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

Old April 25th, 2014 #61
Sam Emerson
Diversity = White Genocide
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Doom Fort II
Posts: 2,800
Sam Emerson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_Smith View Post
What will this future gold-standard currency using nation do when you need to purchase some extra oil to fill in production gaps from ? What's going to happen when prices explode because Peruvians or Ghanans, who despite producing very little in terms of innovation, commodities, or technics, will need oil for their Lamborghinis? (since pound for pound they produce the most gold in the world)

Sure, maybe you could argue, if that happens you invade them and take their gold (deja vu, now these colonial muds are flooding all our countries). But then by that definition, gold-standards don't reduce war, instead they make it even more prevalent.
Mining doesn't add much to the global gold supply each year so there's no danger of gold hyperinflation. Gold producing countries will be buying finished goods and technical help with mining from white countries as long as they have gold to pay for it.

The examples of economic paralysis being blamed on gold are due to price controls and fixed exchange rates.

I'm not attached to gold as money. I want competition in money. Computers make this easier than ever. A mobile app connected to a micropayment system (which would be created instantly if government stopped regulating "money laundering") could handle real time exchange rates between dozens of competing currencies.
 
Old April 25th, 2014 #62
Gibson
.
 
Gibson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,718
Gibson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Emerson View Post
The examples of economic paralysis being blamed on gold are due to price controls and fixed exchange rates.
If two countries use the gold standard, doesn't that impose a fixed exchange rate between them?
 
Old April 25th, 2014 #63
Sam Emerson
Diversity = White Genocide
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Doom Fort II
Posts: 2,800
Sam Emerson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibson View Post
If two countries use the gold standard, doesn't that impose a fixed exchange rate between them?
Fixed exchange rates covered fiat currencies. You wouldn't need to fix anything between two countries using real gold as money. The fixed exchange system broke down because every government wanted to create more money, so the regulated exchange rates were always out of sync with the currencies value.
 
Old April 25th, 2014 #64
Gibson
.
 
Gibson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,718
Gibson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Emerson View Post
Fixed exchange rates covered fiat currencies. You wouldn't need to fix anything between two countries using real gold as money. The fixed exchange system broke down because every government wanted to create more money, so the regulated exchange rates were always out of sync with the currencies value.
The point is, if two countries use the gold standard, that fixes their exchange rate. For example, if the US fixes so UD$40 = 1g gold, and China fixes so CNY250 = 1g gold, then the US$/CNY exchange rate is fixed. Do you agree?

Or do you mean to use gold as real currency, so everyone has to carry gold coins? In which case the exchange rate is again fixed. Do you agree?
 
Old April 25th, 2014 #65
Sam Emerson
Diversity = White Genocide
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Doom Fort II
Posts: 2,800
Sam Emerson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibson View Post
The point is, if two countries use the gold standard, that fixes their exchange rate. For example, if the US fixes so UD$40 = 1g gold, and China fixes so CNY250 = 1g gold, then the US$/CNY exchange rate is fixed. Do you agree?

Or do you mean to use gold as real currency, so everyone has to carry gold coins? In which case the exchange rate is again fixed. Do you agree?
Fixed means price fixed. Exchanging two identical things, a one ounce gold coin for another one ounce gold coin for example, doesn't need to be fixed. I mean 100% gold standard, where any paper money can be exchanged by the bearer for real gold. No currency after World War II was 100% gold backed.
 
Old April 25th, 2014 #66
Gibson
.
 
Gibson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,718
Gibson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Emerson View Post
I mean 100% gold standard, where any paper money can be exchanged by the bearer for real gold.
Okay, so under that system, anyone can go to the Federal Reserve with some paper dollars, and exchange them for a known, fixed ($20 per ounce or whatever the Fed mandates) amount of gold, yes?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Emerson View Post
Exchanging two identical things, a one ounce gold coin for another one ounce gold coin for example, doesn't need to be fixed.
Exchanging a one ounce gold coin for another one ounce gold coin isn't fixed? Who's going to exchange at anything other than 1 for 1? You might not have a law mandating "1 ounce gold = 1 ounce gold", but that's the de facto standard. No?

