This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: Why The Full Faith And Credit Of Governments Is Inferior To Real Assets And How We Can Fix It Once And For All

Tyler Durden's picture


Submitted by Robert Paulson

Title: How the USA got to where it finds itself, why the full faith and credit of governments is inferior to real assets and how we can fix it once and for all

I used to think like a statist, and I used to agree with them. It's appealing to redistribute wealth, especially when it's not fairly achieved.

But what I've realized is that the solution to creating distortions in the market is not to create more distortions by attacking the symptoms. What ends up happening when you do that is that you create a hugely complex set of rules and regulations that hinder the market, make it inefficient and most importantly makes it ripe for abuse via regulation in favor of those who make the right campaign donations to the right politicians. This is the situation we find ourselves in now: A very broken market setup to benefit those who've made the right political moves.

On the other hand, you can simply end the sole cause of the problem to begin with. That sole problem is bad monetary policy. You might say that we should replace everyone in charge of the Federal Reserve with the "right" people. But even if you were able to do that, it's really a temporary fix. The issue isn't just having the wrong people in charge, but having so few people in charge of controlling the levers to begin with. Not only does it create a situation ripe for corruption and collusion, but it puts the value of money in the hands of people who are thereby expected to perform satisfactorily. They execute insane policies at the behest of a government and people who cry "DO SOMETHING!"

It is because of this monetary system that our government and the public at large have been able to amass such humongous debts. Because our system is based upon continual growth, its very lifeblood and continued existence hinges upon consistent expansion of GDP and inflationary monetary policy. The continually bad policy experienced off and on since the Nixon administration has a reason: It was masking declining economic factors.

The stagflation the US experienced in the 70s came about for two reasons: The final end to the gold standard and ensuing monetary policy attempting to stimulate the economy in lieu of actual economic activity. The badly implemented normalization of relations with China by Nixon began the trend of sending manufacturing jobs overseas.

All of this combined with the explosion of consumer credit and the financial industry. People were being squeezed by real declines in jobs and wages. With credit, they could afford to get by "until things got better." This paradigm shift from saving to spending created the consumer culture, yuppies and the decade of greed that was the 80s. As a people, we bought into this idea that we could spend our way into prosperity, and it worked for a while. Actually, up until 2007.

Stagflation was ended in the early 1980s when we finally put someone responsible in charge of the Federal Reserve: Paul Volker. He jacked interest rates up to the high teens until he tamed inflation, but an inevitable and deep recession ensued as a result. In the process, bad businesses (and some good ones) went out of business, many people lost their jobs, but in the end that creative destruction brought us back to reality and put the market in position to spring back forward, especially combined with heavy use of consumer credit as well as deep government deficits and increasing debt.

Throughout the 90s, monetary policy was relatively restrained but ever too loose near the end. It ended up assisting the dot-com bubble by allowing it to blow up far further than it ever could've by itself, ending in an unavoidable recession that was a long time coming. Further, during this time period, China began to become a bigger and bigger factor in supplying inexpensive goods to the market at the cost of American jobs and paid for partially with debt. This time, however, the debt explosion was in the private sector as government spending was restrained and the budget balanced by the end of the decade. In effect, the stagnant income and rising costs of the American people were being masked by continually growing private debt.

So what did the Fed do in the early 00s? In the wake up the dot-com bust and resultant recession, the Fed opened the monetary floodgates wide and never looked back. When the recession ended, it didn't tighten policy as it should've, and did so for two reasons. First, housing was becoming the new hot sector and they didn't want to stop the gravy train in the middle of war time. Second, the government had not only implemented hundreds of billions in war spending and failed to pay for it, but it also cut taxes and held them there. These massive deficits and and increasing debt could only be maintained with low interest rates. Basically, the Fed and the government made a bet that the deficits and debt wouldn't matter because they would be matched by a growing economy and inflation.

Unfortunately, the housing market couldn't keep growing with just loose monetary policy. That could only do so much. So what did they do? They deregulated the mortgage market and allowed lenders to go hog wild with cheap money and low lending standards. In a free market, this wouldn't have been such a problem. However, through a combination of fraud and ineptness, the banks were able to make terrible loans, package them up into securities and falsely rate them as AAA when they were really junk. This is the key factor that allowed them to continually make horrible loans with cheap money and reap massive profits in the process. They were able to build a ticking time bomb of epic proportions because there was no one able or willing to stop them. No one wanted to be the party pooper.

The ratings agencies failed or were complicit specifically because their continued existence was not dependent upon performance but by the fact that they were deemed by the government as the agencies of choice. They had government endorsements and had zero incentive to rate much of anything properly. As you can plainly see, all 3 of the official ratings agencies are still the official ratings agencies despite their horrendous performance. Why would we expect such a system to work in our favor?

Meanwhile, the American people were high. There were two wars on they didn't want to think about. Their houses were increasingly growing in value. They bought new and bigger houses with cheap loans. The "flipping" phenomenon went into full swing. People took out huge loans against their already paid down or paid off homes to pay for consumer goods. Jobs were growing on trees. Everyone was living the high life on borrowed prosperity. It was doomed to fail and began doing so in 2007, culminating with the credit crisis in the Fall of 2008 in the midst of a terrible recession. All the way along, the government and the people became as indebted as they'd ever been (the government's exception being during WW2, though that debt was largely held by the American people). As things got worse, the debt levels only increased in the face of declining housing values. Even worse, due to bankruptcy reforms made in the mid-00s at the behest of the major banks, many people became essentially trapped in their debt with no way out.

The most important factor that so few people understand is that this approximately 40-year long process of consumerism based on expanding consumer and government debt hid a very big problem: Decline of true wealth production and rising real energy costs.

The overall loose economic policies during those 4 decades fostered the rise of consumerism and the financial industry's increasing share of the market. In a normal economic environment with sound money, the efficient market allocates wealth towards activities which create wealth. This includes manufacturing, mining and energy production. Instead, because the market was distorted by easy credit, we began a 40-year long bubble of consumption and the financial services to make it possible.

For 40 years, our monetary policy enabled our ignorance of a very real and pressing problem: Other countries were catching up to us in technology and we were no longer in the front of the pack by a mile. Instead of doubling down on education and allowing the market to guide the future, we passed the buck. We decided that a continually rising standard of living without interruption was preferable to tightening our belt and delaying gratification.

Now we find ourselves saddled with ginormous debts and no economic infrastructure with which to grow our way out. We are a late-stage kidney failure patient on dialysis, and we are in terrible need of a transplant.

So how do we fix this?

Sound money, debt forgiveness and a truly free market that isn't guided by the hand of the government and is instead determined by what the aggregate investor pool thinks is the right direction. Gordon Gecko was wrong overall, but he was right that greed is good. The profit motive is the key to good decisions and long-term thinking. That doesn't mean we need to be miserly dickheads who only care about ourselves, but self-enrichment and the unfettered ability to be as successful as possible is the only route to a truly higher standard of living.

