Sunday, February 28, 2010

Revolt 426's words



That is because you don't understand that you cannot de-regulate EVERYTHING and wait for sociopaths to orchestrate a collapse, THEN PROSECUTE them after the entire economy meltsdown....... but you will never understand that, and if you do - you will never admit it.

The idea for instance, that exchange rate controls are BAD is ABSURD - tell that to a person in argentina after George Soros shorts their currency into oblivion?....

You've shown your colors by declaring the housing problem is the result of people "Intentionally defaulting on their mortgages" i have NEVER heard such a ridiculous argument in my entire life, then you go on to say that there "have always been homeless people" in response to the massive phenomina of tent cities popping up all over the country.

If anyone believes it is the U.S. populations fault that housing prices have collapsed as opposed to the Federal Reserve and Derivatives, then they deserve tyrrany.

-Revolt 426


Of course i obviously agree, there has to be a form of saftey net for the very situation we are currently witnessing ( An incalculable Depresssion that will result in starvation and death if not addressed ). I would agree , it has to be reformed to prevent the massive abuse (Like illegal aliens not paying for it and getting the benefits anyway) , but to call medicaid/medicare "Socialism" is by definition a falsehood and is a big problem because calling a social net, "Socalism" or "Marxism" in this case narrows everyones views to the Preditory Capitalist System VS. the "Socialist" system when infact, you can of course have none of the above if you broaden your perspectives. I see the labeling of all Government activities as "Marxist Socialism" , which the mises website does in nearly all of their articles as a deadly threat to humanity.... which is why i attempt to highlight that "Marxist Socialism" is when the Government Seizes the Means of Production - not when the Government constitutionally provides for the General Welfare of the public. I know you understand this, so do not think i am attacking you here, i am merely highlighting it because i think it's very important.

In regards to both systems being the same, i'd certainly have to disagree with you there.... due to the fact that a fixed exchange rate system would allow the new currency to be pegged to current price levels to avoid the very deflation that an actual domestic gold coin barter standard would result in. That is the major issue here, an International Gold Standard can be pegged to current price levels, but a Domestic Gold Coin standard obviously cannot due to the impossibility of obtaining enough Gold to peg to current price levels..... In addition, a Domestic Gold Coin standard is the use of a commodity as Currency , which i've highlighted as not a "Storage Unit of Wealth" - but a means of exchange valued by a Nations net productive output per capita. So what you have here is using a volatile piece of metal (in the case of Gold) being used as a currency. This means gold mining drives currency levels as opposed to economic expansion - i believe doing this is a grave mistake and a also addressed this in my original post, as Mining for Gold really bears to resemblence to an actual economies expansion rate at all, while Infrastructure infact directly represents an economies expansion rate.

In regards to competeing currency (Specifically for private obligations) i'd also have to disagree , the reality of the situation is that this has indeed been attempted by none other than Andrew Jackson, and the result wiped out the perceived "Weaker" currency, and many families savings were wiped out along with it just because they held state issued notes and not gold convertable notes (Which later imploded the economy anyway)..... so i would also disagree that a competeing currency would help becuase the weaker currency would inevitably be dumped and wiped out. If there were a way to introduce competeing currency without this threat - i perhaps would not be opposed to it, but to my knowledge i simply cannot think of a way for a competeing currency to provide for the General Welfare Clause in any way shape or form.

-Revolt 426


aLLyOuRbAsE - i actually agree and i am against fractional reserve banking (which is being used for Finance Capital aka Derivatives at the moment) and usery in general....

But what has lead to usery? it is the privatized issuence of credit! this was the case in Weimar Germany which allowed Hitler to come to power after the economic blowout and it is certainly the case right now.

I know sometimes i sound a bit nasty in certain responses , but in all honesty i know you were just asking a question , i certainly didn't mean to sound rude if i did ........ i get very frustrated sometimes when people mindlessly worship a certain monetary reform (Not you, you have actually asked logical questions) that would have devestating consiquences on the entire planet and then retort a counter argument with "That is socialism" , or "All fiat currency is theft".... these arguments are absurd in my honest opinion.

As for the Austrian school, they actually have certain reforms that would work - but sadly their foundations , which are
1) The Government must never intervene in the economy or it is "Socialism" and it "Prolongs" "Corrections" (As this is not a correction, but an orchestrated collapse)
2) Gold or similar commodities must be used as a currency
3) All Regulations are BAD for the economy
4) The complete lack of attention to dynamic factors (like derivative bubbles , infrastructure and productive labor) in their views of economics......

The above foundations are argued as "Absolute truths" by many Austrian Economists , and they indeed mislead certain people into believing falsehoods (though i of course admit, many of them do this 100% unwittingly and are really good people) - and that is why i made this thread. Because i am worried that in 4 years, the only alternative to the status quo will be the above mentioned policies that would wreck the nation!. I did this to inform people that there is an alternative that would not result in mayhem, and yes - i do acknowledge the Austrian school has some legitimate policy.

So in closing, i am willing to get a few people mad at me to highlight an alternative monetary policy that would not drastically hurt the world highlight that fiat currency is not the enemy if the system is reformed..... and to highlight the return to a gold system with current debt and population levels would be very very damaging to say the least.

Just as Bill Cooper was willing to get people mad at him (Not sure if you saw his speech where he called the audience sheep to "Get them angry") to highlight our Government has been taken over by a cartel of criminals prior to his death.

-Revolt 426


i would like to add

Lets take an example. If a person has a $300,000 mortgage on a house now priced at $100,000 and they are making a mortgage payment of $2,000 a month they can default, get foreclosed, and move into a $1000 a month apartment and they would in turn MAKE an extra $1000 a month by DITCHING their house. This is WHY and HOW this current housing crises is causing all these foreclosures. Isolated pockets of homeless people have been, and will be there for years to come. It's an emotional appeal, not a fact

Let's take this example at attach a Gold Standard, Austrian theory and reality to it, if someone is paying 2000$ a month for a mortgage, the monetary supply contracts to due the inevitable deflation caused by a gold standard, they will not only have their home foreclosed on by the very people that orchestrated this collapse - but they will likely have NO JOB to rent a house (Like the people in the tent cities all over the country) due to the 5 to 7 Trillion dollar infrastructure deficit and deflationary hell you wish to impose on them.

Yet, you would like to blame the people being foreclosed on for "Intentionally allowing their house to be foreclosed" instead of the Private Banking Cabal that caused the problem in the first place, then you would like to hand the peoples property over to those very same bankers that have looted the entire nation?

How is someone going to rent an apartment with no income due to deflation? Hello! is anyone in there? Do you know what deflation DOES to a country during a Depression (Or breakdown of the economy) ?.

