The Austrian School Deception : Austerity , Economic Snake Oil and Genocide

[planning4acrash]

Now, can some of the doubters see, that Revolting and Globalist Unlibertarian are the snake oil sellers?

Like, we can trust Tarpley and anybody else to print greenbacks wisely? When in actual fact, we can devolve the purse to ourselves with sound money?

For example, if you have sound money (backed by gold, ideally via the end of legal tender laws), then, as savings go up, interest rates go down, and vice versa. So, with sound, Austrian style money, every purchase and every transaction with your bank is an actual vote for the economy and interest rates. That is the beauty of freedom. Rather than having a council of wise men controlling the system for their self interest, you get the entire human action of all people determining interest rates, savings rates, investment rates, etc.

That is why democracy is a scam. With freedom from government, every one of your actions is a vote for the direction of humanity, with socialism, your human actions are suppressed by the manipulation of politicians, their fascist partners, and big government bureaucracy.

Do check out all the wonderful podcasts on lewrockwell.com and the wonderful library of audio books on mises.org

------------------------

What You Should Know About Inflation:  http://www.mises.org/story/2914
The Cultural and Spiritual Legacy of Fiat Inflation: http://mises.org/MultiMedia/mp3/audiobooks/Hulsmann/EOMP/13_EOMP.mp3
 
The Austrian theory of the Business Cycle:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/podcast/?p=episode&name=2008-08-11_017_austrian_theory_of_the_business_cycle.mp3

[Revolt426]

Back from moving for 5 days - and to Planning4Crash, BUMP - now people can decide for themselves 

[Revolt426]

Did I wiki edit this page? Did i make up the gold standard act of 1900? Did i make up the date of march 14th
http://www.historycentral.com/Documents/GoldStandard.html

McKinley fomalized the gold standard, and TR Built the panama canal off the greenback. You're just flat out WRONG.

Lets recount:

You're wrong on the 450M$ limit, you're wrong on the 1837 depression, You're wrong on privately funded railroads, (James J Hill's company was one of the few to not only survive the 1893 depression but increased it's net worth during the depression by 10Mil) You were wrong on the 1980 gold price. You were wrong on gold in the great depression, And here you are trying to save face on McKinley/Roosevelt by accusing me of editting the wiki. McKinley formalized the gold standard. You're full of lies and half truths. You seem to have the conclusion first and cherry pick history to support it.

 

Let's recount, i never said a word about a Limit, regardless - Lincoln increased spending by 300% into productive infrastructure

I never said a word about anything to do with a 1980 Gold Price.. (perhaps you are looking at another persons quote again)

I said McKinley advocated a Gold Standard (And he advocated using Lincolns policies, as you highlighted partially with the Tariffs and building railways)

I addressed the Panama Canal, which was not infrastructure on or for the United States but an act of Britsh backed imperialism.

And privately funded railroads? where is this coming from? yea they exist - have you seen any MODERN RAILROADS LATELY? ..... how about ANY OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE?.

Let's see who is wrong, you compared Abraham Lincoln to Teddy Roosevelt - two complete opposites that had nothing to do with each other (Roosevelt was a traitor, Lincoln actually saved the Union from  collapsing) , and then you say Teddy Roosevelt was a Greenbacker because he expanded the monetary supply in 1907?... this means, what?. Because he expanded the monetary supply by issueing Greenbacks there still wasn't a Gold Standard (It was SUSPENDED TEMPORARILY).

Who is lying? huh?. who links to a blog for information about Presidents?.

Have you even responded to 75% of the things i've written (instead of cherry picking what you could point and say "Ad Hominem" aka "You are a liar i have no counter argument from the Austrian school), or the video you said you didn't watch or ..... maybe i should just stop, you aren't really worth wasting time blathering about diversions, "Teddy Roosevelt was a Lincoln Nationalist" is that a joke?. Actually McKinley's policy was "We are going to fight through the Gold Standard" meaning, we are going to BUILD THINGS. So, infact 90% of the history you posted was nonsense including your pathetic attempt at attacking Stephen Zarlenga as opposed to actually debunking his refute, which (If anyone read it : http://monetary.org/refute.htm) they would see that Mengers theory makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.


So go ahead, ad hominem, and populem, ad nauseum , strawman this to death.

[Revolt426]

Oh heavens, i am still ALSO waiting for the explanation to how the OUTSTANDING DEBT is going to magically correct when the monetary supply contracts.... i almost forgot about one of the major reasons a Gold Standard would cause genocide..........

What happened to that?, wasn't on your cherry picking list like the video i used to highlight what i am talking about?.

[aerborne]

Let's recount, i never said a word about a Limit, regardless - Lincoln increased spending by 300% into productive infrastructure

You've copy pasted it NUMEROUS times in multiple threads.

I never said a word about anything to do with a 1980 Gold Price.. (perhaps you are looking at another persons quote again)

You in fact did you said gold rose to 800$ and inflation along with it. But this was in one of the various things you copy pasted.... Do you not even read your own posts?

