The gold standard

[a-train]

The notion that government welfare is expedient because without it there would be none is ridiculous. Americans actually donate more and support more people willfully than does our government. This we do in addition to what the government takes from us in taxes.

-a-train

[deseretgov]

3) The following is communism and Marxist:

"I'm also a fan of another system. It's a type of fiat system where the Government prints money as legal tender then sets it's value. With government enforcement it would always retain that set value. This would only work in a planned economy where products were of set value as well. So regardless of how much money was made it would have the same value. No inflation or deflation. Instead of the value being determined by international trading it is set. Obvoiusly this would take a lot of work to actually work."

Oh is that all? I just said I was fan of that system, meaning it intrigues me. I didn't mean to say that I would support a system like that. But anyway, I'm not done reading that first book yet.

Don't worry though I'm not afraid to be called communist or whatever. I don't like to be called capitalist either. The current system of capitalism is just like glorified slavery. Don't get me wrong, I support the free market, but I think there should be strict regulation on the organizational structure of businesses. This is to prevent harm to the little guys(employees and consumers). But alas I've gotten off topic again.

So let me see if I've got this right. The gold(or precious metals) standard is good because the value of those metals is pretty much stable. Where as if you were to base currency on a product like a car or xbox or something it would lose value over time. S what other things have had a stable value over time?

[deseretgov]

The notion that government welfare is expedient because without it there would be none is ridiculous. Americans actually donate more and support more people willfully than does our government. This we do in addition to what the government takes from us in taxes.

-a-train

It would be interesting to see if I government could run off of donations not taxes.

[Elgama]

blah

Edited October 29, 2008 by Elgama
on wrong thread it wouldn't delete

[JohnBirchSociety]

Oh is that all? I just said I was fan of that system, meaning it intrigues me. I didn't mean to say that I would support a system like that. But anyway, I'm not done reading that first book yet.

Don't worry though I'm not afraid to be called communist or whatever. I don't like to be called capitalist either. The current system of capitalism is just like glorified slavery. Don't get me wrong, I support the free market, but I think there should be strict regulation on the organizational structure of businesses. This is to prevent harm to the little guys(employees and consumers). But alas I've gotten off topic again.

So let me see if I've got this right. The gold(or precious metals) standard is good because the value of those metals is pretty much stable. Where as if you were to base currency on a product like a car or xbox or something it would lose value over time. S what other things have had a stable value over time?

You should be appalled to be called a communist. Communism is satanic, as all of our Prophets have taught.

Capitalism in the extreme, absent the checks of a free market, does indeed equate to "glorified slavery". When government intervenes, and prohibits the natural checks of a free market upon capitalism, is when the "glorified slavery" happens, as with the current banking crisis.

Strict regulation of private business (someones property) is communism and will never work, and has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of millions of people globally. Non-free market capitalism (fabian socialism) is not much better.

Free-market capitalism where the government only enforces contracts and provides sound money for trade (the proper function of government), has proven itself to be the best remedy to the problems we now face. Ironic it is that that is exactly what the American founders created with their Constitutional Republic. If only we'd follow it!

Communism is not the answer.

And thanks for reading the books we've mentioned. I do appreciate it.

[JohnBirchSociety]

Hahah. I agree, Ben. There are abuses of the welfare system. However, the alternative of having no support for those who desperately need it is simply not acceptable.

You're right. A very large group abuse the care and love we have for our fellow man, but to privatize that would be to leave the innocents out in the cold. I'd rather be cheated of a few dollars than do that. I wish there were a better way, but until I see that help as many people as the government does, I can't.

The "welfare" (now there's a misnomer if I've ever seen one) system is theft and therefore is abuse.

The alternative of not taxing people into poverty is having them be able to more efficiently care for their fellow man.

Your argument that we are incapable of doing so, absent government intervention is absurd. The history of America is the history of the most giving people in human history. Even with our absurd tax burden of today, we are still the most giving people in all of human history.

There IS a better way, it's called freedom. It's called liberty. And it is enshrined in the principles of our Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution.

Government is horribly inefficient in almost all respects.

[Hemidakota]

Adding to this post: today's news -

"Treasury makes first bailout payment"

In the first use of the $700B rescue fund, the Treasury bought $125B worth of stock in nine major financial institutions.

[JohnBirchSociety]

Adding to this post: today's news -

"Treasury makes first bailout payment"

In the first use of the $700B rescue fund, the Treasury bought $125B worth of stock in nine major financial institutions.

The Founders would roll over in their graves. We are nationalizing our banks!

Straight out of the Communist Manifesto...absolutely amazing that these idiots are not thrown out by the people...

[BenRaines]

We have the wolves guarding the hen house. What a conundrum.

Ben Raines

[a-train]

It would be interesting to see if I government could run off of donations not taxes.

Well certainly welfare could and should be. Government has proven itself inept with respect to welfare. Free citizens of their own free will and choice are the best care-takers of the poor.

How do we keep dancing so far off topic?

So let me see if I've got this right. The gold(or precious metals) standard is good because the value of those metals is pretty much stable. Where as if you were to base currency on a product like a car or xbox or something it would lose value over time. S what other things have had a stable value over time?

Stability of price is really not a feature of anything in this world. Yes, there are things that seem to have some natural stability I guess, but supply and demand are always in flux.

There are some that say that precious metals are "stable", but the term is ambiquous and confusing. Exchange rates between gold and other commodities fluxuate with changes in supply and demand. Economist Ludwig Von Mises called for a "sound" money.

Mises explained:

[T]he sound-money principle has two aspects. It is affirmative in approving the market's choice of a commonly used medium of exchange. It is negative in obstructing the government's propensity to meddle with the currency system.

Mises' understanding of the necessity for money untampered by government bureaucracy was expressed thus:

It is impossible to grasp the meaning of the idea of sound money if one does not realize that it was devised as an instrument for the protection of civil liberties against despotic inroads on the part of governments. Ideologically it belongs in the same class with political constitutions and bills of right.

Imagine for a moment that you have in your bank account the funds for your gas bill. But upon your attempt to withdraw the funds, the bank explains that there was a sudden and arbitrary tax levied by the federal government and only a portion of the funds remain.

What would be your response? Would this be an appropriate form of taxation? Suppose the tax was strictly levied as a percentage of the amount in your account regardless of your income. A low income family with $1000 in savings in their account would pay more than a wealthy family that just happened to have only $100 in their account on that day because of recent large purchases. Or, a low income family might suddenly have too little money to survive while a wealthy family feels the pain but is still able to live comfortably.

Imagine how easy it would be for government to spend like crazy so long as such an arbitrary taxation was in their power. Think about how difficult it would be to budget. Foreigners would never deposit money in U.S. accounts.

Such a tax exists! It is called "inflation". How does it work? The government simply creates money out of thin air when it needs a sudden boost. The value of that money comes from all the other money in the economy. The money in your account actually loses value as that value is used by the government arbitrarily and most of the time without the knowledge of the people. All the people see is the accompanying rise in prices. That gas bill goes way up not because the gas company is greedy, but because it now takes more dollars for them to provide the same service. While they collect more dollars, their profits remain the same because their expenses have also risen.

Precious metal money can be inflated also, but the value does not go to an arbitrary government power who can simply bring the new money into existance with the stroke of a keyboard or a number of signatures and spend it on government projects that mainly support the pocketbooks of special interest groups with heavy lobbying power. The value goes to the miners and minters of the precious metal who actually perform diligent labor in providing their goods and services. And, if the free market does not support their labors, they find other work.

The "inflation-proof" nature of precious metal is actually a misnomer. Precious metal money can be both inflated and deflated, it is not "stable". It simply cannot be so inflated or deflated by government to confiscate vast amounts of wealth from all those in possession of the money.

Is that clear as mud?

-a-train

[JohnBirchSociety]

Well certainly welfare could and should be. Government has proven itself inept with respect to welfare. Free citizens of their own free will and choice are the best care-takers of the poor.

How do we keep dancing so far off topic?

Stability of price is really not a feature of anything in this world. Yes, there are things that seem to have some natural stability I guess, but supply and demand are always in flux.

There are some that say that precious metals are "stable", but the term is ambiquous and confusing. Exchange rates between gold and other commodities fluxuate with changes in supply and demand. Economist Ludwig Von Mises called for a "sound" money.

Mises explained:

Mises' understanding of the necessity for money untampered by government bureaucracy was expressed thus:

Imagine for a moment that you have in your bank account the funds for your gas bill. But upon your attempt to withdraw the funds, the bank explains that there was a sudden and arbitrary tax levied by the federal government and only a portion of the funds remain.

What would be your response? Would this be an appropriate form of taxation? Suppose the tax was strictly levied as a percentage of the amount in your account regardless of your income. A low income family with $1000 in savings in their account would pay more than a wealthy family that just happened to have only $100 in their account on that day because of recent large purchases. Or, a low income family might suddenly have too little money to survive while a wealthy family feels the pain but is still able to live comfortably.

Imagine how easy it would be for government to spend like crazy so long as such an arbitrary taxation was in their power. Think about how difficult it would be to budget. Foreigners would never deposit money in U.S. accounts.

Such a tax exists! It is called "inflation". How does it work? The government simply creates money out of thin air when it needs a sudden boost. The value of that money comes from all the other money in the economy. The money in your account actually loses value as that value is used by the government arbitrarily and most of the time without the knowledge of the people. All the people see is the accompanying rise in prices. That gas bill goes way up not because the gas company is greedy, but because it now takes more dollars for them to provide the same service. While they collect more dollars, their profits remain the same because their expenses have also risen.

Precious metal money can be inflated also, but the value does not go to an arbitrary government power who can simply bring the new money into existance with the stroke of a keyboard or a number of signatures and spend it on government projects that mainly support the pocketbooks of special interest groups with heavy lobbying power. The value goes to the miners and minters of the precious metal who actually perform diligent labor in providing their goods and services. And, if the free market does not support their labors, they find other work.

The "inflation-proof" nature of precious metal is actually a misnomer. Precious metal money can be both inflated and deflated, it is not "stable". It simply cannot be so inflated or deflated by government to confiscate vast amounts of wealth from all those in possession of the money.

Is that clear as mud?

-a-train

Hmmmm, I agree with everything.

I'd like to add that though real money as defined by the US Constitution is not inflation proof, it is remarkably stable. The value of Gold and Silver has been remarkably stable throughout history, with one ounce of Gold buying a good suit of clothes. The ratio of Gold value to Silver has stood at about 16 to 1. It has been skewed of late because of its' fixation on the FRN...

16 to 1, very stable.

[a-train]

Hmmmm, I agree with everything.

I'd like to add that though real money as defined by the US Constitution is not inflation proof, it is remarkably stable. The value of Gold and Silver has been remarkably stable throughout history, with one ounce of Gold buying a good suit of clothes. The ratio of Gold value to Silver has stood at about 16 to 1. It has been skewed of late because of its' fixation on the FRN...

16 to 1, very stable.

Although reports are conflicting, the average seems to say that current sliver to gold supply is only 4 to 1! I guess we could say this is either really bad for gold or really good for silver. Of course, that doesn't actually mean much. Silver is simply less desired. For now.

But check it: the melt value of a Morgan would buy 3.8 gallons of gas at my local station based on today's gas and silver prices. What about last July when gas was $4.00 a gallon? Silver was also way up and my Morgan in July would have bought just over 3.5 gallons. Expressed in Morgan dollars, gas fluctuated from the high of 29 cents to a current low of 26 cents a gallon this year.

-a-train

JBS,

Check out www.coinflation.com and CoinFacts.com - The Internet Encyclopedia of U.S. Coins.

[JohnBirchSociety]

Although reports are conflicting, the average seems to say that current sliver to gold supply is only 4 to 1! I guess we could say this is either really bad for gold or really good for silver. Of course, that doesn't actually mean much. Silver is simply less desired. For now.

But check it: the melt value of a Morgan would buy 3.8 gallons of gas at my local station based on today's gas and silver prices. What about last July when gas was $4.00 a gallon? Silver was also way up and my Morgan in July would have bought just over 3.5 gallons. Expressed in Morgan dollars, gas fluctuated from the high of 29 cents to a current low of 26 cents a gallon this year.

-a-train

JBS,

Check out Current Melt Value Of Coins - How Much Is Your Coin Worth? and CoinFacts.com - The Internet Encyclopedia of U.S. Coins.

Yes the supply is 4 to 1. That is interesting.

You know that Gas costs about $.7 less than it did in 1950? Hard to believe, eh?

Here's the deal. Take sound money, in this instance, a one dollar, pure silver, American Eagle. In FRN's it costs about $20. So you could buy about 7.7 gallons with it with gas at $2.60 in FRN's. That comes to about $2.25 FRN per gallon, which is a little over 10% of the value of the American Eagle. If we divide that into the sound money value of the American Eagle (one dollar, silver) we come up with about 23cents. Gas cost about 30cents per gallon in 1950!

By the way, I didn't even bother to take into account the increase in percentage of taxation per gallon we face today versus 1950!

So, the real value, in sound money of a gallon of gas today is about 23 CENTS. In 1950 it was about 30 CENTS. That's 7 CENTS more than today, 58 years later. Even with a higher tax we are paying less than we did in 1950 for a gallon of gas...

WOW!!!

[Hemidakota]

The Founders would roll over in their graves. We are nationalizing our banks!

Straight out of the Communist Manifesto...absolutely amazing that these idiots are not thrown out by the people...

Back to Joseph Smith vision of the constitution hanging by a single thread.

[Hemidakota]

CNN Money Breaking News: Banks over the last week borrowed a record $112 billion a day on average under the Fed's emergency lending program. More soon.

