I don't know what people's problem with gold is. I'd love to be able to trade in gold. Or to use a card (like a debit, for example) to be able to trade in ounces (or grams) of gold instead of dollars. :)
The monetary serfdom of the WORLD WORKING CLASS in a politically manipulated market system of artificial scarcity is the template of our common alienation,exploitation and suffering. Capitalism is historically outdated and a tyrannical imposition for minority private gain. A democratic,conscious, majority movement for a world of cooperation for our common needs and well being expressing our creative energies in a MONEYLESS,CLASSSLESS,STATELESS COMMUNITIES OF HUMNAITY
@shanedk The word free and market is a contradiction in terms , just as CAPITAL enslaves and exploites WAGE LABOR . The dynamics of World Capitalism whether Corporate dominated or State dictated is the abstract PROCESS of CAPITAL ACCUMULATION and CONCENTRATION. This abstract process is not smooth or linear but DESTRUCTIVE and enforced by MILLITARY MIGHT. The INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION was underpinned by built up of the BRITISH NAVY and US DOLLAR by world wide millitary bases.
Because it is unoriginal doesnt mean it is false. You obviously cannot refute what he has said so you go to the easiest arguement that he didn't create it to try and discredit him.
@MrMekune In the real world, Marxism, Marxian exploitation theory, the notion that capitalism impoverishes people or compresses wages or that the Industrial Revolution allowed capitalism to harm people rather than improving working standards, wages and prosperity (overwhelmingly without state or union intervention) consistently for centuries has only been refuted by economics, logic and actual history and so frequently that only the clueless still believe otherwise.
didn't you just say yourself that the worth of money is just there becasue people agree upon it? you sayd: "Universally recognized as valuable"
there is no real worth in a piece of cotton or gold. it's just that its recognized as value. if the "inventor" of money went to a blacksmith and the blacksmith did not take it there is no use arguing about value.
if we all agree that one dollar is a million we'd be no richer than we are now. nothing but the figure on the piece of paper would change because it would be a universal change and therefore does not affect anything.
I agree that there are more aspects to it though. of course money has to be something useful, small, transferable etc. but thats just convinience. fact remains that we have to agree upon its value. its like government. people only have power because we agree that they do
if we all agree that one dollar is a million we'd be no richer than we are now. nothing but the figure on the piece of paper would change because it would be a universal change and therefore does not affect anything.
I agree that there are more aspects to it though. of course money has to be something useful, small, transferable etc. but thats just convinience. fact remains that we have to agree upon its value. its like government. people only have power because we agree that they do
@TheNinerion Gold has been recognized as valuble for over 5,000 years by many different nations. This is intrinsic value. Your Fiat Federal Reserve Note has been recognized for about 30 years.
Your gold has been recognized simply because it is shiny.
You're advocating a step-backward in human thinking and development. Fire has been recognized as valuable for cooking for 5,000 years. Should we abandon our more efficient electrical stoves?
Peter Schiff would indeed be proud, but then, Schiff is just a salesman.
@Lodatzor "Your gold has been recognized simply because it is shiny."
Watch the very video you're commenting on. Shininess has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with it (otherwise, why isn't iron pyrite as valuable?). Gold really is the perfect money in every way: it's heavy without being too heavy, malleable without being too soft, rare without being too rare, useful without being too useful, it's easy to separate and recombine, it's fungible, it's easy to test for purity, etc.
@shanedk Another reason to add to your list is that gold doesn't tarnish. It will literally almost never corrode or go dull. Fools Gold will rust in no time at all in the open air. But I'm agreeing with you, gold has a ton of reasons to be used other than it's shininess!
I did. Gold is not worth more than anything else, intrinsically. It is simply the value we ascribe to it. Money based upon gold is the same as money based upon any finite resource.
The root issue is still the same: you establish something to hoard, and thus set up a system whereby acquisition is the only benchmark of success and happiness.
It won't solve a thing, and indeed only take us backward.
@Lodatzor Gold is just a convenient way of trading something of value. the value of everything is worked out through supply and demand. the demand for gold isn't high, but because it's such a rare metal, it's rarity drives the value up.
You don't really want a substance that's too useful at doing other things (like platinum, which is used in catalytic converters), otherwise you'd get deflation whenever that resource is used up.
This has been bugging me since last week, but anyways, if the dollar were to be tethered to a specific weight of gold, that fixes the value of gold right?
If I don't want gold at all, it's not money at all. It's worthless if we don't want gold. Just like how paper money is worthless if we don't want paper money.
@shanedk Uh, explain how gold and money are different, then. I watched the video. Your point was "There's not $100 of ink in this bill, but there's $100 of gold here!" If I don't want gold, no, there's not $100 of gold here.
@shanedk I watched the video. I'm not going to watch it for a third time. I don't see the point you're making.
And I'm aware money is just as valuable as gold if people don't want it. That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying the concept "GOLD HAS INNATE VALUE THAT MONEY DOESN'T" and thereby using gold as a currency standard is fucking retarded.
@shanedk There's no arguing with you, is there? Your entire argument so far has been "WATCH THE VIDEO EVERYTHING I SAID IS PERFECTLY CORRECT THERE'S NO ARGUING WITH THAT"
I'm sorry, but I've watched the video. Twice. I'm not watching it again.
@bobmuffins Then refute it or STFU. ALL you're doing is repeating the same BASELESS ASSERTION that I was refuting to begin with! You can't just repeat it with NO regard for the rebuttal and then say the problem is with me! That's creationist behavior again.
@shanedk As far as I've figured out, your point is "Gold has value because miners are a thing."
What makes gold a better standard than something else? The value of gold is nearly the same as the value of paper money, even less so since gold has no use aside from decoration, while paper can be burned for warmth at least.
@bobmuffins And no use aside from decoration??? Man, you ARE ignorant, aren't you? I guess electrical contacts, photography, semiconductor bonding, thermal protection suits, CDs/DVDs/BRDs, the anti-icing components in aircraft, man-made satellites, and scanning electron microscopes are all just decorations to you...
@vspqbd And the ironic thing is, it can't be TOO valuable or it doesn't work. That's why silver isn't used that much as currency nowadays: its industrial uses outweigh its monetary uses.
Gold really is perfect: rare without being too rare, useful without being too useful, soft without being too malleable, you can break it apart and put it back together again without losing its value, it's fungible, easy to test for purity...There really isn't any way it's NOT good money!
@vspqbd As far as I know, the real reason for gold in fillings is malleability: You can actually get the gold surfacing on to the damn things (gold is just used as a surfacing material). Amalgam largely replaced it because it could be done in one session instead of two. Now plastics have mostly replaced that, because it's even easier to work with (no mechanical drilling is normally needed, bonds directly to the tooth, matches the color of the teeth, and no mercury questions).
@shanedk Okay, no use to the common man aside from decoration. Perhaps I have to spell out everything for you.
Also, again, I've tried to understand the video, but assume for a moment, all of a sudden, no one in the world wants gold. Your whole point of "Gold innately has value", which is the driving point of this video, is gone.
And for your store of value point: Why isn't money a store of value, again?
@shanedk No, you don't. And in this instance, there's a difference between gold as currency, and gold in electronics.
And if assumptions are useless, the assumption you're making in this video that 'fiat currency' will suddenly lose all of it's value is also a useless assumption, right?
@bobmuffins No, it's OBSERVED FACT. It's happened to EVERY fiat currency in history--and it's currently happening to ours. Whereas gold has proven its value as a currency for thousands of years.
The best money is something that has primarily monetary value and only incidentally industrial value.
@shanedk If we replaced 'gold' with 'stone', 'sand', 'pebbles', 'shells', etc, my point still stands. It has no innate value other than the value we give to it.
@bobmuffins No, it's not, because those other things are NOT fungible, are NOT divisible and recombinable, have very few IF ANY industrial uses, are NOT equivalent by weight...shall I go on?
Gold has innate properties which make it work very well as money. DEAL with it.
"And this in instance, there's a difference between gold as currency, and gold in electronics."
Howso? If that's the case, why did you bring up the idea of using food as a standard of money? "Food would make a FAR better standard than gold. " -- you in an earlier comment.
@bobmuffins No, because a) most of it is perishable, b) it varies in quality, c) it is WAY primarily a consumption item, d) it's NOT AT ALL fungible, etc.
And gold can be AND IS reclaimed from electronics when it's recycled. Gold can also be purchased on the commodity market (or on the gold standard just by turning in dollars) and used in electronics.
Excellent video! The AA is spot on with regard to religion. But when he goes off on politics and economics and (gun rights) he's way off the mark and becomes a delusional blowhard.
