Why would anyone want gold standard?

[Mark6]

Regrading the gold standard, I just find it silly. A bean standard I could understand. Or a lighter standard. Or a bullet standard. These are all things that have inherent value in a post-apocalyptic world. Gold? Not really. But it seems that it's when the economy is taking a dump, and folks are afraid that we're nearing that post-apocalyptic world, that the frightened buy gold.

In all fairness sane advocates of gold standard (which narrows the field down quite a bit) are not looking at Mad Max world. They are looking at serious worldwide depression -- in part caused by oil shortages, -- but not at collapse of civilization. Somewhere on this thread Kvesta said he does not expect his island (Ibiza, off the coast of Spain) to be affected much.

 

[WildCat]

This is an ECONOMICS forum not a RELIGIOUS forum. Stop saying that anybody who questions current economic policies hates Jews.

Oh please, all the kooks who want a gold standard are doing is recycling age-old Jewish banker conspiracy theories that have been going around for hundreds of years. It's just not quite as acceptable to be overtly anti-semitic like back when Henry Ford published The International Jew, so now it's a secret cabal of international bankers and such. But the claims are exactly the same.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

And there's some uncertainty here, but most assessments based on extraction and discovery trends indicate it's either coming right up, or we've just about stumbled on it.

Did I just wake up in 1973?

Peak Oil predictions are like end of the world predictions - they've been going on for 100 years, and every time they've been wrong.

"Yes, those other predictions were wrong, but this time it's different (it always is). We're either at peak oil currently, or it's coming up Real Soon Now^(tm). Any day. I promise. Then we'll see who's laughing."

Of course there is a finite amount of oil. But the high IQ'd among us know that "peak oil" will only be recognized decades after it occurs. Same for a recession - you don't know one has started or finished, until after the fact.

But keep the predictions coming. I love the lulz!!!

 

[GlennB]

Peak Oil predictions are like end of the world predictions - they've been going on for 100 years, and every time they've been wrong.

Oh look, poisoning the well.

Of course there is a finite amount of oil. But the high IQ'd among us know that "peak oil" will only be recognized decades after it occurs.

A slightly mysterious point.

Do you recognise that there is a reality to the concept of "peak oil", just that we won't recognise exactly when it's happening? Why wouldn't "decades after it occurs" be "wrong" too? What's your baseline for accuracy in these matters? An OPEC vote on the matter?

 

[Almo]

Peak Oil predictions are like end of the world predictions - they've been going on for 100 years, and every time they've been wrong.

Hubbert correctly predicted the peak of US oil production, so you're not quite right that the predictions are always wrong.

 

[respect]

This is an ECONOMICS forum not a RELIGIOUS forum. Stop saying that anybody who questions current economic policies hates Jews.

It comes up a lot because the conspiracy theories surrounding banking now are just updated versions of the same old conspiracy theories from the days when anti-semitism was much more socially acceptable. It went from Jews to Jewish bankers to bankers. It is no accident that so many white supremacists, neo-Nazis and other hate groups are advocates of such conspiracy theories, but most people will be turned off outright if someone starts blabbing about how a secret Jewish cabal runs the world, but if you change Jews to international bankers you can pick up some more support for your nonsense conspiracy theory.

Many people who now advocate nonsense conspiracy theories about banking in general, often the Federal Reserve in particular, don't even realize that the crap they spew is the modern conspiracy theory children of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. While certainly not all advocates of such nonsense hate Jews, the crap they spew does come from people who do. Which is why you see so many references to anti-semitism in these threads.

 

[respect]

Oh please, all the kooks who want a gold standard are doing is recycling age-old Jewish banker conspiracy theories that have been going around for hundreds of years. It's just not quite as acceptable to be overtly anti-semitic like back when Henry Ford published The International Jew, so now it's a secret cabal of international bankers and such. But the claims are exactly the same.

I see I was beat to it.

 

[kevsta]

It comes up a lot because the conspiracy theories surrounding banking now are just updated versions of the same old conspiracy theories from the days when anti-semitism was much more socially acceptable. It went from Jews to Jewish bankers to bankers. It is no accident that so many white supremacists, neo-Nazis and other hate groups are advocates of such conspiracy theories, but most people will be turned off outright if someone starts blabbing about how a secret Jewish cabal runs the world, but if you change Jews to international bankers you can pick up some more support for your nonsense conspiracy theory.

