Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old January 29th, 2011 #21
Marse Supial
Creepy-Ass Cracker
 
Marse Supial's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Where "Yes" Is A Two-Syllable Word.
Posts: 3,822
Marse Supial
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Itz_molecular View Post
My error , I wasn't clear .
I generally tend to agree with your statement .
I wasn't thinking in terms of large commercial operations or export markets, but more in terms of a few acres to feed family and friends . The intrinsic value of self-sufficiency in food is priceless . To weather any economic or social turmoil with a full larder will always make the unbearable , bearable.
Being able to raise 'easy meat' , chicken , turkey , game fowl etc. is cheap and relatively easy compared to cattle and hogs .
The barter value of food can be very high , in times of social unrest .
Agreed, with the exception of hogs. Beef cattle are tremendously expensive to raise; prohibitively so in a situation where one is trying to be self-sufficient with food. Unless you have sufficient grassland to sustain them, beef cattle require food suitable for humans -- primarily corn.

Hogs, OTOH, convert waste to pork. You can feed them anything -- apple cores, potatoe peels, chicken bones, milk that has gone bad, corn cobs and other such garden waste, and they convert it to pork.

Last edited by Marse Supial; January 29th, 2011 at 10:30 AM.
 
Old January 29th, 2011 #22
Hudson
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Hassling shopkeeps along the information superhighway
Posts: 1,483
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by General_Lee View Post
Agreed, with the exception of hogs. Beef cattle are tremendously expensive to raise; prohibitively so in a situation where one is trying to be self-sufficient with food. Unless you have sufficient grassland to sustain them, beef cattle require food suitable for humans -- primarily corn.

Hogs, OTOH, convert waste to pork. You can feed them anything -- apple cores, potatoe peels, chicken bones, milk that has gone bad, corn cobs and other such garden waste, and they convert it to pork.
Corn is garbage they feed to cattle. It is a waste product, produced by the skewed economic system we live under. Corn has little protein and massive amounts of starch that makes cattle fat and sick (same thing it does to humans). This is why cattle must consume so much of it, because it has little protein.

Cattle are cheaper to raise than hogs. Cattle are ruminants that convert cheap cellulose protein into meat.

Hogs cannot convert cellulose protein into meat, you must feed a hog expensive human digestable protein, so why not just cut out the middle man and eat the protein you would feed the hog, yourself?
 
Old January 29th, 2011 #23
Marse Supial
Creepy-Ass Cracker
 
Marse Supial's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Where "Yes" Is A Two-Syllable Word.
Posts: 3,822
Marse Supial
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson View Post
Cattle are cheaper to raise than hogs. Cattle are ruminants that convert cheap cellulose protein into meat.

Hogs cannot convert cellulose protein into meat, you must feed a hog expensive human digestable protein, so why not just cut out the middle man and eat the protein you would feed the hog, yourself?
But that cellulose that cattle convert to meat is, generally, grass. If you have the acreage for that then yes, a beef cow would be good thing to have.

The point I was making about hogs is that no matter how careful you are, you will generate waste food products -- apple cores, pea or bean hulls, potato peels -- garbage that would either be composted or wasted completely, that a pig turns into meat.
 
Old April 27th, 2011 #24
Joe_J.
Radio active
 
Joe_J.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Gone to work on the lemming sites against Big Jew.
Posts: 9,439
Blog Entries: 2
Joe_J.
Default

Inflation is on now. One economist expects tremendous deflation to follow. A report I heard last night says that China's annualized inflation is 60%. The Chinese won't allow that to fester if they don't have to since inflation can lead to "social unrest" which is what the government there really fears.

The link below is for Jim Puplava's site. His audio files on the site feature some pretty interesting interviews covering energy, financials, etc. I would describe Puplava as a moderate doomtard.

Quote:
This week in her discussions with Jim Puplava, Nicole believes we will see the peaking of oil prices, the next bout of deflation and a looming depression. She sees resource wars as inevitable, given this deflationary scenario.
http://www.financialsense.com/financ...e-next-tsunami

Also, this thread needs a bump. Alex posted some articles seem to be right on the money, so to speak.
__________________
The average kwan is of such low quality that he'd shoot himself if he had any self awareness.
-Joe from Ohio

Last edited by Joe_J.; April 27th, 2011 at 10:47 AM.
 
Old March 1st, 2012 #25
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,381
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Your Rotten Monetary Policy Is Destroying This Country

by Ron Paul

Before the United States House of Representatives Committee on Financial Services, Hearing on 'Monetary Policy and the State of the Economy,' 2/29/2012

Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing on monetary policy and the state of the economy. I believe that now, more than ever, the American people want to hold the Federal Reserve accountable for its loose monetary policy and want full transparency of the Fed's actions.

While the Fed has certainly released an unprecedented amount of information on its activities, there is still much that remains unknown. And every move towards transparency has been fought against tooth and nail by the Fed. It took disclosure requirements enacted within the Dodd-Frank Act to get the Fed to provide data on the its emergency lending facilities. It took lawsuits filed by Bloomberg and Fox News to provide data on discount window lending during the worst parts of the financial crisis. And it will take further concerted action on the part of Congress, the media, and the public to keep up pressure on the Fed to remain transparent.

Transparency is not a panacea, however, as a fully transparent organization is still capable of engaging in all sorts of mischief, as the Federal Reserve does on a regular basis. Ironically, one of the Fed's more egregious recent actions, adopting an explicit inflation target, was hailed by many as another wonderful example of transparency. Yet if you think about what this supposed 2% inflation target actually is, you realize that it is an explicit policy to devalue the dollar and reduce its purchasing power. Two percent annual price inflation means that prices rise 22% within a decade, and nearly 50% within two decades.

Indeed, if you look at the performance of the consumer price index (CPI) under Chairman Bernanke's tenure, prices have risen at a rate of 2.25% per year. Many, perhaps even most, economists would consider this a modest rise, an example of sober, cautious monetary policy. Some economists of Paul Krugman's persuasion might even argue that this is too tight a monetary policy. However, 2.25% is not too far off from the Fed's new 2% target.

Now look at the performance of the US economy since February 1, 2006, the date Chairman Bernanke took the mantle from Alan Greenspan. Trillions of dollars have been wasted on bailouts, stimulus packages, and other feckless spending. Millions of Americans have lost their jobs and have lost hope of ever regaining employment. The national debt has risen to more than 100% of GDP, as the federal government continues to rack up trillion-dollar deficits, aided and abetted by the Fed's policies of quantitative easing and zero percent interest rates. And we are supposed to believe that a 2% inflation rate, similar to what has prevailed during the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, is the cure for what ails this economy.

This explicit 2% target also fails to take into account that whatever measure is used to determine price inflation, be it CPI, core CPI, PCE, etc., will always be chosen with an eye towards underreporting the true rate of inflation and price rises. Pressure will be exerted on those calculating the price indices, so as not to alarm the public when prices begin to accelerate. One need only look at what is taking place in Argentina today, where the government publishes an official CPI figure that is often less than half that reported by private sources.

A similar situation exists in this country, where economists calculating CPI according to the original basket of goods have determined that price inflation has increased 9.5% per year since 2006, rather than the 2.25% reported by the government. Even the government's own data reports price rises of nearly 7% per year since 2006 on such consumer goods as gasoline and eggs. Bread, rice, and ground beef have increased by nearly 6% per year, while bacon and potatoes have increased nearly 5% per year. This means that in a little over half a decade, prices on staple consumer goods have increased 30-50%, all while wages have stagnated and millions of Americans find themselves out of work and without a paycheck. Of course, government officials claim that price increases do not affect the average American because they can always buy hamburger instead of steak, or have cereal instead of bacon. But the American people can see how they are suffering because of the Federal Reserve. The government’s claims that the official statistics show no reason to be concerned about inflation is Marxist – as in Groucho, who famously said: "Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?"

The Federal Reserve continues to keep interest rates low in the hopes of boosting lending and consumption. But keeping interest rates at zero discourages saving, particularly as the rate of price inflation continues to rise. Why stick money in a savings account earning 0.05% if it is guaranteed to lose at least 2% of its value every year? And this is a guarantee, as the Fed has promised a 2% rate of increase in price inflation, while also guaranteeing a zero percent federal funds rate through 2014. Retirees living on fixed incomes, dependent on savings, or on interest income from investments will see their savings drawn down as they are forced to consume principal. Young people, hard hit by the recession and struggling to find jobs, will fail to see the virtue of thrift. Saving or investing is an exercise in futility, as parking money in the bank or in CDs will guarantee a loss, while investing in stocks, bonds, or mutual funds will net at best paltry gains, and at worst massive losses in this continuing weak economy.

The longer the Federal Reserve keeps interest rates low and discourages savings and investment, the more societal attitudes will change from being future oriented to present oriented. The Federal Reserve and its policies already served to stimulate and prioritize consumption over saving, creating the largest debt bubble the world has ever known. The extended zero interest rate policy only serves to promote more consumption and debt now, eviscerating thrift and savings – the true building blocks of prosperity. This present-oriented mindset has become pervasive especially among politicians, putting the government in dismal financial shape as Congressmen and Presidents over the years have taken to heart Louis XV's famous saying: "Après moi, le déluge." If the American people follow the same path in their own lives, this country will be ruined. Capital will be depleted, infrastructure will fall into disrepair, and the United States will be a mere shadow of its former self. It is well past time to end the failed monetary policy that encourages this mistaken preference for cheap money now.

http://lewrockwell.com/paul/paul794.html
 
Old March 1st, 2012 #26
Roy
Perception Manager
 
Roy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,794
Roy
Default

There has been a real need to accurately gauge inflation. Using a metric such as housing prices is totally inaccurate, because you don't buy a house every day, or even every year. Even if the price of housing is cut by half, that doesn't mean your mortgage is cut by half. You are completely cut off from this "benefit". No one but a first time house buyer gets to enjoy the benefit of deflation in this area, and that's just once in a lifetime. But, deceptive inflation indexes would put that into the calculation and tell you there is deflation.

Same goes for computers. Sure the price of a byte of memory has gone down, but who's going to buy a 90's 166 MHz Gateway to "enjoy" the deflation that has occurred in the computer field? Things like housing and computer prices artificially reduce the inflation numbers in a way that doesn't translate into a consumer's everyday experience.

Thus, there is a need for "truth in inflation statistics".

So, it seems someone has finally come up with an answer: The Everyday Product Index


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505144_1...-as-you-think/

Quote:
Forget the modest 3.1 percent rise in the Consumer Price Index, the government's widely used measure of inflation. Everyday prices are up some 8 percent over the past year, according to the American Institute for Economic Research.

The not-for-profit research group measures inflation without looking at the big, one-time purchases that can skew the numbers. That means they don't look at the price of houses, furniture, appliances, cars, or computers. Instead, AIER focuses on Americans' typical daily purchases, such as food, gasoline, child care, prescription drugs, phone and television service, and other household products.

The institute contends that to get a good read on inflation's "sticker shock" effect, you must look at the cost of goods that the average household buys at least once a month and factor in only the kinds of expenses that are subject to change. That, too, eliminates the cost of housing because when you finance your home with a fixed-rate mortgage, that expense remains constant until you refinance or move.


The group maintains that this index better measures the real-world impact of price changes, particularly for people on a budget. And, largely as the result of the recent run-up in gas prices, this "everyday price index" (EPI) suggests that Americans are being pinched far more tightly than the official inflation measure would have you believe.

Over the past year, the EPI is up just over 8 percent, according to the economics group. The biggest factor: Motor fuel and transportation costs are up 21.06 percent from year-ago levels. The cost of food, prescription drugs, and tobacco also have increased faster than the government's inflation measure, rising 3.56 percent, 4.21 percent, and 3.4 percent, respectively.

On the bright side, prices of household fuel (natural gas and electricity) and supplies have increased only 2.74 percent; recreation and personal care products are up less than 1 percent; and telephone or Internet services are down 0.66 percent.

Admittedly, the purchases that the EPI tracks make up slightly less than 40 percent of the average household budget. But Steven Cunningham, research and education director at AIER, says these items are what contribute to the "sticker shock at the gasoline pump and the supermarket check-out line."
 
Old March 1st, 2012 #27
Rick Ronsavelle
Senior Member
 
Rick Ronsavelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,006
Rick Ronsavelle
Default

One can use the postal rates as a proxy:

History_of_United_States_postage_rates History_of_United_States_postage_rates
 
Old March 1st, 2012 #28
Rick Ronsavelle
Senior Member
 
Rick Ronsavelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,006
Rick Ronsavelle
Default true inflation revealed

Inflation is not really rising prices. Inflation is increase in money supply. Inflation (dilution/adulteration) of money causes rising prices. Therefore let us look at money., One of the better is M3, but no longer reported. We can look at M2 (M1, a measure of the money supply; includes currency in circulation plus demand deposits or checking account balances), M2= measure of the money supply; M1 plus net time deposits (other than large certificates of deposit).

Here at Economagic: http://www.economagic.com/em-cgi/data.exe/frbH6/t0102

Year-----M2 annual % change
2012----9765------6.6
2007----7104------5.4
2002----5454------7.3
1997----3829------2.5
1992----3383------6.7
1987----2447------6.7
1982----1770------8.7
1977----1165-----10.2
1972----718-------8.3
1967----482-------7.4
1962----340----------

1962 to 2012 average per year: 6.95% compounded

So the last five years are near the 50 year average.

To REALLY keep up with inflation one should earn 28.7 times as much as in 1962 (9765 divided by 340). Gold has kept up OK.

Parenthetically- Doctor Friedman was calling for rates of adulteration of 3 to 5 percent for a stable price level (The inflation [funny munny] would be soaked up by rises in productivity of around 4%). The actual rate of adulteration (6.95%) is almost 3 percent more than mrs. friedman called for. We got no stable price level. I wonder if there are any rises in productivity since the seventies.

Last edited by Rick Ronsavelle; March 1st, 2012 at 09:44 PM.
 
Old March 2nd, 2012 #29
Craig Cobb
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,270
Blog Entries: 91
Default

Quote:
But the American people can see how they are suffering because of the Federal Reserve. The government’s claims that the official statistics show no reason to be concerned about inflation is Marxist – as in Groucho, who famously said: "Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?"
Why aren't the entire jewish Rothschild family members in prison awaiting public hangings and lengthy dry outs from large cranes?
 
Old March 2nd, 2012 #30
Fred
Commie Killer
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,492
Fred
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Cobb View Post
Why aren't the entire jewish Rothschild family members in prison awaiting public hangings and lengthy dry outs from large cranes?
Good Question.

Only a small percentage of the White population are thinking people. Of the thinking Whites, most do not know about the Rothschilds or the Jewish control of the international banking elites.

About the masses... As long as the refrigerators are full and the ball games are on TV, a gradual decline is hardly noticeable.

I wish i could be more positive and provide a solution.
 
Old March 14th, 2013 #31
America First
Senior Member
 
America First's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,699
America First
Default What is likely to happen besides a nuke war ?

__________________
Isn't it strange that we talk least about the things we think about most?

We cannot allow the natural passions and prejudices of other peoples
to lead our country to destruction.

-Charles A. Lindbergh
http://www.fff.org/freedom/0495c.asp
 
Old March 14th, 2013 #32
littlefieldjohn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,048
littlefieldjohn
Default




 
Old March 23rd, 2013 #33
littlefieldjohn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,048
littlefieldjohn
Default

"Rally Cheers Goldman; Banksters Optimistic"
After the big run-up, prices will "crash." Itz the same old story.

Last edited by littlefieldjohn; March 24th, 2013 at 12:03 PM.
 
