• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

The case against Dr. Paul

-- EDIT --- Writing economics at 2am is very error prone, especially for me. A proper response ASAP.

ETA: It's pretty disgraceful that you've chosen to ignore, rather than discuss, with some honest, polite and eloquent posters. Choosing to avoid critical debate is a pretty clear marker of someone not interested in honest debate, in my opinion. Suddenly in particular has been nothing but polite. Forthright, perhaps, but he's always attacked your arguments, not you. If you want to be taken seriously, I'd urge you to reconsider.
 
Last edited:
What gets to me about dash is he seems to have a talent for picking the worst possible people to make gurus out of .
Most of the doomsday economist he cites have businesses that sell Gold Silver, and other "Economic Survivalist" merchandise to those who think Armaggedon is right around the corner. You think it's a coincidence they create doomsday scenarios and then sell products that they claim will help you get rich off Armageddon?
 
Last edited:
volatile said:
"If the money supply is fixed but population increases, there is a greater demand for the money itself -- it must be divided among more people."

No, no, no, no, no. It can't be divided between more people because there isn't enough to go around. There is no more gold to give to anyone. Thus, to keep up with dwindling reserves, you have to devalue the currency. Whereas before $1 = 1oz of gold, to increase the money supply you need to say $1 now equals 1/2oz, meaning your money is worth LESS; everyone's money is worth less.
Click to expand...
Alternatively, you can just have the government set the price of gold, but of course then all you're doing is substituting one fiat currency for another.

dash, currently the US government has ~$235 billion in gold reserves. Explain again how a $13 trillion economy can run on that?
 
dudalb said:
What gets to me about dash is he seems to have a talent for picking the worst possible people to make gurus out of .
Click to expand...
Ah, but that's what makes him special! Only he and a few select others know how the economy really works. Same with physics apparently.

Is there a sane Ron Paul supporter to be found?
 
volatile said:
-- EDIT --- Writing economics at 2am is very error prone, especially for me. A proper response ASAP.

ETA: It's pretty disgraceful that you've chosen to ignore, rather than discuss, with some honest, polite and eloquent posters. Choosing to avoid critical debate is a pretty clear marker of someone not interested in honest debate, in my opinion. Suddenly in particular has been nothing but polite. Forthright, perhaps, but he's always attacked your arguments, not you. If you want to be taken seriously, I'd urge you to reconsider.
Click to expand...

I'm assuming this is in reference to my post? I reject "Suddenly" because he's wasting my time, I don't want to bother trying to figure out whether he's stating his real beliefs or being "sarcastic". I reject the other fellow "d???" because he's offensive, belittling, and went out of his way to butt into some other thread I was active in and spread rumours -- I consider this in very poor form. He has attacked me, not my arguments.

I'm not interested in interacting with toxic people. Toxic != skeptic.

-Dave
 
WildCat said:
Alternatively, you can just have the government set the price of gold, but of course then all you're doing is substituting one fiat currency for another.

dash, currently the US government has ~$235 billion in gold reserves. Explain again how a $13 trillion economy can run on that?
Click to expand...

I think what he's missing is that whilst deflation increases his purchasing power, the necessary devaluation needed to combat deflation reduces purchasing power to a greater degree. I wasn't clear on that in my original post (hence me editing it away). If you need to distribute dwindling reserves amongst an expanding economy (or population), devaluation is the only solution.

The Wiki entry on deflation is a useful starting point, which explains this in more detail.

"While an increase in the purchasing power of one's money sounds beneficial, it can actually cause hardship when the majority of one's net worth is held in illiquid assets such as homes, land, and other forms of private property. It also amplifies the sting of debt, since-- after some period of significant deflation-- the payments one is making in the service of a debt represent a larger amount of purchasing power than they did when the debt was first incurred. Consequently, deflation can be thought of as a phantom amplification of a loan's interest rate. (But, conversely, inflation may be thought of as a regressive, across the board general tax.)
This lesson about protracted deflationary cycles and their attendant hardships has been felt several times in modern history. During the 19th century, the Industrial Revolution brought about a huge increase in production efficiency, that happened to coincide with a relatively flat money-supply. These two deflationary catalysts led, simultaneously, not only to tremendous capital development, but also to tremendous deprivation for millions of people who were ill-equipped to deal with the dark side of deflation. Business owners-- on average, better educated in economic theory than their unfortunate cohorts (or just better able to withstand the economic stresses) -- recognized the deflation cycle as it unfolded, and positioned themselves to leverage its beneficial aspects.

