flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Heap > Ron Paul - Economic Collapse is Happening!

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
sleepsleep



Joined: 05 Oct 2006
Posts: 8903
Location: ˛                             ⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣Posts: 334455
sleepsleep
Tyler wrote:

You assume that loans are not beneficial to the person who receives the loan.

the issue is how new money supply is created out of thin air through loan + interest by bankers and elites.
and more critical issues inside how every human are forced to loan direct or indirectly in order to obtain basic necessities.

Tyler wrote:

the poor absolutely don't get poorer. (And trade is not a zero sum game. Both sides of a trade benefit.)

there will never be enough money in society pool to pay back debt and interest for everyone, and this is main vicious cycle that allow rich get richer and poor get poorer.

capitalism is the initial reason that force their parent into such poor pariah enslaved state, then capitalism said it needs more capitalism and capital to invest in those countries and allow better productivity so that kids don't have to work and parent able to support their family.

it is equally like a bastard killer captured you, intimidate you to become a killer and capture other people kids, otherwise he will captures your kids, torture them and turn them into killer.
Post 12 Feb 2016, 09:18
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Tyler



Joined: 19 Nov 2009
Posts: 1216
Location: NC, USA
Tyler
Yeah, the inflationary side of it is bad. I'm an Austrian economist and practically all Austrian economists do is theorize about how horrible inflation is.

But going from "inflation is bad" to "capitalism is bad" is where I disagree. My evidence is that, even with the damage of inflation, poor people of today are living like kings of 300 years ago. That couldn't have happened without the industrial revolution and the industrial revolution was a direct result of the accumulation of private capital -- capitalism.

Capitalism doesn't need inflation. Inflation is bad for capitalism and it makes it less efficient. What capitalism needs is a money that cannot be inflated arbitrarily, like gold or bitcoin.

The "theft via inflation" that you describe is very real. I completely agree with you on that. The actual stated goal of inflation is to increase the value of the stock market. It doesn't take an economist to know that purposely increasing the value of the stock market while decreasing the value of savings is massively biased towards the wealthy at the cost of the poor. What is happening is that the value of poor people's meager savings is being stolen and pumped into the stock market for the benefit of those who can afford to invest in the stock market.
Post 12 Feb 2016, 18:05
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
sleepsleep



Joined: 05 Oct 2006
Posts: 8903
Location: ˛                             ⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣Posts: 334455
sleepsleep
i agree people today is living like king 300 years ago, =)
idk why you choose to compare today and 300 years ago, i think human will keep on progress into more positive environment and ideal society if using positive attitude.

capitalism helps our past transformation, but does capitalism reach its limit to assist us human in our coming transformation? or there should be no more changes and this is our society system final chapter?

capitalism will produce inflation and deflation since it is opportunity based, taking advantage system, production based on profit margin, market share, monopoly. i would say, the ideal condition in capitalism is monopoly.

even bitcoin skyrocketed to one thousand two hundreds sometime ago,
the new money should be hard to move in bulk, and prevent hoarding by certain parties.

Buchanan: A chilling mathematical model of inequality
http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/3665416-155/buchanan-a-chilling-mathematical-model-of

Quote:
The reason is quite simple. As inequality gets more pronounced, a larger fraction of the population faces more stringent budget constraints, and the spectrum of possible economic interactions open to them narrows.


Quote:

Hence, policy interventions aiming to spur economic activity should work better if they inject money into the system at the lower end, rather than from the top.
Post 20 Mar 2016, 17:22
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
sleepsleep



Joined: 05 Oct 2006
Posts: 8903
Location: ˛                             ⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣Posts: 334455
sleepsleep
revolution wrote:
With no "work" behind the money people get, then having money proves nothing about how you contribute to society. If everyone gets money for nothing then the money itself is worth nothing, and thus you end up with no money because no one will value it and they ignore it.


but this is exactly how government and bank create money.
they are created from nothing with debt plus interest.
Post 20 Mar 2016, 17:32
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17279
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
sleepsleep: No. A proper functioning government does not simply give money away, it still has to only give it where some valued work is performed in return. If that rule is not followed then you get runaway inflation and the money collapses. It has happened before. It is a tricky thing to get right, and not all governments manage to figure it out.