I said McKinley advocated a Gold Standard (And he advocated using Lincolns policies, as you highlighted partially with the Tariffs and building railways)

You said that AFTER i pointed out that McKinley wasn't a "lincolnist" but that he formalized the gold standard.

I addressed the Panama Canal, which was not infrastructure on or for the United States but an act of Britsh backed imperialism.

And it was a major benefit to the US as well. It was a major boost to the western seaboard.

And privately funded railroads? where is this coming from? yea they exist - have you seen any MODERN RAILROADS LATELY? ..... how about ANY OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE?.

Let's see who is wrong, you compared Abraham Lincoln to Teddy Roosevelt - two complete opposites that had nothing to do with each other (Roosevelt was a traitor, Lincoln actually saved the Union from  collapsing) , and then you say Teddy Roosevelt was a Greenbacker because he expanded the monetary supply in 1907?... this means, what?. Because he expanded the monetary supply by issueing Greenbacks there still wasn't a Gold Standard (It was SUSPENDED TEMPORARILY).

he expanded our "empire," printed the greenbacks and funded massive infrastructure projects. He picked (JP Morgan backed) winners and "trust busted" the competition (rockefeller). How was he not like lincoln? There's a reason he's on mount rushmore with lincoln.

Who is lying? huh?. who links to a blog for information about Presidents?.

Oooo attack the source not the facts.

Have you even responded to 75% of the things i've written (instead of cherry picking what you could point and say "Ad Hominem" aka "You are a liar i have no counter argument from the Austrian school), or the video you said you didn't watch or ..... maybe i should just stop, you aren't really worth wasting time blathering about diversions, "Teddy Roosevelt was a Lincoln Nationalist" is that a joke?. Actually McKinley's policy was "We are going to fight through the Gold Standard" meaning, we are going to BUILD THINGS. So, infact 90% of the history you posted was nonsense including your pathetic attempt at attacking Stephen Zarlenga as opposed to actually debunking his refute, which (If anyone read it : http://monetary.org/refute.htm) they would see that Mengers theory makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Oh gosh the refute one! I've read it, it's largely nonsense, especially considering YOU don't know what he's attempting to refute, but again, as anyone can click and read, there's already a wonderful refutation of his refutation of austrian economics. http://www.axiomaticeconomics.com/zarlenga.php

So go ahead, ad hominem, and populem, ad nauseum , strawman this to death.

You've demonstrated time and again that you don't know what *ANY* of those mean. You haven't, and will not read ANYTHING by austrian economists to even know what you're "refuting." You're attacking austrian economics based on 2nd hand hearsay and that's the ULTIMATE strawman. MOST of your historical babble is calculated spin the conclusions of which austrian economics had written books on LONG before stephen zarlenga's nonsense. However you fill it with nonsense like gold causing inflation, then deflation, and blame the problems you attribute to Fractional Reserve banking when you're debunking the federal reserve, to gold, when you're "debunking" austrian economics. Infact you're SO guilty of basing your opinion on hearsay that you don't even know WHAT YOU YOURSELF have posted.

The fact is in the US we've never had the gold standard without pyramiding fractional reserve, and moral hazard from the government suspending specie payments when those banks overprint themselves. So at no point in american history, even under lincoln, has our money supply NOT been in the hands of england owned private banks.

[Revolt426]

Well, you haven't provided a single argument other then lying again.... you are very slick when changing subjects, perhaps you are a paid blogger?. 

Keep inserting things i haven't said into my mouth, it makes you look good.

And i have yet to receive an explanation for the requested Austrian answer to Outstanding debt correcting , the Byron Dale video, the history of the United States - and pretty much 75% of what i wrote other then you declaring that i am a liar.

Can you address these issues or just keep changing the subject?

I am done with you, you are quite obviously not here to debate, but de-rail and babble.

[Revolt426]

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!

[planning4acrash]

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![/i]

Of course its freaking volatile during that period, you idiot, because the US started ramping up the freaking printing press. And, for your information, I don't propose a gold standard. I propose that we end legal tender laws, thus allowing people to choose between competing currencies, as does Dr Ron Paul.

[planning4acrash]

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....

 - Yes, if a warmongerer STEALS the gold of one country, dumps it in its own, he WILL inflate prices relative to gold. Because his warfare will not increase production at home, it will reduce it, because re-tooling for war misallocates resources, as is the case with any government intervention BY FORCE.

-----

when in consequence of the discovery of the Taurisian gold seams, gold as compared with silver fell at once in Italy by about 33%"[/i]........

Is that the best you can do? At one time, gold once fell by 30% in one country. Well Sterling fell over 30% over the past year, not because of mining activities, but because GOVERNMENT PRINTED MONEY. Of course, people, being aware of the find, could hedge their bets by purchasing silver.

Are you a Luciferian? Do you believe that God's minerals are not good enough? That Man must replace commodities with sourcery and alchemy to inrich the power of those who wish to break God's Commandments? Are you in league with evil bankers and government who wish to inflate their way into thieving our wealth?

