Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy Jetson who wrote (36251)	7/26/2005 4:40:40 PM
From: gpowell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

Imagination? No, just observing your inconsistent views. The following links and quotes illustrate your belief in a hard money standard. You have advocated for a fixed money supply and restrictions on financial intermediation - that is far from the views of a free market advocate. At best, you are inconsistent in your application of free market principles, at worst you are a hyprocrite for deriding others for their belief in some level of government intervention. Message 21156828 Message 21043233 Message 21281278 Message 21242346 Message 21214283 A growing capitalist economy produces deflation. This is normal. A classic capitalist economy, where the money supply is fixed Deflation is indeed a normal attribute of a growing capitalist economy. More importantly it does not need to be cured. In reality the Fed is "accommodative" when money is created Greenspan: More credit is a good thing. Typical Monetarist twaddle, based on the false belief that a nation's wealth increases when the amount of money and/or credit is increased. Here a links to your belief that restrictive regulation is a good thing, which is entirely consistent with your belief that free banking creates too much money. Message 21497284 Message 21202918 But he also inherited Reagan's delusional deregulation of the banking industry. This loss of monetary discipline led to a costly collapse of a portion of the banking industry. what part of Sarbanes-Oxley do you believe hurts actual wealth producing companies, as opposed to companies which rely on fictitious earnings? I will say that it does seem you are grouping towards a free market solution for money, you recognize there are problems with central bank created money, but you lack the theoretical underpinning to make the “correct” arguments. Further, you betray a lack of trust in the general public, and thus you are inconsistent in your application of free market principles – on the one hand advocating free market solutions and on the other advocating restrictive policies. I think Milton Friedman would be very sympathetic to your angst. BTW, in reviewing some of your past posts I found some egregious errors – here are two that are illuminating: Message 20396076 What does it mean that the Fed Funds rate is at 1.25%? Nothing of any substance beyond public relations. The real rate is the Discount Rate, currently at 2.25%. This is the rate banks pay to borrow from the Fed. You have it backwards; the discount window is not an important source of funds for banks, not since the creation of the FDIC. This is not a little error – it means you lack a basic understanding of how reserves enter the banking system – which seems impossible for anyone who truly has a degree in economics or has done any background research in money and banking. Message 21303066 http://home.pacbell.net/nstuart/Gold_v_Dow.gif To increase the purchasing power of your savings requires you do something else, yet the chart above demonstrates that achieving this requires the right choice in timing rather than the right choice of asset class. In this post you are saying that, in the long-run, no wealth is created, i.e. that the result of human effort and knowledge creation is zero. If you hold this view you cannot be a capitalist and you cannot hope to understand the very nature of the capitalist system and the role money plays in it. This one flawed premise (capitalism as a zero sum game) may, in fact, be the source of many of your pessimistic views on society, politics, and economics.