry-standard design for recognizability, etc.

That said, I do think your point is worth addressing a little further: Although I think gold and silver would be king in a free currency market, there may also be demand for cheaper currency based on cheaper commodities, for the purpose of being able to make small "cash" purchases with the actual hard commodity (rather than a placeholder). What commodity would be used? I have no idea, but the market would naturally want to seek out the commodity with the most stable possible supply, which also meets the criterion of the supply being high enough to keep a good handful cheap enough to use as petty cash.


Backed by gold? Again assuming you have enough gold to have a believable support for your currency. Can I trade my currency for gold from you? How is the price of your gold determined? If gold goes up or down the value of your currency will change- perhaps daily. This makes it impractical as a currency since the value of it is constantly fluxuating and prices in it must be constantly changed.
Zippy, the value of fiat currency goes up and down daily too, does it not? Tell me, why aren't vendors scrambling to change prices day in and day out NOW, as you argue they would under a system of competing currencies? Remember, the whole reason the market is likely to choose gold and silver denominated currencies and prices (in an environment of free competition without coercion) is precisely because gold and silver have a much more stable supply than any other commodities on Earth, thereby guaranteeing more pricing stability than any other currency can offer...unless of course you can find something with a more stable supply, in which case that would become a perfectly viable alternative. You're spreading FUD about the value instability that gold and silver currencies would supposedly have, yet that's the whole problem with fiat money in the first place.


When we had a national gold-backed currency the price of gold was fixed.
Ask yourself, "What was the price of gold fixed relative to?" It was fixed ONLY relative to the notes we used as proxies for gold, which we called dollars...mainly because the word dollar referred literally to a unit of weight! Of course, fixing the prices of gold and silver relative to each other was a mistake, since that allowed their proper price ratio to get out of sync. Still, the price of gold was not fixed relative to any meaningful commodities, goods, or services. By the same token, the price of gold is JUST as fixed today, i.e. the value of a gram of gold is always equal to a gram of gold. In a sane world, paper notes representing gold/silver/etc. would literally be denominated in weight, and so would written checks, electronic credits and debits, etc. Any silly proprietary units of measurement requiring an arbitrary fixed conversion factor from the actual weight of real currency would simply be pushed out of the market for their inconvenience and silliness.


Just asking more questions about "then what" if you end the Fed.

ClayTrainor
10-09-2009, 03:56 PM
The real answer is simple: Rather than ending the Fed, we should push to legalize competing currencies without restrictions (legal tender laws, capital gains tax, etc.). That would allow for a GRADUAL shift. The correct way to end the Fed is to allow competition and watch the Fed slowly fade into oblivion.

Of course, if the Fed collapses suddenly, the currency is shot anyway, and ANY alternative - fiat or not - is basically starting from scratch.

BTW, it's pretty silly of you to associate yourself with Lyndon Larouche and then use the phrase "Cult of Ron Paul," considering this movement is about furthering the ideas and principles of freedom, whereas the Larouche movement is about Larouche the person and will most likely not survive him. :rolleyes:


While I agree with you in principle about declaring bankruptcy, you seem to be arguing about what's practical for the here and now...and frankly, declaring bankruptcy could lead to some pretty catastrophic and precipitous upheavals as well, just like waiting until the currency collapses.

Dammit, i'm really starting to respect the way you think, man. Well said. :cool:

Zippyjuan
10-09-2009, 04:10 PM
Zippy, the value of fiat currency goes up and down daily too, does it not? Tell me, why aren't vendors scrambling to change prices day in and day out NOW, as you argue they would under a system of competing currencies. Remember, the whole reason the market is likely to choose gold and silver denominated currencies and prices (in an environment of free competition without coercion) is precisely because gold and silver have a much more stable supply than any other commodities on Earth, thereby guaranteeing more pricing stability than any other currency can offer...unless of course you can find something with a more stable supply, in which case that would become a perfectly viable alternative. You're spreading FUD about the value instability that gold and silver currencies would supposedly have, yet that's the whole problem with fiat money in the first place.

Were prices stable when you had gold backed money in the US? Were they more stable before the Fed? (yes, we have had other central banks in the past too).
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/US_Historical_Inflation_Ancient.svg/800px-US_Historical_Inflation_Ancient.svg.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_Historical_Inflation_Ancient.svg


"Hoarding" is irrelevant. What's relevant is price:size ratio, i.e. having money that has a sane value for an amount you can hold in your hand. You don't want to bring truckloads of cheap money to buy a loaf of bread, nor do you want to use a microscope to count out grocery money. Thankfully, checks, credit, and electronic debits (where banks do balance transfers of actual physical currency regularly to keep from getting screwed) solve all of those problems anyway, for the most part.


