Added: 3 years ago
From: misesmedia
Views: 82,815
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (409)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • This is a creepy talk. Talks like this is why non-austrians consider austrians "religious believers".

  • Welp, unlike "religious believers" our ideals aren't vested in faith, it's vested in reality.

  • @SeppLainer. There is no such thing as scientific axioms. Science is a practical activity that goes through observation and experiment. It is not science if it lacks testability and falsifiability. There is no place for maxim in any intellectual activity and this is why i think Austrians are demeaning the classical school. I go with Milton Friedman.

  • great lecture overall. i like this guy. he correctly predicts the crisis we are in, he knows how inflation is created and shared it's secrets. he explained how price controls are bad for the people and how we should look at the results of each policy and not to its intentions. but come on... 18:24 - 18:59 it's just pure nonsense. also, about the gold standard, please consider what sir Keynes had to say: "In truth, the gold standard is already a barbarous relic".

  • I'd rather have this barbaric relic that u and any other shmuck in washington can't touch than some paper scraps in my pocket that can be literally dissolved into nothing just by printing more of the stuff. No - government should stay away from money and what ppl. decide it will be. And yes, the line from 18:24 is all true. U have to use argument. Like: government sponsored schools and college scholarships made schools horrible and college enormously expensive, diploma worthless

  • @misesmedia also what year was this lecture given/ could you put it in the description!

  • @misesmedia please change the video title it leads to people shutting off because of assertions like "the title is misleading" or "this guy is just inflating his ego and not talking about history" Something along the lines of " Intelligent economics from an austrian perspective" or "Austrian economics 101".

  • So he presents the lecture as one in the history of economic theory, and begins it by saying 'actually it's impossible to do so, so let's just talk about why Austrian economics rules, without any real theoretical explanation save for MARKET IS GREAT GUYS'

    i watched 15 minutes before turning it off, having learnt nothing. in 15 minutes i could easily explain Quesnay, Smith, Ricardo and Marx and even some of the Marginalists.

    What a joke. It's just another Austrian lesson in arrogance.

  • @fridginators People like you just don't understand why free-markets will always be better than government regulated markets. Shame really.

  • @TheSWTORMMO Well I really don't understand why the government is always the problem. I certainly see why faith in central organizers is the crux of a great deal of difficulty, but I am tempted to think that Oligarchy or Monopoly is functionally equivalent to central planning by powerful states. States tend to be more powerful due to their status, but they may also be competitors to powerful market organizations. Therin lies the theoretical appeal of the state: As a counter-balance.

    Regards.

  • @timisat I disagree completely, because competition just for the sake of competition doesn't help at all. Competition to bring down prices and increase quality is what the free-market needs. Governments will and cannot create that competition, because as soon as they begin losing money they can just begin subsidizing endlessly. And you're right, monopolies are dangerous, but only if that monopoly exists through government protection, with which the majority of monopolies come from.

  • @timisat The state in it of itself is to protect the freedoms of individuals, not provide market competition. Markets provide market competition. Government is there to prevent fraud and to protect the individual rights of the people. Especially through the ideas on which our country was founded upon.There is no "theoretical" appeal for the state to be a competitor in the market, given the unique history of freedom and liberty the United States has had for so long. PM me for further discussion.

  • @TheSWTORMMO Well we could argue about this for years, as Keynes and Hayek did.

    What I disliked about this video however was the fact that it was presented as if it was a clear, unbiased presentation of the history of economic thought...and then instead it was just an exposition of his views. Why did they keep the title when uploading it to youtube?

    Boring video anyway.

  • FED has no gold which surprised me,also. Why would they need it when they create money from nothing? Probably sold it to their banker owners at 42$ /oz, the last official rate.youtube.com/watch?v=0OkIT­edQrek

  • I'm in minute 7, and so far i'm hearing nothing but a bunch of anti-regulation republican rhetoric.

  • 350 Years of Economic Theory in 50 Minutes | Mark Thornton

    Oct-03-2011--Featuring author and scholar Dr. Mark Thornton, this lecture was presented to a group of home school parents and students.

    INFO-AWARENESS , VIKEN Z KOKOZIAN

  • This is extraordinary. Productive forces were not mentioned for the entire lecture. How can you discuss economics without discussing this - it is *fundamental* to *any* economic theory? A lecturer allegedly on "350 Years of Economic Theory in 50 Minutes" with no discussion on economic land - a major issue of economists and especially political economists for most of that period. If this is as good as Austrian economics gets then it truly is at a dead-end.

  • 1. title is misleading.

    2. dr. thornton has a lot criticism on "HIS" goverment but no solution.

    3. he uses alot of cheap and populist examples to point out his opinion.

    4. best of dr. thornton goverment logics:

    -"the more it spends on govermentschools the less education you get"

    -"the more it spends on research the less the technology we get"

    -"the more it spends on healthcare the less healthy we end up be"

    All nice theses but where is your proof? if you can do better go for goverment!

  • @HildingEU Its funny I talk to people like you often, and they are socialist. And there parents work for the government, and they have no practical ways to make money. Believe your keynesian economic theory.