You might think gold is a barbarous relic, and I would agree that money based upon a single asset is a terrible idea. Putting all the eggs in one basket is too high a risk. However, a currency based on a multitude of assets, especially complimented by commodities that are the lifeblood of wealth creation (oil for instance, and perhaps corn in America's case), is a superior system in comparison to fiat currency backed by full faith and credit of the government. By using multiple assets, we can even out the distortions that will occur from time to time, essentially making our currency as stable as a rock. Those who produce the assets backing the currency will be induced to find the equilibrium which maximizes profit without over-extending. When we have that foundation, we can move forward with a market free of excessive and cronyism-based regulations and maintain a focus on only those regulations which are necessary to prevent harm that we find unacceptable. In other words, instead of using regulation to guide the economy in a specific direction, we can use regulation to make certain things off limits. It's the difference between steering towards something and steering away. It's far preferable to steer a ship away from an iceberg than to presume that you can steer it through the iceberg.

Most importantly of all, we need to take money out of politics. None of this will matter unless we prevent our politicians from being beholden to campaign contributors. Our current system engenders corruption of even our best, brightest and well-intentioned representatives. They begrudgingly accept the standard which says they must compromise their principles in order to get reelected. My solution is a constitutional amendment which requires all electoral campaigns to be paid for with public funds and prohibits any advocacy of a candidate which extends further than displays of support by private individuals, and a requirement that all such displays be transparent by way of indicating who is responsible for them.

I humbly give you these words and suggestions in the hopes that together we can build an America which is stronger, better and freer. I believe that only through freedom can we accomplish what our hearts desire. Thank you for reading this.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:29 | 1632942 DonutBoy
DonutBoy's picture

Wow - do you actually believe the public campaign financing will take the money out of politics?

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:50 | 1633007 blindman
blindman's picture

take the money out of banking!
two problems solved.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 22:12 | 1633076 Mactheknife
Mactheknife's picture

Ron Paul...bitchez

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 23:34 | 1633252 jeff montanye
jeff montanye's picture

i second your sentiment.  however the market requires good regulation to function.  see "reinventing the bazaar".  additionally it prices energy, water, air etc. too cheaply because the costs of pollution et. al. are "paid for" by others.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 00:50 | 1633418 l1xx3r
l1xx3r's picture

I disagree... Do not get me wrong, if politics could work, I would love Ron Paul... I also disagree with the "solutions" in this article. Competing currencies is the only way... not some governmentaly backed one (no matter what it includes). We should all start ignoring the tax man and government... we are 10,000 to one of them, 900 to 1 for cops (which most would join us in ignoring government). Lets just ignore these parasites and create our market... one that will work regardless.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 01:24 | 1633482 i-dog
i-dog's picture


Ron Paul has already given up! Listen to this interview ( with Alex Jones @ 13:30 to see that he has already capitulated emotionally to Perry ... and he couldn't change a thing in DC, even if he fought tooth and nail to the end.

Government is the problem, not the solution ... and the worst government of all is a federal government distantly removed from the affected voters facing local issues.

Secede now!!

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 02:14 | 1633532 Dick Fitz
Dick Fitz's picture

Although I support Dr Paul 100%, I agree that politics cannot be changed from the inside.

Dr P wants to repeal legal tender and introduce competing currency, but I doubt TPTB will allow that to happen without bloodshed. But it will happen, sooner than many think. The "Internet Reformation" has already changed the game, and TPTB can't put the genie back in the bottle.

Dr P has done more to educate the public about the DC one-party mafia than anyone in modern history, and deserves respect for that.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 02:27 | 1633543 FEDbuster
FEDbuster's picture

I support Ron Paul, but he would have to be elected Emperor in order to really change things.  Maybe he can go home to TX, be elected Governor and secede from the US?  They would have to build a fence around TX to keep people out, if that were to happen.  Just for fun enjoy this video of Ron Paul going Full Metal Jacket:

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 03:28 | 1633600 RiotActing
RiotActing's picture

Fuck Ron Pail, Mr. Anti government wants to outlaw abortion. How the fuck does that work Mr. Paul? There going to be a private group that enforces this? How does legislating morality square with your "libertarian" ways? He's a joke like all the rest.

Oh yeah, he also doesn't believe in evolution. He's a fucking idiot. His economic policies are not the work of genius. Get over Ron Paul, he actually IS a kook. Ron Paul, what a joke....

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 04:52 | 1633648 bigkahuna
bigkahuna's picture

No-Ron Paul wants to let states determine if it is legal or not.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 06:44 | 1633681 moregoldplease
moregoldplease's picture

I think you mean he doesn't accept evolution as a fact, something you don't seem to accept either. If you have to believe in something then it takes on an aspect of faith not fact.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 08:08 | 1633735 Ganja Jane
Ganja Jane's picture

Stop twisting Ron Paul.

He also said his PERSONAL view is that marriage is between a man and a woman. He then stated his personal view shouldn't be forced on the sovereign individual. Let the States and people decide for themselves what constitutes a marriage and get the government out of the licensing personal business.

Seriously. Stop vilifying Dr.Paul.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 09:37 | 1634049 snowball777
snowball777's picture

Cop out.

Seriously. Stop deifying Ron Paul.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 08:50 | 1633819 FEDbuster
FEDbuster's picture

Looks like your Mom made the wrong "choice"? 

Ron Paul wants to protect lives from the perspective of someone who has delivered thousands of them.  Like gay marriage or medical marijuana, he would make abortion a state issue.  Abortion is mainly about controlling the minority populations in urban areas, so if NYC, Chicago, Atlanta, LA want to keep killing unborn babies they could get their state legislators to give them the go ahead.  Hell, they may as well open some free spay and neuter clinics there, too.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 09:36 | 1634041 snowball777
snowball777's picture

Ah back to the "good ole days" when rich girls could fly somewhere to get an abortion and poor girls had to stay with whatever knuckledragger knocked them up. Oh the times we had.

Too bad there was no spay and neuter clinic in your mom's state.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 10:01 | 1634185 Ganja Jane
Ganja Jane's picture

Once again the language has been corrupted.

There's a clear difference between 'pro-choice' and 'pro-abortion.'

Dr. Paul is an OB/GYN; He might be 'pro-choice'  but NOT 'pro-abortion.'

Pro-choice means the right of the sovereign individual to choose for themselves; Pro-abortion would imply encouraging abortion as a birth control method. Abortions are dangerous to a woman's overall all well-being -physically, mentally and emotionally-if used repeatedly to end unwanted pregnancies instead of using preventative measures. Fuck, just having to make the choice is emotionally and mentally taxing beyond what anyone who hasn't been in a position to make that choice to even begin to understand or even relate to. It's a very personal decision.