Old March 25th, 2013 #34
Crowe
Senior Member
 
Crowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 6,481
Crowe
Default

Are there any recent examples of massive deflation occurring in an economy, and how it affected everyday living for average folks?

I'd take a guess that inflation is almost always worse due to the working class feeling the effects. But I could see how deflation could possibly lead to layoffs at companies/businesses. Many States have labor laws saying you can't give someone a pay cut. But you can still fire them for any reason you want to.
 
Old March 25th, 2013 #35
littlefieldjohn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,048
littlefieldjohn
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowe View Post
Are there any recent examples of massive deflation occurring in an economy, and how it affected everyday living for average folks?

I'd take a guess that inflation is almost always worse due to the working class feeling the effects. But I could see how deflation could possibly lead to layoffs at companies/businesses. Many States have labor laws saying you can't give someone a pay cut. But you can still fire them for any reason you want to.
'Great Depression' - and the deflation of wheat prices in the 1930s might serve as an example , subsequent bank foreclosures on properties and the effect on towns in the Midwest, places like the panhandle of OK .
 
Old March 25th, 2013 #36
Rick Ronsavelle
Senior Member
 
Rick Ronsavelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,006
Rick Ronsavelle
Default

Selgin and co. (2010) cite an interesting study by Atkeson and Kehoe showing no correlation between deflation and depression :

Historically, benign deflation has been the far more common type. Surveying the 20th-century experience of 17 countries, including the United States, Atkeson and Kehoe (2004, p. 99) find “many more periods of deflation with reasonable growth than with depression, and many more periods of depression with inflation than with deflation.” Indeed, they conclude “that the only episode in which there is evidence of a link between deflation and depression is the Great Depression (1929-1934).”

http://mises.org/community/forums/p/31149/488313.aspx

". . .But I could see how deflation could possibly lead to layoffs at companies/businesses. Many States have labor laws saying you can't give someone a pay cut. But you can still fire them for any reason you want to. . ."

Exactly correct. The deflation (deflation is a reduction in money supply) raises the value of each unit of money. If wages don't fall, they will be forced above the market level, causing unemployment. The New Deal folks tried to "keep wages up"- meaning above the market clearing level. This to keep purchasing power up.

But a small drop in wages leads to even larger hiring and more purchasing power, keeping the economy in balance. (Technically this means the demand for labor is elastic) The Keynesians think deflation or falling wages will result in a death spiral. Low wages mean less to spend. Other firms must lay off workers due to low sales. These workers don't have money to buy from still other firms. The way out is more purchasing power- gained by government spending- as "obviously" the market wouldn't provide it.

But the market wasn't there. Government was used to CAUSE unemployment, even though they claimed they were trying to reduce it. (Great Depression).

Deflation can be survived rather easily if no attempt is made to force wages above the market rates.
 
Old March 25th, 2013 #37
littlefieldjohn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,048
littlefieldjohn
Default

True, but say a farmer borrowed to buy equipment and a mortgage when wheat was going for $4 a bushel, and the price drops to $1 , so his wage didn't cover interest payments to the banker. Back then a lot of people, what they did was still work the land.
 
Old March 31st, 2013 #38
jaekel
Senior Member
 
jaekel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,991
jaekel
Default

What factors do they use to determine the value of the dollar? Where do they get their prices? From what products? The reason I ask, is that there is a vast difference in pricing, depending on what you buy, and where you buy it.
 
Old April 1st, 2013 #39
Marse Supial
Creepy-Ass Cracker
 
Marse Supial's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Where "Yes" Is A Two-Syllable Word.
Posts: 3,822
Marse Supial
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jaekel View Post
What factors do they use to determine the value of the dollar? Where do they get their prices? From what products? The reason I ask, is that there is a vast difference in pricing, depending on what you buy, and where you buy it.
There are several measures of inflation. One of the most commonly cited ones is the CPI. http://www.bls.gov/cpi/

Consumer_price_index Consumer_price_index
 
Old April 2nd, 2013 #40
littlefieldjohn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,048
littlefieldjohn
Default

 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:45 PM.
Page generated in 0.15583 seconds.