Edit: I see your point - you're saying it is fixed because 1 ounce gold = 1 ounce of gold. The central banks don't need to fix the exchange rate, because it is fixed by being fixed against gold. Yes?

In other words, using a gold standard fixes exchange rates, yes?

.

Last edited by Gibson; April 25th, 2014 at 12:10 PM.
 
Old April 25th, 2014 #67
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,354
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Why Does Ron Paul Think Bitcoin Does Not Fit The Definition Of Money?
April 25, 2014

Answer by Ron Paul, Former Congressman from Texas, on Quora,

Bitcoin is a very interesting subject because for many years in Congress, I was a champion of legalizing competition in currencies.

We have a terrible monetary system today. We have a government that purposely counterfeits and debases the currencies and I believe that the alternative would be a competition. That means that anything that wants to substitute for the American dollar should be permitted. There should be no prohibitions; there should not be a monopoly and a cartel running our monetary system because it so often benefits the privileged few. We certainly saw this in the bailing out of the financial system where the wealthy bankers got bailed out it in this recent and severe recession. I am a strong believer in competition. Bitcoin is an introduction to that.

Though I don’t personally believe that Bitcoin is true money, it should be perfectly legal and there should be no restrictions on it, there should be no taxes on it. The people who operate Bitcoin would, of course, be prohibited from committing fraud but the people should be able to have competition whether it is a basket of commodities or crypto-currencies – it should be perfectly legal. For this to operate, we need to have freedom from government intervention when it comes to the Internet. I am concerned that the government ultimately wants to curtail the Internet and there have been attempts to do so.

The internet is the salvation for those of us who believe in liberty because it is an alternative way of getting around the system not only in the spreading of our ideas in this instance but in in terms of getting around the monetary system on the whole if they do permit crypto-currencies and other forms of transactions. So, this is something that we should all be concerned about whether we endorse it or not.

What we should all argue for is the use of freedom rather than having a monetary system with regulation domination that is run by a cartel and the special interests – that is the kind of system we have today. We want a system that truly challenges the government in their ability to take care of the very wealthy at the expense of the middle class and the poor.

This question originally appeared on Quora: Why does Ron Paul think Bitcoin does not fit the definition of money?
 
Old April 25th, 2014 #68
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,354
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Tax the Rich?
Michael S. Rozeff

Ludwig von Mises thought that civilization would founder and fail unless intellectuals understood correct economic policies and educated the masses to them. That is because civilization depends on the social cooperation and coordination brought about by free markets, non-inflationary money and property rights. Von Mises was correct.

Unfortunately, today’s intellectuals by and large are either coopted by the nomenklatura or are themselves nomenklatura. It is in the interest of abundant numbers of economists to transmit fallacious economic ideas. Consequently, civilization is faltering along with a sound economy. The sad fact is that one can find comment after comment arguing that capitalism is a failure and that taxing the wealth of the rich is a solution and the road to a sound economy.

An example is the popularity and affection heaped upon an economics book written by French economist Thomas Piketty. Since he supposedly has found a deadly flaw in capitalism and purports to have a remedy (global wealth taxes), he has been embraced by liberals, progressives, and socialists, or by all those who never understood economics in the first place. For an Austrian approach to Piketty’s concern over wealth distribution, see here. The author of this article finds evidence to support the view enunciated by von Mises and Rothbard that inflation causes the distribution of wealth to become top-heavy. For further argument and evidence of this factor, see here. For a more sensible approach to wealth than the economics of Piketty, see here.

It will help in understanding Piketty’s elevated concern with income distribution and his tax proposals to know that he supported the socialist candidate in 2007 and reportedly “has close connections with the French Socialist Party.”

Economic policy-making by the state is an horrendous disaster area, from A to Z. The state readies and drops bombs continuously, blasting one segment of the economy after another. To focus on income distribution as yet more grist for the politician’s mill is pure insanity. Income distribution is the outcome of factors too numerous to mention, much less control, success and failure at creating wealth being one of them. There is absolutely no reason to believe that the state can improve upon free market outcomes, and the latter include voluntary wealth transfers and charitable contributions. There is every reason to believe that the state’s interference will distort incentives perversely, as it has already in many of the state’s attempts to end poverty.