You can't just give everyone money. If you do then people will just sit on their arse and do nothing. In an ideal world we wouldn't even need money, but in the real world people are lazy and greedy so there has to be some method of resource control. Money is a reasonable method of allocating resources as long as people value it. It is not perfect, but so far there is nothing known that works better.
Post 20 Mar 2016, 17:44
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
sleepsleep



Joined: 05 Oct 2006
Posts: 8903
Location: ˛                             ⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣Posts: 334455
sleepsleep
hi revolution,
idk if a proper functioning government concept is attainable? is there an example?

Quote:

- people will just sit on their arse and do nothing
- in the real world people are lazy and greedy

maybe. idk,
is human nature lazy & greedy or current designed system push them into that behaviour?
Post 20 Mar 2016, 18:44
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17279
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
sleepsleep wrote:
is human nature lazy & greedy or current designed system push them into that behaviour?
The current system is designed to deal with, and limit, that behaviour.

It is a control mechanism. Similar to all the other societal control mechanisms like: shame, recognition, reward, punishment, religion, laws, etc.
Post 20 Mar 2016, 19:48
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
ford



Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 102
ford
There is no money in existence. To be money a currency must hold value. Modern money is inflationary by design, and to be created debt must also be created. This is not money. This is simply currency. A money will cycle through small periods of inflation and deflation as more or less is created in reaction to the supply and demand of money.

There is no real alternative to capitalism. Capitalism is the voluntary exchange of value for value among people. If you stop the voluntary exchange, you will be entering a world of mass enslavement. Those are the two options. You can go middle of the road with something like socialism, but socialism suffers the problem of economic calculation. Without an accurate price mechanism, there is no way to determine how much of something ought to be produced as the price is indicative of supply/demand relation. For example, Apple puts an iPad on the market for $1200 and it sells very few iPads. As it drops the price to move current inventory, the iPads sell a little more. By getting the information of at what price an iPad will really sell, the know how many to produce and what price to produce them. Take away that price. How many 128GB iPads do you make? Do you simply make them all 128GB? How about things like shoes? How many at what size? How about foods? Without price you cannot accurately predict how much of any given product ought to be made. This is why people in the USSR often went without shoes, without food, without toilet paper. This was somewhat remedied by using price listings from the UK, but it still didn't work too well. Socialism would need perfect information about the wants/needs of the population, and perfect information cannot truly be attained.

Capitalism has proven itself to be the best method of distributing goods throughout a human society. Every place that employs capitalism does better than those that do not. If we look at China, in my youth only Hong Kong was doing well. The one Chinese city that was capitalistic. In a very short period of time, through the relaxation of regulation and the allowance of capitalism, Shanghai became the world's largest city and hundreds of millions of Chinese were lifted out of poverty. During the 1800s, we saw the single greatest rise in human living standards ever. People left the farm and went to filthy cities where the life expectancy went up despite deplorable conditions. This is capitalism. What may look bad is often still better than what came before, and the biggest indicator of that is that what came after, in a capitalist system, was chosen.

A final thought, there is no truly capitalist country on Earth anymore. What we are currently seeing is more similar to fascism (as put forth in the Fascist Manifesto) than anything. Capitalism is the laissez-faire/Austrian model. Leaving laissez-faire behind, we have seen a constant reduction in real wages in the USA for over 50 years. We have seen a household come to require two full time workers, and we have seen a reduction in vacationing and other luxury activities.

