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 Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Robin Plunder who wrote (99837)	11/23/2008 10:18:19 AM
From: Robin Plunder	Respond to of 110194

more from zarlenga link: "The supreme importance of understanding the nature of money now becomes evident: For if money obtains its value from "intrinsic" qualities, it could be viewed more as a creature of merchants and bankers than of governments. But if money's essence is an abstract social institution obtaining value through law, then its a creature of government and the Constitution had better deal with it adequately. Describing how a uniform currency is to be provided, controlled and kept reasonably stable, in a just manner. The Constitutional Convention faltered on this crucial question." Sort of..if gold is money, it is not a creature of bankers and merchants, it is an aspect of reality, and as such, cannot be altered at whim by bankers or govt. ie, it serves as a protection of our property. when money is social, our property is up for grabs by the group, whether of bankers, govt, or the voters...which is certainly what we have experienced over the last century in the US Robin

To: Robin Plunder who wrote (99837)	11/23/2008 1:12:43 PM
From: bart13	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 110194

This fiat money has no creative power, it is only the power to extort wealth from those who have earned it. That ignores factors like the actual historical facts of the Continental and the greenback fiat currencies, which were redeemed at par. Any theory or assertion that does not include all the facts is suspect. The only money that will serve as wealth protection is a money backed by a tangible, eg gold. Yes, but its just one of the many wealth protections that I own. And the gold standard has not lasted when it has been tried, showing that its not the monetary standard that is the actual problem. Zarlengas thesis is that central planning leads to prosperity I don't believe that's what he said not intended, nor have you addressed most of his actual points - let alone the actual evidence from Schacht's actions in the 1930s. The thesis you note is generally from Keynes, not Zarlenga. Money is a social construct, by definition, and has been that way for millennia. Its just a fact, and its also just a fact that it has been manipulated, etc. during the same period. And it will be until there is both a better educated populace and an economic school and set of theories that works and takes all of history and the facts into account.