I have been interested in investing in gold, but recently an old roommate gave me some of his coins from National Collector's Mint as a parting gift. They were merely bronze clad in 38 mg of gold. When I tried to redeem them, I couldn't get any money at all for them. I still agree with what Shane has to say on the Gold Standard, but I would like to know if I can get in touch with an honest dealer who could provide what I need.
@grungefreak10 Look for a "junk gold" or "junk coin" dealer. These dealers sell gold that has no collectible or numismatic value, just the value of the gold they have.
Interesting, except gold has no value in sustaining life. it is a commodity jut like a cow. In reality it us just a worthless as paper. gold was used because of its durability. the only value it had was the value imprinted on it. when on the gold standard you could not go to the bank and get gold. it was illegal to own except in jewelry. for it to be a medium of exchange every one must except it, no one does. what happens when everyone wants to sell,, the value goes to 0 ,
@shanedk you forgot the panic of 1907, people went to the bank and there was no gold. the gold standard was devised in 1895. and if there are no buyers the price goes to 0. in a real crisis do you want gold or food. no one accepts gold as payment. and gold is only valued in dollars. today because we went off of the gold standard you can turn your money in for gold. go to any commodities exchange and turn your dollars in for gold. you could not do that before 1968
@Thewizzardof9 "you forgot the panic of 1907, people went to the bank and there was no gold"
No, that is NOT what happened in the 1907 panic. See my video on the Great Depression.
"the gold standard was devised in 1895."
The gold standard was set in place by the Coinage Act of 1792 (and arguably by Article I Section 10 of the Constitution in 1789). THIS is how pathetically ignorant you are!
One more questions is to late to save the dollar because the world is looking for US dollar replacement as the dominant main currency. So how is the debt hurting the dollar since our federal government kept borrowing money from China. They own China over $14 trillion of dollars.
@SilentEagles It's never too late, but it would cause short-term economic consequences, both good and bad. No way to tell which one would win out. But long term it's not only good, it's most likely necessary.
TheBIG question that has tobe asked is"WHAT IS MONEY'and the Majority of people really don’t know!One of the easiest,and best videos ever made about“WHAT IS MONEY”can be found,
America; the biggest fraud, ponzi scam, swindle, in the history of mankind,is being perpetrated against an intelligent people.Either our politicians are ignorant of this fraud, or they are a part of this fraud?This is a Major down fall of America
@interstate317 OK, so it's not SC's own currency (which would violate Article I Section 10 of the Constitution), it's legislation that would allow people in SC to do business in either US dollars or gold. That sounds great to me!
@shanedk Are you counting 1933? No, I guess you're not. There are any number of things that could happen to cause gold to lose a large percentage of its value. Now you'll say "Oh, but that stuff could never happen." Yeah, OK. Bet on that. I'll keep doing what I'm doing, retiring next year at age 51.
@shanedk For starters , the government deciding you can't own it any more like in oh, say ... 1933. Any Idea how much money I"d have now if my family hadn't been invested in gold in 1933? Instead of retiring at 51 I'd have retired at 1.
@MrMZaccone "the government deciding you can't own it any more"
That doesn't change its value. It just means people traded it on the foreign market instead of in the US. The fact that government stole your family's wealth doesn't mean that the wealth never existed or doesn't still exist.
@shanedk OK, how about the fact that at that time it was worth less than a hundred dollars an ounce. now it's worth a thousand+ and ounce. Tomorrow, who knows? A drastic change in the economy and it could be worth 50 an ounce again. Where does its value go then?
@MrMZaccone Here's another exercise in simple math. Find the costs for various commodities in dollars, then convert them into ounces of gold for that period. How much did gas cost in dollars in 1960 and how many ounces of gold would that have bought. Then try 1970, then 1980, then 1990, 2000, and 2010? See if you can spot a pattern?
Money is just a tool for transaction of products, goods and services. Nothing more nothing less. But in this world we are living in, money has been put to pedestal of Gods.
shanedk... you really are an idiot, the only reason money is valuable is because people assign value to it. If for example enough people stopped caring about material goods, money WOULD LOSE ALL ITS VALUE. There is NOTHING intrinsically valuable about money.
@dalinean "If the US was on the gold standard now the dollar would be nearly worthless."
HUH??? The dollar today is only worth 4% of what it was when the Fed took over! Whereas it maintained its value all through the time we were on a gold standard. So how the HELL do you arrive at that conclusion???
The fiat currencies of the world are failing.
"The removal of controls from banks is the root cause of the recent economic collapse."
1/ So how come there were depressions and recessions in the 1890's. the great depression ??
2/ And how come the banks in Canada @ Australia and many other places did not need propping up? They were not permitted to trade in the spuriously marketed 'sub prime mortgage'.
3/ One problem is the difference between traded value of stocks and actual production value.
4/ Fiat currencies use coal, beef, wheat, aluminium, prudiuction & etc as the prop to the currency, not just gold
@dalinean 1a) Because of fractional reserve banking supported by the National Banking Act of 1862, and 1b) the Great Depression BECAUSE of the Federal Reserve (see my video on the subject). Even Ben Bernanke acknowledged this.
2. Because they didn't have stupid things like the CRA and weren't obsessed with getting interest rates through the floor.
3) That's the malinvestment that RESULTS from the Fed's manipulation of interest rates.
Simple.. Money is the thing you use to buy and put in your pocket... But several complicated things on how to use the money right and how to earn it.. If you want money for your wealth then go, think positive but just take care of your health.. Because health is the best wealth.
Here's the problem, money's relative value should be based directly on resource quantity, availability, and importance of given units of given resources. Gold is not an acceptable standard on which to base the value. Water, foodstuffs (adjusted for an average of all food values), production materials (materials only, not the tools or effort), time, and effort. Fiat economics is simply insane.
@OriginalTharios No, making money based on consumables has been tried, and it's been a complete and abject failure.
What is it about gold that you think is unacceptable? It's a resource, it has quantity, availability, and importance--everything you say money should be based on!
@shanedk I'd appreciate an example of a genuine attempt at a proper format of such a system. Too often have those against things like socialism pointed to Soviet Russia and China and such as proof that socialism fails, when those were never actual socialist systems, but merely took the label to garner support. Gold is not a resource. It is useful solely in electronics and similar devices in limited capacity. (to be continued)
@OriginalTharios No, they WERE Socialist systems. Compare their policies to the Communist Manifesto and they fit 100%. I'm sick and tired of this bogus No True Scotsman fallacy. It shows that either you're completely ignorant of history, or you don't want to face reality.
@shanedk Gold was selected for two reasons...in the past it was both pretty to look at and easy to fashion into further aesthetically pleasing forms with little effort or know-how. By the time the actual concept of money came about, gold was already the most abundant "precious material" available and digging out more required little expansion. Gold is not intrinsically valuable under ANY circumstances. In fact, it's utterly worthless in and of itself as it has no broad practical use.
@OriginalTharios This is just COMPLETE ignorance. Gold has been selected over and over again because it is in every way everything money should be: it's a store of value, it represents the resources used to obtain it, it's rare without being to rare, malleable without being too soft, it's easy to divide and recombine, it's easy to test for purity, it's completely fungible, it's non-corrosive, it's durable...Can you name me ONE OTHER SUBSTANCE on this planet with all of those qualities?
@shanedk The communist manifesto is not socialism nor communism. It's simply the origin of the terms. The concepts, like most things, predate their labels by a wide margin. Buddhists, hippies, most aboriginal cultures are socialist. Now...as for materials as functional as gold in all respects...Silver,Copper, Tin, Aluminum, a variety of semi-precious stones. Some of these WERE used by some cultures to varying degrees. But gold was always worth the most. (to be continued)
@shanedk Why was gold always of the highest value? In the grand scheme, the total effort of obtaining, refining and minting was no different than silver or copper...or tin and aluminum if it'd been used. Why pick gold as the most valuable medium for the highest denominations of currency? It's pleasing to the eye in a very powerful way...in the same way that generally ALL lustrously shiny things are to people. People aren't special, and nor are their contrivances.
@shanedk I said that after the effort of obtaining, refining, and minting...the amount of total effort that goes into each is comparable. You're also still ignoring that the metals that corrode were still used anyway, even in their corroded forms. Rarity is not a legitimate consideration in anything that is not a necessity. If you don't NEED a thing, its rarity is irrelevant. (to be continued)
@shanedk You also seem to be under the impression that neuropsychology has nothing to do with either the principles of money, economics, or the conditions that motivate both. With FEW exceptions, we are not a particularly objective species, not even as individuals. And finally, money is a product of economics, and economics is nothing more than a human abstraction of ecological principles confined to ourselves alone. (to be continued)
@shanedk Economics and ecology both are about the distribution and configuration of all forms of resources in materials, actions, time, and energy. Nothing more, nothing less. Since we now live in an abstract form of social grouping, we've had to adapt previous methods to suit the new society because ecology in itself operates irrespective of civilization. Hence, what has come to be what we call economics.
