Click my name and scroll back to about March 2 to see my unusual video interview with Mr. Schiff. He discusses how to *exit* a gold boom even if you're more of an agorist than a paper investor. And I question some of his numbers.
Thank you Dr. Doom for rappin' with the Ridley, and thank you x86.
Without question the smartest man in all rooms the moment he enters. He is my economic hero. All I had shoved down my throat in college is Keynes..Listen to Mr. Schiff.
1) Here is what is wrong
2) Here is what is going to happen.
3) HAPPENS
4) Why are not begging for me to tell you what went wrong Answer: Many people make money from government shuffling around the dollars so the connected make money. Just unleash freedom.Financial and personal.
Production makes Consumption possible, production is a means, and consumption is ends.
Socialists believe the opposite is true,, they believe people produce because of consumers, they believe production is and ends, and that consumption is a means.
i agree with schiff but i like dr bouchet. She's very calm and collected when trying to make her point. but schiff looks at the bigger picture, further than just the jobs directly created by stimulus
I love that who Peter ask how much should the government take no one wants to answer that because they don't really want to tell you what really want to take from you.
Low interest rates are dangerous, they allow the government to be seduced to spend too much money and build up large debt. We see the same happen in Europe. Schiff is dead right on this.
I really don't understand this: They are ignorent and highly disagree about the most simple and important issues involved in running a country. How can this be? This is impossible. But if it is really so - why do we have people sitting around running our countries? If Bous. does not even know, that it is possible to pay 50% in tax - as Schiff claims he does - where are we, then? There are plenty such examples in this video. They don't know and won't agree about the most simple things-staggering!
@TWSceptic What I ment is, that how can well educated politicians not know what is going on in their country? How can they disagree and be so ignorent about so many important issues? They should know. So, my question actually was: what does formal education help us, if it leaves us no better understanding of what we are dealing with, if we are still as ignorant as ever? I believe my question is not as stupid as it could sound, if one really digs down in it.
The Privet counterfeit cartel perpetuates poverty and the welfare states that prostitutes there native born playing the Federal Reserve game rather than being a self supporting republic State that can't be a service to the needed just the greedy who puts money above people. America is DEAD.
I love when he talking about his "50% tax rate," he includes the taxes he pays at the state level.
We're talking about the FEDERAL government here. The federal government doesn't tell the states how much they should tax their citizens. Therefore, it's misleading for him to say he pays 50% in taxes and then blame the federal government.
And as conservatives say to the OWS Protesters, "QUIT WHINING!!" Your tax rate was 90 fucking percent in the '50s.
@robgrauertvideo Are you saying that he pays more in state taxes than federal ones? I doesn't really matter whether the taxes are going to the feds or the states (or localities for that matter), what matters is that we are being taxed way too much, the government at all levels is spending too much, and that most of the spending is unconstitutional to boot.
@robgrauertvideo That is true,, and they started to raise them in the beginning of the great depression. Probably why it lasted for over a decade.
Obama wants to raise taxes just like they did in the beginning. He wants to repeat the misstakes.
@DrBoushey, you freaking whore,, You don't need government regulations to prevent Mc Donalds or other companies from making their costumers sick. They go out of business if they make people sick.
Companies have all incentives to make products safe.
Peter is right about 90% of the time. But he keeps saying gold somehow is money per the Constitution?? BS. Peter has gold on his brain. Get off it Peter... In the mean time, there is another guy who just published a book on what everyone who is being taken advantage of can do to get back in the game after having their clocks cleaned... "Money Slaves And Cool Aid"... Get - The - Book dot com (solve the riddle and learn what to do). Good luck pounding it through their thick skulls Peter.
While Schiff is addressing the viability of the currency system, Heather Boushey seems more concerned over the regulation of the ingredients in fast foods.
Dr. Bouchey is a rubber stamped cookie-cutter "expert" of the "university community", as the arrogant bunch of professors and staff in college called themselves. She has probably existed in the academic world since the day she graduated, and that makes her better than everybody else and entitles her to go around telling everyone else how to run their lives and their businesses.
I just love the "and that caused the crisis" with reference to so called 'rich people'. These blind assertions against the upper class, a minority, go unchallenged and explain why the true origins of the crisis remain unknown to many.
lol ...dr douche' tells schiff that the percentage of HIS income HE pays in taxes are IMPOSSIBLE ..like she knows his finances BETTER than he does ..good lord ,where the F#k did this odiously arrogant twat get her doctorate ?
no one should be eligible for congress or ANY govt position UNLESS they have owned or RUN a business with the exception perhaps of former career soldiers .these career govt drones and lawmakers are KILLING the small business owner and by default the US ecomony ..mr cummings is an example and poster boy for EXACTLY whats killing us .
Peter Schiff is good and he can explain it to the average citizen...Law makers are afraid to level with the American people, the pain we will experience to fix this problem will cause most of these bums to loose their jobs.. That is their fear! No one in Washington is willing to be the grown up at the party. We are doomed by those WE elect and ourselves
I wonder what Dr. Bouchey has done in her life to create jobs. Govt sponsored academic blowhards live on grants and hate the free market, therefore what do they actually know about it?
Her name should be Dr. Doushey. Is Ecoly the same the same thing as E. coli? Is she saying she doesn't eat cooked hamburgers? Can we really fill holes with money? Talk about uncertainty.
Would Mr. Schiff be willing to work for minimum wage like he suggested for the rest of America? Has he ever tried to live on minimum wage? It is easy for the rich to tell the rest of the world how they should not get any of their money. The middle class is carrying this country. The rich nor the poor are helping...especially NOT Mr. Schiff. I bet he never is concerned about how he is going to pay his next utility bill... Dr. Boushey is not correct either... time to start over...
@songbird607 wow you have to be pretty stupid to come up wth a comment like that.. obviously peter schiff would rather be employed then unemployed, regardless of wage. in fact if we listened to peter schiff and other austrian economists we wouldnt have these problems. plus if you dont want to work for less than what the minimum wage would be than you dont have to work its simple
@songbird607 Schiff predicted all of this along with other Austrian economists. Did you? Thought so.
Wealth creation starts with savings. Savings finances capital investment (tools, machines, factories). That leads to productivity gains and increased supply, which is where real higher wages and purchasing power derive. It is only then that we can demand (spend/consume). Spending is a byproduct of wealth creation, not the cause.
@songbird607 As he would explain, if the skill/labour worth for a service or product is minimum or below wage...then it's an acceptable wage. In current conditions, that labour simply does not get employed, or gets avoided, or automated.
RESTORING THE AMERICAN DREAM: Search for free millions of jobs on the largest #1 job site worldwide, with over 50 million unique visitors and 1 billion job searches per month and is available in more than 50 countries and 26 languages, covering 94% of global GDP. We have jobs in every state county and city in the US. Plus job and resume posting.
To get started just Google ( Jobs Linked To You ) Then start your job searching free.
'Dr.' Boushay was educated at the New School for Social Research, located in the heart of New York City, more specifically, Greenwich Village. The school was founded in about 1920 by New York social progressives and is known for its 'avant-garde' teaching. It is also home to the World Policy Institute, an international think tank.
Dr. Boushey is wrong: All regulation must go. Regulation as such is evil and destructive. Regulation is preventive law, law that subjects people to force in advance of any specific evidence that they are going to harm others. E.g., her idea about e-coli in hamburger: until and unless there is specific evidence about some particular restaurant doing that, there is no moral or political justification for subjecting the provider to force.
@OolTube02 Far out man! You totally don't get it...like dude. You don't get to do anything you like. When you initiate force by violating another's individual rights, then force is to be used against you. What don't you understand, brah? Should I type slower?
@joepeeler34 And who determines who has what rights? The government? You? Schiff? Whoever is quicker on the draw and gets to live to write history...?
@OolTube02 You might just as well ask who decided that there would be language and which words would be used. Natural rights and common law weren't a product on a single mind or any narrow group of central planners. They weren't created by a vote. They were and are an emergent order. Maybe you should do more reading on other emergent orders, then come back to economics. You might be more receptive to it after having done that. You are under the sway of a central planning fallacy.
@joepeeler34 No, I'm not. You are under the sway of an emergent order fallacy.
So far the Europeans haven't learned adequate English yet just by being left to their own devices and the Americans haven't adopted the metric system yet on their own.
So emergent order my ass! You don't make these things happen by conquest or official decree, they don't happen. Even if you think of common standards as Procrustean beds and that it's a good thing they aren't enforced on people, you must admit it.
@tehgreatist Why? Marginal labor has a price floor just like everything else. Employers have to bid for that labor too. They don't have to bid as high for it because it is low skill. Some jobs are only productive at $5 or $6 an hour. Those jobs are eliminated with the minimum wage. It's those just entering the job market that typically take these jobs. They gain experience and increase their skills. It's not like there isn't class movement. A minimum wage destroys marginal jobs.
@joepeeler34 thats true, but you could also see many large corporations such as mcdonalds and other fast food places, or grocery stores drop their wages. i just dont think the poor need it to be any more diffcult to make an income and save some money.
@tehgreatist They already have contracts with existing employees. Those jobs that still exist are by definition profitable for the business at those wages else they wouldn't exist. Many of those jobs pay above the minimum wage.