/rant
Post 23 Mar 2016, 13:25
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
AsmGuru62



Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Posts: 1409
Location: Toronto, Canada
AsmGuru62
There were a lot of shoes in USSR, but they were all same model - un-wearable.
Smile
Post 23 Mar 2016, 16:05
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Reply with quote
nyrtzi



Joined: 08 Jul 2006
Posts: 192
Location: Off the scale in the third direction
nyrtzi
The global financial crisis of 2007 was artifically stopped and thus the actual problems behind it are still there festering under the hood of global economy without anyone actually being able to fix them. My country is still stuck in recession. There is a limit to how long it can be held back and in the end global economy will go to shit. Just matter of when nature will take its course. Is this what Ron Paul is referring to?
Post 01 Apr 2016, 03:36
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Tyler



Joined: 19 Nov 2009
Posts: 1216
Location: NC, USA
Tyler
nyrtzi, yes. I'm interested, though, how you came to this belief. Are you familiar with any economics or is this just something you've observed organically?
Post 01 Apr 2016, 12:23
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ford



Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 102
ford
nyrtzi, that is what he was referring to. The US Federal Reserve did a lot of debt purchasing to prop up the banks after the US housing bubble collapsed. They also kept the Fed Funds rate low, so the rampant speculation started right away again. More bubbles were created. The CDS and MBS markets also immediately started their risky behaviors again as the loans to do so are almost free due to the low Fed Funds rate. This effectively means that nothing was fixed. The problem is actually larger than it was before, and both US public and US private debt levels are at all time highs. Scarier is that the US public debt is a count of the total amount of US dollars in circulation, so there is double the amount of money in circulation in the USA than there was 8 years ago... the US dollar should be doing poorly against foreign currencies, but due to perception of "recovery," the USD is doing quite well which has hurt foreign economies. The truth is that the US has also been in recession since 08. The US labor force participation rate has been falling fairly steadily since the collapse in the housing market, and most other metrics have been falling as well. The only metric that has been truly improving at all is the Stock market... which is in a bubble. Most companies have been failing to post profits, and we see billion dollars IPOs for companies that have never posted profits and in some cases don't even have a product to offer. It's amazing how insane the central planners have become.
Post 01 Apr 2016, 17:13
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
sleepsleep



Joined: 05 Oct 2006
Posts: 8903
Location: ˛                             ⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣Posts: 334455
sleepsleep
what is the end game?
Post 01 Apr 2016, 19:03
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Tyler



Joined: 19 Nov 2009
Posts: 1216
Location: NC, USA
Tyler
Bad shit, sleepsleep, bad shit is gonna happen. Buy some bitcoin, some gold, some guns, and some bullets, because no one really knows how bad it could get. The whole first world (at least) is dependent on this inflation. The US does it, Europe does, China and Japan do too. I think Russia might be slightly better, but maybe not. Either way, all the first 4 I mentioned are looking at a simultaneous, deep depression *at best*. Worst case scenario, if they try to keep up the game to the very end, is hyperinflation or default (running out of money and not being able to get anymore loans). We haven't seen hyperinflation or default in modern, first world countries, but it could lead to complete chaos. I don't know how much you know about how the US and most other similar countries work, but I'll tell you that there are whole massive portions of the populations which are completely dependent on the government paying for their basic needs. The government is very close already to not being able to do this anymore. When they stop getting their money, all hell is going to break loose.

I'm not too sure how it will affect you. You're in the Philippines right? It depends largely on how globalized your trade is -- how much your country is dependent on the outside world not falling to pieces.
Post 01 Apr 2016, 20:47
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17279
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
sleepsleep wrote:
Jan 1, 2016
Ron Paul Warns of Dollar Collapse 100% In 19 Feb 2016
Didn't happen. So just like all the other predictions, it is meaningless and pointless.

But the problem here was not the prediction itself. The problem was that the predictor made it far too specific. "Proper" predictions should be vague and broad. That way one can interpret them to match almost any event that happens, and then the predictor can later claim they knew about it the entire time. Of course this won't make the prediction any more meaningful, it just makes more successful at matching something that might happen.
Post 02 Apr 2016, 02:09
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Tyler



Joined: 19 Nov 2009
Posts: 1216
Location: NC, USA
Tyler
Revolution, on principle, I agree he was too specific. True economic analysis doesn't permit such specificity in timing. That shouldn't be surprising, given the complexity of the system being predicted. (The economists he's read would say the same. Or, at least, they should. Robert Murphy made a similar stupid mistake in a bet with Bryan Caplan.) That doesn't mean he doesn't understand the mechanisms behind the economy, nor does it mean he won't be right *again*, eventually.

