The Fed is a criminal organization that steals from the American people

[Toddsterpatriot]

You're confusing nominal value with real value.

You're looking at supply, while ignoring demand.

It's what conservatives seem to love these days.. Ignore demand.

Liberals are still more clueless. Not even close.

Well, at least liberals recognize the need to boost demand . Actually, they're both pretty stupid, but at least liberals supported the stimulus/continue to support ventures that boost aggregate demand.

Well, at least liberals recognize the need to boost demand .

And completely ignore anything that would boost supply.
In fact, they actively work to reduce supply.

but at least liberals supported the stimulus/continue to support ventures that boost aggregate demand

Yes, liberals push to increase demand in the worst possible ways.

Huh? We have plenty of supply. Demand tends to lead to an increase in supply by the way, producers increase production due to new demand.
How do you propose increasing demand as of now? Low interest rates, excess reserves, what is left?

Huh? We have plenty of supply.

Sure, for instance, we have all the medical care we'd ever need.
We could spend trillions more on it and not raise the price.

College education as well. Just look at the effect of endless government dollars thrown at college tuition.
Yeah, we need the government to just throw more tax dollars at stuff, to increase demand.

When you say it out loud, you realize the stupidity of your claim.

How do you propose increasing demand as of now? Low interest rates, excess reserves, what is left?

Have low rates increased demand? How about increased regulations?

Maybe we could stop increasing capital requirements on our banks?
Our banks are ridiculously over capitalized and fear adding new loans.

 

[kaz]

"The Fed is a criminal organization that steals from the American people"

Libertarians belong to a childish organization that lies to the American people.

So you got nothing, huh?

This is a very good point. See, this is the sort of poster that just doesn't get how the economy is structured.

We would see this same member post in so many threads supporting a government enforced raise in the minimum wage. However, the thing is, how many raises in the minimum wage have we seen?

Minimum wage in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Many. Too many. And what has it solved? Nothing.

It just keeps going up and up and up as the FED devalues the worth of the currency, stealing the value of the goods, products, land, wealth and LABOR of the American people. Raising the minimum wage is a temporary fix. The wealthy of the nation, the elites in the end don't give two shits about this issue, not really. It is a band-aid. They can afford it. The middle class and poor tend to be the one's that suffer when it distorts the price signals that ripple through the economy.

If the poor and middle class really wanted their dollars to purchase goods and services at a steady rate, they would demand that the FED quit robbing the value of the currency.

Want to help the working poor? End the Fed
Want to help the working poor? End the Fed - Campaign for Liberty

"Raising minimum wages by government decree appeals to those who do not understand economics. This appeal is especially strong during times of stagnant wages and increased economic inequality. But raising the minimum wage actually harms those at the bottom of the income ladder. Basic economic theory teaches that when the price of a good increases, demand for that good decreases. Raising the minimum wage increases the price of labor, thus decreasing the demand for labor. So an increased minimum wage will lead to hiring freezes and layoffs. Unskilled and inexperienced workers are the ones most often deprived of employment opportunities by increases in the minimum wage.


Minimum wage laws are not the only example of government policies that hurt those at the bottom of the income scale. Many regulations that are promoted as necessary to “rein in” large corporations actually hurt small businesses. Because these small businesses operate on a much narrower profit margin, they cannot as easily absorb the costs of complying with the regulations as large corporations. These regulations can also inhibit lower income individuals from starting their own businesses. Thus, government regulations can reduce the demand for wage-labor, while increasing the supply of labor, which further reduces wages.


Perhaps the most significant harm to low-wage earners is caused by the inflationist polices of the Federal Reserve. Since its creation one hundred years ago this month, the Federal Reserve’s policies have caused the dollar to lose over 95 percent of its purchasing power—that’s right, today you need $23.70 to buy what one dollar bought in 1913! Who do you think suffers the most from this loss of purchasing power—Warren Buffet or his secretary?


It is not just that higher incomes can afford the higher prices caused by Federal Reserve. The system is set up in a way that disadvantages those at the bottom of the income scale. When the Federal Reserve creates money, those well-connected with the political and financial elites receive the newly-created money first, before general price increases have spread through the economy. And most fast-food employees do not number among the well-connected."


If anything, what this chart shows is that the minimum wage requires a hair cut so more teenagers can get a job and so our economy would be more competitive with the rest of the world.

You want to know how to discourage illegal immigration? Decrease minimum wage to 4 or 5 dollars (as per the purchasing power between 1940 and 1950) and tighten the controls on who is eligible for social services. I guarantee you that your average sixteen year old will still want to work, but those illegals will stay put.

When the Federal Reserve creates money, those well-connected with the political and financial elites receive the newly-created money first,

Those bastards! How do the elites "receive the newly-created money first"?

For example, loans for mortgages based on money added to the money supply through Fed money provided to banks

 

[kaz]

Adding money to the money supply does not add value. Say the value of a pencil is $1. And the fed adds 10% to the money supply. The price of a pencil just goes up to $1.10. No value was created.

No one but the left should hate the Fed more. When the government adds taxes, every time, they disproportionately tax the rich. The Fed printing money is a regressive tax because the "rich" have investments which compensate for the reduction in the buying power of a dollar.

The "poor" take the full hit because they spend what they earn, and every new dollar created by the Fed hits them in proportion to spending, which is higher for them.

If leftists actually believe what you say, and you grasped what the Fed does, you'd be the first to demand it's abolished. The reality though is you don't give a shit about the poor, you care about government power. Which is why you are the Fed's biggest advocate.

Once again you support what you say you oppose and fuck the people you claim to defend

Adding money to the money supply does not add value.

....? What does this even mean? Should the money supply never be expanded?

We should go back to the gold standard and it should only be expanded if we get more gold. There is no benefit to the country to expand the money supply. Only to the government as they create money is just a tax that they don't have to collect from the people.

The price of a pencil just goes up to $1.10. No value was created.

What kind of stupid shit is this? Here, think about this: In the 1920's, how many hours did a person have to work to get a meal compared to today?

I don't get the relevance of the question to the discussion

When the government adds taxes, every time, they disproportionately tax the rich.

Makes sense, considering that the rich hold most of the taxable dollars. But taxation for revenue is obsolete.

You dropped the point, printing money is a disproportionate tax on the poor, I thought you were against that

 

[kaz]

You can't look at money supply and ignore money demand.

If the Fed adds 10% to the money supply but demand for money rises 11%, prices would drop about 1%.

You're confusing nominal value with real value. Adding nominal dollars to the money supply has nothing to do with what you're arguing

You're confusing nominal value with real value.

You're looking at supply, while ignoring demand.

It's what conservatives seem to love these days.. Ignore demand.

Liberals are still more clueless. Not even close.

Well, at least liberals recognize the need to boost demand . Actually, they're both pretty stupid, but at least liberals supported the stimulus/continue to support ventures that boost aggregate demand.

What is the point in crediting liberals for "recognize a need to boost demand" when none of their policies logically lead to that result?

 

[kaz]

You're confusing nominal value with real value.

You're looking at supply, while ignoring demand.

It's what conservatives seem to love these days.. Ignore demand.

Liberals are still more clueless. Not even close.

Well, at least liberals recognize the need to boost demand . Actually, they're both pretty stupid, but at least liberals supported the stimulus/continue to support ventures that boost aggregate demand.

Well, at least liberals recognize the need to boost demand .

And completely ignore anything that would boost supply.
In fact, they actively work to reduce supply.

but at least liberals supported the stimulus/continue to support ventures that boost aggregate demand

Yes, liberals push to increase demand in the worst possible ways.

Huh? We have plenty of supply. Demand tends to lead to an increase in supply by the way, producers increase production due to new demand.
How do you propose increasing demand as of now? Low interest rates, excess reserves, what is left?

