Rovers Posted August 28, 2010 Share Posted August 28, 2010 Would the crisis of 1857 have anything to do with too many uneducated Irish immigrants finally overwhelming the system? Would crisis of 1873 have anything to do with the devastation the norther aggressors wrecked on the south, and that debt that they accumulated doing so? Sorry, I just thought this was funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted August 28, 2010 Share Posted August 28, 2010 Scoreboard. And how is the aggressor not the one who shot first? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brentastic Posted August 28, 2010 Share Posted August 28, 2010 you don't know what your link means--intragovernmental holdings are NOT Fed holdings.** The numbers I provided above about the Fed are correct. And I don't understand your point about the other central banks in conjunction with your previous statement that there is a sole lender to the government. Are you suggesting that the Chinese central bank and the Fed comprise a "sole lender"? **intragovernment holdings would be things like the current social security surplus. Yeah, I get that. The point is that 80% of our debt is owed to private bankers (Fed and other central banks are all the same entity) and to ourselves. The intragovernmental holdings is essentially money we owe to ourselves because it was borrowed from 'savings' (social security). The Federal Reserve is just part of a bigger group of banks that started with the Bank of England. All central banks world-wide are one in the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted August 28, 2010 Share Posted August 28, 2010 Yeah, I get that. The point is that 80% of our debt is owed to private bankers (Fed and other central banks are all the same entity) and to ourselves. The intragovernmental holdings is essentially money we owe to ourselves because it was borrowed from 'savings' (social security). The Federal Reserve is just part of a bigger group of banks that started with the Bank of England. All central banks world-wide are one in the same. Your 80% point is just plain wrong. Even if we do assume that all of the world's central banks are one in the same (which, of course, they are not), the amount of federal debt they hold is about 1/3 of the total debt. (And the People's Bank of China is going to be very surprised to learn that it is owned by private bankers.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted August 28, 2010 Author Share Posted August 28, 2010 I got a minute and a half in and the guy is simply wrong on his assumptions. I'm sure his intentions are pure but he's another example someone 'tricked' into thinking another alternative (in this case coinage) is the answer. These bankers created the world we live in, so they have a leg up on all of us and being highly motivated/competitive, they understand that people are catching onto the scheme. So their only 'move' now is to get people thinking a coinage system is the answer, but that system will still be controlled by the bankers who control things now. There is key thing he talks about in that first minute that clues in on the truth behind a coinage system. 1 - gold coins with a fraction of silver and/or fractionalized coins Both of these caveats are exactly how the current fiat scheme began - it's what kings used to do, water down the coins (hence more of the pure metalics for the elite). Gold is scarce, I think silver is at least 15x more abundant than gold. The majority of gold that has not been mined (I wonder who owns the mines?) is in the hands of few. Having gold coins that are watered down with anything (in this case silver) allows the banks to 'fractionalize' it just the same (keep making coins with less gold). The fractional reserve system we have now is exactly what's wrong with our current system. Plus that guy doesn't even address the Federal Reserve - no matter what the system, if there is a private organization that is the sole lender to our government at interest, then the system is still broke. Borrower is servant to the lender- remember that. If our government continues to be the borrower then we the citizens and our government (who is supposed to serve us)are servants to a greater power operated mostly from foreign soil. We must stop this way of living and set a better path for our children. Serioiusly. silver isn't 15x more abundant than gold...it's about the other way around....above ground silver may be depleted in 10 years because silver is used in so many more things than gold is....and there is a lot less mining going on in the world because it's almost an old school train of thought... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted August 28, 2010 Author Share Posted August 28, 2010 (edited) another about Bernanke coming from Princeton.... Edited August 28, 2010 by Avernus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted August 28, 2010 Share Posted August 28, 2010 No one really cares as to the method of award bestowal. We only are informed as to the recipients and we instantly realize the method is tainted. There is no way Al Gore or Obama earned anything on merit. All other Nobel awards are suspect. So, spare us your Nobel winning references. We are not impressed. Actually, if one vouched for you - my already low opinion of you is further reduced. But have you learned the difference between a four and six yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted August 28, 2010 Share Posted August 28, 2010 I was actually thinking earlier today that Perch is pretty much in a league of his own in being so wrong about so many different things. Well, maybe, but Lady.Hawke is rising fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brentastic Posted August 28, 2010 Share Posted August 28, 2010 silver isn't 15x more abundant than gold...it's about the other way around....above ground silver may be depleted in 10 years because silver is used in so many more things than gold is....and there is a lot less mining going on in the world because it's almost an old school train of thought... If silver were more scarce than gold, it would be worth more. The perceived value is based on scarcity just like any commodity. Trust me, going back to a gold standard (or silver for that matter) is NOT the answer. I'm not saying I have the answer but a gold standard is definitely not the answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted August 28, 2010 Author Share Posted August 28, 2010 If silver were more scarce than gold, it would be worth more. The perceived value is based on scarcity just like any commodity. Trust me, going back to a gold standard (or silver for that matter) is NOT the answer. I'm not saying I have the answer but a gold standard is definitely not the answer. no you should do more research and silver has been and is the most manipulated commodity I've ever seen.... and I'm not saying anything is the answer...finding the answer to this situation is like finding world peace...we just need to find something that can't be manipulated... but ETF purchases have manipulated silver down so the price for electronics won't be sky high.....but make no mistake, silver is about 15x more scarce than gold.... silver is used so much more in everyday devices than gold and mining is at an all time low... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted August 28, 2010 Share Posted August 28, 2010 But have you learned the difference between a four and six yet? Baby steps Pope, baby steps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted August 28, 2010 Share Posted August 28, 2010 If silver were more scarce than gold, it would be worth more. you are assuming the demand for both commodities doesn't matter--not sure why you would want to make that assumption Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted August 28, 2010 Share Posted August 28, 2010 you are assuming the demand for both commodities doesn't matter--not sure why you would want to make that assumption Doesn't scarcity imply a relationship between supply and demand? So if he says, "if silver was more scarce than gold, it would be worth more", how is that assuming the demand for both commodities doesn't matter? Isn't he actually saying, "if the supply of silver relative to the demand of it was less than that of gold, it would be worth more"? Unless I'm taking his quote out of context. I'm just judging based on your response to the part you quoted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted August 28, 2010 Share Posted August 28, 2010 Unless I'm taking his quote out of context. I'm just judging based on your response to the part you quoted. I think you are pulling his quote out of context because Brent and Avernus were arguing about the total quanties of gold and silver in the world, not the quantity relative to demand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted August 28, 2010 Share Posted August 28, 2010 I think you are pulling his quote out of context because Brent and Avernus were arguing about the total quanties of gold and silver in the world, not the quantity relative to demand. Ah yes, and I really didn't have to dig too far back, did I. He misused the word "scarce" right from the get go, didn't he. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted August 29, 2010 Author Share Posted August 29, 2010 Doesn't scarcity imply a relationship between supply and demand? So if he says, "if silver was more scarce than gold, it would be worth more", how is that assuming the demand for both commodities doesn't matter? Isn't he actually saying, "if the supply of silver relative to the demand of it was less than that of gold, it would be worth more"? Unless I'm taking his quote out of context. I'm just judging based on your response to the part you quoted. you're making that comment under the assumption that they both have equal starting points for a certain amount around the world... the price of silver has been manipulated drastically because the ratio should be 16 oz of silver = 1 oz of gold....but lately the ratio has actually come down from what it has been which was 76:1....it's about 64.5:1 in price....but the silver supply above ground is on track to be depleted in 10 years due to the manipulation which is a result of our need for cheap chinamen products... not to mention how much we use silver...gold is looked at as more of a currency than silver is while silver is more along the lines of copper nowadays, but much more expensive and being used for so many things like solar panels, mirrors, medicine, electronics, etc. etc. while gold is mainly jewelry and certain areas of conductivity like pentium chips and in wiring for HDMI/component etc. etc. wires....and it's such a small amount... I could go on for days, but anyways, silver is much more scarce than gold....this I know for a fact Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brentastic Posted August 29, 2010 Share Posted August 29, 2010 (edited) you are assuming the demand for both commodities doesn't matter--not sure why you would want to make that assumption The demand does matter but imo the demand is almost entirely correlated to availability. I'm not a precious metal expert so I am making some assumptions but I'm not discounting demand. That being said, the real financial world is much more complex than revealed preference. Edited August 29, 2010 by Brentastic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady.hawke Posted August 29, 2010 Share Posted August 29, 2010 (edited) Wiegie, Which of the following Nobel winning economists supported you? Name the person. Nobel Winning Economists Paul Krugman, seriously? He must have been in the Al Gore graduating class. When Milton Friedman knows your name, many will be impressed. Until then, not so much. Care to comment on this, an editorial detailing most that is wrong with today's union ruled state financing: Public Pensions and Our Fiscal Future Edited August 29, 2010 by Lady.hawke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted August 29, 2010 Share Posted August 29, 2010 Wiegie, Which of the following liberal nutjob Nobel winning economists supported you? Brentastic and the Waves are a fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted August 29, 2010 Author Share Posted August 29, 2010 Brentastic and the Waves are a fan. I'm not a fan of the elliott wave theory, but even I think the jokes are pretty ghey at this point... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted August 29, 2010 Share Posted August 29, 2010 I'm not a fan of the elliott wave theory, but even I think the jokes are pretty ghey at this point... I purposely make my jokes ghey as part of an elaborate conspiracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted August 29, 2010 Share Posted August 29, 2010 Wiegie, Which of the following Nobel winning economists supported you? I'll leave it to your solid investigating skills to figure it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted August 29, 2010 Author Share Posted August 29, 2010 I purposely make my jokes ghey as part of an elaborate conspiracy. there isn't a conspiracy about your jokes being ghey..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puddy Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 When push comes to shove I'm still going to trust the judgement of the economics professor with a million Nobel peace prize winner friends over the Lady "I can't believe that Obama the Muslim who isn't a citizen of the United States is president" Hawke and the yarned bearded acoustic guy when it comes to the state of the economy. But then again, I'm pretty much a sheep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 I have to say,I am REALLY enjoying this thread on a number of different levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts