Webster Tarpley's economic solutions won't work

[planning4acrash]

I agree with Webster Tarpley that Derivatives must be deleted, shredded and destroyed. Their perpetrators put behind bars.

But that's where it ends. Webster puts forward a new deal solution. He wants trillions spent on Maglev railways and undustrial exploitation of the solar system. I think that these simplistic solutions would be shot down in flames if exposed to debate with a libertarian from the Mises Institute. Unfortunately, Alex somewhat distrustful of full Libertarian economic freedom, provides Tarpley cover from his critics. This sometimes express itself via swipes at Ron Paul during the radio program, and we never get anybody on the show from the mises institute, even though they have proved themselves as the intellectual force behind Ron Paul, and are one of the few groups focused on economic and political solutions.

Let me explain why I think Tarpley doesn't provide the full solution, and why greater economic freedom is the answer:

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

Unfortunately, all of the new maglev's and space exploration will be funded via tax and bonds. Government would crowd the bond market and small businesses would find themselves less able to issue corporate bonds for expansion, whilst their cash base would be eroded by taxation and inflation. The investment, not being bottom up, could also result in massive misallocation of resources, thus forming a huge government led bubble that would only see government collapse in on itself, once again increasing taxes and money printing, with the necessary police state to quell rebellion.

This was tried before. Glasgow, UK, is a great example. Its vast industries were decimated by the Great Depression. Post WWII, government spent crazy money on a new motorways, but the factory's never opened, because industries had less cash via inflation and tax, and were being crowded out of the bond corporate bond market by government. Industries, unable to express themselves, couldn't express what the actual infrastructure needs were. Who is to say that industry didn't need investment in railways (being torn down by government), who's to say that industry didn't simply need a greater proportion of the country's investment, in their hands, because note, Glasgow and other places were industrial powerhouses long before freeways were erected.

And who do you think built the new deal projects? You guessed, it, the very insider illuminist company's who got all the WWII contracts. Who would build maglevs and exploit the moon at this stage? You guessed it, insiders who received Goldman Sachs bailouts, because they are the only healthy businesses out there.

Where my parents live, a big problem is that the small business is decimated. We had a thriving cottage industry of ceramics. These folk don't need infrastructure, they need less taxes and less inflation. By goodness, they also need less regulation. With Webster Tarpley's solutions, focus on government investment would take our eyes off the ball on de-regulation. For why this is more powerful, look no further than milk. Britain is self-sufficient in milk, but farmers can't make money on it, because farmers can't sell raw milk products via third party distribution or retail. Farmers must, by law, sell their milk to wholesalers to have it pasteurized, (for health reasons?!?!). This turns milk into a commodity where focus is on reducing margins and costs, but illuminist company's get all the distribution and retail contracts. To make matters worse, raw milk is safer and many times more nutritious than pasteurized milk  raw-milk-facts.com. I buy raw milk direct, and get a choice of four types, from different breeds, each a different quality and cost, from the last free market left in Britain, The Farmers Market.

Farmers, at the farmers market, able to circumvent insane/corrupt regulations can now thrive. Imagine how much they would thrive, absent regulations on a wider scale, and free from such high levels of tax and inflation?! You can't begin to imagine the wealth we'd have. This single piece of regulation is the example of millions of others, all interconnected into a web that holds back free humanity from vast wealth and wonderful existence.

We need bottom up growth, driven by smaller government, not bigger government.

Webster Tarpley should be debated on solutions, on the Alex Jones Show, head to head, with a Libertarian economist. Indeed, all those seeking statist solutions should have to debate their solutions with Libertarians, who proved their worth by predicting the crisis and its causes. Unfortunately, Alex has stated, that the "Von Mises" crowd don't have the solutions, so listeners aren't exposed to this.

But you can get that point of view from lewrockwell.com and mises.org.

In particular, I recommend Lew Rockwell's podcasts: http://lewrockwell.com/podcast/

, and the massive media section on mises.org, http://mises.org/media.aspx, in particular, the fabulous resource of FREE audiobook versions of classic economic texts: http://mises.org/media.aspx?action=category&ID=85

[Raincheck]

I agree with Webster Tarpley that Derivatives must be deleted, shredded and destroyed. Their perpetrators put behind bars.

But that's where it ends.

I'll walk with you and Webster that far. Any more and I fear we will all fall in the ditch.

[clearmyst]

Alex should not make such a shoddy assumption,
at least allow lew rockwell or some other mises affiliate to present their case on his show as guests!

[Revolt426]

the reality of the situation is that tarpley has a far more realistic approach then the malthusian genocidal austrian insanity of allowing the entire system to collapse i.n order to obey the pure trickery posed by the snakes at the austrian school. What the austian school proposes is we take the economic expansion of 7 billion human beings and collapse it by pegging it to a piece of metal and strangulating the economy of currency to develope a sustainable amount of infrastructure that their beloved free markets are utterly INCAPABLE OF BUILDING...Thereby depriving billions of PEOPLE Of basic needs like CLEAN WATER TREATMENT PLANTS For example. you think the maglev is a waste ? go read a history book about what the intercontinental railway did in the 1800s. Austrians see any activity for general welfare of humanity as a waste while they NEGLECT THE FACT That modern capitalism is not possible without modern infrastructure.

[Revolt426]

in addition the austrian school neglects to acknowledge all modern private sector technology is DERIVED From non other then federal infrastructure investments. For example all modern computer chips... Where did they come lfrom ?. The kennedy space program. The internet ? Darpa. modern trade routes ?. The intercontinental railway.... So you want the free markets? the free markets DONT EXIST. It is a utopian ideal. An acronym for goldman sachs and jp morgan

[planning4acrash]

I propose progressive Libertarianism. First, pull back the troops, second, wipe out derivatives and corporate welfare, third, slash regulations and taxes, last, reduce social security once people have jobs to go to. This is freedom, yes it is wild and scary, but humans were made, by God, to be free. Learn about it, deal with it, and become part of the solution.

Ron Paul has STATED that social security would be the last thing to be rolled back. He would provide social security (very low cost), until economic freedom provides dispersed wealth.

ANY big government intervention, will be at the expense, and paid for, by the productive private sector. Any massive maglev system, driven by public private partnership, as would have to be the case under Tarpley's plans, would involve a massive land-grab by the establishment, as occurred during the railway expansion.

With Tarpley's solution, you will see big contracts for illuminist corporations, at the expense of local mom and pop businesses, because the huge government programs would push up bond yields and crowd out the corporate investment sector for decades.

Once the public sector has grown back again, demand for maglev can be met, once the economy has saved up enough cash to pay for, and developed enough demand to support a new system. Maglev, under those circumstances, would be focused on actual need that won't need state support. Developed via private subscription and investment from savings, from a 100% deposit banking system, the expansion would be non-inflationary and therefore stable for the future.

With economic freedom, it would be shocking how fast the economy would grow. We would see 20% GDP rise per year, in the first half decade. You haven't lived through that, but just look at the history books. We would repeat the stupendous growth seen in the 19th Century, when sound money existed, and America was the envy of the world.

[Geolibertarian]

I don't agree with Tarpley on everything, nor do I disagree with the Austrian School on everything.

In fact, I actually agree with Austrian Schoolers on many issues. Like them, I oppose all of the following:

     * occupational licensing barriers;

     * both wage and sales taxes;

     * corporatist trade agreements that, as such, are neither "free" nor "fair";

     * interventionist foreign policies;

     * compulsory schooling;

     * victim disarmament (i.e. "gun control"); and

     * governmental assaults on civil liberties
 
And even on the issue of monetary reform, once fractional reserve banking has been outlawed and the current debt-based money system completely replaced by a debt-free greenback system, I would at least be open (particularly if certain election reforms remained unimplemented) to the idea of reforming the legal tender law so that U.S. Treasury currency is good merely for the payment of all public debts (as opposed to both public and private), since that would allow for a web of competing private currencies to rise up along side the national currency, thereby keeping those in charge of the latter in check.

However, there are four key issues on which I passionately disagree with the Austrian School:

(a) the idea that the only way to get out of the current depression is to let everything collapse first -- i.e., to let the very banking criminals who caused this crisis in the first place foreclose on everyone, and to euphemistically call this fraud-based looting of the real economy a market-based "correction" or "adjustment";

(b) the idea that the only way to have "sound" money is to institute gold-based money system;

(c) this cartoonish notion that all government regulations are bad by definition, and the consequent reluctance of the Austrian Schoolers over at lewrockwell.com to even mention the word "derivatives," presumably since doing so would call attention to the fact that the quadrillion-dollar derivatives bubble could never have been created to begin with had the Glass-Steagall Act -- a form of "government intervention" -- not been repealed in 1999; and

(d) the notion that there's no fundamental difference between commodity speculation, on the one hand, and land speculation, on the other (see this and this).

Now, putting aside for the moment the fourth issue (since I've never heard Webster address land speculation), I'll simply say that, such is the intensity of my disagreement with Austrian Schoolers on the first three, that if there were a presidential election tomorrow, and the only two candidates on the ballot were Webster Tarpley and Lew Rockwell, I'd choose Tarpley.

Not because I agree with him on everything, but because he (if nothing else) would at least not implement policies that would turn half the population into Third World peasants.

[planning4acrash]

A dollar greenback would be horrid. Politicians, given power to print it would, and one would see a return to inflation. Fail to limit governments power to print money by providing discipline with gold, and they will take advantage of it. Just imagine yourself with a printing press, surely you'd want to print a few trill for you and your friends? We are all the same in that respect. You may want to print it to do good, but it would have the same immorality and same negative affect. You may not do it, but your successors will be lining up to take advantage.

Gold backing would fix the money supply to avoid deflation. A Greenback would tend to deflate after this horrid bubble.

Glasteagle was only required becase the fractional reserve system required restraints.

Austrians believe in regulation, but only regulation that protects property rights, and enforces contract i.e. to limit the power of govenment to print money (protect money ownership), and protect freedom via natural common law, as per the declaration of independence, magna carta, etc.

[Revolt426]

A dollar greenback would be horrid. Politicians, given power to print it would, and one would see a return to inflation. Fail to limit governments power to print money by providing discipline with gold, and they will take advantage of it. Just imagine yourself with a printing press, surely you'd want to print a few trill for you and your friends? We are all the same in that respect. You may want to print it to do good, but it would have the same immorality and same negative affect. You may not do it, but your successors will be lining up to take advantage.

