What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

[4est_4est_Gump]

you are WRONG!

I am not a smart man.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Adre]

It's more than enough. All you're trying to do is impose discipline on government, so the amount of gold used to back the dollar is immaterial, it can be any minute fraction of an ounce that's needed. All you need is legislation that ties the Dollar to that amount, and no further dollars can be put into circulation without adding that amount to your gold holdings.

Dollars have to be scarcer in order to be worth more. It's because they've been printed ad nauseam that a gold standard is needed to mke them more valuable and to prevent politicians from spending more than they have.

Bullshit. The gold standard can be suspended any time the pols want. WW II ring a bell?

 

[unregistered]

 

[Busybody]

I am not a smart man.

yes, we know

keep on talking "over their head"


there is a reason they "respond" to you

 

[IrezumiKiss]

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m9l2pg8yKW1ql6jblo1_500.png

 

[koalabear]

Infestation of Soros tumble bugs!

 

[koalabear]

Stocks rally ahead of Bernanke

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Stocks rally, rich grab boners, stroke fast and furiously

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Once more, we HAD a gold standard. As the economy grew, it became unstable more and more often leading to abolishing the rules tying currency to gold.

In economic downturns, the public WILL horde gold in an attempt to provide financial security for themselves, driving up the price artificially. We've seen that over the past 6 years. Gold over $1600 per ounce? More than triple it's price in 2006.

This is exactly why our money is not based on a gold standard. The market price of gold fluctuates too much to use it as an effective base for measuring the worth of money.

If it were a good idea then someone would have decided to go back to the gold standard long ago. The fact that not a single country has done so is telling in and of itself.

 

[mercury14]

Once more, we HAD a gold standard. As the economy grew, it became unstable more and more often leading to abolishing the rules tying currency to gold.

In economic downturns, the public WILL horde gold in an attempt to provide financial security for themselves, driving up the price artificially. We've seen that over the past 6 years. Gold over $1600 per ounce? More than triple it's price in 2006.

This is exactly why our money is not based on a gold standard. The market price of gold fluctuates too much to use it as an effective base for measuring the worth of money.

If it were a good idea then someone would have decided to go back to the gold standard long ago. The fact that not a single country has done so is telling in and of itself.

You need to use simpler terms if you want Vette to comprehend this. He doesn't know how stock works so I'm thinking currency is at least two levels over his head.

 

[koalabear]

yipppeeeeee more stimulus

Stocks rise after Fed speech

 

[Sean Renaud]

It's more than enough. All you're trying to do is impose discipline on government, so the amount of gold used to back the dollar is immaterial, it can be any minute fraction of an ounce that's needed. All you need is legislation that ties the Dollar to that amount, and no further dollars can be put into circulation without adding that amount to your gold holdings.

Dollars have to be scarcer in order to be worth more. It's because they've been printed ad nauseam that a gold standard is needed to mke them more valuable and to prevent politicians from spending more than they have.

What are you planning to do about banks and mortgages?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

yes, we know

keep on talking "over their head"


there is a reason they "respond" to you

I'm not really sure of what you're saying...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Once more, we HAD a gold standard. As the economy grew, it became unstable more and more often leading to abolishing the rules tying currency to gold.

In economic downturns, the public WILL horde gold in an attempt to provide financial security for themselves, driving up the price artificially. We've seen that over the past 6 years. Gold over $1600 per ounce? More than triple it's price in 2006.

This is exactly why our money is not based on a gold standard. The market price of gold fluctuates too much to use it as an effective base for measuring the worth of money.

If it were a good idea then someone would have decided to go back to the gold standard long ago. The fact that not a single country has done so is telling in and of itself.

Once again, this is simply not true.

I provided you the links.

The only thing that stops us from going back to a gold standard is that it takes power away from politicians and cedes it back to the markets and politicians do not surrender the power to do favors for their contributors, you remember the contributors, we awarded them the title, "Too Big To Fail."

If gold has more than tripled, then I would ask myself why?

Is it more valuable? I don't think so. There's been no new big invention for gold.

If gold is not more valuable, then the only other conclusion one can reach is that the dollar is less valuable.

 

[mercury14]

Once again, this is simply not true.

I provided you the links.

The only thing that stops us from going back to a gold standard is that it takes power away from politicians and cedes it back to the markets and politicians do not surrender the power to do favors for their contributors, you remember the contributors, we awarded them the title, "Too Big To Fail."

