http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=105934.200
By the way, it is noteworthy to mention Lincoln did the exact opposite in regards to foreign relations , and Teddy Roosevelt had British Traitors all over his immediate family.
Actually, without Lincoln allying with the Czar of Russia, the Civil War would have destroyed the United States.
Teddy Roosevelt was put in to destroy relations with certain countries to pave the way for WWI
-Revolt 426
_________________________________
Revolt426 - Thanks for publishing the articles.
The headline caught my attention.
I don't have anything to contribute but I am compelled to say that diversity of opinion and perspective should be held sacred. I appreciate the hard work and information you are sharing.
Regardless of any particular economic theory, corruption always seems inevitable. Perhaps the root of the problem exists in the hearts of men?
-sig_garrett
__________________________________
There will always be corruption, but it AMAZED me to see that on the Campaign for Liberty website!, good lord.
Teddy Roosevelt's Rough Riders started the god d___ spanish american war - McKinley was opposed to it , Roosevelt started it.......
The Lincoln issue has been debunked IN DETAIL numerous times on this forum, Lord Palmerston , Prime Minister of Britain wanted to cut the United States in half. So he funded the Confederacy, gave them free trade agreements for cheap slave cotton and sent in military advisors like CONFEDERATE GENERAL ALBERT PIKE.
And the Bashing of John F Kennedy, as if he was responsible for the CIA hitting Cuba behind his back.... he actually attempted to DESTROY the CIA.
Then the final oddity, Calvin Coolidge (Of all people) ranked 8th BEST President, the guy responsible for allowing his Treasury Secretary to create a bubble (Andrew Mellon) that was imploded in 1929.......
I Just can't believe what i am seeing here......
-Revolt 426
___________________________________________
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=105934.240
This is nonsense to you:
http://www.monetary.org/mengerrefutation.html
.....The Circularity of Menger's Reasoning
There is a degree of circularity of reasoning in Menger's causes of liquidity and time and place factors. Remember, he is supposed to be defining causes of liquidity of a commodity, not causes of acceptability of a money. Of Menger's 6 causes (see Appendix 1), points 1,2,and 6 really reduce to one point - the effective demand for the commodity. Point number 2 furthermore should have referred to the trading power rather than purchasing power, as he is discussing a pre-monetary situation. Cause #6 would be entirely reflected in the effective demand.
Causes #3 and #4 are reducible to the supply of the commodity.
So we are left with 3 causes of liquidity - supply, demand, and his cause #5, the development of the market and of speculation in the commodity.
The circularity arises from the fact that cause # 5 can be viewed as much as a defining element of liquidity, as a cause of it. And indeed Menger uses it in that way! This can be seen in his use of quantity or volume of trading, as a qualification of liquidity:
"Again, account must be taken of the quantitative factor in the liquidity of commodities."(p.11)
But the quantitative factor is a part of cause number 5 - the development of markets. Thus the tight spread and volume traded in the market (quantity) becomes his definition of liquidity. Thus liquidity, by one defining element of it (development of market mechanisms) causes liquidity by another defining element of it (the tight spread).
So liquidity is caused by liquidity. I stress that I'm not.........
The Volatility of The Precious Metals Against Menger's Thesis
In fact, historical experience with the precious metals, in cases where they were and were not money, has demonstrated both periods of abrupt short lived changes in value in terms of other commodities, and of long drawn out changes where gold and silver lost as much as 80% of their value, and never recovered it.
For example in Greece, after Alexander's conquests and importation of captured gold, prices are reputed to have risen over 50%. In Italy, we read in Mommsen’s classic work of "The severe gold crisis - as about the year 600 AU.... when in consequence of the discovery of the Taurisian gold seams, gold as compared with silver fell at once in Italy by about 33%"........
....For more recent periods, when for all practical purposes, gold had lost its governmental sanction as money, it became even more volatile.
From 1971 to 1974 we saw gold increase over 500% from $38 to $200 an ounce.
In 1975, we saw gold drop almost exactly 50%, from $ 200 an ounce to $103.
We then saw an increase of over 700% to over $850 an ounce, and then a multiyear decline to $232. Now its reached $570 an ounce! It’s not possible to explain these movements as just due to changes in the dollar. Gold is volatile!
___________________________
No, let the Private Sector beware, we are not going to let our population die regardless of what you think the CAUSE of the problem was, the mere fact that deflation would still force millions out of their homes and you have no problem with that tends to turn me away from the Austrian "Solution". The problem is Private Sector issuence of currency and DERIVATIVES. DERIVATIVES DERIVATIVES DERIVATIVES, not housing prices, not fiat currency, not a lack of a utopian free market where the Government is able to "Enforce" all fraud and all is well.As for "Not being able to do anything about it" , the Home Owners and Bank Protection act would infact keep people in their houses and allow banks to continue to issue productive credit....... so , infact - you don't allow an orchestrated collapse to wreck the planet - you FIGHT IT.
It is noteworthy to mention Freddie and Fannie had to be Privatized in order for that to occur , and thankfully - they did not use a mask and revealed it was not the Government that did this, but a Privatized Banking Empire!.
Oh and to add, do not post that there was a bubble before being imploded (Which was in my original post) during the 1929-1933 period, just answer my question has to how the outstanding debt (The massive amounts of outstanding debt , a number un-imaginable) is going to correct itself when the contracts will not allow this, the Austrian school denies the Government can EVER intervene & if all loans were allowed to default the entire system would collapse and destroy the republic resulting in martial law and chaos.
No, actually 8 Billion dollars of grant money was issued for a Mag Lev (which would require over a hundred billion) and he wishes to build wind mills to replace functioning coal fired power plants - the true REVERSAL of progress for mankind.He isn't building anything, all so called "infrastructure" in his budget is in the drastic minority and is window dressing to sell to the progressives in congress, nothing more.