So what would happen if the government just handed out paper dollars to the poor? If that doesn't cost much, why is it that they don't print all the (paper) money in the world? (I apologize for my ignorance...)
@RoseMaryStevens That's essentially what they're doing, by mounting these enormous deficits to pay primarily for Welfare, Medicaid, and Social Security. Those, together with military spending, make up something like 80% of the budget!
@shanedk It deflates. If it's used widely for financial transactions, and the economy grows faster then the supply of gold, then the prices of the goods and services will go down. And that's deflation. The supply of gold must grow in pace with the economy to avoid deflation, and that's not realistic.
@shanedk You are giving an alternative meanings to the word "deflation". Overall falling of prices is deflation by definition. If the prices are expressed in gold, then there will be deflation if the economy grows faster then the gold.
@ShwangShwing "Overall falling of prices is deflation by definition."
NO...IT...IS...NOT!!!
Deflation is a decrease in nominal values (price) WITHOUT A CORRESPONDING DECREASE IN REAL VALUES. If real values drop, then nominal values are going to drop in response and THAT IS NOT DEFLATION.
@shanedk Deflation is a decrease in the general price level of goods and services. source: Robert J. Barro and Vittorio Grilli (1994), European Macroeconomics, chap. 8, p. 142. ISBN 0333577647
If you are not making up your own definitions of the technical terminology then where's you get this meaning of "deflation" from?
@ShwangShwing ANY textbook covering the subject should do it. Look at Economics: Principles in Action by Arthur Sullivan for just one example. He clearly defines deflation as the increase in the real value of money, and inflation as the decrease in the real value of money.
Since you didn't even bother to quote your source, I can only conclude that you misread it: deflation (all other things being equal) RESULTS in the decrease of the price level. Don't confuse an effect for the definition.
@ShwangShwing Oh, I see what you did! You quoted FUCKING WIKIPEDIA and then just posted their reference as if you'd gotten it from there originally. For SHAME.
@shanedk LOL, It's the same in the book, don't worry. In "Macroeconomics" by Paul Wachtel (I found it on the internet lol ), page 94 that you are referring to, are shown the SOURCES OF INFLATION and I don't see anywhere saying what you say. You say "Deflation is a decrease in nominal values (price) WITHOUT A CORRESPONDING DECREASE IN REAL VALUES". General decrease in price and "real values" is also deflation. How do you define "real value"?
@shanedk I just don't have the time to read the whole book because I have responsibilities that right now take almost 100% of my non-sleeping time. I only wanted to say that gold standard will lead to deflation, and I didn't intend walking into an argument. So if a price of an widget expressed in gold falls, that doesn't mean deflation. But if the price of everything falls (also in gold), it is deflation and it will have the same effect as deflation of fiat currency.
@shanedk I've watched your video. I've even noticed that I've made a comment some time ago that I don't remember :). I see I misunderstood you. You are talking about a currency based on gold with gold certificates that are not 100% backed. Right? That seems to solve the money supply problem. But less then 100% backing runs the risk of attack on the gold standard. That would be the same as an attack on a currency board.
@shanedk 100% backing with gold will prevent monetary base growth as needed by an expanding economy. Stop being so aggressive. I won't oppose gold standard being reintroduced in the USA, I don't even live there :)
@ShwangShwing "100% backing with gold will prevent monetary base growth as needed by an expanding economy."
No, it wouldn't, and I've already explained why not. You just ignored my explanation.
When the currency gets too valuable, more people trade gold for the currency, creating more of it. If it loses too much value, people turn in the currency for gold, and it regains its value. This is the THIRD TIME I've explained this to you.
@shanedk OK, now I understand what you are advocating for. Are you also advocating for an end of fractional reserve banking system at the same time as revival of the gold standard?
@ShwangShwing And your ONLY response to my explanation has been to claim that the only way to get more gold is to mine it, as if every single gram of gold in existence would be used to back the currency.
So don't you DARE accuse ME of being aggressive when YOU'RE the one denying the facts!
@ShwangShwing Instead of insisting on what would after all be a bogus argument from authority, how about trying to refute the logic in my inflation video?
@shanedk The fact that the gold will become more valuable will probably make people want to mine more gold, but the gold mined wouldn't be enough to increase the money supply to keep the prices stable. They will fall (expressed in gold). And as the people see that the value of the gold is falling, they will reduce spending. The very same thing that happens with the fiat money.
@ShwangShwing Also look at "Macroeconomics" by Paul Wachtel. On page 94 he goes into detail in the relationship between inflation and the price level.
@ShwangShwing Quotes from the Wachtel book: "The first thing to note is that a sustained inflation cannot be maintained forever without monetary expansion."
"In the short-run, there can be wide variations in monetary growth which have little apparent impact on the inflation rate. However, over long periods of time there is a very strong correlation between inflation rates and monetary growth rates."
@ShwangShwing What gold ACTUALLY does is PROTECT you against deflation. If you have REAL deflation (which is an increase in the value of money), then as money becomes more valuable more people will trade in gold for money, increasing the money supply and stemming the deflation.
Conversely, with inflation, people turn in their dollars for gold and the inflation is arrested.
This video is wrong. The fed only create about 1/10 of all money. Any bank can create a infinite ammount of money (bank credits) if not regulated by the national bank. Money = bank credits = loans. If the loans are unsafe, so are the money. It is unsafe loans that destroys a currency.
@shanedk But Fractional reserve banking is what creates the money. You claim that (our) money represent nothing. That is incorrect. If you take a loan on your house, bank credits (money) will be created. Those money are backed up by the value of your house. So our money represents all value in our society that is base for a loan. Even with the old gold based dollar, just a fraction was backed up by gold. The rest was representing houses factories etc.
@shanedk You are confusing who prints the dollar bills (the central bank), who seeds the credit market (the government using government bonds) and who creates the bank credits (all banks including the central bank). Money are not the bills. It is the credits that are our money.
"So how do I redeem that? If I have $1,000, can I get $1,000 worth of stuff from your house?"
Yes, why not? I have a vintage pinball game you can get for $1.000. That is exactly how you redeem money. You buy stuff.
@AngeCord No, buying is NOT redeeming. Learn what you're talking about. If I have $1000 in money on a gold standard, I AM THE OWNER of $1000 worth of gold. I doubt you'll just let me come in and take your pinball game!
@shanedk You must understand, our money are bank credits. They are created when someone borrows money. (When you lend money to- or from a bank) Some of that debt has physical representation in form of mortgages. The money can only be 'redeemed', like you want to, from those that owns the debt. So, only the bank can claim my house if I borrowed money from the bank. If I borrowed $1000 from you, and failed to pay back, you could use a balif to claim my pinball game.
@AngeCord We're not talking about banks NOW! We're talking about what it's like on a pure gold standard. And in the gold standard, you can redeem gold FROM THE BANK (or assayer) at any time regardless of who defaults on what.
Debt is NOT a commodity; it is not a good. You're only making yourself look more and more stupid the more you persist in this insanity.
Sorry, you make no sense. How can we not talk about banks when you with the same breath tells that "you can redeem gold FROM THE BANK "
"Debt is NOT a commodity...."
it our currency isn't debt, or gold, then what is it? I didn't invent the system, maybe it is insane, but I am certainly not stupid. Since you like to resort to namecalling, I question your motived behind this.
@shanedk Am I getting you right if your "gold standard" includes banning people form borrowing money from banks? Because if they can, all the problems i mentioned will come up.
"Why do you think it's called fiat currency?"
If the dollar's value was based solely on what the government sais, it wouldn't stand much chance on an international currency market. The dollar has real values buildt into it. Why do you think the dollar plumeted when the morgage bubble bursted?
Because if people can borrow money that other people has put into the bank, the currency will cease to be a pure gold standard. The credit form dollars will be based on perhaps house mortages, and the currency as a total will be partly represented in gold and partly in houses after a while.
"No, you could still loan out time deposits. Just not demand deposits."
Those timelocked credits are still an asset, even if locked. The bill you put into your account will be out in someone elses pocket until he desposit it in a bank so yet another credit is created. Time deposits would slow down the degeneration of the gold currency, but not fix it completely. Actually, I think banning demand desposit allone would have bigger impact on the echonomy than moving back to gold currency.
@shanedk "Because government printed a bunch of money to try and "fix" it."
No. The houses that was base for the loans turned out to be over valued. That means that many people won't be able to pay back their loans, wich means that the banks risks going bankrupt, wich means that people will take out their savings and buy foreign currency. The dollar became a commodity that many want to sell but few want to buy. What happens to such a commodity? The price drops.
@shanedk "No, that happened because government encouraged--and in some cases even required--giving low-interest loans to riskier clients."