  • @yoyuepz the fact that I disagree with dr.thornton doenst make me a socialist or a keynesian. but a pure free market economy will never provide such things like human rights, social justice, public order or any other none profit services and history is my attestor. Charles Caleb Colton said: “Corruption is like a ball of snow, once it's set a rolling it must increase.” and this is the real problem of any economy system.

  • @HildingEU I dont care about human rights...... and "justice" lol come on its a joke in the west. I tell you about human rights, in my country I am not allowed to ask someone for a HIV test because it would "breach" human rights..... so where I try to limit risk, infact I am not "allowed" to do it. Yep beautiful wonder of human rights. Corruption everywhere, just in the west they carpet bomb countries and say in the name of "democracy", Lybia is a good example of "human rights" or "oil"? mmmmm

  • @HildingEU Human rights in the west are a result of free markets. How are the human rights in china, cuba, venzuela, africa, russia saudi arabia, iran etc... You look at countries in the west with just a taste of the capitalist structure and you see people with food, clothing, shelter, running water etc.. What history books are you reading? The despots in these countries are fascist countries where the government gets rich by taking from the people..kinda like whats starting in the US today

  • @quinnrasta I dont get your point. All the countrys you mentioned have a capitalist structure or better a capitalist monetary system and therefor all of them are a dictatorship of the money. And the degree of neo-liberalism defines the degree of dictatorship. Sure the goverment takes away money but more money is taken away by interest-rate mechanics. On a long run 10% get richer and 90% pay for them and this is a global problem. dont believe this mainstream shit read Silvio Gesell.

  • @HildingEU Rights in China have become better as they have become more of a capitalist country, hence capitalism is helping human rights not hurting them. The right to property and intellectual property is one of the most important aspects of capitalism. Now there are many forms of capitalism, in the US crony capitalism or corporatism is the norm, it NOT FREE MARKET, where everyone is treated equally. The more economically free a society is, the more the society thrives! History has shown that

  • Just give me a capitalist country that is freer economically than the United States and it worse off...I will wait

  • @quinnrasta the FREE MARKET idea is a nice one and a good one but it has the same problem like every other ideology. the interest rates and interest on interest will allways destroy a free market on the long run you cant avoid this. I myself love the idea of freedom of choice but it depends on a fully informed customer and this is not a realistic scenario, for example commercials will allways produce biased customers. ***(dot)rumormillnews(dot)com/­cgi-bin/archive(dot)cgi?read=1­03723 check plz

  • @HildingEU The problem with interest rates is the fed determining what interest rates should be instead of the free market. You need to look at an interest rate just like you look at any other product such as a car or tv. When people save money interest rates go down and when savings are low interest rates go up. Of course this only happens in the free market.When the fed attempts to sway people into consuming instead of saving it creates a HUGE problem, hence the reason there is no recovery yet

  • @quinnrasta the whole idea of interest is wrong and during the middle age it was a crime to take interest for a good reason. this knowledge just got lost during the ages.

    margritkennedy*de/index*php?la­ng=EN

    stupid youtube why we cant use links, replace * with .

    our believe in the classic economic sience is so strong that we cant see alternative solutions.

    and on the issue of the fed I just cant believe how naive Woodrow Wilson was. he should have had the knowledge of Andrew Jackson.

  • @HildingEU If there was no interest there would be no borrowing, no banking, no lines of credit. No one can force you to borrow and on top make you pay interest unless you are the federal government. So do you want to eliminate the borrowing of money? Why would you risk lending someone money? Why would you sell a product that you made for a profit? Money represents work, when you lend someone money you are lending your work for a price. It is no different than making a profit on a piece of gum

  • There was interest during biblical times. Should two people get together and agree on the price of borrowing and lending it is no one's business on what two people voluntarily agree to. No one can force you to borrow and no one can force you to lend. Getting rid of interest rates will only cause the people that need to borrow to get it from the government aka federal reserve.What you are talking about ,is getting rid of profit. USSR tried that ans they succeeded, everyone was poor except govt

  • @quinnrasta its very complicated to discuss this over youtube commentary also because english is not my mother tongue. the FED is not goverment the FED is a consortium of private banks and therefor profits out of interest are payed by all citizen therefor the public pays for the private fault nr.1 lending money with interest creates money out of nothing fault nr.2. the profit for lending money to a scientist who finds a cure for cancer does not primarily consist of interest dont you think?

  • @quinnrasta its very complicated to discuss this over youtube commentary also because english is not my mother tongue. the FED is not goverment the FED is a consortium of private banks and therefor profits out of interest are payed by all citizen therefor the public pays for the private fault nr1 lending money with interest creates money out of nothing fault nr2. the profit for lending money to a scientist who finds a cure for cancer does not primarily consist of interest dont you think?

  • @quinnrasta if you think the only motivation for lending money should be to get more money you are doomed. the motivation for lending money should be to improve the world and the living for everyone and not only the creditor. I know this sounds a little like a dream but dreams can come true the only thing people have to do is to change their mind.

  • @HildingEU again, you want to eliminate profit, which dooms societies. Why should a doctor or dentist charge patients,why does an accountant charge to do someone taxes.Your dream is flawed,if this was the way the world went round,then everyone would become a janitor if they reap the same reward as a doctor. All you are doing when you borrow money is borrowing someone's time(work).No different with a doctor when you go see them, profit has made America the leader in innovation improving the world

  • @quinnrasta I dont want to eliminate profit I just want to eliminate interest and this is a major difference! just my definition of profit is not interest but to raise quality of living. I bank could instead charge a static fee on a credit but only one time and pay for money lend to them, so they would still have a business. in addition a bank should have a minimum reserve of 100%. watch this: /watch?v=swkq2E8mswI

  • @quinnrasta I dont want to eliminate profit I just want to eliminate interest and this is a major difference! just my definition of profit is not interest but to raise quality of living. I bank could instead charge a static fee on a credit but only one time and pay for money lend to them, so they would still have a business. in addition a bank should have a minimum reserve of 100%. watch this watch?v=swkq2E8mswI

  • @HildingEU -"the more it spends on healthcare the less healthy we end up be"

    think longterm, if people do not excersise, dont eat healthy foods theire health is getting worse, because they think that they will get free treatment due to the fact of "govt spending more on healthcare". in the longterm, people are getting sicker. think about seatbelts, if you have your seatbelt on, you are willing to take more risk on traffic, because u feel somehow safe, dont let fool urself by the seatbelt!

  • @dAsterum I get your point and you are right to some degree, but its up to the healthcare how they work. will they support prevention instead of aftercare are there any bonussystems for people who had not a single treatment in some period or payback if you live healthy and acive without smoking, drinking and so on. its important to reward people instead of penalize, its a psychological thing.

  • @HildingEU The proof is in the pudding, especially with education.Since the department of education was established & a trillion dollars later, our test scores rank 40th in the world falling quite drastically from the top.College education funded by the gov has led to cost of tuition rise nearly 400% in the last 25 years Health care after being funded by the government starting in 1962 health care costs have skyrocketed. Gall bladder surgery in 62 would cost you $40 today it will cost 200x that.

  • Comment removed

  • "Free Market" ideology has been put forward by the neoliberals over the last 30 years who have run the world economy into the ground.

    Think outside the dollar

    and read Turbulence # 5 Dec. 2009

    W.W.W.Turbulence.dot.O.R.G.dot­.U.K

  • bologna

  • @andrespereyda Mmmm...

  • @DiscoDude82 i'd have to revisit the video to come up with a more affable comment. it just seems like the guy, and the "philosophy", are trying to sell me something.

  • Awesome lecture!!!:) Thanks!

  • continued from the post below---

    "Everything that is worth having is produced within the market economy and available to everyone,...everything thats worth having is produced in a market economy."--Actually, culture (not corporate culture), human rights, freedom (from a great concentration of power via mega monopolies to which the public lose their ability to dictate their rights and human worth), environmental health are valuable but erode in free markets (shown int'lnally from free trade)

  • @cst105instructor2838 You are assuming that we live in a free market economy. We don't. The government creates monopolies where as a true free market would not allow them due to ever increasing costs to acquire the 'next' business. Governments do not create jobs. That $500 they took from in taxes to create a job would have been spent or invested by you elsewhere which in turn would have created demand which creates jobs.

  • @Dogeatsdogs Yeah, I put that in the comment, that there aren't "free markets", but had to edit it out before posting to fit it in the comment space. I understand the appeal of an economic system that would allow flexibility, but I don't think free market should exist as a social or cultural organizing force nor that if we were to institute it now that it would have the results we hope for. Mostly I think the parts of it that would flourish would just advantage the corproate power even more.

  • @cst105instructor2838

    If your town does not want free trade then it doesn't get it. This way you can always move. I see flaws in that as well but to know what issues affect you in your town makes better sense than something happening in Washington, this includes a completely sound competitive currency. With very limited government, it excludes the few who want to own it.Allow the world Independence..

  • @cst105instructor2838

    Check out "Revolutionizing Economic Thought" on you tube for some beginning methods to develop a truly responsive economy for human well - being as an end and not fal$e ideology as a 'motivator' for the functioning of the economy.

    read "The Web of Debt" the book by Hellen Brown discussing the functioning of fractional reserve banking and how it has indebted the world and how we can break free.

  • The key points he sets up at the beginning need to be critically analyzed. To me, they are quite false. If Austrian economics start from these priniciples its a very skewed system.

    "It is the market economy that produces prosperity and nothing else"--Market economies are also known for creating vast class differences, some very rich, and some very poor. In fact, market economies create unemployment (not the govn't) & poverty.

  • That's my simple prognosis of our government's hold on the economy. I could say so much more, but Youtube character limits is prohibitng me from doing so.

  • This is a polemic. Not a lecture.

  • Very informational and useful video.

  • Hello, awesome video. You will have better results with bee4 biz (Just google this) because they pay tons more and more frequently I now earn like 12 times more. It is a link shortener that pays.