[Geolibertarian]

Austrian School cultists just never stop. The moment they find out someone has created a thread devoted to explaining to people that, contrary to Austrian School dogma, it's not necessary to destroy our economy (by letting criminal bankers foreclose on everyone and then euphemistically calling this parasitic wealth-transfer a market-based "correction" instead of a fraud-based looting) in order to save it; that it's not necessary to burn down our economic "house" in order to roast the inflationary "pig"; and that crucifying mankind upon a cross of gold is not the only alternative to enslaving mankind within a prison of debt, they immediately flock to that thread like obsessed stalkers and begin trolling and trolling and trolling, ad nauseam, in a desperate attempt to derail that thread, and to discourage relative newcomers from learning more about the "Greenback" alternative.

                        A typical Austrian School troll


If, after all the facts and information that've been presented in this and other threads, anyone is still foolish enough to take these discredited trolls seriously, then that person probably deserves to live in aristocratic tyranny (which is exactly what the let-everything-collapse/cross-of-gold approach of the Austrian School would quickly lead to).

[planning4acrash]

Austrian School cultists just never stop.

How about you respond to my specific points, rather than hurl abuse.

[Revolt426]

Since i haven't gotten any answers for my questions (particularly the hundreds of millions of mortgages that will default due to the deflation of ANY GOLD STANDARD) , i'll post a (One of numerous) solution(s) as opposed to letting 4 Billion+ people die / get kicked out of their homes. Keep in mind that this act violates Austrian "Free Market" rules and would be unacceptable during a true STATE OF EMERGENCY to save lives;

Homeowners and Bank Protection Act of 2007
Whereas, the failure the leadership of the United States Congress to pass the Homeowner and Bank Protection Act of 2007 proposed by Lyndon LaRouche in his July 25, 2007 webcast, has transformed a dire situation from one that could have remained manageable through the Autumn of 2007, into a breakdown crisis of not only the U.S. economy, but of the world economy;

Whereas, the Congressional leadership instead chose a course of insulting treatment of state and local legislative and associated bodies within the states, who clamored for the Congress to enact the HBPA, as shown in the HBPA's passage by five state legislatures, and more than 150 city councils across the United States, in addition to hundreds of endorsements by trade union and other constituency leaders individually;

Whereas the repeated attempts approved by Congress to bail out financial institutions with cumulative trillions of taxpayers' and Federal Reserve money, have utterly failed;

Whereas, forcing the leadership of the U.S. Congress into more responsible behavior on the HBPA now, is perhaps the only chance to begin to move things in a direction which could lead to saving the United States of America itself from the deepest physical depression in its history;

THEREFORE, be it resolved, that

the City/State of______________________

hereby endorses the Homeowners and Bank Protection Act of 2007, as initiated by economist Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. This Act includes the following provisions:

1. Congress must establish a Federal agency to place the Federal and state chartered banks under protection, freezing all existing home mortgages for a period of however many months or years are required to adjust the values to fair prices, and restructure existing mortgages at appropriate interest rates. Further, this action would also write off all of the speculative debt obligations of mortgage-backed securities, derivatives, and other forms of Ponzi schemes that have plunged the banking system into bankruptcy.

2. During the transitional period, all foreclosures shall be frozen, allowing American families to retain their homes. Monthly payments, the equivalent of rental payments, shall be made to designated banks, which can use the funds as collateral for normal banking practices, thus recapitalizing the banking systems. These affordable monthly payments will be factored into new mortgages, reflecting the deflating of the housing bubble and the establishment of appropriate property valuations, and reduced fixed mortgage interest rates. This shakeout will take several years to achieve. In the interim period no homeowner shall be evicted from his or her property, and the Federal and state chartered banks shall be protected, so they can resume their traditional functions, serving local communities, and facilitating credit for investment in productive industries, agriculture, infrastructure, etc.

3. State governors shall assume the administrative responsibilities for implementing the program, including the rental assessments to designated banks, with the Federal government providing the necessary credits and guarantees to assure the successful transition. And therefore,

Be it Further Resolved, that a copy of this resolution shall be forwarded to members of Congress from the state, and also be delivered to the President of the United States, for immediate implementation.

[planning4acrash]

Since i haven't gotten any answers for my questions (particularly the hundreds of millions of mortgages that will default due to the deflation of ANY GOLD STANDARD) , i'll post a (One of numerous) solution(s) as opposed to letting 4 Billion+ people die / get kicked out of their homes. Keep in mind that this act violates Austrian "Free Market" rules and would be unacceptable during a true STATE OF EMERGENCY to save lives;

Had mortgage companies gone broke, rather than been bailed out, bankruptcy could have involved wholesale re-setting of the loans and writing off of debt.

Those who have borrowed beyond their means should go bankrupt. They will then rent, at a lower price, and can save up for another go.