I ment, with too big loans on their houses, many people can't pay back. But I agree on you why it happened. Government deregulation and policies sat of a wall street loan-fest that undermined the currency.
@AngeCord I mentioned a reason for the deflation after the crisis, and you said, "The dollar became a commodity that many want to sell but few want to buy. What happens to such a commodity? The price drops."
@shanedk Canada, back in the 1930's, demonstrated just what nastiness you can pull with the STANDARD rules of fiat currency. At that time Canadians, like Americans to this day, did NOT like $2 bills and didn't want to circulate them. They were forced into circulation by paying out government benefits payments in them, then enforcing the law (which also exists in the US, AFAICT) that says that if you refuse "legal tender" at your normal place of business for a debt, YOU FORFEIT PAYMENT.
@evensgrey A guy actually did that a few years ago. He was upset with Best Buy, so he went to the bank, got a bunch of $2 bills, and tried to pay them. They thought they were counterfeit and wouldn't take them! (Called the Secret Service and everything!) So yeah, they ended up forfeiting payment. It was funny.
@shanedk As I understand it, a lot of Americans are perfectly willing to destroy them when they get them. Since they only get one or two at a time at the most, it doesn't (these days, anyway) amount to much loss.
I'm not surprised at the target, either. You don't get the nickname "Worst Try" for nothing.
@shanedk "In a pure gold standard, every single dollar is redeemable for gold."
But as soon as someone puts one single dollar into a bank account, it won't be a pure gold standard anymore, because there will exsist one more dollar than what is represented in real gold.
@shanedk No it isn't. Think about it. The bank has the dollar bill and they can use to go collect their gold nugget. If they do, the bill will be destroyed by the central bank, and there will be one bill less on the market, and one gold nugget less in the vault. BUT I will still have one dollar an my bank account, so the total number of dollars (including bills and credits) are as before. The credit dollar in my account is an asset for me and is accepted as payment (using a card).
@AngeCord "BUT I will still have one dollar an my bank account"
But that would be A DIFFERENT DOLLAR than the one the bank redeemed! That dollar would be from THE BANK'S ASSETS. If they did that with YOUR assets, they'd be STEALING.
the amazing statheist. what a boob
natritious1 1 month ago
I don't know what people's problem with gold is. I'd love to be able to trade in gold. Or to use a card (like a debit, for example) to be able to trade in ounces (or grams) of gold instead of dollars. :)
vspqbd 1 month ago
@vspqbd There was a bank a few years ago who tried that, and GovCo made them stop. It was cool, though; I've still got the card!
shanedk 1 month ago 2
The monetary serfdom of the WORLD WORKING CLASS in a politically manipulated market system of artificial scarcity is the template of our common alienation,exploitation and suffering. Capitalism is historically outdated and a tyrannical imposition for minority private gain. A democratic,conscious, majority movement for a world of cooperation for our common needs and well being expressing our creative energies in a MONEYLESS,CLASSSLESS,STATELESS COMMUNITIES OF HUMNAITY
arzoyan 3 months ago
@arzoyan And again, word-for-word. Do you not have any original thoughts of your own?
shanedk 3 months ago
@shanedk The word free and market is a contradiction in terms , just as CAPITAL enslaves and exploites WAGE LABOR . The dynamics of World Capitalism whether Corporate dominated or State dictated is the abstract PROCESS of CAPITAL ACCUMULATION and CONCENTRATION. This abstract process is not smooth or linear but DESTRUCTIVE and enforced by MILLITARY MIGHT. The INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION was underpinned by built up of the BRITISH NAVY and US DOLLAR by world wide millitary bases.
arzoyan 3 months ago
@arzoyan Yeah, more copypasta. Again, any original thoughts?
Fair warning: if you respond with more copypasta you'll be blocked for flooding.
shanedk 3 months ago
@arzoyan And that's why even the poorest citizens in the united states are living better then in any other time in human history?
JuryDutySummons 1 month ago
@shanedk
Because it is unoriginal doesnt mean it is false. You obviously cannot refute what he has said so you go to the easiest arguement that he didn't create it to try and discredit him.
Oh look I did the same.
MrMekune 1 month ago
@MrMekune It HAS been refuted, TIME AND TIME AGAIN, by me and many others. DEAL with it.
shanedk 1 month ago
@MrMekune In the real world, Marxism, Marxian exploitation theory, the notion that capitalism impoverishes people or compresses wages or that the Industrial Revolution allowed capitalism to harm people rather than improving working standards, wages and prosperity (overwhelmingly without state or union intervention) consistently for centuries has only been refuted by economics, logic and actual history and so frequently that only the clueless still believe otherwise.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
You are officially my hero. I could not have expressed the argument for a gold standard better than you just did. Peter Schiff would be proud!
panzerkilla 3 months ago
didn't you just say yourself that the worth of money is just there becasue people agree upon it? you sayd: "Universally recognized as valuable"
there is no real worth in a piece of cotton or gold. it's just that its recognized as value. if the "inventor" of money went to a blacksmith and the blacksmith did not take it there is no use arguing about value.
TheNinerion 4 months ago
@TheNinerion That's only ONE aspect of it. Watch the video again.
If it's just because people agree on it, then why don't we all just agree that $1 is now worth a million? Then we'll all be rich!
shanedk 4 months ago
@shanedk
if we all agree that one dollar is a million we'd be no richer than we are now. nothing but the figure on the piece of paper would change because it would be a universal change and therefore does not affect anything.
I agree that there are more aspects to it though. of course money has to be something useful, small, transferable etc. but thats just convinience. fact remains that we have to agree upon its value. its like government. people only have power because we agree that they do
TheNinerion 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@shanedk
if we all agree that one dollar is a million we'd be no richer than we are now. nothing but the figure on the piece of paper would change because it would be a universal change and therefore does not affect anything.
I agree that there are more aspects to it though. of course money has to be something useful, small, transferable etc. but thats just convinience. fact remains that we have to agree upon its value. its like government. people only have power because we agree that they do
TheNinerion 4 months ago
@TheNinerion Gold has been recognized as valuble for over 5,000 years by many different nations. This is intrinsic value. Your Fiat Federal Reserve Note has been recognized for about 30 years.
panzerkilla 3 months ago
@panzerkilla
Your gold has been recognized simply because it is shiny.
You're advocating a step-backward in human thinking and development. Fire has been recognized as valuable for cooking for 5,000 years. Should we abandon our more efficient electrical stoves?
Peter Schiff would indeed be proud, but then, Schiff is just a salesman.
Lodatzor 1 month ago
@Lodatzor "Your gold has been recognized simply because it is shiny."
Watch the very video you're commenting on. Shininess has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with it (otherwise, why isn't iron pyrite as valuable?). Gold really is the perfect money in every way: it's heavy without being too heavy, malleable without being too soft, rare without being too rare, useful without being too useful, it's easy to separate and recombine, it's fungible, it's easy to test for purity, etc.
shanedk 1 month ago 2
@shanedk Another reason to add to your list is that gold doesn't tarnish. It will literally almost never corrode or go dull. Fools Gold will rust in no time at all in the open air. But I'm agreeing with you, gold has a ton of reasons to be used other than it's shininess!
McPrfctday 1 month ago
@McPrfctday That's true, it's noncorrosive, and can't be destroyed except in a science lab by a process that's completely reversible.
shanedk 1 month ago
@shanedk
"Watch the very video you're commenting on."
I did. Gold is not worth more than anything else, intrinsically. It is simply the value we ascribe to it. Money based upon gold is the same as money based upon any finite resource.
The root issue is still the same: you establish something to hoard, and thus set up a system whereby acquisition is the only benchmark of success and happiness.
It won't solve a thing, and indeed only take us backward.
Lodatzor 1 month ago
@Lodatzor Gold is just a convenient way of trading something of value. the value of everything is worked out through supply and demand. the demand for gold isn't high, but because it's such a rare metal, it's rarity drives the value up.
You don't really want a substance that's too useful at doing other things (like platinum, which is used in catalytic converters), otherwise you'd get deflation whenever that resource is used up.
Corporatism 2 weeks ago
shanedk super vid !!!
wewantmoreparty 4 months ago
This has been bugging me since last week, but anyways, if the dollar were to be tethered to a specific weight of gold, that fixes the value of gold right?
ThePyro3825 4 months ago
@ThePyro3825 No, it provides a means of adjusting the money supply based on the value of gold.
shanedk 4 months ago
No, no, no.
If I don't want gold at all, it's not money at all. It's worthless if we don't want gold. Just like how paper money is worthless if we don't want paper money.
