This entry was posted on March 8, 2009 at 10:33 pm and is filed under Economy, Video. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
8 Responses to “Inflation Is Tax: Mind Blowing Visual”
Can you actually talk to the Congressman there? I mean, I suppose they get plenty of phone calls. Anyway, the Federal Reserve system isn’t bad per say, it just has no checks and balances and no regulation whatsoever. And this comes from someone who hates regulation and big government, but the issue with the gold standard is that money becomes more and more valuable over time so the prices of everything drops, which makes kind of a deflation movement. And deflation hurts economies in a similar way that inflation does. I’m not sure which one would be worse, but heh.
most of the time when you call or write, you get one of their staffers. The best place to catch up to a congressman is at a town hall meeting.
Concerning the Federal Reserve not being bad per say, I would have to disagree. The entire monetary system in the US is run by a cartel of private bankers – that in and of itself makes it bad. Because it destroys the value of property and income by inflating, that makes it near evil.
Concerning gold, it is important to remember that falling prices are not the same as deflation. Deflation is monetary contraction and when you have monetary contraction falling prices are a natural result. Falling prices in and of themselves however are not necessarily a bad thing. If your purchasing power increases with a gold standard because prices “go down”, then the person you are buying from also profits from falling prices. They pay less for raw materials to make their goods etc. There is balance within the market when the money is backed by gold.
Well, the market being flooded with goods while the monetary mass stays the same has similar effects as deflation. And falling prices are a problem to producers because their stocks are depreciating and you can also have problems with a few number of people attaining enough money to collapse the markets if they pull it out and keep it stashed, similar to what the Fed is doing when they collapse the markets. Of course, the gold standard is good because it keeps the money printing at bay, but you have the opposite cycle going on, don’t you?
Who makes a lot now would benefit from it because wages decrease in time along with prices so who gets the money first, benefits the most. So if I save 10% from a wage now for an year(and put it in my fridge somewhere like the girl in Coyote Ugly did), I could acquire the whole yearly wage of the said job in 100 years when a lot more goods are produced, a lot more jobs are around and all the markets expand, except the monetary one, right?
I think you would be hard pressed to find a lot of historical evidence that supports an opposite problematic cycle when on a gold standard, certainly not one as severe as what we are going through now. It’s important to remember that recession is a natural part of the business cycle. I’m sure there are inherent issues with any system, but having a monetary structure based on fiat currency is probably the worst route you can go.
I don’t think that on a gold standard you would see a ton of prices dropping like in your Coyote Ugly scenario. Wholesale prices remained relatively unchanged for the 100 years leading up to the creation of the Federal Reserve. The FED is really the culprit in everything.
The gold standard is better because it keeps the government spending at bay easier and it removes the risk that having money nowadays holds due to bad monetary policies. I was just saying that this form of monetary system has flaws too. And if you compare the production hike of the 19th century to the one of the 20th century, there’s a huge difference.
And the 1929 crisis happened while the US was on the gold standard – and yes, I know that it’s not related, but the gold standard isn’t crisis proof either.
While it’s true that we were still on a gold standard in 1929, we didn’t have a federal reserve prior to 1913. Since its inception we’ve had nothing but trouble. There is some great black and white propaganda stuff on youtube about how inflation is actually good for the economy. Its hilarious to watch.
I know that. Really small inflation might be beneficial, but the statistics are always rigged so that the Fed can print more while keeping the inflation the same(removing the price of the goods that get more expensive from the consumption basket – I don’t know how you call it in English). And it’s beneficial only from the POV that most businesses start with lend money and it’s sort of a relief for them, but that’s about it.
And there are lots of hilarious videos on youtube. Like the “Money as Debt” one. It’s so stupid for those that actually study economics. I liked the most that they claim that people who study economics/finance don’t get taught how the current system works. I’m a freshman at a bad university and I got taught that.
March 9, 2009 at 8:48 pm |
Ever watch Tommy Boy? You kinda remind me of Richard, LOL. Absolutely hilarious,bro! Keep it up!!!!