Many people who now advocate nonsense conspiracy theories about banking in general, often the Federal Reserve in particular, don't even realize that the crap they spew is the modern conspiracy theory children of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. While certainly not all advocates of such nonsense hate Jews, the crap they spew does come from people who do. Which is why you see so many references to anti-semitism in these threads.

Ok, well Im not even entirely sure what the conspiracy theories are with regards to the Fed?

that they debase the money? that they are a privately owned corporation, with the franchise on money creation?

that they are owned by a few of the original banks?

is "The Creature from Jekyll Island" a conspiracy theory book? (havent read it anyway, just heard the name)

is it not true that a few people had a very secret meeting to arrange it all?

if so, was that not technically a conspiracy anyway?

were any of the attendees Jewish? I mean its no secret that Jewish familes have been into banking for a long while is it?

I personally, do not hold that against the Jewish people, there are powerful families of every race involved in business the world over.

I would be grateful to know exactly what is regarded here as the Fed CTs that aren't true.

 

[UndercoverElephant]

It comes up a lot because the conspiracy theories surrounding banking now are just updated versions of the same old conspiracy theories from the days when anti-semitism was much more socially acceptable.

What I believe about banks in 2011 has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with religion.

I cannot believe half the stuff I am reading in this thread. I am reminded that most of the people posting here are American.

 

[psionl0]

It comes up a lot because the conspiracy theories surrounding banking now are just updated versions of the same old conspiracy theories from the days when anti-semitism was much more socially acceptable. It went from Jews to Jewish bankers to bankers. It is no accident that so many white supremacists, neo-Nazis and other hate groups are advocates of such conspiracy theories, but most people will be turned off outright if someone starts blabbing about how a secret Jewish cabal runs the world, but if you change Jews to international bankers you can pick up some more support for your nonsense conspiracy theory.
Many people who now advocate nonsense conspiracy theories about banking in general, often the Federal Reserve in particular, don't even realize that the crap they spew is the modern conspiracy theory children of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. While certainly not all advocates of such nonsense hate Jews, the crap they spew does come from people who do. Which is why you see so many references to anti-semitism in these threads.

So EVERYBODY who criticizes bankers are really only substituting "banker" for "Jew" to disguise the fact that they have no interest in the banking system - just a hatred of Jews?

That is the KOOKIEST CONSPIRACY THEORY I have ever seen.

Since money-lending forms part of Jewish history, antisemitics are guaranteed to link Jews to the worst excesses of banks and there always will be kooky conspiracists who incorporate such anti-semetic views into their theories. However such views are strictly a minority and 99.9% of criticisms about the banking industry are actually about the banking industry - not Jews.

In fact, the only time I ever see Jew mentioned in these forums is when a poster wants to use the race card to ridicule another's views on money / banking. Its pathetic.

 

[Sceptic-PK]

I wish there were more "private corporations" that gave all their profits to the government!

 

[kevsta]

So EVERYBODY who criticizes bankers are really only substituting "banker" for "Jew" to disguise the fact that they have no interest in the banking system - just a hatred of Jews?

That is the KOOKIEST CONSPIRACY THEORY I have ever seen.

Since money-lending forms part of Jewish history, antisemitics are guaranteed to link Jews to the worst excesses of banks and there always will be kooky conspiracists who incorporate such anti-semetic views into their theories. However such views are strictly a minority and 99.9% of criticisms about the banking industry are actually about the banking industry - not Jews.

In fact, the only time I ever see Jew mentioned in these forums is when a poster wants to use the race card to ridicule another's views on money / banking. Its pathetic.

exactly. and coming from the level of supposedly rational intelligent poster that this place is supposed to pride itself on.. pathetic really is the best word.

to me it shows that you have no actual arguments against what has been said, and attempt to hide behind a wall of assumed superiority with your ridiculous dismissals of any criticism as anti-semiticism.