It's not just an economic issue to me. It is a moral issue. The government should not be interfering with contract--wage contract or any other.
The government doesn't drive up real wages. Only productivity gains can do that.
@joepeeler34 we agree fundamentally, i just dont want to see the middle and lower class suffer. but yes, with moral integrity and a little bit of fairness everyone should still be paid reasonably.
@tehgreatist The term "reasonable" is a subjective one. If a person doesn't think the wage offered is "reasonable" he is free to sell his labor elsewhere.
If the most a person can get on the market it $6 an hour that tells me all I need to know. It's not volitional on the part of the business owner, it is systemic. Some jobs just want exist when mimimum wage prices are imposed.
The govt. is saying in effect that you can't work under a certain wage. By what right do they do that?
@joepeeler34 In the long run the plutocrats will figure out they can't sell anything to people without even a living wage, like Henry Ford did, when he realized the people who made his cars were also the ones to buy his cars.
Unfortunately, to paraphrase Keynes, in the long run we're all dead because the lack of a living wage didn't allow us to have that mole on our forearm looked at in time.
Yes, I am saying the lack of a decent minimum wage is going to make us all die of skin cancer...!
@OolTube02 Your use of term plutocracy is not warranted. There can only be rule by wealthy persons in the absence of a free market. It is then that those with wealth can get special favors from the government.
Corporatism isn't a natural outgrowth of free markets. It's a natural outgrowth of unlimited democracy and economic illiteracy on the part of the public to allow government central planning efforts.
@joepeeler34 Yes, yes, I know! There is no such thing as a natural monopoly, a lack of regulation couldn't possibly enable anyone to corner a market and the government is the root of all evil and if we removed it it wouldn't merely replace democracy with plutocracy.
I get it. Conservatives do not understand the concept of systemic causation and emergent patterns. If a problem or its solution doesn't involve accusing and punishing a sentient entity for conspiracy to sabotage it doesn't exist.
@OolTube02 Who said anything about natural monopolies? I didn't. I was explaining why wage prices are systemic, not volitional. That doesn't pertain to so-called natural monopolies.
But since you brought it up, natural monopolies aren't common, but they can happen. They just want last long in a truly free market. That is because high profit margins attract new investment. Increased competition means lower profit margins. Profit margins will fall till they find a new level.
@OolTube02 Also, I have no use for democracy. I favor a republic. What we have now is the inevitable result of unlimited democracy. Individual rights don't exist in this system. Some things just should not be up for a vote.
In a Republic the individual has some protections from the majority. There is no tyranny of the majority.
Organized interest factions will control a mob-rule democracy. Corporatism and a welfare state are the natural outcomes of such a system.
@joepeeler34 I am aware of that. During the Irish Potato Famine you would have been on the side of the food producers being allowed to sell to whomever they want, and if that means exporting to England even while your neighbors are literally starving, so be it! Anything else, any democratic interference in the market would have been despotism. It would have saved lives but it would have meant oppression.
It literally qualifies as a psychological disorder to think like that, you know...
@OolTube02 I make a point, then you don't even attempt to refute it. I'll take your constant changing of the subject for an inability to defend your positions. Before I ask your accusatory question, why not first ask why the Irish economy and was so dependent on the simple potato?
Could it be British laws that imposed bans on the education, possession of land, and entering of a profession by Irish Catholics? That's a government abrogating natural law--a failure of your ideas.
@joepeeler34 Could the lack of voting rights have had anything to do with the Irish Catholics' underclass status? But I suppose democracy is not the answer, representing an unacceptable tyranny of the majority over the minority...
@OolTube02 You do understand that democracy is not the only representative system? One can still vote in a Republic you know. The difference is that the mob can't vote themselves other people's money and protections. Not everything should be up for a vote. You should learn the difference between a constitutionally federal republic and a centralized unlimited democracy. Until you do, you'll be searching in the dark for answers.
@joepeeler34 Once people are desperate enough they always vote themselves other people's property -- just not by orderly fashion of checking a box at the ballots but by taking to the streets with pitchforks or guns.
Like I said, it's like the difference between feeling pain early on or smelling the gangrene much later, by which time your society's connective tissue may already be necrotic everywhere...
@OolTube02 People vote themselves other people's money even when they aren't desperate. Look at how many people get the government to subsidize mansions in disaster prone areas. Look at how many well-off seniors (there are a lot of them) vote themselves S.S. and Medicare. It's the rich who benefit disproportionately from the welfare state.
That's why we need to limit the power of government. A republic does that.
@OolTube02 What happened to Rome. Drifted into a dictatorships. Written constitutions will not prevent the growth of a government. It's why I don't even like to use the word government. I prefer Protectorate because they are different things. Only an educated, vigilant population will keep government in line and liberty in check. A people must first start with a good system though.
What happened to unlimited democracy in Greece? What's happneing to unlimited democracy now in the West?
@OolTube02 Also, for a funny explanation of my point see "Let's make democracy" on YouTube. It strips away all the concealing language quite nicely. Then check out "The Story of Your Enslavement."
@OolTube02 Moreover, to answer your question in more detail, what is to be done in the wake of a problem created by an intrusive government? Afterall, the Irish economy wouldn't have been so dependent on potatoes if not for British laws. Crop failures--in this case caused by a potato disease-- happen all the time, but it is only when an economy has been reduced to a subsistence level by government central planning efforts that hard choices, to the extent that there are choices, must be made.
@OolTube02 There wasn't enough crop to feed Irishman. Let's say some farmers who had a meager amount of potatoes to sell sold them to other Irish. What were they going to pay them with? If they had purchasing power, they would buy potatoes/other food from importers.
If those who had a small surplus just gave it away, where would they get the capital necessary for next year's crop?
It would have ended in even more deaths and malnourishment. What you call "democracy" is just force and theft
@OolTube02 I prefer to identify myself as a liberal. That is a liberal in the classical sense of the word.
I don't understand emergent orders? Ha! Now you are projecting. A market is an emergent order. You seem to have a hard time understanding that some things aren't the result of central planning. Money is an emergent order as well. It wasn't an invention of central planners anymore than a market is. Common law and language are two more examples of emergent orders.
@joepeeler34 I know you believe in emergent order and harmony. What you don't understand or see coming is the possibility of emergent chaos and destruction. You're to the economy the equivalent of some spaced-out, head-in-the-clouds hippie, who thinks untouched nature is all peace and bliss and love and understanding between all creatures.
@OolTube02 I do believe in destruction--creative destruction. And it isn't a matter of "believing" in emergent orders. It is a matter of ACCEPTING their existence and seeking to understand them.
@OolTube02 Moreover, the concept of emergent orders lacking a central planners is counterintuitive for most. This is why you think that wages are volitional, rather than systemic.
Employers must compete for wages with other employers. Some labor will be bid up higher owing to greater productivity levels, but even marginal labor must be competed for. There is a price floor even for this marginal labor just as there is for anything else. There's nothing special about wage prices.
@OolTube02 Why do most people make far above the minimum wage? You think it is volitional right? You think that all other prices other than wage prices are systemic, but for some reason you imagine that wage prices operate outside of economic law. It's a very shallow understanding of how markets work.
The Keynes quote was pertaining to the reflation of credit bubbles, not minimum wage laws. We have been following Keynesian prescriptions for decades. The long-run is here. Observe the results.
@joepeeler34 No, you haven't been following Keynesian prescriptions for decades. Keynes was about the government doing deficit spending only in times of an economic slump, when a lack of demand caused a temporary decrease in private investment, not all the time. Reagan doing deficit spending in '83 may have been justified, but not in '86 any more. Encouraging a housing bubble in 2001 was okay, but no longer in 2005.
This would be Keynesianism like a stopped clock being right twice a day.
@joepeeler34 I suppose when you get cold at night you refuse a blanket because that would merely be artificially inflating a body heat bubble. If the Invisible Hand of Thermodynamics wants you to catch pneumonia then so be it!
Ah man, what self-destructive foolishness! This is what getting a glimpse into the internal workings of a cult is like...
@OolTube02 It's sad when one has to resort to sophistry and bizarre analogies.
There is nothing artificial about a blanket. It has to be produced. It can't be created out of thin air.
Credit has to derive from real saved capital. If central banks try to replace with real saved capital with artificialy banking procedures a false boom can occur if rates are kept low enough long enough. It creates a phony, ephmeral "prosperity."
Ah, Keynesian drones, and their pretense of knowledge!
@OolTube02 Reagan's deficit spending didn't create the increased standard of living. We just ran up a credit card. The recovery had far more to do with the Federal Reserve, led by Paul Volcker, let interest rates find their natural rate. Prime rate went over 20%. The cheap monetary spigot was turned off. Volcker turned off the Fed's funny money machine. That strengthened the dollar. Lowering income tax rates helped, but it would have been far better to slash spending without deficits.
@OolTube02 What are you talking about? Interest rates need to rise. Again, what are you talking about? Where did I advocate that the Fed should artificially lower interest rates? You are the one who advocates that. My mind is hurting trying to reason with you. You project ideas on to me that you hold.
Here, I'll type slower. I-want-interest-rates-to-be-determined-by-market-conditions. They can be high or low depeding on supply of savings and deman for credit.
