|
Post by cyberbluntz on Apr 27, 2011 16:49:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 27, 2011 18:34:24 GMT -5
Is it his non-dual approach or his Buddhist perspectives that you like?
|
|
|
Post by cyberbluntz on Apr 27, 2011 18:49:49 GMT -5
I like his indifference and determination that people are living but an illusion of freedom.
|
|
|
Post by smokey on Apr 27, 2011 21:42:05 GMT -5
Ron Paul is a patriot, and if he had the power, would end the Federal Reserve and our corrupt fiat money system based on debt. He would then, as he has proposed, institute a monetary system backed by gold, or gold and silver.
What is keeping our financial system from crashing is government borrowing and the purchasing of that debt indirectly by Federal Reserve's electronic money printing. While this process is preventing the collapse of the financial/banking system and deflation in the economy, it is funneling funds into the commodities/energy markets where speculation is inflating the prices of food and fuel. This, in turn, acts like a tax on the economy extracting the disposable income we spend on non-necessities such as restaurants, entertainment, haircuts and other stuff we don't really need to pay for that which we do need.
If we changed over to a gold-backed monetary system tomorrow, the economy would instantly collapse into a deflationary depression much, much worse than the Great Depression. Although the current shenanigans are creating the nuisance of inflating prices and falling incomes, the end of these stopgap measures would instantly render pensions, stocks, bonds, real estate, and all other financial investments relatively worthless as all the too-big-to-fail and too-arrogant-to-invest-in-precious metals banks and hedge funds fail.
In reality, there is no way out of this mess we created by borrowing from tomorrow's income to fund today's desires. This unnatural action is now being met by Mother Nature trying to balance our imbalanced world in a reversion-to-mean
Government and personal incomes are maxed out. The time has come and gone for Peter to pay Paul.
Too bad it ain't Ron Paul who's gonna be paid.
.
|
|
|
Post by klaus on Apr 27, 2011 21:56:08 GMT -5
It's his non-dual approach to the Federal Reserve.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Apr 28, 2011 11:13:52 GMT -5
I certainly don't want to start discussing politics on this forum, but the idea of a gold-backed currency is pretty funny to anyone who understands anything about currency flows and currency volumes in today's world. First, there isn't enough gold in the world to back up the US currency, second, it couldn't be transported at the speed that would be necessary if any entity demanded payment in gold, and third, trillions of dollars now flow electronically between institutions every day on a worldwide basis without taking into account an estimated 600 trillion additional dollars in options, derivatives, credit default swaps, and other arcane forms of hedging used by millions of individuals and businesses. When the US was on the gold standard, there were several depressions (so being on a gold standard didn't solve that problem), and money flows were ultra-simple by comparison with what's happening today. I wouldn't want to try and defend the current system or predict where it may be ultimately heading, but the facts of the current system make the idea of a gold standard somewhat quaint.
|
|
|
Post by cyberbluntz on Apr 28, 2011 12:33:35 GMT -5
I certainly don't want to start discussing politics on this forum, but the idea of a gold-backed currency is pretty funny to anyone who understands anything about currency flows and currency volumes in today's world. First, there isn't enough gold in the world to back up the US currency, second, it couldn't be transported at the speed that would be necessary if any entity demanded payment in gold, and third, trillions of dollars now flow electronically between institutions every day on a worldwide basis without taking into account an estimated 600 trillion additional dollars in options, derivatives, credit default swaps, and other arcane forms of hedging used by millions of individuals and businesses. When the US was on the gold standard, there were several depressions (so being on a gold standard didn't solve that problem), and money flows were ultra-simple by comparison with what's happening today. I wouldn't want to try and defend the current system ore predict where it may be ultimately heading, but the facts of the current system make the idea of a gold standard somewhat quaint. Unfortunately this post shows how ignorant you are on what "Backed" means. Research a bit more before you formulate a rebuttal.
|
|
|
Post by cyberbluntz on Apr 28, 2011 12:44:33 GMT -5
Also, please show where there isn't enough gold in the world, roflmao!
Let me help you a bit, Being backed by gold and or silver does not mean that we can't electronically transfer funds or even have paper in place of it. It only means that piece of paper is actually worth something. You could go and trade the $1 piece of paper for 1/1500- gold ounce.
It really simple and logical, it prevents people from making more money that is in fact reducing the value of your current money, and stealing it from you.
Then again, I have around 50 ounces of silver because I saw this comming a while ago.
With this Fiat System goldand silver will continue to rise, it's not that it is more valuable, it is just that there are more dollars in circulation so each one is worth that much less, and more dollars a being printed out every day, and will continue to be, unless we say something about it.
|
|
|
Post by cyberbluntz on Apr 28, 2011 12:45:50 GMT -5
Here is an example.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 28, 2011 13:42:27 GMT -5
Seems to me, though I'm pretty ignorant about such things (hehe), backed by a gold standard essentially means the dollar is a gold certificate, which would be theoretically redeemable for an equivalent in gold.
