Under the dominance of state education from Kindergarten to university , economics has actually become, first and foremost, a pseudo-science legitimizing government interventionism in virtually all walks of live. - Financial journalist Lars Schall with Prof Thorsten Polleit. http://goldswitzerland.com/it-isnt-capitalism-that-has-caused-the-crisis/
Does the world need central anything? Only a statist/globalist or welfare recipient, all dependent on the theft and redistribution of other people's wealth through taxes and inflation, would think so.
Yes and more specifically the negative gearers, leveraged property investors clients (friends) of the banks and the like welfare for the rich recipients.
Yes. Yes, we do need central banks. Like we need bureaucracy. For if we had neither, then the ... persons who think in a most novel way (I call them "idiots") would be in private enterprise. And imagine the impact of all those clowns in the real world! Certainly they would be less than likely to be in positions of authority, but as little cogs, they would stuff up more plans, operations and undertakings than they would aid. They would drift from place to place being a pain. At least now they are all in one place and can be watched.The challenge is, as it is more generally for government, to keep the bastards under control!!! They seem to grow their own power by assuming they are important and they have the time to get in the way of people who are busy producing real products rather than red tape.
Spoken like a true Swanson! [img=FluxBB bbcode test]http://wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net/80450F/screencrush.com/files/2012/08/Ron-Swanson.jpg[/img]
To be honest, I think the world is better of with Central Banks, just not the clowns and robber barons that currently run them. Under a gold standard, if you have no gold, you're basically ****ed. How do you jump start your economy? Printing money (which really means I.O.Us on the productive potential of your nation), is not a bad thing provided you treat that money printed as something that will need to be paid back with real value down the line. It's like the common wisdom that it is OK to borrow provided it is for productive purposes. As it stands, money has lost this meaning when it became debt based. Also, a Central Bank probably doesn't need governors calling the shots - when the economy reaches a certain level, the money printing would kick in and when it reached a higher level later on, the money would be "paid back" with gold or some other good that actually has productive value. ^ Something like that.
I've said before that I reckon a government (if that's what we have to have) should be able to print money for endeavours that expand the capacity of an economy. For instance, a piece of infrastructure that increases the productive potential of a population and provides a positive ROI. But the fact is, every thought or opinion about what a good government should do, assumes there can be a good government that does the right thing at the right time for the right reasons. An altruistic, solely benevolent government. Unfortunately this is not the case and governments, their politicians and bureaucrats are motivated by self-interest as much, if not more than every body else. So perpetually putting one's faith and hope in the idea of a caring, benevolent central bureaucracy and government is to live in a delusion that denies the reality of experience. This can be best exemplified by the subjugation of personal property rights by the state, with victimless crimes being prosecuted against the citizenry by a militarised police force and increasingly less independent justice system, that are all dependent on the confiscatory power of the state. I know, for example, that when I am travelling about I am more worried about receiving a fine than I am about pretty much anything else and the sight of a police car or speed camera increases that anxiety. Then there are fines on top of the taxes of the unconstitutional local governments. There is the reality of malevolent government, politicians and bureaucracies and then there is the fantasy of a centrally planned and controlled utopia. Unfortunately, we seem to have to suffer the first, while believing in and being taught to believe in the second.
Wrong. The gold still exists. It has not evaporated so someone has the savings needed. The need to "jump start" is simply the need to send a price signal to a large group of people to stop doing the jobs they were doing, retrain themselves and move to doing new things. Pre-central bank meddling, recessions were much shorter lived phenomena, but phenomena that have to happen when you need structural wide-scale adjustment to accommodate disruptive technological changes, changes in relative scarcity of different goods/services. Creating IOU's from nothing simply distorts the price signals about what changes need to happen in the economy and delays the restructuring (along with bigger boom/busts in money supply).
Explain this to me. * If all the gold is in other countries, and no one wants to invest in yours, how do you get these "savings" you talk of? * What is the "jump start" price signal, exactly?
What do you mean? Either there is something worthwhile investing in or there isn't. The central bank can't make worthwhile investments happen all they can do is make non-worthwhile investments look worthwhile creating future problems. You can pay people to dig holes and fill them in again with pretend money but all it does is steal the resources from the parts of the economy that are productive to put them into hole digging&filling. So you are actually making the productive sectors less productive. Printing money doesn't solve anything fundamental - it just papers over the cracks and keeps people in less productive jobs. Buggy whip manufacturers are kept in business when they should have closed or reconfigured their factories to making Femdom whips and studded leather underwear. ?? The recession. What are you talking about?
lol i thought they were fair questions .so if your country has no gold do you have no money ? What if your country has nothing worthwhile to invest in ? what if all that country can do is dig holes & fill them back in ? Printing money makes people less productive ? 3< :lol:
Then don't expect to have a colour TV. The presence of a central bank can't change that. Who would accept payment from a central bank for their TV if the only service they got was a hole dug and filled in? In this example, the money printing will divert people from digging holes to cutting out extra potato stamps to mark pieces of paperbark with squished insect ink. This means less holes will be dug&filled. You've made the economy less productive.
Thats a little harsh dont u think ? just because u live in a poor country by no fault of your own u cant have what other countries have . fkme im glad u aint running the world You cant use the hole diggers to cut out the potato stamps the holes they are digging are to plant the potatos !!! dont u know anything ... sheesh as usual your theory comes up empty for fairness in the world & is purely designed in your head to suit you . You have a wild view of the world bs god help us if u ever get a position of power So what about my first question if you have no gold you have no money ? or do you borrow that gold from other countries ? same shit different day who cares what you borrow you still need to owe somebody something & what country in the right mind will lend their gold basically lowering their ability to have money to lend to some other country ......really ? there just isnt enough gold to monetise the world While i agree money printing is way out of hand your solutions turn pear shaped when the finer details come into it
@reno The problem is that you are concocting stupid situations. All economies have potential (even the poor countries) but you cannot unlock that potential with fake printing. You may look like you are doing something but it is far more likely that you'll be crowding out truly productive parts and creating future unproductive industries by doing so. W.r.t. your first question - if this is the case then you currently don't have an economy. If you don't have an economy a central bank making magic marks on pieces of paper won't do anything. If you have potential (e.g. great iron ore resources for example) then you need to redirect local resources into that sector. If the potential is actually worthwhile then investors will flock to it (domestic and international). The fact that you've been an active participant on this forum for years and still spout rubbish like this just says to me that you have no clue what most of the discussions are on about or are trolling again. The volume of gold is irrelevant. There could be ten times more or ten times less. The $ part of $/oz is simply a way of measuring relative value against other goods and services. It's a nominal number just like 1,100 Korean Won are worth 0.67 of a UK pound.
The volume of gold is irrelevant ? .....really ? 3< You still didnt answer what if a country has no gold ?. you have no economy is that your answer ? :lol: you can have an economy with no gold look around numbskull theres plenty that do ....just not in your world Earthjade asked you the same questions & got the same response ..... 3< You think if you ignore it long enough people will forget & go away . Grandiose ideas & nothing to back it up with just empty rhetoric. You think you got it all worked out . lol You really have no idea
Well this really is a no brainer: 1. They build an impressive facility and pretend there is gold there; 2. They print up currency as if it is backed by the non-existent gold and buy real goods; then 3. They sell gold derivatives in limitless supply and settle all claims in the limitless currency they print up. There should be a text book on that somewhere.