Hard money advocates argue that if there were no "rigidities" in an economy, then deflation should be a welcome effect, as the lowering of prices would allow more of the economy's effort to be moved to other areas of activity, thus increasing the total output of the economy. However, while there have been periods of 'beneficial' deflation (especially in industry segments, such as computers), more often it has led to the more severe form with negative impact to large segments of the populace and economy.

Since deflationary periods favor those who hold currency over those who do not, they are often matched with periods of rising populist sentiment, as in the late 19th century, when populists in the United States wanted to move off hard money standards and back to a money standard based on the more inflationary (because more abundantly available) metal silver."
 
Last edited:
dash said:
I'm assuming this is in reference to my post? I reject "Suddenly" because he's wasting my time, I don't want to bother trying to figure out whether he's stating his real beliefs or being "sarcastic".
Click to expand...

Its not his fault your views are indistinguishable from a parody of themselves now, is it? Or that you're rather inastute in judging tone?

He's a very intelligent, very well respected poster who you could learn a lot from. Pretending he doesn't exist makes you look foolish.

I reject the other fellow "d???" because he's offensive, belittling, and went out of his way to butt into some other thread I was active in and spread rumours -- I consider this in very poor form. He has attacked me, not my arguments.

I'm not interested in interacting with toxic people. Toxic != skeptic.
Click to expand...

Toxic? Dudalb posted in another thread you were in; there is no rule against this, and you'll often find the same names crop up in a lot of the threads. It seems you've come to the JREF with some pretty far out stances, so please don't be surprised if we take issue with them. A thin skin will not serve you well here.

Dubalb has not mocked you or attacked you; he has mocked and attacked your arguments. Considering one of them involves channeling Egyptian gods and the denial of the entirity of physics, you cannot honestly be surprised, can you?

If Dubalb's wrong, explain where he is. With views like yours, the forum will get very quiet, very quickly if you choose to ignore everyone who mocks you,

Take them both off ignore and respond to their posts. What have you got to lose?
 
WildCat said:
Alternatively, you can just have the government set the price of gold, but of course then all you're doing is substituting one fiat currency for another.

dash, currently the US government has ~$235 billion in gold reserves. Explain again how a $13 trillion economy can run on that?
Click to expand...

How is this a problem? The USA is bankrupt. We don't have enough bullion, at current dollar per ounce rates, to back $13 trillion in federal reserve notes (I'm taking your word that that's the amount of dollars in circulation).

Let's use your numbers. $235 billion in gold is 26.111 million ounces of gold, at $900 per ounce. If you want those 26.111 million ounces of gold to back 13 trillion dollars, that works out to $497,874 per ounce. Actually that's way too high, I don't think there are $13 trillion dollars in circulation, that's the yearly GDP I think you're referring to. I think in actual currency it's in the order of hundreds of billions of dollars of actual paper money. It's on the order of $50,000 per ounce as I recall, if you were to back all the dollars in circulation by gold.

It doesn't matter what you set your valuation to, you can tie any paper to whatever amount of physical gold you want. Instead of ounces, you can use grams. Conversely you can tie whatever dollar amount you want to an ounce of gold. You're defining the value of your new "dollar".

The existing dollars will never be backed by gold. They'll become worthless first. The concept of a gold backed currency means a new currency, after the dollar collapses.

Note the USA might actually be completely out of gold, there hasn't been an independent audit of the gold reserves in Fort Knox for like 50 years. GATA is putting a full page ad in Friday's Wall Street Journal. Here's a pdf file: http://www.gata.org/files/GATA-AD-01-14-2008.pdf

The current dollars get devalued to near worthlessness, Weimar Republic style. It's because the various debts owed are owed in dollars. So the government can't tax enough to pay off the debt, they'll just print more dollars. Here are your freshly minted dollar bills, enjoy! So anyone owning bonds gets wiped out. Foreign nations hoarding dollars take a hit -- China and Japan. Saudi Arabia gets hit.