It's almost completely identical. Sorry.
bobmuffins 6 months ago
@bobmuffins It's not in ANY way identical. Watch the video.
shanedk 6 months ago
@shanedk Uh, explain how gold and money are different, then. I watched the video. Your point was "There's not $100 of ink in this bill, but there's $100 of gold here!" If I don't want gold, no, there's not $100 of gold here.
Food would make a FAR better standard than gold.
bobmuffins 6 months ago
@bobmuffins "Uh, explain how gold and money are different, then."
It's in the video.
"If I don't want gold, no, there's not $100 of gold here."
Oh, and you want the ink and paper?
Are you REALLY this dense?
shanedk 6 months ago
@shanedk I watched the video. I'm not going to watch it for a third time. I don't see the point you're making.
And I'm aware money is just as valuable as gold if people don't want it. That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying the concept "GOLD HAS INNATE VALUE THAT MONEY DOESN'T" and thereby using gold as a currency standard is fucking retarded.
bobmuffins 6 months ago
@bobmuffins You can CLAIM it all you want, but until you refute the information in the video, you have nothing more than the creationists do.
shanedk 6 months ago
@shanedk There's no arguing with you, is there? Your entire argument so far has been "WATCH THE VIDEO EVERYTHING I SAID IS PERFECTLY CORRECT THERE'S NO ARGUING WITH THAT"
I'm sorry, but I've watched the video. Twice. I'm not watching it again.
bobmuffins 6 months ago
@bobmuffins Then refute it or STFU. ALL you're doing is repeating the same BASELESS ASSERTION that I was refuting to begin with! You can't just repeat it with NO regard for the rebuttal and then say the problem is with me! That's creationist behavior again.
shanedk 6 months ago
@shanedk As far as I've figured out, your point is "Gold has value because miners are a thing."
What makes gold a better standard than something else? The value of gold is nearly the same as the value of paper money, even less so since gold has no use aside from decoration, while paper can be burned for warmth at least.
bobmuffins 6 months ago
@bobmuffins "As far as I've figured out, your point is "Gold has value because miners are a thing.""
Then you haven't even TRIED to understand the video.
What is there about the concept of a "store of value" that you have problems with?
shanedk 6 months ago
@bobmuffins And no use aside from decoration??? Man, you ARE ignorant, aren't you? I guess electrical contacts, photography, semiconductor bonding, thermal protection suits, CDs/DVDs/BRDs, the anti-icing components in aircraft, man-made satellites, and scanning electron microscopes are all just decorations to you...
shanedk 6 months ago
@shanedk
Not to mention the inertness of gold makes them near ideal for fillings in teeth.
vspqbd 6 months ago
@vspqbd And the ironic thing is, it can't be TOO valuable or it doesn't work. That's why silver isn't used that much as currency nowadays: its industrial uses outweigh its monetary uses.
Gold really is perfect: rare without being too rare, useful without being too useful, soft without being too malleable, you can break it apart and put it back together again without losing its value, it's fungible, easy to test for purity...There really isn't any way it's NOT good money!
shanedk 6 months ago
@vspqbd As far as I know, the real reason for gold in fillings is malleability: You can actually get the gold surfacing on to the damn things (gold is just used as a surfacing material). Amalgam largely replaced it because it could be done in one session instead of two. Now plastics have mostly replaced that, because it's even easier to work with (no mechanical drilling is normally needed, bonds directly to the tooth, matches the color of the teeth, and no mercury questions).
evensgrey 6 months ago
@evensgrey "As far as I know, the real reason for gold in fillings is malleability"
That and the fact that it doesn't corrode or rust. Amalgam and plastics have the advantage of being cheaper.
shanedk 6 months ago
@shanedk Okay, no use to the common man aside from decoration. Perhaps I have to spell out everything for you.
Also, again, I've tried to understand the video, but assume for a moment, all of a sudden, no one in the world wants gold. Your whole point of "Gold innately has value", which is the driving point of this video, is gone.
And for your store of value point: Why isn't money a store of value, again?
bobmuffins 6 months ago
@bobmuffins "Okay, no use to the common man aside from decoration."
The "common man" doesn't need electronics? Doesn't use CDs and DVDs? Doesn't watch satellite TV? Has no need for electrical devices and components?
"but assume for a moment, all of a sudden, no one in the world wants gold."
Assume, for a moment, angels start flying out of your ass. Assumptions are USELESS.
Money IS a store of value--that's one of its requirements! Or when you say "money" do you really mean "fiat currency"?
shanedk 6 months ago
@shanedk No, you don't. And in this instance, there's a difference between gold as currency, and gold in electronics.
And if assumptions are useless, the assumption you're making in this video that 'fiat currency' will suddenly lose all of it's value is also a useless assumption, right?
bobmuffins 6 months ago
@bobmuffins No, it's OBSERVED FACT. It's happened to EVERY fiat currency in history--and it's currently happening to ours. Whereas gold has proven its value as a currency for thousands of years.
The best money is something that has primarily monetary value and only incidentally industrial value.
shanedk 6 months ago
@shanedk If we replaced 'gold' with 'stone', 'sand', 'pebbles', 'shells', etc, my point still stands. It has no innate value other than the value we give to it.
bobmuffins 6 months ago
@bobmuffins No, it's not, because those other things are NOT fungible, are NOT divisible and recombinable, have very few IF ANY industrial uses, are NOT equivalent by weight...shall I go on?
Gold has innate properties which make it work very well as money. DEAL with it.
shanedk 6 months ago
@bobmuffins
"And this in instance, there's a difference between gold as currency, and gold in electronics."
Howso? If that's the case, why did you bring up the idea of using food as a standard of money? "Food would make a FAR better standard than gold. " -- you in an earlier comment.
vspqbd 6 months ago
@vspqbd Yeah, consumables and things that spoil do NOT make good money...
shanedk 6 months ago
@vspqbd Food makes a good standard in that it has an actual value. You need it to live.
Also, gold as currency: it stays in the economy. Gold in electronics: It's gone once it's put into the electronic.
Hurp.
bobmuffins 6 months ago
@bobmuffins No, because a) most of it is perishable, b) it varies in quality, c) it is WAY primarily a consumption item, d) it's NOT AT ALL fungible, etc.
And gold can be AND IS reclaimed from electronics when it's recycled. Gold can also be purchased on the commodity market (or on the gold standard just by turning in dollars) and used in electronics.
Every post you make shows how ignorant you are.
shanedk 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A biggest public campaign has started to abolish fractional reserve system. Visit POSITIVE MONEY website and support the campaign.
PositiveMoneyUK 6 months ago
Excellent video! The AA is spot on with regard to religion. But when he goes off on politics and economics and (gun rights) he's way off the mark and becomes a delusional blowhard.
FaganRoberts 7 months ago
I have been interested in investing in gold, but recently an old roommate gave me some of his coins from National Collector's Mint as a parting gift. They were merely bronze clad in 38 mg of gold. When I tried to redeem them, I couldn't get any money at all for them. I still agree with what Shane has to say on the Gold Standard, but I would like to know if I can get in touch with an honest dealer who could provide what I need.
grungefreak10 7 months ago
@grungefreak10 Look for a "junk gold" or "junk coin" dealer. These dealers sell gold that has no collectible or numismatic value, just the value of the gold they have.
shanedk 7 months ago
Interesting, except gold has no value in sustaining life. it is a commodity jut like a cow. In reality it us just a worthless as paper. gold was used because of its durability. the only value it had was the value imprinted on it. when on the gold standard you could not go to the bank and get gold. it was illegal to own except in jewelry. for it to be a medium of exchange every one must except it, no one does. what happens when everyone wants to sell,, the value goes to 0 ,
Thewizzardof9 9 months ago
@Thewizzardof9 Way to not watch the video...
"when on the gold standard you could not go to the bank and get gold."
Oh yes you absolutely could!!!
"it was illegal to own except in jewelry."
That was only after 1933 when the tyrant FDR tried grabbing all the gold to pay for his boondoggles.
"what happens when everyone wants to sell,, the value goes to 0"
Um, no. You can't have sellers without buyers. Complete ignorance!
shanedk 9 months ago
@shanedk you forgot the panic of 1907, people went to the bank and there was no gold. the gold standard was devised in 1895. and if there are no buyers the price goes to 0. in a real crisis do you want gold or food. no one accepts gold as payment. and gold is only valued in dollars. today because we went off of the gold standard you can turn your money in for gold. go to any commodities exchange and turn your dollars in for gold. you could not do that before 1968
Thewizzardof9 9 months ago
@Thewizzardof9 "you forgot the panic of 1907, people went to the bank and there was no gold"
No, that is NOT what happened in the 1907 panic. See my video on the Great Depression.
"the gold standard was devised in 1895."