@joepeeler34 I understand. People's judgment cannot always be trusted, but the all-wise and all-powerful Invisible Hand of the Market is always right. All hail to thee, Invisible Hand, our salvation from this fallible world of puny mortal decision-makers to Free Market Heaven!
I think it is customary to watch this video at this point: watch?v=zI5hrcwU7Dk
WTF there was another version of only Peters part of this hearing posted here: /watch?v=_BHLguFEN3M that had over 120k views and now it says the user removed it?????
@Theman101289 Well, I can forgive her if she didn't know in advance what an overbearing loudmouth she was going to sit next to. Or maybe she simply wasn't feeling well that day and that's why she wasn't up to the job of holding her own. It's not like I'm always at the top of my game in these kinds of situations myself, so who am I to judge? But next time, if there ever is a next time, she better be a little more assertive; I agree...
Sales tax is a red herring. The sales tax on products he sales is an amount he collects for the government from the end consumer--HE does not pay that sales tax. In addition, he doesn't pay any sales tax on products he buys that goes into the products he sales. There is no resale tax. Any manufacturing tax MOST businesses simply roll into the product cost, plus he writes off tax he pays on machines, equipment, and so on.
@pasha582 The rich love sales tax because it's regressive, hitting those the worst who have to spend most of their cash for goods just to survive. Those who can make lots of money with money are comparatively unaffected by such a tax. So what's not to love, from his perspective?
Don't make me laugh about "machines!" That guy doesn't produce anything. He just shovels money around and lives off the crumbs, like the Master of the Universe straight from the Bonfire of the Vanities that he is.
@OolTube02 15 years ago, Peter Schiff lived in an one bedroom apartment in Los Angeles and started his company Europacific capital from there. His business has grown and he is making money through his understanding of the market economy and government policies. He is a talented economist and investor! That's why he is rich and better off than you. You have no rights to his wealth and property! Now, the congress on the other hand is made up of unproductive leeches who should be thrown out!
@AFRIKTODAY It's because people like him make a thousand times more than an engineer that people don't literally make anything any more in the US and breaking levees drown hundreds.
Is it his fault? Is it his right? Who gives a shit about these philosophical questions as the infrastructure is crumbling? Maybe you should focus a little less on who has the ideological right to what financial wealth and more on what money is meant to facilitate in the first place...
@OolTube02 Dude, you ought to be kidding. The State literally bailed out the fat cats on wall streets 3 years ago with trillions of dollars from us the tax payers. Did Peter Schiff get any of those funds? No! The US military is building roads in afghanistan, Irak; the US is shelling out money to Egypt, Iraq, Pakistan. For what? To maintain an illusion of grandeur while " the ROADS ARE CRUMBLING HERE AT HOME". Dude you are blaming the wrong culprit. BLAME THE STATE, not peter schiff!
@AFRIKTODAY Of course he got some of those funds. If he was invested in Goldman Sachs or anything that AIG insured he got money from the bailout. It was lack of government oversight that caused the banking crash and yet Schiff argues for more deregulation of industry, using his own financial industry as an example. It's another credit bubble or derivatives trading default that's going to cause the next crash, and if Schiff's testimony above is listened to he will certainly share blame in that.
@OolTube02 WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT DUDE? Seriously, you are another " moron" who is voicing his opinion on something he does not know about. Peter Schiff wrotes a book titled " crash proof" warning people about the real estate and credit bubble that was created by the FED AND THE CONGRESS. How could he invest on something he warned people against? You are pathetically ignorant... I lack words to describe and characterize you. Just look on the internet for " PETER SCHIFF WAS RIGHT!"
@AFRIKTODAY So what you're contending is that Schiff shorted those bank stocks and then lost money when the bailout prevented them from defaulting? I haven't researched this, but it would explain why he's so angry about it.
Schiff wasn't so right about the bear market he predicted after the internet bust.
But I'm much more worried about the future. Most blame the 1999 bank deregulations and the Bush/Obama tax cuts for the disaster and yet this guy thinks they didn't go far enough...
@OolTube02 What really annoys me is the fact that you are judging Peter Schiff without having any prior knowledge about him. Just click his name on youtube or on google and you will get enough material to analyze his perspective. You do not have to agree with his position, but at least, get your affirmations in check if you do not want to sound like an parrot. Peter Schiff philosophy on investment is focused on hard assets and foreign stocks in emerging economies. He never buys US STOCKS!
Peter Schiff did short the real estate related stocks when they were falling but his MAIN concern is the soundness of the US economies that is being destroyed by too big to fail policies and crony capitalism that serves the few at the expense of the many. The same people who benefited mostly from artificially low interest rates in the years 2001-2007 WERE BAILED OUT AND NONE WENT TO JAIL OR WAS FIRES FROM HIS POSITION OF POWER.
@AFRIKTODAY And yet in the same breath that Schiff feigns outrage about the bailed out financial industry, held to no account, he advocates for even more deregulation, lawlessness, tax breaks...
Do you know what funds institutions who'd go after criminal banksters, who bankrupted millions. Taxes do. Do you know what funds the kind of criminal cronyism that made the bailouts possible? Private campaign contributions.
But I'm not hearing him scream and holler for campaign finance reform...
@OolTube02 You really do not get it. Cronyism is the alliance between the State and some favored private institutions. The goal of the so called regulations is to prevent competition and entry. That's what the whole game is all about. Maintain a few incompetent at the top regardless of the quality of the service that they offer. Deregulating will open the market to more dynamic enterprise will a full spectrum of service, it will permit innovation and the big " bailed" zombies will not SURVIVE
@OolTube02 There is no such a thing as a natural monopoly! Monopolies or rather cartels ( which exist on wall street) are created with the support of the legislature which make it more expensive and complicated for new business to enter a particular trade. I haven't heard you complain about Goldman Sach, JP morgan, CITI, bank of America and other big international banks that received trillions of dollars of tax payers bail out in order to pay themselves salaries and bonuses! WHY?
@AFRIKTODAY I know the concept of natural monopolies or anything that isn't the result of intelligent design boggles the mind of the conservative because they just can't wrap their heads around systemic causation, emergent patterns... George Lakoff wrote a whole book about it.
The bailouts were outrageous because of the lack of conditions attached. Yes, the government is corrupt, but that was in itself the result of a deregulated business world turning around and buying a weak government...
@OolTube02 What are you talking about? The more I read you, the more I am embarrassed. Monopoly is the granting of exclusive privilege by the State. End of story! Now, wall street is not a monopoly but a cartel! Cartel aim at preventing entry into their trade in order to maximize their profit by overcharging their consumers. The point of emphasis here is the role of the State " THAT BAILED THEM OUT"! 3 trillion dollars to the bankers and you are talking about deregulations? ARE U KIDDING ME?
@AFRIKTODAY Monopoly is someone being in control over the only supply chain of something, whether by way of a factory or a road or a patent. Sometimes it's government causing it, sometimes it's simple geography. That's what I was talking about. And what I was also talking about is you seeing only the artificial monopolies, not the natural ones, because there is a conservative mental blind spot there -- that, to put it vulgarly, sometimes shit happens without someone deliberately shitting on you.
@OolTube02 You are giving me your " flawed understanding" of what a monopoly is while I am providing you with the classical definition of that economic concept. The first " recognized" monopoly in western history was the South sea company that was created by the then Great Britain to trade exclusively in the name of the throne. No other corporation was allowed to compete with that company. There is no such a thing as " natural monopoly" in the free market.
@AFRIKTODAY Well, there are natural monopolies. But never mind that...!
Even just taking artificial, government-enforced monopolies into account -- you don't wish to get rid of all of those. Your rights to property, of being allowed to do whatever you want with the things officially recognized as owned by you -- that's a monopoly. The so-called "free market" is based on trading with goods you own. So the whole concept of economic freedom is actually based on government-granted monopolies.
@OolTube02 Because regulations are what benefit the big companies and were a leading cause to the financial collapse, like arbitrary reserve requirements that war far too low considering the risk that comes with it when you have a FDIC.
@Visfen I agree with the contention of reserve requirements having been lowered too much. But wouldn't higher reserve requirements constitute stricter and (some would argue) more investment-inhibitive government regulations -- they very thing Schiff is ranting against in the video...?
@OolTube02 No it wouldn't. That's just a matter of what price fixing the government is engaging it. 10:1, 40:1 and 100:1 are all government regulations that are advocated because of the FDIC. You could let people decide how much risk they want to take. That is the market solution. It's not deregulation, it's a different form of regulation.
@Visfen It's still regulation and therefore socialist. No regulation means banks can take whatever risk they want to take with your money and don't have to tell you anything. If you go broke you know better next time and won't invest your money with that bank again. So by process of elimination I'm sure you will eventually find a trustworthy financial institution after about twenty defaults or so. That's the way of the truly free market.
Peter Schiff did short the real estate related stocks when they were falling but his MAIN concern is the soundness of the US economies that is being destroyed by too big to fail policies and crony capitalism that serves the few at the expense of the many. The same people who benefited mostly from artificially low interest rates in the years 2001-2007 WERE BAILED OUT AND NONE WENT TO JAIL OR WAS FIRES FROM HIS POSITION OF POWER.
