A Must Read-Economics made simple

[wiseones2cents]

Barter is too ignorant, savage, and pathetic to be called "an economy." That's like calling wood "paper" and Hydrogen and Oxygen "water."

What do you think an economy is based on? An exchange of valuables. When you include worthless paper in the mix, that is when it becomes pathetic.

Its great for the people making the money out of thin air. You can buy slaves and anything else you want without giving away your true wealth(Gold, silver, jewels, labor).

Can you imagine if we were all able to make money out of thin air? Nobody would have to work. Nobody would want to work. But then again, we would not be able to hire any workers. So we would have to do the work ourselves and trade(bartor) for REAL valuables.

 

[Damocles]

OMG. you fucking dillhole. Those are exactly the things we should avoid.

We should do the opposite. Abandon currency altogether and move to a more agrarian more dispersed society, with barter, personal agriculturue and personal manufacuring the norm. A real economy.

Yeah! Because truckloads of chickens are much easier to carry in your wallet!

 

[Sammy Jankis]

Yeah! Because truckloads of chickens are much easier to carry in your wallet!

LOl. What a braindead response. LOL.

 

[wiseones2cents]

Those who recently took to the streets to protest the Banks and were given such short shift by the police and American press have legitimate reasons for protesting the Bank. The sad part of it is, so do all Americans , but most of them are totally unaware of why they should. The Bank, after all, is far removed from their everyday lives and seems to have no relation to their own wages and life styles. They are blind to the gold hemorrhage which has taken place, continues to take place, and threatens to impoverish us at some point in time in the future.

As previously mentioned, even our so-called “former enemy,” Russia is not immune from this economic rape, according to testimony of one witness, Anne Williamson, before the Banking Committee of the House, on September 21, 1999 .

Williamson is the author of a book, Contagion: The Betrayal of Liberty , Russia , and the United States In the 1990s her testimony indicting the Bank and the IMF, also indicted the U.S. Treasury, the Harvard Institute for International Development, and the Federal Reserve. Williamson said “taxpayer-subsidized globalism (then) is not a new phenomenon, but it has reached an apogee of sorts under the guiding hand of the opportunistic Clinton Administration.”

She continued, “When the IMF touted a 1996 $10.2 billion loan on the basis of what an extraordinary job Russia had done in meeting the conditions of a 1995 $6.7 billion loan, one crucial detail went unmentioned. The $6.7 billion loan was extended without any conditions via the IMF’s Systematic Transformation Facility, a program designed to funnel money to Russia in return for ‘the promise to reform’. Also left unsaid was that through the magic of money’s fungibility, the $6.7 billion loan financed – almost to the kopeck – Yeltsin’s bloody and disastrous assault on Chechnya.”

Following these loans and the 1995 elections, in 1996 the Fund proceeded with another loan of $10.2 billion, “front-loaded with a billion dollars meant for Yeltsin ’s re-election.” One perk from this, Williamson told the House Committee, was a $700- million annual deal with Tyson Chicken protected “from a threatened 20 percent tariff increase.” Tyson has been a long time political and financial crony of Clinton .[ii]

Clinton ’s Treasury Secretary, Larry Summers demanded the head of the World Bank ’s Chief Economist, Joseph Stiglitz in 1999, when he revealed U.S. meddling in Russia’s so-called election in 1995—among other secrets of the global meddlers. Stiglitz , in a 2002 interview with reporter Greg Palast ,[iii] revealed “the real, often hidden workings of the IMF, World Bank, and the bank’s 51% owner, the U.S. Treasury.”

Stiglitz was not shy about reporting the U.S. . Treasury wanted Yeltsin re-elected and “US-backed oligarchs stripped Russia’s industrial assets, with the effect that the corruption scheme cut national output nearly in half causing depression and starvation.” So Russia abruptly disappears as a world power. Had you ever even noticed?

Russia was not the only country, of course, to suffer the indignities of IMF and Bank policies which squeeze the last “pound of blood” out of the people of the nations who turn to the banks for aid, and when the nation is down and out and the banks turn up the heat, riots explode as happened in Indonesia, Bolivia, and Ecuador, as well as others. The country’s assets are up for grabs, and the “people” are poorer than before.

Palast commented, “You’d almost get the impression that the riot is written into the plan.” And then, he said, secret documents in his possession support the conclusion the Bank callously expected “social unrest,” as a consequence of their actions. Those on IMF ’s “side” are equipped with bullets, tanks and teargas – just like the Hungarian 1956 uprising of brave people who went up against the Soviets with bare hands and received no assistance from the United States, repeated in the years’ later episode of the students in Tiananmen Square.