The gold standard was set in place by the Coinage Act of 1792 (and arguably by Article I Section 10 of the Constitution in 1789). THIS is how pathetically ignorant you are!
shanedk 9 months ago
@shanedk
What about Diamonds, Ruby, Sapphire, Emerald, and other Gems does it make Dollar valuable if you trade in.
SilentEagles 9 months ago
@SilentEagles The gold standard is NOT about being able to BUY gold (or anything else)! In effect, the money you have IS gold under a gold standard!
Gems like you mention aren't gold because 1) they can't be recombined and 2) a gem twice the size is worth more than twice the value.
shanedk 9 months ago
@shanedk
One more questions is to late to save the dollar because the world is looking for US dollar replacement as the dominant main currency. So how is the debt hurting the dollar since our federal government kept borrowing money from China. They own China over $14 trillion of dollars.
SilentEagles 9 months ago
@SilentEagles It's never too late, but it would cause short-term economic consequences, both good and bad. No way to tell which one would win out. But long term it's not only good, it's most likely necessary.
shanedk 9 months ago
TheBIG question that has tobe asked is"WHAT IS MONEY'and the Majority of people really don’t know!One of the easiest,and best videos ever made about“WHAT IS MONEY”can be found,
youtube.com/watch?v=EtF_zbI5j7M&feature=channel_video_title
America; the biggest fraud, ponzi scam, swindle, in the history of mankind,is being perpetrated against an intelligent people.Either our politicians are ignorant of this fraud, or they are a part of this fraud?This is a Major down fall of America
Clint45s 9 months ago
Money has no standard of cost. Shares have no cost standard in money.
How it is possible to measure company cost if there is no standard of cost of labor?
It is necessary to measure money in joules or calories.
Serrokot 10 months ago
@shanedk
Here in Sweden the money is NOT divisible anymore!!!!
division called öre is used only in cell phones and electricity bills.
I have never seen something else that worth a money unit here (1 SEK)
hedleypanama 11 months ago
@hedleypanama Considering that one krona is only about 15 cents US, I fail to see this as a significant point.
shanedk 11 months ago
@shanedk my point is that money here is not divisible, because its value is too low...
hedleypanama 11 months ago
@hedleypanama what does this mean I live in Canada...how does your currency operate...
lucy9359 9 months ago
you a so good
fejlpost 11 months ago
how are you feeling about South Carolina trying to circulate their own currency?
interstate317 11 months ago
@interstate317 I haven't heard anything about it.
shanedk 11 months ago
@shanedk watch?v=j9O8ydtlOcU
you can also google it, the story is about 1 day old
interstate317 11 months ago
@interstate317 OK, so it's not SC's own currency (which would violate Article I Section 10 of the Constitution), it's legislation that would allow people in SC to do business in either US dollars or gold. That sounds great to me!
shanedk 11 months ago
The problem is that tomorrow's money isn't worth yesterday's money, even if it's gold. It may be worth more, it may be worth less.
MrMZaccone 1 year ago
@MrMZaccone Gold has consistently held its value for thousands of years.
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk Are you counting 1933? No, I guess you're not. There are any number of things that could happen to cause gold to lose a large percentage of its value. Now you'll say "Oh, but that stuff could never happen." Yeah, OK. Bet on that. I'll keep doing what I'm doing, retiring next year at age 51.
MrMZaccone 1 year ago
@MrMZaccone "Are you counting 1933?"
Yes.
"No, I guess you're not."
I guess you don't know what you're talking about.
"There are any number of things that could happen to cause gold to lose a large percentage of its value."
Like?
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk For starters , the government deciding you can't own it any more like in oh, say ... 1933. Any Idea how much money I"d have now if my family hadn't been invested in gold in 1933? Instead of retiring at 51 I'd have retired at 1.
MrMZaccone 1 year ago
@MrMZaccone "the government deciding you can't own it any more"
That doesn't change its value. It just means people traded it on the foreign market instead of in the US. The fact that government stole your family's wealth doesn't mean that the wealth never existed or doesn't still exist.
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk OK, how about the fact that at that time it was worth less than a hundred dollars an ounce. now it's worth a thousand+ and ounce. Tomorrow, who knows? A drastic change in the economy and it could be worth 50 an ounce again. Where does its value go then?
MrMZaccone 1 year ago
@MrMZaccone That's inflation of the dollar, not a change in the value of gold.
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk No, no it's not.
MrMZaccone 1 year ago
@MrMZaccone What a cogent and informed rebuttal...
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk Simple math shows that you are wrong, the answer is left as an exercise for the student.
MrMZaccone 1 year ago
@MrMZaccone Here's another exercise in simple math. Find the costs for various commodities in dollars, then convert them into ounces of gold for that period. How much did gas cost in dollars in 1960 and how many ounces of gold would that have bought. Then try 1970, then 1980, then 1990, 2000, and 2010? See if you can spot a pattern?
johnrainrules 11 months ago
By your definition, nothing = money.
MrMZaccone 1 year ago
@MrMZaccone I don't know how you POSSIBLY could have gotten that from watching the video.
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk Because the value of paper money is whatever an issuing authority says it is. Ever lived in a war zone?
MrMZaccone 1 year ago
@MrMZaccone Rewatch the video: fiat money is only one kind of money, and it's the least sound kind.
shanedk 1 year ago
Money is just a tool for transaction of products, goods and services. Nothing more nothing less. But in this world we are living in, money has been put to pedestal of Gods.
neXus200xx 1 year ago
shanedk... you really are an idiot, the only reason money is valuable is because people assign value to it. If for example enough people stopped caring about material goods, money WOULD LOSE ALL ITS VALUE. There is NOTHING intrinsically valuable about money.
TehPhysicalist 1 year ago
rot.
A simplification of the economic process.
If the US was on the gold standard now the dollar would be nearly worthless.
The fiat currencies are tied to the perceived worth of the issuing country.
The removal of controls from banks is the root cause of the recent economic collapse.
dalinean 1 year ago
@dalinean "If the US was on the gold standard now the dollar would be nearly worthless."
HUH??? The dollar today is only worth 4% of what it was when the Fed took over! Whereas it maintained its value all through the time we were on a gold standard. So how the HELL do you arrive at that conclusion???
The fiat currencies of the world are failing.
"The removal of controls from banks is the root cause of the recent economic collapse."
WHAT removal of controls?
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk
1/ So how come there were depressions and recessions in the 1890's. the great depression ??
2/ And how come the banks in Canada @ Australia and many other places did not need propping up? They were not permitted to trade in the spuriously marketed 'sub prime mortgage'.
3/ One problem is the difference between traded value of stocks and actual production value.
4/ Fiat currencies use coal, beef, wheat, aluminium, prudiuction & etc as the prop to the currency, not just gold
dalinean 1 year ago
@dalinean 1a) Because of fractional reserve banking supported by the National Banking Act of 1862, and 1b) the Great Depression BECAUSE of the Federal Reserve (see my video on the subject). Even Ben Bernanke acknowledged this.
2. Because they didn't have stupid things like the CRA and weren't obsessed with getting interest rates through the floor.
3) That's the malinvestment that RESULTS from the Fed's manipulation of interest rates.
shanedk 1 year ago
@dalinean 4) No, fiat currencies use government force. That's IT.
shanedk 1 year ago
Simple.. Money is the thing you use to buy and put in your pocket... But several complicated things on how to use the money right and how to earn it.. If you want money for your wealth then go, think positive but just take care of your health.. Because health is the best wealth.
markfuller042 1 year ago
Here's the problem, money's relative value should be based directly on resource quantity, availability, and importance of given units of given resources. Gold is not an acceptable standard on which to base the value. Water, foodstuffs (adjusted for an average of all food values), production materials (materials only, not the tools or effort), time, and effort. Fiat economics is simply insane.
OriginalTharios 1 year ago
@OriginalTharios No, making money based on consumables has been tried, and it's been a complete and abject failure.
What is it about gold that you think is unacceptable? It's a resource, it has quantity, availability, and importance--everything you say money should be based on!
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk I'd appreciate an example of a genuine attempt at a proper format of such a system. Too often have those against things like socialism pointed to Soviet Russia and China and such as proof that socialism fails, when those were never actual socialist systems, but merely took the label to garner support. Gold is not a resource. It is useful solely in electronics and similar devices in limited capacity. (to be continued)
OriginalTharios 1 year ago
@OriginalTharios No, they WERE Socialist systems. Compare their policies to the Communist Manifesto and they fit 100%. I'm sick and tired of this bogus No True Scotsman fallacy. It shows that either you're completely ignorant of history, or you don't want to face reality.
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk Gold was selected for two reasons...in the past it was both pretty to look at and easy to fashion into further aesthetically pleasing forms with little effort or know-how. By the time the actual concept of money came about, gold was already the most abundant "precious material" available and digging out more required little expansion. Gold is not intrinsically valuable under ANY circumstances. In fact, it's utterly worthless in and of itself as it has no broad practical use.