@OolTube02 3 This kinds of things occurs in bananas republics, not the supposedly US open market economy. CAPITALISM is FIRST AND FOREMOST A SYSTEM OF PROFIT AND LOSS. The rich and connected were BAILED OUT, AND THAT IS UNJUST. It has nothing to do with PETER SCHIFF PERSONALLY but the DETERIORATION OF THE US ECONOMY!
So, blame the regulators who protect the big bankers and the fact corporations who pay no income taxes ( GE) and leave the like of SCHIFF ALONE!
Because the Liberal media will disagree with him until the bitter end, like when people laughed at him when he said (about a year before it happened) that banks were in trouble and the housing market was going to collapse. GS was trading at about $170 per share when he said this. Now it's $93 and it was as low as $50 before Warren Buffet save it.
They say Schiff is this clairvoyant future-teller because he predicted doom in the housing market. But he also predicted the bursting of the internet bubble would lead to a bear market. So you're suffering from confirmation bias if you think he's a reliable prophetic authority.
In reality the guy simply makes up for in confidence in what he lacks in competence. I guess the word for people like him is "dazzler."
I agree with Schiff on taxes as well as I agree with the Dr who says that infrastructure jobs do create work for the public and private which is true, Pending if the job that is created is necessary.Schiff is right about taxes as if one compares to other countries like Canada, they pay 50% there about, yet they do not have the rules or laws to deal with as far as manufacturing goes as well as health care is not the employers expense either.
@cheba2k1 Yes, this hearing is an allegory for the political situation in the country as a whole. Deluded loudmouths on the right versus timid wimps on the left. Bullies versus pushovers. Schiff is obviously an idiot. I have no idea whether the woman is smart or dumb because I could hardly hear her.
@itachi705 So... Assuming the rape allegory were accurate, you're implying I'd be better off striving for a dose of Stockholm syndrome and identify with the rapists instead...?
@OolTube02 Why do you say that Schiff is an idiot? In this hearing he just told the government what they are doing wrong and how to correct the problem. Its clear that these government officials are afraid to really do the right thing because they don't want to lose their seats in congress. Schiff predicted many economic problems to come and unfortunately he's gonna be right again unless the COWARDS in office get the guts to do something about it.
@cheba2k1 You've had tax cuts and financial deregulation for the last ten years and where did it get you?
Schiff predicted a bear market after the internet bubble burst -- epic fail!
He predicted the housing bust? Big deal! I predicted the housing bust. When my relatives told me they had bought a house in Florida at he height of the boom I told them, "are you crazy; in one or two years you would have gotten it for half the price."
So y'all should listen to me and I say he's an idiot.
@OolTube02 Schiff is telling the government that its spending too much money. Thats the problem and its devaluing our currency and interest rates are too low. so with those two problems he and anyone else that understand the basics of economics can see that those two issues will bring major problems in the near future.
@cheba2k1 Yes, and Schiff is also telling the government it is taxing too much at a time when it's been taxing less than in the last sixty years or so. Clinton raised taxes and turned a recession into booming economy while Republicans screamed their heads off. Bush/Obama lowered taxes and kept them low and now you're in the dumps, but this guy is telling you too much taxes are the problem. And too much regulation, after Bush let the industry write the laws.
@OolTube02 Why do you say that Schiff is an idiot? In this hearing he just told the government what they are doing wrong and how to correct the problem. Its clear that these government officials are afraid to really do the right thing because they don't want to lose their seats in congress. Schiff predicted many economic problems to come and unfortunately he's gonna be right again unless the COWARDS in office get the guts to do something about it.
@BlueSkies360 What makes you any differnent fron the usual run of the mill conspiracy theorist? Or maybe you are. Are you a truther, a birther, a government hater?
@lizardgizard2002 So, basically my assessment was accurate. You're just a shill for the government. Mature statement btw, yes of course we swedes are big in the whole tea party movement.. lol.
@lizardgizard2002 Grow up yourself, calling people teabaggers, conspiracy theorists, truthers and birthers. Can it not just be that we have a different idea on what should be the responsibilities of the government? And considering where I am from, don't you think I have some insight as to why I have an opposition to such a system?
@Visfen No you do not have a different idea. You have delusions. I am Canadian not American so I have insight as to what is right and wrong with the government system. You do not, however, because you are in the wrong side of the issue, lol.
@lizardgizard2002 Yeah I'm Swedish and I'm involved in politics. I have some idea how government function and the economy, being as I'm also a double major.
You're clueless, you can't even defend your views, instead it's this politics of conspiracy theory, this pixie-book nonsense about the right wing being evil. Grow up, read a book.
@Visfen You are a double major idiot if you have the same ideas as Peter Schiff. I ddoubt that you do actually, it is just that you think libertarianism is "in" and it is "cool" to be a cult member. You must have an idea that you are wrong because you brought up that the right was evil, no one else did. The right wing is "delusional". The right wing is "heartless". The right wing is "whining", "complaining". The right wing is "unintelligent",etc but not evil.
@VisfenYou are a double major idiot if you have the same ideas as Peter Schiff. I ddoubt that you do actually, it is just that you think libertarianism is "in" and it is "cool" to be a cult member. You must have an idea that you are wrong because you brought up that the right was evil, no one else did. The right wing is "delusional". The right wing is "heartless". The right wing is "whining", "complaining". The right wing is "unintelligent",etc but not evil.
This has been flagged as spam show
Click my name and scroll back to about March 2 to see my unusual video interview with Mr. Schiff. He discusses how to *exit* a gold boom even if you're more of an agorist than a paper investor. And I question some of his numbers.
Thank you Dr. Doom for rappin' with the Ridley, and thank you x86.
RidleyReport 1 day ago
Without question the smartest man in all rooms the moment he enters. He is my economic hero. All I had shoved down my throat in college is Keynes..Listen to Mr. Schiff.
1) Here is what is wrong
2) Here is what is going to happen.
3) HAPPENS
4) Why are not begging for me to tell you what went wrong Answer: Many people make money from government shuffling around the dollars so the connected make money. Just unleash freedom.Financial and personal.
JohnnyMac2237 2 weeks ago
Production makes Consumption possible, production is a means, and consumption is ends.
Socialists believe the opposite is true,, they believe people produce because of consumers, they believe production is and ends, and that consumption is a means.
bjarnet3 1 month ago
Comment removed
StopFear 1 month ago
i agree with schiff but i like dr bouchet. She's very calm and collected when trying to make her point. but schiff looks at the bigger picture, further than just the jobs directly created by stimulus
pamchirathivat 2 months ago
@pamchirathivat She's either a deception artist or a fool. Keep learning about Austrian economics.
dubified89 2 weeks ago
hes got some balls spitting the truth like that in congress
norskemann1 2 months ago
I love that who Peter ask how much should the government take no one wants to answer that because they don't really want to tell you what really want to take from you.
glanemann 2 months ago
Boushey is a moron.
ddstar 2 months ago
999 likes, made it 1000 XD
8TheManWithNoName8 2 months ago
lol @13:20
DBKK 2 months ago
awesome how everyone has notes except peter lol
DBKK 2 months ago
finally they invited Obi Wan Kenobi to come and teach them :)
comadivine1 3 months ago
Low interest rates are dangerous, they allow the government to be seduced to spend too much money and build up large debt. We see the same happen in Europe. Schiff is dead right on this.
TWSceptic 3 months ago
I really don't understand this: They are ignorent and highly disagree about the most simple and important issues involved in running a country. How can this be? This is impossible. But if it is really so - why do we have people sitting around running our countries? If Bous. does not even know, that it is possible to pay 50% in tax - as Schiff claims he does - where are we, then? There are plenty such examples in this video. They don't know and won't agree about the most simple things-staggering!
pvn2474 3 months ago
Comment removed
TWSceptic 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@pvn2474 That's the problem with democracy, if the voters are idiots, the politicians are too...
TWSceptic 3 months ago
@TWSceptic What I ment is, that how can well educated politicians not know what is going on in their country? How can they disagree and be so ignorent about so many important issues? They should know. So, my question actually was: what does formal education help us, if it leaves us no better understanding of what we are dealing with, if we are still as ignorant as ever? I believe my question is not as stupid as it could sound, if one really digs down in it.
pvn2474 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Privet counterfeit cartel perpetuates poverty and the welfare states that prostitutes there native born playing the Federal Reserve game rather than being a self supporting republic State that can't be a service to the needed just the greedy who puts money above people. America is DEAD.
GovernMentalFreedom 3 months ago
I love when he talking about his "50% tax rate," he includes the taxes he pays at the state level.
We're talking about the FEDERAL government here. The federal government doesn't tell the states how much they should tax their citizens. Therefore, it's misleading for him to say he pays 50% in taxes and then blame the federal government.
And as conservatives say to the OWS Protesters, "QUIT WHINING!!" Your tax rate was 90 fucking percent in the '50s.
robgrauertvideo 3 months ago
@robgrauertvideo Are you saying that he pays more in state taxes than federal ones? I doesn't really matter whether the taxes are going to the feds or the states (or localities for that matter), what matters is that we are being taxed way too much, the government at all levels is spending too much, and that most of the spending is unconstitutional to boot.