Would you like graphic details of the abortion procedure and the physical aftermath lasts weeks, perhaps maybe months? How about the emotional and mental turmoil that lasts for years?

Once again we have a failure to communicate.

I'll check back. I am willing to share my experience if you're willing to LISTEN.

Tue, 09/06/2011 - 09:42 | 1638063 Ganja Jane
Ganja Jane's picture

Ron Paul is pro-life but Not anti-choice; he wants to return it to the states to decided for themselves.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 07:59 | 1633726 MarketTruth
MarketTruth's picture

WAKE UP! The 'full faith and credit' is based on the slave labor of the USA's citizens via the ability of taxation.

If you starve the beast, and also begin to barter every now and then to as often as you can, there is no 'full faith' both for the country's ability to generate tax income and in the debt-based privately owned central bank's FIAT currency.


Mon, 09/05/2011 - 08:34 | 1633788 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Black market revolution.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 08:53 | 1633835 FEDbuster
FEDbuster's picture

Craigslist, swap meets and farmers markets are a good start. 

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 11:57 | 1634651 Kayman
Kayman's picture

"the efficient market allocates wealth towards activities which create wealth. This includes manufacturing, mining and energy production. Instead, because the market was distorted by easy credit, we began a 40-year long bubble of consumption and the financial services to make it possible."

This article is a succinct summary of scarcity of free markets. The price being paid by the unemployed.

"the country's ability to generate tax income" will price the purchasing power of the USD in the long run.

If we had a choice, and we don't without blood in the streets, I would let slimy politicians run the Federal Reserve.  Private banking criminals do not have the country's interest. Period.

I think I will go outside and throw up now.


Mon, 09/05/2011 - 01:04 | 1633444 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

A million laws and regulations won't help when law enforcement is corrupt and selectively prosecutes.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 03:16 | 1633590 AldousHuxley
AldousHuxley's picture

that doesn't mean we should make bankster's legit.


to fix corruption you need regulation that forces those in power to have some skin in the game. Align the interest with those of the public.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 07:58 | 1633714 Ganja Jane
Ganja Jane's picture

The problem with pollution is that those responsible aren't held responsible for the costs of cleaning up the mess; itrs often left to the the tax payer to pay for  out of pocket or by means of the legal fees in pursuing the case.

Dubya made sure that superfunds are the problem of the taxpayer and NOT the company doing the pollution.

Why can't we productively shift this discussion to alternative energy like geothermal, harmonics, solar, hydro and wind power?

Summary: Government statistics show that about 70 percent of all federal energy subsidies goes toward oil, natural gas, and coal. Fifteen percent goes to ethanol, the only 'renewable' source of energy that consistently gets bipartisan support in Congress (think farm lobby and Iowa, thanks Monanto!). Large hydropower companies — TVA, Bonneville Power, and others — soak up another 10 percent. That leaves the 'greenest' renewables—wind, solar, and geothermal—to subsist on the crumbs that are left. Harmonics hasn't even entered the conversation let alone Tesla technology.

We can have 'cheap' energy with little to no pollution. The problem is the real people in charge couldn't profit and control the sheeple with it.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 08:38 | 1633793 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

With free markets, profits will drive innovation and determine energy sources. Government is NEVER a part of the solution- it is ALWAYS the source of the problem.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 13:52 | 1635027 Ganja Jane
Ganja Jane's picture

I am all for Laissez Faire but when it comes to the environment, we need to be more careful. I am as 'Green' as they come but I don't believe the populous is creating global warming, I don't believe in 'Saving the Planet.' I'd rather address the global poisoning, weather modification using Tesla Technology along with 'Chemtrailing,' GMO's and depleted uranium. The planet will still be here if we die off. We're poisoning ourselves thru the environment we need to survive as a species.

Much love to you, my brother.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 14:09 | 1635110 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

When private property is enshrined in law, people retain the ability to make polluters responsible for their actions. It is government that protects polluters through regulation.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 09:41 | 1634070 snowball777
snowball777's picture

It's difficult to bring about a tort suit when the chromium 6 in your tapwater has given you a fatal case of cancer, don't you think?


Mon, 09/05/2011 - 11:25 | 1634539 Gohn Galt
Gohn Galt's picture

Exactly.  The corruption of our government is in every stage.  If anyone is licensed or certified, like a doctor, corporate food producer, teacher or city services.  I can guarantee that not one thing that they can produce or deliver is in your best interest.  Whatever happens to the world or the government, the days of blindly trusting others for food or medical solutions are gone and it might have only been an illusion at best.

I have take of all of my own needs, filter all air, distill all water, grow in environmentally controlled conditions.  I track the air quality inside and out.  Including alpha, beta, gamma radiation.

If a man is a beggar, he can not approach life on his terms.  So I say, empower and educate the beggars so they may become men.


Mon, 09/05/2011 - 08:01 | 1633728 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Regulation kills free markets. It is an intervention for the benefit of the few that create it. Markets need nothing except an atmosphere of sound money through the elimination of legal tender laws. As John Adams said, "you don't have to force a man to accept good money".

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:40 | 1632945 Captain Benny
Captain Benny's picture

His name is Robert Paulson.

I think he's advocating the right thing regarding election reform, but success cannot be achieved in reforming this beast of a western world without some serious pain and that means a depression that will be far worse than the "Great Depression" ...

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 23:26 | 1633234 Bananamerican
Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:34 | 1632958 buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

No-one can be trusted to administer the money. Everyone steals. It is a fatal flaw in any proposed system. This is just more of the same. Some bankers get rich while the people who actually produce are exploited.


Here is my suggestion:


1) massive dieoff.

2) self sufficiency.

3) barter.


It's the only way forward.



Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:41 | 1632979 flacon
flacon's picture



1) massive dieoff.

2) self sufficiency.

3) barter.


That's why humans invented MONEY and TRADE because those three things are too unappealing for an extended period of time... but I hear you man! I hear you! 


Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:44 | 1632994 buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

yeah, unappealing, unappealing to those who wish to exploit the labor of others.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 23:54 | 1633290 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

Yep.   And this part lacked sufficient explanation: based upon a single asset is a terrible idea.

The argument given, about all the eggs in one basket, is a bit limp.   Having too many baskets allows for gaming of the system.   A gold standard is a focused and direct asset that has historical significance.   Of course, the Federal Reserve will have to be dissolved to accomplish that.   Therein may lie the fly in this ointment.

And, please, don't anyone post about economies with gold standards have failed or had other problems.   They were not true gold standards in the classic sense.   Yes, a gold standard can be gamed as well, but it will have to be twisted into something only called a gold standard -- not the real thing.   Does anyone really think that the U. S. has a "Democracy" or "Free Markets"?   Same concept.