Boosting demand without boosting supply leads to higher prices, basic on the supply and demand curve

 

[MisterBeale]

"The Fed is a criminal organization that steals from the American people"

Libertarians belong to a childish organization that lies to the American people.

So you got nothing, huh?

This is a very good point. See, this is the sort of poster that just doesn't get how the economy is structured.

We would see this same member post in so many threads supporting a government enforced raise in the minimum wage. However, the thing is, how many raises in the minimum wage have we seen?

Minimum wage in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Many. Too many. And what has it solved? Nothing.

It just keeps going up and up and up as the FED devalues the worth of the currency, stealing the value of the goods, products, land, wealth and LABOR of the American people. Raising the minimum wage is a temporary fix. The wealthy of the nation, the elites in the end don't give two shits about this issue, not really. It is a band-aid. They can afford it. The middle class and poor tend to be the one's that suffer when it distorts the price signals that ripple through the economy.

If the poor and middle class really wanted their dollars to purchase goods and services at a steady rate, they would demand that the FED quit robbing the value of the currency.

Want to help the working poor? End the Fed
Want to help the working poor? End the Fed - Campaign for Liberty

"Raising minimum wages by government decree appeals to those who do not understand economics. This appeal is especially strong during times of stagnant wages and increased economic inequality. But raising the minimum wage actually harms those at the bottom of the income ladder. Basic economic theory teaches that when the price of a good increases, demand for that good decreases. Raising the minimum wage increases the price of labor, thus decreasing the demand for labor. So an increased minimum wage will lead to hiring freezes and layoffs. Unskilled and inexperienced workers are the ones most often deprived of employment opportunities by increases in the minimum wage.


Minimum wage laws are not the only example of government policies that hurt those at the bottom of the income scale. Many regulations that are promoted as necessary to “rein in” large corporations actually hurt small businesses. Because these small businesses operate on a much narrower profit margin, they cannot as easily absorb the costs of complying with the regulations as large corporations. These regulations can also inhibit lower income individuals from starting their own businesses. Thus, government regulations can reduce the demand for wage-labor, while increasing the supply of labor, which further reduces wages.


Perhaps the most significant harm to low-wage earners is caused by the inflationist polices of the Federal Reserve. Since its creation one hundred years ago this month, the Federal Reserve’s policies have caused the dollar to lose over 95 percent of its purchasing power—that’s right, today you need $23.70 to buy what one dollar bought in 1913! Who do you think suffers the most from this loss of purchasing power—Warren Buffet or his secretary?


It is not just that higher incomes can afford the higher prices caused by Federal Reserve. The system is set up in a way that disadvantages those at the bottom of the income scale. When the Federal Reserve creates money, those well-connected with the political and financial elites receive the newly-created money first, before general price increases have spread through the economy. And most fast-food employees do not number among the well-connected."


If anything, what this chart shows is that the minimum wage requires a hair cut so more teenagers can get a job and so our economy would be more competitive with the rest of the world.

You want to know how to discourage illegal immigration? Decrease minimum wage to 4 or 5 dollars (as per the purchasing power between 1940 and 1950) and tighten the controls on who is eligible for social services. I guarantee you that your average sixteen year old will still want to work, but those illegals will stay put.

When the Federal Reserve creates money, those well-connected with the political and financial elites receive the newly-created money first,

Those bastards! How do the elites "receive the newly-created money first"?

For example, loans for mortgages based on money added to the money supply through Fed money provided to banks

I've heard sound arguments that restricting the supply of liquidity to just gold in the economy might hinder growth, so that is sort of a trick question. I think Todd is trying to trip us up, he knows quite a bit about what he is talking about here. Gold bugs can be a bit unrealistic. (OTH, maybe hindering growth, i.e., placing limits on growth is fates/divinity's way of saying, that is all the planet can take? That's my spiritual and philosophical side.)