MrSubtle 3 months ago
@robgrauertvideo That is true,, and they started to raise them in the beginning of the great depression. Probably why it lasted for over a decade.
Obama wants to raise taxes just like they did in the beginning. He wants to repeat the misstakes.
@DrBoushey, you freaking whore,, You don't need government regulations to prevent Mc Donalds or other companies from making their costumers sick. They go out of business if they make people sick.
Companies have all incentives to make products safe.
bjarnet3 3 months ago
@robgrauertvideo Dude seriously. Your reply is be lucky you don't pay 90%?
glanemann 2 months ago
Put Schiff in charge of the fed :D
Norie92 3 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Peter is right about 90% of the time. But he keeps saying gold somehow is money per the Constitution?? BS. Peter has gold on his brain. Get off it Peter... In the mean time, there is another guy who just published a book on what everyone who is being taken advantage of can do to get back in the game after having their clocks cleaned... "Money Slaves And Cool Aid"... Get - The - Book dot com (solve the riddle and learn what to do). Good luck pounding it through their thick skulls Peter.
TMIAmerica 3 months ago
While Schiff is addressing the viability of the currency system, Heather Boushey seems more concerned over the regulation of the ingredients in fast foods.
MX3516 4 months ago
Dr. Bouchey is a rubber stamped cookie-cutter "expert" of the "university community", as the arrogant bunch of professors and staff in college called themselves. She has probably existed in the academic world since the day she graduated, and that makes her better than everybody else and entitles her to go around telling everyone else how to run their lives and their businesses.
MX3516 4 months ago
I just love the "and that caused the crisis" with reference to so called 'rich people'. These blind assertions against the upper class, a minority, go unchallenged and explain why the true origins of the crisis remain unknown to many.
mason72518 4 months ago
lol ...dr douche' tells schiff that the percentage of HIS income HE pays in taxes are IMPOSSIBLE ..like she knows his finances BETTER than he does ..good lord ,where the F#k did this odiously arrogant twat get her doctorate ?
woodenmajor 4 months ago
no one should be eligible for congress or ANY govt position UNLESS they have owned or RUN a business with the exception perhaps of former career soldiers .these career govt drones and lawmakers are KILLING the small business owner and by default the US ecomony ..mr cummings is an example and poster boy for EXACTLY whats killing us .
woodenmajor 4 months ago
He called him Dr Shiff. haha fredudian slip
3point101 4 months ago
Mr Cummings.....go back to school
shidoski 4 months ago 2
Peter Schiff is good and he can explain it to the average citizen...Law makers are afraid to level with the American people, the pain we will experience to fix this problem will cause most of these bums to loose their jobs.. That is their fear! No one in Washington is willing to be the grown up at the party. We are doomed by those WE elect and ourselves
gman2013 4 months ago 2
5:28 is epic!!
jgilmorejgi 4 months ago
It isn't the 99% vs 1% IMO, Need to come together for common good for things just like this, and get rid of garbage laws that make jobs overseas
ABeans07 4 months ago
I wonder what Dr. Bouchey has done in her life to create jobs. Govt sponsored academic blowhards live on grants and hate the free market, therefore what do they actually know about it?
wcscargo 4 months ago
Her name should be Dr. Doushey. Is Ecoly the same the same thing as E. coli? Is she saying she doesn't eat cooked hamburgers? Can we really fill holes with money? Talk about uncertainty.
BaceFookable 4 months ago
Would Mr. Schiff be willing to work for minimum wage like he suggested for the rest of America? Has he ever tried to live on minimum wage? It is easy for the rich to tell the rest of the world how they should not get any of their money. The middle class is carrying this country. The rich nor the poor are helping...especially NOT Mr. Schiff. I bet he never is concerned about how he is going to pay his next utility bill... Dr. Boushey is not correct either... time to start over...
songbird607 4 months ago
@songbird607 wow you have to be pretty stupid to come up wth a comment like that.. obviously peter schiff would rather be employed then unemployed, regardless of wage. in fact if we listened to peter schiff and other austrian economists we wouldnt have these problems. plus if you dont want to work for less than what the minimum wage would be than you dont have to work its simple
richiespice10 4 months ago
@songbird607 Schiff predicted all of this along with other Austrian economists. Did you? Thought so.
Wealth creation starts with savings. Savings finances capital investment (tools, machines, factories). That leads to productivity gains and increased supply, which is where real higher wages and purchasing power derive. It is only then that we can demand (spend/consume). Spending is a byproduct of wealth creation, not the cause.
joepeeler34 4 months ago 2
@songbird607 As he would explain, if the skill/labour worth for a service or product is minimum or below wage...then it's an acceptable wage. In current conditions, that labour simply does not get employed, or gets avoided, or automated.
kardentyrell 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Peter Schiff for chairman of the Federal Reserve!! Ron Paul 2012!!
lynx1208 4 months ago
Why is this edited?
bobbyp21 5 months ago
@bobbyp21 probly cause the whole thing was like 2 hours long
OddRobb 4 months ago
Peter Schiff is legend
HornetUK1 5 months ago 41
RESTORING THE AMERICAN DREAM: Search for free millions of jobs on the largest #1 job site worldwide, with over 50 million unique visitors and 1 billion job searches per month and is available in more than 50 countries and 26 languages, covering 94% of global GDP. We have jobs in every state county and city in the US. Plus job and resume posting.
To get started just Google ( Jobs Linked To You ) Then start your job searching free.
robvar83 5 months ago
He ran for Chris Dodd's (D) senate seat in 2010 and lost to an establishment, east coast RINO hack. We deserve all the tyranny we voted for.
bmac6446 5 months ago 2
This man should be in charge of the treasury, or something.
OddRobb 5 months ago 28
@OddRobb Or President? He'd a lot better than any of the others who are running.
MrSubtle 3 months ago
@MrSubtle Just because he knows and practices sound monetary principles doesn't mean he is fit for holding office.
OddRobb 3 months ago
@OddRobb Compared to whom?
MrSubtle 3 months ago
'Dr.' Boushay was educated at the New School for Social Research, located in the heart of New York City, more specifically, Greenwich Village. The school was founded in about 1920 by New York social progressives and is known for its 'avant-garde' teaching. It is also home to the World Policy Institute, an international think tank.
ElectRepublicans 5 months ago
Dr. Boushey is wrong: All regulation must go. Regulation as such is evil and destructive. Regulation is preventive law, law that subjects people to force in advance of any specific evidence that they are going to harm others. E.g., her idea about e-coli in hamburger: until and unless there is specific evidence about some particular restaurant doing that, there is no moral or political justification for subjecting the provider to force.
The gov't should not "regulate" the innocent.
HBinswanger 5 months ago
@HBinswanger Far out, dude! We should all be like, free to do whatever we like, want, brother! Down with The Man, man!
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 Far out man! You totally don't get it...like dude. You don't get to do anything you like. When you initiate force by violating another's individual rights, then force is to be used against you. What don't you understand, brah? Should I type slower?
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 And who determines who has what rights? The government? You? Schiff? Whoever is quicker on the draw and gets to live to write history...?
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 You might just as well ask who decided that there would be language and which words would be used. Natural rights and common law weren't a product on a single mind or any narrow group of central planners. They weren't created by a vote. They were and are an emergent order. Maybe you should do more reading on other emergent orders, then come back to economics. You might be more receptive to it after having done that. You are under the sway of a central planning fallacy.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 No, I'm not. You are under the sway of an emergent order fallacy.
So far the Europeans haven't learned adequate English yet just by being left to their own devices and the Americans haven't adopted the metric system yet on their own.
So emergent order my ass! You don't make these things happen by conquest or official decree, they don't happen. Even if you think of common standards as Procrustean beds and that it's a good thing they aren't enforced on people, you must admit it.
OolTube02 5 months ago
i like a lot of what schiff said but removing the minimum wage worries me
tehgreatist 5 months ago
@tehgreatist Why? Marginal labor has a price floor just like everything else. Employers have to bid for that labor too. They don't have to bid as high for it because it is low skill. Some jobs are only productive at $5 or $6 an hour. Those jobs are eliminated with the minimum wage. It's those just entering the job market that typically take these jobs. They gain experience and increase their skills. It's not like there isn't class movement. A minimum wage destroys marginal jobs.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 thats true, but you could also see many large corporations such as mcdonalds and other fast food places, or grocery stores drop their wages. i just dont think the poor need it to be any more diffcult to make an income and save some money.
tehgreatist 5 months ago
@tehgreatist They already have contracts with existing employees. Those jobs that still exist are by definition profitable for the business at those wages else they wouldn't exist. Many of those jobs pay above the minimum wage.
It's not just an economic issue to me. It is a moral issue. The government should not be interfering with contract--wage contract or any other.
The government doesn't drive up real wages. Only productivity gains can do that.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 we agree fundamentally, i just dont want to see the middle and lower class suffer. but yes, with moral integrity and a little bit of fairness everyone should still be paid reasonably.
tehgreatist 5 months ago
@tehgreatist The term "reasonable" is a subjective one. If a person doesn't think the wage offered is "reasonable" he is free to sell his labor elsewhere.
If the most a person can get on the market it $6 an hour that tells me all I need to know. It's not volitional on the part of the business owner, it is systemic. Some jobs just want exist when mimimum wage prices are imposed.
The govt. is saying in effect that you can't work under a certain wage. By what right do they do that?
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 In the long run the plutocrats will figure out they can't sell anything to people without even a living wage, like Henry Ford did, when he realized the people who made his cars were also the ones to buy his cars.
Unfortunately, to paraphrase Keynes, in the long run we're all dead because the lack of a living wage didn't allow us to have that mole on our forearm looked at in time.
Yes, I am saying the lack of a decent minimum wage is going to make us all die of skin cancer...!
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 Your use of term plutocracy is not warranted. There can only be rule by wealthy persons in the absence of a free market. It is then that those with wealth can get special favors from the government.
Corporatism isn't a natural outgrowth of free markets. It's a natural outgrowth of unlimited democracy and economic illiteracy on the part of the public to allow government central planning efforts.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 Yes, yes, I know! There is no such thing as a natural monopoly, a lack of regulation couldn't possibly enable anyone to corner a market and the government is the root of all evil and if we removed it it wouldn't merely replace democracy with plutocracy.
I get it. Conservatives do not understand the concept of systemic causation and emergent patterns. If a problem or its solution doesn't involve accusing and punishing a sentient entity for conspiracy to sabotage it doesn't exist.
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 Who said anything about natural monopolies? I didn't. I was explaining why wage prices are systemic, not volitional. That doesn't pertain to so-called natural monopolies.
But since you brought it up, natural monopolies aren't common, but they can happen. They just want last long in a truly free market. That is because high profit margins attract new investment. Increased competition means lower profit margins. Profit margins will fall till they find a new level.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@OolTube02 Also, I have no use for democracy. I favor a republic. What we have now is the inevitable result of unlimited democracy. Individual rights don't exist in this system. Some things just should not be up for a vote.
In a Republic the individual has some protections from the majority. There is no tyranny of the majority.
Organized interest factions will control a mob-rule democracy. Corporatism and a welfare state are the natural outcomes of such a system.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 I am aware of that. During the Irish Potato Famine you would have been on the side of the food producers being allowed to sell to whomever they want, and if that means exporting to England even while your neighbors are literally starving, so be it! Anything else, any democratic interference in the market would have been despotism. It would have saved lives but it would have meant oppression.
It literally qualifies as a psychological disorder to think like that, you know...
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 I make a point, then you don't even attempt to refute it. I'll take your constant changing of the subject for an inability to defend your positions. Before I ask your accusatory question, why not first ask why the Irish economy and was so dependent on the simple potato?
Could it be British laws that imposed bans on the education, possession of land, and entering of a profession by Irish Catholics? That's a government abrogating natural law--a failure of your ideas.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 Could the lack of voting rights have had anything to do with the Irish Catholics' underclass status? But I suppose democracy is not the answer, representing an unacceptable tyranny of the majority over the minority...
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 You do understand that democracy is not the only representative system? One can still vote in a Republic you know. The difference is that the mob can't vote themselves other people's money and protections. Not everything should be up for a vote. You should learn the difference between a constitutionally federal republic and a centralized unlimited democracy. Until you do, you'll be searching in the dark for answers.
Your starting premises are all wrong.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 Once people are desperate enough they always vote themselves other people's property -- just not by orderly fashion of checking a box at the ballots but by taking to the streets with pitchforks or guns.
Like I said, it's like the difference between feeling pain early on or smelling the gangrene much later, by which time your society's connective tissue may already be necrotic everywhere...
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 People vote themselves other people's money even when they aren't desperate. Look at how many people get the government to subsidize mansions in disaster prone areas. Look at how many well-off seniors (there are a lot of them) vote themselves S.S. and Medicare. It's the rich who benefit disproportionately from the welfare state.
That's why we need to limit the power of government. A republic does that.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 Yeah.
What happened to the Roman Republic again...?
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 What happened to Rome. Drifted into a dictatorships. Written constitutions will not prevent the growth of a government. It's why I don't even like to use the word government. I prefer Protectorate because they are different things. Only an educated, vigilant population will keep government in line and liberty in check. A people must first start with a good system though.
What happened to unlimited democracy in Greece? What's happneing to unlimited democracy now in the West?
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@OolTube02 Also, for a funny explanation of my point see "Let's make democracy" on YouTube. It strips away all the concealing language quite nicely. Then check out "The Story of Your Enslavement."
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@OolTube02 Moreover, to answer your question in more detail, what is to be done in the wake of a problem created by an intrusive government? Afterall, the Irish economy wouldn't have been so dependent on potatoes if not for British laws. Crop failures--in this case caused by a potato disease-- happen all the time, but it is only when an economy has been reduced to a subsistence level by government central planning efforts that hard choices, to the extent that there are choices, must be made.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@OolTube02 There wasn't enough crop to feed Irishman. Let's say some farmers who had a meager amount of potatoes to sell sold them to other Irish. What were they going to pay them with? If they had purchasing power, they would buy potatoes/other food from importers.
If those who had a small surplus just gave it away, where would they get the capital necessary for next year's crop?
It would have ended in even more deaths and malnourishment. What you call "democracy" is just force and theft
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 "You are nothing, your purse is everything."
I best let Wikipedia speak for me on the philosophy that bailing someone out is never justified:
/wiki/Great_Famine_(Ireland)#Food_exports_to_England
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 I prefer to identify myself as a liberal. That is a liberal in the classical sense of the word.
I don't understand emergent orders? Ha! Now you are projecting. A market is an emergent order. You seem to have a hard time understanding that some things aren't the result of central planning. Money is an emergent order as well. It wasn't an invention of central planners anymore than a market is. Common law and language are two more examples of emergent orders.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 I know you believe in emergent order and harmony. What you don't understand or see coming is the possibility of emergent chaos and destruction. You're to the economy the equivalent of some spaced-out, head-in-the-clouds hippie, who thinks untouched nature is all peace and bliss and love and understanding between all creatures.
Peace out, brother!
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 I do believe in destruction--creative destruction. And it isn't a matter of "believing" in emergent orders. It is a matter of ACCEPTING their existence and seeking to understand them.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 Better make sure the bird you're killing is a Phoenix first, not a dodo...!
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 Moreover, the concept of emergent orders lacking a central planners is counterintuitive for most. This is why you think that wages are volitional, rather than systemic.
Employers must compete for wages with other employers. Some labor will be bid up higher owing to greater productivity levels, but even marginal labor must be competed for. There is a price floor even for this marginal labor just as there is for anything else. There's nothing special about wage prices.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@OolTube02 Why do most people make far above the minimum wage? You think it is volitional right? You think that all other prices other than wage prices are systemic, but for some reason you imagine that wage prices operate outside of economic law. It's a very shallow understanding of how markets work.
The Keynes quote was pertaining to the reflation of credit bubbles, not minimum wage laws. We have been following Keynesian prescriptions for decades. The long-run is here. Observe the results.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 No, you haven't been following Keynesian prescriptions for decades. Keynes was about the government doing deficit spending only in times of an economic slump, when a lack of demand caused a temporary decrease in private investment, not all the time. Reagan doing deficit spending in '83 may have been justified, but not in '86 any more. Encouraging a housing bubble in 2001 was okay, but no longer in 2005.
This would be Keynesianism like a stopped clock being right twice a day.
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 You are right--I haven't been following Keynesian prescriptions for decades. The lunatics in government have.
Keynes supported fiat currency and central banks. He did advocate what you wrote, but he didn't stop there.
He supported reflating credit bubbles with more cheap money. Replacing one credit bubble with another is boilerplate Keynesianism.
Housing bubbles just pop. They aren't based on any real saved capital. The economy is strected in two directions at once.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 I suppose when you get cold at night you refuse a blanket because that would merely be artificially inflating a body heat bubble. If the Invisible Hand of Thermodynamics wants you to catch pneumonia then so be it!
Ah man, what self-destructive foolishness! This is what getting a glimpse into the internal workings of a cult is like...
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 It's sad when one has to resort to sophistry and bizarre analogies.
There is nothing artificial about a blanket. It has to be produced. It can't be created out of thin air.
Credit has to derive from real saved capital. If central banks try to replace with real saved capital with artificialy banking procedures a false boom can occur if rates are kept low enough long enough. It creates a phony, ephmeral "prosperity."
Ah, Keynesian drones, and their pretense of knowledge!
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@OolTube02 Reagan's deficit spending didn't create the increased standard of living. We just ran up a credit card. The recovery had far more to do with the Federal Reserve, led by Paul Volcker, let interest rates find their natural rate. Prime rate went over 20%. The cheap monetary spigot was turned off. Volcker turned off the Fed's funny money machine. That strengthened the dollar. Lowering income tax rates helped, but it would have been far better to slash spending without deficits.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 So now lowering interest rates in reaction to a recession is good all of a sudden...
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 What are you talking about? Interest rates need to rise. Again, what are you talking about? Where did I advocate that the Fed should artificially lower interest rates? You are the one who advocates that. My mind is hurting trying to reason with you. You project ideas on to me that you hold.
Here, I'll type slower. I-want-interest-rates-to-be-determined-by-market-conditions. They can be high or low depeding on supply of savings and deman for credit.