March 21, 2009 at 3:37 am |
Can you actually talk to the Congressman there? I mean, I suppose they get plenty of phone calls. Anyway, the Federal Reserve system isn’t bad per say, it just has no checks and balances and no regulation whatsoever. And this comes from someone who hates regulation and big government, but the issue with the gold standard is that money becomes more and more valuable over time so the prices of everything drops, which makes kind of a deflation movement. And deflation hurts economies in a similar way that inflation does. I’m not sure which one would be worse, but heh.
March 21, 2009 at 3:26 pm |
rebeliousvanilla,
most of the time when you call or write, you get one of their staffers. The best place to catch up to a congressman is at a town hall meeting.
Concerning the Federal Reserve not being bad per say, I would have to disagree. The entire monetary system in the US is run by a cartel of private bankers – that in and of itself makes it bad. Because it destroys the value of property and income by inflating, that makes it near evil.
Concerning gold, it is important to remember that falling prices are not the same as deflation. Deflation is monetary contraction and when you have monetary contraction falling prices are a natural result. Falling prices in and of themselves however are not necessarily a bad thing. If your purchasing power increases with a gold standard because prices “go down”, then the person you are buying from also profits from falling prices. They pay less for raw materials to make their goods etc. There is balance within the market when the money is backed by gold.
March 21, 2009 at 3:47 pm |
Well, the market being flooded with goods while the monetary mass stays the same has similar effects as deflation. And falling prices are a problem to producers because their stocks are depreciating and you can also have problems with a few number of people attaining enough money to collapse the markets if they pull it out and keep it stashed, similar to what the Fed is doing when they collapse the markets. Of course, the gold standard is good because it keeps the money printing at bay, but you have the opposite cycle going on, don’t you?
Who makes a lot now would benefit from it because wages decrease in time along with prices so who gets the money first, benefits the most. So if I save 10% from a wage now for an year(and put it in my fridge somewhere like the girl in Coyote Ugly did), I could acquire the whole yearly wage of the said job in 100 years when a lot more goods are produced, a lot more jobs are around and all the markets expand, except the monetary one, right?
March 25, 2009 at 7:19 pm |
I think you would be hard pressed to find a lot of historical evidence that supports an opposite problematic cycle when on a gold standard, certainly not one as severe as what we are going through now. It’s important to remember that recession is a natural part of the business cycle. I’m sure there are inherent issues with any system, but having a monetary structure based on fiat currency is probably the worst route you can go.
I don’t think that on a gold standard you would see a ton of prices dropping like in your Coyote Ugly scenario. Wholesale prices remained relatively unchanged for the 100 years leading up to the creation of the Federal Reserve. The FED is really the culprit in everything.
March 26, 2009 at 3:25 pm |
The gold standard is better because it keeps the government spending at bay easier and it removes the risk that having money nowadays holds due to bad monetary policies. I was just saying that this form of monetary system has flaws too. And if you compare the production hike of the 19th century to the one of the 20th century, there’s a huge difference.
And the 1929 crisis happened while the US was on the gold standard – and yes, I know that it’s not related, but the gold standard isn’t crisis proof either.
March 26, 2009 at 3:29 pm |
While it’s true that we were still on a gold standard in 1929, we didn’t have a federal reserve prior to 1913. Since its inception we’ve had nothing but trouble. There is some great black and white propaganda stuff on youtube about how inflation is actually good for the economy. Its hilarious to watch.
March 26, 2009 at 4:21 pm |
I know that. Really small inflation might be beneficial, but the statistics are always rigged so that the Fed can print more while keeping the inflation the same(removing the price of the goods that get more expensive from the consumption basket – I don’t know how you call it in English). And it’s beneficial only from the POV that most businesses start with lend money and it’s sort of a relief for them, but that’s about it.
And there are lots of hilarious videos on youtube. Like the “Money as Debt” one. It’s so stupid for those that actually study economics. I liked the most that they claim that people who study economics/finance don’t get taught how the current system works. I’m a freshman at a bad university and I got taught that.