How can you blame the citizens for causing a 1.5 Quadrillion dollar Derivative bubble? have you lost it?.

-Revolt 426


It's not really about counter-acting inflation although it would have that effect when other nations purchase the physical goods this nation produces , it's actually about rebuilding the things necessary that would otherwise prevent a recovery... this nation has been de-industrialized to the brink of complete economic disintigration and certain people would have you believe the private sector is going to re-build roads, bridges, railways , water treatment plants and the like. The problem with this is they haven't done it thus far and the private sector is quite obviously dominated by lunatic malthusians that do not wish for the nation to be re-industrialized.

As for the infrastructure projects (in your question regarding "how do we know that will be enough"..) , that question answers itself. How do we know? you spend the amount of currency into infrastructure that is needed to complete the project. That is a part of "Moneterism dogma" , that being the question asked is "How much is that going to cost" - well how to you value a currency?

Is a currency valued by digging gold out of the Earth or is currency a means of exchange that reflects the net production output of a nation?. the latter is obviously the correct answer.

And as for people who wish to bring up the "Venus Project" , if the Banking Empire wanted these things done they would have been done already - and they would be being built right now, it is an absurd argument (This is obviously not aimed at allyourbase).... What gives the people more control over the monetary supply, the mandatory appropriation through congress and the executive branch of currency or privatized issuence of currency?. It's really quite absurd to argue the Government is going to be responsible for something like that when it is illegal to appropriate currency without a congressional vote..... that is unless the private sector can bypass it.

As for the Gold Standard creating deflation., not only have other Austrians posted "Deflation as Liberty" links in THIS thread from, but how do you think a BANKRUPT UNITED STATES is going to obtain enough GOLD to use as a currency for people to be able to pay their outstanding debts off?

This question has been answered a dozen times over and you still say "How do you know it's going to cause deflation"

are you INSANE? of course it's going to cause deflation do you think the U.S. is going to be able to get enough Gold to match the current monetary supply being the whole nation (and world) is bankrupt?

Aside from your de-railing, you still have not answered how people are going to pay off their inflated debts with deflated dollars - although you said "i did answer you , you just didn't like the answer" ..... i have YET to see an answer to this question.... can you please re- answer it?

I would also like to know how foreclosing on people and giving their property to the banks that orchestrated the depression is an emotional appeal? i see that as the reality that you are attempting to impose on humanity?

In our current situation the "Not matter what" phrase i used still stands. In my view, saving human lives during a Depression is far more important than deficit spending to "Balance the Budget" , as Mouslini said in his drive towards Corporatism, as Mayor Bloomberg and Arnold Schwarzeneggar parroted recently during economic hardships in regards to cutting public programs..... and as Obama is saying to "Cut Medicaid , Medicare" and now, Social Security - if however, we seized the insolvent banks rather then bailing them out and ended our occupation of numerous countries it is my sincere beleif it would not put us into debt, specifically with good monetary reform that increases the nations physical productive capabilities. The point of a social net is not only a moral one to provide health care (I'd suggest reforming and expanding medicare/medicaid) , but one that preserves the nations productive workforce from being wiped out, because without that workforce there is obviously no chance of a recovery.

I'd also emphasize as Webster Tarpley did - no gutting of Social Security during a Depression. We are well aware 401k's/Pensions have been wiped out and with GM/Ford (Our last productive industry) going down this is going to drastically expand this problem.

As you can see from the following, the powers that be are still to this day parroting the Mousilini "Balance the Budget" during economic hardship stuff, all the while completely dumping every cent of our GDP into bailing bankers out of a black hole......

It's Now Public: After Health Care, Obama Intends to Dismantle Social Security

June 17, 2009 (LPAC)—None other than Mr. Peter Orszag himself took to the pages of today's Financial Times to assure London financiers, that "once health-care reform is in place," Social Security is next on the Obama administration's chopping block. The pledge by President Obama's Office of Management and Budget Director is made in the concluding paragraph of a signed op-ed touting the Obama administration's fascist health-care reforms as "A Medical Plan to Boost America's Fiscal Health;" not to secure human health, but that of the financial system.

In its June 10 report on its annual review of the U.S. economy, the International Monetary Fund reported that it had received similar assurances from Obama administration officials: "We welcome the Administration's intention to work toward developing a political consensus on Social Security reform once health-care reforms are complete," the IMF wrote. This arm of the usurious monetarist system insisted the U.S. must be ready to further bailout Wall Street if necessary, but "substantial further measures will be needed to rein in soaring entitlement costs over the longer term."

Thus, is it again made bare, that the intention of the current fascist controllers of the Obama administration, is to rip up the U.S. Constitution, its General Welfare clause, and the entitlement programs which defend human life. With FDR's life-saving Social Security program still in place, old people in the United States may not "get out of the way" as fast as Prince Philip would like. Deny them health care and Social Security both, in the middle of an economic breakdown crisis, and killings en masse are guaranteed.

-Revolt 426


Quote from: aLLyOuRbAsE on June 09, 2009, 08:10:16 PM
i dont think im getting this, you spend the amount needed to complete the infrastructure, but how do you know that the infrastructure will offset the amount youve had to inflate?

Good question, because infrastructure allows the expansion of an economy.

I mentioned a very simple example of this in regards to water treatment plants needed to facilitate the population, but it goes much further then that...

You need energy output to facilitate the population (Infrastructure)

You need Transit (Infrastructure)

You need Roads (Infrastructure)

etc.. al..... so, the question remains what really reflects the current population levels, digging up gold out of the Earth or Infrastructure - which would you prefer your currency be pegged too?

Spending money into the economy does not cause inflation - because it has labor and infrastructure to back it, so you are not "artificially inflating, to counter act deflation" , you are actually providing the physical economic infrastructure required for a modernized economy to function...... the resultant of modernizing infrastructure is an increase in production output, which is really what a sound currency is..... when your production output levels are equivalent to the amount of currency in circulation.

Did that help?, if i misunderstood re-phrase and i'll respond.

-Revolt 426


It is really unbelievable to see people blame the "Government" when it is common knowledge that the "Government" is not responsible for the Private Banking Cabals that have taken OVER the Government - then to see the solution "Get rid of Government"....... how about we get rid of the PRIVATE BANKING CABAL?:

Why America is a bank-owned state

Can people be rational ? does it always have to be this herd mentallity "Government is always the enemy" while completely disregarding that Banks are running the nation?. It is really mind boggling at this point..........

No one advocated "BIG GOVERNMENT" in this thread at any point, but the argument none the less comes up "We need smaller Government!" in response to a monetary reform thread.... sure go ahead and cut the beuracracies out of Government, that doesn't mean we don't need Government at all, these absolutes are really absurd upon examination.... you ignore how this situation started in the first place (By handing our monetary supply FROM the Government, To a PRIVATE BANK)

-Revolt 426


Quite absurd, because during the 1800's Andrew Jackson's "Gold Standard" Imploded the economy (Which is the 19th Century as the propaganda you posted just mentioned).

In addition - as i've mentioned about 50 times, the Bretton Woods system (1944-1971) was infact, not a domestic Gold Standard but a Fixed Exchange Rate system based on an International Gold Standard..... but people just don't want to read do they?

Economic Reform?

If they are not spent productively you get an economic breakdown like we are currently seeing, this can lead to inflation.

The point of spending them into productivity is that productivity (Labor) is required for Capitalism to exist.

Our current workforce is a "Service Economy" meaning, there is virtually no production left due to outsourcing to slave wage nations via "Free Trade" agreements.....

You cannot subsitute production with services, because it leads to the current situation. I hope that answers the question.

-Revolt 426


I would not object to calling what I'm advocating "economic" stimulus, but calling it "fiscal" stimulus implies that the money being spent on public infrastructure is obtained either by taxing it first or by borrowing it first. And under my system it is neither taxed nor borrowed, but "issued."

If your definition of fiscal stimulus includes the option of issuing debt-free currency to fund infrastructure (as opposed to taxing or borrowing debt-based currency to fund it), then by all means call it that.

I was simply acknowledging the fact that, since the average American isn't even familiar with that option (yet), his definition of fiscal stimulus is usually limited to the other two options of tax-and-spend and borrow-and-spend, and that it would therefore likely cause unnecessary confusion in the minds of relative newcomers to lump all three options into the same category.

That's merely a point of clarification. I'm not even arguing with anyone at this point. Logged



There actually is one phrase you used worth addressing since all other derailing nonsense has already been addressed. "Faith Based Economics" , considering the Austrian "Theory" that has been debunked by a multitude of people has NEVER been proven and the other reforms are constitutional and HAVE been proven.

That is what i call "Faith based economics" , having faith in a system that has no historical basis as opposed to one that has actually worked. The Austrian theory is unconstitutional because it is against the general welfare of the citizens of the United States (and the world) due to the fact that it would foreclose on an un-imaginable amount of mortgages and kick people out of their homes (which leads to tent cities as opposed to your suggestion that they simply "Buy/Rent cheaper homes"). All this while the very bankers that orchestrated this entire collapse would end up owning all of the property?

Your characterization of any human innovation as "Faith based" becuase only the "Markets" know if it will spurr the economy was already addressed as a utopian falsehood due to the fact that human innovation/inventions drive economies in the first place - a full circle from start to finish. An Anti-Scientific, stone age view of civilization.

Your argument "What if we spend a quadrillion dollars into a mag lev and it takes 50 years to build" - can you use common sense? Do you know how railways are built? does it take a quadrillion dollars to build a railway? Do you realize sectional parts of the railway would be operational as the entire system was built? How was the first Intercontinental Railway built? did we spent 1 quadrillion dollars?

What if the sky falls? What if Jesus is ressurected and he fixed the economy? What if ........ we stop with the irrational "What if" questions that can be answered by common sense and address the question that would literally kick anyone with debt out of their homes?

It's not really about counter-acting inflation although it would have that effect when other nations purchase the physical goods this nation produces , it's actually about rebuilding the things necessary that would otherwise prevent a recovery... this nation has been de-industrialized to the brink of complete economic disintigration and certain people would have you believe the private sector is going to re-build roads, bridges, railways , water treatment plants and the like. The problem with this is they haven't done it thus far and the private sector is quite obviously dominated by lunatic malthusians that do not wish for the nation to be re-industrialized.

As for the infrastructure projects (in your question regarding "how do we know that will be enough"..) , that question answers itself. How do we know? you spend the amount of currency into infrastructure that is needed to complete the project. That is a part of "Moneterism dogma" , that being the question asked is "How much is that going to cost" - well how to you value a currency?

Is a currency valued by digging gold out of the Earth or is currency a means of exchange that reflects the net production output of a nation?. the latter is obviously the correct answer.

And as for people who wish to bring up the "Venus Project" , if the Banking Empire wanted these things done they would have been done already - and they would be being built right now, it is an absurd argument (This is obviously not aimed at allyourbase).... What gives the people more control over the monetary supply, the mandatory appropriation through congress and the executive branch of currency or privatized issuence of currency?. It's really quite absurd to argue the Government is going to be responsible for something like that when it is illegal to appropriate currency without a congressional vote..... that is unless the private sector can bypass it

-Revolt 426


Kashta_Bureh wrote:

Yes, I do agree with some of the views of the Tea Party. I'm sick and tired of these social programs, I'm sick and tired of poor people who can't hold up their slack and then hard working people like me have to pay taxes for their lazy asses. Tim, it isn't the job of the government to provide "social services," that is what the private sector and charities are for.
We don't need Social Security, Welfare or Medicare, and Social Security is nothing but a Ponzi Scheme. The government forces you to pay into it but now the fund is empty and no money will be there when I become a senior. So basically, the social security fund is a fraud.
Like I said, Blacks have an entitlement mentality and this is why they love Welfare, WIC, the Democratic party, and other social programs. I despise these programs. Every dollar I own or make came through hard work, sacrifice, and discipline, nobody has ever given me sh*t. And I have no respect for losers who grovel to the government for hand outs because they're too stupid and lazy to fend for themselves.
most European countries and Canada have excellent social security systems and socialized medicare ... and the poeple who live there understand the system and are proud of the quality of social services they get. WHen they reach retirement age they will have money there ...



Kashta_Bureh wrote:

WTF? Dude, you have no clue what you're talking about. The Great Depression happened AFTER the Federal Reserve was created, not before. Have you forgotten that the USA was established in 1776?
For the first 153 years of American history THERE WAS NO DEPRESSION. There were "recessions," not "depressions," Emperor John. Do you know the difference between the two? America didn't have the first depression until 1929, and that was because of the FEDERAL RESERVE, which was created in 1913 and its expansion of credit and "easy money" led to what became known as the ROARING TWENTIES.
Spend more time studying history, you have a lot to learn. One more thing, Roosevelt didn't get us out of the Great Depression, he exacerbated it. WORLD WAR 2 got us out of the Great Depression, because wars are good for an economy so long as that economy is not destroyed in the War, and the USA won WW2.
Correction ... the USA was nto alone in that war ... the USA TEAMED UP with the allies win WW2 ...

ABout 12.5 million Americans fought in WWII in Europe ... about 30 million Europeans and Russians fought against Germany.

