>>It does not strike me as overly wise at all. He strikes me as 1) a state rights advocate and 2) he has latched onto 0% inflation.<<
"From now on, depressions will be scientifically created." -- Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh Sr. , 1913
blacklistednews.com
bostonherald.com
the founding fathers knew tyranny. they set up a government to to try and avoid it. an all powerful goodie bag big brother government that can give you everything can also take it all away.
how'd that work out for the north vietnamese? chinese? iraqis? afghanies? mexicans? romans? russians? germans? greeks? almost every nation that has ever existed.
i'm sorry, but the founding fathers created something that was head and shoulders better than anything any collectivist has ever created and i stand with them. we are the united STATES of america, not the FEDERAL states of america - and for d*mn good reason.
i *wish* collectivism worked, but it doesn't. it never has. the ones in power eventually enslave everyone else. this is historically the rule - with few exceptions - and those exceptions are now all bankrupt by their big federal over lords.
imho, the police state and enslavement of the populace will follow.
>>The FED has a dual mandate, 1) inflation, and 2) employment.<<
that's misleading. by design. they have a single mandate - to keep credit aggregate in line with GDP (don't run debt up lots higher than revenues).
how did that work out?
market-ticker.denninger.net
the mandate is right here - i'm not making it up, i'm simply not misleading like the controlled press...
"The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Open Market Committee shall maintain long run growth of the monetary and credit aggregates commensurate with the economy's long run potential to increase production..."
federalreserve.gov
they broke the law. they are criminals. they own the media, so his crimes make him time man of the year.
yes, the result of obeying the law - not taking credit parabolic to GDP will be lower unemployment and price stability. it is cause and effect.
the fed is supposed to control credit aggregates for the effect of controlling unemployment and price stability.
why has price stability been off the rails for well over a decade and unemployment exploding now?
market-ticker.denninger.net
simple, the fed broke the law. that's the cause. price instability and high unemployment is simply the result.
>>He thinks that a single variable control is better. This I doubt. The current system is a single input, two output system. He is advocating a single input, single output system. This will likely do a better job of regulating the one variable, but it will result is wild swings of the other variable. You often post about the coming unrest caused by the current system, but this system would descend into unrest way quicker, for the simple fact that it has no interest in employment stability, yet lack of employment is the main cause of social unrest. You are focused on destruction of savings as being the main cause of social unrest. The bulk of Americans don't have savings which are anywhere near a significant fraction of their income streams. One is way more important than the other.<<
your paradigm is false because you assume that piling on trillions of debt to society and making billionaire bankers whole for bad loans they should eat (so they don't do it again!) is actually making something better.
it isn't. it is making things much, much worse. it is delaying the outcome (you are right on here), but it will make the outcome 3x, 5x or 10x worse when it finally hits.
i'll take 10% pain today to avoid 100% pain in 10 days.
think of it this way - how far ahead would we be if we bit the bullet when LTCM collapsed in the late 90s.
we would suffered earlier, but we would have fixed the problems and missed all the subsequent ever larger bubbles and busts. instead, the booms get bigger, the debt explodes and the busts get worse...
now we need $10s of trillions to paper over the current crisis... temporarily.
if we can't handle X debt, how can we handle 2X? how can we handle 3X? 5X?
>>And he thinks that markets are magical and can set interest rates just fine. How many posts have you made on this board about market manipulation? So why are you advocating placing interest rates under the tender care of GS traders as well? This is nuts.<<
GSes crowd used rates to do this...
market-ticker.denninger.net
they already control rates now - unilaterally. Nathan wants to allow the rest of society to be involved in the process.
>>Most of what he writes is Utopian handwaving about the magical results he expects, not the details or any logical argument for WHY these magical results will occur. For petes sake, he advocates TWO YEARS of full tax refunds to pay down debt. Talk about the great sucking sound out of the economy!<<
i agree that some of the ideas are utopian. congressional control of the money (the constitutional model) has some serious flaws - the largest of which is the american people have their collective head up their arse and just accept liars and cheats for "leaders."
>>I do find the question of inflation targets interesting and would like to read some well written articles on it. I suspect small positive inflation is important mainly for psychological reasons.<<
i'd be happy with real inflation numbers - they lie through their teeth right now. match box homes don't go from $100k to $500k in a decade with 2-3% inflation, regardless of what criminals would have us believe.
>>It might well be the case that for a subset of the population, 0% would be better psychologically, but if so, I suspect they are a distinct minority. Some people need pay raises on a regular basis to keep them beavering away,<<
not if prices don't go up. raises based on merit are real. lately, nobody is getting a raise and inflation plugs along.
>>while others are more obsessed with knowing that the stash under the mattress is not losing value. There is likely a gene or two responsible for both views. Which one it is better to address in a monetary system for overall system benefit is a good question. Like I say, I suspect that low positive inflation is.<<
how about debt free money - why should society pay 7-8% on their money supply every year to people who do nothing but log entries in books?
every year, year after year.
>>He also makes odd arguments for both a distributed money supply system (lots of yaking about returning control to the people and states) but then he still has a centralized federal board to actually determine the quantity.
I'll read more, but it does not strike me as very well thought out. How for example does he handle the fact that rising populations intrinsically cause inflation due to competition for resources?<<
simple, add more debt free sovereign money.
>>His method for calculating the quantity of money (if I read this correctly!) is to very carefully compute inflation, then REDUCE the money supply if inflation is positive, since he is trying to regulate to 0%. So as a country gradually shifts from rural to higher urban population (growth of cities) real estate and other resources (water, farm land) all become more sought after, but per this gentleman, he will respond by choking the money supply as this happens! LOL!<<
but that isn't inflation, per se, it is simply a growing economy. you'd grow the money supply to support the growing economy. of course, growing workers mean growing goods to be sold... so there will be some balance there.
>>Note that he can handle the population increase by itself (1'st order effect) but not the 2'nd order effect it has on competition for resources, which is expressed in asset inflation. Even if he comes up with some complex formula to adjust RE prices as they shift to higher density urban (i.e. a former farmhouse now in the city can be priced higher and still not be inflation?), how does he handle free market choices of people competing for more desirable places as they become less available? Asset inflation happens around job creation, yet he will respond by trying to kill it off??<<
copy and paste the question to him or post in one of the swarmusa.com forums.
these guys aren't authoritarian - they want something that works and all good ideas will be considered.
>>Someone should ask him to discuss the sale of Manhattan Island for some beads to the current price of real estate there and ask how his monetary system would work over the same period of time for this example.<<
copy and paste and ask him... he's very hands on.
check out "the money masters" on google videos...
video.google.com
these people can't continue to rule over america without collapsing our democratic republic. |