Gold backing would fix the money supply to avoid deflation. A Greenback would tend to deflate after this horrid bubble.

Glasteagle was only required becase the fractional reserve system required restraints.

Austrians believe in regulation, but only regulation that protects property rights, and enforces contract i.e. to limit the power of govenment to print money (protect money ownership), and protect freedom via natural common law, as per the declaration of independence, magna carta, etc.

You cant have it both ways. You are either an Austrian or not, you cannot say "OH, Glass Steagall was needed but everything else isn't" and then say "OH social secrurity is bad but it would be rolled back LAST", "Oh, Derivatives are bad but everything else is ok".

You double speak quite often in regards to Austrian teachings, which are essentially the Government is the enemy and cannot under any circumstances build anything for the General Welfare of the population nor regulate the infallable economic system  that will never fail so long as the enemy, Government, stays out of it.

Glass Steagall alone proves the Austrian school is complete hogwash but we can go deeper into the matter if you wish.

As for the Greenback, if the currency was ISSUED by INVESTING it DIRECTLY into INFRASTRUCTURE it would have LABOUR attached to it - as opposed to a PIECE of METAL - and infact - you're Gold Standard policies have utterly FAILED numerous times in U.S. History, let's start with the Brilliant Andrew Jackson who blew half the countries wealth by disintigrating a currency?


No absolutely not, you worry about inflation - do you realize that if a Gold Standard were implimented you would slave for the rest of your life to pay a few Thousand dollars worth of debt off via the biggest Deflaitionary HELL ever  experienced?

You would literally be a slave for the remainder of your life

How about the Great Depression? we were ON THE GOLD STANDARD prior to FDR taking office , did it stop printing of money? No, 100 Billion dollars in Gold Redeemable currency was issued by a PRIVATE bank (Hey hey Private, the Austrians love it) when the FED had 4 Billion in it's reserves.

It is dumbfounding that someone can possibly argue for further de-regulation after witnessing what the PRIVATE SECTOR , not the GOVERNMENT, did in regards to creating 1.5 Quadrillion dollars of ficticious capital.

It is even further dumbfounding that one would argue an investment into a maglev for instance, which would triple the speed of Trade Transit and cut the cost in half - to argue that it is worthless?

You want the Austrian School policies, go impliment them in the United Kingdom, and here in the U.S. we will use the American System, that was founded under our first President and Treasury Secretary - then we will see whos economy expands and who returns to the stone age.

The audasity of even suggesting pegging 7 Billion souls economic opportunities to a Domestic Gold Standard is in itself suicide - you may has well do what the Japanese do and take a katana and gut yourself, because that is exactly what the result would be if we follow the "The Government cannot interfere, let the system collapse and put it back on the gold standard policy" - which would result in Martial Law due to a complete economic failure on tune with the Lombard Collapse of 1342.

You want disease, plague , deflation, poverty and genocide? then allow the bubble to explode and let the whole system collapse, as if there would be a functioning currency after such a thing happened for the "Solvent" banks to buy up the "Insolvent" Banks, when in reality nearly all the Commercial Banks in the world, which nearly all businesses in the world depend on , on a daily basis, are 100% Insolvent.

[Revolt426]

With Tarpley's solution, you will see big contracts for illuminist corporations, at the expense of local mom and pop businesses, because the huge government programs would push up bond yields and crowd out the corporate investment sector for decades.

Once the public sector has grown back again, demand for maglev can be met, once the economy has saved up enough cash to pay for, and developed enough demand to support a new system. Maglev, under those circumstances, would be focused on actual need that won't need state support. Developed via private subscription and investment from savings, from a 100% deposit banking system, the expansion would be non-inflationary and therefore stable for the future.

With economic freedom, it would be shocking how fast the economy would grow. We would see 20% GDP rise per year, in the first half decade. You haven't lived through that, but just look at the history books. We would repeat the stupendous growth seen in the 19th Century, when sound money existed, and America was the envy of the world.

#1 the proposal is not to build infrastructure via NO BID contracts, but infact to build via contracts that are BIDDED on. IN addition to that, illuminists would be put in front of a Pecora Commision like entity and put in jail under Tarpley's solution.

#2 "Once the public sector has grown back again..."
And you fail to realize nothing will EVER grow back again without basic infrastructure in place, considering the railways in the US are literally FALLING APART, along with the Bridges, Roads and every other bit of infrastructure that has not been updated in 4 decades. Labour is prior to capital - you wanna print money and give it to the private sector and pray they do the right thing? it doesn't work - history is certainly not on your side here. Infact, everytime a private robber baron has patented technology it has been locked away in a vault and never resurfaced.

#3 "With economic freedom, it would be shocking how fast the economy would grow" - How do you define economic freedom? with the definition you offer Goldman Sachs and it's financial masters in London would grow and 4/5ths of the worlds population DIES.

[planning4acrash]

#3 "With economic freedom, it would be shocking how fast the economy would grow" - How do you define economic freedom? with the definition you offer Goldman Sachs and it's financial masters in London would grow and 4/5ths of the worlds population DIES.

- NO, I said that we boost social security payments during the transition, that wealth comes via cutting taxes and instituting no inflation, no debt sound, gold backed currency, that is redeemable in gold. This money is transferred to the ENTIRE private sector, with NO discrimination, via the end of inflation, and massive tax cuts FUNDED primarily by pulling back troops and minding our own business, and ending corporate welfare for illuminist organizations. Then, we cut government spending wherever possible, bringing taxes right down, right down to about 10%. Instantly, with the end of 15% inflation, and 40% taxes (55% wealth bleed) - the private sector, and a temporarily supported unemployed, we'd get back on our feet again, after about 1-2yrs of painful readjustment, albeit with a social welfare net retained for the interim.
- We don't need additional infrastructure straight away BECAUSE economic activity has plummetted and needs to grow again, before existing infrastructure is once again strained.
- One of the main reasons we need big infrastructure is because fractional reserve banking and government pork barrel funnels money into corporate entities, leading to disproportionate growth in big city centres. With liberty, you would see equal growth in villages as you would see in cities, which is the PRIME REASON why massive infrastructure spending will not solve any problem, it merely reinforces the system we need ended.
- In Victorian days, villages were wealthy because farming was not regulated, small towns had many small industrial players, and cities were very diverse. Now, we just have big towers with corporate HQ's that sponge off everybody else, and take profits from chain stores and businesses, from communities into the cities. With my model, profits stay in small local businesses, and are spent locally, leading to a massive chain of events that create vast local wealth, dispersed accross the nation.

#1 the proposal is not to build infrastructure via NO BID contracts, but infact to build via contracts that are BIDDED on. IN addition to that, illuminists would be put in front of a Pecora Commision like entity and put in jail under Tarpley's solution.

The point is, that, at the moment, the only businesses big enough to build maglev are illuminist corporations. We can put the ring leaders in jail, but cannot jail the whole of GM, Crysler, Ford, all of the company and all of its employees. In anycase, you will need a big governme nt to decide which projects to follow. Government is not smart enough to do this. As mentioned before, ALL these projects will be proportional to the amount of capital they starve from the private sector, which itself, will invest capital far more efficiently. The Soviet Union produced 75% of its food on the 98% of land run by the government, 35% on private gardens. We live in a Sovietized world, America is run like the Soviet Union now. Soviet means run by councils, CFR, Bildeberg, etc.

#2 "Once the public sector has grown back again..."
And you fail to realize nothing will EVER grow back again without basic infrastructure in place, considering the railways in the US are literally FALLING APART, along with the Bridges, Roads and every other bit of infrastructure that has not been updated in 4 decades. Labour is prior to capital - you wanna print money and give it to the private sector and pray they do the right thing? it doesn't work - history is certainly not on your side here. Infact, everytime a private robber baron has patented technology it has been locked away in a vault and never resurfaced.

I meant to say, "when the private sector has grown back again...

--- You FAIL to realize that government isn't smart enough to decide which infrastructure many areas, what  is required.   One area, for example, may require additional internet capacity, another may need a building program of 30sqm studio's for ceramic producers, one may need outlets for local producers, producers, tent cities are demonstrating a need for compact city centre housing for those who want to get on their feet, large farms need breaking up and taken over by family farmers, big superstores probably need breaking up into multiple trader market areas, e.g. farmers markets, for some areas, the infrastructure they need is a farmers or a crafts market, some places will need a small car-park to bring people in.

--- You FAIL to understand that the type of small business that actually provides growth, corporations usually outsource jobs, growth comes from small to medium sized industries, most of these require subtle infrastructure that government is not smart enough to identify and provide. A business with two people hires one person, it grows by 1/3, if that industry is growing, we can quickly see thousands of jobs provided in small competitive firms.

The specific bridges and roads you want improved may have nothing to do with supporting the future growth industry. If you have the wrong target, you will have built your big pork barrel project at the expense of other businesses YOU HAVE NOT ACKNOWLEDGED that the cost of government providing, is the FACT that government can only take money from the productive private sector. YOUR GROWTH industry's are crowded from the private finance and corporate bond market. Government investment is not proportional to new activity, it is proportional to the activity it stifles.

--- Roads, railway, all these things were provided by the PRIVATE SECTOR. Government caused inflation was what stopped them from being going concerns and is what made socialism necessary. Get back to sound money, and you will be laughing.

Just imagine what we can provide now from the private sector, when Victorian technology plus freedom, built much of what we value today.

[planning4acrash]

All of the small business investments will be slashed by 20 to 50% by Tarpley's INSANE, projects that won't be used, crowding mom and pop out of the loans and corporate bonds market.

If people don't use maglev now, or during the boom, how the heck do we fill them during the depression? Flying will be cheaper than a maglev ticket, PEOPLE WILL FLY OR DRIVE, except those on government payroll.

[planning4acrash]

The Greenback was a disaster for post-war America. America got hyper-inflation.

America should have taxed people heavily to pay for the war, then dropped the taxes, post victory, they would have avoided inflation.

Failure of the greenback is why gold and silver are written into the constitution.

---

Being progressive and pragmatic about a transition to liberty is not doublethink, it acknowledges that there will be a transition, and that some changes are higher priority than others.

[Geolibertarian]

The Greenback was a disaster for post-war America.