OriginalTharios 1 year ago
@OriginalTharios This is just COMPLETE ignorance. Gold has been selected over and over again because it is in every way everything money should be: it's a store of value, it represents the resources used to obtain it, it's rare without being to rare, malleable without being too soft, it's easy to divide and recombine, it's easy to test for purity, it's completely fungible, it's non-corrosive, it's durable...Can you name me ONE OTHER SUBSTANCE on this planet with all of those qualities?
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk The communist manifesto is not socialism nor communism. It's simply the origin of the terms. The concepts, like most things, predate their labels by a wide margin. Buddhists, hippies, most aboriginal cultures are socialist. Now...as for materials as functional as gold in all respects...Silver,Copper, Tin, Aluminum, a variety of semi-precious stones. Some of these WERE used by some cultures to varying degrees. But gold was always worth the most. (to be continued)
OriginalTharios 1 year ago
@OriginalTharios "The communist manifesto is not socialism nor communism. It's simply the origin of the terms."
Geez...anyone wanna play Count the Fallacies in that one?
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk Why was gold always of the highest value? In the grand scheme, the total effort of obtaining, refining and minting was no different than silver or copper...or tin and aluminum if it'd been used. Why pick gold as the most valuable medium for the highest denominations of currency? It's pleasing to the eye in a very powerful way...in the same way that generally ALL lustrously shiny things are to people. People aren't special, and nor are their contrivances.
OriginalTharios 1 year ago
@OriginalTharios "In the grand scheme, the total effort of obtaining, refining and minting was no different than silver or copper."
But they're not as rare as gold, they're more difficult to work with, and they both corrode over time.
"or tin and aluminum if it'd been used."
Those are VERY cheap metals, too plentiful to be effective as money.
Stop with the "shiny things" malarkey. You're not going to convince ANYONE who's knowledgeable of the subject with that crap.
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk I said that after the effort of obtaining, refining, and minting...the amount of total effort that goes into each is comparable. You're also still ignoring that the metals that corrode were still used anyway, even in their corroded forms. Rarity is not a legitimate consideration in anything that is not a necessity. If you don't NEED a thing, its rarity is irrelevant. (to be continued)
OriginalTharios 1 year ago
@shanedk You also seem to be under the impression that neuropsychology has nothing to do with either the principles of money, economics, or the conditions that motivate both. With FEW exceptions, we are not a particularly objective species, not even as individuals. And finally, money is a product of economics, and economics is nothing more than a human abstraction of ecological principles confined to ourselves alone. (to be continued)
OriginalTharios 1 year ago
@shanedk Economics and ecology both are about the distribution and configuration of all forms of resources in materials, actions, time, and energy. Nothing more, nothing less. Since we now live in an abstract form of social grouping, we've had to adapt previous methods to suit the new society because ecology in itself operates irrespective of civilization. Hence, what has come to be what we call economics.
OriginalTharios 1 year ago
So what would happen if the government just handed out paper dollars to the poor? If that doesn't cost much, why is it that they don't print all the (paper) money in the world? (I apologize for my ignorance...)
RoseMaryStevens 1 year ago
@RoseMaryStevens That's essentially what they're doing, by mounting these enormous deficits to pay primarily for Welfare, Medicaid, and Social Security. Those, together with military spending, make up something like 80% of the budget!
shanedk 1 year ago
If the economy grows on a gold standard, there will be a deflation.
ShwangShwing 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing Gold doesn't inflate or deflate. That's the beauty of it.
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk It deflates. If it's used widely for financial transactions, and the economy grows faster then the supply of gold, then the prices of the goods and services will go down. And that's deflation. The supply of gold must grow in pace with the economy to avoid deflation, and that's not realistic.
ShwangShwing 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing That is NOT deflation. See my video on the subject.
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk You are giving an alternative meanings to the word "deflation". Overall falling of prices is deflation by definition. If the prices are expressed in gold, then there will be deflation if the economy grows faster then the gold.
ShwangShwing 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing "Overall falling of prices is deflation by definition."
NO...IT...IS...NOT!!!
Deflation is a decrease in nominal values (price) WITHOUT A CORRESPONDING DECREASE IN REAL VALUES. If real values drop, then nominal values are going to drop in response and THAT IS NOT DEFLATION.
Econ 101.
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk Deflation is a decrease in the general price level of goods and services. source: Robert J. Barro and Vittorio Grilli (1994), European Macroeconomics, chap. 8, p. 142. ISBN 0333577647
If you are not making up your own definitions of the technical terminology then where's you get this meaning of "deflation" from?
ShwangShwing 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing ANY textbook covering the subject should do it. Look at Economics: Principles in Action by Arthur Sullivan for just one example. He clearly defines deflation as the increase in the real value of money, and inflation as the decrease in the real value of money.
Since you didn't even bother to quote your source, I can only conclude that you misread it: deflation (all other things being equal) RESULTS in the decrease of the price level. Don't confuse an effect for the definition.
shanedk 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing Oh, I see what you did! You quoted FUCKING WIKIPEDIA and then just posted their reference as if you'd gotten it from there originally. For SHAME.
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk LOL, It's the same in the book, don't worry. In "Macroeconomics" by Paul Wachtel (I found it on the internet lol ), page 94 that you are referring to, are shown the SOURCES OF INFLATION and I don't see anywhere saying what you say. You say "Deflation is a decrease in nominal values (price) WITHOUT A CORRESPONDING DECREASE IN REAL VALUES". General decrease in price and "real values" is also deflation. How do you define "real value"?
ShwangShwing 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing Search through the book. He mentions real values all over the place.
It's clear now you just don't want to learn.
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk I just don't have the time to read the whole book because I have responsibilities that right now take almost 100% of my non-sleeping time. I only wanted to say that gold standard will lead to deflation, and I didn't intend walking into an argument. So if a price of an widget expressed in gold falls, that doesn't mean deflation. But if the price of everything falls (also in gold), it is deflation and it will have the same effect as deflation of fiat currency.
ShwangShwing 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing How about watching a 10-minute video? Everything I put in is supported by logic.
Prices on a gold standard AREN'T "expressed in gold." The currency is fixed to a gold standard and fully exchangeable.
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk I've watched your video. I've even noticed that I've made a comment some time ago that I don't remember :). I see I misunderstood you. You are talking about a currency based on gold with gold certificates that are not 100% backed. Right? That seems to solve the money supply problem. But less then 100% backing runs the risk of attack on the gold standard. That would be the same as an attack on a currency board.
ShwangShwing 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing No, they'd be backed 100%. They'd HAVE to be.
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk 100% backing with gold will prevent monetary base growth as needed by an expanding economy. Stop being so aggressive. I won't oppose gold standard being reintroduced in the USA, I don't even live there :)
ShwangShwing 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing "100% backing with gold will prevent monetary base growth as needed by an expanding economy."
No, it wouldn't, and I've already explained why not. You just ignored my explanation.
When the currency gets too valuable, more people trade gold for the currency, creating more of it. If it loses too much value, people turn in the currency for gold, and it regains its value. This is the THIRD TIME I've explained this to you.
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk OK, now I understand what you are advocating for. Are you also advocating for an end of fractional reserve banking system at the same time as revival of the gold standard?
ShwangShwing 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing Once again: yes, yes, YES!!!
Geez, it's not like I'm equivocating or anything!
shanedk 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing And your ONLY response to my explanation has been to claim that the only way to get more gold is to mine it, as if every single gram of gold in existence would be used to back the currency.
So don't you DARE accuse ME of being aggressive when YOU'RE the one denying the facts!
shanedk 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing Instead of insisting on what would after all be a bogus argument from authority, how about trying to refute the logic in my inflation video?
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk The fact that the gold will become more valuable will probably make people want to mine more gold, but the gold mined wouldn't be enough to increase the money supply to keep the prices stable. They will fall (expressed in gold). And as the people see that the value of the gold is falling, they will reduce spending. The very same thing that happens with the fiat money.
ShwangShwing 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing I just love how you idiots think that every single gram of gold on the planet will be backing up the currency...
shanedk 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing Also look at "Macroeconomics" by Paul Wachtel. On page 94 he goes into detail in the relationship between inflation and the price level.
shanedk 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing Quotes from the Wachtel book: "The first thing to note is that a sustained inflation cannot be maintained forever without monetary expansion."