If gold has more than tripled, then I would ask myself why?

Is it more valuable? I don't think so. There's been no new big invention for gold.

If gold is not more valuable, then the only other conclusion one can reach is that the dollar is less valuable.

And if the global economy stabilizes in a couple years and the price of gold is reduced by half as investors pour into stocks, what will be the impact of our currency plummeting?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

And if the global economy stabilizes in a couple years and the price of gold is reduced by half as investors pour into stocks, what will be the impact of our currency plummeting?

Dealt with in the links.

 

[koalabear]

Dealt with in the links.

"if".

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

"if".

"If" the stimulus would have worked, we'd be under 6% unemployment...

 

[bra_man69]

I thinking that 16 trillion dollars of gold a fucking lot maybe more then at fort Knox's

 

[phrodeau]

Another month of DJIA growth is done.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Don't lie. The DJIA has been in free fall since Obama was nominated as the Democratic Candidate.

 

[bra_man69]

And if the global economy stabilizes in a couple years and the price of gold is reduced by half as investors pour into stocks, what will be the impact of our currency plummeting?

Maybe we all can try control the silver market like the hunt brothers tried in the early 80's

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Another month of DJIA growth is done.

I moving money today out of stocks, most of it was money I put in at the beginning of the Obama Presidency for tax purposes.


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...ittle-inflation-capsize-u-s-amity-shlaes.html

I said it once, I'll say it again, there were bright spots even during the Depression when things looked like they had turned the corner. We are in a Lost Decade and all the happy dancing and celebrating now will be remembered.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

See opening charts:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012...cy_and_the_federal_reserve.html#ixzz25DMedOTo

The United States and Japan have lost manufacturing due to other factors. Zero interest rates do not cure that which interest rates did not cause. But zero interest rates are the drug of choice for more government borrowing and spending.

The net effect of governments setting zero interest rates, then borrowing wildly at those addictive levels, is the denial of a fair return on savings and investments for the people.
People are the ultimate consumers, and when money is taken from their hands, consumption, especially the purchase of services, suffers. The money that was once "fair return" has been kept by the government and denied the savers.

It is a dangerous situation when the borrower sets the rates.

But, just like in Japan, we see the end results. First, when all the buttons have been pushed, the Federal Reserve becomes impotent. It plays best between the 20-yard lines, to use a football metaphor. But now that the field has been made shorter, with the room to move now practically nonexistent, the Fed has made itself nearly irrelevant. And the people there have acquired a three-trillion-dollar portfolio of interest bearing instruments in the process.

A real substantial stimulus would be to allow the market to return to a real interest rate environment, rather than this Botox-induced state we are in. Historically, rates for savings and other short-term instruments were enough to cover inflation, plus an increment more to induce savings. Remember when savings was a good thing to promote? Even during the Greenspan era, the Fed attempted to promote savings...for a while.

This return to a fair return on money would put dollars back in the hands of consumers and provide a real stimulus for the economy. But alas, it cannot happen. With the federal government spending nearly 6% of its budget on debt service now, at these contrived low levels, going back to the rates of just five years ago would be a budget-buster.

Add in the Federal Reserve's three-trillion-dollar portfolio. The Fed has been patting itself on the back for the money it has made. The face values went up as the interest rates went down. Great trading. (Helps to have the answer key, doesn't it, Ben?) But if rates somehow rise, via intent or market forces, this portfolio will decline sharply in value. Another reason why low rates are here to stay.

The decline in manufacturing in the U.S. and Japan began well before the 2008 financial crisis. The decline was due to other factors, most notably the awakening of China, South Korea, and others of the Pacific Rim. Taxes, labor costs, trade policy, and competition are the culprits here, not interest rates. The low rates haven't helped manufacturing, but they have certainly taken the buying power away from savers and return seekers.

Like the cowboy who is out of bullets and keeps clicking and flicking the gun as if a bullet might roll out the barrel, Bernanke hints at QE3. Fewer people listen. The Fed is making itself irrelevant.

Perhaps Ben could revisit his Botox economy. The stock market is up near all-time highs. All that managed money seeking fair return has been channeled to stocks, gold, and other commodities. People have been cattle-driven to 2%-dividend-yielding stocks, just to get a near-fair return. But at what risk? Everyone once thought real estate was the ticket to financial freedom. How did that cattle drive work out?