-Revolt 426
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=12517
____________________________________________
____________________________
Quote from: planning4acrash on June 05, 2009, 07:30:22 PM
The UK and US governments, and their politicians, and you, once you have national insurance, are listed as corporations. All listed on "Dunn and Bradsheet". All statute laws are contract laws under corporate admiralty law. So, the definition between public and private is, at the root asinine. There is corporate tyranny, vs liberty. That's all.
This argument only exists in the brain of one who cannot comprehend reality or history..... given the fact that you live under a monarchy i can understand where you are coming from, however in the United States we have broken free of Corporatist Fascism WITHOUT wiping billions of people out and we intend to do so again.
You admire Ron Paul, your argument assumes Ron Paul is part of the Corporatist State just because he is a politician. I admire others like Marcy Kaptur who are not afraid to publically address Derivatives. I do not think she is part of the Private Corporatist state nor do i think it is impossible for the people to regain control of their Government (which has been done numerous times here in the United States)..... while others may maintain "The Government is always the enemy EXCEPT FOR RON PAUL"........ i would just have to disagree with that.
In addition, the definition of Liberty is flexible in terms of the Austrian school, because according to you, allowing a systemic collapse of the entire economic system is freedom! .... well i beg to differ because i do not think de-populating the planet has any resemblence to "Liberty"..... i addressed this in the original post specifically with Exchange Rate Controls (Amongst other things). So the problem is, your definition of Liberty is quite inaccurate because private bankers looting elderly peoples pensions and 401k's is not Liberty in my view.
_______________________________
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=105934.280
There is also the additional tidbit that he has allowed the FED to continue Bernanke's insane "Quantitive Easing" , based on Milton Freidman's quanative theory of money. The printing and loaning of 9 to 11 Trillion dollars to finance capitalism as opposed to production/infrastructure.
I realize Obama touts his love for Lincoln (appearently an appeal to the african american community) however, he is the true ANTI-LINCOLN.
The clouded word "Fiscal Stimulus" may be taking you for a ride on propaganda express.
What is now considered a fiscal stimulus is to print currency and give it to people (Banks in the majority), and the drastic reduction of all medciaid, medicare and social security payouts.
So, fiscal stimulus to Obama = Stimulating the Finance Capitalist Bankers and letting the population drop dead.
Well, Obama has not put any insolvent banks into bankruptcy, and a private banking system still issues our currency (We cannot issue sovereign credit) - so him just building infrastructure would be a radical improvement but would not address many issues (Like the 1.5 Quadrillion dollar Derivative bubble) - so no, he would have to do alot more than that to win my support.
Building infrastructure without reforming the entire monetary system and wiping derivatives out is not going to work, the Derivative monster is crushing all bank ability to issue credit.
_____________________________________
From geolibertarian:
The problem is that "fiscal stimulus" usually means borrowing the money in question before "spending" it. This borrowing aspect is the literal opposite of what I'm proposing:
----------------------------------
http://www.wealthmoney.org/happen.html
What Would Happen?
If the American Transportation Act were passed and became effective January 1, 2006, you would no longer pay tax on gasoline, diesel or other fuels. You would pay no tax on oil products, no tollway fees, no axle taxes, license fees, or other taxes normally collected to pay for roads and bridges.
Taxes to build and maintain roads and bridges would no longer be collected. No more bonding would be necessary for road & bridge construction and maintenance. Property taxes would be lower. All new money would now be created and exchanged into circulation as a Wealth (debt-free) payment for the labor and raw resources used in combination to build and maintain our roads and bridges. These are a Wealth produced that benefit ALL citizens equally. This was the principle behind the 'monetizing' of gold and silver bullion Free as a Wealth to the people who produced it and a debt-free medium of exchange to ALL. The government would hold the roads and bridges in "trust" for the people who would thereafter use them free-of-charge with no taxation or fees of any kind. The new money would represent the Wealth of our Nation (peoples' labor and raw sources) just like gold certificates once represented the Wealth metal money produced by the people and deposited with the Treasury. The certificate represented the production and was as good as the Wealth (gold or silver) it represented.
[Continued...]
----------------------------------
There's a fundamental difference between monetizing debt (as Keynesian borrow-and-spenders would have us do) and monetizing wealth.
Logged
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"For the first years of [Ludwig von] Mises’s life in the United States...he was almost totally dependent on annual research grants from the Rockefeller Foundation.” -- Richard M. Ebeling
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=162212.0
_____________________________
Economic Reform?
If they are not spent productively you get an economic breakdown like we are currently seeing, this can lead to inflation.
The point of spending them into productivity is that productivity (Labor) is required for Capitalism to exist.
Our current workforce is a "Service Economy" meaning, there is virtually no production left due to outsourcing to slave wage nations via "Free Trade" agreements.....
You cannot subsitute production with services, because it leads to the current situation. I hope that answers the question.
-Revolt 426
_______________________________________
I would not object to calling what I'm advocating "economic" stimulus, but calling it "fiscal" stimulus implies that the money being spent on public infrastructure is obtained either by taxing it first or by borrowing it first. And under my system it is neither taxed nor borrowed, but "issued."
If your definition of fiscal stimulus includes the option of issuing debt-free currency to fund infrastructure (as opposed to taxing or borrowing debt-based currency to fund it), then by all means call it that.
I was simply acknowledging the fact that, since the average American isn't even familiar with that option (yet), his definition of fiscal stimulus is usually limited to the other two options of tax-and-spend and borrow-and-spend, and that it would therefore likely cause unnecessary confusion in the minds of relative newcomers to lump all three options into the same category.
That's merely a point of clarification. I'm not even arguing with anyone at this point.
-geolibertarian
_______________________________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment