Its started!

[Lexx_Luthor 57]

Yough Jug, if I recall, Gates and Jobs were both college dropouts...no "economics" or "business" degrees needed there.

 

Jug::

I'm not smart enough to discuss economics

 

If you pulled yourself up, and engage in economics on the street, you can to talk economics with far more authority than "professional" government and central bank funded economists, because the field has been largely funded, and so corrupted, by the "Government Banking Complex." Worse, one should consider debt, business destroying taxation, and property tax on homes, as long term national security threats, but this seems conveniently ignored by .gov agencies that get funded by massive borrowing. There are counterexamples to the fraudulent economics of the Gov/Bank complex. One is Antal Fekete who escaped from Hungarian communism. TxBill's poast brings a favorite article to mind...

 

TxBill:: portuguese people,

 

Oh man... lves dos Reis who masterminded the 1920s counterfeit scam ~> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alves_dos_Reis. What is interesting, is he hoped to use his profits to gain control of the central bank to thwart investigation. Fekete has a very humorous introduction to his (very long) article THE REVOLT OF QUALITY. Its worth quoting in part here, at The CombatAce.

 

 

The Portuguese Bank Note Case

:

:

Mises' dictum that the bank note is a present good naturally leads to the tantalizing question whether an undetected counterfeit bank note is a present good as well. Exactly the same argument that made the genuine bank note a present good would make a counterfeit bank note a present good, too. Pity, this puts the bankers and counterfeiters into the same class: they are both in the business to create present goods out of practically nothing. I would be happy to rest my case there, however, it raises more questions than it answers. Should the practice of producing present goods out of nothing be outlawed along with quackery and witchcraft - regardless whether this dangerous prestidigitation is practiced by honorable gentlemen, the bankers, or by disreputable crooks, the counterfeiters? Both the banker and counterfeiter are illusionists, mesmerizing the public into believing that their product, the bank note, is a present good and not merely a promise to deliver present good on demand. Both the banker and the counterfeiter are determined to escape any and all responsibility concerning the bank note after they have succeeded in putting it into circulation. The activities of the two are hardly different from an economic point of view. The difference is exclusively in our legal arrangements, aiding and abetting the former, while criminalizing the latter. It should criminalize both.

 

The following example, known as the Portuguese bank note case, is quite instructive and you will be pleased to hear it. In the late 1920's an astonishing and ingenious crime led to a fascinating civil suit that was not without its ironic side....

:

:

~ http://www.gold-eagle.com/gold_digest_02/fekete090902.html

 

mesmerizing the public ... I emphasized this, because "public" includes real life or Main Street businesses and working men/women, all together. As for the Occupy thing, I don't see anything is really starting here. Men and women, even the Occupiers, are still mesmorized by the "freebies" that the debt system promises.

[+Typhoid 231]

Lexx,

 

Some good points but overly simplistic. Yes, the government is debasing the currency and have subverted the banking system in the pursuit of monetary manipulation.

 

That is NOT Capitalism!!!

 

That is government interference and control of portions of the economy in an attempt to implement a measure of control over the economy. And many of the Wall Street bankers have bought their influence with the government, including the Temporary Resident of the White House and his party (see Goldman Sachs). And yes - that corruption crosses party lines.

 

If you want me to join you on the picket lines against THAT - I'm with you!!

 

Where your description falls a little short, in my humble economic opinion, is that you have taken the generalization too far and made the claim that all wealth represents a debt by someone else and that the banks are stealing all wealth.

 

Not true. Wealth is more accurately represented in ownership. As in stock ownership. If you have savings in the bank, mutual funds, 401k's, employee stock options, etc., you have wealth which is an ownership stake in the economy. That is not a debt - that is ownership in the means of production. Only free market capitalism gives you that option and THAT is what capitalism really is. Ownership.

 

Any other government controlled economy in the end results in precisely what you stated - a debt by someone to the individual masquerading as wealth. A government pension (social security for example) is pure debt and can be taken away by the stroke of the congressional pen. You own nothing. You have no wealth beyond what the government in its infinite wisdom and benevolence chooses to give you. You are but a serf to the state and subject to the whims of the elite rulers, however it is they came to power.

