Comments on: Why conservatives spin fairytales about the gold standard Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 By: AlkalineState Mon, 23 Sep 2013 20:20:26 +0000 Gold fluctuates in value. It is also easily manipulated since large holders can dump it on the market, wait for the ensuing panic, buy more after it tanks. Dump again. That’s how the price crank works.

So Why would gold be any more solid now than any other commodity? The whole notion of returning to the Gold standard is borne in ignorance and intellectual laziness.

By: highlandlad Mon, 23 Sep 2013 18:22:24 +0000 The article is simply twaddle. The purpose of the Federal Reserve System was, and still is, to centralize control over the economic activities of the United States and exert indirect control over the World economy through the agent of the U.S. dollar, and to ensure that that currency would be “elastic”, i.e., inflationary and made available to Wall Street and the Money-Center Banks in NY and Chicago whenever a run on the banks threatened.

The author is correct in stating that borrowers are disadvantaged by a hard currency which is resistant to money-inflation, and that a hard currency favours those who save and lend over those who borrow and spend, but absent the savers where would the borrowers obtain the funds to spend? It is also incorrect to state that a rate of inflation of 2% to 3% is low “historically”. Inflation at that level is low relative to the inflation rate experienced in the 1970s and 1980s, but it is high relative to the rate of inflation experienced in the 1960s and the 1990s and the early years of the present Century.

The author is incorrect in stating that following the establishment of the Federal Reserve System in 1913 that the gold was no longer in circulation. Until Nixon disavowed the ‘gold standard’, in order to prevent France from draining the gold reserves of the United States by redeeming inflated U.S. dollars for gold at the Treasury as required by law, the dollar was pegged to a fixed rate of exchange ($35 per oz.-Troy). Nixon’s move collapsed the Bretton Woods currency exchange arrangement and led directly to the inflationary period of the 1970s and 1980s. Volker’s move to quash inflation in the early 1980s through high interest rates crushed the economy and led to recession. The subsequent boom and bust economic fluctuations in the U.S. and World economies is directly tied to the alternating bouts of money-inflation and interest rate hikes that the Federal Reserve has imposed on the U.S., and through integration of the U.S. financial system with foreign financial centres, on the World economy at large.

Krugman’s hypotheses are largely bunkum. Inflation is a scourge in hand-maiden’s clothing. It led to the 2007-2008 financial system crash; and it will lead to an even deeper financial system correction when the latest Fed originated bout of inflationary money expansion terminates.

The FOMC’s recent statements give an inkling of just how poor the current U.S. economy is. But the FOMC is pushing on a string. Its QE-3 is of doubtful value. A proposal purportedly floated by Dr. Janet Yellen calling for the implementation of Fed policies of negative nominal interest rates will only drive the economy further into the ground. Fiscal and regulatory policies of Congress and the Whitehouse are having a strongly negative impact on the economy and employment. Under the combination of Federal Reserve inflationary money actions and politically dysfunctional fiscal and regulatory policies, the U.S., and indirectly the World, is facing a prolonged period of economic stagnation inflation — our old friend from the 1970s “stagflation”.

By: rhess595 Sat, 21 Sep 2013 14:51:27 +0000 The above analysis totally fails because it doesn’t recognize that the tea party rural and small town populists are angry because they(like working Democrats in the cities) have been ripped off by the financial sharks who control both the Republican party power structure and the current administration. Sure they lash out at liberals and socialists(does anyone actually know any?) and the usual targets in their brainwashed minds. But at heart this is a revolution against a Wall Street controlled dysfunctional government.

Anyone who believes that inflation is at a historic low hasn’t been buying his own necessities. We know from history that governments have for a variety of reasons become insolvent and debased metal and paper(or electronic) currencies. Gold has endured for use in currencies for many thousands of years because it is not easily duplicated. Of course governments have mixed cheaper metals in coins, and the latest innovation of the Wall Streeters is manipulating the nominal price of gold.

We are going through a doorway in history to a new future with a different power structure. The old powers are dysfunctional and not meeting our needs as a national community. Funny how the demand for physical gold endures no matter what the Wall Street paper price, whether you’re a tea party rancher or liberal school teacher, a Chinese father or an Indian mother.

By: OneOfTheSheep Fri, 20 Sep 2013 19:18:16 +0000 @usagadfly,

I’m greatly encouraged by your willingness to consider the truths all of us would change if we could. Some are truly cruel and unjust.

Being “part of a community” means accepting and conforming to the core beliefs of that community. The “community” is able to function because of MUTUAL commitment.

It seems to me the “debate” you advance is much like that of “which comes first, the chicken or the egg”. Fascinating, but of little practical significance. Let’s remove emotion from it.

If you are cold and have an empty wood stove, you can present infinite arguments to that stove why it should heat you before your blood flows sufficiently to go out in the cold and chop fuel to feed it. None will get you “heat in advance”. It is simple fact that you must get off your butt and go chop wood, bring it in and feed it to the stove before it can or will offer the warmth you desire.

In the same, sense, people must make individual decisions as to whether or not they will labor for the “common good”, because only AFTER they have done so and offered up the fruits of their labor does the “community comprised solely of such contributing individuals” have “community resources” to dispense. To such extent as they CHOOSE to distribute to those who have not contributed, they increasingly risk their ability to “take care of themselves” in “worse times”.

Some of those receiving unearned benefits will, instead of contributing back to the community that helped them, decide that they were entitled to the help received merely because they exist. Those will NEVER become “contributing members of the benevolent society.

Quite the contrary. If the benevolent society is democratic, it’s very benevolence creates a “counter-society” that, once a majority, can and will destroy it. Any presumptions as to the basic “good” of human nature sufficiently in conflict with Darwin’s “survival of the fittest” evidence place the long term survival of both you D your society at increasing risk.

So I think you have it backwards. Obligation (commitment) must precede “rights”. I do agree that “You cannot have one when it is convenient and not have the other when it is inconvenient.” But most of us also understand that we cannot give away that which we have not earned. Why can’t “our” government comprehend that simple immutable reality?

By: usagadfly Fri, 20 Sep 2013 17:19:09 +0000 @one of the sheep:

Generally I think you are correct about this.

I do think, however, that either people are a part of a certain community or they are not. If you exclude obligations to people from your community, you also exclude their obligations to you. If that is not so, then they are as much property as a cow. You take by right but do not give by obligation. That simply only happens with human property.

Also, people have the right to association, meaning they can be part of a community if they are welcome and so choose, or not. But obligations come with “rights”. You cannot have one when it is convenient and not have the other when it is inconvenient.

Actually, “toilet paper” money has been manipulated to benefit the rich, not the poor. The problem is that it is very difficult to trust any kind of banker, central or otherwise. Finding an honest politician with integrity is likewise hard to do.

By: COindependent Fri, 20 Sep 2013 14:51:50 +0000 @Mac Do you think inflation reflects the purchasing power and value of the dollar over time? My position is that by allowing our government to continually pump dollars into the economy it debases the value of the dollar. And, by linking the dollar to gold (at some fixed rate–pick one say $800 ounce) would inhibit the expansion of the money supply without the associated economic growth, and thus underwriting the longer term purchasing power of a dollar.

By: OneOfTheSheep Fri, 20 Sep 2013 00:48:10 +0000 Mac20nine,

When the Fed does precisely what it must to facilitate sustaining the “status quo” (i.e. runaway spending without appropriate priorities) what difference is there of substance whether it is the Fed or Congress stealing the purchasing power of “we, the people”? Without AGREED priorities, there is no limit to the size of government or the amount it can and will take from us in taxes.

When the Fed does precisely what it must to facilitate sustaining the “status quo” (i.e. runaway spending without appropriate priorities) what difference is there of substance whether it is the Fed or Congress stealing the purchasing power of “we, the people”? Without AGREED priorities, there is no limit to the size of government or the amount it can and will take from us in taxes.

Either way it’s “our” government, but one in which the average citizen’s voice and interests are ignored. We “citizens” are right back where we were in 1776, subject to taxation without [meaningful] representation, accountability or limit. Yes, there are many, ,many “out there” in increasing financial trouble.

Some have lost “jobs”; and yet there is no such thing as a “job. There exists only an employer’s “need”, and such “needs” come and go and change with “progress” and as society changes. So there has ceased to be a “market” for that which some have to offer…like makers of buggy whips when automobiles replaced horses. Good for society, hell on the individual. No “right” No “wrong”. It is what it is.

Of those “on the bottom” of our economy, more than a few that make some half-hearted inquiries AFTER their unemployment runs out (after TWO YEARS!) then find an Esquire (attorney) to “wiggle” them on Social Security Disability and Medicare until they are old enough to collect regular Social Security. Sorry, I don’t view that as a “good faith” effort to be a productive member of our society.

The clock ticks without pause. The consequences of denial and procrastination are dire, so suck it up and “deal with it” (or not). Food and shelter are more easily available than through most of history. Everything else is optional. Make sure that sense of entitlement is the first thing tossed out the door. No one hungry and cold is “special”. Life gives those on the bottom few trophies.

Homes are lost when mortgages fall behind. Credit is lost if one blows it without prioritizing cash flow. Those who saved for a “rainy day” have more time and options than those who lived paycheck to paycheck. Those who act quickly and correctly suffer less in adversity than those who are overwhelmed.

All are NOT created equal in originality, flexibility or even risk assessment and mitigation. In the end we must each do what we can, where we are, with what we have. With little practice, few Americans are “good” at handling hard times. Who, precisely, promised life would be easy? It can be a real bitch at times.

Anyone who opens their eyes can see that our society needs fewer and fewer people to do what must be done. I have no idea what many younger people will do “for a living”. Businesses as we speak are revising their “needs” (positions) such that anyone warm and breathing that can read, write and do basic math at Junior High level can be contributing “100%” after a week or two of “on the job training”.

Hire only part time and employers pay no sick leave, overtime, continuing education, medical insurance and pensions. Such workers are as light bulbs. One fails, pop another in. No difference between them. No learning of skills, no advancement. Welcome to the future.

How do I think some people are going to react? With frustration and hostility towards anyone not suffering as they are. For those in the wrong place, things can and likely will get real nasty real quick. As the Boy Scouts say, be prepared (as best one can). Have a nice day, and please don’t kill the messenger.

By: notnews Thu, 19 Sep 2013 20:24:32 +0000 I can hardly believe that anyone who knows what money is can think the gold standard is an option. This ties to so many issues it almost takes your breath away. I guess I just wish someone had mentioned “The Wizard of Oz” for the fun of it or bitcoin just to cause trouble.

By: Mac20nine Thu, 19 Sep 2013 18:10:23 +0000 @Zotdoc: again, the author never stated that the gold standard caused wealth inequality.

By: Mac20nine Thu, 19 Sep 2013 17:56:54 +0000 @OneOfTheSheep: I’d suggest the Fed re: debasing the dollar, not Congress. I’d also relate you open up your eyes to the many having trouble finding work, not the ones cheating the system. They do exist, they are trying, they are not all watching television all day. You have read of the jobless recovery, outsourcing, age discrimination and weakness in manufacturing I take it?

I think you’re getting warm with your comment about not being able to plan for a future. If you can view the Recession as impacting those on the lowest rungs most harshly you might also be able to envision inserting ‘working class’ or for some, ‘unemployed’ wherever you see a ‘*’.

‘When * citizens CAN NOT PLAN a future with reasonable financial certainty and security they DO NOT HAVE a future worthy of preparation.’ Now think about the 50 year old machinist tossed on the street, as well as at least some of the urban poor re: ‘Nor the purpose or motivation to better themselves’. It’s hard to pick yourself up and re-train after a lifetime of honest work when your 401k’s tanked, your home is worth less or your pension gobbled up by “investors”. Or to go work a McJob while you figure out how to pivot and maybe your wife left you.

It’s hard for some that never got a decent education to better themselves when all most of them can reasonably hope for is working class jobs and what they’re becoming. When they can’t afford good education or training. Doesn’t excuse the cheaters but how many or the 8+% do you think are in desperate straits right now? If you think you’ve got it bad think about those hit even harder. How many kids whose parents REALLY need those food stamps? Both working full time and trying to find a solution? Maybe Dad should relocate to Nebraska.

‘When there is no certain reward for industry and effort beyond just that which allows the * exploited to survive’, due to how government and business is hollowing out the remaining dollars from the plebs, how do you think some people are going to react?