"In the short-run, there can be wide variations in monetary growth which have little apparent impact on the inflation rate. However, over long periods of time there is a very strong correlation between inflation rates and monetary growth rates."
shanedk 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing Another good source (if you can find it--it's out of print) is "The Economics of a Pure Gold Standard" by Mark Skousen.
shanedk 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing Here's a good discussion of the definition of inflation and how your erroneous definition causes a lot of problems:
mises.org/daily/908
shanedk 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing What gold ACTUALLY does is PROTECT you against deflation. If you have REAL deflation (which is an increase in the value of money), then as money becomes more valuable more people will trade in gold for money, increasing the money supply and stemming the deflation.
Conversely, with inflation, people turn in their dollars for gold and the inflation is arrested.
shanedk 1 year ago
This video is wrong. The fed only create about 1/10 of all money. Any bank can create a infinite ammount of money (bank credits) if not regulated by the national bank. Money = bank credits = loans. If the loans are unsafe, so are the money. It is unsafe loans that destroys a currency.
AngeCord 1 year ago
@AngeCord No, the video is correct, it just doesn't cover Fractional Reserve Banking. I have another video for that.
shanedk 1 year ago
@shanedk But Fractional reserve banking is what creates the money. You claim that (our) money represent nothing. That is incorrect. If you take a loan on your house, bank credits (money) will be created. Those money are backed up by the value of your house. So our money represents all value in our society that is base for a loan. Even with the old gold based dollar, just a fraction was backed up by gold. The rest was representing houses factories etc.
AngeCord 7 months ago
@AngeCord "But Fractional reserve banking is what creates the money"
No, fractional reserve banking MULTIPLIES the already-created money (see my video on the subject). The money itself is created by the Fed.
"So our money represents all value in our society that is base for a loan."
So how do I redeem that? If I have $1,000, can I get $1,000 worth of stuff from your house?
In a pure gold standard, every single dollar is redeemable for gold.
shanedk 7 months ago
@shanedk You are confusing who prints the dollar bills (the central bank), who seeds the credit market (the government using government bonds) and who creates the bank credits (all banks including the central bank). Money are not the bills. It is the credits that are our money.
"So how do I redeem that? If I have $1,000, can I get $1,000 worth of stuff from your house?"
Yes, why not? I have a vintage pinball game you can get for $1.000. That is exactly how you redeem money. You buy stuff.
AngeCord 7 months ago
@AngeCord No, buying is NOT redeeming. Learn what you're talking about. If I have $1000 in money on a gold standard, I AM THE OWNER of $1000 worth of gold. I doubt you'll just let me come in and take your pinball game!
shanedk 7 months ago
@shanedk You must understand, our money are bank credits. They are created when someone borrows money. (When you lend money to- or from a bank) Some of that debt has physical representation in form of mortgages. The money can only be 'redeemed', like you want to, from those that owns the debt. So, only the bank can claim my house if I borrowed money from the bank. If I borrowed $1000 from you, and failed to pay back, you could use a balif to claim my pinball game.
AngeCord 6 months ago
@AngeCord We're not talking about banks NOW! We're talking about what it's like on a pure gold standard. And in the gold standard, you can redeem gold FROM THE BANK (or assayer) at any time regardless of who defaults on what.
Debt is NOT a commodity; it is not a good. You're only making yourself look more and more stupid the more you persist in this insanity.
shanedk 6 months ago
@shanedk "We're not talking about banks NOW!"
Sorry, you make no sense. How can we not talk about banks when you with the same breath tells that "you can redeem gold FROM THE BANK "
"Debt is NOT a commodity...."
it our currency isn't debt, or gold, then what is it? I didn't invent the system, maybe it is insane, but I am certainly not stupid. Since you like to resort to namecalling, I question your motived behind this.
AngeCord 6 months ago
@AngeCord Now you're just lying. I TOLD YOU WHAT I MEANT: we're talking about banks UNDER A GOLD STANDARD. We don't HAVE a gold standard now!
"it our currency isn't debt, or gold, then what is it?"
Government fiat. Why do you think it's called fiat currency?
shanedk 6 months ago
@shanedk Am I getting you right if your "gold standard" includes banning people form borrowing money from banks? Because if they can, all the problems i mentioned will come up.
"Why do you think it's called fiat currency?"
If the dollar's value was based solely on what the government sais, it wouldn't stand much chance on an international currency market. The dollar has real values buildt into it. Why do you think the dollar plumeted when the morgage bubble bursted?
AngeCord 6 months ago
@AngeCord "Am I getting you right if your "gold standard" includes banning people form borrowing money from banks?"
No, why would it?
"Why do you think the dollar plumeted when the morgage bubble bursted (sic)?"
Because government printed a bunch of money to try and "fix" it.
shanedk 6 months ago
@shanedk "No, why would it?"
Because if people can borrow money that other people has put into the bank, the currency will cease to be a pure gold standard. The credit form dollars will be based on perhaps house mortages, and the currency as a total will be partly represented in gold and partly in houses after a while.
AngeCord 6 months ago
@AngeCord No, you could still loan out time deposits. Just not demand deposits.
shanedk 6 months ago
"No, you could still loan out time deposits. Just not demand deposits."
Those timelocked credits are still an asset, even if locked. The bill you put into your account will be out in someone elses pocket until he desposit it in a bank so yet another credit is created. Time deposits would slow down the degeneration of the gold currency, but not fix it completely. Actually, I think banning demand desposit allone would have bigger impact on the echonomy than moving back to gold currency.
AngeCord 6 months ago
@shanedk "Because government printed a bunch of money to try and "fix" it."
No. The houses that was base for the loans turned out to be over valued. That means that many people won't be able to pay back their loans, wich means that the banks risks going bankrupt, wich means that people will take out their savings and buy foreign currency. The dollar became a commodity that many want to sell but few want to buy. What happens to such a commodity? The price drops.
AngeCord 6 months ago
@AngeCord "The houses that was base for the loans turned out to be over valued."
Because of the credit expansion!
"That means that many people won't be able to pay back their loans"
No, that happened because government encouraged--and in some cases even required--giving low-interest loans to riskier clients.
shanedk 6 months ago
@shanedk "No, that happened because government encouraged--and in some cases even required--giving low-interest loans to riskier clients."
I ment, with too big loans on their houses, many people can't pay back. But I agree on you why it happened. Government deregulation and policies sat of a wall street loan-fest that undermined the currency.
AngeCord 6 months ago
@AngeCord Oh, and the value of a currency dropping is INflation, not DEflation. Deflation is when the value of the currency INCREASES.
shanedk 6 months ago
@shanedk "Oh, and the value of a currency dropping is INflation, not DEflation. Deflation is when the value of the currency INCREASES."
I know. I can't see that I have confused this in any of my posts.
AngeCord 6 months ago
@AngeCord I mentioned a reason for the deflation after the crisis, and you said, "The dollar became a commodity that many want to sell but few want to buy. What happens to such a commodity? The price drops."
shanedk 6 months ago
@shanedk Canada, back in the 1930's, demonstrated just what nastiness you can pull with the STANDARD rules of fiat currency. At that time Canadians, like Americans to this day, did NOT like $2 bills and didn't want to circulate them. They were forced into circulation by paying out government benefits payments in them, then enforcing the law (which also exists in the US, AFAICT) that says that if you refuse "legal tender" at your normal place of business for a debt, YOU FORFEIT PAYMENT.
evensgrey 6 months ago
@evensgrey A guy actually did that a few years ago. He was upset with Best Buy, so he went to the bank, got a bunch of $2 bills, and tried to pay them. They thought they were counterfeit and wouldn't take them! (Called the Secret Service and everything!) So yeah, they ended up forfeiting payment. It was funny.
shanedk 6 months ago
@shanedk As I understand it, a lot of Americans are perfectly willing to destroy them when they get them. Since they only get one or two at a time at the most, it doesn't (these days, anyway) amount to much loss.
I'm not surprised at the target, either. You don't get the nickname "Worst Try" for nothing.
evensgrey 6 months ago
@shanedk "In a pure gold standard, every single dollar is redeemable for gold."
But as soon as someone puts one single dollar into a bank account, it won't be a pure gold standard anymore, because there will exsist one more dollar than what is represented in real gold.
AngeCord 7 months ago
@AngeCord No, because that dollar is backed up by gold in a vault.
shanedk 7 months ago
@shanedk No it isn't. Think about it. The bank has the dollar bill and they can use to go collect their gold nugget. If they do, the bill will be destroyed by the central bank, and there will be one bill less on the market, and one gold nugget less in the vault. BUT I will still have one dollar an my bank account, so the total number of dollars (including bills and credits) are as before. The credit dollar in my account is an asset for me and is accepted as payment (using a card).
AngeCord 6 months ago
@AngeCord "BUT I will still have one dollar an my bank account"
But that would be A DIFFERENT DOLLAR than the one the bank redeemed! That dollar would be from THE BANK'S ASSETS. If they did that with YOUR assets, they'd be STEALING.
shanedk 6 months ago