No it wasn't:

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

Thanks to over a century of relentless propaganda, the image of the Greenbacks comes down to us as worthless paper money. But upon more careful examination, on balance they were probably the best money system America has ever had....Demonstrating how far monetary history has been distorted, readers may be surprised to learn that every Greenback printed was ultimately as valuable as its gold equivalent, and became redeemable for gold coinage at full value. Today the Greenback supporters are erroneously presented as merely being pro-inflation or against sound money. What they really wanted was a more honest money system, controlled by government, instead of banks....

They [Greenbacks] were receivable for all dues and taxes to the U.S., except import duties, which still had to be paid in coin. The Greenbacks were payable for all claims against the U.S. except interest on bonds which was still payable in coin. The Greenbacks were declared a legal tender for all other debts, public and private....

Greenback critics argue that they were inflationary and mistakenly measure the inflation against gold, starting at equal to a gold dollar in early 1862, and falling to 36 cents against a gold dollar by mid 1864. So one gold dollar exchanged for nearly $2.50 in Greenbacks. That is often the whole of their analysis and it is very misleading. Actually the Greenbacks did drop against gold; first to 58 cents at the end of 1862, then back up to 82 cents in mid 1863 and then down to a brief low of 36 cents on July 16, 1864.

From that point they moved up steadily, averaging 39 cents for August; 45 cents for September; and 48 cents for October, 1864. They retreated to $0.44 in December, and averaged $0.68 for December 1865. From there they gradually rose to $1.00, at par with gold in December 1878. Greenbacks became freely convertible into gold, dollar for dollar, in January 1879....

Economists mistakenly argue that it was only because the Greenbacks were eventually made convertible into gold by law, that made them hold and increase their value. However, that law was a hard fought political struggle, dependent on the 1868 presidential election. The battle could have gone either way and the actual "resumption" law could not get passed by Congress until 1874, for implementation in 1879. This could not have kept the Greenback from further declines, and start moving it upward back in mid-1864.

What did occur in July 1864 was that our government put a limit of $450 million on the Greenbacks and from that month they started rising (i.e. gold began falling in terms of Greenbacks)....

While the Greenbacks lost substantial value for a period, the nation was engaged in the bloodiest war in its history, in which 13% of the population served in the armed forces and 625,000 died....Is it reasonable to expect that any government in those circumstances could completely protect its citizens from financial and other hardships?

[Economic historian Irwin] Unger has noted that:

"It is now clear that inflation would have occurred even without the Greenback issue."

And comparing a wartime inflation under a government run money system (the Civil War) to wartime inflation under a private banker run system (WW I), Civil War historian [J.G.] Randall wrote:

"The threat of inflation was more effectively curbed during the Civil War than during the First World War."....

The fact that the Greenbacks were not accepted for import duties may also have been an important negative factor against the currency:

"Hence it has been argued that the Greenback circulation issued in 1862 might have kept at par with gold if it, too, had been made receivable for all payments to the Government," wrote financial historian [Davis Rich] Dewey.

Also, if interest payments on government bonds had been paid in Greenbacks instead of gold, a large part of the demand for gold would have disappeared.

-- Stephen Zarlenga, The Lost Science of Money, pp. 453-65

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


So the bottom line is that, contrary to popular myth, Greenbacks actually performed quite well (particularly given the extreme circumstances in which they were issued), and would have functioned even better if they had been made receivable for the payment of both import duties and interest on government bonds, and would have functioned better still if they had been issued for the production, rather than destruction, of public goods.

Austrian School cranks will never admit to this, of course, so they just mindlessly parrot the same old lies, hoping that no one will bother to check whether their baseless assertions are actually rooted in fact or not.

Failure of the greenback is why gold and silver are written into the constitution.

Wrong again. Had it not been for the Continentals, there would never have been a Constitution in the first place:

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

http://www.monetary.org/briefusmonetaryhistory.htm

CONTINENTAL CURRENCY - LIFEBLOOD OF THE REVOLUTION

The skirmishes at Lexington and Concord are considered the start of the Revolt, but the point of no return was probably May 10, 1775 when the Continental Congress assumed the power of sovereignty by issuing its own money.

Congress authorized a total of $200 million; and though at first, they had no legal power to do so, had no courts or police, or power to levy taxes; the Continental currency functioned well in the early years and became a crucial part of the revolution. In 1776, it was only at a 5% discount to coinage, when General Howe took over New York city and made it a center for British counterfeiting. Newspaper ads openly offered the forgeries:

"Persons going into other colonies may be supplied with any number of counterfeit Congress notes for the price of the paper per ream. They are so neatly executed that there is no risque in getting them off. ... Enquire for Q.E.D. at the Coffee House from 11 PM to 4 AM."

Congress did not exceed its authorized issue of $200 million (except to replace worn out notes), but the British certainly did’ We don’t know how much they counterfeited, but it could have been billions; and yet the Continental currency continued to function! In March 1778 after 3 years of war, it was at $2.01 Continental for $1 of coinage.

General Henry Clinton complained to Lord George Germaine that "The experiments suggested by your lordships have been tried, no assistance that could be drawn from the power of gold or the arts of counterfeiting have been left untried but still the currency ... has not failed."

Finally it did fail, but not before providing the foundation for delivering the nation, carrying the revolution over 5 years to within 6 months of its victory. Thomas Paine wrote:

"Every stone in the bridge that has carried us over, seems to have a claim upon our esteem. But this was a corner stone, and its usefulness cannot be forgotten." (p. 116)

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION DOWNPLAYED US EXPERIENCE

Yet by the time of the Convention, the great benefits of the Continentals was nearly ignored; along with much of the rest of our hard won monetary experiences. Many wanted to emphasize that the Continentals became worthless; placed all abstract money under that cloud, and rejected the idea of paper money altogether.

They ignored the fact that paper money was crucial in giving us a nation; that abstract money usually requires an advanced legal system in place; that the normal method of assuring its acceptability is to allow the taxes to be paid in it. And then there was the little matter of a War against the world’s strongest power!

Tom Paine would say it best:

"But to suppose as some did, that, at the end of the war, it was to grow into gold or silver or become equal thereto was to suppose that we were to get $200 millions of dollars by going to war, instead of paying the cost of carrying it on." (p. 117)

CONVENTION SKIRTS THE MONEY ISSUE

The Convention met from May to September, 1787, but the money question was not taken up in earnest until August 16! When we think of the "Founders" at the Convention, we should remember that Jefferson and Paine were not there; and Franklin was so advanced in age that someone else had to deliver his closing speech for him. Van Buren was 6 years old.

In addition to ignoring the nations rich practical experience with money, the convention paid little heed to the brilliant writings of John Locke and Benjamin Franklin on money. The delegates didn't bother to find out why Locke in 1718 wrote:

"Observe well these rules: It is a very common mistake to say that money is a commodity ... Bullion is valued by its weight ... money is valued by its stamp."

Locke viewed money as a pledge for wealth, rather than wealth itself:

"For mankind having consented to put an imaginary value upon gold and silver by reason of their durableness, scarcity and not being liable to be counterfeited; have made them by general consent, the common pledges ... they having as money, no other value, but as pledges ... and they procure what we want or desire only by their quantity, it is evident that the intrinsic value of silver and gold, used in commerce is nothing but their quantity."

They didn't consider the reasons Ben Franklin gave in his 1729 "Modest Inquiry Into The Nature And Necessity Of A Paper Currency, for agreeing with Locke’s view: "Silver and gold...(are) of no certain permanent value..." and "We must distinguish between money as it is bullion, which is merchandise, and as by being coined it is made a currency; for its value as merchandize and its value as a currency are two distinct things ..."

THE ABUSE OF MONETARY THEORY

Unfortunately the delegates were more influenced by a crude and primitive theory which heavily supported the Bank of England, and contained several crucial monetary errors, which tended to "legitimize" the Bank’s system of finance. This theory of money was part of Adam Smith’s WEALTH OF NATIONS, published in 1776, and quoted by delegates to the Convention. Smith wrote very little about money, but his monetary mistakes and inconsistencies have had such a bad effect on mankind’s money systems, that we’ll devote a full chapter to him later. His book promoted the idea that only gold and silver are money, and never mentions the legal concept of money, as put forward by the philosophers and jurists Bishop Berkeley, John Locke, Julius Paulus, Plato, Aristotle, and others.

In 1786, anticipating the Convention, a very curious book, "ESSAYS ON MONEY" was published anonymously in the US Its entire thrust was to "theoretically" attack the idea of government paper money:

"State bills are an absurd form of money and not money at all."

Why? - no answer. It turned out to be written by the Clergyman, John Witherspoon. Referring to Locke and Franklin’s views, he misrepresented their point on money, saying:

"They seem to deny the intrinsic value of gold and silver."

Discussion? - none.

Then, using a rhetorical device, he stated some arguments for government paper money, and stonewalled them, pretending they didn't matter. Concerning those with personal knowledge of some of the colonies paper money systems:

"We are told by persons of good understanding that (paper money) contributed to (the colonies) growth and improvement."

Rebuttal? - none.

Concerning the fall of the Continental Currency:

"(Some say it was due to the) Counterfeiting ... of our enemies".

Disagreement? No germane discussion.

[Continued...]

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


As anyone who's seen the first hour of The Money Masters knows, banking oligarchs were well aware of the enormous threat that debt-free paper money posed to their parasitic privileges -- and hence to the unearned fortunes these privileges provided them -- so they used their powerful influence to ensure that Congress was given the power to borrow paper money at interest from a private bank instead of the power to issue such money itself at no interest.

Criminal bankers and financiers have been exploiting this Constitutional loophole ever since, and the American people are now suffering through yet another banker-engineered depression because of it.

As for the alleged superiority of gold and silver money over debt-free greenbacks, history shows that Austrian School cranks are wrong on that issue as well:

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

[Andrew] Jackson and Van Buren removed the monetary power from the private bankers but did not re-establish it in the hands of the nation. Instead, Van Buren organized the Independent Treasury System, establishing 15 sub branches of the Treasury to handle government moneys in 1840. From December 1836 the government moved toward making and receiving all payments in coinage, or truly convertible bank notes....Once the state bank notes were no longer accepted by the government, their circulation was cut back dramatically.

This was the closest our nation has ever come to implementing a real gold/silver standard. Operating under the commodity theory of money, Van Buren, who truly cared for the Republic, helped bring on the worst depression the Nation had ever seen, starting in 1837. It was reportedly even worse than that caused by the 2nd Bank of the U.S. in 1819. Bad as the state bank notes were, they had still been functioning as money!

Those who proclaim that no gold and silver money system has ever failed should consider that whether you are a laborer, farmer, or industrialist, the money system's success or failure is not measured by the value of a piece of metal. When your job, your farm, or factory has disappeared in a monetarily created depression, the system has failed!

-- Stephen Zarlenga, The Lost Science of Money, p. 426

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


To any relative newcomers who may be reading this, I invite you to watch the following so that you'll have an even better understanding as to why gold-based money is not the panacea that the monetary-flat earthers from the Austrian School blindly insist it is:

       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9E0UPBtmTb0 (part 1 of 3)
       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9FWECWWN5o (part 2 of 3)
       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aM7D3mnUSI0 (part 3 of 3)

[Revolt426]

Planning4crash your lack of education historically is unbeleivable. You say the amazing growth in the 1800s was a result of the gold standard and free markets when in REALITY the united states was virtually bankrupt during the runup to the civil war due to the exact policies you are proposing. And infact revival of the greenback by lincoln and his credit system is what reindustrialized our nation and was copied by bismark of germany which re industrialized germany...... Which is where king edward came in.. Forced the german keiser to oust bismark and orchestrated world war 1 as a direct result of the lincoln style system that industrialized both nations and therefor was a threat to the british empire. Your skewing of historical facts will not work here.

[Revolt426]

All of the small business investments will be slashed by 20 to 50% by Tarpley's INSANE, projects that won't be used, crowding mom and pop out of the loans and corporate bonds market.

If people don't use maglev now, or during the boom, how the heck do we fill them during the depression? Flying will be cheaper than a maglev ticket, PEOPLE WILL FLY OR DRIVE, except those on government payroll.

again you fail to understand that a maglev would be occupied by not only people... But physical goods... And again you fail to realize modern infrastructure such as a maglev is required to replace our current rail system that is literally falling apart from 40 years of neglect..... In addition one more fact you fail to comprehend is that a maglev would triple transit speeds and cut costs potentially less then half for private sector trade. It is quite astonishing for someone to spew disinformation...be debunked and then do it agan

[planning4acrash]

again you fail to understand that a maglev would be occupied by not only people... But physical goods... And again you fail to realize modern infrastructure such as a maglev is required to replace our current rail system that is literally falling apart from 40 years of neglect..... In addition one more fact you fail to comprehend is that a maglev would triple transit speeds and cut costs potentially less then half for private sector trade. It is quite astonishing for someone to spew disinformation...be debunked and then do it agan

I have not been debunked. You have failed to learn, listen or apply logic.

ANYBODY who says that the economy needs just two big projects is a blithering idiot.

We had an economy that boomed, WITHOUT maglev. Its collapsed into itself, and apparently we need Maglev. Its total insanity, probably only one illuminous company is capable of maglev and mining the moons, its crazy. Just stark raving bonkers. Yes, crumbling infrastructure needs rebuilding, but first, we must re-build the monetary base, and build factories and get people farming. This will involve a significant amount of movement of people, I'd imagine, many will leave the cities and start work in rural/semi-rural areas, where they can farm, mine, and produce to their hearts content.

Just say I'm right, and the economy needs to shrink back from huge UN sponsored cramped "sustainable" cities, just suppose I'm right, Tarpley will be in a 20th century mindset, literally fighting tooth and nail against a free market that actually needs potholes filled in country roads, alongside a few standard freight rail lines, which will spring up where industry CHOOSES to congregate, not where Tarpley DEMANDS a maglev station.

I can just imagine Tarpley the Fat Controller, standing there declaring "HERE BE A STATION, YE SHALL START UP BUSINESS HERE OR BE DAMNED", so the proles reply "I WANT TO LIVE ELSEWHERE, THE CITIES ARE STARK WITH NO SPACE TO BUILD IN OR LAND TO TILL", Tarpley replies, "YOU SHALL CONFORM TO MY UTOPIA, GO TO THE TARPLEY RE-EDUCATION CAMP, AND PAY YOUR 40% MAGLEV TAX", so the prole starved, couldn't afford to start up a business, and certainly couldn't afford the maglev ticket. Reduced to poverty by Tarpley, the prole was pleased that Greyhound still provided affordable travel for Thanksgiving.

-------

What people need, is less taxes, more money in their pockets and less parasitical government and big pork barrel nonsense spouted by people like Tarpley, who, capable of assessing the current moment, are criminally insane, when it comes to planning the world's biggest economy.

[planning4acrash]

       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9E0UPBtmTb0 (part 1 of 3)
       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9FWECWWN5o (part 2 of 3)
       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aM7D3mnUSI0 (part 3 of 3)

Greenback helped the war, but following hyperinflation led to fiat being outlawed by the CONSTITUTION.

But fine, I may chuck you a Gold Sovereign, post hyperinflation, whilst you clutch your greenbacks, and use them to keep warm in the coming depression.

I already am on a personal gold standard, the UK pound plunged 40% this year, my savings went up 40%, because I was on a gold standard.

You are poison, a Luciferian idiot, to think that you can talk away 5000yrs of proven value.\

Here all about it, REVOLTING, and GEO-UN-LIBERTARIAN anounce that gold has no value, less than stinking government printed paper. THERFORE it is, and shall be, and allways was. AND NOTE, we are at war with East Asia, West Asia is our Ally, Always has been, we weren't just at war with them, and, chocolate rations are down 10%, hail the 20% chocolate ration increase.

GEO, hows about you pass me some of your hashish,

[Revolt426]

I have not been debunked. You have failed to learn, listen or apply logic.

ANYBODY who says that the economy needs just two big projects is a blithering idiot.

We had an economy that boomed, WITHOUT maglev. Its collapsed into itself, and apparently we need Maglev. Its total insanity, probably only one illuminous company is capable of maglev and mining the moons, its crazy. Just stark raving bonkers. Yes, crumbling infrastructure needs rebuilding, but first, we must re-build the monetary base, and build factories and get people farming. This will involve a significant amount of movement of people, I'd imagine, many will leave the cities and start work in rural/semi-rural areas, where they can farm, mine, and produce to their hearts content.

Just say I'm right, and the economy needs to shrink back from huge UN sponsored cramped "sustainable" cities, just suppose I'm right, Tarpley will be in a 20th century mindset, literally fighting tooth and nail against a free market that actually needs potholes filled in country roads, alongside a few standard freight rail lines, which will spring up where industry CHOOSES to congregate, not where Tarpley DEMANDS a maglev station.

I can just imagine Tarpley the Fat Controller, standing there declaring "HERE BE A STATION, YE SHALL START UP BUSINESS HERE OR BE DAMNED", so the proles reply "I WANT TO LIVE ELSEWHERE, THE CITIES ARE STARK WITH NO SPACE TO BUILD IN OR LAND TO TILL", Tarpley replies, "YOU SHALL CONFORM TO MY UTOPIA, GO TO THE TARPLEY RE-EDUCATION CAMP, AND PAY YOUR 40% MAGLEV TAX", so the prole starved, couldn't afford to start up a business, and certainly couldn't afford the maglev ticket. Reduced to poverty by Tarpley, the prole was pleased that Greyhound still provided affordable travel for Thanksgiving.

-------

What people need, is less taxes, more money in their pockets and less parasitical government and big pork barrel nonsense spouted by people like Tarpley, who, capable of assessing the current moment, are criminally insane, when it comes to planning the world's biggest economy.

Your denial is unbelievable, so let us go over a few BASIC FACTS about the Austrian Schools policies and what you are flat out IGNORING and REFUSE to address. How about you address the following instead of giving me mathmatical statistics that are irrelivant:

Let's start with History:
1: THE GREENBACK
You claim the economic boom in the 1800's was due to "Free Market" "Free Trade" and Gold Standards, 100% FALSE . DEBUNKED, DISINFORMATION. The FACT of  the matter is, when Andrew Jackson came into office in 1829 and implimented your Domestic Gold Standard policies it resulted a temporary boom followed by a self destruction of the economy in 1837 via destruction of the State Issued currency and over issueing of Gold Convertable Notes. In the years after the panic of 1837, the U.S. Gradually moved towards complete bankruptcy until Lincoln  was elected President. Lincoln , being an intelligent human being, removed the gold standard and revived the Greenback, directly investing it into agriculture technology and the Intercontinental Railway. What this did was it allowed the U.S. to BYPASS British Controlled Trade Routes and spurred the private sector by giving them a faster, more effecient alternative then naval routes.. After Lincoln was assassinated the Railway had already taken it's toll pushing the United States to the state of world economic superpower, this prompted Chancellor Otto Von Bismark of Germany to MIMIC the exact railway and credit policies of Lincoln, which he indeed did.... and the result was a tremendous re-industrialization of Germany.

NOW, In comes King Edward the 8th of Britain, Uncle of Keiser Willhelm of Germany. Otto Von Bismark made a secret peace treaty with the Czar of Russia to NOT INTERVENE should Austria invade the Balkans, to prevent continental war. So, the Keisers uncle King Edward pressured Willhelm to OUST Bismark, which nullified the peace arrangement and allowed King Edward to Draw Austria, Germany and Russia into a continental WAR as Britain sat back and essentially watched the other powers destroy each other, typical British Empire dirty tactics.

AFTER World War I, Britain, at the Treaty of Versailles blaimed the entire war on Germany and forced them to pay reperations. This , combined with the War debt put such a tremendous burdain on Germany that it was virtually unable to continue to function , and without real leadership it lead to Hyperinflation....... the most importent aspect of this is, without the Treaty of Versailles , Germany would not have collapsed.

2: The GOLD STANDARD
Let us begin with addressing the fact that the Gold Standard is a form of Anglo Dutch Usery because they have a monopoly on the world gold supplies and we can go from there.....
Now Let's emphasis what the Gold Standard would RESULT IN, AS IT DID in the 1830's:
Keep in mind, in the 1800's there were MILLIONS of people, and we are in the year 2009 with a Word Population of 7 BILLION HUMAN BEINGS. So, you propose we peg the BASIC economic needs and expansion of these 7 billion human beings to a piece of metal. The Result of this is nothing short of pure GENOCIDE. Besides the ABSURD notion that gold has intrinsic value, considering gold cannot grow little GOLD LEGS and produce Labour and PHYSICAL GOODS that other nations purchase, There is not enough gold on the Planet to sustain 7 Billion Human Beings if pegged to economic expansion. The main result would be a deflationary holocaust - so riddle me this. If you purchased a house via a 200,000$ mortgage and the dollar returned to the Gold standard, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PAY IT OFF AFTER THE RESULTING DEFLATION?. Keep in mind, the Gold Standard would strangle the economy for currency which is in itself a crime against humanity, but regardless, if payrolls go down and the dollar deflates you will be a SLAVE for the remainder of your life, paying off a mortgage, or even a simple student loan.

3: INFRASTRUCTURE
This includes the Gold Standard, because if it were implimented , the Nation States would not be able to build VITAL things such as Clean Water Treatment plants and Nuclear Power Plants which are the very things neccessary for the sustaining of 7 billion people world wide. Can you provide me with a solution to surviving without drinking water from the Von Mises book of insanity?. In addition, you fail to comprehend that without basic infrastructure in place the private sector will be UNABLE to rebuild it self, and keep in mind that the Private Sector is 100% BANKRUPT. So, you propose we WAIT , (As if any private sector growth would be even possible after the complete collapse of an economy) , Until the Private Sector "Grows" and allow the Private Sector to build infrastructure...... now that is what i call genocide, considering it would likely take the private sector atleast a decade, probably TWO decades to even attempt to rebuild itself, and with a Gold Standard it would be virtually impossible.

Please address the above 3 issues then we can continue debating, because these are the 3 major issues you have completely ignored. Thankyou.

[planning4acrash]

Nonsense. Americans forget that the British, via the Bank of England, was capable on an international scale, of causing the type of carnage now being caused by the Feral Reserve.

The ONLY justification for a Greenback, is if, as is suggested, America doesn't have any gold in Fort Knox. If it has what it says it has, it simply re-values its gold, defaults on debt, (it can support this via its military force), and staves off deflation without the need for any more printed funny money.

If America doesn't have any gold, well, its screwed.

The ONLY reason US dollar got world reserve status, was because it was backed by Gold.


DEBUNK my 70% profit on gold appreciation. DEBUNK gold soaring during the panic of the 1870's, DEBUNK gold soaring during the great depression, DEBUNK gold soaring ever since the break with the gold standard during the 1970's.

[Magnumpi]

This wonderful railroad boom caused a record breaking depression.

7 Billion people? I don't care about them, he who owns the precious metals is okie dokie. I help others by helping myself. Scenario: economy collapses. Dollar is worth less than nothing. Out of the ruins some people rebuild farms and industry on gold that retained it's buying ability as it has forever... That's basically it. Everyone else shot themselves in the feet.

I have a well for water. My car can handle a few potholes, and if it doesn't the truck would. You along with others didn't prepare? Awwww... tough cookies. Talk about waiting? How long till a US currency based on labor/land/??? actually exists. How about this. In a free society, you can have this magical currency if you want. And anyone lame enough to take it seriously can use it. Meanwhile, you'll get no support from me, or my lasting wealth, free of inflation, for asinine "We" projects.  But that's not good enough. So, build an army, force a tax on everyone's labor, 360 degrees right back to where we are. Yay!

[planning4acrash]

What nonsense, we have enough water, maybe we need investment in more Ecoloblue's?! Maybe we don't need plants everywhere, just need high quality efficient units in our own houses. Maybe people can make up their own minds, rather than depending on GOD Tarpley and SATAN big government to wipe our noses.


The private sector is only bankrupt because big government crowded out the private sector and taxes us, via tax and inflation, at over 50%.

We don't need nuclear just yet, we have plenty of coal,  and could do with extra carbon dioxide. Business, operating at lower levels, doesn't need additional capacity just yet, they need more money in their profits.

They need lower taxes, no inflation, and less bureaucracy, less peacocks strutting around directing funny money and fighting the vain, never one battle against Adam Smith's wonderful, fantastic invisible hand.

[planning4acrash]

"so riddle me this. If you purchased a house via a 200,000$ mortgage and the dollar returned to the Gold standard, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PAY IT OFF AFTER THE RESULTING DEFLATION?"



Shouldn't have been an idiot, spending that much money. You should go bankrupt, houses would then become affordable, and government can get out of providing affordable houses because the free market has provided them, and I don't need to be taxed to pay for affordable housing for poor people, because rich people want stupid prices propped up.

If you were stupid enough to not see the housing bubble, you don't deserve your money. You certainly shouldn't tax somebody like me who is clever enough to see it coming and invest accordingly. Tax me, and, you reduce my ability to invest sensibly in the future and provide you a job.

though, given your stupidity, I doubt your job will be better than toilet cleaning. But that's fine, we all have to start somewhere, maybe, forced into toilet cleaning, you will wake up, smell the coffee, and work towards doing something productive, rather than being a mouthpiece for parasitical government whores.

[Revolt426]

What nonsense, we have enough water, maybe we need investment in more Ecoloblue's?! Maybe we don't need plants everywhere, just need high quality efficient units in our own houses. Maybe people can make up their own minds, rather than depending on GOD Tarpley and SATAN big government to wipe our noses.

UTTER BULLSHIT. We have about 15 to 20 years worth of Drinking Water left world wide because of the lack of Water Treatement facilities. As for TARPLEY , you are not insulting TARPLEY, you are insulting the AMERICAN SYSTEM, which was founded during the ratification of our constitution, because that is precisely what Tarpley advocates. As for "BIG GOVERNMENT" , Government investing currencty directly into infrastructure, as noted in the preable to constitution "For the General Welfare of the people" would give currency real value via physical LABOUR. You are mincing the word "Big Government" with Monetary reform and it is pure LIES. Big Government would be, the Department of Education, the Department of Homeland Security etc.... In any case, your first assertion that we have "PLenty of Drinking Water" is a lie, go TELL THAT TO THE CITIZENS OF SOMALIA AND THE CONGO.

The private sector is only bankrupt because big government crowded out the private sector and taxes us, via tax and inflation, at over 50%.

Again, you LIE...... (Not suprisingly) the Private Sector is BANKRUPT because the government REPEALED GLASS STEAGALL, and the PRIVATE SECTOR engaged in massive SPECULATION in the form of a 1.5 QUADRILLION dollar bubble of DERIVATIVES. Last i checked, the Government did not create Derivatives, the Private Sector did.

We don't need nuclear just yet, we have plenty of coal,  and could do with extra carbon dioxide. Business, operating at lower levels, doesn't need additional capacity just yet, they need more money in their profits.

Another Bold Faced LIE. We dont need nuclear just yet? Well, if you actually did some research the energy output relative to population density has been utterly COLLAPSING for 4 DECADES. You ever heard of the Tennesse Valley Authority? what did that do? it supplied rural farmers with electricity when the private sector refused to and allowed them to re-build their farms. In addition, as highlighted above, tell the people of Africa they dont need Energy when they do not even have the luxory of lightbulbs in the majority of their communities.

They need lower taxes, no inflation, and less bureaucracy, less peacocks strutting around directing funny money and fighting the vain, never one battle against Adam Smith's wonderful, fantastic invisible hand.

Your invisable hand has resulted in 1.5 Quadrillion dollars of FUNNY MONEY, and you still have not addressed the 3 subjects i highlighted in the previous post, being HISTORY in regards to the 1800's, The Gold Standards Deflaionary Hell and, your horrid lie "We dont need clean water" . Are you INSANE?. or are you just in denial and unable to admit you are wrong?.

And as far as Adam Smith, i would go ahead and research that CLOWN as well and see who he was associated with because he is another FALSE PROPHET that you are worshipping.

[Revolt426]

"so riddle me this. If you purchased a house via a 200,000$ mortgage and the dollar returned to the Gold standard, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PAY IT OFF AFTER THE RESULTING DEFLATION?"



Shouldn't have been an idiot, spending that much money. You should go bankrupt, houses would then become affordable, and government can get out of providing affordable houses because the free market has provided them, and I don't need to be taxed to pay for affordable housing for poor people, because rich people want stupid prices propped up.

If you were stupid enough to not see the housing bubble, you don't deserve your money. You certainly shouldn't tax somebody like me who is clever enough to see it coming and invest accordingly. Tax me, and, you reduce my ability to invest sensibly in the future and provide you a job.

though, given your stupidity, I doubt your job will be better than toilet cleaning. But that's fine, we all have to start somewhere, maybe, forced into toilet cleaning, you will wake up, smell the coffee, and work towards doing something productive, rather than being a mouthpiece for parasitical government whores.

So you openly admit you are a genocidal maniac, it finally comes out...... the "CATTLE WERE IDIOTS" for taking loans out and trying to provide shelter for themselves, let us kick them out of their houses and make them slaves...... again you fail..

And in a sickening way, by calling everyone who took a mortgage out to purchase a home an idiot because it does not abide by your FALSE POLICIES

[Revolt426]

This wonderful railroad boom caused a record breaking depression.

7 Billion people? I don't care about them, he who owns the precious metals is okie dokie. I help others by helping myself. Scenario: economy collapses. Dollar is worth less than nothing. Out of the ruins some people rebuild farms and industry on gold that retained it's buying ability as it has forever... That's basically it. Everyone else shot themselves in the feet.

I have a well for water. My car can handle a few potholes, and if it doesn't the truck would. You along with others didn't prepare? Awwww... tough cookies. Talk about waiting? How long till a US currency based on labor/land/??? actually exists. How about this. In a free society, you can have this magical currency if you want. And anyone lame enough to take it seriously can use it. Meanwhile, you'll get no support from me, or my lasting wealth, free of inflation, for asinine "We" projects.  But that's not good enough. So, build an army, force a tax on everyone's labor, 360 degrees right back to where we are. Yay!

EXACTLY - and not suprisingly, he is from the Nation of Usery, the United Kingdom - and advocates going back to the stone age because he was "SMARTER" then the "Idiots" that took mortgages out to provide for their families.....

[Revolt426]

DEBUNK my 70% profit on gold appreciation. DEBUNK gold soaring during the panic of the 1870's, DEBUNK gold soaring during the great depression, DEBUNK gold soaring ever since the break with the gold standard during the 1970's.

Oh i have to address this one, for your own education. The Dollar WAS NOT ON THE GOLD STANDARD DURING BRETTON WOODS - IT WAS AN INTERNATIONAL EXCHANGE RATE CONTROL MECHANISM that ANCHORED THE DOLLAR TO GOLD at 35$ an OUNCE. It was NOT convertable to Gold in any WAY SHAPE or FORM.

And the exchange rate controls that your school fights to avoid, are precisely what WE NEED, because we are having an economic breakdown crisis and certain currencies are going to hyperinflate while others deflate rendering impossible to TRADE. IN addition, the floating exchange rate system we now have allows the speculative vultures to come in and short 3rd world countries currencies, drive them down into destruction and then swoop in with the IMF to loan them money and privatize/rape/pillage their coutries.

America built itself by FREEING itself from a domestic gold standard, as for Fort Knox - FDR's Bretton Woods system was NOT a Domestic Gold Standard as i just mentioned.

[Revolt426]

In regards to ENERGY OUTPUT, a CLEAR example of why we need power plants and the current infrastructure is utterly incapable of sustaining even HALF the world population:
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2004/3129world_grains.html

July 23, 2004
World Food Grains
Output Potential Falls
by Marcia Merry Baker

The wheat harvest drew to a close in July in Kansas—one of the world's leading wheat centers—and the estimate is the crop will be down by fully 35% from last year's decent level. On July 18, the Kansas Agricultural Statistics Service reported that this year's area harvested will be 8.7 million acres, 1.3 million fewer than last year; the average yield per acre will be 36 bushels, down 12 from last year's yield; so all told, the harvest will be 313.2 million bushels (8.5 million metric tons), down 35% from 2003. In addition, the milling quality of the harvestable wheat is poor.

The immediate circumstances for such a large swing in the crop (Winter wheat, the predominant U.S. type planted in the Fall), include prolonged drought in western Kansas, harvest-time storms in central Kansas, and other "natural" factors. However, the reason for this occurrence is not at all Mother Nature, but rather, the combined impact of decades of policies undermining reliable, secure farm output, both here in the U.S. Grain Belt, and in other granary regions of the world, from Argentina to France, Australia, the Canadian Prairie Provinces, Russia, and so on. They include:

Lack of infrastructure, refusal to rebuild or extend infrastructure;


Decades of underpaying family farmers, who have had to rely on off-farm jobs to survive; many have given up farming altogether;


High energy prices for fuel for farm machinery, drying grain, etc.;

Cartel control over processing, transportation, inputs, and trade.


In June, at the onset time of the Northern Hemisphere Winter wheat harvest, the U.S. Department of Agriculture issues its first-of-the-season harvest crop estimates; and likewise, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) issues its June global Food Outlook. For total world production of wheat and grains of all types (rice, corn, sorghum, oats, barley, rye, triticale, etc.), the picture is bleak.

How a once highly-productive agriculture region in Australia has been undermined over the past 30 years, is decribed in the interview below with farmers from the huge state of Western Australia, one of the world's leading wheat regions.

In contrast to this takedown process, China and India have pursued policies intended to build-up and stabilize their agriculture production, with notable success in recent years. However, in so many parts of the world, the farm sectors have been in decline, or in the case of Africa—despite its vast natural agro-climatic potential—obstructed by global financial powers, that the trend of total annual grain production of all kinds has been declining per capita, and headed for guaranteed famine.

One way to look at the effect of variable and inadequate harvests, is in terms of the drastic drawdown taking place in carryover stocks of grains (of all kinds). Table 1 shows the 40% drop in world stocks over five crop years from 2000/01 to 2004/05, from the June FAO Outlook Report.

For wheat in particular, the June USDA report forecast a serious gap between the amounts globally available, and needed for human consumption. In the 2003-04 season, the wheat harvest is estimated to be 550.02 million tons—almost 40 million tons less than what is needed for annual human consumption, estimated at 588.41 million tons. This simply means a huge drawdown in stocks; and hunger. This gap will help reduce world wheat reserves from the 167.14 million tons in reserve in 2002, to 126.43 million tons, a one-year drop of about 25%.

The ratio between wheat reserves available and consumption requirements is the worst since 1954, according to the USDA.

[Revolt426]

In regards to Energy Output Per Population (Capita)
The Astounding High Cost of `Free' Energy
by Laurence Hecht

The author is editor-in-chief of 21st Century Science & Technology.

Jan. 31—Every time someone mentions wind or solar power as the answer to our energy needs, the image that should form in your mind is that of 1 billion or more dying and starving children. If you do not yet understand why this is the case, you are forgiven. By the end of this piece you shall have been given the essential concepts and facts both to understand this ugly truth, and to act to prevent it.

Begin with this: To maintain a global population in a condition resembling a modern 21st-Century standard of living will require an installed electrical generating capacity of at least 3 to 5 kilowatts per capita. Today, only the United States, Japan, and a few countries of western Europe even approximate this level of generating capacity. Let us understand the meaning of this more clearly, before moving on to the crucial question of how we shall generate this power the world so desperately needs.

Kilowatts are a measure of electrical power, the amount of work that can be done per unit of time. One of the first means of measuring power was to compare it to that of a working horse. The standard horsepower is equivalent to about 750 watts of electricity. That means that it takes 750 watts of electricity, driving a motor or other device, to do the same work as a standard working horse. Thus, 1 kilowatt (1,000 watts) of electricity, is equivalent to the work of about 1.33 muscular horses of the working type. The horse cannot work all day, however, but perhaps for only one third of it, after subtracting the time for meals and rest. Thus, 1 kilowatt of electrical generating capacity, available all day and night, could do the work of 3 times 1.33 horses, which equals 4 horses.

Here in the United States, we have about 3 kilowatts of electrical generating capacity available per capita—much less than we need to be a truly productive economy, but still, something that most of the world comes nowhere near. Thus, we could say that every person in the United States, on average, has the work of 12 horses available to him every hour of the day and night, in the form of electricity.[1] Without electricity, the work of those silent horses must be done by men and women, laboring to turn pumps, to carry water on their heads, to spend a whole day scrubbing clothes, and another heating irons on a fire to press them, while such simple requirements as water and sewage treatment, refrigeration, and even the light bulb, go wanting. Such and worse remains the condition of a majority of the world's population—some 1.7 billion people who are entirely without electricity, and several billion more for whom the supply is intermittent and deficient.

China, for example, which produces a great part of the manufactured products consumed in the U.S.A., had only 0.3 kilowatts of generating capacity available per capita in 2005, which increased by 2008 to an estimated 0.5 kilowatts. Well over half of this electricity goes to power Chinese industry, the product of which is primarily exported. Thus, the amount available per person for use in China is less than 0.25 kilowatts, about one-third of a horsepower. Taken over the full 24 hours, we can say that the average person in China has available to him the work of 1 horse, compared to the 12 horses available in the United States. The source of most U.S. manufactured products is the low-wage labor of millions of Chinese, many of them from families with no access to even the electric light.

In India, Egypt, most of the rest of Africa, and large parts of South America, it is far worse. In Mexico, another major source of U.S. manufactured goods, the electricity available per capita is about the same as China. Such an injustice cannot continue for long. How then will we remedy it?

No one can seriously propose that the world energy shortage can be solved with windmills and solar panels. The proponents of these systems have never addressed the world need, except to propose such patronizing and pathetic schemes as solar-powered refrigerators for African villages, which only work, if at all, when the Sun is shining. But even the proposals to use solar and windmills in the developed countries are a chimera. They have never proven economically or technologically feasible, despite the enormous public expense in tax credits and subsidies which they have drawn upon.

To bring the present world population of 6.7 billion people up to a level of just 1.5 kilowatts of electrical generating capacity per capita will require that we build 6,000 gigawatts[2] (6 million megawatts) of generating capacity. The only feasible way to accomplish this is to embark now on a crash program to build nuclear power plants, making use of our limited existing capabilities and gearing up for a serial production capability for the new breed of fourth-generation, high-temperature helium-cooled reactors, among other models.

Could solar or wind power possibly address the world electricity deficit? The largest existing solar power plant, the solar concentrator known as Nevada Solar One, produces less than 15 megawatts of power, averaged over the course of the day.[3] The largest solar plant using photovoltaic panels is in Jumilla in southeastern Spain. It is rated at 23 megawatts maximum capacity. Divide this by four, and you have the actual average output of less than 6 megawatts! A single large nuclear power plant can produce 1,000 megawatts (1 gigawatt) or more of electrical power. It can do this all day every day, not just when the Sun shines, and on a land surface area hundreds of times smaller than the equivalent solar plants or wind farms.

What Is Energy Density?
But wind and solar power are "free" people say: The energy is there, a bounty of nature, we just have to use it. Yet once one analyzes such an argument, one sees that it is meaningless sophistry, even on the face of it. Coal, oil, and uranium are "free" in the same sense. A certain amount of work has to be done to mine them and bring them to the place where they will be consumed, but work also has to be done to utilize wind and solar, a very great deal of work compared to the benefit received.

Instead of such loose use of language, let us examine the two most important concepts in evaluating a power source, energy density and energy flux density. By the energy density of a fuel or power source, we mean the amount of useful work that can be derived from a given mass of the substance. By energy flux density, we mean the transformative power which can be obtained from that fuel source. Let us examine the first term first, and see what we can learn from it.

Over the course of human history, there have been several progressive increases in the energy density of the fuels employed. The transition from wood burning to coal (which is almost four times more energy-dense than wood), took place in Europe in the 18th Century. The higher temperatures and regulation that could be achieved with coal fires permitted the introduction of new technologies related to smelting of ores, steelmaking, and other techniques. Until the 1950s, coal was the primary energy source for industry and transportation, and it remains the principal fuel used for electricity generation in the U.S.A.

Oil is about 50% more energy-dense than coal. The advantage of oil over coal as a fuel for powering steam ships became a factor in geopolitics at the close of the 19th Century, with the conversion of the British Royal Navy from coal- to oil-fired steam boilers. The weight advantage of oil, and its ease of handling (not requiring manual stokers to feed the fire), increased the range and efficiency of warships. The lighter derivatives of petroleum, such as gasoline, benzene, and kerosene, are among the most energy-dense liquids, which made them desirable as a transportation fuel—as long as they last.