I do not care at all what has gone before in here, answer ME, not previous posters.

you can be absolutely certain, that when I talk about "Banksters" I am referring to the criminal element in senior management of banks (worldwide) and Wall St firms, and have zero interest in their nationality.

example http://www.nndb.com/people/213/000032117/ this person just presided over a blatent theft of $600 million of customer's money, which may or may not ever be returned. Suspicion is that JPMorgan have stolen it, and will get to keep it because of seniority of claims in the bankruptcy procedure.

Is he Jewish? mm, doesnt look like it? so seriously, get a grip, or just admit you have no valid response, it's pretty obvious to anyone else that's the case whenever you have to revert to playground nonsense like this.

I wish there were more "private corporations" that gave all their profits to the government!

besides the point, am I incorrect or not?

 

[Sceptic-PK]

besides the point, am I incorrect or not?

Of course you're not correct. And it's not like the structure of the Fed is a closely-guarded secret. How do you not know the answer to your question?

 

[kevsta]

Of course you're not correct. And it's not like the structure of the Fed is a closely-guarded secret. How do you not know the answer to your question?

well, it would seem to me the answer to this is quite opaque, and can obviously be interpreted in different ways by different people, ie..

Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (1982)

Court Rules Federal Reserve is Privately Owned

Case Reveals Fed's Status as a Private Institution

Below are excerpts from a court case proving the Federal Reserve system's status. As you will see, the court ruled that the Federal Reserve Banks are "independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations", and there is not sufficient "federal government control over 'detailed physical performance' and 'day to day operation'" of the Federal Reserve Bank for it to be considered a federal agency:

so if you could point me to the definitive answer to the public ownership question, I would be grateful?

 

[Sceptic-PK]

Gonna quote a user from another forum because he knows a lot more about it than I do.

that court case only reference the Fed as a private organization with respect to the federal tort claims act for that particular court case. In Brinks Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System the courts ruled that the Fed was a federal instrumentality with respect to the Service Contract Act.

How the Fed works and the nature of its structure is available on Wiki or the Fed's website. Have fun.

 

[kevsta]

Gonna quote a user from another forum because he knows a lot more about it than I do.

How the Fed works and the nature of its structure is available on Wiki or the Fed's website. Have fun.

I have read both wiki, and the Fed's website, both leave me with the impression that the wording is opaque, possibly deliberately misleading, and a privately owned organization, but thanks for playing anyway.

 

[Sceptic-PK]

I have read both wiki, and the Fed's website, both leave me with the impression that the wording is opaque, possibly deliberately misleading,

Just because you can't grasp something doesn't make it opaque or deliberately misleading.

and a privately owned organization

Well you haven't got anything right yet so I don't expect you to start now.

 

[kevsta]

Just because you can't grasp something doesn't make it opaque or deliberately misleading.

just because you cant defend your point adequately doesnt give you excuse to call other people stupid. but that's just how it works round here isnt it?

Well I haven't got anything right yet so don't expect me to start now.

there, I amended it for you.

 

[jhunter1163]

I've moved some inappropriate posts to AAH. Do not personalize your arguments and remain civil and polite. Any further inappropriate posts will lead to mod/admin action, possibly including suspension.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jhunter1163

 

[Sceptic-PK]

just because you cant defend your point adequately doesnt give you excuse to call other people stupid.

I didn't say you were stupid. I said just because you don't understand the Wiki or the Fed site it doesn't mean there's deliberate skullduggery afoot. I wasn't attempting to defend my point because I hadn't felt the need to do so, I merely suggested you do the hard yards for your own lazy self.

Sheesh.

The Fed is an independent quasi government agency. The Board of Directors and the Chairman are appointed by the President & the houses. Member banks of the Federal Reserve system are mandated to purchase stock in the Fed, which they cannot trade and earn 6% on regardless of economic conditions. The bank is audited by the GAO, which is an arm of Congress. All Fed profits are remitted to Treasury each year (minus expenses). Last time I made a simple calculation the Fed's expenses made up 3% of its profit. The Fed has both public and private aspects but for the purpose of our discussion re monetary policy the Fed is an agency independent inside government. The role it plays is essentially the same as any other central bank.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_12591.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_of_the_Federal_Reserve_System
http://www.federalreserve.gov/pf/pf.htm

Don't be so damn lazy.