  • "If you're the person who first spends the new money, then you're buying all your stuff before prices go up. And so you're getting a great deal, but as prices rise and the money filters through the economy, the people getting the money at the end or don't get it at all are going to be hurt because they're paying higher prices. Their real income is drawn down. ...of course wages and salaries are only adjusted after the fact." - Dr. Mark Thornton (35:35)

  • … Rubbish.

    … Intelligent commentators would start by defining “Economics”, which must be “the Science of Fulfilling Consumer Desires Efficiently”.

    … That would indicate that primitive Market Capitalism and Socialistic Slavery are NOT economic systems and should be excluded.

    … Start your economic education by reviewing “The Revolutionary ConsumerCard Article”, then "The Great Pyramid, Why Was It Built".

  • Milton Friedman >> Rothbard.

  • This guys seems to use the terms "government and Federal Reserve" interchangeably. I don't think he is aware the "Fed" is not a governmental agency. It is an organization owned only by its' shareholder member banks. The Federal Reserve is as much a government entity as Federal Express.

  • @TheRobin3212

    yeah but its the same effect as a govt institution. It was established through govt legislation (though unconstitutionally). Its a centralized NON MARKET institution. So what is the REAL difference between the Fed & the govt other than name only?

  • @TheRobin3212 Of course he is aware. The Fed has a legislative prerogative to do what it does and the seeming interchange of terms doesn't substantively affect his presentation.

    If the presentation was based on regulation of the Fed; curtailing the powers of the Fed; restructuring, abolishing or replacing the Fed with something else, then the distinction, mechanisms and relationship between government and the ancillary institutions would be very important.

  • The US Government has no true jurisdiction over the economy. The public would denounce any attempt for change as "socialist" which would not doubt put an end to even the most durable and popular politician's career. Not to mention, the numerous amount of individuals along with factors partaking within democracies does not allow for effective moves to be done to corral an overinflating economy nor allow it to mold it into what they want, thus making it difficult for the government to do anything.

  • but these changing winds can blow cold and hostile...

  • yeah, blame the government for everything... asshole

  • Did he say "Only Austrians have an economic theory?" Bizarre.

  • E-conomics

  • thumbs up if you were bored and typed in 50 minutes

  • The market economy only solves the economic sector in which competition is a must. But in other areas of life, it is irresposible to even think that the market has a solution. The market is a tool to distribute wealth, not ethics or values.

  • who the fuck is going to watch 50 minutes of economic shit. Please kill me now.

  • @pomel2 the dudes who like it :D

  • how does money printing in the US affects to a country that doesnt have his own currency like ecuador and uses US Dollars as national currency?

  • @ssantosk It affects them the same way it affects the US, by increasing supply, you reduce scarcity and the "price" goes down and other currencies around the world become more expensive for you.

  • @ssantosk countries like that often take loans from the IMF or the world bank which are arms of the federal reserve and banking elite who have taken the people of the US hostage. please watch confessions of an economic hitman. a man named john perkins has exposed the way these banking dynasties enslave third world countries. he has a book to and it is well worth reading. also watch zeitgeist 3 moving forward. mind meets matter and energy, in lies we trust; the cia, bioterrorism and hollywood.

  • Nice talk. I only have one problem and that is gold. Paper has more use then gold. it is a vanity metal that has no use. 

  • I support the fact that everyone should sleep with his gold at home what is the use keeping the gun without something to protect

  • hey you said you will teach us how to make money.

    you takjed about inflation but i didnt get it

    stupid economist.

  • its not whether we are on a "gold" backed currency that matters. Its the quantity and the increase of it that matters. Gold currency failed because people were issuing more and more credits on it, and well who ever discovers gold and mined it got rich. Fiat currency fails because you can issue bills of credit on itself through fractional reserve banking..

  • Government bad, market good, no facts, numbers or statistics needed. Now I'll make up some arguments and tell you why they are bad, thus proving Austrian economics is superior, no facts or number needed again.

  • @Parazitas999 Yeah i was looking for more substance too..

  • @Parazitas999 It will take you a solid 3 to 6 months to fully understand economics. It cannot be done in a 50 minute video. Even Peter Schiff would need at least 3 hours to break it down to the basics so that morons can understand the essential flaws with Keynes' theory.

  • @residentzombie Yes it can not be done in 50 minutes, yet the title is "350 years of economic theory in 50 minutes" :) Maybe the speaker should make up his mind before talking what is he going to talk about, because this was a 50 minute long video on topics: "How to become an Austrian Economist like me" and "I'm correct and you are wrong just because I said so".

  • URANIUM

    Gold and silver are for suckers since the market is controlled by "wisemen".

    But uranium is the true king of all metals because of the radiation characteristics wich makes it "special" for the military and civilian(nuclear power plants) use.

    The tiny austrian "miracle" is rubbish: is about the plundered gold and silver from the colonies of the Habsburg/Austro-Hungarian Empire and deposited in Swiss during WWII.

  • @RomaniaTricolor Hmmmm....

    I like the idea....a lot...

    However, I and you can not acquire Uranium (due to the government), and it's inherent radioactive characteristics make it both highly profitable and highly toxic. Uranium banks would be extremely expensive to run. Again, uranium sound like the coolest reserve currency ever! However, we'll get cancer bringing it, unaided by expensive technology, for exchange.

  • @Brownyman You don't need to buy uranium, just go on NYSE an try to find some uranium mines CCJ(Cameco) shares (I doubt you'll find a single one).

    :)

  • All you trolls, trolling misesmedia need to understand anyone curious enough to find this channel isn't going to be persuaded by your lame arguments...LMFAO.

  • This is just absurd. It's the whole Austrian Economic idea of mark-to-market value and unregulated housing speculation that caused the economic crisis to begin with. The truth, folks, is that so many people were moving into the real estate business trying to make a quick buck that appraisers and underwriters failed to do their jobs and were even moreso complicit in the fraud. I know because I was there.

  • gold bars...kinda expensive

    gold coins...which one?

    gold certificates...is this reliable paper

    gold stocks...i can lose money from this.

    so which one should i get???

  • This seems like a whole lot of zero sum thinking.

  • I definitely didn't learn 350 of economic theory....

  • the obsession with gold is a psychological fixation. its not very useful. its a soft metal. bottom line is its not a need and we need to start thinking of what we actually and really need wich is a new moral, educational and political system. we should just claim the resources of the world common heritage to man and the living things around him. debt based money and a profit motive will never solve the problems we face today. the most advanced empire that has ever been on the verge of collapse.

  • Wrong. There is decreased supply of gold and silver. lies

  • @lebiew um. no you are wrong. as long as there are gold mines and people do not throw away or bury their gold and silver, there will obviously be more gold and silver supply.

    whether or not it is used in production (silver), doesn't decrease the supply because someone is always in ownership of it, and somewhere else there is a mine, mining more if it, the supply increases.

  • @TheAttackRat The gold mines are shut down. Gold dredging in Ca. is banned. Silver is mined but used in phones, computers, etc. Not held or buried. Gold and silver ownership is in the form of stock certificates not physical.

  • aslong as it does not hyper inflate, fiat will work. It's the rate of inflation that is the key, not the cumulative amount over time. 500 times means nothing. Find the rate of increase that it takes to go from 1 to 500 over a 120 years......2 to 3 inflation per year.

  • It is possible. But the point is the FED should not have the right to devalue YOUR dollars. Even if it were complete government controlled (not just audited) It would fuck up sooner or later; It just has btw.

    the thing people don't realize is that people adapt to the rate of inflation. so it's speed doesn't matter, it's the acceleration of inflation that causes a temporary boom, or temporary bust.

  • he also mentions that the amount of dollars has increase by 5000 or some other number much greater than 30. This indicates to me that there is greater or more valuable produce within the US and as a result people are much wealthier. So aside from "removing the government from the equation", how exactly would we benefit from this change in currency?

  • Question for some one who knows a little more about economics:

    Does the Austrian School prefer gold coins to the paper/electronic money we are currently using?  If so, how could gold coins allow for the growth of the economy given that you can't just make more gold? Would the coins simply increase in value? Notice he blames our current system for resulting in the devaluation of the dollar. However, he points out the dollar has decreased to 1/30th of its value 100 years ago or whatever...

  • @hyperreality8 no, it has been slowly decreasing for a long time but it took some step falls in the past.

    the amount of gold isn't the growth! it's the value. the economy can grow even if the supply (worldwide) is somehow decreasing. and even not worldwide, but i don't want to confuse the point i'm making.

    The absolute best book in my opinion (i have read many Austrian economics books) is 'how an economy grows and why it crashes' by PETER SCHIFF. Please read it if you have time.

  • @TheAttackRat What is your source for it having been decreasing? (I'm not sure were to look to check stats like that).

  • @hyperreality8 inflation. the fed expands the money supply and the government spends it.

    the more money, the less it's worth. if we all were given a million dallars, we wouldn't be living like millionaires would we?

  • @TheAttackRat thanks for your answers which are meant to satisfy elementary school students. i guess i shouldn't be expecting intelligent answers underneath this video anyway...

  • @hyperreality8 HA so says the person who asked 'how could an economy grow is the gold coins didn't increase"

    wow.. you know creationist think scientists are stupid. herpy derp er... but does that mean scientists are stupid?

    obviously not

    call me stupid, but everyone else will hold that label for you.

  • @TheAttackRat i think you have trouble reading... take care moron

  • @hyperreality8 ffs man, you ask a elementary question. you get an elementary answer.

    if you want to shit on things you don't understand, go fuck yourself. dipshit.

  • @hyperreality8 You are correct about how using gold would work, since gold is not unlimited like a fiat currency then the value of the gold would necessarily increase with greater demand. Also without inflation prices would normally drop over time so that you should be able to buy more with your money so it is worth more in that way. There are plenty of intelligent, thoughtful people that follow Austrian economics but apparently attack rat isn't one of them.

  • they should just make gold coins. not even a gold standard because that still leaves the window open for fraud.

    Americans should hold onto their gold as much as their guns. whatcha gonna protect with just guns? you bank owned house?

  • @TheAttackRat haha

  • @TheAttackRat There is a power in guns with the intent of violent defense and offense. Most people fear death more than anything. I do not. I fear the loss of freedom more than anything. So with that said. I believe not only in a free market but complete and total freedom. I am not only a Capitalist in the sense of money and capital but also the will to survive at all costs. Even the cost of being a moral and good person. I care only about myself and my family. Is that wrong of me? Be honest.

  • @shartstastegood not really. but we all have natural instincts that lead us to try to live in a community and impose force and coercion on others. i think much of these state-ist ideologies are just manifestations of that, but they do not realise they are just following instinct, and don't seem to know that while soft coercion may work in a small group, but on a national scale (their instinct aren't fussed), those same instincts to use force/coercion lead to totalitarianism.

  • @TheAttackRat gold as a currency would be dominated and manipulated by whoever sits on the biggest pile of gold. additionally, u have a labour increase where u have a population increase. the amount of gold in the world barely fluctuates and could never inflate or deflate hand in hand with labour/population changes

  • @BOZ11 but that's exactly where people go wrong. it's the acceleration of money supply, either increasing or decreasing that causes depressions and booms. unless population started growing exponentially, or decreased massively.. there wouldn't be any problem.

    even a slowly falling supply (as long as people know it is falling) wouldn't do damage.

    if someone had most of the money today, they could do just the same. so that argument is erroneous. of course today, gold ownership is less spreadout

  • @TheAttackRat it is growing exponentially! there were fewer than 2 billion ppl in the world in 1900. 110 years later it's 6.8 billion. There is no way gold is flexible enough to deal with sharp population changes as we're currently experiencing, nor it fungible enough, nor is it evenly distributed since the bankers own it all and would impoverish all of us overnight (more so than they have) if we moved to gold. terrible idea. debt free fiat currency, e.g. lincoln's u.s notes are the way to go

  • @BOZ11 it is growing expotentially, yes! but that is slow compared to the ability for people to realise and change prices. the reason why inflation (increasing the money supply, not price rises) causes booms, then a bust, is because people mistake thier increase in money for wealth, they over-invest/undersave.. then reality hits them in the face.

    the population increase can never do that, it's expotential growth is slow compared to money creation. it most definitely is flexiable enough

  • @TheAttackRat and how is gold not fungiable enough. it's gold like all other gold.

    if you can name one period in which a government or other entity did not tamper with the money supply, or even a way to stop them from doing so, then maybe.. but you seem to forget the whole point. it's not what works best, it should be about the rights of people trading with whatever naturally becomes a natural currency. and clearly that wouldn't just be gold and other metals are just as fungible.

  • @TheAttackRat gold is the most fungible thing i can think of...

  • @TheAttackRat the only way gold could be fungible enough in a world wide economy consisting of a population expected to grow to over 10 billion, is if we were all trading in gold dust!

  • @BOZ11 Also, gold supply could even be decreasing by a lot, but as long as people know this, and are able to adjust prices accordingly, there should be no problem (unless we are expected to handle this gold dust).

    it's the unexpected acceleration (or deceleration), that causes the artifical booms/busts.

    like a car going backwards or forwards. as long as it is accelerating, you feel an external force.

    but again, all metals can be used. i'm not calling for an exclusively gold standard.

  • @TheAttackRat u understand why booms and busts happen, but you're advocating money backed by a commodity that CANNOT inflate with labour; leading to a permanent and debilitating scarcity of currency that strangles economic development and concentrates currency further into the banking sector, since the bankers own all the gold

  • @BOZ11 no it doesn't! and if bankers own alll the gold (they don't, but are buying up now), history had its part to play.

    what you are buying into is a myth by keynesians that money supply has to grow fast than growth. but you don't seem to understand, it is the percentage that you have compared to others that counts.

    and we don't need a purely gold standard, it can be any metals. even many.

  • @TheAttackRat *this is because history has its part to play

    yes, bad sentence, but it's Youtube and you get what i mean.

  • @TheAttackRat "what you are buying into is a myth by keynesians that money supply has to grow fast than growth" - I never said that. I said currency has to inflate with commodities and labour, but not faster; gold can't.

    "it is the percentage that you have compared to others that counts"

    It's not fungible enough in a world with 10+ billion and all the commodities to go with it. Also, they're overselling gold by at least 50:1 so there isn't anything like as much gold in the world as u imagine

  • @TheAttackRat "they should just make gold coins. not even a gold standard" - before

    "and we don't need a purely gold standard, it can be any metals. even many." - now

    glad to see you're no longer adamant on gold. yes of course a currency backed by a basket of commodities is infinitely saner. the trouble with commodities is that we use them. debt free fiat currency, e.g. lincoln's u.s notes is better still. check out the video 'Money masters' on my favourites

  • @BOZ11 hardly a contradiction. a gold standard would be a big step in the right direction.

    again though, same challenge. who is to stop the government from calling an emergency and increasing the supply to pay off a debt or go to war? when has their ever been a responsible use of fiat money?

    the biggest myth for fiat is that a decreasing supply will cause a deflationary spiral. it is the change of production.

    i would think under a gold standard (or basket) the only threat are alchemists lol

  • @TheAttackRat "gold is the most fungible thing i can think of..."

    u mean to tell me, the most fungible thing u can think of, is also one of the rarest commodities on earth? are u handicapped?

    "i would think under a gold standard (or basket) the only threat are alchemists lol"

    "lol". this means you are ignorant of money changing and clipping. you have an air of condescension about u, but u don't know anything. watch the video i recommended and stop disseminating your ignorance . i'm disengaging

  • @BOZ11 look up the word you idiot! fungifiable, meaning any specimen can be replaced with another.

    monalisa = non fungifiable

    sand= very fungifiable

    gold = absolutely fungifiable, every pure metal and sunstance is in the same 100% fungifiable catagory.

    its rarity has NOTHING to do with it!

  • @TheAttackRat "its rarity has NOTHING to do with it!"

    i said i'd disengage, but i actually owe an apology since i was conflating divisibility with fungibility. Of course the rarer a commodity is, the less divisible it is; hence the gold dust comments, and gold's inability to back large increases in labour and commodities with divisibility being a major concern. they are overselling gold at least 50:1. there is at least 50 times less gold than gold certificates. it's fractional reserve gold

  • the alchemist bit was a joke, and 'clippings'? are you refering to the coins,.... because that was also a joke. OBVIOUSLY we're not going back to carrying coins. but if we really wanted to have possession of one, we should be able to. and our wealth should at least be attached to something tangible.

    i've seen that video ok. fiat money is usually proposed by the people who want to manipulate it.

  • @TheAttackRat what about a non-debt based fiat spent into existance on public works projects; infrastructure incl. transit, education, etc.

  • @scjtraveler you miss the point. we own the our things, including our money. moneys value is supposed to come from what it actually represents. currently it represents nothing, but has value because people beleive it have value.

    a nondebt based fiat would give control of money to government. it's bad enough having a fed, but if gov had direct control, things would be a lot worse. they wouldn't have to print to pay off thier debts. they'd just print and spend which would = communism very soon.

  • @TheAttackRat scjtraveler is trying to get u to think. "moneys value is supposed to come from what it actually represents" - did u ever ask yourself why?

  • @BOZ11 yes i have asked myself why, and perhaps you might ask, golds real uses are about that of paper anyway?

    well people KNOW gold cannot be forged so easily, this is why it has value. perhaps it is more a representative of wealth, rather than intrisic; like wheat or milk.

    in any case, it is just another reason to stick with metals rather than paper.

  • @TheAttackRat u don't internalise anything. "Gold and silver ownership is in the form of stock certificates not physical" - lebiew told u this 3 days ago. On the very same day, I said: "they're overselling gold by at least 50:1 so there isn't anything like as much gold in the world as u imagine".

    "well people KNOW gold cannot be forged so easily" - As we've been trying to tell u for 3 days: they print off more than 50 gold certificates per item of gold, because nobody takes physical delivery.

  • @TheAttackRat "are you refering to the coins,.... because that was also a joke" - have some courage. u said earlier we should be trading actual gold, not just gold standard

    "OBVIOUSLY we're not going back to carrying coins"

    back to? we never stopped. did coins disappear? are they not legal tender?

    "wealth should at least be attached to something tangible." commodities and labour are tangible enough.

    "fiat money is usually proposed by the people who want to manipulate it"

    as is gold.

  • @BOZ11 it not about courage. i think you don't understand the principle i get my ideas from. generally people see the current politic landscape as the norm, and everything else as odd. they then usually bet that there is a reason for that other view not being mainstream without ever thinking it all through and listening to thier arguments. anarchy should be seen as the default starting point, and people should appreciate that government cannot achieve anything with taking freedom.

  • @BOZ11 the coins represent value, they are not actually valuable for thier weigh in whatever metal they are made of, which they should be.

    i should get a 50c coin and know, its value comes from the fact that there is 50c worth of whatever metal it is made of. that's the whole point. and thats why people don't see capitalism as what it is, a form of bartering with a commonly valued good. they see paper notes and coin, which if smelted, are never worth even 2% of the represented value.

  • @BOZ11 i was always for a basket. but it is quicker to say a gold standard. and no a purely gold standard would not be easily manipulated (transition period would have to occur). but the only way to enforce a purely gold standard would be to place rules on against using other metals as currency.. i believe most countries have these rules.

  • @TheAttackRat

    The problem with the gold standard is that we do not have enough gold to go around.

  • @TheAttackRat lol@this guy

  • @TheAttackRat Gold coins preventing fraud? Do you know why coins have ridges on the edges of them? It's because people used to shave the valuable metal off and make their own coins when they had enough shavings. Besides, there wouldn't be enough gold to go around for our population. And if you know anything about economics, a country can flourish with inflation but not deflation. think about the housing bubble.. house prices were inflating, but as soon as it dropped chaos occured.

  • @rockboy679 nice trolling, mr. monetarist =)

    indeed, fraud is bad thing, but don't you find that creating money otof thin air is a bit worse than filing milligrams of metal off coins? Besides, there are lots of other metals and substances that can be used as money, and with all those it is possibility of them being mined and produce inflation that is worrying than their scarcity. Also, metals like platinum are much more valuable as catalysts, than money.

  • @rockboy679 like for example, Niobium. it costs around 100usd/kg (+-100% =). One typical change coin weighs 5-10g, which makes 100-200 coins per kg = 1$~50c per typical coin. Around 5e7kg of niobium is mined yearly, which is 5e9 (5 billion us dollars worth), so no scarcity should be a problem.

  • @coturnix19 Honestly back in the day these metals had value that could actually buy you things. NOW the entire world uses imaginary money... Have you tried buying groceries with gold? Lets see you try to make a deal with the cashier; "I'll give you my gold watch for these groceries". The cashier would rather take your credit card(aka fake money) than your gold watch. The world will no longer use actual money, everything will be digital... How will they manage this? They'll probably have some sor

  • @coturnix19 sort of global currency bank which controls everything... that's if they don't have that already. And if they do that, then obviously it doesn't matter which country is "powerful" or has "value" because this global bank decides what value to give for each country because they will have the power to shut down trade in whatever part they want.

  • @rockboy679

    The difference is the presupposed authority of central banks, and of the state in general. There aren't any competing currencies, because monopoly courts protect the fiat paper money with legal tender laws (that is, offer to force cashiers and stores to accept Federal Reserve notes) and steal and shut down competing currencies (e.g. what happened with the Liberty Dollar).

    Of course money seems easily manipulable to you - the only currencies you've ever heard of are socialized.

  • @TheAttackRat with guns? Screw the house, I'm using them to protect my life.

  • @TheAttackRat lol not many americans cares about gold, they're too ignorant. Thats good because gold prices dont go up too fast so my parents and i can purchase more.

  • @TheAttackRat who will stop the rats who will rub off gold from the coins?

  • @TheAttackRat Seeing posts like these being top rated makes me not like mises so much.

  • Omg my intenet browser says that i dont have permission to view their website !! :(

  • @DreamerXI coincidence? dun dun dunnn... *paranoid look-around* -.-

  • I was wondering if anybody did the numbers on ...If the USA is 2 trillion dollars in debt ...how much gold in pounds will it take to pay it off...and...do the world have that much gold in it...i m thinking that if gold is a $1000/oz...then how many pounds is that? do anybody know? i also think that we are stuck with the paper money because of the amount of people that are alive today..i don't think that there is enough gold to have an effective method of transfer of goods and service

  • Comment removed

  • @soleeforu just to correct u there that USA is in debt of $13.258 Trillion not 2 trillion thanks

  • @soleeforu Money is just a substitute for what I produce in the exchange of what you produce... The amount of gold is not important... Your goal is not to have much gold but other things that you see as valuable... Gold / money is just temporary kept as wealth...

    The marked will price gold by how much is available.. If there is a lack of gold, the gold will become more valuable,,, even if you get paid less,, your preserve you purchasing power.

  • @bjarnet3 Gold isn't fungible enough though

  • @soleeforu google: 'us debt clock'

    it's more like 700% GDP or 150 trillion (including unfunded liabilities)

    and there is enough for all the people. that's a silly arguement as we can have it in bank deposits with a card; like you can with other currencies. or dilute with another metal... silver/copper etc.

  • Let's decentralize corporations through self-sufficiency

  • Free markets mean plutocrats are free to rape you for everything you own. "Freedom is slavery" to these Austrian monsters. Fuck you and die.

  • @ih8grep Not possible with sufficient market participation.

  • @gothicsolace By definition, any free market is free to polarize around a few super participants at the exclusion of all others. It is ironically the true road to serfdom.

  • @ih8grep I wouldn't agree that a mal-distribution of wealth is necessary in free markets, polarization is not possible with sufficient participation, corporate profits are publicly owned and the markets purpose are to accurately reflect good and services that are truly in public demand. This is not the case due to little natural regulation that occurs from a small minority of the population even knowing how money works, so we are sold what they want us to buy and they reap all the profits.

  • @gothicsolace What "free markets" have given us is more like medieval feudalism. A few powerful interests control all production and resources, and they're free to strengthen their control. The idea is presented to us like a market place where "a baker with bread to trade meets a fishing tribe" but reality is a Darwinian battle arena. The "free market" provides only poverty, servitude and death. I squander the precious hours of my life toiling so someone else doesn't have to. It's slavery...

  • @ih8grep I'm sorry you feel this way. You don't have to toil endlessly if you know how to claim the profits that are owned to you.

  • @gothicsolace Fiat currency debt, inflation outpacing salaries, skyrocketing cost of living expenses, crucial necessities like food and fuel fluctuating in a "free market" casino, tell me how that's not servitude. By definition someones profit is someone else's loss, MY loss. The closed loop fantasy of everyone exchanging everything doesn't exist. A greedy elite makes us slaves. If there is some way to escape this cycle of damnation, lets please hear it.