The people who will indulge in the insanity of attempting to control the distribution of wealth are of two main kinds. There are first the ignorant. They are those who do not understand the negative consequences of widespread state interference in this or any other economic matter. The second are those who stand to gain by such interference because it suits their fancy, their ideology, their religion, their quest for power, their influence, their popularity, their wealth or their chances of reelection. They include politicians. They include those in the nomenklatura who benefit by being the architects, purveyors, advisors, researchers, reporters, economists and administrators of such measures.

Anyone who pretends that he knows how to restructure the wealth of a set of people so as to cause a better situation than letting nature take its course should think about how well they could do this among their own siblings or among all the children and elderly that are related by blood and marriage in their family. The wealth disparities and differences in situations among this rather small group will be much larger than one might suppose. One should be humbled by the difficulty of acting as one who had the power to redistribute wealth among the people in this group with the supposed aim of either increasing happiness or stimulating economic growth.

1:38 pm on April 25, 2014
Email Michael S. Rozeff
 
Old April 25th, 2014 #69
Sam Emerson
Diversity = White Genocide
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Doom Fort II
Posts: 2,800
Sam Emerson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibson View Post
Edit: I see your point - you're saying it is fixed because 1 ounce gold = 1 ounce of gold. The central banks don't need to fix the exchange rate, because it is fixed by being fixed against gold. Yes?

In other words, using a gold standard fixes exchange rates, yes?
Trade gold for gold and there is no exchange of different things. A fixed exchange rate is something like a law or regulation mandating that two apples are worth one orange. Gold for gold doesn't require any fixing. Fixed and floating exchange rates of fiat currencies are part of economic history, that's what I was referring to when I blamed price fixing for the economic paralysis and trade problems we suffered under the fiat currency system.

It's difficult to explain hard money today because no one alive has lived in a society where hard money is commonly used. The "flexible" money that let the Jews fight World War II is a great evil, and the almost universal support of fiat money by powerful Jews (with a only a few Jew outcasts siding with gold and against central banking, who were shunned by Jewry for their trouble) should provide WNs with a clue about which way is good for whites.
 
Old August 16th, 2014 #71
vindicator06
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 262
Talking Yids & Money

Mike Gleason posted...

This week saw the end of an era for the silver market –
and potentially a new dawn for investors in the metal
who have long cried foul over price manipulation. On
Thursday, the London silver fixing ended after 117
years of setting benchmark prices through ritualized
backroom trading. Many precious metals investors
welcome the departure of the archaic price-setting
mechanism. It will be replaced by supposedly more
transparent electronic markets. The new silver pricing
system made its debut this week. It is administered by
the CME Group and Thomson Reuters and known as the London
Silver Price. The U.S. Mint said it will adopt the new
London silver benchmark pricing in managing its inventory.
Whether the new system for delivering benchmark silver spot
prices actually is more open and less prone to manipulation
remains to be seen (because of the Yids in the system).
Electronically traded markets have in some instances become
very vulnerable to inexplicable gyrations in the hands of
automated, high-frequency traders. The silver futures markets
remain dominated by concentrated positions taken out by a
handful of (Jew-controlled) Federal Reserve member banks.
No other widely traded commodity has been virtually cornered
like this in the paper markets. It will be hard to make the
case that we have free and fair markets for silver as long as
the big (Jew) banks have the ability to exert such undue
influence over them. As for this week’s market action, silver
showed a modest decline through Thursday’s close but is selling
off a bit this morning. Prices currently come in at $19.56 per
ounce, down 1.7% for the week with most of that decline coming
today. The gold market also produced lackluster price action
for most of the week, with the monetary metal coming in at $1,294
an ounce, down about 1% on the week thanks to this morning’s
selloff. Gold experienced a brief pop after the release of
weak retail sales data pointed to a slowing economy, but the
move didn’t amount to much. The only real notable price movement
we’re seeing in the precious metals markets this week is in palladium.
The white hot metal finished near multi-year highs on Thursday.
Palladium’s 2% gain on the week brings spot prices to $884 an
ounce as of this Friday morning recording. Most commodities moved
to the downside this week, in spite of simmering geopolitical
conflicts in sensitive parts of the world. Inflation as a
concern remains off the radar of the mainstream media and most
investors. But even though it’s not currently making news,
inflation represents a very serious long-term threat to your
wealth and is certain to rear its ugly head again under our
monetary system. It was 43 years ago this month that President
Richard Nixon closed the gold window. He completely untethered
the currency from the historic promise of being redeemable in gold.
Since then, price levels in the United States have skyrocketed.
A new car that cost $2,700 in 1971 now costs $32,000. A barrel
of oil that could be had for $2.20 in 1971 now costs nearly $100.
Since 1971, gold prices have moved from $41 per ounce to $1,300.
Silver has gone from just $1.40 an ounce to $20.