If we don't flush out that malinvestment, capital can't go to productive uses. What is more immoral, keeping a person in their home, beyond their means, or starving prudent investors and savers from capital? Because both go hand in hand. The former results in less wealth for the world as a whole, the latter results in the most productive result, so is the best way to have the most people doing well. Austrian economists are highly moral, but take a longer view of morality. They look beyond the moral objective of socialism, by analyzing the moral depravity of the impact that socialism has on unconnected third parties.

[Elvis]

Had mortgage companies gone broke, rather than been bailed out, bankruptcy could have involved wholesale re-setting of the loans and writing off of debt.

Those who have borrowed beyond their means should go bankrupt. They will then rent, at a lower price, and can save up for another go.

If we don't flush out that malinvestment, capital can't go to productive uses. What is more immoral, keeping a person in their home, beyond their means, or starving prudent investors and savers from capital? Because both go hand in hand. The former results in less wealth for the world as a whole, the latter results in the most productive result, so is the best way to have the most people doing well. Austrian economists are highly moral, but take a longer view of morality. They look beyond the moral objective of socialism, by analyzing the moral depravity of the impact that socialism has on unconnected third parties.

The first problem with that line of thinking is this:

"Moles inside the 2006 Bilderberg meeting in Ottawa, Canada, revealed to Jones a secret plan contrived by the global elite to “artificially implode the subprime mortgages as a pretext to cause a larger economic collapse so they could basically pose as the saviors and then rewrite the financial international order” and establish a New World Order, as admitted by the Wall Street Journal (see David Gaffen, One Week Later, a New World Order)."

http://nationalexpositor.com/News/1578.html

[Freeski]

Had mortgage companies gone broke, rather than been bailed out, bankruptcy could have involved wholesale re-setting of the loans and writing off of debt.

Those who have borrowed beyond their means should go bankrupt. They will then rent, at a lower price, and can save up for another go.

If we don't flush out that malinvestment, capital can't go to productive uses. What is more immoral, keeping a person in their home, beyond their means, or starving prudent investors and savers from capital? Because both go hand in hand. The former results in less wealth for the world as a whole, the latter results in the most productive result, so is the best way to have the most people doing well. Austrian economists are highly moral, but take a longer view of morality. They look beyond the moral objective of socialism, by analyzing the moral depravity of the impact that socialism has on unconnected third parties.

I like that.

[Michal Ptacnik]

I honestly don't.

I think livelihood of people is more important than keeping to the rules of the free market game.

Those who borrowed too much should be allowed to go bankrupt, but they should be able to retain some of their property, at least the proverbial roof above their heads. Also, in my opinion, people should not be allowed to sell their future; any debt that would have to be repaid for more than, let's say, ten years monthly or so if the payments would have the potential to significantly limit the person's life should be declared illegal and unbinding. Is it a regulation and strain on a free market? You bet, but it is also a necessary step towards freedom, paradoxically, and to equality.

Furthermore, the practice of people owing other peoples' homes is pseudo feudal and is a direct antithesis of any form of freedom for the people; unless you own your own home, you are someone else's serf, period. Homes should be only traded on a highly regulated market, on a home-for-home basis so that no one will become homeless, and all people should have the right to own a home.

It's almost biblical, in a sense. In ancient Izrael, according to the Bible, it was by divine law that every free man shall own for life a plot of land from which he and his posterity shall live, and thus they won't be able to lose "all but the clothes on their backs" because they in fact could not sell their homes, even if they wanted. This is a very, very good arrangement.

Keeping the opportunities equal and people free is what regulation should be here for,
since in such areas that influence livelyhood, free market naturally leads to feudalism and in the end it virtually eats it's own tail, destroys it's own future, because there is no free market in a corporate/feudal society, in a society that is no longer the "land of the free," but the "land of the haves owning the have nots," whether by the virtue of owning their home, or by owning their future.

[Michal Ptacnik]

Addendum: There is one more interesting historical concept that would apply to the outlined worldview and complement the set regulatory measures.

It is true that if we make the social net too perfect, it might be... not demotivating, but rather motivating towards frivolous behavior with money. Now, I could reason that commercials and the zeitgeist of today's consumer society does all of this and infinitely better than any law could, but for the sake of argument, let us admit that perhaps it would be demotivating, in this sense (to have regulated home market, etc., viz my above post)

Now the ancient Romans knew that frivolous economic behavior has potential serious consequences and thus implemented the institute called Cura Prodigi, a decree which limited the "frivolous" person in his freedom to do as he pleases with his property and finances until such a time when he was deemed "cured" of his "immature" or "prodigal" behavior.

Translated to the modern times, you could sue someone at the court that he is too prone towards such frivolous behavior, much as you can today try to convince the court to declare a person insane and thus incapable to care for their own legal matters.

If the court agreed with you, the "prodigus," the person found too "economically irresponsible," would then be placed under a curator, a finance keeper, who would take care of his finances for a set amount of time, since the person himself is obviously incapable, or unwilling to do it himself in a productive fashion. This would also mean he could order him to buy and sell property and perhaps even to get a specific (or any) job.