Have you been hearing about Sovereign Wealth Funds? These foreign governments are pooling their dollars and are buying up USA assets with them -- before the dollars become worthless.

Countries issue new currencies all the time. Kennedy tried during his presidency. There is a good argument that he was assasinated because he was putting into circulation these new "Kennedy dollars" which would have been used to eradicate the Federal Reserve. Lincoln issued greenbacks to fund the Union expenses during Civil War. He chose to issue a new currency temporarily, rather than borrow it (at interest) from banks. Very smart move, saved a lot of money.

If the dollar ceases to be accepted internationally, how will the USA buy all our foreign made toys? The oil we need? Raw materials we don't produce internally anymore?

It's gonna be rough. That much is certain.

-Dave
 
dash said:
How is this a problem? The USA is bankrupt. We don't have enough bullion, at current dollar per ounce rates, to back $13 trillion in federal reserve notes (I'm taking your word that that's the amount of dollars in circulation).

Let's use your numbers. $235 billion in gold is 26.111 million ounces of gold, at $900 per ounce. If you want those 26.111 million ounces of gold to back 13 trillion dollars, that works out to $497,874 per ounce. Actually that's way too high, I don't think there are $13 trillion dollars in circulation, that's the yearly GDP I think you're referring to. I think in actual currency it's in the order of hundreds of billions of dollars of actual paper money. It's on the order of $50,000 per ounce as I recall, if you were to back all the dollars in circulation by gold.

It doesn't matter what you set your valuation to, you can tie any paper to whatever amount of physical gold you want. Instead of ounces, you can use grams. Conversely you can tie whatever dollar amount you want to an ounce of gold. You're defining the value of your new "dollar".

The existing dollars will never be backed by gold. They'll become worthless first. The concept of a gold backed currency means a new currency, after the dollar collapses.

Note the USA might actually be completely out of gold, there hasn't been an independent audit of the gold reserves in Fort Knox for like 50 years. GATA is putting a full page ad in Friday's Wall Street Journal. Here's a pdf file: http://www.gata.org/files/GATA-AD-01-14-2008.pdf

The current dollars get devalued to near worthlessness, Weimar Republic style. It's because the various debts owed are owed in dollars. So the government can't tax enough to pay off the debt, they'll just print more dollars. Here are your freshly minted dollar bills, enjoy! So anyone owning bonds gets wiped out. Foreign nations hoarding dollars take a hit -- China and Japan. Saudi Arabia gets hit.

Have you been hearing about Sovereign Wealth Funds? These foreign governments are pooling their dollars and are buying up USA assets with them -- before the dollars become worthless.

Countries issue new currencies all the time. Kennedy tried during his presidency. There is a good argument that he was assasinated because he was putting into circulation these new "Kennedy dollars" which would have been used to eradicate the Federal Reserve. Lincoln issued greenbacks to fund the Union expenses during Civil War. He chose to issue a new currency temporarily, rather than borrow it (at interest) from banks. Very smart move, saved a lot of money.

If the dollar ceases to be accepted internationally, how will the USA buy all our foreign made toys? The oil we need? Raw materials we don't produce internally anymore?

It's gonna be rough. That much is certain.

-Dave
Click to expand...
OK, I should have known better after peeking at your Ra-channeling physics thread. There's really no point in arguing economics with someone who claims Kennedy was assasinated for the Kennedy half-dollar... which didn't come out until after his assasination by Oswald.

Good night!
 
volatile said:
Take them both off ignore and respond to their posts. What have you got to lose?
Click to expand...

They offend my value systems. If that means I have a thin skin, I can live with it. This heckling Wildcat is doing is pretty offensive as well. Exactly what is the purpose of making snide remarks about a person in a discussion? Where is common courtesy? Would they do these things if we were speaking face to face?

I've been internet savvy since the 80's. There were ethics in those days. Politeness was one. I posted a lot in usenet. The offensive behaviours present in these forums would never be tolerated back then.