ALso, the USA genral public was never in danger from Germany ... but all the citizens of the UK, France, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Belgium, Poland, Austria, Hungary, RUSSIA,... and a few others, were under direct fire.

Less than 1 million US citizens, nealry all soldiers, died in the EUrpoean war. Over 50 million European citizens and sodliers died in that war.

Another 4 million Americans fought against Japan.



Kashta_Bureh wrote:

Social Security is a government sanctioned Ponzi Scheme, it is no different from what Bernard Madoff did, the only difference is that it has government approval. In a Ponzi Scheme, people pay into a fund with the promise and expectation that they will get money from it later, but only the people who paid into the fund at the beginning get paid, everyone else is left holding an empty bag.
Research "Ponzi Scheme" in Wikipedia and then study the Social Security program carefully and you will see that the two are basically the same. The government forces you and I to pay into the SS fund, but they have been dipping their hands into this fund for years and now it is estimated that the government OWES trillions of dollars that it doesn't have, which means Baby Boomers who think they can rely on Social Security are going to get raped when they find out there is no money in it.
Research recently showed that the money coming out of the SS fund actually superseded the money going in, and that is bad news. Welfare creates more poor people because the government taxes productive citizens to pay for citizens who are not productive. Why should I have to pay taxes for some hoochie mama and her 5 kids who are lazy, incompetent, and who don't want to excel in life?
there is corruption and abuse in any large system ... however, the difference between a PONZI scheme and a social system is that the PONZI scheme is a short term get rich quick scheme that only the senior and originating members can benefit from. Most social systems have already been running for more than half a century, and in some countries over a century, and most of the public that deserves access to the systems has been getting that access/benefits. If the social system was a PONZI scheme it would have died within a few years at most.



Kashta_Bureh wrote:

WTF? Dude, you have no clue what you're talking about. The Great Depression happened AFTER the Federal Reserve was created, not before. Have you forgotten that the USA was established in 1776?
For the first 153 years of American history THERE WAS NO DEPRESSION. There were "recessions," not "depressions," Emperor John. Do you know the difference between the two? America didn't have the first depression until 1929, and that was because of the FEDERAL RESERVE, which was created in 1913 and its expansion of credit and "easy money" led to what became known as the ROARING TWENTIES.
You forgot about the panic of also forget that the Roaring twenties had a series of Republican presidents and congress. Now as for the age before the "Great Depression" there were many countless recessions occurring at a rate much higher than they occur now
Kashta_Bureh wrote:
Spend more time studying history, you have a lot to learn. One more thing, Roosevelt didn't get us out of the Great Depression, he exacerbated it. WORLD WAR 2 got us out of the Great Depression, because wars are good for an economy so long as that economy is not destroyed in the War, and the USA won WW2.
I love how conservatives like to repeat this lie. Roosevelt inherited a 25% unemployment in 1933 when he became Pres. By 1936 it was at 11%. In 1937 Roosevelt cut spending and raised taxes and the unemployment zoomed up again. Had Roosevelt stayed on his path he would have got us out.

Conservatives like you love to say that WWII brought us out of depression not government programs, but what was WWII. It was a major government stimulus program. THe government created jobs for people to go to work which is what they supposed to do in a stimulus program.http://en.wikipedia.or g/wiki/Great_Depression#Turnin g_point_and_recovery


Notes on a Return to the Gold Standard

Notes on a Return to the Gold Standard

by Richard C. Cook
Global Research, May 15, 2007

Within the monetary reform movement there is a raging controversy over whether we should return to the gold standard or whether an effective program of reform could be accomplished through other means.

While the author of this article does not support a return to the gold standard, he is sympathetic to those who want to do just that. When the U.S. went off the gold peg in 1971, it opened the door to the modern era of runaway inflation, dollar hegemony, and the unlimited creation of financial bubbles. Removal of gold altogether from the monetary system is certainly one of the key events which has exposed us to the danger of a major financial crash and worldwide depression.

But throughout history, a gold standard has generally acted as an artificial constriction on the ability of a currency to expand sufficiently to support economic growth. By making currency scarce, the gold standard facilitated the bankers’ control of the economy. It was the bankers who got the governments of the world to go onto the gold standard after 1870 by undermining the utilization of silver. This allowed the bankers to control the world’s monetary supply to the detriment of economic democracy until the 1930s, when gold became only a denominator of international trade, not a backing of domestic currencies.

One of the most destructive periods of U.S. economic history took place during the currency contractions, monetary deflations, and financial ruination of farmers and workers during the late 1800s, when the bankers ruled through gold. It was what led to the founding of the Greenback and Progressive parties and to William Jennings Bryan’s famous speech at the 1900 Democratic national convention where he declared that we should not “crucify mankind on a cross of gold.”

The situation was relieved by the discovery of gold in South Africa and the Yukon and by improved methods for the extraction of gold from ore. But these circumstances also showed that a gold standard favored those nations which controlled gold. A gold standard leads to hoarding, market manipulations, and ultimately warfare over its possession and control.

Also, gold may or may not prevent inflation, because there are many things bankers can do to inflate the currency if they wish to. This happened with the inflation during and after World War I. This was a financial crime by which the bankers deliberately destroyed the value of the remaining paper greenbacks and silver certificates from post-Civil War days.

During the 1920s and 30s, the U.S., acquired much of the world’s gold through having lent bank-generated credit to the European allies so they could pay for having fought World War I. This policy impoverished much of Europe, including Germany, which had to pay war reparations, and contributed to the conditions leading to World War II.

It was the gold standard that led to the bankers wrecking the U.S. economy in 1932 by shipping Treasury gold as a bail-out to England, at the same time the U.S. was trying to recover from the crash of 1929. The 1932 gold and currency contraction was the real cause of the Great Depression. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt removed this danger by eliminating the domestic gold standard in 1933.

But even when paper currency was supposedly convertible to gold, or even gold and silver, the metallic standard always was a fiction. There never was and never could be enough for banks to hand over the requisite quantity to the “bearer on demand” if more than a fraction of the currency in circulation was presented for redemption at the same time.

In fact, during the state banking era prior to the Civil War, banks would destroy their rivals by showing up on their doorstep with quantities of the paper notes of the bank under attack and asking with a smirk for metallic reimbursement. The same thing happened during runs on the banks, resulting in frequent financial panics and bankruptcies.

Actually, those who favor a return to the gold standard tend to confuse the shaky redemption policy with the days when a miner or broker could walk into a U.S. Mint and have the government stamp his gold or silver into coins free of charge. Those really were the “good old days,” but that time is gone forever.

