Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

Jim Rogers - Right Answer, Wrong Reasons

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
2,346
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Nov 25, 2008

An analysis of Jim Rogers losing an argument on CNBC, and why he should have applied Austrian Business Cycle Theory instead of Friedman and Schwartz's Monetary History of the United States.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2a3fsqLYaw

  • likes, 0 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Top Comments

  • Is a system based on credit a viable economy? Economy must be such that banks cannot control it.

  • I think Jim Rogers is an Austrian. He did support Ron Paul for president, and he says the Fed should be abolished.

see all

All Comments (23)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • In 1969, Milton Friedman, after examining the history of business cycles in the US, concluded that: "The Hayek-Mises explanation of the business cycle is contradicted by the evidence. It is, I believe, false." He analyzed the issue using newer data in 1993, and again reached the same conclusions.

    In his "The Monetary Studies of the National Bureau, 44th Annual Report". The Optimal Quantity of Money and Other Essays. pp. 261–284. and "The 'Plucking Model' of Business Fluctuations Revisited".

  • LOL......jim rogers has a history degree from Oxford UK.....and retired a gazillionaire at 37. You GOT TO BE JOKING...."tell him to read his history" ...lol, How narcissistic of you.

  • Bailout No One Ever! Let the free market and freedom of will balance out our economic system. A free market can recover faster than any John Maynard Keynes system. Water seeks its' own level. The difference in a major recession  taking 10 years to recover or only 2 years is the pain. Take the short term free market pain!

  • alright im pretty sure the video you where referring to was the one when Jim was in-front of a big stock board, but anyway if you watch the entire video he explains his reason for doing what he was saying. The reason he gave back in the 30s it was a run on the back, now banks collapse because of bad loans, and other things you would have to watch the video he does explain himself

  • If you read Jim's writing, you will see he is successful because he doesn't give a s*** about economic dogma; the Austrian School falls in this category.

  • You totally miss the point. Had the Fed bailed out homeowners and bad mortgages first, this would have naturally bailed out the banks, fundamentally. Now the Fed, due to their stupidity, will have bailed out the banks and now the homeowners at twice the cost that it would have been. This is what nailed us. We are now bankrupt and all the negative monetary issues that follow, lack of consumer confidence, high unemployment, inflation and food shortages. Printing money is not the answer.

  • I'm Austrian. I follow you. I have been of the same opinion for some time, but the banks still aren't lending and interest rates are at a quarter of a percent now, I'm starting to think we may be headed for a deflationary spiral. What do you think the probabilities are for that?

  • Good man giving Schiff his due at the end. :)

Loading...

0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more