Do you have an opinion about the Currency Collapse theory?

Very interesting points you've made. Let me then make you some questions:
1 - What kind of debt you think it must be forgiven and who would deserve not to be paid back?
2 - What positive impact could result from negative interbank rates?
3 - Do you think it would be fair to tax wealth that is not moving? And don't you think that it would promote too much consumption and prevent savings and investment?

Now that I think about QE's purpose, it's precisely this attempt to exit crisis by promoting the functioning of the economy (although the way to get there is different).

 

1) False assumptions believing the masses to be right. This is what is called an "ad populum" argument, be careful the masses throughout history are cannon fodder.

2) Who is right? An enigma? Well I'm right about how the system operates. But if you are asking about a specific forecast if/when a collapse may eventuate then no one can give you an answer. What I and others have sort to do is give you scenarios of how things can in all probability happen. I see no reason why the system can't continue but all roads lead to totalitarianism, microchipped population, depopulation etc. And possibly war or more disasters like a pandemic, or maybe a combination. They are ruthless.

3) "Banks lend but the new money supplied isn't enough to supply the economy to meet the requirement of the total debt obligation."
What does this mean? Well nearly ALL money is created as a debt that has to be paid off by someone. This debt has interest on it. After a while the interest repayments are huge as the only the principle is created. So, the system requires a hyperbolic expansion of the monetary supply just to recieve the interest back on the debt. If money is not being lent out in sufficient amounts then you end up with money being sucked out of the system because the interest is still being repayed without enough new money being created. This is a credit squeeze. Often people will call this scenario "deflation" but I see price staying HIGH. Because the interest and cost and debt are simply too high to charge less. Leading to a depression, bankruptcy etc.

Also I'm not sure how you get a distinction between economic and currency as you're talking about 2 sides of the same coin.

Hmm.. let me simplify. It's reasonable to buy silver and gold as insurance and CASH, get some protection, a supply of food and medical items, have skills like growing food, knowledge of nutrition, and basic preparedness for "black swan" events.

 

Unaffordable, propagating debt would be forgotten. They do this now, because otherwise this system they are so heavily invested in may consciously unravel.
Negative rates has a deflationary effect on wealth hoarding, even assets. It promotes economic exchange at the most fundamental level. Tell me why the most productive or hardworking people should pay more? While people with the most money are rewarded for doing nothing.
Preventing the need for savings and investment would be the end goal. Fair in terms of within our current economic rules we've been brought up with? No. The more we remove the infinite perpetual growth aspect of our economy, the less need for wealth preservation or even the concept of ownership.

QE is a band aid that will help maintain and extend before change is needed.

"What is it to own something? Physical possession is only ownership if that possession is socially legitimate; with legitimacy, physical possession isn't even necessary." Charles Eisenstein

 

Removal of property rights. Whoa! Hairs on the back of my neck are standing up. "Danger Will Robinson".

This is communism and another totalitarian model, those that disagree with this type of system will be murdered in the millions!

Just look who he is quoting!!! Charles Eisenstein!!!! Shesh! Another Stalin.

 

Not removal of rights, removal of the pre conditional needs of property ownership so as ownership will naturally turn obsolete.

Try and think outside of your social memes for 2 seconds Miloman!

 

"Not removal of rights, removal of the pre conditional needs of property ownership so as ownership will naturally turn obsolete."


Gobbledegook from the Manifesto, or the GLW?


OC

 

Mate,

I can see the utopia theosophy indoctrination from a mile away. You can dress the pig up anyway you want, put lipstick on it... it's still a pig to me and any child can see the emperor has no clothes. You're on a forum with the least gullible people I could imagine.

It's the manifesto alright.

O.C. nailed it, "Gobbledegook"!

 

And with that mentality, we will defs head into collapse. Fortunately, it is generational change that will eventuate and permabears like you two will be just another chapter in the history books. It is the eldest that have the highest resistance to change of this scale.


...utopia? lol

 

China just recalled its ambassadors to Australia, USA and a bunch of other countries.

 

link?

cannot find it.

 

http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2014/s4012643.htm?source=rss


Did they have a bonfire, and take their SinoCipher app with them?

The spooks must be spooked.



Australia denies Chinese ambassador recalled

http://www.nst.com.my/latest/australia-denies-chinese-ambassador-recalled-1.606209

You can never confirm these things until they have been denied.

 

I wonder if our peace loving Chinese brothers are going to invade the threatening neighbours such as Vietnam, or the Philippines, or any one of another dozen.

just like you average communist bunch, send in the tanks and ask questions later.

OC

 

Funny, I immediately thought of currency briefing, but it may be Japan, Vietnam, Ukraine, Iran and a few other minor matters that could blow up.

I don't much like that China has volunteered to build nuclear power stations in Iran as part of the oil/gold/yuan-roubles dealing.