 

That is where the OWS drones fail in their bit. What they are protesting is precisely what they propose to implement - just in different terms. They are their own worst enemy. It is no coincidence that the Communist Party of the USA and the Nazi Party of the USA both endorse OWS.

[Lexx_Luthor 57]

Typhoid::

Only free market capitalism gives you that option and THAT is what capitalism really is. Ownership.

 

Exactly. The central banking system owns your wealth and your savings because they own the money -- and rightfully so, since its their sheets of paper, central bank debt notes. You should be free to use, and privately own, any money you wish. Under legal tender law you are not free in this most basic requirement.

 

Ownership!

 

We'll disagree on the stock market and by association the 201k system. At one time, stocks and more importantly bonds may have been a workable long term savings method. Today they seem more like a gambling casino under the roof of the free floating debt based currencies and interest rates.

 

Its not just the banking system. Fraudulent municipal governments violate private ownerwhip through property tax, and taxes on homes will become an ignored national threat (ignored by "official" OWS demands as well -- I like your take on that). "But property taxes are manageable." Perhaps today, but not for the unemployed. As the debt collapse and job losses gather steam, watch these local yahoos ramp property tax rates to compensate for crashing property values.

[UK_Widowmaker 571]

On target Jug!!

 

 

Most of those who are critical of free market economies, corporations and private businesses don't understand how any of them actually work. Economic illiteracy is rampant.

 

Businesses create jobs - but those are the people in them that make them work and generate opportunities. Penalize the risk takers and you will eliminate risk-taking - which is precisely the results we now see.

 

Jumping off a cliff with a Parachute is risk taking...Jumping off without one, is Banking

[+Typhoid 231]

I will not argue against critical comments of the current banking system.

 

I'll help hold the rope!!

 

But that is not what capitalism is. That is my point. The current banking process is an abomination and a product of socialist government interference/siezure.

 

But that goes into another argument.

Edited October 20, 2011 by Typhoid

[+Jug 99]

I just read through my previous posts and apologize for waxing eloquent or not on subjects far from the reason I am an active participant on this site. Nothing like blowing a few things up when your frustration with other things gets out of hand. I am taking my Thud downtown tonite and nothing compares...............

[UK_Widowmaker 571]

I LOVE This Forum!!!!!!!!!

[+Typhoid 231]

Nothing like blowing a few things up when your frustration with other things gets out of hand. I am taking my Thud downtown tonite and nothing compares...............

 

Sounds like a plan!!

 

Scooter time!

 

[+Brain32 265]

 

The current banking process is an abomination and a product of socialist government interference/siezure.

 

 

Actually that's a yes and no issue, the recession was caused by lack of intervention and then rescue attempt was made with a bad choice of intervention.

[+Typhoid 231]

Actually that's a yes and no issue, the recession was caused by lack of intervention and then rescue attempt was made with a bad choice of intervention.

 

I disagree. The fundamental cause of the recession was government intervention in the banking process going all the way back to the Community Reinvestment Act.

 

The problems caused by that government/community-activist shakedown of the banks was made worse by the Wall St idiots who bundled the bad loans into derivatives that no one could accurately value and then sold as investments. Much of those bad loans products were then on the books of the various financial institutions as part of their secure reserves - but were essentially worthless because of the CRA loans they were based on.

Once the financial meltdown started, then I agree - a series of bad choices were made in the intervention to rescue the financial system from the previous interventions.

 

One key point - the TARP was supposed to bail out the financial system by purchasing the bad assets. (hence the name). Those funds were appropriated for that specific purpose. Once in the hands of the new regime, however, those funds were used to buy into the companies, including car companies, with stock purchases and restructures contrary to bankruptcy laws.

 

in short - the TARP funds were misappropriated and used in a takeover move as opposed to a bail out.

 

combined with the incompetent mis-management of the Federal Reserve and intentional debasement of the currency - and we have a really, really bad situation as a result of government intervention.

 

so of course - the proposed solution is more government intervention. How well has that worked out so far?

[+Brain32 265]

I disagree. The fundamental cause of the recession was government intervention in the banking process going all the way back to the Community Reinvestment Act.

 

That's just one part of the problem, this all started with brakethrough of neoliberalism whose point is actually less government not more...