After extensive research (okay, I Googled it) the estimated total value of all gold ever mined in the world is about 7.5 trillion at the moment. Assuming all the gold ever mined in human history is sitting in a treasury building somewhere, it still adds up to only half the 14 trillion dollar debt. At first glance, this tells me there could never be enough currency in circulation to pay off our debt because there's not enough gold to authorize that currency. Sure, it's all just 'on paper', but that's the point. For the paper to actually represent something real, that real something has to actually exist whether somebody demands it or not. When Zen says an 'entity', he doesn't mean a person, though Donald Trump walking into a bank asking to be paid 3 billion in gold would raise a few eyebrows even if there was a gold standard.
Also, I don't know the numbers, but Zen's point about creative money flows is well taken. Since, without a standard, money is just imagined into existence, folks have been using a lot of imagination, which is why the house of cards comes tumbling down every now and then. The gold standard just makes our financial dealing 'real', and we've gone way beyond anything real.
Just how it seems to me.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Apr 28, 2011 14:07:16 GMT -5
I certainly don't want to start discussing politics on this forum, but the idea of a gold-backed currency is pretty funny to anyone who understands anything about currency flows and currency volumes in today's world. First, there isn't enough gold in the world to back up the US currency, second, it couldn't be transported at the speed that would be necessary if any entity demanded payment in gold, and third, trillions of dollars now flow electronically between institutions every day on a worldwide basis without taking into account an estimated 600 trillion additional dollars in options, derivatives, credit default swaps, and other arcane forms of hedging used by millions of individuals and businesses. When the US was on the gold standard, there were several depressions (so being on a gold standard didn't solve that problem), and money flows were ultra-simple by comparison with what's happening today. I wouldn't want to try and defend the current system ore predict where it may be ultimately heading, but the facts of the current system make the idea of a gold standard somewhat quaint. Unfortunately this post shows how ignorant you are on what "Backed" means. Research a bit more before you formulate a rebuttal. I understand exactly what "backed" means, have read about this subject extensively, and could probably put together a package of source material that would be an eye-opener for anyone seriously interested in this topic, but there is no need to argue about something that we both agree has a snowball's chance in hell of taking place. The only thing of common interest here is probably how one can best thrive in the existing financial environment (since it is unlikely to change in the immediate future), and this has been well covered on another thread about money and wealth. Silver and gold would have been a great investment three years ago when Paulson made his big bet (as of two weeks ago he was showing a gain of more than 5 billion on gold, alone), but it is now a bit late to the party IMO. As an investor, one merely needs to recognize that inflation will increase in the future, and find currently undervalued assets that will more than offset the increase while providing maximum yield. And now, back to your regularly scheduled programming......LOL
|
|
|
Post by klaus on Apr 28, 2011 14:23:14 GMT -5
Poof!
|
|
|
Post by cyberbluntz on Apr 28, 2011 14:26:39 GMT -5
You do make a good point, that is if the dollars in circulation were actually worth anything besides the paper and ink, but they are not.
The point that there are roughly (or were) 600 billion in circulation leads one to belive that there is more than enough. Way more than enough when mixed with silver.
Having nothing backing the dollar is why we are in this mess. Endless right to print endless money, devaluating every piece that is already there.
Money could even be backed by the other commodities. There has to be an end to it, or it will never end. Now is forever, so if we don't do something now, we never will!
|
|
|
Post by cyberbluntz on Apr 28, 2011 14:29:48 GMT -5
By not resisting and pretending that everything is ok, you are in fact condoning it.
If your fine living an illusion, go for it! I am not.
|
|
|
Post by teetown on Apr 28, 2011 16:09:19 GMT -5
Hmm, I was very interested in Austrian economics and gold backed currencies back in the day. I even campaigned for Ron Paul. Now I don't have much of an interest in it. This non duality stuff has pretty well killed my interest in economics and politics and other worldly issues, heh heh.
I will say that I listened to some of those "goldbugs" like Peter Schiff about 4 years ago and put some of my college loans into gold and silver. Pretty risky decision in retrospect. I should have just given the extra money back to the bank!
So I've been sitting on this little stash of gold and silver coins for the past few years and I totally forgot about it until last week. I was on CNN and saw a headline about silver being $50 an ounce! When did that happen? Now I've doubled my investment, and my little stockpile is worth enough to probably pay off the rest of my college debt if I decided to cash it in. Not sure though, because I think it still might go even higher. Meh, so maybe those Austrian dudes know what they're talking about.
|
|