Sound Money

[Manhattan]

Biggest political issue of our times and the politicians do a real good job of keeping us distracted with other things.

[HuskersNow]

What would you consider "sound money?"

[Manhattan]

For starters, a currency based on the gold standard. That would go a long way to prevent wanton corruption and social/economic engineering by the government.

[HuskersNow]

I would definitely prefer a gold standard over the current fiat money that this country uses, however, I would much prefer it if the government stopped intervening completely in fiscal policy. I agree with you that a gold standard would prevent many disastrous policies of government.

 

In a free market the currency would be whatever the buyer and seller happen to agree upon. Although the majority of transactions would probably involve gold, they wouldn't have to.

[Blaze1up]

Theres a reason Central banks are buying up gold right now.

 

Central banks around the world added 425.4 metric tons of gold to their reserves last year, the biggest increase since 1964, according to the World Gold Council.

 

Central banks now possess 18 percent of all gold ever mined. "There's clearly been a renaissance of gold in central bankers' minds," Nick Moore, an analyst at Royal Bank of Scotland, told Bloomberg.

 

"Gold is quietly, at the edge, becoming the world's second reservable currency, supplanting the euro and rivaling the dollar," money manager Dennis Gartman wrote in his Gartman Letter, obtained by Bloomberg. "The trend shall continue months, if not years, into the future." – MoneyNews

[bennychico11]

haha...oh the ol' free market. Or rather the assumed "free market" that's actually controlled by market manipulation.

 

lol

[Landlord]

Money is redundant and worthless. 'Nuff said.

[HuskersNow]

haha...oh the ol' free market. Or rather the assumed "free market" that's actually controlled by market manipulation.

 

lol

In this thread we could talk about the free market versus mixed markets, but I feel that that topic has been beaten to death in previous threads and no one is going to change their mind on the matter. Maybe it would be more constructive to talk about money using different economic models. I'm not telling you what you can and can't post about, I just feel it would be better to keep this thread more focused.

 

Money is redundant and worthless. 'Nuff said.

As I'm sure you're well aware, people value things differently. I think that most people put a far greater value on money than you do. Since you have no use for your money you can just send it to me and I will get it off of your hands for you

[Landlord]

haha...oh the ol' free market. Or rather the assumed "free market" that's actually controlled by market manipulation.

 

lol

In this thread we could talk about the free market versus mixed markets, but I feel that that topic has been beaten to death in previous threads and no one is going to change their mind on the matter. Maybe it would be more constructive to talk about money using different economic models. I'm not telling you what you can and can't post about, I just feel it would be better to keep this thread more focused.

 

Money is redundant and worthless. 'Nuff said.

As I'm sure you're well aware, people value things differently. I think that most people put a far greater value on money than you do. Since you have no use for your money you can just send it to me and I will get it off of your hands for you

 

 

I already get rid of as much of it as I can, but if I was bringing in more I would certainly oblige, as long as you put it towards something healthy and constructive

 

 

Really though, I don't think Adam Smith envisioned the world looking like this. The ones that value money the most are the ones that would be so much better off without it, if you ask me (not poor, just in a society without wealth as we know it).

[bennychico11]

In this thread we could talk about the free market versus mixed markets, but I feel that that topic has been beaten to death in previous threads and no one is going to change their mind on the matter. Maybe it would be more constructive to talk about money using different economic models. I'm not telling you what you can and can't post about, I just feel it would be better to keep this thread more focused.

 

no, my point being that the market is actually controlled by greed. People are not perfect and the market is actually fixed. You can support the idea of a free market but it doesn't mean the market is going to follow that ideology.

[Manhattan]

In this thread we could talk about the free market versus mixed markets, but I feel that that topic has been beaten to death in previous threads and no one is going to change their mind on the matter. Maybe it would be more constructive to talk about money using different economic models. I'm not telling you what you can and can't post about, I just feel it would be better to keep this thread more focused.

 

no, my point being that the market is actually controlled by greed. People are not perfect and the market is actually fixed. You can support the idea of a free market but it doesn't mean the market is going to follow that ideology.

 

I hope the market is controlled by "greed", as you call it. Person A wants something Person B has. Person B voluntarily agrees to an exchange of goods/services. Just as long as humans are capable of mutual comparison, there will be envy, which is good. It is the motivation that makes people want to improve their lives, and the free market provides the mechanism for which people can freely exchange things as they please.

 

The problem - why the market is actually "fixed" - is because of government meddling in it. Messing with interest rates by the unregulated Federal Reserve. Debasing currencies. Rewarding poor business decisions that would otherwise weed out the poor businesses. Providing an atmosphere for businesses to believe that if they fail, they will be bailed out by the government, so there is no longer any restraint in engaging in fiscally irresponsible or risky business decisions. Then there is the social economic engineering.

 

Or what about this scenario that played out in the late 70s and mid 90s? The greatest exploitation in recent American history was this sub-prime mortgage problem. Entirely created by the government:

 

1) Government wants votes, but more importantly, they want money, and more specifically, they want money for their business partners and federal reserve. Poor people who don't live in nice houses want nice houses.

 

2) Government tells banks that it is okay to lend to poor people who otherwise wouldn't be able to afford it. They got their back, and since interest rates were always [artificially] low and the real estate prices were rising, they didn't foresee it ever being a problem. They're too smart. They paint this as a great American ideal that everyone should own a house and the government will make sure the banks will make that possible - though they ordinarily would have not, obviously.

 

3) Millions of poor people buy houses. In order to facilitate this, new houses need to be constructed. Construction business flourishes. Many other housing related industries and banks start doing really, really well.

 

4) The gig goes on for awhile. All praise the Fed for making this brilliant situation whereby people who can't afford nice houses get to live in nice houses.

 

5) The economy takes a downturn and most of these people start defaulting on their mortgages because - surprise! - they don't and never did have the money to afford their houses. Most end up poorer than they were before, their money surrendered to housing related businesses and banks.

 

6) The government and media paint this problem as the problems of an "unregulated" free-market when this couldn't be further from the truth. It was that the government decided to interfere in the first place that created an artificial business situation that would have never existed in the free market.

 

What really happened:

 

Government just took billions of dollars from mostly working class people and redistributed to the banks and large housing businesses, and of course, back to the Federal Reserve. The brilliance of this plan of exploitation is that the victims are so eager to participate in it, and when the deed is done, they come back to the government even more willing to be "protected" when they really are just signing up for more exploitation. The government robs the voters of their economic independence to secure support, and at the same time, takes what little money they had to fund the expanding government needed to satisfy all of their crazy expanding powers that the people now crave after what the so-called evil businesses did to them.

 

Quite the system.

[bennychico11]

I'm all for one who says it'd be great if the government stayed out of the affairs of the business. And that perhaps the government did have a hand in creating the recent economic disaster. But don't think the banks were just saying, "we don't know what's going on! The government told us we could lend to you with these high interest rates even though we know you can't afford it!" The banks were just as greedy as anyone. Just like anyone who tries to up-sell you a large bag of popcorn at the movie theater when you just wanted to buy a coke...the banks wanted to up-sell you the idea of owning a more expensive house with no money down, just as long as they could lock you with an adjustable rate! The bank just wants to make more money as any other company does. If the government allows them to do it...they're going to do it. They just offered that bag of popcorn with your soda...you didn't HAVE to buy it. But even if the government COMPLETELY stayed out of the way of the big banks and just let them do what they wanted, do you think that they wouldn't have still lent out these risky loans?

 

I hope the market is controlled by "greed", as you call it. Person A wants something Person B has. Person B voluntarily agrees to an exchange of goods/services. Just as long as humans are capable of mutual comparison, there will be envy, which is good. It is the motivation that makes people want to improve their lives, and the free market provides the mechanism for which people can freely exchange things as they please.

 

That's the problem...humans aren't capable of mutual comparison. Person A does want what Person B has, but doesn't want to pay what Person B wants for it. And he doesn't want to spend HIS money to get it.

Securities fraud and stock market manipulation is what I'm talking about. It'd be great if the securities market was controlled by simple supply and demand, but there's a lot of under the table dealing and price manipulation that goes on. Some of it legal but unethical...and others just plain illegal. And if there wasn't some sort of regulation, it would probably be going on even worse.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE68P27W20100926

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/financialcareers/06/mmakertricks.asp

http://stockmarketquarterly.com/market_makers.htm

[Blaze1up]

That would be free trade.

[bennychico11]

That would be free trade.

 

yes, but directly related.

Especially if we're talking about using a gold standard

[Blaze1up]

Free trade turned capitalism into a joke with no way to regulate the rest of the world from slave wages that have monopolized and dominated the market. Clinton looked real good during the tech boom but what president wouldn't, while everyone was banking off the economy he sled NAFTA under our nose and created an economical bust.