Maybe hoarding is the wrong word- my point was that any competing currency has to have enough value to be seen as more desirable to use than the currency currently out there but not so valuable that people want to keep it instead of spending it. If it is not circulating then it is not a useful currency. Dollar coins failed because people were not willing to use them. For more and more people money is a piece of plastic and numbers on a computer.


Zippy, remember that before the Fed came about, Congress didn't even HAVE a fiat money gravy train to rely on, due to the Constitution prescribing only money backed by gold and silver. It is precisely the creation of the Fed and subsequent gradual shift away from gold (due to the Fed manipulating money while we were still supposedly under a gold standard) that gave Congress the power to incessantly borrow without limit. Now, granted, getting rid of the Fed now and handing the printing press over to Congress isn't going to fix anything, which is why the RIGHT solution is simply legalizing competition to give alternatives time to get started (i.e. before an outright collapse).


I see your point on that. It is the ability to borrow which needs to be changed- I whole heartedly agree on that. It is just that getting rid of the Fed does nothing to address that issue. A balanced budget amendment would be a viable tool.

Mini-Me
10-09-2009, 04:49 PM
Dammit, i'm really starting to respect the way you think, man. Well said.
Haha, thanks...I've always liked your posts too. :)


Were prices stable when you had gold backed money in the US? Were they more stable before the Fed? (yes, we have had other central banks in the past too).
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/US_Historical_Inflation_Ancient.svg/800px-US_Historical_Inflation_Ancient.svg.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_Historical_Inflation_Ancient.svg

While the larger post-Revolutionary fluctuations correspond with government "screwups" (Civil War, etc.), I agree that your chart still shows numerous smaller short-term fluctuations. Even so, 19th century fluctuations look worse than they really are by today's standards, since we used to calculate price inflation more honestly...unless the fluctuations were adjusted based on today's standards, in which case I'm curious just how many statistics we have from that period that would make such recalibration possible. Anyway, it's important to note that this chart ends before the heavy inflation of our own decade. Plus, even this chart shows fluctuations during times of relatively free banking (such as the Jacksonian era up to the Civil War) to be much smaller than those of the 20th century, and they're obviously much less one-sided. It's possible that even the small fluctuations can be explained by Austrians in terms of their own theory, but maybe that's not the case too. Either way, I'll freely admit that I don't have the knowledge or expertise to do so, so I'm taking the chart mostly at face value.

All that said, you cannot ignore the fact that despite short-term fluctuations under the gold standard, prices were nevertheless stable in the long run, i.e. the currency did not steadily depreciate as it does under the reign of a central bank. A dollar near the beginning of the 19th century was worth approximately the same as a dollar near the beginning of the 20th. The difference is profound when you consider the impact the different patterns have on the long-term value of peoples' savings past the yearly fluctuations.



Maybe hoarding is the wrong word- my point was that any competing currency has to have enough value to be seen as more desirable to use than the currency currently out there but not so valuable that people want to keep it instead of spending it. If it is not circulating then it is not a useful currency. Dollar coins failed because people were not willing to use them. For more and more people money is a piece of plastic and numbers on a computer.
I think we're in agreement here then. Although I agree gold and silver currency would be far too valuable to directly use sane amounts as petty cash, there would be no real obstacles to checks, debit payments, credit payments, etc. (with timely physical currency transfers between banks of course), or even paper proxy certificates (or cheaper commodities used as petty cash). :)


I see your point on that. It is the ability to borrow which needs to be changed- I whole heartedly agree on that. It is just that getting rid of the Fed does nothing to address that issue. A balanced budget amendment would be a viable tool.
At this point, I agree that directly abolishing the Fed wouldn't eliminate the endless borrowing problem that creating the Fed started. A balanced budget amendment would definitely do wonders to fix the borrowing problem, so long as it was actually followed. Getting rid of legal tender laws, capital gains taxes, etc. and legalizing competing currencies would gradually accomplish the same thing, since people would gradually shift away from dollars into competitors, and the Fed would lose more and more influence until becoming entirely irrelevant. After all, the Treasury may be able to print fiat currency, but it can't print actual commodities of value. ;)

Unfortunately, seeing either of our solutions from the federal government is pretty unlikely anytime soon. :-/ It's kind of funny how we talk about our preferred solutions when we have so little power and so little time to see them to fruition. It's sad, because there are real opportunities to end the insanity now, but it may very well continue on its current course until collapsing...and then who knows what'll happen? Hopefully we'll see secession and more decentralization, but we'll probably be looking at even more centralization instead, like regional or one-world government. Blah.