http://www.resist.com/CARTOON%20GALL...ws_image14.jpg

In 1964, a gallon of regular gas in the U.S. averaged 25 cents.
Dimes, quarters, and half dollar coins were still made of 90%
silver in 1964, the last year the U.S. minted 90% silver coinage
for circulation. To buy one gallon of gas, you paid with a silver
quarter. Fifty years ago, that silver quarter and that gallon
of gas had equal market value. Today, the silver in that quarter
is valued in paper dollars at about $3.75, which is also the
price you’ve paid recently for gas. That $3.75 price tag is
fifteen times the 1964 cost, meaning a paper dollar today is
worth less than 7% of its former self 50 years ago. But the
buying power locked in that silver quarter – its true value –
is exactly the same as 50 years ago, and today it will still
pay for a gallon of gas. The buying power of the silver did
not change. It was the dollar that changed. Metal and dollar
values don't march in lockstep day by day with everyday prices.
But over time, the illustration works perfectly. And let’s
not forget that the stock market is also reflective of this
underlying inflationary mega-trend. The Dow traded at 900 in
1971. It now trades at over 16,700. So the question isn’t
whether to protect yourself from rising prices in the years
ahead, but how. There can be long periods within a secular
inflation when stocks as an asset class are out of favor and
lag behind -- while precious metals experience spectacular
inflation-beating growth. And vice versa. Gold and silver
have certainly been laggards over the past three years. But
they outperformed stocks from 2001 to 2011. At the 2011 cyclical
peak in precious metals, gold traded at one-sixth of the value
of the Dow. History suggests that gold can move all the way up
to a 1:1 ratio with the Dow, as it did in 1980 and during the
Great Depression. The Dow:gold ratio currently stands at 12.7:1.
That means that from here, the precious metals could outpace stocks
with same magnitude that they did from 2001 to 2011 all over again.
Another bull market leg of such power could bring the Dow:gold
ratio back to 1:1. Of course, there’s no guarantee the ratio will
get all the way back to that parity level. But even if the best
gold could do was get to one-third of the value of the Dow that
would imply a gold price north of $5,500 based on the Dow’s latest
tick. No matter what way you look at it, there’s a huge upside for
gold and all the precious metals in the years ahead.

...and this fellow will be made out of an alloy of copper and
tin (bronze, for the benefit of the dumbed-down Goyum out
there).

http://th03.deviantart.net/fs71/PRE/...82-d5d583q.jpg
 
Old November 9th, 2014 #72
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,354
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

[from an essay on violence in prison, well worth reading, this snippet on money]

The locked-off world of a prison is a reflection of greater society in every sense, and the economy is no exception: The principles may be expressed primitively inside, but the system functions identically. Consider America's fiat currency. Long ago, a dollar could be exchanged for a certain amount of gold. Then it was silver. Then nothing. Starting in 1968, a dollar was worth only a dollar because the U.S. said it was. So why does the rest of the world still believe us? Because of our willingness to project American power across the globe. The U.S. has intercontinental ballistic missiles; we had prison shanks.

http://deadspin.com/violence-is-curr...apo-1643807529
 
Old April 20th, 2015 #73
Sam Emerson
Diversity = White Genocide
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Doom Fort II
Posts: 2,800
Sam Emerson
Default Currency Competition

Until recently there were only two sorts of money, money by law and commodity based money. All paper money is money by law, usually called fiat money. Its value derives from the power of the government. Commodity based money - gold and silver coins for example - can gain value from government endorsement (that's why governments set up mints) but it isn't completely dependent on government. A man with gold coins can still spend them after the government that minted them has collapsed, been overthrown or conquered. Paper money doesn't fare so well.