Should we return to the time of a banker-controlled gold standard? Probably not. What should really control the monetary supply is the sovereign power of representative government which must be equipped with the knowledge and authority to balance purchasing power with economic production.

This could be done by a National Dividend system combined with reduced taxation and direct government spending of money into the economy. The system would be overseen by a Monetary Control Board as advocated by the American Monetary Institute in its draft monetary reform legislation. The author describes such a system in his recent article, “Monetary Reform and How A Nation’s Monetary System Should Work.”

At the same time, lending for speculation should be outlawed, as should fractional reserve banking. There would then be no reason why money could not be paper, coinage, or electronic ledger entries. The monetary supply could expand or contract according to the real needs of the producing economy, not a more or less accidental quantity of precious metal.

For this to work, control of money must be removed entirely from the banks and restored to the people, acting through Congress as the U.S. Constitution requires. And under such a system where the money supply served real human needs instead of bank profiteering, promise of gold redemption would be unnecessary.

Having said all this, the author certainly has no objection to the buying and selling of gold as a commodity. Under certain conditions it might serve as a store of value and a hedge against inflation. But you can’t wear it, eat it, or live in it. What gives value to an economy is its ability to produce goods and services. That ability derives from the skills, education, and spirit of a nation’s population. In the end, money really derives its value from the character of the people and the honesty of government. That is why we should not even try to go back to an era where the monetary system failed in large part because of the gold standard.

Thursday, February 4, 2010

I have already addressed in my essay that this is not a "correction", but an orchestrated implosion break-down of the economy, therefor not "Avoiding the correction" would result in massive genocide on a global scale as highlighted in the first quotation of my essay [1.5 Quadrillion dollars in private sector/off books speculative derivative contracts and a 5 Trillion dollar infrastructure deficit are causing this Depression/Collapse].The Derivatives are not Government creations and are sucking the life out of all Commercial Bank credit issuence, Thankfully you stray from the Austrian school on this issue and agree that they must be wiped out.The Infrastructure is falling apart and threatens to destroy the economy as well [it has not been updated since 1958 for the most part] , the essay shows the amount of potential infrastructure failures we may have due to neglect.

-Revolt 426



One could easily posit all sorts of ridiculous fearmongering scenarios concerning government-controlled police and government-controlled armies as a way of scaring the gullible into embracing the stateless utopian fantasy world of the Austrian School, wherein--according to those who promote this delusional, quasi-religious fairy-tale--a mystical, God-like entity euphemistically called the "free market" magically keeps privately controlled police and privately controlled armies from terrorizing, oppressing and enslaving people.Fortunately, most of the people in this forum aren't quite so gullible. They know that keeping the police and military in public rather than private hands is, if nothing else, the far lesser of two evils; and that the reason certain public institutions have become so corrupt and oppressive in recent years is that they've been, in effect, "privatized" to one extent or another (case in point: the "Federal" Reserve), and that the solution to this is not to mindlessly throw the baby out with the bathwater but to reclaim from these private interests our rightful control over our own government.

I don't know about anyone else, but I, for one, say "no" to the privatized tyranny that anarcho-capitalists would have us all living under if they had their way, and "yes" to the liberty and freedom that can only be experienced in a truly Democratic Constitutional Republic:



No one advocated any planning. The point of the essay was to highlight major flaws in an appearently popular system on the internet and provide an alternative (issuence of currency for labor by spending it into infrastructure).

There is no private "Infrastructure" market, the private sector has never developed one major infrastructure project without Government lending or spending.
A) Startup costs are top much for Corporations to build it
B) They don't even want to build it , since they wish to de-populate the planet
C) It is not profitable enough for them to waste their time with it

That being said, no one has advocated anything other then spending Greenbacks into Infrastructure (No micro management, "centralized power" , "Large Government").

If you think the Government building a canal, bridge, road etc.. is Socialism or "Centralized Power" then i suppose our first President and founding fathers were Socialists!....... this is all explained in the essay i posted , however.

The reason why you cannot find "The Line" is because i do not belong to a particular school of economics, but i would consider myself a Dirigist to some extent (explained in essay).

So, where is the line, i'll answer that no problem;

Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution "General Welfare" Clause.

Before attempting to impliment any policy, ask yourself "If this for the General Welfare" of the population of the United States (Meaning , is this going to damage a portion of the population)

I believe in the "Freest Markets" possible without parasitical elites with the ability to destroy life....... so fixing exchange rates would be a great answer to one of these problems. Is that tyrranical? i do not see how it is in any way shape or form - yet the Austrian school proclaims it is tyrrany.


i do not profess to agree with either side entirely, however, i do believe that free markets are not evil, and i do believe there is something that could be defined as "an invisible hand".

Geo and Revolt, i have had Revolt admit that it (invisible hand) exists, however, im getting the impression neither of you feel that it is of any worth, in fact, you appear to think it does great harm.

I can't speak for Revolt, but as for me, I happen to believe in free enterprise. I just don't buy into the implied notion that calling something "free" makes it so. It doesn't. The "devil" (or lack thereof) is in the "details," as they say.

this is where i feel i would disagree with you, when you say "100% of the austrian school is lies etc", that is a wild and erroneous statement for obvious reasons.

Actually that's not my position. Have you read the following post of mine?

if so, why do you talk of free markets as though they were magic,

I'm afraid you've got it backwards; it's the Austrian Schoolers who do that. I merely call them on it.

i appreciate you believe in liberty and the constitution, but you seem unwilling to trust in them in so far as allowing the natural progression of markets,

The problem is that "allowing the natural progression of markets" is very often (though not necessarily always) an Austrian School euphemism for allowing an artificial implosion of markets to occur, which means allowing the very criminal bankers who orchestrated the collapse in the first place to foreclose on everyone and buy everything up at pennies on the dollar. Austrian Schoolers, in true Orwellian fashion, routinely call this parasitic transfer of wealth a market-based "correction" or "adjustment" (and that letting it take its course is thus conducive to "liberty"). In reality, it is a fraud-based looting of the real economy, and is conducive only to feudalistic tyranny.

Hope that clarifies the nature of the dispute.


-Revolt 426


Wednesday, February 3, 2010


OK, so, assuming that your system worked. Here is my fundamental question. By issuing fiat money, you have diluted the overall supply of money, taking it from other people via inflation. This is a given. Because the economy is a closed system, it can only be grown by labour that generates wealth. Printing of money does not create wealth.

So, with that in mind. Pray tell, what is the opportunity cost of your proposal, because I assure you there is one.

And what is the moral cost? Socialism breaks down family structures and morality, moving people from work, saving and local interdependence, towards speculation, gambling, and dependence on the state.