Austrian Econ Disciple
10-09-2009, 05:17 PM
Audio Stream Relative to text below: http://larouchepac.com/lpactv?nid=12010


On these boards and in the general movement I hear a lot of things like: "end the fed" "competing currencies"...and all that good stuff.

What do you do when you end the federal reserve system? Everyone on this board knows that the federal reserve system is bankrupt and is going to eventually implode on itself. So what do you after you end it? Just let the whole country go into oblivion, because that is what will happen if you suddenly end it and nothing is done afterwords. You can't pull the plug on the fed and expect everything to be awesome the next day...hell...the next generation.

So, when i ask this question i get a lot of "competing currency" arguments followed by "free market" shouts and "less government" blah blah blah. Frankly, its all bullshit in regards to the immediate future. I've spent the last week in vent asking this question: "End the fed, then what?" All i have gotten is a bunch of bullshit in response that relates to nothing involving protecting our nation's populace from a total collapse. And it really shows the narrow-mindedness of what appears to be "The Cult of Ron Paul" forums.

The only option is bankruptcy, declare it...or kiss the constitution goodbye, and say hello to a dark-age and a fascist government. If we don't declare bankruptcy, then all the arguments about "competing currencies" and the rest of the relative bullshit in regards to the survival of our nation in the near future, wont even be able to be discussed simply b/c there won't be anything resembling The "United" States, the "personal liberty" message will become pointless, and to be rather honest IT IS POINTLESS NOW.

I say all this b/c this movement offers no clear "message" ,now, about what to do with the economic situation much less does this movement have a "message" to push once the federal reserve system finally collapses. A lot of what I see on this board is just mainstream bullshit. And it is depressing to have learned of the great achievements this board had during RP's campaign via the "For Liberty" movie, and then look at what it has become...the people who have left.

Do something.

Harris.

Wrong. Basically, we would follow a similar path as the US did after the Civil War, however, with some differences. To pay the debt simply sell all Public Land. Not all at once, or else the prices would be astronomically low. Over a 5 to 10 year period we could easily sell off all the land and pay our debt. In that time, we can also set, say a 3 year timeline to end the fed. In that time, we would repel all legal tender laws, and allow for the competition of currencies along with the Federal Reserve. You wouldn't be forced to use FRN's, however if you still wanted to, you could.

Austrian Economics is mainstream bullshit?! Ha, we are laughed at, at most major Universities, by most Economists (Who know jack shit about Capitalism), and by just about every major power player.

Let the market, which is the people, decide the best currency. Currencies that are the strongest (Naturally, sound money), would become widely used and currencies that are fiat in nature would become quickly out-dated and unused. The best currency wins, or multiple currency. We can't predict the specifics of the currency, all we can predict is that the market will choose the best currencies. If you had a choice right now, to use FRN's, or use 100% Gold Standard sound money, 100% Silver sound money, or a floating Gold/Silver standard (Not bi-metallism), who honestly would choose FRNs? Money is simply the medium of exchange in commerce.

LibertyEagle
10-10-2009, 08:19 AM
Austrian Economics is mainstream bullshit?!

Uh, that is not what he said.

Socratic Method
10-10-2009, 08:51 AM
Uh, that is not what he said.

What did he say? :confused:

Cheers,
SM.

brandon
10-10-2009, 09:58 AM
A lot of what I see on this board is just mainstream bullshit.
...

Live_Free_Or_Die
10-10-2009, 11:30 AM
nt

max
10-10-2009, 11:43 AM
What did Hitler do to save Germany from endless inflationary debt and pull it out of the Depression?

1. He ignored the Versailles Treaty debt and said "Fuck you Central Bankers, we aint paiyin."

2. He issued interest free/debt free currency that was scientifically managed so that it correlated to production.

Germay's dead economy came roaring back to life while the rest of the world was mired in depression.

The German Mark was the strongest currency known to man....and it was fiat currency. It was better than gold because it was honestly and scientifically managed.

We need to declare bankruptcy and REPUDIATE THE DEBT.....WE ALSO NEED TO END THE GLOBAL EMPIRE...

Those two steps would allow us to end the income tax.