(Yeah, I know it's a Constitutional Republic.   A person's gotta cover his ass in all ways possible around here to keep from getting slammed.)

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 01:35 | 1633493 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

I love ya, Rocky, but the idea that *any* fixed resouce commodity is going to somehow solve the problem of human corruption is just WRONG.

Let's say, just for sake of discussion, we had a PERFECT gold standard in place tomorrow.

What is supposed to happen to all the people who own no gold?  They trade in their "savings" or "wealth" for some amount of gold, right?  So the amount of gold available defines the current gold "conversion rate" according to whatever everyone considers their "wealth" today.

Now tomorrow, when I lent my friend a few bucks and told him to give me an extra buck back, is the "conversion rate" of gold supposed to change?  Because of the PRIVATE CONTRACT that existed between me and my friend?

Problem: any fixed exchange-rate for a physical commodity is incompatible with EITHER: a free market of floating exchange rate, OR a functional credit market.

Which of those common assumptions do you want to sacrifice?  Floating exchange, or a credit market?

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 04:04 | 1633623 Alpha Monkey
Alpha Monkey's picture

I love ya, Rocky, but the idea that *any* fixed resouce commodity is going to somehow solve the problem of human corruption is just WRONG.

The solution is to let it be free floating, not fixed, with price discovery by the free market.  Once the price reaches the true value, it will be incredibly difficult to manipulate.  If you're wondering how valuable gold might get, imagine if everyone realized there dollar denominated "wealth" assets were just paper and poured into gold.  What might that price be, and when would it go down if everyone that was holding it as a wealth asset saved it to pass it onto their children.


Now tomorrow, when I lent my friend a few bucks and told him to give me an extra buck back, is the "conversion rate" of gold supposed to change?  Because of the PRIVATE CONTRACT that existed between me and my friend?

Small amounts of debt and interest would never destroy an economy, why do you think they should influence the price of the worlds prefered wealth asset.  Now, when governments endorse programs of over-spending on debt, (which would be much more significant amounts of money) then the world would be aware of this, and the value of gold in that country's currency would increase.  In this scenario, it is the savers who benefit when their governments decide to turn on the printing presses.  Savers who have their wealth in gold that is, not in local currency denominated assets.

Problem: any fixed exchange-rate for a physical commodity is incompatible with EITHER: a free market of floating exchange rate, OR a functional credit market.

There is no problem, we will eventually see gold take it's rightful place as the premier wealth asset, AND have functioning credit markets that are kept in check by gold.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 13:43 | 1635003 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture


I think you misunderstand the point of the criticism.  It's not that my friend's and my private contract for a few grams of gold is going to ruin the system--it's that ANY private debt-contract requires quantities of gold to be "promised" which may not ever come into existence.

Something "breaks" in a fixed-commodity resource currency.  The problem is structural, logical, and foundational.  There are reasons why countries went off the gold standard, and they're not just that politicians wanted to steal more.

THIS SAID: A gold standard right now would be a good idea, as it would be somewhat corrective to the current over-creation of debt-based money.  It just won't be any kind of permanent solution, and even the simplest gaming-through of the options demonstrates why.  The economy is NOT a steady-state system.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 06:13 | 1633667 eaglefalcon
eaglefalcon's picture

You might as well agree with your friend on how any ounces of gold he needs to pay you back instead of how many bucks, that way you don't get into a dispute later and lose the friendship.  


Why bother with a "gold standard" i.e. a paper currency backed by gold?  Why not just one world currency -- gold so that nobody would ever bother with  "exchange rates" again.  If anyone is complaining about the weight of gold, they can make payments with gold denominated check or debit card.  


In fact that is my dream world, gold as sole currency (maybe silver as spare changes), non-fractional reserve banking, no consumer credit, no mortgage, everything needs to be bought by cash gold.  If anyone wants to make risky investment, thats their choice, but no bail out from government, so they need to either eat their loss or pay big insurance money, that'll wipe out 95% of the credit, drive down the price of everything, and make a huge segment of the society responsible, productive and prudent citizens.


In fact, if gold becomes the only currency, we dont need central banks any more.  I'd rather subject myself to the force of the market than to the tyranny of bernanke

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 07:31 | 1633694 Koffieshop
Koffieshop's picture

If the world would ever settle into a steady-state economy with no population or economic growth and have sustainable production it would be in the way you described. Also, products would cost a fortune and last a life-time. None of that cheap throw-away crap. Houses would be build to last a couple of hundred years.

It sounds wonderful, but I think we will never have this. People are ambitious assholes and need strife, discord and illusions of grandeur because that is how evolution is pushing us forward.
Lessons of the past are forgotten and if there is no problem you can be sure someone will create one.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 23:23 | 1637015 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

I love ya, Rocky, but the idea that *any* fixed resouce commodity is going to somehow solve the problem of human corruption is just WRONG.

Absolutely nowhere did I say that.  Human corruption is a constant, not a variable.   As for people needing gold to make transactions in a gold standard economy... how's that?   The folks with cash in their banks don't need gold, but the bank does.  It is the holder of gold in proxy for the depositor.   Farmers don't need anything but hard assets, land, and seed.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 22:52 | 1633163 SloSquez
SloSquez's picture

The cure has become the disease...odd that.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 23:41 | 1633277 knukles
knukles's picture


Mon, 09/05/2011 - 12:08 | 1634686 Kayman
Kayman's picture

Or more precisely - The Federal Reserve; the disease purporting to be the cure.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 19:58 | 1636352 mendolover
mendolover's picture

IMAO I believe we are headed for all three.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:54 | 1633019 disabledvet
disabledvet's picture

My solution is far simpler: appoint me to all that important stuff and everything will be just fine.

Besides look at my floppy ears. How could you go wrong with floppy ears like that?

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 22:00 | 1633045 buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

polly purebred needs a new pair of shoes? ;)

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 00:24 | 1633371 delacroix
delacroix's picture

wasn't underdog a drug addict?

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 10:53 | 1634420 WmMcK
WmMcK's picture

I thought that was Shoeshine Boy ...

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 01:05 | 1633448 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

Is that you, Barack?

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 22:19 | 1633092 oldman
oldman's picture

"No-one can be trusted---------------"

that is the problem            om

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 22:28 | 1633110 Howard_Beale
Howard_Beale's picture

It's almost as if this guy is in the utopia camp of Ayn Rand. He thinks the market will work it all out just peachy. Buzz, barter is a great start. But the pool of skillls and assets has to be the right size and more or less balanced.

WTF will all these skill-less politcians do? Soylent Green would probably be best for the lot of them.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 23:24 | 1633232's picture

It always makes me laugh when someone says that individualists seek utopia. Collectivists envision utopias. Individualists concern themselves with their own happiness and do not try to build perfect one-size-fits-all societies. It is true, however, that most folks are happier and more productive when they are free.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 04:03 | 1633622 AldousHuxley
AldousHuxley's picture

with freedom comes responsibility


that means john galt has to clean his own toilet



Mon, 09/05/2011 - 11:55 | 1634637's picture

Collectivists make the weakest among them clean the toliets and then they say that they're doing the poor slob a favor.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 17:00 | 1635844 AldousHuxley
AldousHuxley's picture

Collectivists attack john galts one by one and make him the toilet cleaning slave. Divide and conquer baby. That's how blacks in Africans became slaves. Individualists selling each of his own kind out for money. Look around, elites ARE collectivists (intermarriage of wealth, inheritance amongst kin, bailing each other out, conservatism of cultural rules etc.) while they want every non-elite to be individualists living under super competition. This is optimal for the elites and tea party folks are buying heaps of it.


unless you grew up as an orphan and educated your self, fed yourself as a child, and have never used any government resource you are fooling of your individualistic achievements. The achievements itself is defined by society.


Just remember, union of 10 richest families in the world can override any individualistic talent you might have for they write the rules.







Tue, 09/06/2011 - 00:42 | 1637183's picture

Free your mind your ass will follow.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 23:03 | 1633188 agNau
agNau's picture

There is one and only one to be trusted with money. That would be Mr.Gold.
Corruption will always be with us. Yet as Nixon discovered with Vietnam, one can only stretch a gold backed currency so far. What we see today is another failed attempt to control mans greed. AND........a do-over.
Who's turn is it? I am certain we will get it right this time.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 01:51 | 1633512 trav7777
trav7777's picture

wasn't was US Peak Oil

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 02:04 | 1633523 Spitzer
Spitzer's picture

wasn't peak US oil. The US needed to raise the  price of oil to keep the oil industry afloat for the rest of the world. (Texas oil, Canadian oil, North Sea oil ect) 

No other sorce of oil could compete with the light sweet crude coming out of the middle east if the price of oil was only derived form production costs of ME oil.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 12:14 | 1634707 Kayman
Kayman's picture

Deliciously ironic that France, having just had their ass handed to them by the Vietnamese, was exchanging FRN's for gold.

Paying for wars by printing and borrowing has always been gold friendly. $35/ounce seems like a fairy tale.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 00:07 | 1633333 Hurdy Gurdy Man
Hurdy Gurdy Man's picture

Itex, bitchez!


Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:35 | 1632962 Cole Younger
Cole Younger's picture

Repealing the 17th amendment would be a step in the right direction of getting money out of politics. Anyone can buy a senators vote. Iff you can't buy the senate, it's a waste of money to try and buy the house.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:42 | 1632986 jules from aus
jules from aus's picture

que national anthem...

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:42 | 1632987 lynnybee
lynnybee's picture

or, we can declare the debt invalid, fradulent debt,  & get rid of the parasites that have  sucked the wealth out of this country (& succeeded, mind you ) , reinstate glass - steigel & hand back the ticking time bomb to WALL ST. & they can blow themselves to smitherines & leave us all alone.     i know !   let's adopt the banking model like in North Dakota, where banks are strictly utilitarian & don't have shareholders to keep happy.     It would be so nice to go to sleep at night just knowing that the ROTHSCHILDS don't have anything to do with this country anymore ........... I could sleep soundly .

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 22:33 | 1633124 EvlTheCat
EvlTheCat's picture

where banks are strictly utilitarian & don't have shareholders to keep happy

Or you could join a credit union..

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 23:10 | 1633203 lynnybee
lynnybee's picture

oh yes !   i'm a member of a credit union + am stacking silver !!   you guys here on ZEROHEDGE really educated this old woman well !    someday we'll all be telling our grandchildren bedtime stories about the BIG BAD BANKERS who tried to TAKE OVER THE WORLD !  ..... & the whole thing is true.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 23:21 | 1633226 topcallingtroll
topcallingtroll's picture

Lynnybee the big bad bankers could not take over the world without colluding with the people who wanted more than they could afford on their own, i.e., the redistributionists.  You wouldn't be that kind of person would you?  You don't vote for politicians who promise to give you more things and more money than you can afford on your own do you?

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 02:04 | 1633524 MsCreant
MsCreant's picture

What has Lynnybee said in her post that would indicate this to you? I think there is a way we are all a little (or a lot) guilty of what you charge, but why single this poster out?

I marked you down for your comment. You are a fun troll, a whoot and a half. But if Lynnybee is who she claims, she is not the right target for your wrath. Bring that shit over here big boy, let it out.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 10:17 | 1634269 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

don't think they were colluding with Lynnybee, think they were colluding with folks a little more powerful. As Ms. C says, a lot of us may be guilty of living beyond our means, but none of us set the rules that actually promoted it. We didn't write the propaganda that promoted wasteful wars, useless energy policies, and criminal monetary systems.    

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 12:23 | 1634737 Kayman
Kayman's picture


I remember when Lynnybee first arrived on ZH.  She appears genuine or else she is one hell of an actress. I will take the former.

And she has never struck me as being from the "something for nothing" cloth.

You, however, come out and shoot first and ask questions later.  Get some rest- you need it.

Good morning Sunshine.


Sun, 09/04/2011 - 23:53 | 1633298 knukles
knukles's picture

Rothschilds are not shareholders. 
They own the law makers, peace keepers, vote counters, media and central banks.
They are the Illuminati, Pure Power.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:45 | 1632988 sbenard
sbenard's picture

Fiat failure = flight to hard assets!

We're watching the emergent trend right before our beady little eyes!

Next up for your viewing pleasure: A hyperinflationary depression!

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:49 | 1633001 NumNutt
NumNutt's picture

How did you know my eyes were beady.......

Oh and how about term limits for all House and Senate seats.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:46 | 1632999 blindman
blindman's picture

first, end the fed and their increasingly destructive debt notes.
then we have a chance, a hope even.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:47 | 1633003 ThirdCoastSurfer
ThirdCoastSurfer's picture

Yes! Society has needs. These can either be filled publicly or privately. 

When the private sector fails to address these issues, government fills the void. Left to its own devices and government assumes control. 

If you have followed the case of the McCourt family, owners of the Dodgers, you see the example of wealth that exceeds the worst example of the the TV show "Hoarders", but owning dozens of houses is not considered the same as owning dozens of cats. 

Then you have the case of T. Boone Pickens, whose massive donations to the University of Oklahoma State has created buildings and stadiums in his name while advancing higher education. 

What needs to be impressed upon the wealthy and everyone else for that matter is you have the choice to broadly spend your money and influence as you see fit on the needs of society, or the government will take it from you.  

You can donate $30,000 to attend a political fundraiser, or you can hire 30 people at $1,000 a piece to perform a function in your area that reduces the need for government to accomplish. 