The US economy is much larger than the gold supply of the entire planet by now. That said, I'm not opposed to a commodity based currency however. Even one based on the labor and goods, which is the full faith and credit of the American people, would be good enough.

"The reverse of the notes were printed with green ink, and were thus called "greenbacks" by the public, being considered equivalent to the Demand Notes already known as such. These Notes were issued by the United States to pay for labor and goods.[3][6]

Earlier Secretary Chase had the slogan, "In God We Trust" engraved on U. S. coins. During a cabinet meeting there was some discussion of adding it to the U. S. Notes as well. Lincoln, however, humorously remarked, "If you are going to put a legend on the greenbacks, I would suggest that of Peter and Paul, 'Silver and gold I have none, but such as I have I give to thee.'"[7]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenback_(1860s_money)

When they eventually replace the dollar, it will either be with a new debt based fiat currency, or, if things go against them and the other side gets it's way, a free floating exchange basket of currencies based on commodities. Who knows? Maybe global civilization will collapse in a nuke exchange and make the whole thing pointless and academic, these maniacs are playing with fire.

 

[Wilbur Right]

Maybe we could stop increasing capital requirements on our banks?

Really? Why? You looking forward to another tax payer funded bailout?

 

[Wilbur Right]

Our banks are ridiculously over capitalized and fear adding new loans.

Is that why you think you were turned down for your loan?

 

[Wilbur Right]

We should go back to the gold standard and it should only be expanded if we get more gold

LMAO. Yea that's what we need to do. I was just telling Janet (fed chair) yesterday that kaz on a message board said we needed to go back to the gold standard.

She laughed and laughed.

Gold standard, flat 10% tax. You all are a riot.
You all ever discuss reality?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

"The Fed is a criminal organization that steals from the American people"

Libertarians belong to a childish organization that lies to the American people.

So you got nothing, huh?

This is a very good point. See, this is the sort of poster that just doesn't get how the economy is structured.

We would see this same member post in so many threads supporting a government enforced raise in the minimum wage. However, the thing is, how many raises in the minimum wage have we seen?

Minimum wage in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Many. Too many. And what has it solved? Nothing.

It just keeps going up and up and up as the FED devalues the worth of the currency, stealing the value of the goods, products, land, wealth and LABOR of the American people. Raising the minimum wage is a temporary fix. The wealthy of the nation, the elites in the end don't give two shits about this issue, not really. It is a band-aid. They can afford it. The middle class and poor tend to be the one's that suffer when it distorts the price signals that ripple through the economy.

If the poor and middle class really wanted their dollars to purchase goods and services at a steady rate, they would demand that the FED quit robbing the value of the currency.

Want to help the working poor? End the Fed
Want to help the working poor? End the Fed - Campaign for Liberty

"Raising minimum wages by government decree appeals to those who do not understand economics. This appeal is especially strong during times of stagnant wages and increased economic inequality. But raising the minimum wage actually harms those at the bottom of the income ladder. Basic economic theory teaches that when the price of a good increases, demand for that good decreases. Raising the minimum wage increases the price of labor, thus decreasing the demand for labor. So an increased minimum wage will lead to hiring freezes and layoffs. Unskilled and inexperienced workers are the ones most often deprived of employment opportunities by increases in the minimum wage.


Minimum wage laws are not the only example of government policies that hurt those at the bottom of the income scale. Many regulations that are promoted as necessary to “rein in” large corporations actually hurt small businesses. Because these small businesses operate on a much narrower profit margin, they cannot as easily absorb the costs of complying with the regulations as large corporations. These regulations can also inhibit lower income individuals from starting their own businesses. Thus, government regulations can reduce the demand for wage-labor, while increasing the supply of labor, which further reduces wages.


Perhaps the most significant harm to low-wage earners is caused by the inflationist polices of the Federal Reserve. Since its creation one hundred years ago this month, the Federal Reserve’s policies have caused the dollar to lose over 95 percent of its purchasing power—that’s right, today you need $23.70 to buy what one dollar bought in 1913! Who do you think suffers the most from this loss of purchasing power—Warren Buffet or his secretary?


It is not just that higher incomes can afford the higher prices caused by Federal Reserve. The system is set up in a way that disadvantages those at the bottom of the income scale. When the Federal Reserve creates money, those well-connected with the political and financial elites receive the newly-created money first, before general price increases have spread through the economy. And most fast-food employees do not number among the well-connected."


If anything, what this chart shows is that the minimum wage requires a hair cut so more teenagers can get a job and so our economy would be more competitive with the rest of the world.

You want to know how to discourage illegal immigration? Decrease minimum wage to 4 or 5 dollars (as per the purchasing power between 1940 and 1950) and tighten the controls on who is eligible for social services. I guarantee you that your average sixteen year old will still want to work, but those illegals will stay put.

When the Federal Reserve creates money, those well-connected with the political and financial elites receive the newly-created money first,

Those bastards! How do the elites "receive the newly-created money first"?

For example, loans for mortgages based on money added to the money supply through Fed money provided to banks

Only elites can get mortgages?
How is the Fed providing this money to the banks? Is it a gift?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Maybe we could stop increasing capital requirements on our banks?

Really? Why? You looking forward to another tax payer funded bailout?

You're right, our economy grows so well when we restrict loans. Let's double the capital requirements.
No downside to that, right?

As far as the bank bailout, it made money.

 

[Wilbur Right]

As far as the bank bailout, it made money.

So do drug dealers. Is that a good thing?

 

[Wilbur Right]

You're right, our economy grows so well when we restrict loans.

I know. Look how well things went when ANYBODY could get a loan.

 

[paulitician]

You got that right. The U.S. Government is by far the biggest most deadly criminal gang on earth. Most Governments are just criminal organizations in the end. They operate just like brutal gangs do. In fact, criminal gangs model themselves after Governments.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

As far as the bank bailout, it made money.

So do drug dealers. Is that a good thing?

Saving the banking system is a good thing. Drug dealers, not so much.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You're right, our economy grows so well when we restrict loans.

I know. Look how well things went when ANYBODY could get a loan.

Left alone, do you think banks would make housing loans to just anybody today?

 

[paulitician]

As far as the bank bailout, it made money.

So do drug dealers. Is that a good thing?

Saving the banking system is a good thing. Drug dealers, not so much.

YAY! We saved the Billionaire Banker Elites!! Now everything's gonna be great for us!

Man, the Banker Elites must laugh their asses off at how naive and dumb most people are. They'll believe anything their Governments tell them.

 

[kaz]

We should go back to the gold standard and it should only be expanded if we get more gold

LMAO. Yea that's what we need to do. I was just telling Janet (fed chair) yesterday that kaz on a message board said we needed to go back to the gold standard.

She laughed and laughed.

Gold standard, flat 10% tax. You all are a riot.
You all ever discuss reality?

That's hilarious coming from an unctuous little gnome who says your opinion all the time on message boards.

Grow up

 

[kaz]

"The Fed is a criminal organization that steals from the American people"

Libertarians belong to a childish organization that lies to the American people.

So you got nothing, huh?

This is a very good point. See, this is the sort of poster that just doesn't get how the economy is structured.

We would see this same member post in so many threads supporting a government enforced raise in the minimum wage. However, the thing is, how many raises in the minimum wage have we seen?

Minimum wage in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Many. Too many. And what has it solved? Nothing.

It just keeps going up and up and up as the FED devalues the worth of the currency, stealing the value of the goods, products, land, wealth and LABOR of the American people. Raising the minimum wage is a temporary fix. The wealthy of the nation, the elites in the end don't give two shits about this issue, not really. It is a band-aid. They can afford it. The middle class and poor tend to be the one's that suffer when it distorts the price signals that ripple through the economy.