I'm not interested in debating the "ignore list" issue with you or anyone. If you wish to discuss economics I'll be happy to. Ditto with wildcat, but I suggest he/she learn a little bit of manners. It doesn't appear there is any limit to the names the JREF forum can store in an individual's ignore list.

Try to ignore the hecklers. Make up your own mind. What I'm talking about is important. Yes it's not mainstream yet. But unless you've lived under a rock for the last few months you must have gotten some inkling of the economic problems coming down.

If you can formulate specific stopping points or objections to what I'm saying I will try to assist in understanding.

-Dave
 
WildCat said:
OK, I should have known better after peeking at your Ra-channeling physics thread. There's really no point in arguing economics with someone who claims Kennedy was assasinated for the Kennedy half-dollar... which didn't come out until after his assasination by Oswald.

Good night!
Click to expand...

Do you even read what I write? I didn't claim Kennedy was assasinated because of his issuance of a new currency. I said it was merely a good argument.

Heavens, do you people even know how to read? Or is the extent of your reading just a sort of pattern recognition system, looking for certain keywords, like:

Kennedy assasination
open minded
paradigm
depression
economic collapse

Then when you find them you get the "AHA!" moment and go for the jugular?

I would suggest, if you're going to draw conclusions from the other thread, which is
"The Law Of One Material and Dewey B. Larson's Physics" you actually read the whole thread, in detail, and understand exactly what I wrote. Failing that you're merely talking out your rear end.

It's better to read a small amount with complete understanding, than to read a large amount with next to no understanding.

-Dave
 
volatile said:
I think what he's missing is that whilst deflation increases his purchasing power, the necessary devaluation needed to combat deflation reduces purchasing power to a greater degree. I wasn't clear on that in my original post (hence me editing it away). If you need to distribute dwindling reserves amongst an expanding economy (or population), devaluation is the only solution.
Click to expand...

Wait a minute, you've edited your original post? So now you were correct from the very beginning? Isn't that a bit of revisionist behaviour? Changing history? Sort of a, "I never said that! Prove it!"

I think that's very poor form. Also if you make a mistake, learn to swallow your pride and admit to it. The skill will serve you well in life, believe me. The point in life isn't to avoid making mistakes entirely, it is to swiftly correct once mistakes are discovered.

-Dave
 
WildCat said:
OK, I should have known better after peeking at your Ra-channeling physics thread. There's really no point in arguing economics with someone who claims Kennedy was assasinated for the Kennedy half-dollar... which didn't come out until after his assasination by Oswald.

Good night!
Click to expand...

Also regarding the Kennedy currency issue question, read this link:

http://www.john-f-kennedy.net/thefederalreserve.htm

On June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the authority to basically strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the United States Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a pen, President Kennedy declared that the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank would soon be out of business. The Christian Law Fellowship has exhaustively researched this matter through the Federal Register and Library of Congress. We can now safely conclude that this Executive Order has never been repealed, amended, or superceded by any subsequent Executive Order. In simple terms, it is still valid.

When President John Fitzgerald Kennedy - the author of Profiles in Courage -signed this Order, it returned to the federal government, specifically the Treasury Department, the Constitutional power to create and issue currency -money - without going through the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank. President Kennedy's Executive Order 11110 [the full text is displayed further below] gave the Treasury Department the explicit authority: "to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury." This means that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury's vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation based on the silver bullion physically held there. As a result, more than $4 billion in United States Notes were brought into circulation in $2 and $5 denominations. $10 and $20 United States Notes were never circulated but were being printed by the Treasury Department when Kennedy was assassinated. It appears obvious that President Kennedy knew the Federal Reserve Notes being used as the purported legal currency were contrary to the Constitution of the United States of America.
Click to expand...

Now what were these Kennedy half dollars you were referring to?

-Dave
 
WildCat said:
Did you forget that deflation in the real estate market is what is driving the mortgage problems we're currently experiencing?
Click to expand...

NO.

The fact that rates were increasing; which has nothing to do with the value of the property, is the problem.
 
WildCat said:
:boggled:

Great googly-moogly!
Click to expand...

Yeah.....

Can you figure out what the hell that guy is saying? Because to me, it seems like he wants to replace our current fiat money with another fiat money, while at the same time upping the inflation rate to ungodly large levels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom