Topic: I really wish the Federal Reserve would print more money.
Meta !PARAdoxiHw started this discussion 13 years ago #28,082
I want them to print like $850 billion a month, not $85 billion. I often fantasize about the USA undergoing some kind of Zimbabwe/Weimar Germany style hyperinflation so people will finally appreciate the value of sound (commodity-based) money.
inb4 decadent statism/Ron Paul cliche stuff.
inb4 decadent statism/Ron Paul cliche stuff.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later[^] [v] #416,635
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 7 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #416,636
A good time to hold Bitcoins
Anonymous B replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 10 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #416,637
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 6 hours later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,669
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 46 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,680
jeegus chris stop being mad about ron paul losing you idiots he had a fairytale idealogy okay
Meta !PARAdoxiHw (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,681
Anonymous D replied with this 13 years ago, 4 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,682
@previous (Meta !PARAdoxiHw)
look meta i know its fun to believe in fairytales most of us believed in santa or god at some point but they're just ideas with no substance behind them
ron paul is merely a political santa sure everybody says he'll be down your chimney but nobody is actually coming down your chimney okay bro because its hella impractical
grow up bud
look meta i know its fun to believe in fairytales most of us believed in santa or god at some point but they're just ideas with no substance behind them
ron paul is merely a political santa sure everybody says he'll be down your chimney but nobody is actually coming down your chimney okay bro because its hella impractical
grow up bud
(Edited 12 seconds later.)
Meta !PARAdoxiHw (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 5 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,683
@previous (D)
You miss the point. The thing I admire is liberty, and Ron Paul is simply a person who more or less espouses that philosophy. There are many others like F.A. Hayek, Murray Rothbard, Ludwig von Mises, Lew Rockwell, etc.
You miss the point. The thing I admire is liberty, and Ron Paul is simply a person who more or less espouses that philosophy. There are many others like F.A. Hayek, Murray Rothbard, Ludwig von Mises, Lew Rockwell, etc.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 22 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,684
@previous (Meta !PARAdoxiHw)
Currency is a fiction. Please understand this. It is a representation, a placeholder, of wealth. I don't give a give a fuck if one side of the equation (let's say you have a limited currency) is always constant. That doesn't fucking matter if the other side is always flapping up and down.
Actual wealth (produced goods and services) fluctuates. If you can't adjust the amount of currency in circulation that represents that wealth, then you get wild fluctuations in currency value. If you can control at least one side of the equation and ride it to match the other, you can at least try to stabilize things.
Currency is a fiction. Please understand this. It is a representation, a placeholder, of wealth. I don't give a give a fuck if one side of the equation (let's say you have a limited currency) is always constant. That doesn't fucking matter if the other side is always flapping up and down.
Actual wealth (produced goods and services) fluctuates. If you can't adjust the amount of currency in circulation that represents that wealth, then you get wild fluctuations in currency value. If you can control at least one side of the equation and ride it to match the other, you can at least try to stabilize things.
Meta !PARAdoxiHw (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 10 hours later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,703
@previous (E)
So why is artificially manipulating the value of dollars any better than prices fluctuating. Let's say the price of gold has quadrupled in the past 20 years. Did gold gain in value, or did the dollar drop in value?
And you are right, gold is not terribly useful outside of some specialized industrial processes (and of course, bling-bling trinkets and jewelry). The main benefit of gold is that its production is outside of the control of anyone
Prices can and must fluctuate in response to supply and demand, it is the only way to maximize economic efficiency.
So why is artificially manipulating the value of dollars any better than prices fluctuating. Let's say the price of gold has quadrupled in the past 20 years. Did gold gain in value, or did the dollar drop in value?
And you are right, gold is not terribly useful outside of some specialized industrial processes (and of course, bling-bling trinkets and jewelry). The main benefit of gold is that its production is outside of the control of anyone
Prices can and must fluctuate in response to supply and demand, it is the only way to maximize economic efficiency.
Meta !PARAdoxiHw (OP) double-posted this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #416,705
@416,684 (E)
Or to put it another way, lets say the quantity of widgets fluctuates. If the amount of currency in circulation stays more or less stable, we can expect the prices of widgets to rise and fall. This sends a valuable signal: when prices are high it tells consumers that widgets are scarce and they should minimize their purchasing of widgets. It simultaneously tells producers that there is money to be made in widgets, and stimulates production whereupon prices will decline. When widget prices fall, it tells consumers to increase their consumption and producers to slow their production because there is a glut of widgets.
If you try to manipulate the currency to keep widget prices "stable" then this whole system breaks.
Or to put it another way, lets say the quantity of widgets fluctuates. If the amount of currency in circulation stays more or less stable, we can expect the prices of widgets to rise and fall. This sends a valuable signal: when prices are high it tells consumers that widgets are scarce and they should minimize their purchasing of widgets. It simultaneously tells producers that there is money to be made in widgets, and stimulates production whereupon prices will decline. When widget prices fall, it tells consumers to increase their consumption and producers to slow their production because there is a glut of widgets.
If you try to manipulate the currency to keep widget prices "stable" then this whole system breaks.
Anonymous E replied with this 13 years ago, 14 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #416,846
@previous (Meta !PARAdoxiHw)
> manipulate the currency to keep widget prices "stable"
The price of widgets will fluctuate depending on supply on demand, which is what you seem to be describing. That happens already.
What doesn't happen already is that the currency value will fluctuate based on some commodity that it is tied to. Supply and demand for some commodity like gold will affect your currency value, and you can't adjust demand for money to the supply of money because you have fixed that side of the equation.
There are further problems with things like trade deficits (where you have gold-backed currency flowing out) without an equal or greater amount of (probably fiat currency, because who the fuck is on the gold standard?) flowing in. While you have solved the problem of hyper-inflation, (and pretending like modern economists are blind to this is a bit a strawman, no?) you are not solving the problem of price spikes wreaking havoc on your economy. Plus, the gold standard is a problem in a recession economy. Plus, there isn't actually enough gold on hand to cover what we're doing now without causing massive problems by even trying to adopt it. Plus, blah blah blah.
> manipulate the currency to keep widget prices "stable"
The price of widgets will fluctuate depending on supply on demand, which is what you seem to be describing. That happens already.
What doesn't happen already is that the currency value will fluctuate based on some commodity that it is tied to. Supply and demand for some commodity like gold will affect your currency value, and you can't adjust demand for money to the supply of money because you have fixed that side of the equation.
There are further problems with things like trade deficits (where you have gold-backed currency flowing out) without an equal or greater amount of (probably fiat currency, because who the fuck is on the gold standard?) flowing in. While you have solved the problem of hyper-inflation, (and pretending like modern economists are blind to this is a bit a strawman, no?) you are not solving the problem of price spikes wreaking havoc on your economy. Plus, the gold standard is a problem in a recession economy. Plus, there isn't actually enough gold on hand to cover what we're doing now without causing massive problems by even trying to adopt it. Plus, blah blah blah.