After the set amount of time would pass, the cura would be lifted (to prevent indefinite curas and the resulting slavery) and the person would be free once again and hopefully would be motivated by the social consequences of losing his financial freedom not to repeat his mistakes. If not, he could be placed under another cura for another term.

Elegant, reasonable, tried and tested.

[Revolt426]

Had mortgage companies gone broke, rather than been bailed out, bankruptcy could have involved wholesale re-setting of the loans and writing off of debt.

And the major flaw, or catastrophe you are pushing is to allow the entire system to go bankrupt and collapse, with the idea that others will purchase the wreckage  - when infact a systemic collapse would destroy the entire Republic before you could even buy up the post industrial,  50-60 year old infrastructure, dwindling hospitals, bridges falling down, energy grids collapsing, Railways collapsing, pathetic old energy output statistics that cannot meet the populations demands and a 10 page list of other things that would restrict any recovery from occuring.

The flaw is , that you think there will be "Wealth" after the system collapses for people to buy anything , when infact , if you look at what happened in 1923 Germany - the result of this was HITLER (And so forth throughout history). You do not dig wealth out of the dirt,  you produce and sell things to create wealth. Until this is realized, no solution will be available.

[Geolibertarian]

And the major flaw, or catastrophe you are pushing is to allow the entire system to go bankrupt and collapse, with the idea that others will purchase the wreckage  - when infact a systemic collapse would destroy the entire Republic before you could even buy up the post industrial, 50-60 year old infrastructure, dwindling hospitals, bridges falling down, energy grids collapsing, Railways collapsing, pathetic old energy output statistics that cannot meet the populations demands and a 10 page list of other things that would restrict any recovery from occuring.

I would call that a major practical flaw in the Austrian School's let-everything-collapse/cross-of-gold scheme.

A major ethical flaw in their lunatic scheme is that it lets criminal bankers foreclose on everyone for failing to pay them usurious interest on "loans" for which they (the bankers) gave no lawful consideration.

A relative newcomer may now be asking: "Why would Austrian Schoolers insist that we sheepishly let a criminal banking cartel foreclose on everyone, even though the 'loans' it extended were, by their very nature, rooted in fraud? Why, in other words, would they mindlessly promote the fraud-based looting of our economy, and then euphemistically call this parasitic transfer of wealth into the hands of aristocratic bankers a market-based 'correction' or 'adjustment'"?

Once you learn about the aristocratic origins and leanings of the Austrian School, you'll know exactly why:

       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuHCAXtjZ6Q (part 1 of 4)
       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlJT-5w21IY (part 2 of 4)
       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxe-LlAO_cQ (part 3 of 4)
       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bl5jOUvIcuI (part 4 of 4)

[aerborne]

Let the buyer beware? The problem isn't that house prices are collapsing, it's that they were artificially inflated. They're going to go back down and no one can do anything about it.

You guys act like people up and instantly die when their home gets foreclosed. (genocide really) People choose to let their homes be foreclosed even if they can afford the mortgage payments because they are in negative Equity. Home gets foreclosed, they move to a new home that's priced in todays market, or rent and wait for house prices to turn around again. These bullshit emotional appeals of genocide are ridiculous.

Secondly, the austrian economic ideas are not to let fraud go unpunished. The banks should be prosecuted for liar loans, the bankrupt banks should be put in bankruptcy and prosecuted for their fraud. You completely misrepresent austrian ideals in this gigantic wave of strawmen.

Austrians don't say we should let house prices go down, they say we can't stop house prices from going down. Whether people should get to keep the homes that are worth 35% of what they paid for the homes or not because of bank fraud isn't really an issue if we *PROSECUTE THE FRAUD.*

Seems to be a key point your missing in your strawman is the part where we prosecute fraud when it starts.

Once again you attribute the cause of economic crises to fractional reserve on one hand, then attribute it to "austrian cultists" on the other hand.

Since i haven't gotten any answers for my questions (particularly the hundreds of millions of mortgages that will default due to the deflation of ANY GOLD STANDARD) , i'll post a (One of numerous) solution(s) as opposed to letting 4 Billion+ people die / get kicked out of their homes. Keep in mind that this act violates Austrian "Free Market" rules and would be unacceptable during a true STATE OF EMERGENCY to save lives;

That's because you're not going to get an answer. You take the assumption that it would cause deflation as true, with no evidence that it is. Gold has NEVER deflated the economy. Andrew Jackson's bi-metallic didn't deflate the economy, I've already posted the numbers. The federal reserve started on the gold standard and didn't deflate the economy. McKinley's formalizing of the gold standard didn't deflate the economy. Every deflationary "crises" came after a massive inflation of fractional reserve pyramiding. You ignore the inflation period before each deflation and blame gold on the left hand, and fractional reserve on the right hand when you're not attacking "austrian cultists." Again the only nonsense you know about austrian economics are hearsay strawmen from 3rd party sources. You don't know a god damn thing about rothbard except the lies and strawmen you've heard from OTHER people.
 

[Revolt426]

Let the buyer beware? The problem isn't that house prices are collapsing, it's that they were artificially inflated. They're going to go back down and no one can do anything about it.
.
 