U-n-d-e-r-s-t-a-n-d-?
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 I understand. People's judgment cannot always be trusted, but the all-wise and all-powerful Invisible Hand of the Market is always right. All hail to thee, Invisible Hand, our salvation from this fallible world of puny mortal decision-makers to Free Market Heaven!
I think it is customary to watch this video at this point: watch?v=zI5hrcwU7Dk
OolTube02 5 months ago
Schiff grilling Keynesian zombies?... what else is new?
schitzonix 5 months ago
WTF there was another version of only Peters part of this hearing posted here: /watch?v=_BHLguFEN3M that had over 120k views and now it says the user removed it?????
hazeee123 5 months ago
@hazeee123 It's a government conspiracy, I tell you...!
OolTube02 5 months ago
BE SURE TO EMAIL DR. BOUSHEY ABOUT HER PATHETIC PERFORMANCE AND HOW MUCH SHE SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF HERSELF.
hboushey @ americanprogress. org
Theman101289 5 months ago 4
@Theman101289 I did :) Thanks
H1TMANactual 5 months ago
@Theman101289 Well, I can forgive her if she didn't know in advance what an overbearing loudmouth she was going to sit next to. Or maybe she simply wasn't feeling well that day and that's why she wasn't up to the job of holding her own. It's not like I'm always at the top of my game in these kinds of situations myself, so who am I to judge? But next time, if there ever is a next time, she better be a little more assertive; I agree...
OolTube02 5 months ago
Sales tax is a red herring. The sales tax on products he sales is an amount he collects for the government from the end consumer--HE does not pay that sales tax. In addition, he doesn't pay any sales tax on products he buys that goes into the products he sales. There is no resale tax. Any manufacturing tax MOST businesses simply roll into the product cost, plus he writes off tax he pays on machines, equipment, and so on.
pasha582 5 months ago
@pasha582 The rich love sales tax because it's regressive, hitting those the worst who have to spend most of their cash for goods just to survive. Those who can make lots of money with money are comparatively unaffected by such a tax. So what's not to love, from his perspective?
Don't make me laugh about "machines!" That guy doesn't produce anything. He just shovels money around and lives off the crumbs, like the Master of the Universe straight from the Bonfire of the Vanities that he is.
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 15 years ago, Peter Schiff lived in an one bedroom apartment in Los Angeles and started his company Europacific capital from there. His business has grown and he is making money through his understanding of the market economy and government policies. He is a talented economist and investor! That's why he is rich and better off than you. You have no rights to his wealth and property! Now, the congress on the other hand is made up of unproductive leeches who should be thrown out!
AFRIKTODAY 5 months ago in playlist Peter Schiff
@AFRIKTODAY It's because people like him make a thousand times more than an engineer that people don't literally make anything any more in the US and breaking levees drown hundreds.
Is it his fault? Is it his right? Who gives a shit about these philosophical questions as the infrastructure is crumbling? Maybe you should focus a little less on who has the ideological right to what financial wealth and more on what money is meant to facilitate in the first place...
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 Dude, you ought to be kidding. The State literally bailed out the fat cats on wall streets 3 years ago with trillions of dollars from us the tax payers. Did Peter Schiff get any of those funds? No! The US military is building roads in afghanistan, Irak; the US is shelling out money to Egypt, Iraq, Pakistan. For what? To maintain an illusion of grandeur while " the ROADS ARE CRUMBLING HERE AT HOME". Dude you are blaming the wrong culprit. BLAME THE STATE, not peter schiff!
AFRIKTODAY 5 months ago
@AFRIKTODAY Of course he got some of those funds. If he was invested in Goldman Sachs or anything that AIG insured he got money from the bailout. It was lack of government oversight that caused the banking crash and yet Schiff argues for more deregulation of industry, using his own financial industry as an example. It's another credit bubble or derivatives trading default that's going to cause the next crash, and if Schiff's testimony above is listened to he will certainly share blame in that.
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT DUDE? Seriously, you are another " moron" who is voicing his opinion on something he does not know about. Peter Schiff wrotes a book titled " crash proof" warning people about the real estate and credit bubble that was created by the FED AND THE CONGRESS. How could he invest on something he warned people against? You are pathetically ignorant... I lack words to describe and characterize you. Just look on the internet for " PETER SCHIFF WAS RIGHT!"
AFRIKTODAY 5 months ago
@AFRIKTODAY So what you're contending is that Schiff shorted those bank stocks and then lost money when the bailout prevented them from defaulting? I haven't researched this, but it would explain why he's so angry about it.
Schiff wasn't so right about the bear market he predicted after the internet bust.
But I'm much more worried about the future. Most blame the 1999 bank deregulations and the Bush/Obama tax cuts for the disaster and yet this guy thinks they didn't go far enough...
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 What really annoys me is the fact that you are judging Peter Schiff without having any prior knowledge about him. Just click his name on youtube or on google and you will get enough material to analyze his perspective. You do not have to agree with his position, but at least, get your affirmations in check if you do not want to sound like an parrot. Peter Schiff philosophy on investment is focused on hard assets and foreign stocks in emerging economies. He never buys US STOCKS!
AFRIKTODAY 5 months ago
@OolTube02 SECONDLY,
Peter Schiff did short the real estate related stocks when they were falling but his MAIN concern is the soundness of the US economies that is being destroyed by too big to fail policies and crony capitalism that serves the few at the expense of the many. The same people who benefited mostly from artificially low interest rates in the years 2001-2007 WERE BAILED OUT AND NONE WENT TO JAIL OR WAS FIRES FROM HIS POSITION OF POWER.
AFRIKTODAY 5 months ago
@AFRIKTODAY And yet in the same breath that Schiff feigns outrage about the bailed out financial industry, held to no account, he advocates for even more deregulation, lawlessness, tax breaks...
Do you know what funds institutions who'd go after criminal banksters, who bankrupted millions. Taxes do. Do you know what funds the kind of criminal cronyism that made the bailouts possible? Private campaign contributions.
But I'm not hearing him scream and holler for campaign finance reform...
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 You really do not get it. Cronyism is the alliance between the State and some favored private institutions. The goal of the so called regulations is to prevent competition and entry. That's what the whole game is all about. Maintain a few incompetent at the top regardless of the quality of the service that they offer. Deregulating will open the market to more dynamic enterprise will a full spectrum of service, it will permit innovation and the big " bailed" zombies will not SURVIVE
AFRIKTODAY 5 months ago
@AFRIKTODAY You're not really familiar with the concept of the economies of scale and the formation of natural monopolies, are you...?
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 There is no such a thing as a natural monopoly! Monopolies or rather cartels ( which exist on wall street) are created with the support of the legislature which make it more expensive and complicated for new business to enter a particular trade. I haven't heard you complain about Goldman Sach, JP morgan, CITI, bank of America and other big international banks that received trillions of dollars of tax payers bail out in order to pay themselves salaries and bonuses! WHY?
AFRIKTODAY 5 months ago
@AFRIKTODAY I know the concept of natural monopolies or anything that isn't the result of intelligent design boggles the mind of the conservative because they just can't wrap their heads around systemic causation, emergent patterns... George Lakoff wrote a whole book about it.
The bailouts were outrageous because of the lack of conditions attached. Yes, the government is corrupt, but that was in itself the result of a deregulated business world turning around and buying a weak government...
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 What are you talking about? The more I read you, the more I am embarrassed. Monopoly is the granting of exclusive privilege by the State. End of story! Now, wall street is not a monopoly but a cartel! Cartel aim at preventing entry into their trade in order to maximize their profit by overcharging their consumers. The point of emphasis here is the role of the State " THAT BAILED THEM OUT"! 3 trillion dollars to the bankers and you are talking about deregulations? ARE U KIDDING ME?
AFRIKTODAY 5 months ago
@AFRIKTODAY Monopoly is someone being in control over the only supply chain of something, whether by way of a factory or a road or a patent. Sometimes it's government causing it, sometimes it's simple geography. That's what I was talking about. And what I was also talking about is you seeing only the artificial monopolies, not the natural ones, because there is a conservative mental blind spot there -- that, to put it vulgarly, sometimes shit happens without someone deliberately shitting on you.
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 You are giving me your " flawed understanding" of what a monopoly is while I am providing you with the classical definition of that economic concept. The first " recognized" monopoly in western history was the South sea company that was created by the then Great Britain to trade exclusively in the name of the throne. No other corporation was allowed to compete with that company. There is no such a thing as " natural monopoly" in the free market.
AFRIKTODAY 5 months ago
@AFRIKTODAY Well, there are natural monopolies. But never mind that...!
Even just taking artificial, government-enforced monopolies into account -- you don't wish to get rid of all of those. Your rights to property, of being allowed to do whatever you want with the things officially recognized as owned by you -- that's a monopoly. The so-called "free market" is based on trading with goods you own. So the whole concept of economic freedom is actually based on government-granted monopolies.
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 Because regulations are what benefit the big companies and were a leading cause to the financial collapse, like arbitrary reserve requirements that war far too low considering the risk that comes with it when you have a FDIC.
Visfen 5 months ago
@Visfen I agree with the contention of reserve requirements having been lowered too much. But wouldn't higher reserve requirements constitute stricter and (some would argue) more investment-inhibitive government regulations -- they very thing Schiff is ranting against in the video...?