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 22:23 | 1633101 oldman
oldman's picture

Hey Third,

Leave the cats out of these discussions. please. Besides, no one owns a cat----we are owned by the cats.

Aside from this item, thanks for the post                        om

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 23:18 | 1633214 mynhair
mynhair's picture

TY, and you are right.  Our cats own us.  We have thumbs.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 23:50 | 1633294 Prometheus418
Prometheus418's picture

My cat tries to own me, but I am Prometheus, and he is Zeus.  Usually, I trick him and he struts away shamefaced.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 09:44 | 1634087 snowball777
snowball777's picture

Zeus wants you to think that, fireboy; all part of the kitty psy-op.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 02:11 | 1633528 MsCreant
MsCreant's picture

When I came to understand this simple fact, that my cat owns me, it opened up the world of all cats to me like it had never been opened before. I feel blessed. I get along well with all cats now. They know me as the servant that I am. It is good fun.

I used to dislike them. I just didn't understand my place in their world.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 06:56 | 1633687 Dugald
Dugald's picture

Nicely said......and to add an old saw.....Dogs have owners...Cats have  Staff..!

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 15:57 | 1635633 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

consider the birds of the air...

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 12:31 | 1634762 Kayman
Kayman's picture


We have a war going on here.  I have kicked the cats, all 3 of them (including our 3 legged cat-Pegleg) out of our bedroom.

There has been a vote, 4 to 1, that it is I that must leave the bedroom.

Tue, 09/06/2011 - 17:11 | 1639567 MsCreant
MsCreant's picture

I have the ability to ignore the meowing, my hubby does not. He is the primary slave, as a result.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 01:11 | 1633457 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

Charity should always be of free will. Just because the government commits a crime, that does not make it right. 

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:48 | 1633005 oldman
oldman's picture

yeah, I remember this

"Stagflation was ended in the early 1980s when we finally put someone responsible in charge of the Federal Reserve: Paul Volker. He jacked interest rates up to the high teens until he tamed inflation, but an inevitable and deep recession ensued as a result. In the process, bad businesses (and some good ones) went out of business, many people lost their jobs, but in the end that creative destruction brought us back to reality and put the market in position to spring back forward, especially combined with heavy use of consumer credit as well as deep government deficits and increasing debt."

And reagan told the workers to go back to work or else

and taxes were cut to a level that only support the mic

and everyone got a credit card

and education was suddenly a cost item

 and schollchildren had to work for their milk subsidy

 and all the fools were released from the  asylums


Sun, 09/04/2011 - 22:10 | 1633068 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

I find it a bit amusing too.

Volcker was appointed by Carter in '79.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 22:53 | 1633117 oldman
oldman's picture


Sun, 09/04/2011 - 22:30 | 1633118 oldman
oldman's picture


Carter was the last president I would have trusted to name a fedhead----even though i disagreed with him often. Volker's act was one thing ,but used as an excuse for throwing the poor and the children to the wolves---------i can't go on i'm still pissed off at how the middle class in this country applauded the underclass's poverty.

Well, what goes 'round comes 'round, no?


Sun, 09/04/2011 - 22:55 | 1633173 topcallingtroll
topcallingtroll's picture

The middle class in this country does not applaud the poverty of the "underclass."

What I think most middle class peoploe applaud is getting rid of incentives for laziness and popping out a bunch of kids to get more money.

I will believe the poor and children have been thrown to the wolves when I see skinny poor people.  Bunch of fat ass TV watching welfare/disability fucks.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 00:01 | 1633318 The Deleuzian
The Deleuzian's picture


I said it before "your my kind of top calling troll"

I don't see to many people on welfare that aren't fat and lazy...

But why should they change... They're given everything they need...

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 05:44 | 1633659 Medea
Medea's picture

Not a very Deleuzian thing to say.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 12:46 | 1634796 Kayman
Kayman's picture

The Deleuzian

Read your bio. Welcome.  ZH is the antidote to baseless Hopium.  Now go take your Happy Pills.

Dr. Bernank is the Pilot and the Teleprompter Toady is the co-pilot.  So fasten your seat belt. Oh, I should mention the owners are safely on the ground.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 01:29 | 1633486 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

What's "the middle class" supposed to mean?

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 02:22 | 1633540 MsCreant
MsCreant's picture

There is so much bad shit in cheap food, I just don't know about that judgement. Many of them are addicted to high fructose corn syrup and on a blood glucose negative feedback roller coaster loop from hell that they can't and don't even know to get off of.

My life changed from night to day, depression wise, when I got off sugar. When I cheat a little, I can feel it now. I can self correct because I am generally pretty clean that way. It is so hard to sort it out if everything you eat has sugar in it.

If you are born into a culture like you describe, where those behaviors are normalized, it is hard to "pull oneself up by one's bootstraps" when you have never been told you can succeed and none of your role models do anything that looks like success within the system.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 05:45 | 1633660 Medea
Medea's picture

Cheers. Well put.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 09:38 | 1634046 jayman21
jayman21's picture

Feedback loop bitches - this is the only place I think I would read such a comment.  Spot on unless you work for one of the bigs producing the cheap food.  The bigs would disagree.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 10:41 | 1634370 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

There is no more profound phrase than "you are what you eat." No wonder everything is going to hell when Monsanto lines our market shelves and feeds our school kids. This country has blocked all efforts to even allow us to see what products contain genetically modified food. That labelling is fairly common in Europe. Corn and Soy, make that genetically modified corn and soy, make up just about everything we eat and now everything we feed the animals that we eat. Genetically modified food is one of the most dangerous human experiments ever undertaken.  I now use a combination of raw organic sugar whose taste, much like organic raw sea salt, is so much stroner and purer that you can use temendously less. I also use Stevia an incredible plant.  Like Ms. C, changing my diet has definitely changed the way I feel. Of course, if I start to miss my depression, I just sign in to this site.



Mon, 09/05/2011 - 12:54 | 1634837 Kayman
Kayman's picture


 genetically modified corn

I watched a program on GM corn.  The farmers that grew it, wouldn't eat it.

And since it is not a natural food for cattle, it was the reason the cattle were being pumped full of antibiotics; the cows stomachs were ulcerating.

Haven't seen the program since. Hmmmm..... I wonder why. Oops can't be Negative here on ZH..... sigh....