Commodity money tended to settle on just two major elements, gold and silver. Gold doesn't corrode and is rare enough to pack a lot of value in a one ounce coin. Silver is less valuable, but it's useful for smaller transactions. Copper and nickel were used for microtransactions.

Eventually governments noticed that gold and silver certificates, which were just paper documents, were being exchanged in place of gold and silver coins. Someone saw an opportunity. If you could issue as many of those certificates as you liked you would be financially independent. So the state made a deal with bankers and went into the fiat money business. Fiat money introduced extremely high rates of inflation. In times of crisis instead of raising taxes the government created more money. When wars cost more than expected - create more money. It was the answer to all problems.

If, a few decades later, the currency had lost almost all of its value, well, in the long run we are all dead. Or retired.

The tendency to inflate and the devaluation of money it caused could be observed. But inflation had more insidious effects. It distorted the market by creating an illusion of economic growth. A new dollar is created. Someone, usually a government agency or a bank, spends or lends it out. That dollar signals demand. Billions of them signal a lot of demand. The fractional reserve scam, already covered in this thread, only makes it worse by multiplying the artificial demand tenfold.

Most recently we experienced this in real estate, with the Clinton and Bush administrations encouraging liar loans to turn niggers and mexicans into homeowners.

As the money creation grew after 2001 this created a housing boom, lifting the entire economy. But it was all based on an illusion. To sustain it would have required hyperinflation, and the money creators draw the line at hyperinflation. They don't draw the line at creating bubbles. Creating bubbles (stimulating the economy as central bankers call it) is half the purpose, the other half being enriching the government and its banking partners.

How to escape this trap? The same way you escape any monopoly. Competition.

In recent years there's been a boom in alternative currencies based on cryptography. Bitcoin is the most well known, but there are others and they're evolving fast.

If legal tender laws were repealed and free competition in money were allowed the market itself would reveal the best money. You wouldn't have to take the word of gold bugs or Austrian economists. It would be right there in the monetary exchange rates. If gold better held value and was more widely accepted than fiat money then gold would rise. If bitcoins were more useful they would rise. If the money crackpots are right and what people crave in a currency is constant inflation and the caprice of government whims then fiat money would prevail.

I'm not sure if gold or cryptography is the best basis for currency, but I know government isn't.
 
Old January 1st, 2017 #74
RickHolland
Bread and Circuses
 
RickHolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Jewed Faggot States of ApemuriKa
Posts: 6,666
Blog Entries: 1
RickHolland
Default

Quote:
In June 2015, Managing Partner of the Institute of Trading and Portfolio Management Anton Kreil was interviewed whilst on a business trip from Singapore to New York and London. In this fly on the wall documentary style interview, Anton is probed by interviewer Tom Murray on what it takes for people to become financially successful and to obtain personal freedom. The result is an epic journey around the world, providing a glimpse into the life of one of the most successful financial markets traders in the world over the last 20 years and his philosophies on money, business and life. During the interview Anton provides 10 key messages that if followed and implemented properly over time, will help anybody achieve financial success and win their freedom.

10 Secrets to Achieve Financial Success

1. Respect Money and be Indifferent towards it (20:59)
2. Rent to Own – Define Assets and Liabilities Properly (42:33)
3. Build and Own your own Infrastructure (50:16)
4. Go Travelling, Get Perspective, Get your Dream Life (1:01:00)
5. Know that Risk is Subjective not Two Dimensional (1:07:33)
6. Seek out Alternative Education (1:17:45)
7. Learn to Value your Time Properly (1:24:30)
8. Ditch the Smart Phone (1:33:12)
9. Mainstream Media is Useless. Don’t consume it (1:40:51)
10. Choose Role Models that suit Your Objective (1:45:09)
__________________
Only force rules. Force is the first law - Adolf H. http://erectuswalksamongst.us/ http://tinyurl.com/cglnpdj Man has become great through struggle - Adolf H. http://tinyurl.com/mo92r4z Strength lies not in defense but in attack - Adolf H.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:12 PM.
Page generated in 0.13917 seconds.