Peter Schiff explains the global economic situation (and future of the dollar)

www.schiffradio.com

from August 15th, 2011

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Peter Schiff
• inflation
• dollar
• economy

[Wenbier]

Let's have hyper-inflation with good grammar!

"Loan" is a noun; "lend" is a verb.

You lend money to your brother. Your brother is the recipient of a loan.

[Frrrrrrrrunkis]

@Wenbier sounds like SOMEONE'S trying to marginalize Mr. Schiff

[iandaous]

@Wenbier - you're a retard. Loan can be used as a verb and a noun. Just like 'run.' example... I like to run. or Did you do the 5 or 10 mile run?

[aliaandreadi]

@defnotacanadian well said

[defnotacanadian]

The government during the depression subsidized farmers to NOT grow food. Thereby protecting the high prices. This is when people are starving. This has to end. Free markets or no markets.

[regelemihai]

@hurting

If you subsedize an industry, i.e a producer, you effectively remove the incentive of increasing input, quality, and lowering prices. You get money from a third party source--not from the consumer. The free market stands against such actions. I don't see it as being contradictory to what Schiff is saying.

[hurting]

@regelemihai The idea that farm subsidies raise food prices is directly contradictory to the very basic free market economic principles that Schiff claims to espouse. A subsidy to a CONSUMER might at least arguably have the potential to raise prices (e.g. govt basically 'subsidized' mortgages, contributing to inflated home values). But subsidizing the PRODUCER (farmer) does nothing to enable that farmer to charge more for his crop. At worse, prices should stay the same.

[USTreasuryBond]

Why do some austrian and free market libertarian economists favor trade deficits and some do not? Surely Peter Schiff is NOT in favor of subsidies for domestic exporting industries and tariffs on imported goods.

[t4509228]

@Wenbier You're wrong. Try looking the word up.

[regelemihai]

...government largess. Those who go out of business are the ones who SHOULD go out of business. If a company isn't keeping up with the compettion, it goes under. The government, however, props up these failing companies with their misguided interventions. It's the free market that lowers prices; not government.

You're clueless. At least don't be so aggressive when expounding your ignorance.

[regelemihai]

@MrFabianGhosty

No, I think he's got it right. Maybe you don't get the fact that subsidies are technically hand-outs. When the government engages in protectionism, prices rise; they don't fall. The intended purpose of such interventions is to protect the "workers," not the consumers. This applies not only to farmers, but to every single industry. When they receive money, they have less incetive to lower down prices--kinda' makes sense. This benefits the companies who benefit from...

[pretorious700]

@Frrrrrrrrunkis grammar police are mostly anal retentives