 

That mentality? Well I am against evil if that is what you mean? I am happy to deconstruct your argument. It is a "new age" agenda that has roots deeply in the occult practices of theosophy. And by goobledegook, I mean a fairy tale to indoctrinate in this case you want to target the young who are more easily influenced.

You miss the part of theosophy and the evil agenda behind it, which is in part to control, microchip populations and presented through some kind of communist utopia. This is not new and has been used to manipulate masses throughout history. Communism in China, Russia, and still to this day in North Korea. It's a different form of human farming but still the few will control the masses.

So tell me your influences? Zeitgeist? Steiner? Blavatsky? Crowley? Venus project? Thrive? Lucis Trust Publications? Michael Tsarion? Jordan Maxwell? Alice Bailey?

Do you know where your philosophy has come from?

 

I must admit I started trying to read Charles Eisenstein's book after BiGs recommended it a while ago. I got totally lost in his verbiage talking about sacred this and sacred that, gift economy this and gift economy that. I tried skipping ahead to find what point he was trying to lead to and basically got bored and gave up.

Is there a shorter description (or a particular chapter) that summarises what basic structure he is proposing?

 

1 - Ok, I see where you're coming from. I agree. And History is definitely a very powerful tool to see what mistakes are made over and over again. But let's not forget that today we have internet and social media, which may change the paradigm. Stocks and commodities are bought online, information is displayed online and in real-time, people connect and communicate like never before, etc. Therefore, it's very difficult nowadays to fool the whole world. I know that the Financial Crisis from 2008 is an example but a currency collapse taken place worldwide holds a totally different relevance.

2 - Yeah, that's also the conclusion I begin to take looking at all the comments made so far. There is consensus about how the system operates but claiming a hiperinflation scenario is speculating and predicting the future. It all comes down to how the masses will react, which is something very hard to perceive.

3 - "Well nearly ALL money is created as a debt that has to be paid off by someone"
This is what I don't understand. Everything that comes after is logical. But this isn't yet in my mind.
As far as I know, every dollar note (or euro, or other currency) does not represent a commitment to anybody. The note only has a number. And the unit only has the value that the country's population or the Foreign Exchange is willing to accept. It's a matter or supply and demand, nothing more (I think). Where is the obligation of someone that trades a certain good for a 100 dollars note in accepting the note back for the same good? The person can simply refuse. Where is the debt?

 

1) Never underestimate the literal stupidity of the masses, ever! It defies belief! Yes you can trade but you are trading electronically rigged markets not actual physical commodities. In nearly all cases the physical commodity is not there. In fact most "physical" real commodities simply get traded in the "unseen" over the counter market. So if the masses electronically flood the market into gold, they can on paper but it physically doesn't mean it exists.

2) I disagree it is predictable, the masses are ALWAYS reactionary. ALWAYS leave things to the last minute. ONLY care about themselves. ARE VERY dangerous. How or when it unfold is the only part that is not predictable. Either way there's plenty we all can do to prepare. It's just how it unfolds if it does. Hyperinflation vs. Biflation vs. Stagflation. However the direction where we are headed (or more accurately where they are directing us) is clear.

3) All money is not only owed but owed with interest by someone. Let's take something basic, you take out a credit card and spend $10,000. That $10,000 is created by the bank out of thin air, and it has a interest bill to go with it. The interest itself is never created. Now consider all money in circulation is created that way.

Perhaps re-read that (3) because that is exactly what money is. That's why they need to create more and more of it, because the interest can never be satisfied. Maybe do a search "debt based money system" or something like that.

The note you are using is what someone else has spent into the economy on credit.

All asset values are essentially "how long is a piece of string". But that's a story for another day.

 

And what borrower would be burnt with that? Could you identify ilegitimate debt that, if forgotten, would not unfairly harm anybody's savings or investments?

How? I really don't understand how that would harm savings and benefit traders (other than the banks themselves). But, even if that was to be true, to trade a lot is not necessarily working hard, is it?

Personally, I don't see any problem in savings. But if you would want to prevent gains made without effort, just forbide capital interests and things should be ok.

Without savings and investment, how would a new factory be built? Or new heavy machines be bought?

 

tax on money hurts much more than free press printing.

 

bordsilver:

"I must admit I started trying to read Charles Eisenstein's book after BiGs recommended it a while ago. I got totally lost in his verbiage talking about sacred this and sacred that, gift economy this and gift economy that. I tried skipping ahead to find what point he was trying to lead to and basically got bored and gave up."

"Is there a shorter description (or a particular chapter) that summarises what basic structure he is proposing?"

It sounds like communism with sugar on top. But hey, I'm another old guy with "that mentality" who will be "another chapter in the history books" because of my "resistance to change".