If the poor and middle class really wanted their dollars to purchase goods and services at a steady rate, they would demand that the FED quit robbing the value of the currency.

Want to help the working poor? End the Fed
Want to help the working poor? End the Fed - Campaign for Liberty

"Raising minimum wages by government decree appeals to those who do not understand economics. This appeal is especially strong during times of stagnant wages and increased economic inequality. But raising the minimum wage actually harms those at the bottom of the income ladder. Basic economic theory teaches that when the price of a good increases, demand for that good decreases. Raising the minimum wage increases the price of labor, thus decreasing the demand for labor. So an increased minimum wage will lead to hiring freezes and layoffs. Unskilled and inexperienced workers are the ones most often deprived of employment opportunities by increases in the minimum wage.


Minimum wage laws are not the only example of government policies that hurt those at the bottom of the income scale. Many regulations that are promoted as necessary to “rein in” large corporations actually hurt small businesses. Because these small businesses operate on a much narrower profit margin, they cannot as easily absorb the costs of complying with the regulations as large corporations. These regulations can also inhibit lower income individuals from starting their own businesses. Thus, government regulations can reduce the demand for wage-labor, while increasing the supply of labor, which further reduces wages.


Perhaps the most significant harm to low-wage earners is caused by the inflationist polices of the Federal Reserve. Since its creation one hundred years ago this month, the Federal Reserve’s policies have caused the dollar to lose over 95 percent of its purchasing power—that’s right, today you need $23.70 to buy what one dollar bought in 1913! Who do you think suffers the most from this loss of purchasing power—Warren Buffet or his secretary?


It is not just that higher incomes can afford the higher prices caused by Federal Reserve. The system is set up in a way that disadvantages those at the bottom of the income scale. When the Federal Reserve creates money, those well-connected with the political and financial elites receive the newly-created money first, before general price increases have spread through the economy. And most fast-food employees do not number among the well-connected."


If anything, what this chart shows is that the minimum wage requires a hair cut so more teenagers can get a job and so our economy would be more competitive with the rest of the world.

You want to know how to discourage illegal immigration? Decrease minimum wage to 4 or 5 dollars (as per the purchasing power between 1940 and 1950) and tighten the controls on who is eligible for social services. I guarantee you that your average sixteen year old will still want to work, but those illegals will stay put.

When the Federal Reserve creates money, those well-connected with the political and financial elites receive the newly-created money first,

Those bastards! How do the elites "receive the newly-created money first"?

For example, loans for mortgages based on money added to the money supply through Fed money provided to banks

Only elites can get mortgages?
How is the Fed providing this money to the banks? Is it a gift?

I didn't take it as narrowly as you apparently intended it. But by saying you did mean it that narrowly, you became wrong. Lots of money is distributed through loans funded by the Fed. Since you apparently think only the super rich get Fed money, you're going to need to explain how you come to that conclusion, which is clearly wrong then anyway

 

[MisterBeale]

Our banks are ridiculously over capitalized and fear adding new loans.

Is that why you think you were turned down for your loan?

Holy shit, I can't believe Todd just said that.

No, the reason he was turned down for a loan was because they AREN'T "ridiculously" over capitalized.
At least, not for a "little" crises.

I can't get accurate numbers anywhere. The capitalization is in the billions, and their exposure on the derivatives market is in the trillions.

If some disaster wipes out some commodity, the world economy is sunk, over night. When too big to fails, do just that, they could never be saved with out major restructuring. There isn't enough money on the planet.

We are talking financial and global Armageddon. There is no turning back now.

How to deal with this is the REAL reason why Trump is hated by the establishment. The plan is to globalize the whole system. I don't think he wants to go along with that plan.

The rest of the establishment have been planning this since that last Breton Woods.

What do you think they talk about in those Bilderburg meetings, the family and kids? If they had bothered to invite Trump, they might not be in the mess they are in now. He would know what the plan is supposed to be.