[JohnBirchSociety]

CNN Money Breaking News: Banks over the last week borrowed a record $112 billion a day on average under the Fed's emergency lending program. More soon.

That's a currency inflation of over $500,000,000,000 dollars (half a trillion) in a week folks!

You simply CANNOT do that with Constitutionally sound money, namely Gold or Silver Coin...

Do you not all see the utter danger such nonsense puts us under?

[a-train]

That is a 5% increase in M3 (total money supply). The total physical U.S. currency is only a mere $1 trillion!

-a-train

[healthnut]

Hi everyone! This is exciting to me.I am a first timer in chat rooms or blogs or forums or whatever they might be.

Anyway I am a 57 yr old mother,wife and grandmother of 8.Husband is not a member and I would really like to connect with others of the same situation.

my main passion is the natural health industry.I manage a busy health food store and also practice reflexology.So anyone with health questions I would be glad to help out as much as I can.

[JohnBirchSociety]

Hi everyone! This is exciting to me.I am a first timer in chat rooms or blogs or forums or whatever they might be.

Anyway I am a 57 yr old mother,wife and grandmother of 8.Husband is not a member and I would really like to connect with others of the same situation.

my main passion is the natural health industry.I manage a busy health food store and also practice reflexology.So anyone with health questions I would be glad to help out as much as I can.

Welcome.

You should start a thread on immunizations, in the Health Section. I'd join in on that conversation.

[FunkyTown]

That's a currency inflation of over $500,000,000,000 dollars (half a trillion) in a week folks!

You simply CANNOT do that with Constitutionally sound money, namely Gold or Silver Coin...

Do you not all see the utter danger such nonsense puts us under?

Yes. I'm pretty sure most people who have thought about it realizes the danger that guarantee poses. Everyone will borrow the money, up to the limit guaranteed by their various governments. Then, they will panic and stop lending to one another because they're used to not having to worry about it.

In fact, intra-bank lending will hit an all time high simply because it doesn't matter to the lending officer. "Risky business venture with high pay off? If it works, I get a huge bonus! If it doesn't, it's -guaranteed-!"

Frankly, it's a bunch of selfish, self-interested bankers causing it. The government didn't want a recession, so they bet on hope. The problem with betting on hope and not planning for the worst is that if the worst happens, it's worse than you can weather. Best case scenario: People smarten up and the economy gets back to relative normality, though it never reaches the highs of the past century. Worst case scenario: Total economic collapse because the individuals running the economy don't care if it succeeds or not, they just care about their individual bonuses.

I'm not saying an economic collapse is imminent or even inevitable. It's just that the economy has been placed in a situation where hyperinflation -could- happen.

[a-train]

I'm not saying an economic collapse is imminent or even inevitable. It's just that the economy has been placed in a situation where hyperinflation -could- happen.

I think you are absolutely right. We can make the changes necessary to turn our course away from global economic disaster (which can mean a number of things). But if we do NOT change course, we will have a global economic disaster.

-a-train

[JohnBirchSociety]

Yes. I'm pretty sure most people who have thought about it realizes the danger that guarantee poses. Everyone will borrow the money, up to the limit guaranteed by their various governments. Then, they will panic and stop lending to one another because they're used to not having to worry about it.

In fact, intra-bank lending will hit an all time high simply because it doesn't matter to the lending officer. "Risky business venture with high pay off? If it works, I get a huge bonus! If it doesn't, it's -guaranteed-!"

Frankly, it's a bunch of selfish, self-interested bankers causing it. The government didn't want a recession, so they bet on hope. The problem with betting on hope and not planning for the worst is that if the worst happens, it's worse than you can weather. Best case scenario: People smarten up and the economy gets back to relative normality, though it never reaches the highs of the past century. Worst case scenario: Total economic collapse because the individuals running the economy don't care if it succeeds or not, they just care about their individual bonuses.

I'm not saying an economic collapse is imminent or even inevitable. It's just that the economy has been placed in a situation where hyperinflation -could- happen.

I agree.

[JohnBirchSociety]

I think you are absolutely right. We can make the changes necessary to turn our course away from global economic disaster (which can mean a number of things). But if we do NOT change course, we will have a global economic disaster.

-a-train

Seems like, by all indications, we're on the razor's edge of disaster.

A real collapse is on the horizon.

[Hemidakota]

CNN Breaking News -- U.S. government to borrow $550 billion over 3 months to support economic rescue plans.

[JohnBirchSociety]

CNN Breaking News -- U.S. government to borrow $550 billion over 3 months to support economic rescue plans.

Who are we borrowing from? Perhaps the Chinese Communists? Or maybe the Islamic Revolutionaries in the Middle East?

Wow.