 

The problems caused by that government/community-activist shakedown of the banks was made worse by the Wall St idiots who bundled the bad loans into derivatives that no one could accurately value and then sold as investments.

 

Ahhh now we'retalking - derivatives, they are the cause of problems but when certain institutions wanted to induce regulation on them it was almost violently fought away. As for valuing them, that's why the Wall St. guys had(and still have) rating agencies, so they paid them to rate those derivatives as "AAA" while they were infact "junk".

 

Much of those bad loans products were then on the books of the various financial institutions as part of their secure reserves - but were essentially worthless because of the CRA loans they were based on.

Bad loans were a product of the fact that loaners didn't even care if the loan can and will be payed back, they would give a loan and sell that debt away. So infact instead of checking credibility, risks and all the usual stuff the only thing that was in their intrest was to give as much loans as possible, sell them as derivatives to investment banks(Wall st.) which would then with help of rating agencies rate them as top of the line and sell them away (but also insure them first together with bunch of other people which will later lead to ensurance companies brakedown) but also bet against them in the market while in the same time selling them as top of the line - that's just insane and even fraudulent.

 

Also besides that and again with help of lobbying banks managed to achieve increase of base to debt ratio to over 30:1 which is totally insane from economical standpoint as that would mean that even very small percentage drop would most certainly make them insolvent which who would know is exactly what happened.

 

So if the State kept it's regulative purpose and imposed it on derivatives, there's no way in the world those junk derivatives would be marked as AAA, so in turn they could not sell them at the price they did and with the flow of causality there would be no intrest for the loaners to issue bad loans as then they couldn't sell them as derivatives and would simply have to make sure those loans are good because everything else would not bring them money.

 

 

Once the financial meltdown started, then I agree - a series of bad choices were made in the intervention to rescue the financial system from the previous interventions.

I still say lack of previous (good)interventions was the cause of 2007 recession.

 

so of course - the proposed solution is more government intervention. How well has that worked out so far?

Well solution to buissness cycle drops was always government intervention, at no time in history of economics did the market managed to pull itself out without the help of government intervention.

 

The only time when we had about 30 years without recessions(which normally occur about every 10 years) was during the time of keynesianism which was bascially a period of goverment intervention based economic policy...however we diched that after OPEC crisis in the 70's...

 

Howevery I can agree with you on the fact that if they keep insisting on current means of intervention - we are screwed....

[Lexx_Luthor 57]

You can't "regulate" the system we have. We got away with the appearance, or facade, of regulation in years past because the debt system gave the false appearance of working well. But, the closer you get to debt collapse, the more "regulations" must be abandoned, or it all falls apart. They are doing the *only* thing possible to save our system. Okay, we are screwed if we don't regulate. But we are screwed if we do regulate, because then the real numbers come out, the scam blows up, and we have no alternative because of legal tender laws. We are screwed either way -- just look at the debt.

 

Think of it as a financial scam since 1913, when the US central bank and IRS were created here in USA. When the scam starts to unravel where *everybody* can see it as a fraud, you HAVE to fake the numbers, or it blows up in a way everybody can see.

 

Brain::

The only time when we had about 30 years without recessions(which normally occur about every 10 years) was during the time of keynesianism which was bascially a period of goverment intervention based economic policy...however we diched that after OPEC crisis in the 70's...

Your years are spot on. You know, deep in your bones, what's going down.

 

It wasn't Keynesianism. It was a glorious 30 years spending down that 18 kilotonnes of gold raked in during World War 2, while the rest of the world crawled out of destruction. Then in 1971 we (well, USA) defaulted on the 1944 Bretten Woods Agreement by closing the international gold window.

 

Then, oil-gold swaps and speculation in derivatives kicked the can down the road for another 30 years, and here we are. Can they kick it again? I like to think of carbon credits as the new speculative vehicle to prop up the dollar debt system. The top lobbyists for carbon credit trading are the giants -- Morgan, Sachs, etc... I can visualize a world where carbon credits allow another 100x increase in gambling leverage, while the world including the west descend into a third world style poverty. There are a thousand trillion (one quadrillion) dollars worth of derivatives today. Could carbon credits push that 1000 fold to a thousand quadrillion over the next 30 years? Recall, leverage and debt grows exponentially, while economic growth on the street does not. Anyways its all fascinating stuff.