Is this broad and nonspecific enough, you think? https://youtu.be/IHNp1wf1T_k

I'd guess you're old enough to remember a normal interest rate. Did you know that, if the federal funds rate was 5% right now (the average over the last ~60 years is about 5.5%), the interest on federal debt would account for almost half of federal tax receipts/income? Just the interest. ($18.9T * 0.05 ≈ ½ $2.1T. See FRED of the Chicago Federal Reserve Bank for data.) Does that seem normal to you? Don't let normalcy bias blind you. *This* is the reason you're not able to get a reasonable rate on your savings without putting your future in the hands of the stock market -- because the federal government couldn't pay its bills if you did. The whole game relies on the ability to hold the interest rate insanely low for the foreseeable future. I can explain why that isn't sustainable if you'd like.
Post 02 Apr 2016, 04:25
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
nyrtzi



Joined: 08 Jul 2006
Posts: 192
Location: Off the scale in the third direction
nyrtzi
Tyler wrote:
nyrtzi, yes. I'm interested, though, how you came to this belief. Are you familiar with any economics or is this just something you've observed organically?


I'm mostly just parroting the simplified explanations I've heard from other people. Mostly my friends who are into bitcoin and such. Do correct me if I got it all wrong.

The current global pseudo-capitalist pseudo-free market economy. The crash boom cycle is the way it works in practise, right? First things grow and while they're growing people and institutions make both good and bad investments. Once there are enough bad investments and they're spotted the economy tries to reset itself in order to get back the money into places where it can do some good.

In 2007-2008 there was a crash. Or at least a partial one. The way I see the situation is that a proper recovery from the previous crash never came because it wasn't allowed to play itself through but was artificially stopped with all kinds of different ill-advised measures. Or perhaps the ill-advisedness depends upon who's viewpoint we're looking at it from.

Why pseudo-capitalistic pseudo-free market? Because in a real free market there would be no socializing of losses of the rich and the bankers for the poorer to pay, bailouts and "too big to fail" but instead the rich and powerful would have to bear the responsibility for their own fuckups. Add to this the use of inflation as mechanism for the transfer of wealth from the poorer to the rich like you mentioned above and it does really sound like a big scam and a conspiracy or at least has the makings of such.

Then again can we call bad investments fuckups if they're made intentionally knowing that if one can make it bad enough the big daddy state institutions will have no other choice than to suck up all your losses, have others pay for them and in practice reward you for the mess you made?
Post 02 Apr 2016, 05:24
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
sleepsleep



Joined: 05 Oct 2006
Posts: 8903
Location: ˛                             ⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣Posts: 334455
sleepsleep
http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?p=185793#185793
sleepsleep wrote:

just to clarify, dr. ron paul doesn't makes any exact date prediction, the date was put by youtuber, i copy paste the youtube title and link.
Post 02 Apr 2016, 05:33
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Tyler



Joined: 19 Nov 2009
Posts: 1216
Location: NC, USA
Tyler
nyrtzi, you got it pretty much right. If you're interested in looking further into it, the theory behind what your friends are telling you is called the "Austrian Business Cycle Theory."

One part you kinda missed is the relation between low interest rates and bad investments, but that's a pretty nuanced point, so it's totally excusable. Essentially, the interest rate communicates information to actors in the market about how much demand there is for consumption versus saving (consumption now vs consumption in the future). Setting the interest rate low tells entrepreneurs there is more savings than there really is. So more entrepreneurs start new production plans than would otherwise do so (because loans are cheaper than they would otherwise be) and they end up competing over the resources, a smaller amount of resources they expected and thus at a higher price than they expected.
Post 02 Apr 2016, 07:17
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
nyrtzi



Joined: 08 Jul 2006
Posts: 192
Location: Off the scale in the third direction
nyrtzi
@Tyler
Ah, thanks. Had no idea about that. Not my field after all. Smile
Post 02 Apr 2016, 15:10
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar.

Powered by rwasa.