What are the financial and moral implications of your plan? How would your spending be any better than the spending of G.W Bush, Tony Blair, or anybody else? Giving you the power to print money, is that not a moral hazard that would be used by future leaders? What about your posterity?

You fail to understand the difference between spending and lending.

A Credit system is Low interest rate federal LENDING to rebuild the Nation , so an example of a successful policy in regards to this similar to the Intercontinental Railway and TVA would be a Mag Lev as i mentioned.

You issue a contract that is BIDDED on by a multitude of companies with the ability to do something of this nature (Machine Tool Workers) and you LOAN them low interest sovereign credit (LENDING) to the tune of maybe 1% interest and lower.....

Now, in regards to the "Power to Print Money" the American System is run via Congress Approprations of Lending and Treasury Issuence of Credit.

So, the nation would be UNABLE to print money without labour being involved because all of the money printed would be directly invested into infrastructure projects, which directly represent the economy and population as opposed to gold.

In regards to "Socialism" , this is another false paradigm that was created by the powers that be and that is parroted by Austrians (I am not attacking you here), the Government building of Railways, Power plants and Water Treatment facilities is NOT Socialism.

Socialism (As opposed to what we have today, which is the fascist corporatist state) is when the Government Seizes Markets. AN example of actual socialism is Hugo Chavez seizing all of the oil companies in Venezuella.

The American System does no such thing - there is no preventative measures that restrict the private sector from doing what they please in regards to building infrastructure. But the reality of the situation is, as i have said, the Private Sector is bankrupt , unwilling and unable to build the basic neccessaties for an economy to function - so Federal Lending would be the only solution to prevent a thermo dynamic collapse (Meaning, the modern civilized economy would cease to function) of the Nation.

I would just like to add, that the word "Fiat" is such a Dogma these days because it is based on the assumption that "Currency is backed by nothing but the Federal Government's word" -

But if the system were overhauled to that of what we began with, and modernized , "Fiat" money would actually be representative of the Nations economic infrastructure and ability to produce , provide for transportation of , and sell to other nations , physical goods.

I would say that a Currency that is represented or valued per physical labour and a Nations economic output is far more valuable then Gold, which is indeed a piece of metal (Scarce or not) that is incapable of increasing a Nations ability to produce physical goods.

So, in conclusion you cannot put a value on currency (Via Gold), you can put a currency on a Value (The Value being the Economies ability for physical production highlighted by it's underlying infrastructure).

-Revolt 254

In regards to this nonsense that i already disproved, the Government building infrastrucuture, as designated in the Constitution as "For the General Welfare of the people, is NOT SOCIALISM - SOCIALISM IS WHEN GOVERNMENT SEIZES MARKETS.

-Revolt 254

It's not just supply and demand.

It's regulation over the money supply.

There are tons of houses out there! Alot people would like them - but a Depression has been orchestrated by an Empire, based in London......

These actions have NOTHING to do with any such laws of supply and demand, because those laws do not take dynamics into interest.

Math is not Science, the Austrian school of economics does not take people into account or their minds. The Human mind must constantly update their infrastructure via science (New discoveries) as the population expands.

Putting a cap on this is equivelent to suicide of the race, but we need not go extinct because we are running out of Drinking Water.

There is a Scientific Solution that the private sector is currently unable to provide, which is De-Salination of Salt Water via Nuclear Power plants, which has been proven to work in numerous areas. This is one of many examples of how you must take the population into account in economics, not just laws and math.

-Revolt 254


That is exactly why they must be regulated. Specifically, the Private Sector Financiers / Speculators. That doesn't mean that all Regulation is good, it means that parasitical regulation is necessary for any Freedom to be acheived.

What i find very disturbing is, (Not targetting you, because you are obviously aware of this), There are numerous people parroting Austrian Philosphies on the Forum and labeling them as the "Free Markets"......... and Austrian Fundamentals haven't the slightest thing to do with any freedom whatsoever.

Primarily their 2 pillars, which is Gold Must be used as a currency and All Government intervention/regulation is bad for the economy. In addition, they claim contractions of monetary supply are great because everything will just adjust and the dollar will strengthen (As if the markets had an invisible hand!) .......

However, They do not just adjust. People go bankrupt (Farmers foremost) and starve to death, this is precisely what happened in every real Depression in U.S. history - which is contraction of the monetary supply or "Deflation". Austrians would prefer 30% Deflation as opposed to 10% inflation....... because the word inflation is so frightening to them that they ignore what the word DEFLATION would do.

If anyone wishes to see what deflation does, i would suggest looking at the period from 1929 to march 1933 because it resulted in economic collapse , massive unemployment, starvation and breadlines....... the result as of FDR's Inauguration was, the United States banking system was no longer functioning.

As for the use of Gold as a currency, this is another tremendous problem that has nothing to do with "Free Markets". Infact, you will probably become a slave if Gold is used as a currency because there is NOT ENOUGH Gold to supliment the expanding population. This may not have been the case 400 years ago because we didn't have 6.8 Billion Human Beings on the planet.... However, as of now, if we were to enstate a domestic Gold Standard the resulting deflation would essentially bankrupt the nation , making all who weren't elitists slaves to creditors. For instance, think of all the people who now owe debt in the form of mortgages , commercial loans, auto loans, student loans, installment loans, credit card loans etc....

Now, if you enstated a Gold Standard and followed Austrian Contract rules, you would owe *Example* 100,000$ on a mortgage, and your weekly salary would drop from a higher sum (If you were lucky enough to get a job) and would be more like 100 dollars a week. I am sure you can see it would take your entire life to pay off 100,000 dollars and you would likely die before paying it off.

Other problems with the Gold Coin Standard consist of
A) The Gold does not represent the economic or population expansion rate
B) "Coin Clipping" was a serious problem when Coin standards were enstated
C) the elites control 80+% of the world Gold Supplies/Mines
D) Gold Standards make it impossible to recover from a Depression due to lack of or strangulation of currency to rebuild the Nation's infrastructure.
E) The very reason the Austrians say it works which is, "Scarcity" - is the very reason it doesn't work. If the economy is to expand, the monetary base must expand. If the economy is to recover from a Depression the monetary base must expand rapidly so long as it is issued into Productive Scientific Infrastructure that enables the Private Sector to Function. For Example, Without Clean Water, the Human race cannot survive - and since we are running out of Clean Water (For Drinking and Crop Irrigation) , we must develope things to produce clean water such as Nuclear De-Salination of Salt Water, which has been proven to work. This is one of many examples of required infrastructure for civilization to continue to function...... others include:

* Repairing and scientifically updating the collapsing Bridges, Roads , Railways which are needed for transportation of Human Beings and Productive Goods
* Developing new Power Plants (4th Gen. Nuclear and eventually Laser Fusion) to provide power to factories , farms and the like for production
* Mass Transit which is more efficient then cars since the Auto Sector is dead (For years atleast)
* + Any Scientific Creation by use of the Human Mind that would improve living standards and spurr the private sector

The point being, a Physical Economy is based on it's underlying infrastructure. And infrastructure is a Scientific Developement. When population expands, infrastructure must be updated to facilitate that population or you get poverty, and if neglected long enough, genocide. This is why Africa is still a third world continent..... do you see any railways in Africa? Water ways? Means of Power and Transport for any private sector to be able to produce and transport goods?......... We are heading towards that situation if we allow our basic economic infrastructure to collapse...... and if we do not modernize it to facilitate population levels we will not recover from this nightmarish economic meltdown (This is not a Depression , it is a systemic collapse, so we must take all statistical economics and toss them)


What if that person you are targetting honestly earned his income by working his *ss off his whole life? is that still a justifiable approach?