But each of these improvements in the energy density of fuels was dwarfed by the discovery of atomic energy. As illustrated in the accompanying figure, a barely visible speck of uranium fuel, when fully fissioned, is equivalent to 1,260 gallons of fuel oil (weighing 4.5 tons), 6.15 tons of coal, or 23.5 tons of dry wood. When compared by weight, the advantage of uranium fuel over the older types is as follows:

Advantage per unit weight of Uranium ...[4]
... over Wood: 11.5 million times
... over Coal: 3.0 million times[5]
... over Petroleum: 2.2 million times

We shall be modest and note that these figures are derived by assuming that all of the fissionable uranium in the fuel pellet is burned up (fully fissioned). The fuel burn-up rate in many presently operating reactors, may be only about 4%, although it is higher in advanced reactor designs. Thus, the figures above need to be divided by 25, giving nuclear power, in the worst-case scenario, an energy density advantage over wood, coal, and petroleum of only 88,000 to 460,000. However, with fuel reprocessing, a form of recycling, the burn-up rate is nearly total. Because of the production of extra neutrons in the fission reaction, new fuel can be created by nuclear transmutation as the old fuel burns up. The full nuclear fuel cycle, employing reprocessing and fuel breeding, is a virtually limitless cycle. Nuclear is the only fuel that replaces itself as it burns.

Energy Flux Density
To progress from the concept of energy density to energy flux density, it is necessary to have a deeper conception of the notion of work. In physics-textbook terms, energy is the same as work. It was one of the great achievements of 19th-Century physics, to demonstrate the equivalence of heat, electricity, and mechanical motion, resolving all these forms of energy (work), and others, to a common measure. Thus, the technical definition of energy flux density would simply be the amount of energy passing across a given surface area in a unit of time. An example of a higher energy flux density could be had by comparing the capability of a sharp knife to a dull one. Holding the sharper knife, the same work exerted by the hand is concentrated over a smaller surface area. The energy flux density is greater and the sharp knife is able to cut where the dull one cannot.

By that method of accounting, the energy flux density produced by the fission of a single uranium atom can be shown to be from about 20 million to 20 quadrillion times greater than that gained by burning a molecule of an energy-dense fuel, such as natural gas.[6] However, even this astounding numerical advantage does not yet comprehend the essential difference. To understand energy flux density in the context of physical economy, a higher conception of work is required. It is not sufficient to regard work, as we do in physics, merely as the expenditure of energy measured in calories, joules, kilowatt-hours, or electron volts.

Rather, when considering a physical economy, we must look at the transformative power of the work. Something akin to the skilled worker's maxim "don't work hard, work smart," is appropriate as a first approximation of the concept. Implied in the saying is the idea, that by application of the human mind, the same expenditure of effort can be made more efficient, perhaps by use of a different tool, or by the improvisation of a new one, or by organizing the process in a different way. In the case of nuclear, as opposed to chemical or mechanical processes, a higher order sort of innovation is at work. Here, we are dealing with the introduction of a new discovery of universal physical principle, the revolution in physical chemistry which began with the Curies' separation of the first gram of radium, and proceeded through the identification of the radioactive decay process, nuclear transmutation, the energy-mass relation, the nucleus, the isotope, the neutron, the accelerator, the discovery of fission, the chain reaction, and so forth.

Apart from the questions of cost and efficiency, the fallacy of saying that wind and solar can be made to generate electricity, just as nuclear power can, is that it leaves out the transformative power which the application of this new universal physical principle permits. Nuclear energy works smarter, vastly smarter, than wind, solar, or fossil fuels ever can. The reason is not merely its superior energy flux density, measured in caloric terms, but the transformation in the physical economic process as a whole which it can accomplish.

With the fission of each uranium nucleus, several tiny entities, part particle and part wave, are released at velocities approaching that of the speed of light. These particle/waves, which we call neutrons, have the ability to penetrate the nucleus of another nearby atom, and to transform it into a new element, a process known as transmutation. But this is only the beginning, for that new element may, in turn, spontaneously transmute into another, and another, producing a family of by-products (isotopes) which finally settle into a stable form. By mastering the chemistry of these transformations, we have the ability to make new materials, some known and some yet to be discovered, which will be of benefit to future human life. We have also the benefit of the rays these isotopes give off, at least three different types, and each one at a different strength. Their uses in diagnosis and treatment of an array of dangerous diseases are proven, and every day brings new possibilities.[7]

Nuclear for Fuel and Water
In many parts of the world, including some of extremely high population density, such as the east coast of India, the supply of clean water is running out. Ground wells are becoming contaminated as the fossil water supply within the ground becomes exhausted. Substantial regions of the United States, including Southern California and the American Southwest, are also reaching critical water supply limits. Producing drinking water by desalination of seawater is a proven process. Currently, 40 million cubic meters of water a day are produced by desalination, mostly in the Middle East and North Africa. The leading methods are reverse osmosis, using electric-powered pumps to force salt or brackish water through a specially designed membrane, and flash distillation. However, desalination is an energy-intensive process.

The feasibility of using nuclear power for large-scale desalination was first demonstrated nearly 40 years ago in Soviet Kazakstan. For 27 years, the Aktau fast reactor produced 80,000 cubic meters per day of freshwater, and up to 135 megawatts of electric power at the same time. Japan has operated ten demonstration desalination facilities linked to nuclear reactors, and India in 2002 set up a demonstration desalination plant at the Madras Atomic Power Station in the southeast, with a 6,300 cubic meter per day output. Windmills and solar panels will not supply the large amounts of electric power required to produce freshwater in dry areas of the world, but nuclear plants can do it.

Nuclear power also offers the solution to the dependency on imported oil. The key is the two atoms of hydrogen contained in every molecule of water. Hydrogen is a fuel, which can be utilized on its own, or combined with carbon sources to produce liquid fuels quite similar to those we now use. Hydrogen can be obtained from water either by electrolysis or by thermo-chemical splitting. At the higher temperatures available from the new generation of modular helium-cooled reactors, the efficiency of both these processes is greatly increased. Nuclear-produced hydrogen or hydrogen-based fuels, combined with ample electricity for battery vehicles, will provide a stable local supply of the transportation fuel the nation needs. Instead of enriching the Anglo-Saudi oil cartel by shipping petroleum across thousands of miles of ocean, we can produce our own, cleaner fuel at domestic nuclear power plants, while also providing our electricity and other needs.

These are the things that we as a nation need. They are also the things the world needs. They are but some of the immediately knowable practical advantages of the use of this new physical principle, which has defined the 20th-Century revolution in science. Much more lies ahead, waiting to be discovered. Some breakthroughs, such as the practicable development of thermonuclear fusion energy, are almost now within our grasp. Others are yet to come. To deny its application to our economy, and to return to 18th Century and earlier modes of power generation, is to stop human progress.

[1] A useful pedagogical device that used to be found more often at science museums and other public displays was the bicycle-driven generator. By mounting on the bicycle, the student could discover just how much work, in the form of pedaling, was required to keep a single 100-watt light bulb glowing, thus getting a sensuous appreciation for the labor-saving efficiency of modern electrical power generation.

[2] 1 gigawatt = 1 thousand megawatts = 1 million kilowatts

[3] Beware of labelling. The plant has a peak power output of 64 megawatts. But, like all solar plants, that is the amount it can produce at high noon. As the Sun falls in the sky, the output of the solar plant falls with it, until, for half the day, the solar plant produces no power at all.

When shopping for a solar power plant, divide the manufacturer's claimed output by four to five, and you will have a clearer idea of the con-job you are about to buy into. Also remember, that for most of the day, solar concentrator plants require back-up power from natural gas-powered heaters to keep the working fluids flowing. And don't forget that the Sun doesn't shine every day. In order to integrate such an erratic power source into the grid, requires sophisticated planning, electronic circuitry, and maintenance work, the cost of which is rarely considered.

[4] Derivation of figures in this table:

Weight of oil equivalent (at sp. gr. = 0.9):

30 bbls × 42 gals/bbl × 7.2 lbs/gal × 453.6 grms/lb. = 4.12 × 106 grams

Weight of coal equivalent:

6.15 tons × 2,000 lbs/ton × 453.6 grms/lb = 5.58 × 106 grams

Weight of wood equivalent:

23.5 tons × 2,000 lbs/ton × 453.6 grms/lb = 2.13 × 107 grams

Dividing these weights by 1.86 grams of uranium, which when fully fissioned is equivalent to the energy content of the above weights of oil, coal, and wood, gives the results shown in the table. (Derived from graphic by Dr. Robert J. Moon, 1985.)

[5] The weight comparison to coal is not academic, as coal accounts for nearly half the tonnage carried on U.S. railroads. Gradually replacing coal-fired plants with nuclear power will be an important step in creating a viable rail freight transportation system.

[6] See Appendix for calculation.

[7] Alas, the United States is falling far behind in the use of medical isotopes, because we have nearly shut down our capability to produce all but the commonest of them, and now must import more than 90% of what we use. The chances for survival of certain types of cancers are far greater in a hospital in Europe than here, because U.S. doctors do not make use of the relevant targetted radioisotope therapies.

[planning4acrash]

Forget all that NONSENSE.

Our problem is not lack of resources, lack of energy, lack of anything. We suffer from an excess of counterfeit money, printed by the fed, and the fractional reserve banks it supports.

Government, trying to hold the system together, has formed ridiculously expensive social welfare and warfare state programs. War in the middle east is to force others to accept worthless dollars, they were seeking out euro's, pounds, anything but the dollar.

----

So, the debate is not about what expansion we need, its about how do we achieve sound, moral economics, where the wealth of the people is not sequestered. Economic expansion will come about, driven by those who have earned wealth, once sound money is achieved, once the CONSTITUTION is enforced.

Once we drive HAMILTONIANS such as REvolting and Globalist-un-libertarian out the country, as we kicked their buts during the revolution.

----

In the age of global governance/dominance, the question also extends to, how do we achieve sound, moral economics, where the wealth of nations is not sequestered.

In the world of global plutocracy, the question also extends to, how to we achieve sound, moral economics, where the wealth of the planet is not sequestered into the hands of a handful of inbred reprobates who worship Satan.