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.

[Revolt426]

You guys act like people up and instantly die when their home gets foreclosed. (genocide really) People choose to let their homes be foreclosed even if they can afford the mortgage payments because they are in negative Equity. Home gets foreclosed, they move to a new home that's priced in todays market, or rent and wait for house prices to turn around again. These bullshit emotional appeals of genocide are ridiculous.
 

Looks like logic and reality prove you wrong again;

With America's economy in freefall and its housing market in crisis, California's state capital has become home to a tented city for the dispossessed.

[Geolibertarian]

With America's economy in freefall and its housing market in crisis, California's state capital has become home to a tented city for the dispossessed.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/03/05/article-1159677-03C00321000005DC-173_634x312.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/03/05/article-1159677-03C003DD000005DC-125_634x432.jpg

[Elvis]

Had mortgage companies gone broke, rather than been bailed out, bankruptcy could have involved wholesale re-setting of the loans and writing off of debt.

Those who have borrowed beyond their means should go bankrupt. They will then rent, at a lower price, and can save up for another go.

If we don't flush out that malinvestment, capital can't go to productive uses. What is more immoral, keeping a person in their home, beyond their means, or starving prudent investors and savers from capital? Because both go hand in hand. The former results in less wealth for the world as a whole, the latter results in the most productive result, so is the best way to have the most people doing well. Austrian economists are highly moral, but take a longer view of morality. They look beyond the moral objective of socialism, by analyzing the moral depravity of the impact that socialism has on unconnected third parties.

The second problem with that line of thinking is that the plan was set up so the mortgage companies wouldn't go broke - in fact, they would absorb the majority of wealth in the country. The freddymac/fannymae scam was to federally back the subprime loans they intended to write. Many went default. Surpise! That's why when 95% of the calls & faxes going in congress, senate, whitehouse were ignored. The deal had already been set up - a long time ago. "Those who have borrowed beyond their means should go bankrupt." Oh, they will. They took the bailout money to payoff loans and within 24 - Surprise! We're not going to do that anymore - we're going to prop up (manipulate in our favor) the stock market, cleaning out the retirement savings of all those babyboomers. Can you say "perfect timing"? While we're cleaning that out, we still hold all the mortgages on the default loans that the taxpayers are paying for. So when they started passing out million dollar bonuses to employees to shut them up and make them accomplices, it was like passing out candy to kids. Merry Christmas one and all! Oh, except those who were misled into borrowing beyond their means. Perfect plan, really all that was missing was a gun and a mask.

[Revolt426]

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!.

[Elvis]

It is noteworthy to mention Feddie 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!.

should also mention - never been audited. Seems like NOW! would be the perfect time for more than one thing.

[planning4acrash]

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!.

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.

[Revolt426]

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.

[planning4acrash]

Deflation as liberty: http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/audiobooks/DeflationandLiberty.mp3


Freedom involves people suffering the consequences of their failures, because government, taxing those who did not make that mistake, reduces the productivity of society as a whole, and is immoral

[Revolt426]

Deflation as liberty world wide genocide by foreclosing on all outstanding mortgages and forcing people to default on other debts: http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/audiobooks/DeflationandLiberty.mp3

there ya go... until i recieve an answer to this question i will continue to bring it up regardless of people who wish to post links without actually answering that question.

[aerborne]

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".

you ignore me to make these emotional appeals? People are going to die because their overpriced home got foreclosed? Houses are selling for 1$ in detroit. You again ignore the inflation that caused this deflation to attack me with emotional appeals that people are going to die because of the DEFLATION, when it's the inflation that set them up in the first place.

You act like the land mine didn't exist and that people are being killed by spontaneous ground explosions. Austrian Economists support walking therefore they are killing millions of people who are being victimized by these strange mysterious explosions.

Austrian's are against artificial inflation, so ignore the artificial inflation, and attack them based on the results of policies austrians are exist. This is the same arguments NeoCons used to support the iraq war after they couldn't find WMD: Well we're here now we have to live up to our responsibility.

We're here on this inflationary bubble we have to do something. Well austrians were against building the bubble in the first place, you ignore the bubble and attack deflation. Deflation isn't the problem, inflation isn't the problem. Building artificial bubbles through artificial inflation in the hands of banks, or governments,

Do we need to bring up the thomas jefferson quote "First by inflation, then by deflation ...?"

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.

Here you're ignoring the problem and attacking austrian's on stuff they said would happen. Fraud loans, derivative schemes, and what not are going to drive up housing prices artificially... You ignore the inflation, and attack the deflation, and say austrians support deflation of artificially created bubbles that they were against. You know nothing of austrian economics, you're own arguments are half truthes spun into attacks. Austrians said that the printing of currency lead to derivatives and all these schemes that have lead to rising house prices, you restate this, and attack based on your own false conceptions that austrians think deflation is good. You don't understand austrian economics at all.