I have a better suggestion - how about we reform our monetary system so instead of a Private Central Bank controlling our entire currency and monetary system, the actual people we elect into office control it?

The Federal Reserve system is loaning money to banks without Permission from Congress or the President, how about we get rid of that system and cut the banks out of the equation, then we replace with a system that invests money, instead of loaning it, into infrastructure (such has high tech railways, agriculture). This will create jobs and give the currency a real instrinsic value because it has been spent or worked into the economy, rather then *Loaned at interest* as the Federal Reserve system does.

Does that sound like a good idea to you?.


What is not great about Printing money out of thin are? Well allow me to elaborate!

When you print money out of thin air it has no value , and the only way to maintain the currencies value in that sort of system is to have Foreign Countries Hold US DEBT Such as CHINA .

However, Foreign countries no longer wish to hold US debt because the dollar is on the verge of collapsing, so printing money "out of thin air" will directly inflate the currency as soon as the currency is spent into the economy.

The banks that are receiving these capital injections are NOT Loaning it to people, they are instead hoarding all of it and waiting to either pay off their Derivative Obligations or Consolidate their competitors. This can be seen already by Bank of America Consolidating Merrill Lynch and Countrywide - and by Wells Fargo Consolidating Wachovia, and by JP Morgan Chase consolidating WAMU.

This means that larger banks are essentially EATING all of there competition, which in turn leads to Fascism.


If you didn't find out yet, Russia has not been a Communist nation since the Soviet Union collasped..... i figured you knew that already...

Economic commentaries

Absolutely, Austrians actually want an end of legal tender laws, that government's role is simply to ensure that counterfeit doesn't occur. I'd go further, and suggest that only private courts, under common law, are capable, given that government have a vested interest.

Revolt256's Response are Bold

One must remember, that a paper greenback, will only be accepted by the market, by force, via forceful legal tender laws. There is no way in the world that anything other than force would get anybody to value paper above gold and silver. It is imoral to devalue those who have things with real value, and, by incentivising people to sell quality to buy nonsense paper, you push real quality and gold out of the economy. So, not only are legal tender laws immoral, they are economically stupid, except if you are a self-centered government who just wants to print money for yourself and your friends. Much as kings gave land to loyal supporters during the middle ages. This is neo-feudalism.

One must NOT forget, your cultish behavoir in face of debunking on a multitude of occasions in this thread alone, and your insanity in regards to allowing (BILLIONS) of people to die, to follow the "Laws of Von Mises" is nothing short of pure Selfishness, USERY and GENOCIDAL MURDER.

Forget all that NONSENSE.

Again, i'll revert you to the excellent article i posted about 5 or 6 posts up about the FACT That due to the principles of allowing the Private Sector which is dominated by inbred oligarchs who happen to come from your so called Nation, to follow Austrian policy and "Not intervene" With the sacred markets when HUMANITY ITSELF is at stake....... this proves you are guilty of the worst kind of Usery.

"Let's forget 'ALL THAT NONSENSE' about the fact that there isn't enough Clean Water, Food or Energy on the planet, so we should allow 5 Billion HUMAN BEINGS to be kicked out of their houses via foreclosure, go bankrupt and STARVE TO DEATH.

You are nothing more then a SOCIAL DARWINISTIC piece of filth if you advocate "Forgetting that Nonsense" - and infact - when YOU lose your job, lose your home and your nation fails, you will be on the street and you will get exactly what you deserve.

What makes you better then the "illuminists" as you call them, as if they are enlightened in some way shape or form?. You advocate precisely what THEY DO, which is allowing the "Idiots" aka the CATTLE to lose everything and STARVE TO DEATH to OBEY a CULT of Market Rules invented by a group of shadey individuals... Hence putting the "Rules of the Von Mises Free Market" BEFORE Humanity Itself.

What makes you better then a Nazi? can you please tell me? considering this crisis threatens to wipe out atleast 4 billion human beings and you refuse to engage in rational debate and provide ways to SAVE these HUMAN BEINGS, and instead follow a cult of economic laws that are complete falsehoods?.

What is the difference between that and being a Nazi? It is pure usery and when you are finished using, you discard "Let them go bankrupt and kick them out of their homes, they are idiots".............

"Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate … It will purge the rottenness out of the system..." - Andrew Mellon, Secretary of Treasury, 1929.

Infact, you have already proven your "Model" would result in "GENOCIDE" and you REFUSE to address that issue - and as far as the Deflation issue, your solution is "They are idiots, let them go bankrupt" , kick them out of their homes and let them starve to death.

You alone stating you are an Adam Smith worshipper along with a Von Mises Worshipper is proof you have not done sufficient research OR you just refuse to admit you are wrong - because Adam Smith was nothing more then a puppet of LORD SHELBURNE and a collaborater with Karl Marx to setup YET ANOTHER paradigm that you have obviously fell right into, and refuse to even do the research on what you are preaching.


I don't agree with Tarpley on everything, nor do I disagree with the Austrian School on everything.

In fact, I actually agree with Austrian Schoolers on many issues. Like them, I oppose all of the following:

* occupational licensing barriers;

* both wage and sales taxes;

* corporatist trade agreements that, as such, are neither "free" nor "fair";

* interventionist foreign policies;

* compulsory schooling;

* victim disarmament (i.e. "gun control"); and

* governmental assaults on civil liberties

And even on the issue of monetary reform, once fractional reserve banking has been outlawed and the current debt-based money system completely replaced by a debt-free greenback system, I would at least be open (particularly if certain election reforms remained unimplemented) to the idea of reforming the legal tender law so that U.S. Treasury currency is good merely for the payment of all public debts (as opposed to both public and private), since that would allow for a web of competing private currencies to rise up along side the national currency, thereby keeping those in charge of the latter in check.

