Back to the gold standard
- Thread starter iheartaaron4life
- Start date
LiLaDideParis
New member
The sources don't prove that he was a paedophile though, just a pederasty, which is legal in most countries where they don't stone homosexuals to death. Again, I assume you know the difference, despite the conservatories's rather blatant attempt at misleading based on the source?
boltebabe33
New member
Dude, you'll be able to make a stronger case if you learn to - I dunno - read your own bloody sources.
Way to shoot yourself in the foot.
Way to shoot yourself in the foot.
frankenfish
New member
There will be more QE even if he doesn't hint at it.
Always is in an election year.
Raz
Always is in an election year.
Raz
BazookaJane
Member
Yeah I guess, but it is how it is done and also when it is done, in an election year for the US.
There are also rumors floating around that JP Morgan is not too healthy, so we could have an interesting week ahead of us.
There are also rumors floating around that JP Morgan is not too healthy, so we could have an interesting week ahead of us.
No not really, because you know what they are about.
My dad always used to say that the enemy you could see was not the real enemy.but then you look at the hypocrites in the Labour party, the biggest being tony bliar, a property millionare, who is now working for JP morgan In any event wasn't keynes a fascist
My dad always used to say that the enemy you could see was not the real enemy.but then you look at the hypocrites in the Labour party, the biggest being tony bliar, a property millionare, who is now working for JP morgan In any event wasn't keynes a fascist
X_sammi_t_X
New member
I find it funny that anyone see's real distinction between any mainstream political party these days, ESPECIALLY in the US.
In the UK one works at the behest of the trade unions and one works at the behest of the city.
To say that the left wing is fascist or the right wing is fascist is meaningless we can find examples of fascism on both sides if you like wide enough.
Raz
In the UK one works at the behest of the trade unions and one works at the behest of the city.
To say that the left wing is fascist or the right wing is fascist is meaningless we can find examples of fascism on both sides if you like wide enough.
Raz
Schnatzel
New member
So why is it that if the economy can be fixed so easily by creating a fiat currency quantified by governments, don't they convert to that type of system? It's been obvious that Governments want citizens to invest their money instead of saving it, but it would seem to me that if banks reverted to strictly saving's and loan entities that many problems would be solved. Of course the banks would initially reject that type of system, but for the long term security of nations, the US in particular, it would seem to be a no brainer. What am I missing?
starwings20
Member
A fiat currency is not backed by anything, so that means that ~Governments can print as much money as they want and politicians just want to be in power, so they are quite happy to keep on printing money, helping special interest groups so they get their votes or their money.
America used to have a system under the Glass Steagall act were commercial banks and investment banks were separate but that was repealled
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Act
read more here
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2012/08/27/repeal-of-glass-steagall-caused-the-financial-crisis
America used to have a system under the Glass Steagall act were commercial banks and investment banks were separate but that was repealled
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Act
read more here
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2012/08/27/repeal-of-glass-steagall-caused-the-financial-crisis
icemaster316_2001
Member
What's your point? I mean isn't that what their doing now? The currency we have is technically a fiat currency, granted it is backed by debt, however the debt is only an asset if the debtor is in a position to repay it. Sooner or later we are going to reach checkmate, then we risk horrible consequences. We need to put the power back into the hands of the people by limiting the power and control the banks have on governments. To do this it would seem the government needs to control the currency. Many think the government needs to control industry, healthcare, and social security, I would think currency would be right up there on the list. Still we must be missing something.
Obewan I agree with you, in that bring back the Glass-Stegal act for the USA and equivelants over here seperate retail and investing banks
And for the love of jeeebus you cannot bring the gold standard back now. There is nothing you can back currencies with now.
Government spending is insane compared to then, there is not enough gold or w.e you want available.
And for the love of jeeebus you cannot bring the gold standard back now. There is nothing you can back currencies with now.
Government spending is insane compared to then, there is not enough gold or w.e you want available.
KatrinaM
Member
I would like to go a bit further with this thread.
Going back to the goldstandard is obviusly not a realistic idea,but what is ???
I mean,lets be honest,there are only two options:to save money,or to invest in the economy.
Let's take to first option,stop spending money,and what will be the result ???
I give you an example:SPAIN.
Spain has done exacly that,and the net result is:25% unemploiment in general,up to 50% yought unemploiment.
So,a cut in spending can create massive unemploiment.
The second opition:investment.
You will create more dept,but can perhaps stop peaple from loosing there jobs.
I would like to say clearly here that this is not only an American problem,it's exactly thesame in Europe !!!
Dus enyone have an idea to get out of this mess ???
Your opinion is most welcome.
Haw do we get out of this?????
Going back to the goldstandard is obviusly not a realistic idea,but what is ???
I mean,lets be honest,there are only two options:to save money,or to invest in the economy.
Let's take to first option,stop spending money,and what will be the result ???
I give you an example:SPAIN.
Spain has done exacly that,and the net result is:25% unemploiment in general,up to 50% yought unemploiment.
So,a cut in spending can create massive unemploiment.
The second opition:investment.
You will create more dept,but can perhaps stop peaple from loosing there jobs.
I would like to say clearly here that this is not only an American problem,it's exactly thesame in Europe !!!
Dus enyone have an idea to get out of this mess ???
Your opinion is most welcome.
Haw do we get out of this?????
ThriceBlessed
New member
You get out of it by gradually reducing government spending, by everyone living within there means. People paying of their debts instead of getting more credit cards and mortgages which should never of been offered to people who can't afford to pay them.
You accept that we have 5 years of austerity ahead.
You do however maintain infrastructure to support self sufficient economic growth i.e private business. See my previous post on the differences between stimulus and infrastructure spending.
You stop giving foreign aid to country's who don;t need it (ref Britain in this one)
Charity begins at home. You encourage small business's to grow, you encourage people to set up business in your country by having good infrastructure.
You spend government money in helping your country excel in the fields it good at.
You stop trying to chase short term statistics to please people electing you. With this stop cooking the books.
You stop demonizing immigrants, when its you the government who is offering them everything under the sun, if they have skills, and talent get them in, if not your still welcome to come here, but you will receive NO hand outs.
You keep looking for inefficiency in already established departments. You do not cut funding to library's and charities who do work which the government would have to do.
You raise the standards of education in the country because FFS and this really gets me worked up, we keep dumbing down generation after generation.
You stop demonizing rich individuals as a crowd please, because if you want business's to stay and you want factories built and charities to be patron'd thats a price worth paying. You do however not let them avoid tax.
You cut bureaucratic nonsense for planning permissions etc
You ensure co-operations pay the taxes they need to, not hounding single parents on benefits, because the amounts are not even worth comparing.
K done
Questions welcome,
You accept that we have 5 years of austerity ahead.
You do however maintain infrastructure to support self sufficient economic growth i.e private business. See my previous post on the differences between stimulus and infrastructure spending.
You stop giving foreign aid to country's who don;t need it (ref Britain in this one)
Charity begins at home. You encourage small business's to grow, you encourage people to set up business in your country by having good infrastructure.
You spend government money in helping your country excel in the fields it good at.
You stop trying to chase short term statistics to please people electing you. With this stop cooking the books.
You stop demonizing immigrants, when its you the government who is offering them everything under the sun, if they have skills, and talent get them in, if not your still welcome to come here, but you will receive NO hand outs.
You keep looking for inefficiency in already established departments. You do not cut funding to library's and charities who do work which the government would have to do.
You raise the standards of education in the country because FFS and this really gets me worked up, we keep dumbing down generation after generation.
You stop demonizing rich individuals as a crowd please, because if you want business's to stay and you want factories built and charities to be patron'd thats a price worth paying. You do however not let them avoid tax.
You cut bureaucratic nonsense for planning permissions etc
You ensure co-operations pay the taxes they need to, not hounding single parents on benefits, because the amounts are not even worth comparing.
K done
Questions welcome,
Yondaime_Naruto
New member
This isn't actually true. It's not backed by a physical commodity. It's backed by the wealth of the country, in the largest possible sense of wealth. So physical and non-physical valuables.
If I move to an island by myself and print a bunch of my own currency, no one will care. If I pen the most brilliant book ever written and Hollywood wants to make a movie out of it they'll have to buy my Island Money with their dollars in order to pay me. Now my Island Money has value (and I have a dollar reserve). That value before the transaction was based on my book and after by the dollars the island now has.
Printing more money wont mean I can buy more things with Island Money, it just means that it's worth less.
If I move to an island by myself and print a bunch of my own currency, no one will care. If I pen the most brilliant book ever written and Hollywood wants to make a movie out of it they'll have to buy my Island Money with their dollars in order to pay me. Now my Island Money has value (and I have a dollar reserve). That value before the transaction was based on my book and after by the dollars the island now has.
Printing more money wont mean I can buy more things with Island Money, it just means that it's worth less.