In fact the RISK (but perhaps not likelihood) of hyperinflation is far greater today because in a real money based economy inflation and even hyperinflation are safety valves for a overly monetized economy. We have no such safety value currently, so there are no failsafes, when things fall apart, they fall apart completely. Whereas in the past we would have corrected years ago, today we have your hock stick chart, Money doesn't = gold today, it equals confidence, and that can run out too!
It comes from speculation, from feelings really. There is no way to objectively value any currency. The hyper-inflation position is not that printing money will cause hyperinflation, but that monetizing debt into a currency that has no intrinsic worth, along with economic stagnation and political turmoil, MAY cause a crisis in confidence, and since currency is valued by the confidence in it, such a crisis would lead to hyperinflation.
I am not an economist but I think you are mis-characterizing the Hyperinflation position. Historically hyperinflation is caused by printing money because historically money stood for something real: silver or gold. Today what gives value to money? When they switched off of gold I think their remained the illusion that money=something (i.e. the gold in Ft. Knox), but today money is valued by fiat.
The truth is, a COMBINATION of left- and right-wing policies will make the economy run most smoothly. The idea, inherent among most members of ALL three major ideologies (left, right and libertarian), that they have ALL THE ANSWERS on economics, is flat-out nonsense. No one ideology has a monopoly on "the solutions for growth and prosperity."
For example, Mankiw supports a carbon tax, which is a "no-no" in conservative circles. He identifies or is said to be a "New Keynesian", not so much as a neoclassical, much less an Austrian.
All relevant polls and surveys of ECONOMISTS on all the major claims that are oftentimes made (such as, "rent control is a bad idea") show that ECONOMISTS ARE SPLIT on most economic issues, except for free trade. It seems that the vast majority of them DO support free trade, interestingly. Economists are more center-right on some economic questions and center-left on others. Even Gregory Mankiw, the conservative Romney-supporting Bush economic advisor, is kind of left-wing on SOME economics.
The "hyperinflation" claim is yet another bogus scare tactic designed to "show everyone that we're right" from the libertarian side on economic issues. I USED to be a libertarian, and then I opened my eyes and realized that economic is a LITTLE more complicated than a black and white world where ONLY left, right, or libertarian solutions are the ONLY way to go. Economies are very complicated, and we have YET to truly understand how they work. Economics is still fairly young as a science.
I'm so TIRED of these libertarian and Austrian MORONS claiming we're in for "hyperinflation." They've been claiming this for, what, the last 2-3 YEARS?? IT HASN'T HAPPENED! It WON'T happen! So stop bitching and whining. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the U.S. YET to have any hyperinflation AT ALL? Where do they get this absurd idea that we'll have hyperinflation? Do they even UNDERSTAND how inflation works?? I think they need to re-take Economics 101.
Austrians are dumbasses, plain and simple. They invent all these wild-eyed 'theories' based on little to no evidence, much less anything that's EMPIRICALLY PROVEN through a good study (oh, wait, they don't BELIEVE in empirical studies because "You can't study human behavior like the physical laws of the universe", which is BS). They're IDIOTS, I'm sorry to say. I usually don't name-call, but I do have to call it like I see it.
And they make up all kinds of wacky conspiracy theories or ideas about institutions like the Fed or the Fed's "true role" in the U.S. It's enough to make your head explode! They ACTUALLY think the Fed is some kind of "private company that's not part of the gov't", when in REALITY, they just don't understand the decentralized Fed system compared to OTHER central banks. So they assume it's "private", which is a load of crap.
The Fed IS part of the gov't but it's an INDEPENDENT AGENCY, kind of like the CIA. To say that the Fed is "private" like it's some kind of business is just insane. Where do they GET such wacky ideas? They just use this "private" claim as a way to scapegoat the Fed for ALL our economic woes, whether deserved or undeserved.
QE and QE2 have only printed just south of 25% of GDP in terms of extra money given to the banks. Probably not even THAT much! Yet I'm supposed to believe that unleashing this 25% or less of GDP in NEW money is "gonna create hyperinflation"?? Oh, please. Besides, as the economy RECOVERS, banks will lend out more of that money to borrowers IN A SLOW FASHION, not so quick that the economy doesn't have time to adjust. The hyperinflation claim assumes that all the money will be lent
IMMEDIATELY, which it will not. Not by a long shot
Btw, do the people who "fear" this even KNOW how the Fed actually creates fiat currency?? Or do they HONESTLY think the Fed has access to a printing press that it uses constantly to churn out TRUCKLOADS of new dollars that it delivers daily or weekly to all the banks in the country?
Look up Treasury securities and the Fed, libertarians. THEN you'll know how it really 'creates money out of thin air.' It's really the banks who do it.
If the reserve ratio were 100%, the Fed COULD NOT print new 'money out of thin air', at least not by the way it does it now, because it relies on BANKS to use that reserve multiplier (the amount they can lend out as a multiple of how much they have in ACTUAL hard currency) to lend out more money, and more people get those loans in their bank accounts, which means they themselves are 'richer' and have more money in the econ.
I learned all this shit in basic econ. my first year of college! Why do most libertarians seem to have been ASLEEP in class when the professor talks about the Fed?? Is it REALLY that hard to understand central banking?
The ONLY institution in the U.S. that has an active printing press (at least, one that's LEGAL) is the U.S. Mint, which is operated by the TREASURY Dept., not the Fed. At most, the Fed MAY have some hard currency in terms of gold in places like Fort Knox, but that's about it. Of course, that gold doesn't do much but sit there with our currency unbacked by it, and the vast majority of Americans don't invest in gold.
In terms of inflation, at MOST we would see maybe 25% if the QE and QE2 money worked immediately. But I'm pretty sure most economists define hyperinflation as much higher, at least 50 or 100%. MOST, if not all, states with REAL hyperinflation have it well above 100%, some into the THOUSANDS.
The idea that we'll become the next Weimar Republic is just clownish.
We don't have inflation? You haven't been monitoring prices the last 2 years. Food has inflated nearly 35%, Fuel nearly 125% since this video. You were wrong. Post your correction please to gain some respect back.
Another thing to consider. The Federal Reserve won't allow hyperinflation to happen. They are a for profit business that gains its prestige the same way any bank does, by loaning money and charging interest. Only they issue their own currency. They can do this because the dollar is accepted as payment. If it dies, the Fed will go out of business. So believe me, the Fed will not let hyperinflation happen.
the dollar isnt "accepted" as payment, it is forced to be payment, thereby giving it monopoly status, making it almost immune from risk and destroying competition.
This is all true. Many people still believe we will get hyperinflation but they have no evidence to back it up. Some say its a political crisis, loss of confidence in the currency, whatever. There is no single cause of it. There are several economic conditions that need to be present in order for hyperinflation to thrive. Other than the explosion of base money, none of the other conditions are present. Anyone who thinks they know when the will be, doesn't have a clue.
So... increase nominal balance sheets in order to offset 'write-downs' from sour loans, gain interest on floating capital in S/T insutrments instead of loaning to create value for individuals, and you get what? Commodity surges because there is a magnified need for hard assets to collateralize in exchange for new debt?Good thing the arbitragers are milking the discount window teat, huh!?
I agree with your summary that the banks are not loaning the trillions created however you cannot look at this one factor. There will soon come a time when the velocity of money goes ballistic which will be a political decision. The FED has the power to put the destructive process in motion and keep up appearnaces temporarily but the music will eventually stop. Foreigners will lose confidence in the US Dollar and have already started to. When the panic starts then we will see the effects.
It's interesting because I agree with most of what you say but you still appear to get it wrong. Hyperinflation occurs because of a catastrophic loss of confidence in the currency. It has its root in monetary policy but it is essentially a polical problem. As such hyperinflation is slightly different from very high inflation.
Now we are at the point where the world is ready to dump the dollar. Whether US citizens are still willing to use it will determine whether we get hyperinflation or not.
let this be a lesson to everyone, when you're making a video commentary, please do it in a quiet environment so we don't have to struggle to hear what you're saying over the background noise. nice video. it'll be fantastic for all of us if you're right.
My cost of living has doubled in the last two years. Everything I pick up costs more and more. Insurance, taxes, fees, tolls, food, gas,repairs, heating oil, everything........
Is this deflation because my house is worth 100k less?
I will go with Gerald Celente, Shiff, Bob Chapman and others, they have predicted most all that has happened with accuracy. The have the track record, buy silver!
There are several Nobel Prize in Economics recipients that are saying the US is on the door step of hyperinflation. Here is the reality. Current Gross National Debt (all debt owed by all debtors) and all obligations (contracted promises) due over the next 30 years is approximatly 800 times the current GDP. The entire wealth of the world can not cover this.
Hyperinflation is not going to happen.There would be complete social chaos of a type unseen since the civil war.There is no demand side inflation as is evident in the BDI which is dropping like a stone. Also the US dollar is not going to tank. The Euro may implode but that will send the dollar up. At present we are seeing a speculative blow off similar to early 2008. High inflation...not hyperinflation... will probably occur in a couple of more years.
@librazone "We've never really seen hyper-inflation [of prices]..." I think that very high price inflation - of 9% to 15% over a period of 5 - 7 years - as we witnessed from about 1976-1983 is the near equivalent, for consumers, of short-term hyper-inflation of prices. Buying power is eroded in either case. It is debatable whether or not hyperinflation of prices was occurring during the late 70s.
We're not seeing hyperinflation? I'm sorry but the poster of this video is a god damn moron. YOU are not seeing it, I am seeing it anywhere I look. a new york strip is upward of 8 dollars now and growing fast. Gas is going up, already too expensive. Rent - up 100 bucks. Electric - up 30. Tell me again with all your jargon how reality isn't real?
@LeonRFpoa What you have just described is inflation not hyperinflation! When we start seeing 100 trillion dollar notes here in the US like they have in Zimbabwe that would be hyperinflation.
Fractional Reserve.......means the bank only have to have a fraction of what they loan out, what rubbish, the money are created by the bank on the corner ? what garbage. This guy need to have a course in National Economy, and he thinks he is clever, and others are dumb, like most there degrade others by calling them dumb, is the dumbfuck himself, what an ass.
One last point. This idiot also stated that the money supply doubled, so we should have seen Hyperinflation. That's the dumbest thing I've heard in a long time! In November 2008, Zimbabwe had an inflation rate of 98% PER DAY!!! That is hyperinflation, not 100% per year. (100% inflation per year could lead to hyperinflation, but doubling the money supply in one year WILL NOT create hyperinflation)
This just shows that any idiot with a camera can spew incorrect information on the Internet.
That's all hyperinflation is, it's an out of control debt spiral of any government. It doesn't matter if the country is called USA or Zimbabwe. Do a little research before you post videos of yourself on You Tube. Hyperinflation can easily be understood by anybody, at least I thought it could before I saw this video.
Zimbabwe's Debt to GDP ratio is 282.60% according to WIkipedia. 110% is less than half of Zimbabwe's Debt to GDP ratio. We are on the road to hyperinflation, but we are not there yet.
When the government over-borrows, they have trouble paying the interest. This causes the government to borrow more money to pay the interest. But now, they have to pay all the interest on the old loans, plus interest on the new loans. The government must borrow more each year, because their debt level keeps getting higher (as a % of GDP).
The guy in the video is an idiot and doesn't know what hyperinflation is. It's not caused by printing massive amounts of money. It's caused by the government borrowing too much money over & over again. (In the video, the guy states that we can't have hyperinflation because our money supply comes from loans.)
thanks for this very interesting perspective. "why is there no hyperinflation yet?" would probably be unsatisfactorilly answered by ron paul as "well it might come tomorrow if we don't do something" whereas in reality I think your credit model makes more sense.
RamzPaul, from 1982 to 2009 the rates were lowered. This causes a bubble in Real Estate and the fourth/next decade is a deflationary decade. Like clockwork this happened in the 1890's, 1930's, 1970's and 2010's. The contraction in jobs and Real Estate keeps inflation in check. We learned from the 1970's that when foreclosures were all sold off in 1976 then inflation occurs and Real Estate quadrupled in price by 1980. I expect Real Estate will quadruple in price from 2016 to 2020.
BLOOOOOPER!! Zimbabwe had to do price fixing this occurs after hyperinflation Germany 1923 they had 100 trillion dollars ?The point is , this guy is so wrong its not even funny
We have seen a huge increase in the supply of money in the last few years. The reason that prices have not gone sky high is because we a in a huge recession right now.
what he is saying is pretty obvious that credit creates money. however that is not entirely correct. credit MULTIPLIES money (or capital). It's called LEVERAGE. if the gov't prints money and provides a lower rate - essentially loosening monetary policy - it effectively provides fuel for credit markets to burn. That does not mean credit markets will open up but if they do open up this can mean high inflation. Hyperinflation is a loose term (anything above 10% is hyperinflation in my view).
1) If the dollar collapses then the supply of money will rise as people sell dollars.
2) The banks may not be lending the money they borrow from the fed. However they do get it into the money supply by turning around and buying T-Bills (lend back to the government). The government then just takes the money they just printed and uses it to pay medicare or print a social security check etc.
Fractional reserve banking started with gold reciepts...and now it is being done with fiat money. We get it. You seem like a smart guy, but I disagree with you because once credit money becomes cash...inflation will kick in.
Credit money v. fiat money....creating money from thin air is wrong! And, it will eventually lead to big time inflation as we saw under the Jimmy Carter POTUS.
I beg to differ with you Mr. Paul. Your premise is that the fed put $1 trillion into the monetary supply. [your number] It is actually more like $50 trillion. You then say there is no inflation and ergo there can be no hyperinflation. A. that is wrong: the fed lent money to banks, who turned around and paid it to foreign banks. America never got that money. B. the influx of "money" was never money it was simply a line of credit. i.e. noone got a $20 bill. however money supply = inflation
""this is what money is ? you get paid a chicken for a days work ok ? you don't need a chicken every day so you need to swap your chicken for a loaf of bread ,but a chicken has more value than a loaf of bread ,if you were to work for a day you would get 5 loafs of bread ,so so need a medium to break up the value of your chicken ,paper money allows us to do this ? Money has always been based on something ? it has to have some corresponding value , if not every historical instance says what ?"
"this is what money is ? you get paid a chicken for a days work ok ? you don't need a chicken every day so you need to swap your chicken for a loaf of bread ,but a chicken has more value than a loaf of bread ,if you were to work for a day you would get 5 loafs of bread ,so we need a medium to break up the value of your chicken ,paper money allows us to do this ? Money has allows been based on something ? it has to have some corresponding value , if not every historical instance teaches what ?
"this is what money is ? you get paid a chicken for a days work ok ? you don't need a chicken every day so you need to swap your chicken for a loaf of bread ,but a chicken has more value than a loaf of bread ,if you were to work for a day you would get 5 loafs of bread ,so so need a medium to break up the value of your chicken ,paper money allows us to do this ? Money has allows been based on something ? it has to have some corresponding value , if not every historical instance says what ?
this is what money is ? you get paid a chicken for a days work ok ? you don't need a chicken every day so you need to swap your chicken for a loaf of bread ,but a chicken has more value than a loaf of bread ,if you were to work for a day you would get 5 loafs of bread ,so so need a medium to break up the value of your chicken ,paper money allows us to do this ? Money has allows been based on something ? it has to have some corresponding value , if not every historical instance leads to disaster
Not convinced. My understanding is that hyperinflation happens when governments first runs up crazy debts and can't find anybody else to finance them. Then they print fiat money to pay down credit. Check out Wiemar Germany, Argentina 2000, etc. Something else to note is that hyperinflation doesn't happen instantly. It happens over time with building inflation first. So we'll see inflation rates rising before they go ballistic. It always arrives in hard times. That has a check mark.
If the world sent all the dollars home and would not accept them in return, wouldn't we have hyper-inflation then.....any market can crash and crash much faster than they grow
yeah and the ONE QUADRILLION in Derivatives aren't gonna cause any serious issues either...oh inflation isn't a problem since the dollar has lost nearly 99% of its value in under 100 years...what is this guy smokin'?
There are too many populists and other leftists posing as libertarians and conservatives. Posers confuse matters enough so that even true libertarians and conservatives get confused. Thanks for helping to set the record straight about a system of money creation that is millenia-old.
By the way, I read M. Friedman's *Free to Choose* and *Capitalism and Freedom*, and he didn't make the claim in those books you said he makes. In what book did he make that claim?
I have heard of companies with orders on the cooks for their products, but cant get credit. Even consumer car loans arent available. The banks wont lend.
Oh, and the government and banks are one in the same for all intents and purposes. The Fed is part of the banking cartel, and the government and Fed are intertwined and dependant on each other, as all all governments and central banks. They both have the exact same mutually dependant on each other.
If the Fed had little power of money creation, then what would be the effect if it jacked rates to 50%? How much money would those banks create then? Nuff said.
This guy is wrong. Wait until that created money starts to circulate. Banks are efficient at getting that money circulating. In the parlance of economics, it's called velocity. Once the velocity increases, then you will see hyperinflation. With this credit crunch, the banks can't get all this newly created money into the system. But wait. It's coming. Oh, and our country has seen hyperinflation before. Read the History of Banking or History of Coinage.
then why is the dollar index decreasing at a rapid rate ever since the crisis and all these bilouts and stimuluses were given?? without the production and savings (credit) to constitute all the influx of base currency wealth in the system, it devalues the currency, hence hype-flation. They have only pushed 1/3 of the stimulus into the system, anyhow. Prices already seem ridiculous to me. You've got 25-30% markups on basic products in the last 6-7 years. That's not hyperinflation, but it's close
I don't follow this. Who cares Fed or banks, and sometimes how can you differentiate. The fact is - trillions more, and all that 'fractional banking' where he says the fraction is actually - ZERO! Whatever the source, that's a lot of cash. Some things inflate horribly - like housing, particularly gov guaranteed. Hospital costs. Others don't, like electronics.
Credit money is what the economy lives on and not fiat money. The fed can create all they want. If the banks do not lend that money there will be no hyperinflation.
M1 and M2 are what matters and that can be 10x or more what we have as actual money.
So far they have increased the money supply about 2x which is nothing.
I happen to agree with him. I think the link is not direct.
Friedman wasn't "neo classical". He's more often associated with the "Chicago" school of Ecnomics. He would not be happy about this, watch the Charlie Rose interview with him, he provides a clause to his perspective, regarding the Fed printing a significant amount of money, which they have and are.
Wow, you are soooooo wrong it is unbelievable. I want to see if you put your money where your mouth is. Buy T-bills since there is no problem. I will stick to gold, silver, and food ETF's
If we can agree that inflation is creating money without an asset backing it, and is the reason why commercial loans are not highly inflationary, then monetizing debt must be at least more inflationary than commercial lending? No?
And what are we to expect when the expanded fiat currency hits the market, and consequently commercial lending picks up again?
Also, do you know how much fiat currency is out now as opposed to 2 years ago?
We are in a money bubble right now, and it hasn't yet burst. Just like the housing bubble, it took years for the damage to show. It took for years for the German Currency to collapse in 1923. The dollar won't collapse in a slow and modest paste, instead, it will reach a point that it will collapse all at once.
We haven't experienced the inflation you refer to because it's swept under the rug being shipped off to foreign lands in the form of deficits, both trade and government budget ones, financed by foreign investors. Yes, the banking system creates money, and that is inflationary because four borrowers chase an item rather than a single one with actual money.Now, things are surprisingly deflationary in the home market, but commodities are rising, and will ramp up to a gallop, I think very soon
Just because something hasn't happened doesn't mean it will never happen. Things don't happen until they happen. Did you expect a collapse of the banking system in 08? The Austrians did.
What about the 54T in unfunded liabilities including 11 T. in debt most of which to foreigners and most of it short term. What happens if the interest rate needs to be raised? What about the US dollars that are in foreign banks? What if that comes home?
This is a really great video and certainly justifies making it a favorite well over a year ago. So many "experts" have been calling for inflation or hyperinflation since "Helicopter Ben" went into action, but your video explains why it hasn't happened. The constriction of credit to the average person has actually been deflationary and so far the trend continues as evidenced by declining real estate prices. Great job!
WRONG!!!!!!! I would be rather enthralled to have an intellectual conversation with you; as I am sure that you are gravely and fundamentally mistaken. In fact, I question weather you have ever given any moments credence to the arguments presented by the austrians. If you had you would realize that they are very much against the very things you mentioned!
Chief among these is their absolute disdain for any artificially manipulated money which invariably favors big GOV
Why did you leave out the term "VELOCITY OF MONEY".
was this a simple mistake
Worse! ... was this omission an aid toward building a straw man argument!
OR have you simply never heard of this term. In either case I suggest you look this up and if you feel it crucial in explaining the lag effect in rising prices than please correct yourself. At least as an effort to promote TRUTH.
This is the most ridiculous thing I ever heard before. Money and credit are synonymous. It doesn't matter how money comes into existance.
When someone takes out a loan to buy for instance a house, the money that is loaned to them is used to pay for the house; so this money goes into the previous owners bank account. If he spends this money, whatever he spends the money on will go to the next owner.
The money supply is expanding while goods and services aren't; this causes prices to rise.
Why have we not seen hyperinflation? Because the bubble hasn't burst yet. Plain and simple, give it a little bit of time and the devaluation will hit. You are openly admitting that you prefer to rely on the valuation of a dollar that has no consistent value based on wealth, we might as well start using entropy as currency.
Priniting trillions of dollars with no real commodity backing should theorhetically devalue the dollar. It is the same for any commodity, whether it's oil, gold, diamonds, or anything else, including fiat paper notes.
For ex, if I were to somehow make 10 trillion dollars worth of diamonds, the value of each individual diamond on the global market would decrease; so why does this not occur with dollars??? This economics stuff is so damned confusing! =-( Can anyone fill me in?
Money created without an asset backing it is pure inflation. However, most currency is created with an asset backing it. For ex. A home loan has a house, a car loan a car, etc..
However, when money is created with NO asset backing (monetization), it is pure inflation, and destroys the currency's value
Yet, the reason current monetization is not hyperinflationary is that this fiat money has not entered the economy. When it does... ouch!
So are the banks not lending money to prevent hyperinflation then? And if so, they will eventually be forced to do something with their new notes, and when they do, is the dollar automatically dead when it hits American markets then? If we artificially prop up the dollar by keeping the banks alive with limbo money, can we keep the global scam going until I'm a fogie at least?
I don't know if they're intentionally not lending. My sense is that they are afraid to lend and they can't find qualified borrowers.
Actually monetization devalues the currency. So, printing money to prop up banks makes the system weaker. If anything, monetization will accelerate the fall
And it's hard to believe that banks aren't lending money because people are unwilling to take it. The average American consumer is much like a crack addict in that they think of mostly short term gains. Offer credit, and it shall be used.
We Americans were consuming more than we produced. Unfortunately, we exported our jobs with globalization. This stagnated wages and forced us to borrow in order to maintain our standard of living.
Interest rates were beneath inflation, so putting money in a savings account actually made us lose money.
The solution, IMO, is to repatriate our jobs with fair trade tariffs and raise interest rates to make saving more attractive.
The problem with higher interest rates is that the government owes 11 trillion dollars and most of that is
1)Owned by foreigners
2)Short term t-bills, as opposed to the old 30 year bonds so if the interest rate were to go up for 5 years we would be paying much higher interest on most of the us debt. We got away with it in 1980 because most gov debt wasn't effected because not that many bonds matured and needed to be rolled over.
Can you imagine 20% interest rates and what it would do to us?
They are fixed, the problem is that they are much shorter term at 2-5 years which means if there is an interest increase that lasts for a few years nearly all the debt could be rolled over. Debt that gets rolled over will be at the new rate. It also means that more debt has to be sold this year than just the new debt due to the old ones maturing. It's very scary. Even at low interest can you imagine if we no longer could borrow money? We'd have to pay (current) for all this shit.
I had not thought about that. Thanks. That is scary. Most bills are 3yr term. Holy crap! that means when the notes come due, we will have to borrow money on top of the money we borrow to fund our deficits, national mortgage pmts. Wow! The only solution is to monetize. Soon our deficits will not be funded by existing money. We're on the brink of hyperinflation.
Yes, it's very scary. Last week the Chinese gov called for an international effort to force countries with reserve currencies to better manage their money. Since the Euro and the Yen are not in bad shape and are being managed OK, you know they were referring to the US. What makes that so bad is that China is our number 1 creditor. If China stops buying our debt we are in major, major trouble. Of course, that probably won't happen, at least this year.
It's clear that China needs to prop up the dollar. If the $ falls, their exports take a bigger hit, and their reserves take an even bigger hit.
However, this can't go on forever. China knows that our debt is too big. I'm sure they know what I relized a few hours ago: that the cost to service our national debt will require monetization.
I was unsure if the dollar would collapse. That doubt is now gone. Your comment, "debt gets rolled over at a new rate," did the trick. My stomach hates you.
The thing is it will NEVER happen or at least not until China weans its economy off exporting to the US. They are more dependant on the US than the US is on them. If China stops importing dollars they cannot export to US. And if dollar crashes they will lose much more than the US. Actually a devaluation of the dollar is beneficial to the US as we can pay off our debts at a much lower cost. China will lose in this scenario.
We need their "stuff" and they need our paper dollars and somehow you think they need us more? If the dollar crashed it would hurt US a lot more than THEM. Talk to anyone who has lived through hyper-inflation.
I don't think it's going to happen until we lose reserve currency status though. The world's central banks aren't going to let the dollar collapse as long as it's the reserve currency.
We hold more dollars than they do and it's the currency we work for. Hyperinflation might wipe out your debt but good luck getting food or importing oil or anything else. If you think hyperinflation would hurt China more than us, I suggest you read books about people going through it. It did wonders for Germany.
You are blatantly wrong that we hold more dollars - we have LESS than 0 dollars - every household has about 1million in debt if you allocated the national debt now. So we hold NEGATIVE dollars. Or in other words less than 0.
We work for dollars, our assets are in dollars, we live in a dollar economy. If the dollar goes down 50%, you are 50% poorer, especially given we import so much.
Inflation is not a good thing, you have to throw off this Orwellian double speak.
Assets whose value is based on the US and the US' economy, unless you are holding foreign assets. If you are rich enough that you don't need to work and can live off your savings or dividends from investments (assuming these are foreign), then more power to you.
If you're paycheck is in dollars you will be less wealthy
One of the major problems with dollar falling is that so much of our economy is based on foreign resources. A great deal of stuff made in the USA is made with parts that come from outside the US. Obviously it's not perfectly even across the board and instant, but a falling dollar is bad for America and American Assets. U.S. consumers are addicted and reliant upon, the cheap foreign products made possible by the deliberately weakened Yuan.
No nation is more protectionist than China and I think the US should reinstate the historical 20% tariff. With 50 billion month trade deficits, I don't think it will hurt America in the longer term although everything will be 20% more money since we import so much.
So you want to turn America into China. Please. What america needs (as any other country) is to let the markets adjust. Unfortunately with so far we are going down the wrong road rewarding the incompetence and inefficiency with all these bailouts to fatcats so they can keep their Lamborghinis while burrying the taxpayer under a mountain of debt.
I agree with you about the bailouts and all that, but what is wrong with bringing manufacturing jobs back to the US? What is wrong with good paying manufacturing jobs? What is wrong with consumers saving money for the future? Credit doesn't increase your standard of living, it just shifts lower consumption into the future.
Because we are not as efficient as the Chinese (or we cannot do it for same money) - simple as that. Why should all of us pay to subsidize inefficiency? What you are proposing will cause additional inflation which in the end will hurt everybody.
First of all, that's not inflation. If the Chinese un-pegged from the dollar and didn't constantly inflate the Yuan, we would be paying substantially more for Chinese made goods. People used to say the same shit about Japanese goods until they let the yen rise, now they manufacture in the US. The US was the king of manufacturing the cheapest highest quality goods in the world while paying the highest wages. The Chinese are inflating their currency to kill us.
Inflation is plain and simple devaluation of a currency. If you are paying a higher price for other goods than you were previously it is inflation. If you propose protectionism you will end up paying a higher price or you if gov't imposes price controls you will end up with more demand than supply and rationing...
Prices going up is a symptom of inflation. I am for market solutions, not gov solutions (although I do think we should reinstate the 20% tariff). Wealth of Nations style trading makes sense, using HUGE amounts of energy to ship parts, raw materials and seeking cheap assembly/labor is just a ridiculous waste.
I think high energy cost is going to bring a lot of jobs back home, or at least I really hope it does. I don't see how it can work with expensive energy.
Zarni000, you have no idea what ur talking about. Price increases are NOT inflation. They are its symptom. Inflation is the creation of money faster than goods are services to justify it.
Tarriffs will increase prices, but wages will rise faster than prices because the jobs will be repatriated. The price is irrelevant, what matters is the purchasing power of labor. If prices double, but wages triple, then bring it on. Tariffs will instantly increase the demand for American labor, and its cost
Well apparently you do not have any idea what you are talking about. Inflation means rising general price level (goods and/or services). Really it is irrelevant what it is due to - credit expansion or money supply.
exactly, just because the banks are holding the money now and unable to lend it, doesn't mean it will always be that way... as soon as they start loosenning up again, which they are now, you will see a temporary rise in the stock markets(already happenning) followed by inflation and an even deeper recession
*sigh* and why do prices rise? Hmmm? You schiff fanatics do not understand economics for shit. Bank credit and fiat money are two very different things.
@zarni000 No. Inflation is not a rise in prices. If it was, there would be no way of measuring it as we have prices which fall and rise on daily basis. He is right. We will not see hyperinflation, but deflation. The inflation part has already been done. Inflation is the expansion of money and credit, while deflation is the opposite.
you are ignorant. CPI is a measure of inflation and that is a "price index". if you can't measure inflation by price rise how can you measure it? maybe put your thumb out and check the winds?
Also although you are right that inflation is both money supply and credit we have not yet seen the credit markets open up. That actually remains to happen. This is when we will see the full manifestation of inflation. And you are wrong again- we have not yet seen inflation after the crisis.
@zarni000 So you think the banks will start lending again to people who are essentially broke? You think the banks are looking to go insolvent again? Not gonna happen any time soon my friend. Of course we have not seen inflation and we will not see it until the huge debt bubble blows up. It needs to disappear before people can actually borrow again.
@zarni000 So you tell me why they are holding ALL their money with the fed and are not lending any of it to individuals. And also explain to me why even if people and business can borrow, they are reluctant to as well. You are forgetting that it takes 2 to tangle. One side lends, the other borrows. If one side is not willing to play the game, it's check mate. Over. Not gonna happen regardless of how much dollars are printed into existence.
Banks do not need to hold their money with the fed. That is not how it works.We have a fractional reserve system - they only need to show a very small part as reserve and even that is very loosely enforced.
Secondly - yes sooner or later credit markets will open up. Bear in mind they don't have to open up for US consumers - banks can lend to the rest of the world. The dollar will plumet regardless when that happens.
@zarni000 Hahahahaha. No you are wrong. And you are talking to someone that knows about this. US banks are holding the biggest amount of money in history with the Fed. Go look it up. And just like you have an account with a bank, the banks have to hold an account with the fed. How do you think banks transact US dollars? The fact that the law says that banks have to hold a minimum reserve requirement is beyond banks being insolvent or not. Okay, so US can lend to Greece right? Nobody to lend man!
The law says one thing...it's not enforced anymore.
Secondly the FED does not allow auditing of their statement - if you knew about the US system you would know that already. There is no proof either way what their books are.
Also I am not arguing with you right now they are holding off on lending. I am saying that pretty soon they will not be.
@zarni000 So we just had a 70 inflationary period and all you hyperinflation didn't say one word. Now that the opposite seems to be happening, you guys are screaming hyperinflation.Should I dare say, HYPER-deflatoin. Lol.
i am not talking about a bank lending to a government. Credit markets are much more flexible than that. I am talking about capital outflows to foreign markets. That is for instance what happens in Japan - check out what Yen carry trade is for instance. This means for instance Japanese housewives borrowing and buying foreign assets for higher returns.
@zarni000 I thought Japanese investors were burnt by the derivatives blow up last years, especially those housewives you mention. Who will these banks lend to?
@zarni000 I agree that they don't "NEED" to hold it with the fed. They can invest it, lend it, etc... But for some WEIRD reason, they are holding most of it with the fed right now.
Good heavens! You are ignorant. China is debasing its currency in order to keep competitive with the dollar. How do you think the yuan is valued in lock step with the dollar?
The domestic effect is suppressing the purchasing power of Chinese labor. With very exceptions, the Chinese people live in squaller.
Futher, they are communist. Government forces them to work. They have no choice. Their employment is forcibly voluntary.
China may be communist gov't politically but the market is capitalist in every sence of the word. Go to China and see for yourself and then speak. Nobody is forcing anybody to work.
And the chinese do not live in squalor. There is a substantial growing middle class.
Tariffs have nothing to do with bailouts. You're foggins the issue. To think that the bailouts are the cause is wrong. The bailouts are a continuation of the problem, but not the cause.
The cause was the repeal of tariffs followed by the repeal of Glass Steagall.
The solution to the crisis is to undue the financial and trade errors that happened under Clinton and Bush.
Tariffs have been in place for the majority of America's history. Before the Federal Reserve, 1913, most funds to the treasury came from tariffs. There were no income taxes nor property taxes.
I keep hearing this annoying lie that Smoot Hawley created the great depression. Nonsense. It kept America's manufacturing base inside our border so that we were able to produce our WWII needs from within. Today, if we had another WW, we would have to import our tools.
3 years later. Still no hyperinflation.
maozebong100 1 month ago
You're right.
straydoggio 2 months ago
In fact the RISK (but perhaps not likelihood) of hyperinflation is far greater today because in a real money based economy inflation and even hyperinflation are safety valves for a overly monetized economy. We have no such safety value currently, so there are no failsafes, when things fall apart, they fall apart completely. Whereas in the past we would have corrected years ago, today we have your hock stick chart, Money doesn't = gold today, it equals confidence, and that can run out too!
ronpfloyd 4 months ago
So where does the value come from?
It comes from speculation, from feelings really. There is no way to objectively value any currency. The hyper-inflation position is not that printing money will cause hyperinflation, but that monetizing debt into a currency that has no intrinsic worth, along with economic stagnation and political turmoil, MAY cause a crisis in confidence, and since currency is valued by the confidence in it, such a crisis would lead to hyperinflation.
ronpfloyd 4 months ago
I am not an economist but I think you are mis-characterizing the Hyperinflation position. Historically hyperinflation is caused by printing money because historically money stood for something real: silver or gold. Today what gives value to money? When they switched off of gold I think their remained the illusion that money=something (i.e. the gold in Ft. Knox), but today money is valued by fiat.
So where does the value come from?
ronpfloyd 4 months ago
The truth is, a COMBINATION of left- and right-wing policies will make the economy run most smoothly. The idea, inherent among most members of ALL three major ideologies (left, right and libertarian), that they have ALL THE ANSWERS on economics, is flat-out nonsense. No one ideology has a monopoly on "the solutions for growth and prosperity."
whoo689 5 months ago
Comment removed
whoo689 5 months ago
For example, Mankiw supports a carbon tax, which is a "no-no" in conservative circles. He identifies or is said to be a "New Keynesian", not so much as a neoclassical, much less an Austrian.
whoo689 5 months ago
All relevant polls and surveys of ECONOMISTS on all the major claims that are oftentimes made (such as, "rent control is a bad idea") show that ECONOMISTS ARE SPLIT on most economic issues, except for free trade. It seems that the vast majority of them DO support free trade, interestingly. Economists are more center-right on some economic questions and center-left on others. Even Gregory Mankiw, the conservative Romney-supporting Bush economic advisor, is kind of left-wing on SOME economics.
whoo689 5 months ago
The "hyperinflation" claim is yet another bogus scare tactic designed to "show everyone that we're right" from the libertarian side on economic issues. I USED to be a libertarian, and then I opened my eyes and realized that economic is a LITTLE more complicated than a black and white world where ONLY left, right, or libertarian solutions are the ONLY way to go. Economies are very complicated, and we have YET to truly understand how they work. Economics is still fairly young as a science.
whoo689 5 months ago
@whoo689
Soooo... you still are a libertarian? You just explained what libertarians think about the economy...
drshlotzkin 5 months ago
I'm so TIRED of these libertarian and Austrian MORONS claiming we're in for "hyperinflation." They've been claiming this for, what, the last 2-3 YEARS?? IT HASN'T HAPPENED! It WON'T happen! So stop bitching and whining. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the U.S. YET to have any hyperinflation AT ALL? Where do they get this absurd idea that we'll have hyperinflation? Do they even UNDERSTAND how inflation works?? I think they need to re-take Economics 101.
whoo689 5 months ago
Austrians are dumbasses, plain and simple. They invent all these wild-eyed 'theories' based on little to no evidence, much less anything that's EMPIRICALLY PROVEN through a good study (oh, wait, they don't BELIEVE in empirical studies because "You can't study human behavior like the physical laws of the universe", which is BS). They're IDIOTS, I'm sorry to say. I usually don't name-call, but I do have to call it like I see it.
whoo689 5 months ago
And they make up all kinds of wacky conspiracy theories or ideas about institutions like the Fed or the Fed's "true role" in the U.S. It's enough to make your head explode! They ACTUALLY think the Fed is some kind of "private company that's not part of the gov't", when in REALITY, they just don't understand the decentralized Fed system compared to OTHER central banks. So they assume it's "private", which is a load of crap.
whoo689 5 months ago
The Fed IS part of the gov't but it's an INDEPENDENT AGENCY, kind of like the CIA. To say that the Fed is "private" like it's some kind of business is just insane. Where do they GET such wacky ideas? They just use this "private" claim as a way to scapegoat the Fed for ALL our economic woes, whether deserved or undeserved.
whoo689 5 months ago
QE and QE2 have only printed just south of 25% of GDP in terms of extra money given to the banks. Probably not even THAT much! Yet I'm supposed to believe that unleashing this 25% or less of GDP in NEW money is "gonna create hyperinflation"?? Oh, please. Besides, as the economy RECOVERS, banks will lend out more of that money to borrowers IN A SLOW FASHION, not so quick that the economy doesn't have time to adjust. The hyperinflation claim assumes that all the money will be lent
whoo689 5 months ago
IMMEDIATELY, which it will not. Not by a long shot
Btw, do the people who "fear" this even KNOW how the Fed actually creates fiat currency?? Or do they HONESTLY think the Fed has access to a printing press that it uses constantly to churn out TRUCKLOADS of new dollars that it delivers daily or weekly to all the banks in the country?
Look up Treasury securities and the Fed, libertarians. THEN you'll know how it really 'creates money out of thin air.' It's really the banks who do it.
whoo689 5 months ago
If the reserve ratio were 100%, the Fed COULD NOT print new 'money out of thin air', at least not by the way it does it now, because it relies on BANKS to use that reserve multiplier (the amount they can lend out as a multiple of how much they have in ACTUAL hard currency) to lend out more money, and more people get those loans in their bank accounts, which means they themselves are 'richer' and have more money in the econ.
whoo689 5 months ago
Honestly...
I learned all this shit in basic econ. my first year of college! Why do most libertarians seem to have been ASLEEP in class when the professor talks about the Fed?? Is it REALLY that hard to understand central banking?
whoo689 5 months ago
Listen up:
The ONLY institution in the U.S. that has an active printing press (at least, one that's LEGAL) is the U.S. Mint, which is operated by the TREASURY Dept., not the Fed. At most, the Fed MAY have some hard currency in terms of gold in places like Fort Knox, but that's about it. Of course, that gold doesn't do much but sit there with our currency unbacked by it, and the vast majority of Americans don't invest in gold.
whoo689 5 months ago
In terms of inflation, at MOST we would see maybe 25% if the QE and QE2 money worked immediately. But I'm pretty sure most economists define hyperinflation as much higher, at least 50 or 100%. MOST, if not all, states with REAL hyperinflation have it well above 100%, some into the THOUSANDS.
The idea that we'll become the next Weimar Republic is just clownish.
whoo689 5 months ago
We don't have inflation? You haven't been monitoring prices the last 2 years. Food has inflated nearly 35%, Fuel nearly 125% since this video. You were wrong. Post your correction please to gain some respect back.
gladedb 8 months ago
Another thing to consider. The Federal Reserve won't allow hyperinflation to happen. They are a for profit business that gains its prestige the same way any bank does, by loaning money and charging interest. Only they issue their own currency. They can do this because the dollar is accepted as payment. If it dies, the Fed will go out of business. So believe me, the Fed will not let hyperinflation happen.
TheFunk335 8 months ago
@TheFunk335
the dollar isnt "accepted" as payment, it is forced to be payment, thereby giving it monopoly status, making it almost immune from risk and destroying competition.
SecularNumanist 6 months ago
This is all true. Many people still believe we will get hyperinflation but they have no evidence to back it up. Some say its a political crisis, loss of confidence in the currency, whatever. There is no single cause of it. There are several economic conditions that need to be present in order for hyperinflation to thrive. Other than the explosion of base money, none of the other conditions are present. Anyone who thinks they know when the will be, doesn't have a clue.
TheFunk335 8 months ago
MOAR!!!!
antonyneal 8 months ago
Great point. Conclusion; Get out of debt because we might see hyperDEflation?
PJCelis 9 months ago
So... increase nominal balance sheets in order to offset 'write-downs' from sour loans, gain interest on floating capital in S/T insutrments instead of loaning to create value for individuals, and you get what? Commodity surges because there is a magnified need for hard assets to collateralize in exchange for new debt?Good thing the arbitragers are milking the discount window teat, huh!?
d1drummason 9 months ago
This isn't a loaded question- I'm honestly interested. What are your academic credentials? Or are you just interested in economics?
MacbookProWizard 10 months ago
I agree with your summary that the banks are not loaning the trillions created however you cannot look at this one factor. There will soon come a time when the velocity of money goes ballistic which will be a political decision. The FED has the power to put the destructive process in motion and keep up appearnaces temporarily but the music will eventually stop. Foreigners will lose confidence in the US Dollar and have already started to. When the panic starts then we will see the effects.
DanielSnedden 10 months ago
None of this made any sense. 6 minutes of some douche rambling.
mirabilo 10 months ago
It's interesting because I agree with most of what you say but you still appear to get it wrong. Hyperinflation occurs because of a catastrophic loss of confidence in the currency. It has its root in monetary policy but it is essentially a polical problem. As such hyperinflation is slightly different from very high inflation.
Now we are at the point where the world is ready to dump the dollar. Whether US citizens are still willing to use it will determine whether we get hyperinflation or not.
BlunderCity 11 months ago
let this be a lesson to everyone, when you're making a video commentary, please do it in a quiet environment so we don't have to struggle to hear what you're saying over the background noise. nice video. it'll be fantastic for all of us if you're right.
you5711 1 year ago
My cost of living has doubled in the last two years. Everything I pick up costs more and more. Insurance, taxes, fees, tolls, food, gas,repairs, heating oil, everything........
Is this deflation because my house is worth 100k less?
caganb 1 year ago
when the dollar dies maybe peoples eyes will open..it will happen eventually
tinky626 1 year ago
Here we are in 2010 and now we are seeing hyperinflation. This guy was a bit presumptuous...
MsTheresaKelly1 1 year ago
I will go with Gerald Celente, Shiff, Bob Chapman and others, they have predicted most all that has happened with accuracy. The have the track record, buy silver!
PSYCHOLOGYZOOM 1 year ago
There are several Nobel Prize in Economics recipients that are saying the US is on the door step of hyperinflation. Here is the reality. Current Gross National Debt (all debt owed by all debtors) and all obligations (contracted promises) due over the next 30 years is approximatly 800 times the current GDP. The entire wealth of the world can not cover this.
Robbob9933 1 year ago
Hyperinflation is not going to happen.There would be complete social chaos of a type unseen since the civil war.There is no demand side inflation as is evident in the BDI which is dropping like a stone. Also the US dollar is not going to tank. The Euro may implode but that will send the dollar up. At present we are seeing a speculative blow off similar to early 2008. High inflation...not hyperinflation... will probably occur in a couple of more years.
librazone 1 year ago
@librazone "We've never really seen hyper-inflation [of prices]..." I think that very high price inflation - of 9% to 15% over a period of 5 - 7 years - as we witnessed from about 1976-1983 is the near equivalent, for consumers, of short-term hyper-inflation of prices. Buying power is eroded in either case. It is debatable whether or not hyperinflation of prices was occurring during the late 70s.
musicalidea 1 year ago
We're not seeing hyperinflation? I'm sorry but the poster of this video is a god damn moron. YOU are not seeing it, I am seeing it anywhere I look. a new york strip is upward of 8 dollars now and growing fast. Gas is going up, already too expensive. Rent - up 100 bucks. Electric - up 30. Tell me again with all your jargon how reality isn't real?
Ramzpaul you are a friggin moron.
LeonRFpoa 1 year ago
@LeonRFpoa What you have just described is inflation not hyperinflation! When we start seeing 100 trillion dollar notes here in the US like they have in Zimbabwe that would be hyperinflation.
xkev1980x 1 year ago
Hyper inflation my bad
HeadoftheFed 1 year ago
No possibility of inflation. what about the jumping up of the price of just about every thing from gas to orange juice?
HeadoftheFed 1 year ago
Trust me i understans fractional banking econ i this why i wil vote for ron paul.
This is how we created an aristocracy.
HeadoftheFed 1 year ago
Great video, thanks!!
2000drpain86 1 year ago
Fractional Reserve.......means the bank only have to have a fraction of what they loan out, what rubbish, the money are created by the bank on the corner ? what garbage. This guy need to have a course in National Economy, and he thinks he is clever, and others are dumb, like most there degrade others by calling them dumb, is the dumbfuck himself, what an ass.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
One last point. This idiot also stated that the money supply doubled, so we should have seen Hyperinflation. That's the dumbest thing I've heard in a long time! In November 2008, Zimbabwe had an inflation rate of 98% PER DAY!!! That is hyperinflation, not 100% per year. (100% inflation per year could lead to hyperinflation, but doubling the money supply in one year WILL NOT create hyperinflation)
This just shows that any idiot with a camera can spew incorrect information on the Internet.
NOLDaemon 1 year ago
That's all hyperinflation is, it's an out of control debt spiral of any government. It doesn't matter if the country is called USA or Zimbabwe. Do a little research before you post videos of yourself on You Tube. Hyperinflation can easily be understood by anybody, at least I thought it could before I saw this video.
(3 of 3)
NOLDaemon 1 year ago
@NOLDaemon Why didn't we have hyperinflation when the government had a debt of 110% of it's GDP?
Vidar1979 1 year ago
@Vidar1979
Zimbabwe's Debt to GDP ratio is 282.60% according to WIkipedia. 110% is less than half of Zimbabwe's Debt to GDP ratio. We are on the road to hyperinflation, but we are not there yet.
NOLDaemon 1 year ago
@NOLDaemon We wish we could get some inflation going. Deflation is much more probable than some nonsensical runaway inflation.
Vidar1979 1 year ago
When the government over-borrows, they have trouble paying the interest. This causes the government to borrow more money to pay the interest. But now, they have to pay all the interest on the old loans, plus interest on the new loans. The government must borrow more each year, because their debt level keeps getting higher (as a % of GDP).
(2 of 3)
NOLDaemon 1 year ago
The guy in the video is an idiot and doesn't know what hyperinflation is. It's not caused by printing massive amounts of money. It's caused by the government borrowing too much money over & over again. (In the video, the guy states that we can't have hyperinflation because our money supply comes from loans.)
(1 of 3)
NOLDaemon 1 year ago
thanks for this very interesting perspective. "why is there no hyperinflation yet?" would probably be unsatisfactorilly answered by ron paul as "well it might come tomorrow if we don't do something" whereas in reality I think your credit model makes more sense.
jojomcbean 1 year ago
This idjut thinks Ron Paul doesn't know what fractional lending is? .
LarryHarveyMusic 1 year ago
RamzPaul, from 1982 to 2009 the rates were lowered. This causes a bubble in Real Estate and the fourth/next decade is a deflationary decade. Like clockwork this happened in the 1890's, 1930's, 1970's and 2010's. The contraction in jobs and Real Estate keeps inflation in check. We learned from the 1970's that when foreclosures were all sold off in 1976 then inflation occurs and Real Estate quadrupled in price by 1980. I expect Real Estate will quadruple in price from 2016 to 2020.
MrAlanKendall 1 year ago
BLOOOOOPER!! Zimbabwe had to do price fixing this occurs after hyperinflation Germany 1923 they had 100 trillion dollars ?The point is , this guy is so wrong its not even funny
AlbertInSanAntonio 1 year ago
Do not listen to this idiot.
We have seen a huge increase in the supply of money in the last few years. The reason that prices have not gone sky high is because we a in a huge recession right now.
tonybonez 1 year ago
what he is saying is pretty obvious that credit creates money. however that is not entirely correct. credit MULTIPLIES money (or capital). It's called LEVERAGE. if the gov't prints money and provides a lower rate - essentially loosening monetary policy - it effectively provides fuel for credit markets to burn. That does not mean credit markets will open up but if they do open up this can mean high inflation. Hyperinflation is a loose term (anything above 10% is hyperinflation in my view).
zarni000 1 year ago
Here are two things that go against your theory:
1) If the dollar collapses then the supply of money will rise as people sell dollars.
2) The banks may not be lending the money they borrow from the fed. However they do get it into the money supply by turning around and buying T-Bills (lend back to the government). The government then just takes the money they just printed and uses it to pay medicare or print a social security check etc.
Both 1) and 2) will raise the supply of money!
darkmath100 1 year ago
Fractional reserve banking started with gold reciepts...and now it is being done with fiat money. We get it. You seem like a smart guy, but I disagree with you because once credit money becomes cash...inflation will kick in.
Credit money v. fiat money....creating money from thin air is wrong! And, it will eventually lead to big time inflation as we saw under the Jimmy Carter POTUS.
Temple420org 1 year ago
I beg to differ with you Mr. Paul. Your premise is that the fed put $1 trillion into the monetary supply. [your number] It is actually more like $50 trillion. You then say there is no inflation and ergo there can be no hyperinflation. A. that is wrong: the fed lent money to banks, who turned around and paid it to foreign banks. America never got that money. B. the influx of "money" was never money it was simply a line of credit. i.e. noone got a $20 bill. however money supply = inflation
shakaama 1 year ago
""this is what money is ? you get paid a chicken for a days work ok ? you don't need a chicken every day so you need to swap your chicken for a loaf of bread ,but a chicken has more value than a loaf of bread ,if you were to work for a day you would get 5 loafs of bread ,so so need a medium to break up the value of your chicken ,paper money allows us to do this ? Money has always been based on something ? it has to have some corresponding value , if not every historical instance says what ?"
1929spectre 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"this is what money is ? you get paid a chicken for a days work ok ? you don't need a chicken every day so you need to swap your chicken for a loaf of bread ,but a chicken has more value than a loaf of bread ,if you were to work for a day you would get 5 loafs of bread ,so we need a medium to break up the value of your chicken ,paper money allows us to do this ? Money has allows been based on something ? it has to have some corresponding value , if not every historical instance teaches what ?
1929spectre 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"this is what money is ? you get paid a chicken for a days work ok ? you don't need a chicken every day so you need to swap your chicken for a loaf of bread ,but a chicken has more value than a loaf of bread ,if you were to work for a day you would get 5 loafs of bread ,so so need a medium to break up the value of your chicken ,paper money allows us to do this ? Money has allows been based on something ? it has to have some corresponding value , if not every historical instance says what ?
1929spectre 1 year ago
this is what money is ? you get paid a chicken for a days work ok ? you don't need a chicken every day so you need to swap your chicken for a loaf of bread ,but a chicken has more value than a loaf of bread ,if you were to work for a day you would get 5 loafs of bread ,so so need a medium to break up the value of your chicken ,paper money allows us to do this ? Money has allows been based on something ? it has to have some corresponding value , if not every historical instance leads to disaster
1929spectre 1 year ago
Not convinced. My understanding is that hyperinflation happens when governments first runs up crazy debts and can't find anybody else to finance them. Then they print fiat money to pay down credit. Check out Wiemar Germany, Argentina 2000, etc. Something else to note is that hyperinflation doesn't happen instantly. It happens over time with building inflation first. So we'll see inflation rates rising before they go ballistic. It always arrives in hard times. That has a check mark.
TimWilsonChannel 1 year ago
@TimWilsonChannel My understanding is the same as yours...inflation is coming...it is just a matter of when.
Temple420org 1 year ago
If the world sent all the dollars home and would not accept them in return, wouldn't we have hyper-inflation then.....any market can crash and crash much faster than they grow
immetal1 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
yeah and the ONE QUADRILLION in Derivatives aren't gonna cause any serious issues either...oh inflation isn't a problem since the dollar has lost nearly 99% of its value in under 100 years...what is this guy smokin'?
jonesey5168 2 years ago
Comment removed
jonesey5168 2 years ago
There are too many populists and other leftists posing as libertarians and conservatives. Posers confuse matters enough so that even true libertarians and conservatives get confused. Thanks for helping to set the record straight about a system of money creation that is millenia-old.
By the way, I read M. Friedman's *Free to Choose* and *Capitalism and Freedom*, and he didn't make the claim in those books you said he makes. In what book did he make that claim?
retmiles 2 years ago
I'm fully invested in Lady Gaga bobble head dolls. I now earn over $100,000 a year.
The way to get rich quick is to learn that the world is INSANE. Find out what the inmates worship and see ya at the bank!
PennnSmith 2 years ago
This video is almost a year old, but still as relevant as ever. Five stars.....
i4Truth 2 years ago
good video
going to one world currency and that
won't be a bad thing.
golfdu222 2 years ago
I have heard of companies with orders on the cooks for their products, but cant get credit. Even consumer car loans arent available. The banks wont lend.
ANTIDALLARD 2 years ago
I hope you're right but I'm not planning on it.
Piscivorus 2 years ago
Very good
sdr262 2 years ago
Why not?
Not yet.
pokemonyu 2 years ago
We shall see. China, Russia, India, and Japan may prove you wrong if they bail from the Dollar.
Crow4gold 2 years ago
Oh, and the government and banks are one in the same for all intents and purposes. The Fed is part of the banking cartel, and the government and Fed are intertwined and dependant on each other, as all all governments and central banks. They both have the exact same mutually dependant on each other.
If the Fed had little power of money creation, then what would be the effect if it jacked rates to 50%? How much money would those banks create then? Nuff said.
razerfish 2 years ago
This guy is wrong. Wait until that created money starts to circulate. Banks are efficient at getting that money circulating. In the parlance of economics, it's called velocity. Once the velocity increases, then you will see hyperinflation. With this credit crunch, the banks can't get all this newly created money into the system. But wait. It's coming. Oh, and our country has seen hyperinflation before. Read the History of Banking or History of Coinage.
razerfish 2 years ago
then why is the dollar index decreasing at a rapid rate ever since the crisis and all these bilouts and stimuluses were given?? without the production and savings (credit) to constitute all the influx of base currency wealth in the system, it devalues the currency, hence hype-flation. They have only pushed 1/3 of the stimulus into the system, anyhow. Prices already seem ridiculous to me. You've got 25-30% markups on basic products in the last 6-7 years. That's not hyperinflation, but it's close
yakmouth77 2 years ago
Well, I am pretty much convinced that we will have hyper-inflation, but this guy seems to know what he is talking about. Not sure what to think now.
jrwannabe01 2 years ago
I don't follow this. Who cares Fed or banks, and sometimes how can you differentiate. The fact is - trillions more, and all that 'fractional banking' where he says the fraction is actually - ZERO! Whatever the source, that's a lot of cash. Some things inflate horribly - like housing, particularly gov guaranteed. Hospital costs. Others don't, like electronics.
web77s 2 years ago
Credit money is what the economy lives on and not fiat money. The fed can create all they want. If the banks do not lend that money there will be no hyperinflation.
M1 and M2 are what matters and that can be 10x or more what we have as actual money.
So far they have increased the money supply about 2x which is nothing.
I happen to agree with him. I think the link is not direct.
zarni000 2 years ago
Friedman wasn't "neo classical". He's more often associated with the "Chicago" school of Ecnomics. He would not be happy about this, watch the Charlie Rose interview with him, he provides a clause to his perspective, regarding the Fed printing a significant amount of money, which they have and are.
quittingtomorrow 2 years ago
You're flat out wrong. It's simply impossible to increase the money supply without reducing the value of the dollar.
Its common sense. Sound money, stop racking up debt and printing up worthless currency out of thin air.
You Sir, you stop spreading misinformation when you don't know what the heck you're talking about.
cashmny78 2 years ago
Wow, you are soooooo wrong it is unbelievable. I want to see if you put your money where your mouth is. Buy T-bills since there is no problem. I will stick to gold, silver, and food ETF's
rsettin 2 years ago
ramspaul, sincere question:
If we can agree that inflation is creating money without an asset backing it, and is the reason why commercial loans are not highly inflationary, then monetizing debt must be at least more inflationary than commercial lending? No?
And what are we to expect when the expanded fiat currency hits the market, and consequently commercial lending picks up again?
Also, do you know how much fiat currency is out now as opposed to 2 years ago?
Be well
iamgabrielf 2 years ago
We are in a money bubble right now, and it hasn't yet burst. Just like the housing bubble, it took years for the damage to show. It took for years for the German Currency to collapse in 1923. The dollar won't collapse in a slow and modest paste, instead, it will reach a point that it will collapse all at once.
RRbattlefield 2 years ago
We haven't experienced the inflation you refer to because it's swept under the rug being shipped off to foreign lands in the form of deficits, both trade and government budget ones, financed by foreign investors. Yes, the banking system creates money, and that is inflationary because four borrowers chase an item rather than a single one with actual money.Now, things are surprisingly deflationary in the home market, but commodities are rising, and will ramp up to a gallop, I think very soon
BabyHominid 2 years ago
boy are you in for a [unpleasant] surprise...
Sinisterene 2 years ago
So I have heard for the past 30 years. Still waiting.
ramzpaul 2 years ago
Just because something hasn't happened doesn't mean it will never happen. Things don't happen until they happen. Did you expect a collapse of the banking system in 08? The Austrians did.
What about the 54T in unfunded liabilities including 11 T. in debt most of which to foreigners and most of it short term. What happens if the interest rate needs to be raised? What about the US dollars that are in foreign banks? What if that comes home?
christo930 2 years ago
@ramzpaul
I think that you are wrong- the hyperinflation is being "exported" right now as the US debt is bought up by other nations. Good vid.
auraofgloom 1 year ago
@ramzpaul
This is a really great video and certainly justifies making it a favorite well over a year ago. So many "experts" have been calling for inflation or hyperinflation since "Helicopter Ben" went into action, but your video explains why it hasn't happened. The constriction of credit to the average person has actually been deflationary and so far the trend continues as evidenced by declining real estate prices. Great job!
i4Truth 1 year ago
your a fucking retard what are you somekind of starbuck junkie you better lay off the caffine dumbass durrrrp!
gozzy1001 2 years ago
WRONG!!!!!!! I would be rather enthralled to have an intellectual conversation with you; as I am sure that you are gravely and fundamentally mistaken. In fact, I question weather you have ever given any moments credence to the arguments presented by the austrians. If you had you would realize that they are very much against the very things you mentioned!
Chief among these is their absolute disdain for any artificially manipulated money which invariably favors big GOV
they endorse SOUND MONEY
joeymackaroni 2 years ago
Why did you leave out the term "VELOCITY OF MONEY".
was this a simple mistake
Worse! ... was this omission an aid toward building a straw man argument!
OR have you simply never heard of this term. In either case I suggest you look this up and if you feel it crucial in explaining the lag effect in rising prices than please correct yourself. At least as an effort to promote TRUTH.
joeymackaroni 2 years ago
joeymackaroni 2 years ago
This is the most ridiculous thing I ever heard before. Money and credit are synonymous. It doesn't matter how money comes into existance.
When someone takes out a loan to buy for instance a house, the money that is loaned to them is used to pay for the house; so this money goes into the previous owners bank account. If he spends this money, whatever he spends the money on will go to the next owner.
The money supply is expanding while goods and services aren't; this causes prices to rise.
jjenson2006 2 years ago
Why have we not seen hyperinflation? Because the bubble hasn't burst yet. Plain and simple, give it a little bit of time and the devaluation will hit. You are openly admitting that you prefer to rely on the valuation of a dollar that has no consistent value based on wealth, we might as well start using entropy as currency.
GabrielTech 2 years ago
Priniting trillions of dollars with no real commodity backing should theorhetically devalue the dollar. It is the same for any commodity, whether it's oil, gold, diamonds, or anything else, including fiat paper notes.
For ex, if I were to somehow make 10 trillion dollars worth of diamonds, the value of each individual diamond on the global market would decrease; so why does this not occur with dollars??? This economics stuff is so damned confusing! =-( Can anyone fill me in?
AllahConsciousness 2 years ago
AllahConsc, I'll give it a try.
Money created without an asset backing it is pure inflation. However, most currency is created with an asset backing it. For ex. A home loan has a house, a car loan a car, etc..
However, when money is created with NO asset backing (monetization), it is pure inflation, and destroys the currency's value
Yet, the reason current monetization is not hyperinflationary is that this fiat money has not entered the economy. When it does... ouch!
iamgabrielf 2 years ago
So are the banks not lending money to prevent hyperinflation then? And if so, they will eventually be forced to do something with their new notes, and when they do, is the dollar automatically dead when it hits American markets then? If we artificially prop up the dollar by keeping the banks alive with limbo money, can we keep the global scam going until I'm a fogie at least?
AllahConsciousness 2 years ago
I don't know if they're intentionally not lending. My sense is that they are afraid to lend and they can't find qualified borrowers.
Actually monetization devalues the currency. So, printing money to prop up banks makes the system weaker. If anything, monetization will accelerate the fall
iamgabrielf 2 years ago
And it's hard to believe that banks aren't lending money because people are unwilling to take it. The average American consumer is much like a crack addict in that they think of mostly short term gains. Offer credit, and it shall be used.
AllahConsciousness 2 years ago
We Americans were consuming more than we produced. Unfortunately, we exported our jobs with globalization. This stagnated wages and forced us to borrow in order to maintain our standard of living.
Interest rates were beneath inflation, so putting money in a savings account actually made us lose money.
The solution, IMO, is to repatriate our jobs with fair trade tariffs and raise interest rates to make saving more attractive.
iamgabrielf 2 years ago
The problem with higher interest rates is that the government owes 11 trillion dollars and most of that is
1)Owned by foreigners
2)Short term t-bills, as opposed to the old 30 year bonds so if the interest rate were to go up for 5 years we would be paying much higher interest on most of the us debt. We got away with it in 1980 because most gov debt wasn't effected because not that many bonds matured and needed to be rolled over.
Can you imagine 20% interest rates and what it would do to us?
christo930 2 years ago
Do T-bills adjust interest rates? I thought they were fixed loans. Doesn't the interest rate only increase on new loans?
iamgabrielf 2 years ago
They are fixed, the problem is that they are much shorter term at 2-5 years which means if there is an interest increase that lasts for a few years nearly all the debt could be rolled over. Debt that gets rolled over will be at the new rate. It also means that more debt has to be sold this year than just the new debt due to the old ones maturing. It's very scary. Even at low interest can you imagine if we no longer could borrow money? We'd have to pay (current) for all this shit.
christo930 2 years ago
I had not thought about that. Thanks. That is scary. Most bills are 3yr term. Holy crap! that means when the notes come due, we will have to borrow money on top of the money we borrow to fund our deficits, national mortgage pmts. Wow! The only solution is to monetize. Soon our deficits will not be funded by existing money. We're on the brink of hyperinflation.
iamgabrielf 2 years ago
Yes, it's very scary. Last week the Chinese gov called for an international effort to force countries with reserve currencies to better manage their money. Since the Euro and the Yen are not in bad shape and are being managed OK, you know they were referring to the US. What makes that so bad is that China is our number 1 creditor. If China stops buying our debt we are in major, major trouble. Of course, that probably won't happen, at least this year.
christo930 2 years ago
It's clear that China needs to prop up the dollar. If the $ falls, their exports take a bigger hit, and their reserves take an even bigger hit.
However, this can't go on forever. China knows that our debt is too big. I'm sure they know what I relized a few hours ago: that the cost to service our national debt will require monetization.
I was unsure if the dollar would collapse. That doubt is now gone. Your comment, "debt gets rolled over at a new rate," did the trick. My stomach hates you.
iamgabrielf 2 years ago
The thing is it will NEVER happen or at least not until China weans its economy off exporting to the US. They are more dependant on the US than the US is on them. If China stops importing dollars they cannot export to US. And if dollar crashes they will lose much more than the US. Actually a devaluation of the dollar is beneficial to the US as we can pay off our debts at a much lower cost. China will lose in this scenario.
zarni000 2 years ago
We need their "stuff" and they need our paper dollars and somehow you think they need us more? If the dollar crashed it would hurt US a lot more than THEM. Talk to anyone who has lived through hyper-inflation.
I don't think it's going to happen until we lose reserve currency status though. The world's central banks aren't going to let the dollar collapse as long as it's the reserve currency.
christo930 2 years ago
I disagree. You need to think who holds the dollars. It is china and Japan and not us. The lender is hurt not the debter.
Secondly if you have hyperinflation this will effectively reduce their advantage as a low cost exporter which is the only advantage they have.
zarni000 2 years ago
We hold more dollars than they do and it's the currency we work for. Hyperinflation might wipe out your debt but good luck getting food or importing oil or anything else. If you think hyperinflation would hurt China more than us, I suggest you read books about people going through it. It did wonders for Germany.
christo930 2 years ago
You are blatantly wrong that we hold more dollars - we have LESS than 0 dollars - every household has about 1million in debt if you allocated the national debt now. So we hold NEGATIVE dollars. Or in other words less than 0.
zarni000 2 years ago
We work for dollars, our assets are in dollars, we live in a dollar economy. If the dollar goes down 50%, you are 50% poorer, especially given we import so much.
Inflation is not a good thing, you have to throw off this Orwellian double speak.
christo930 2 years ago
Maybe if all you have is dollars.
I for one will not be 50% poorer because I own assets.
If you keep everything in dollars that is your problem.
zarni000 2 years ago
Assets whose value is based on the US and the US' economy, unless you are holding foreign assets. If you are rich enough that you don't need to work and can live off your savings or dividends from investments (assuming these are foreign), then more power to you.
If you're paycheck is in dollars you will be less wealthy
christo930 2 years ago
First of all. Who says you have to own assets that are based on the US economy.
Second of all a devaluation of the dollar does not necessarily mean all assets in the US fall. That is just plain ignorant. I am sorry.
zarni000 2 years ago
I did mention foreign assets in that post.
One of the major problems with dollar falling is that so much of our economy is based on foreign resources. A great deal of stuff made in the USA is made with parts that come from outside the US. Obviously it's not perfectly even across the board and instant, but a falling dollar is bad for America and American Assets. U.S. consumers are addicted and reliant upon, the cheap foreign products made possible by the deliberately weakened Yuan.
christo930 2 years ago
Yeah...protectionism. Been tried before and results were never good .
zarni000 2 years ago
No nation is more protectionist than China and I think the US should reinstate the historical 20% tariff. With 50 billion month trade deficits, I don't think it will hurt America in the longer term although everything will be 20% more money since we import so much.
christo930 2 years ago
So you want to turn America into China. Please. What america needs (as any other country) is to let the markets adjust. Unfortunately with so far we are going down the wrong road rewarding the incompetence and inefficiency with all these bailouts to fatcats so they can keep their Lamborghinis while burrying the taxpayer under a mountain of debt.
zarni000 2 years ago
I agree with you about the bailouts and all that, but what is wrong with bringing manufacturing jobs back to the US? What is wrong with good paying manufacturing jobs? What is wrong with consumers saving money for the future? Credit doesn't increase your standard of living, it just shifts lower consumption into the future.
christo930 2 years ago
Because we are not as efficient as the Chinese (or we cannot do it for same money) - simple as that. Why should all of us pay to subsidize inefficiency? What you are proposing will cause additional inflation which in the end will hurt everybody.
zarni000 2 years ago
First of all, that's not inflation. If the Chinese un-pegged from the dollar and didn't constantly inflate the Yuan, we would be paying substantially more for Chinese made goods. People used to say the same shit about Japanese goods until they let the yen rise, now they manufacture in the US. The US was the king of manufacturing the cheapest highest quality goods in the world while paying the highest wages. The Chinese are inflating their currency to kill us.
christo930 2 years ago
Inflation is plain and simple devaluation of a currency. If you are paying a higher price for other goods than you were previously it is inflation. If you propose protectionism you will end up paying a higher price or you if gov't imposes price controls you will end up with more demand than supply and rationing...
zarni000 2 years ago
Prices going up is a symptom of inflation. I am for market solutions, not gov solutions (although I do think we should reinstate the 20% tariff). Wealth of Nations style trading makes sense, using HUGE amounts of energy to ship parts, raw materials and seeking cheap assembly/labor is just a ridiculous waste.
I think high energy cost is going to bring a lot of jobs back home, or at least I really hope it does. I don't see how it can work with expensive energy.
christo930 2 years ago
Prices going up IS inflation.
As for the rest of the post I wholeheartedly agree. It is a waste. However, I don't think fighting fire with fire is the solution.
zarni000 2 years ago
Zarni000, you have no idea what ur talking about. Price increases are NOT inflation. They are its symptom. Inflation is the creation of money faster than goods are services to justify it.
Tarriffs will increase prices, but wages will rise faster than prices because the jobs will be repatriated. The price is irrelevant, what matters is the purchasing power of labor. If prices double, but wages triple, then bring it on. Tariffs will instantly increase the demand for American labor, and its cost
iamgabrielf 2 years ago
Well apparently you do not have any idea what you are talking about. Inflation means rising general price level (goods and/or services). Really it is irrelevant what it is due to - credit expansion or money supply.
zarni000 2 years ago
Sadly for you and the fools who believe as you, the next five years are going to be a rude lesson on the true meaning of inflation.
iamgabrielf 2 years ago
I am actually all set. I don't think you need to worry about me.
zarni000 2 years ago
exactly, just because the banks are holding the money now and unable to lend it, doesn't mean it will always be that way... as soon as they start loosenning up again, which they are now, you will see a temporary rise in the stock markets(already happenning) followed by inflation and an even deeper recession
cigarscool 2 years ago
Excellent.
FUZZYisBIG 2 years ago 8
*sigh* and why do prices rise? Hmmm? You schiff fanatics do not understand economics for shit. Bank credit and fiat money are two very different things.
bweazel 1 year ago
@zarni000 No. Inflation is not a rise in prices. If it was, there would be no way of measuring it as we have prices which fall and rise on daily basis. He is right. We will not see hyperinflation, but deflation. The inflation part has already been done. Inflation is the expansion of money and credit, while deflation is the opposite.
dannydarias1 1 year ago
@dannydarias1
you are ignorant. CPI is a measure of inflation and that is a "price index". if you can't measure inflation by price rise how can you measure it? maybe put your thumb out and check the winds?
Also although you are right that inflation is both money supply and credit we have not yet seen the credit markets open up. That actually remains to happen. This is when we will see the full manifestation of inflation. And you are wrong again- we have not yet seen inflation after the crisis.
zarni000 1 year ago
@zarni000 So you think the banks will start lending again to people who are essentially broke? You think the banks are looking to go insolvent again? Not gonna happen any time soon my friend. Of course we have not seen inflation and we will not see it until the huge debt bubble blows up. It needs to disappear before people can actually borrow again.
dannydarias1 1 year ago
@dannydarias1
these people were broke before....
history has shown people don't learn from past mistakes - so yes
Also banks don't go insolvent - they get bailouts.... i would have assumed you have learnt that one by now.
zarni000 1 year ago
@zarni000 So you tell me why they are holding ALL their money with the fed and are not lending any of it to individuals. And also explain to me why even if people and business can borrow, they are reluctant to as well. You are forgetting that it takes 2 to tangle. One side lends, the other borrows. If one side is not willing to play the game, it's check mate. Over. Not gonna happen regardless of how much dollars are printed into existence.
dannydarias1 1 year ago
@dannydarias1
Banks do not need to hold their money with the fed. That is not how it works.We have a fractional reserve system - they only need to show a very small part as reserve and even that is very loosely enforced.
Secondly - yes sooner or later credit markets will open up. Bear in mind they don't have to open up for US consumers - banks can lend to the rest of the world. The dollar will plumet regardless when that happens.
zarni000 1 year ago
@zarni000 Hahahahaha. No you are wrong. And you are talking to someone that knows about this. US banks are holding the biggest amount of money in history with the Fed. Go look it up. And just like you have an account with a bank, the banks have to hold an account with the fed. How do you think banks transact US dollars? The fact that the law says that banks have to hold a minimum reserve requirement is beyond banks being insolvent or not. Okay, so US can lend to Greece right? Nobody to lend man!
dannydarias1 1 year ago
@dannydarias1
The law says one thing...it's not enforced anymore.
Secondly the FED does not allow auditing of their statement - if you knew about the US system you would know that already. There is no proof either way what their books are.
Also I am not arguing with you right now they are holding off on lending. I am saying that pretty soon they will not be.
zarni000 1 year ago
@zarni000 So why don't you tell me what will motivate them to lend, and who it will be that they will lend to?
dannydarias1 1 year ago
@dannydarias1
economy works in cycles friend...
zarni000 1 year ago
@zarni000 So we just had a 70 inflationary period and all you hyperinflation didn't say one word. Now that the opposite seems to be happening, you guys are screaming hyperinflation.Should I dare say, HYPER-deflatoin. Lol.
dannydarias1 1 year ago
@dannydarias1
i am not talking about a bank lending to a government. Credit markets are much more flexible than that. I am talking about capital outflows to foreign markets. That is for instance what happens in Japan - check out what Yen carry trade is for instance. This means for instance Japanese housewives borrowing and buying foreign assets for higher returns.
do some more research before you argue.
zarni000 1 year ago
@zarni000 I thought Japanese investors were burnt by the derivatives blow up last years, especially those housewives you mention. Who will these banks lend to?
dannydarias1 1 year ago
@zarni000 I agree that they don't "NEED" to hold it with the fed. They can invest it, lend it, etc... But for some WEIRD reason, they are holding most of it with the fed right now.
dannydarias1 1 year ago
@zarni000 uhh did you not watch the video?
Vidar1979 1 year ago
China is more efficient because of slave labor and they debase their currency.
iamgabrielf 2 years ago
It is not slave labor. They are just willing to work for that. If you were willing to work for that money you would have a job.
zarni000 2 years ago
Good heavens! You are ignorant. China is debasing its currency in order to keep competitive with the dollar. How do you think the yuan is valued in lock step with the dollar?
The domestic effect is suppressing the purchasing power of Chinese labor. With very exceptions, the Chinese people live in squaller.
Futher, they are communist. Government forces them to work. They have no choice. Their employment is forcibly voluntary.
iamgabrielf 2 years ago
I am not sure who is ignorant here.
China may be communist gov't politically but the market is capitalist in every sence of the word. Go to China and see for yourself and then speak. Nobody is forcing anybody to work.
And the chinese do not live in squalor. There is a substantial growing middle class.
zarni000 2 years ago
Tariffs have nothing to do with bailouts. You're foggins the issue. To think that the bailouts are the cause is wrong. The bailouts are a continuation of the problem, but not the cause.
The cause was the repeal of tariffs followed by the repeal of Glass Steagall.
The solution to the crisis is to undue the financial and trade errors that happened under Clinton and Bush.
It will be painful, but is today not painful?
iamgabrielf 2 years ago
Tariffs have been in place for the majority of America's history. Before the Federal Reserve, 1913, most funds to the treasury came from tariffs. There were no income taxes nor property taxes.
I keep hearing this annoying lie that Smoot Hawley created the great depression. Nonsense. It kept America's manufacturing base inside our border so that we were able to produce our WWII needs from within. Today, if we had another WW, we would have to import our tools.
iamgabrielf 2 years ago
what about in 1980? gold silver oil all when up huge
sov19871987 2 years ago
This guy is talking about the velocity of money. Money in the hands of people, where more is inflationary, as opposed to money sitting in a bank va