However, there are four key issues on which I passionately disagree with the Austrian School:

(a) the idea that the only way to get out of the current depression is to let everything collapse first -- i.e., to let the very banking criminals who caused this crisis in the first place foreclose on everyone, and to euphemistically call this fraud-based looting of the real economy a market-based "correction" or "adjustment";

(b) the idea that the only way to have "sound" money is to institute gold-based money system;

(c) this cartoonish notion that all government regulations are bad by definition, and the consequent reluctance of the Austrian Schoolers over at to even mention the word "derivatives," presumably since doing so would call attention to the fact that the quadrillion-dollar derivatives bubble could never have been created to begin with had the Glass-Steagall Act -- a form of "government intervention" -- not been repealed in 1999; and

(d) the notion that there's no fundamental difference between commodity speculation, on the one hand, and land speculation, on the other (see this and this).

Now, putting aside for the moment the fourth issue (since I've never heard Webster address land speculation), I'll simply say that, such is the intensity of my disagreement with Austrian Schoolers on the first three, that if there were a presidential election tomorrow, and the only two candidates on the ballot were Webster Tarpley and Lew Rockwell, I'd choose Tarpley.

Not because I agree with him on everything, but because he (if nothing else) would at least not implement policies that would turn half the population into Third World peasants.



Revolt254's words:

in addition the austrian school neglects to acknowledge all modern private sector technology is DERIVED From non other then federal infrastructure investments. For example all modern computer chips... Where did they come lfrom ?. The kennedy space program. The internet ? Darpa. modern trade routes ?. The intercontinental railway.... So you want the free markets? the free markets DONT EXIST. It is a utopian ideal. An acronym for goldman sachs and jp morgan


the reality of the situation is that tarpley has a far more realistic approach then the malthusian genocidal austrian insanity of allowing the entire system to collapse i.n order to obey the pure trickery posed by the snakes at the austrian school. What the austian school proposes is we take the economic expansion of 7 billion human beings and collapse it by pegging it to a piece of metal and strangulating the economy of currency to develope a sustainable amount of infrastructure that their beloved free markets are utterly INCAPABLE OF BUILDING...Thereby depriving billions of PEOPLE Of basic needs like CLEAN WATER TREATMENT PLANTS For example. you think the maglev is a waste ? go read a history book about what the intercontinental railway did in the 1800s. Austrians see any activity for general welfare of humanity as a waste while they NEGLECT THE FACT That modern capitalism is not possible without modern infrastructure.
-Revolt 254



If there's one thing this thread has proven to me, it's that the Austrian School is more of a religious cult than a legitimate school of "economic thought," because far too many of its followers end up revealing (in the heat of debate) that -- despite all the happy horse___ they parrot about "liberty" and "freedom" -- they simply don't care if literally millions of Americans starve to death, as long as they do so on the altar of Austrian School dogma.

The only difference is that, unlike most other cults, the Austrian School uses economic verbiage to conceal its true, sociopathic nature instead of religious verbiage. But at the end of the day the results are the same: innocent people being sacrificed on the altar of the cult's wackjob belief system.

It is for this reason that I'm more than happy at this point to let objective onlookers read the previous posts to this thread and decide for themselves which side of the let-everything-collapse-and-we'll-euphemistically-call-it-the-"free market" debate they agree with.

There's no need to preach to me about that, because I've railed countless times against compulsory government schooling for that very reason.

The point is that one doesn't have to be pro-collapse (and hence pro-mass starvation) on economics to be pro-choice on education.

Or to put it another way: one doesn't have to be in favor of "burning down the house" to be in favor of "roasting the pig."

Austrian School cranks, of course, see it differently: as far as they're concerned, if you're not in favor of "burning down the house" (metaphorically speaking), then by definition you're a pig-lover! Roll Eyes


By the way, the addition tidbit, which i call a BOLD FACE LIE - by inserting the paradigm of "IT's either the Bailout, or Austrian school" is a falsehood in itself, because the methodology Tarpley is suggesting has NOTHING TO DO WITH A BAILOUT WHATSOEVER.

You refuse to acknowledge that there is anything in between "Bailout" and "Austrian School" - when there is this system that the United States was FOUNDED on, which prevented the United States from going bankrupt via WAR DEBTS and simoultaniously built the Nation.

The Bailout has not been advocated by ANYONE here, including Tarpley.

SO infact, you are setting up your own "It's the bailout or Austrian school" Paradigm, and in addition you are insulting the United States, not Webster Tarpley.

It would also do you good to look up what the word "Socalism" Means, which is when the Government SEIZES MARKETS, which no one has even SUGGESTED here.

-Revolt 254

Reply by jack on January 31, 2010 at 12:11am
First of all, Mike formally published the theses of inevitable failure in 1979: a) that any pretended economy subject to interest inevitably terminates itself under insoluble debt; and b) that there is one and one only integral solution to the categoric faults of the imposed systems: 1) inflation and deflation; 2) systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money or property; and 3) inherent, irreversible multiplication of artificial indebtedness by interest.

Secondly, he furnished the Reagan Administration with computer models which projected the present failure, proving the first thesis (a) — which models c) you can still download, complete with source code from our pages; d) run 1980s data; and e) still project that the present failure will occur at approximately 2010 AD.

Thirdly, it is utterly preposterous that any Austrian “economist” could have projected the present failure; and every person here with the least familiarity with this pseudo science knows why:

The Austrians routinely reject mathematics; and they in fact exalt interest — the very cause of failure!

The reason nonetheless that Austrians and Hayek in particular exalt interest (with no mathematic or rational defense whatever), Hayek himself tells us: It makes “banking” (obfuscating the promissory notes of the people) “an extremely profitable business.” (See Mises page, reproducing Hayek’s article: “A Free-market Monetary System.”)

“Freedom” is Hayek’s first lie, for there is no freedom even from terminal exploitation, when the purported “Free Market Monetary System” is imposed upon the people despite political promises to the contrary, and when it can only multiply artificial indebtedness in proportion to capacity to pay, as the unassenting subjects are forced to maintain a vital circulation by perpetually re-borrowing principal and interest as ever greater sums of artificial debt, perpetually increased so much as periodic interest on an ever greater sum of debt, until of course the sum of artificial indebtedness exceeds their (finite) capacity to pay, destroys their credit-worthiness to maintain a vital circulation — and you have what you have right now, everywhere around you.

That’s freedom, Mr. Austrian “economists?”

In fact the lie of your pretended economy can only multiply artificial cost!

Now, to say you predicted the present failure, even as it is the one possible fundamental consequence of the interest you advocate — that is one of the greatest lies in history.

But it won’t fly.
► Reply to This