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 being housing prices. Even under your schemes housing prices will go down. The acts even acknowledge this by allowing customers to keep their houses and reduce the price of their loans. You seem to forget that, the counterparty already GOT PAID the full amount of the loan by the bank. So lets look at what the banks to options are: To foreclose on the house and resell it (making the bank the counterparty) and be paid in full by whoever takes out a mortgage to buy the house.... or to reduce the amount owed by someone who's defaulted on a loan. In either situation they lose money on this loan but which would you say carries more risk?

Looks like logic and reality prove you wrong again;

With America's economy in freefall and its housing market in crisis, California's state capital has become home to a tented city for the dispossessed.

That's hardly even anecdotal evidnce. It's just a flat out emotional appeal. Do you suppose the people living their lost their homes because they fell into negative equity or because of extenuating circumstances like losing their job? Do you even know how many of california's repossessed live in the tent city? You'll have to do better then these fallacious emotional appeals.

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!.

Aaahh this sounds like support for big government. I'm i to believe you're implying this wouldn't have happened if it were the government in charge of fanny and freddie, instead of them being "private" organizations?

there ya go... until i recieve an answer to this question i will continue to bring it up regardless of people who wish to post links without actually answering that question.

You will continue to blind yourself to the fact that this deflationary crisis is the result of decades long artificial inflation. You continue to skew facts and attack austrian economics based on failed policies they were against in the first placed and SAID would cause this. You ignore every austrian who said the bubble would pop inevitably and it would not be pretty.

Austrian economics: Don't create an inflationary bubble.
your lame ass attacks: Austrians support economic genocide by supporting deflation.

It's a massive leap in logic. It's completely nonsense, and because you're only knowledge of austrian economics is second hand you have no clue what you're talking about. You don't even understand what inflation and deflation are, you've proven that, and you've proven you don't know a thing about economics in general, much less austrian economic theory. You've lied about history to support your attacks, and completely ignore the inflationary period that caused this deflation to attack austrians with strawmen of views they don't support.

[Revolt426]

And with all that de-railing blather, you still have not answered the question ( You know, the one that would essentially put anyone with debt into bankruptcy) .... brilliant! i think it is rather obvious that you are attempting to dodge that question?.

First it was a strawman and ad hominen - then it was "You are a liar" - now it's emotional appeals (With pictures of people living in tents after being foreclosed on which you could care less about).

Do you actually think anyone who understands what is being posted in this thread is going to buy into your utter nonsense, particularly when members of the forum are LOSING their homes?........

So again,

there ya go... until i recieve an answer to this question i will continue to bring it up regardless of people who wish to post links without actually answering that question.

Please do tell me, how is a Gold standard not going to cause deflation and hence the defaulting of massive amounts of debts, mortgages being of most importance considering the result would be the pictures of the above tent cities X 10000

[Revolt426]

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.

[planning4acrash]

there ya go... until i recieve an answer to this question i will continue to bring it up regardless of people who wish to post links without actually answering that question.

Deflation of debt, what is the alternative? More debt? Or do we want sound money? Even your greenback, non-debt based fiat, we must get rid of debt Both plans involve deflation

[Revolt426]

Deflation of debt, what is the alternative? More debt? Or do we want sound money? Even your greenback, non-debt based fiat, we must get rid of debt Both plans involve deflation

If you read any of the posts in this thead, you would know that there is indeed a sound alternative to the Austrian method and the status quo, you just choose to ignore it... which is unfortunate but atleast you acknowledge the resultant would be an incalculable amount of foreclosers and debt defaults of various kinds.

With a greenback system you are able to
A) issue currency without a CAP into productive means which does not cause inflation. (What causes inflation is when you allow the printing of currency into UN-Productive means and the Net Production levels fall below the monetary supply)

B) There will have to be a Government Intervention to keep people in their homes regardless of any reform because this is the greatest economic collapse in the history of man kind due to it's globalized unique nature and massive population levels to sustain.

C) Rebuild the Nations infrastructure which is the only thing that would allow a recovery in the first place.

[aLLyOuRbAsE]

If you read any of the posts in this thead, you would know that there is indeed a sound alternative to the Austrian method and the status quo, you just choose to ignore it... which is unfortunate but atleast you acknowledge the resultant would be an incalculable amount of foreclosers and debt defaults of various kinds.

With a greenback system you are able to
A) issue currency without a CAP into productive means which does not cause inflation. (What causes inflation is when you allow the printing of currency into UN-Productive means and the Net Production levels fall below the monetary supply)

B) There will have to be a Government Intervention to keep people in their homes regardless of any reform because this is the greatest economic collapse in the history of man kind due to it's globalized unique nature and massive population levels to sustain.

C) Rebuild the Nations infrastructure which is the only thing that would allow a recovery in the first place.

isnt that pretty much what obama is doing minus the green backs?

i agree with the freezing of derivatives etc, but im not sure i agree with fiscal stimulus...

fact is everything is inflated, to suggest we can keep everything up there or even continue the inflation is as dangerous as just letting things fall.

i would like to point out that there is no easy option here, propping up is just as bad as letting things fall, which is why i think that the only sensible option is stop the war on terror, use the money to wipe out the income tax, and legalise competing currencies. we are never going to keep this bubble going, but at the same time we shouldnt just let it pop, which is why i think ron paul's plan is the best as it doesnt do either of those things.