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 No it wouldn't. That's just a matter of what price fixing the government is engaging it. 10:1, 40:1 and 100:1 are all government regulations that are advocated because of the FDIC. You could let people decide how much risk they want to take. That is the market solution. It's not deregulation, it's a different form of regulation.
Visfen 5 months ago
@Visfen It's still regulation and therefore socialist. No regulation means banks can take whatever risk they want to take with your money and don't have to tell you anything. If you go broke you know better next time and won't invest your money with that bank again. So by process of elimination I'm sure you will eventually find a trustworthy financial institution after about twenty defaults or so. That's the way of the truly free market.
OolTube02 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@OolTube02 SECONDLY,
Peter Schiff did short the real estate related stocks when they were falling but his MAIN concern is the soundness of the US economies that is being destroyed by too big to fail policies and crony capitalism that serves the few at the expense of the many. The same people who benefited mostly from artificially low interest rates in the years 2001-2007 WERE BAILED OUT AND NONE WENT TO JAIL OR WAS FIRES FROM HIS POSITION OF POWER.
AFRIKTODAY 5 months ago
@OolTube02 3 This kinds of things occurs in bananas republics, not the supposedly US open market economy. CAPITALISM is FIRST AND FOREMOST A SYSTEM OF PROFIT AND LOSS. The rich and connected were BAILED OUT, AND THAT IS UNJUST. It has nothing to do with PETER SCHIFF PERSONALLY but the DETERIORATION OF THE US ECONOMY!
So, blame the regulators who protect the big bankers and the fact corporations who pay no income taxes ( GE) and leave the like of SCHIFF ALONE!
AFRIKTODAY 5 months ago
e-coli in 'our' hamburgers. I can't think of a stupider thing to talk about at a time like this.
iflyboats 5 months ago
the nigger's response 'education...blaa blaa..' simple drivel for the masses. What an idiot, it just shows those who can't work in gov't.
justgetsome 5 months ago
Peter Schiff is right on point. If you look beyond the media static and democratic/republican rhetoric your eyes will see.
mosl2te 5 months ago
Notes yes - but not a prepared speech. That marks a good man. Excellent testimony.
MarcusCMarcellus 5 months ago
He killed it.
Ana1106 5 months ago
@Ana1106 Yeah, he and guys like him, over the last decade...
OolTube02 5 months ago
Comment removed
HollywoodSheen 5 months ago
Comment removed
HollywoodSheen 5 months ago
Wow, Mr. Cummins is a dope.
dlporter198 5 months ago
Because the Liberal media will disagree with him until the bitter end, like when people laughed at him when he said (about a year before it happened) that banks were in trouble and the housing market was going to collapse. GS was trading at about $170 per share when he said this. Now it's $93 and it was as low as $50 before Warren Buffet save it.
dlporter198 5 months ago
How come Peter Schiff has never been interviewed on CBS 60 minutes ????
I respect that news show and know it reaches a lot of people throughout the world. Why isn t Peter's voice heard on a greater scale ?????
alex630710 5 months ago
They say Schiff is this clairvoyant future-teller because he predicted doom in the housing market. But he also predicted the bursting of the internet bubble would lead to a bear market. So you're suffering from confirmation bias if you think he's a reliable prophetic authority.
In reality the guy simply makes up for in confidence in what he lacks in competence. I guess the word for people like him is "dazzler."
OolTube02 5 months ago
I agree with Schiff on taxes as well as I agree with the Dr who says that infrastructure jobs do create work for the public and private which is true, Pending if the job that is created is necessary.Schiff is right about taxes as if one compares to other countries like Canada, they pay 50% there about, yet they do not have the rules or laws to deal with as far as manufacturing goes as well as health care is not the employers expense either.
cannabisopensource 5 months ago
I see why they do not get anything done up there. They merely argue and if anyone presents facts they are interrupted and the subject changes
cannabisopensource 5 months ago
How much of my income should i have to give to the government to be fair? that bitch couldn't answer the question.
cheba2k1 5 months ago in playlist cheba2k1's Favorited Videos
@cheba2k1 Yes, this hearing is an allegory for the political situation in the country as a whole. Deluded loudmouths on the right versus timid wimps on the left. Bullies versus pushovers. Schiff is obviously an idiot. I have no idea whether the woman is smart or dumb because I could hardly hear her.
It's pathetic. You guys are so doomed.
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 You are getting raped in 2012. You're trying to avoid your own defeat by projecting it onto the victors. Both sad and hilarious.
itachi705 5 months ago
@itachi705 So... Assuming the rape allegory were accurate, you're implying I'd be better off striving for a dose of Stockholm syndrome and identify with the rapists instead...?
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 Why do you say that Schiff is an idiot? In this hearing he just told the government what they are doing wrong and how to correct the problem. Its clear that these government officials are afraid to really do the right thing because they don't want to lose their seats in congress. Schiff predicted many economic problems to come and unfortunately he's gonna be right again unless the COWARDS in office get the guts to do something about it.
cheba2k1 5 months ago
@cheba2k1 You've had tax cuts and financial deregulation for the last ten years and where did it get you?
Schiff predicted a bear market after the internet bubble burst -- epic fail!
He predicted the housing bust? Big deal! I predicted the housing bust. When my relatives told me they had bought a house in Florida at he height of the boom I told them, "are you crazy; in one or two years you would have gotten it for half the price."
So y'all should listen to me and I say he's an idiot.
OolTube02 5 months ago
@OolTube02 Schiff is telling the government that its spending too much money. Thats the problem and its devaluing our currency and interest rates are too low. so with those two problems he and anyone else that understand the basics of economics can see that those two issues will bring major problems in the near future.
cheba2k1 5 months ago
@cheba2k1 Yes, and Schiff is also telling the government it is taxing too much at a time when it's been taxing less than in the last sixty years or so. Clinton raised taxes and turned a recession into booming economy while Republicans screamed their heads off. Bush/Obama lowered taxes and kept them low and now you're in the dumps, but this guy is telling you too much taxes are the problem. And too much regulation, after Bush let the industry write the laws.
Enjoy your Great Depression 2.0...!
OolTube02 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@OolTube02 Why do you say that Schiff is an idiot? In this hearing he just told the government what they are doing wrong and how to correct the problem. Its clear that these government officials are afraid to really do the right thing because they don't want to lose their seats in congress. Schiff predicted many economic problems to come and unfortunately he's gonna be right again unless the COWARDS in office get the guts to do something about it.
cheba2k1 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Next HUGE moneybomb for Ron Paul will be on OCT 19th
BLACKTHISOUT . COM
qwerty94376 5 months ago
Imagine that Steve Jobs could have had his cancer cured if not for Keynsianism that have absorb millions of new scientists into government jobs.
BlueSkies360 5 months ago
@BlueSkies360 What makes you any differnent fron the usual run of the mill conspiracy theorist? Or maybe you are. Are you a truther, a birther, a government hater?
lizardgizard2002 5 months ago
@lizardgizard2002 What makes you different from a shill for the government?
Visfen 5 months ago
@Visfen A teabagger raises his ugly head.
lizardgizard2002 5 months ago
@lizardgizard2002 So, basically my assessment was accurate. You're just a shill for the government. Mature statement btw, yes of course we swedes are big in the whole tea party movement.. lol.
Visfen 5 months ago
@Visfen I take it back you are not a teabagger, just ugly, an American wannabe, a delusional libertarian wannabe. Should I continue. Grow up.
lizardgizard2002 5 months ago
@lizardgizard2002 Grow up yourself, calling people teabaggers, conspiracy theorists, truthers and birthers. Can it not just be that we have a different idea on what should be the responsibilities of the government? And considering where I am from, don't you think I have some insight as to why I have an opposition to such a system?
Visfen 5 months ago
@Visfen No you do not have a different idea. You have delusions. I am Canadian not American so I have insight as to what is right and wrong with the government system. You do not, however, because you are in the wrong side of the issue, lol.
lizardgizard2002 5 months ago
@lizardgizard2002 Yeah I'm Swedish and I'm involved in politics. I have some idea how government function and the economy, being as I'm also a double major.
You're clueless, you can't even defend your views, instead it's this politics of conspiracy theory, this pixie-book nonsense about the right wing being evil. Grow up, read a book.
Visfen 5 months ago
@Visfen You are a double major idiot if you have the same ideas as Peter Schiff. I ddoubt that you do actually, it is just that you think libertarianism is "in" and it is "cool" to be a cult member. You must have an idea that you are wrong because you brought up that the right was evil, no one else did. The right wing is "delusional". The right wing is "heartless". The right wing is "whining", "complaining". The right wing is "unintelligent",etc but not evil.
lizardgizard2002 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@VisfenYou are a double major idiot if you have the same ideas as Peter Schiff. I ddoubt that you do actually, it is just that you think libertarianism is "in" and it is "cool" to be a cult member. You must have an idea that you are wrong because you brought up that the right was evil, no one else did. The right wing is "delusional". The right wing is "heartless". The right wing is "whining", "complaining". The right wing is "unintelligent",etc but not evil.
lizardgizard2002 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@VisfenI take it back you are not a tea