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 14:00 | 1635059 Ganja Jane
Ganja Jane's picture

This is an excellent documentary on the industry and economics of subsidized GMO corn: King Corn-

I'm a documentary watching dork. My netflix queue is 85% docs. I think this is available on netflix instant least it was when I saw it 2 years ago.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 16:37 | 1635684 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

hey msC!

when i first met muriel james, not quite a decade after her '71 book came out, at a conference, she said that she she would not accept any "clients" for counselling unless and until they:  stopped using alcohol, tobacco, drugs, refined sugar and anything made outa "enriched" white flour.  i think she may have insisted on a daily vitamin, too.  she said it cost her a lot of "business" b/c people would call back after a coupla months and say they didn't think they needed her, anymore! 30 years later, i cannot say her influence on me was insignificant as i stepped up to self-appoint slewie as chaplain of the United States Militia

Biography of Muriel James - Author of Born to Win

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 08:39 | 1633754 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Or it could be poverty forces poor people to choose the foods that are the worst for their heath and contribute to obesity. Obesity can make you lazy, slowing down your metabolism and creating depression in a society that prizes physical beauty. These same foods are loaded with toxic chemicals that further erode the body's ability to function and think clearly- creating physical addictions to sugar. 

At least they have an excuse. You are just an ignorant asshole incapable of compassion or understanding. It is almost impossible to fix that.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 12:58 | 1634848 Kayman
Kayman's picture

Come on Sean7k- may it's the food he eats.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 13:26 | 1634937 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

By the way, this comment addresses Top Calling Troll's comment on lazy, welfare addicts.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 10:24 | 1634298 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

the food card, like many of these systems, keep us passive. WOuld like to know what it would look like out there without 42 million people being fed. Of course, the numbers keep growing and the jobs keep dropping. Something ugly is going to rise from this sludge

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 14:11 | 1634327 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Top Calling Troll,

The problem lies with the top 16%. Familarize yourself with a bell curve- the best predictor of behavior, intelligence and actions. 

Now, 66% of the population are "average" intelligence. 16.6% are below average. This equals 83% of the population, where you will undoubtedly find all those "welfare" obesity types, who also happen to NOT be part of the top 16% that make all the decisions on what type of society we will create. Now go farther, the top 3% actually are responsible for the real determinations economically, socially and politically.

This 3% is the group that makes war, pollutes the planet, runs Wall Street, created the central banking cabal, instituted corporate farming and the destruction of the food supply. They created the intelligence groups, practiced genocide, the military-industrial complex, and created a taxation system that allows them to socialize costs across all income groups.

This group includes the intelligencia, the people that think if only "they" were trusted with the decisions for society, they could create an optimum model. What we now call Socialism and a central planned market economy.

Yes, they are also responsible for the advancements in the arts and sciences. So, how do we get this group of people to weed out the sociopaths that destroy all great contributions that are made? Well, lets ask the other 13% of the people capable of making a difference, of understanding the actions of the 3%, that have also profited the most by riding on their coattails, because THEY ARE THE ONES THAT HAVE THE ABILITY TO CHANGE THE EQUATION. 

You are blaming the cattle for the actions of the cowboys. The cattle are doing what they are told and are being lead to slaughter and for this you want to attach all the blame? 

Noblesse Oblige bitchez...

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 08:42 | 1633803 Bicycle Repairman
Bicycle Repairman's picture

I think you'll find that all Americans are scared, and express great relief and approval when someone else gets thrown under the bus.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 08:53 | 1633840 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

I think you'll find that all Americans are scared, and express great relief and approval when someone else gets thrown under the bus.

I dont know if US citizens are scared but true, they express great approval when someone else gets thrown under the bus.

"Better them than me"

Such is the eternal US citizen nature.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 10:27 | 1634305 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

most folks I talk to are scared. They may not know what is going on but they know it isn't good. They also have a sense that they have been lied to and used

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 23:08 | 1633200 three chord sloth
three chord sloth's picture

And reagan told the workers to go back to work or else

Assuming you are talking about the Air Traffic Controllers, that was a good thing. Unions have no place in government -- they destroy the necessary balance between the private sector/voters/taxpayers and the public sector/political class/tax eaters. The rise in government unions and their strength has directly tracked with the diminishment of the citizen's influence and the high-handed "we know what's best" authoritarianism of our public "servants".

and taxes were cut to a level that only support the mic

What the heck is "the mic"?

and everyone got a credit card

Just a continuation of a pre-existing trend... and yes, it went too far. But these things always do overshoot, don't they.

and education was suddenly a cost item

Another pre-existing trend that just kept going -- see "government unions" above.

and schoolchildren had to work for their milk subsidy

What? Never happened. The free school lunch program has been steadily increasing since it was created.

 and all the fools were released from the  asylums

Yet another continuation of a pre-existing trend. Deinstitutionalization began in the 1950s, accelerated in the 1960s, and then just kept going and going. At first, this deinstitutionalization was a good thing -- too many folks were locked up for the "sin" of non-conformity, or simply being inconvenient to a relative with money or power -- but like all movements led by true believers, it overshot its target. True believers never know when to stop... and subsequently ruin much of their earlier good works. True believers, both left and right, always make the mistake of thinking "If a little bit is this good, a lot will be even better". Rarely true.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 07:28 | 1633698 Optimusprime
Optimusprime's picture

"mic" probably refers to "military-industial complex". 

It is becoming a familiar abbreviation--and it's about time.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 09:46 | 1634095 three chord sloth
three chord sloth's picture

Ahhh... thanks. I thought "the mic" was something like "the vig".

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 09:47 | 1634101 snowball777
snowball777's picture

Continuing trends....which Reagan was a part of from his early anti-union propaganda days until his alzheimer-riddled demise.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 13:05 | 1634867 Kayman
Kayman's picture

Ahhh.... Reagan- fed in infancy by the Unions, changed horses seemlessly; the consumate actor.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:50 | 1633008 TK7936
TK7936's picture

Fiat money is back by the products and services in circulation. The Problem is when the Money in cirulation expands the productive capacity of the economy. That is a political Problem, not a systemic one. If you really want to change things then there should be no centralized money production , its expansion can not be decided by a single insitution or person. Bernanke essentially is a KING now. I do not know how to decentralize the system in a benefiicial way but that would be the real Mission.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:53 | 1633025 blindman
blindman's picture

state banks

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 22:23 | 1633102 X.inf.capt
X.inf.capt's picture

Wheres Andrew Jackson when you need him?

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 22:38 | 1633136 blindman
blindman's picture

The Hermitage
Davidson County
Tennessee, USA
GPS (lat/lon): 36.21477, -86.61191

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 22:48 | 1633159 X.inf.capt
X.inf.capt's picture

cool, we need him, quick, get some jumper cables.....

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 23:50 | 1633293's picture

America needs a doctor (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) but I'm afraid that Andy Jackson is too far gone for that.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 00:16 | 1633350 X.inf.capt
X.inf.capt's picture

yeah, so is our economy,

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 00:27 | 1633376 X.inf.capt
X.inf.capt's picture

and so is our currency

and so is our values

and so is our country

well, that completes my first 24 hrs on the ZH forums.

all i can say is you are some sharp guys out there...

but, man you guys play rough in this fight club...

ever thought about joining the infantry?

i think you guys could make it.

good night, all!

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 00:29 | 1633379's picture

'Night, tenderfoot.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 00:21 | 1633362 William Wallace
William Wallace's picture

Andrew Jackon said, "One man with courage makes a majority."  

Based on that, it seems that all we need to do is find one man with courage.  But that may be harder than it sounds.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 00:33 | 1633387's picture

The bank's got trouble with a capital "T" and that rhymes with "P" and that stands for Paul!

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 14:05 | 1635087 Ganja Jane
Ganja Jane's picture

Deliciously twisted...

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 08:22 | 1633762 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Native Americans would disagree. Jackson oversaw the wholesale destruction of entire cultures- our own genocide. Jackson was a land speculator, as were his buddies, he never forgave the banks for the Panic of 1819. Just because his revenge coincides with what was the best possible solution for America makes Jackson's actions convenient- not heroic.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 19:07 | 1636188 krispkritter
krispkritter's picture

And you've done what, regardless of motivation, to improve anyones cause? You dickless Liberal-sounding shithead...

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 19:49 | 1636330 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

What's the matter Kritter? You didn't know your hero was a scumbag? Enjoy wallowing in your ignorance.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 23:20 | 1633223 TimmyM
TimmyM's picture

TK7936 you need an anedote for all that koolaid. What you are looking for is "free money". It is as simple as repealing legal tender laws. Money can be whatever two people decide. Think about it like I can pay you in silver coinage and not owe capital gain tax if my money had appreciated. It is like anyone could create their own money and if it was accepted so be it. Think of it like competition for money. Whoever has the best money wins until something better comes along. This is the same dynamic that drives the foreign exchange markets presently. Ron Paul has promoted this concept.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 13:08 | 1634876 Kayman
Kayman's picture

Bernanke essentially is a KING

Too much power. Too little personal responsibility.

"No bean curd today !"

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:50 | 1633014 DocinPA
DocinPA's picture

I like the broad basket of commodities idea as a basis for currency.  However, the only way to get the corruption out of politics is to take away their power to do favors.  If they can't give anybody any special deals, nobody will be giving them money.  Ever.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 22:18 | 1633087 dumpster
dumpster's picture

broad basket of commodities

well impossible to drink oil

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:55 | 1633031 Spitzer
Spitzer's picture

The only reality is freegold. Freegold is the realization that bond markets, whether it is treasuries or JGB's, are not a store of value.  Giving governments capital so they can consume and waste it, is the opposite of store of value.

The world will be forced to realize this and when it does, all the money in bonds the world over, will find its way to gold.

Warren Buffet said "I could buy all the farm land in the US for the value of all the gold" Ok old man, take the value of every bond market in the world and see how much farm land you can buy. The difference is, the gold is tangible and the bonds are the opposite of tangible. They are not even assets.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 22:07 | 1633062 TK7936
TK7936's picture

I understand the benefits of the gold system but it also has its many flaws. Plus dont forget, we all come from Gold Systems and the Gold men managed to overtake them. I think its time for something new. We need something that takes the human equasion out of the system, something self regulatory.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 22:39 | 1633142 Mec-sick-o
Mec-sick-o's picture

A Resource based economy, rather than profit.

Risking to sound silly, I like the approach at Bee Movie... a big board with job openings, automated and balanced by needs and skills.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 23:34 | 1633251 dumpster
dumpster's picture

swimming with new ideas... take the human out.   lol

make gold and silver the standard any on changes that shoot them in the head

all these new ideas about a monetary system ,, do a little study before making half assed assumptions

read Tom Woods on why a gold standard . reisman on gold standard .  some wise in people read the constitution about gold and silver ,

A standard internationally based on gold ..  will stop the madness for a time

until the people forget how crappy the alternative was ,  then off on on these hair brained ideas from people about 40 years old .. and as about fimiliar with austrian economics as the man in the moon.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 00:04 | 1633327 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

Agreed.   See my comment above.   The bastardized "gold standards" we've had weren't the real thing.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 00:08 | 1633334 DoChenRollingBearing
DoChenRollingBearing's picture

Spitzer & dumpster,

I can never understand so many people cannot see the value of gold.  Bunch of suckers, dummies.

Gold is what everybody wants, even the Socialists want our gold for their schemes.  Different breed of Sucker the Socialsts are, they will suck each of us dry for their cherished Hungry Collective.

Gold is what will save us if we can be saved at all.  Freegold...  That is the sound of liberty!

+ $1875 and green to you.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 01:03 | 1633441 Spitzer
Spitzer's picture

That is freegold. All long term savings will be saved in gold while keeping fiat as a short term medium of exchange.

With all savings out of reach of politicians, then they will have nothing to gain from printing money because printing money will not access them to savings like it does now.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 21:57 | 1633037 reefermadness
reefermadness's picture

No to a gold standard. It won't work and it would be highly deflationary. And if you think it would constrain politicians think again. Much better to concentrate on the money as debt dynamic that creates the hockey stick exponential debt collapse we are currently experiencing. 

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 23:20 | 1633222 mynhair
mynhair's picture

Ya, gold sux.  Silver is better.

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 23:35 | 1633254 X.inf.capt
X.inf.capt's picture

I remember a company named NORFED (the gold/ silver/ copper coin guys), they were really good, until.....

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 23:56 | 1633307 krispkritter
krispkritter's picture

I agree pussy. But I was just watching some vids of the TX wildfires and for some reason this crossed my came to mind...rofl...

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 22:25 | 1633064 ??
??'s picture

finally some (in)sanity

evil is good and good is evil

NBC news headlline (actually that's a lie', it's a headline but not from NBC, which should be no surprise as they gave Friday's economic numbers less than 30 seconds a full 10 minutes into Fridays nightly news broadcast

Troubling Trend: Libyan Rebels Are Rounding Up Black Africans

Sun, 09/04/2011 - 22:57 | 1633176 topcallingtroll
topcallingtroll's picture

What do people expect?

The black african countries supported Ghaddafy with arms shipments and with mercenaries during the uprising.

The Libyan people are not stupid and they will not forget.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 02:46 | 1633566 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

What do people expect?

The black african countries supported Ghaddafy with arms shipments and with mercenaries during the uprising.

The Libyan people are not stupid and they will not forget.
What is to be expected?
In this US world order, certainly not intelligent propaganda, only cheap propaganda.

One third of Lybian population is black.

Justifying assassinations on people loosely connected to some events is somehow dangerous for someone living in the West, given how many times Western governments are involved in military adventures.

The Lybian people are indeed not stupid: they are using the legitimacy provided by the US and NATO to perform an ethnical cleansing. That is good and shows their potential to grow into US citizens.

Mon, 09/05/2011 - 00:44 | 1633406 SoCalBusted
SoCalBusted's picture

Where's Malcolm X?

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!