[Geolibertarian]

If there's one thing this thread has proven to me, it's that the Austrian School is more of a religious cult than a legitimate school of "economic thought," because far too many of its followers end up revealing (in the heat of debate) that -- despite all the happy horseshit they parrot about "liberty" and "freedom" -- they simply don't care if literally millions of Americans starve to death, as long as they do so on the altar of Austrian School dogma.

The only difference is that, unlike most other cults, the Austrian School uses economic verbiage to conceal its true, sociopathic nature instead of religious verbiage. But at the end of the day the results are the same: innocent people being sacrificed on the altar of the cult's wackjob belief system.

It is for this reason that I'm more than happy at this point to let objective onlookers read the previous posts to this thread and decide for themselves which side of the let-everything-collapse-and-we'll-euphemistically-call-it-the-"free market" debate they agree with.

[Magnumpi]

If there's one thing this thread has proven to me, it's that the Austrian School is more of a religious cult than a legitimate school of "economic thought," because far too many of its followers end up revealing (in the heat of debate) that -- despite all the happy horseshit they parrot about "liberty" and "freedom" -- they simply don't care if literally millions of Americans starve to death, as long as they do so on the altar of Austrian School dogma.

The only difference is that, unlike most other cults, the Austrian School uses economic verbiage to conceal its true, sociopathic nature instead of religious verbiage. But at the end of the day the results are the same: innocent people being sacrificed on the altar of the cult's wackjob belief system.

It is for this reason that I'm more than happy at this point to let objective onlookers read the previous posts to this thread and decide for themselves which side of the let-everything-collapse-and-we'll-euphemistically-call-it-the-"free market" debate they agree with.

I'm willing to bet more are starving now than when they were allowed to be self sufficient... Hmm.

[Geolibertarian]

I'm willing to bet more are starving now than when they were allowed to be self sufficient... Hmm.

There's no need to preach to me about that, because I've railed countless times against compulsory government schooling for that very reason.

The point is that one doesn't have to be pro-collapse (and hence pro-mass starvation) on economics to be pro-choice on education.

Or to put it another way: one doesn't have to be in favor of "burning down the house" to be in favor of "roasting the pig."

Austrian School cranks, of course, see it differently: as far as they're concerned, if you're not in favor of "burning down the house" (metaphorically speaking), then by definition you're a pig-lover! 

[Magnumpi]

 Oh. So, help people, only not this way. Just that way. And who decides? Someone else. Who pays? Everyone besides them. Great system you got there, wonder if it'll work...

 I'm not even sure what the argument is, that bad companies, and incompetent people should prosper at the demise of the others? Not everyone gets a Benz. A 12 year old cavalier is as good as it gets for some folk.

 What do you have against people doing what they want? What's wrong with my solution of allowing you people to do as you wish with your own currency and I with mine? The Austrian schoolers don't tell anyone they have to anything. This new system of yours sounds the same as the current one.

[planning4acrash]

What do you have against people doing what they want? What's wrong with my solution of allowing you people to do as you wish with your own currency and I with mine? The Austrian schoolers don't tell anyone they have to anything. This new system of yours sounds the same as the current one.

Absolutely, Austrians actually want an end of legal tender laws, that government's role is simply to ensure that counterfeit doesn't occur. I'd go further, and suggest that only private courts, under common law, are capable, given that government have a vested interest.

One must remember, that a paper greenback, will only be accepted by the market, by force, via forceful legal tender laws. There is no way in the world that anything other than force would get anybody to value paper above gold and silver. It is imoral to devalue those who have things with real value, and, by incentivising people to sell quality to buy nonsense paper, you push real quality and gold out of the economy. So, not only are legal tender laws immoral, they are economically stupid, except if you are a self-centered government who just wants to print money for yourself and your friends. Much as kings gave land to loyal supporters during the middle ages. This is neo-feudalism.

[Revolt426]

Absolutely, Austrians actually want an end of legal tender laws, that government's role is simply to ensure that counterfeit doesn't occur. I'd go further, and suggest that only private courts, under common law, are capable, given that government have a vested interest.

One must remember, that a paper greenback, will only be accepted by the market, by force, via forceful legal tender laws. There is no way in the world that anything other than force would get anybody to value paper above gold and silver. It is imoral to devalue those who have things with real value, and, by incentivising people to sell quality to buy nonsense paper, you push real quality and gold out of the economy. So, not only are legal tender laws immoral, they are economically stupid, except if you are a self-centered government who just wants to print money for yourself and your friends. Much as kings gave land to loyal supporters during the middle ages. This is neo-feudalism.

One must NOT forget, your cultish behavoir in face of debunking on a multitude of occasions in this thread alone, and your insanity in regards to allowing (BILLIONS) of people to die, to follow the "Laws of Von Mises" is nothing short of pure Selfishness, USERY and GENOCIDAL MURDER.

Forget all that NONSENSE.

Again, i'll revert you to the excellent article i posted about 5 or 6 posts up about the FACT That due to the principles of allowing the Private Sector which is dominated by inbred oligarchs who happen to come from your so called Nation, to follow Austrian policy and "Not intervene" With the sacred markets when HUMANITY ITSELF is at stake....... this proves you are guilty of the worst kind of Usery.

"Let's forget 'ALL THAT NONSENSE' about the fact that there isn't enough Clean Water, Food or Energy on the planet, so we should allow 5 Billion HUMAN BEINGS to be kicked out of their houses via foreclosure, go bankrupt and STARVE TO DEATH.

You are nothing more then a SOCIAL DARWINISTIC piece of filth if you advocate "Forgetting that Nonsense" - and infact - when YOU lose your job, lose your home and your nation fails, you will be on the street and you will get exactly what you deserve.

What makes you better then the "illuminists" as you call them, as if they are enlightened in some way shape or form?. You advocate precisely what THEY DO, which is allowing the "Idiots" aka the CATTLE to lose everything and STARVE TO DEATH to OBEY a CULT of Market Rules invented by a group of shadey individuals... Hence putting the "Rules of the Von Mises Free Market" BEFORE Humanity Itself.

What makes you better then a Nazi? can you please tell me? considering this crisis threatens to wipe out atleast 4 billion human beings and you refuse to engage in rational debate and provide ways to SAVE these HUMAN BEINGS, and instead follow a cult of economic laws that are complete falsehoods?.

What is the difference between that and being a Nazi? It is pure usery and when you are finished using, you discard "Let them go bankrupt and kick them out of their homes, they are idiots".............

[planning4acrash]

In my model, we cut costs, socialism is alive and well during the transition (foodstamps for all would cost 1/100,000,000th of the bailout nonsense)

- That socialist support would fade away, whilst free market reforms and freed capital markets create the greatest boom ever seen. A combination of all the technologies that proceeded it. A new capitalist economy, arising from 7billion points of light, instead of this stupid new world order, arising from 100 points of light, or Tarpley's insane socialist utopia that would arise from none other than his a-hole.

[Magnumpi]

 when YOU lose your job, lose your home and your nation fails, you will be on the street and you will get exactly what you deserve.

You mean roughly $15'000 a year that numerous governments thieve from me? Dang, I wish. When I did lose my job, I got a fraction of that.

What really irks me is how high on the horse you people are to not only assume you know best how to take care of eeeeeeeeeeeeveryone else, but have the audacity to call someone else a cultist? The leading cause of unnatural death is government, in their quest toward globalism. So naturally, the cure is, global government taking care of everyone, everywhere all the time. Not only is that not libertarian, that's not freedom of any kind.

I don't want to kill anyone. Or starve anyone. All I ask is that people work for what they want, and accept responsibility for themselves because it's impossible to ask everyone else provide it for them.

Talk about cults: The only way to "own" property is to buy it on credit. Now, what did that lead to again? I'm really struggling here. It sounds familiar but, can't quite place it. Something about actual wealth being taken from the middle class and then devaluing the currency to force people into debt. God, where is that from? Some book, a movie perhaps? Video game? Driving me crazy, where did that idea come from...

[Revolt426]

In my model, we cut costs, socialism is alive and well during the transition (foodstamps for all would cost 1/100,000,000th of the bailout nonsense)

- That socialist support would fade away, whilst free market reforms and freed capital markets create the greatest boom ever seen. A combination of all the technologies that proceeded it. A new capitalist economy, arising from 7billion points of light, instead of this stupid new world order, arising from 100 points of light, or Tarpley's insane socialist utopia that would arise from none other than his a-hole.

Infact, you have already proven your "Model" would result in "GENOCIDE" and you REFUSE to address that issue - and as far as the Deflation issue, your solution is "They are idiots, let them go bankrupt" , kick them out of their homes and let them starve to death.

You alone stating you are an Adam Smith worshipper along with a Von Mises Worshipper is proof you have not done sufficient research OR you just refuse to admit you are wrong - because Adam Smith was nothing more then a puppet of LORD SHELBURNE and a collaborater with Karl Marx to setup YET ANOTHER paradigm that you have obviously fell right into, and refuse to even do the research on what you are preaching.

[Revolt426]

You mean roughly $15'000 a year that numerous governments thieve from me? Dang, I wish. When I did lose my job, I got a fraction of that.

What really irks me is how high on the horse you people are to not only assume you know best how to take care of eeeeeeeeeeeeveryone else, but have the audacity to call someone else a cultist? The leading cause of unnatural death is government, in their quest toward globalism. So naturally, the cure is, global government taking care of everyone, everywhere all the time. Not only is that not libertarian, that's not freedom of any kind.

I don't want to kill anyone. Or starve anyone. All I ask is that people work for what they want, and accept responsibility for themselves because it's impossible to ask everyone else provide it for them.

Talk about cults: The only way to "own" property is to buy it on credit. Now, what did that lead to again? I'm really struggling here. It sounds familiar but, can't quite place it. Something about actual wealth being taken from the middle class and then devaluing the currency to force people into debt. God, where is that from? Some book, a movie perhaps? Video game? Driving me crazy, where did that idea come from...

When someones policy will result in massive genocide and unsuspecting individuals read their snake oil on the forum, and then PUSH it, and possibly have it's policy installed, i am VERY sorry but i insist, i must SPEAK OUT AGAINST the utter MURDER of Billions of People.

If Planning4Crash would like to follow his Austrian Methods, that is fine and dandy - but do not brainwash others after you have been refuted with detailed evidence that the very policy he offers would result in complete chaos and genocide.