[Revolt426]

I would also like to add there is going to have to be another "Hoover moratorium" , which means many Internatioanl debts are going to have to be frozen for a specified amount of time to avoid the massive amounts of crushing debt that would prevent a recovery as well.


This is indeed a global collapse and requires global freezing of certain debts.

[Revolt426]

isnt that pretty much what obama is doing minus the green backs?

i agree with the freezing of derivatives etc, but im not sure i agree with fiscal stimulus...

fact is everything is inflated, to suggest we can keep everything up there or even continue the inflation is as dangerous as just letting things fall.

i would like to point out that there is no easy option here, propping up is just as bad as letting things fall, which is why i think that the only sensible option is stop the war on terror, use the money to wipe out the income tax, and legalise competing currencies. we are never going to keep this bubble going, but at the same time we shouldnt just let it pop, which is why i think ron paul's plan is the best as it doesnt do either of those things.

Obama is doing the 100% OPPOSITE of what is being suggested here....

He is bailing out banks with currency and is not building ANYTHING. I do not see how you came to the conclusion that Obama is issuing currency into infrastructure or any productive means when he is actually cutting all social services and has given 9 to 11 Trillion dollars to the finance oligarchs?.

No one has suggested the propping up of anything here, but the actual building of various types of infrastructure (to facilitate the 5+ Trillion dollar infrastructure deficit) such as modernized power (Not GREEN),  dams, roadways, railways (MagLev) , water treatment plants...etc...

Propping up = Printing currency and bail it out, there is no building of anything involved in propping markets up.

[aLLyOuRbAsE]

Obama is doing the 100% OPPOSITE of what is being suggested here....

He is bailing out banks with currency and is not building ANYTHING. I do not see how you came to the conclusion that Obama is issuing currency into infrastructure or any productive means when he is actually cutting all social services and has given 9 to 11 Trillion dollars to the finance oligarchs?.

No one has suggested the propping up of anything here, but the actual building of various types of infrastructure (to facilitate the 5+ Trillion dollar infrastructure deficit) such as modernized power (Not GREEN),  dams, roadways, railways (MagLev) , water treatment plants...etc...

Propping up = Printing currency and bailout it out, there is no building of anything involved in propping markets up.

i realise obama is not doing what he said he would do, he is a chronic liar after all, but the fiscal stimulus package was sold as building infrastructure was it not? i remember obama saying the same things youve just said, like building infrastructure, updating stuff yada yada.

let me put it this way, you are saying that its ok to print money as long as it builds productive stuff...what happens if it doesnt quite work out that way, what if we thought it was going to be productive but then it turns out it isnt, like a bridge to no-where? do we get inflation then?

in theory, if you could make sure every cent went into productive stuff, then yes that would counteract inflation, not stop it mind, but COUNTERACT it, but the second you have money being spent into stuff that is not productive, where are you at? inflation-ville, thats where.

everything has been artificially inflated, and you are saying to avoid deflation we should spend money into infrastructure, i call that propping up.

[Geolibertarian]

i realise obama is not doing what he said he would do, he is a chronic liar after all, but the fiscal stimulus package was sold as building infrastructure was it not?

Have you read the following?

---------------------------------------

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=12517

America's Fiscal Collapse

by Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research
March 2, 2009

“We will rebuild, we will recover, and the United States of America will emerge stronger" ( President Barack Obama, State of the Union Address 24 Feb 2009)

"Those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account—to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day—because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government." President Barack Obama, A New Era of Responsibility, the 2010 Budget)

"Strong economic medicine" with a "human face"

“Promise amid peril.” The stated priorities of the Obama economic package are health, education, renewable energy, investment in infrastructure and transportation. "Quality education" is at the forefront. Obama has also promised to "make health care more affordable and accessible", for every American.

At first sight, the budget proposal has all the appearances of an expansionary program, a demand oriented "Second New Deal" geared towards creating employment, rebuilding shattered social programs and reviving the real economy.
The realities are otherwise. Obama's promise is based on a mammoth austerity program. The entire fiscal structure is shattered, turned upside down.

To reach these stated objectives, a significant hike in public spending on social programs (health, education, housing, social security) would be required as well as the implementation of a large scale public investment program. Major shifts in the composition of public expenditure would also be required: i.e. a move out of a war economy, requiring a movement out of military related spending in favour of civilian programs.

In actuality, what we are dealing with is the most drastic curtailment in public spending in American history, leading to social havoc and the potential impoverishment of millions of people.

The Obama promise largely serves the interests of Wall Street, the defence contractors and the oil conglomerates. In turn, the Bush-Obama bank "bailouts" are leading America into a spiralling public debt crisis. The economic and social dislocations are potentially devastating.

[Continued...]

---------------------------------------