Palast says Stiglitz is “particularly emotional over the WTO’s (World Trade Organization, almost indistinguishable and interchangeable with the two Banks) intellectual property rights treaty (it goes by the acronym TRIPS). It is here, says the economist, that the new global order has ‘condemned people to death’ by imposing impossible tariffs and tributes to pay to pharmaceutical companies for branded medicines. ‘They don’t care,’ said the professor of the corporations and bank loans he worked with, ‘if people live or die.’”

We who live in the United States can sit back and commiserate with the unhappy residents of these 3rd World Nations who scrabble in the dirt for roots to give their starving children, but can our turn be far behind?

Davison Budhoo , another former employee of the IMF , agrees the two banks wreak havoc on the Third World which is “in an accelerated spiral of economic and social decline”---which decline is “linked directly to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.” (Throughout all of Julian Huxley’s writings was an almost paranoid refrain about population control. As he saw it, some method of bringing the world’s population surges to “manageable” levels had to be invented. Was this it? Was this why the UN did nothing about the Moslem genocide against Christians in Rwanda ?)


http://www.minutewoman.net/debt slavery.htm

Russia?LOL Who do you think financed the Bolshevik(Jewish) uprising? The European banks using federal reserves(including USA) around the world and leaving tax payers the bills.

Then they orchestrated this cold war(which was all hype). Of which they were investing in both sides(Russia and America). Turned it into an arms race. Made a killing, and when the Russian military had had enough of fighting the Oligarchs wars(like Afghanistan), they turned on the Soviet Union.

This led to the collapse of the USSR. And all the so called enemy Communist Ogliarchs fled and were welcomed in mostly America(Britain, France, Israel) with open arms to invest their money that they had stole from the Russian people. With the help of European elites.

Some cold war hey? Where you welcome the enemies in your homes with open arms.

 

[Damocles]

LOl. What a braindead response. LOL.

Yes, your response is brain dead. Now tell me which is more efficient.

It is better to make the paper worth something, rather than to go back to swapping pigs and chickens for windows...

Seriously, it is inane and extreme. It's like saying the solution to oil spills is to make everybody start buying horses again. Nobody is going to take you seriously.

 

[wiseones2cents]

Yeah! Because truckloads of chickens are much easier to carry in your wallet!

When you make a truck load of furniture, do you put it in your pocket or deliver it with a truck?lol

Actually, a horse and carriage sounds just about right. If you live in the country

 

[Sammy Jankis]

Yes, your response is brain dead. Now tell me which is more efficient.

It is better to make the paper worth something, rather than to go back to swapping pigs and chickens for windows...

Seriously, it is inane and extreme. It's like saying the solution to oil spills is to make everybody start buying horses again. Nobody is going to take you seriously.

It's better to go to a barter system, where totalitarianism through currency control is impossible. Many people feel as i do. But you keep carrying water for the man.

 

[Damocles]

It's better to go to a barter system, where totalitarianism through currency control is impossible. Many people feel as i do. But you keep carrying water for the man.

Right, you and three others = many.

Nobody will take you seriously, because barter is cumbersome and limits economic growth and the ability to move within classes. So preach on, brother, you will never see your dreams become reality because they are based in deliberate ignorance of the society in which you live.

It's not even worth arguing, because unless there is a total collapse of society, we won't be returning to barter... It is far more realistic to ensure that the "money" is based in something of value, you might even get popular support for that one.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

Right, you and three others = many.

Nobody will take you seriously, because barter is cumbersome and limits economic growth and the ability to move within classes. So preach on, brother, you will never see your dreams become reality because they are based in deliberate ignorance of the society in which you live.

It's not even worth arguing, because unless there is a total collapse of society, we won't be returning to barter...

many will be coming to my side now that it's becoming obvious that the end point of fiat currency is entire countries having to jump in line with whatever bankers say to keep getting the fake money flow.

It takes a severe psychotic break from reality to see what's happening in the world now and to keep braying about the virtues of fiat money.

 

[Damocles]

many will be coming to my side now that it's becoming obvious that the end point of fiat currency is entire countries having to jump in line with whatever bankers say to keep getting the fake money flow.

It takes a sever psychotic break from reality to see what's happening in the world now and to keep braying about the virtues of fiat money.

When maintaining the position to back the currency with something of value one is not "braying" about the "virtues" of fiat currency, that is now simply deliberately disingenuous, you are consciously making the choice not to actually speak on what I said, and to maintain your fictional ability to get society to abandon their ability to move within classes and to carry items of value to exchange...

Your statements in this thread, unlike those in other threads that are succinct and intelligent, are based in deliberate ignorance and are deliberately disingenuous.

Again, dreaming the unrealistic dream, doesn't make the dream "better" it just means you waste energy on the impossible because you want to "seem" better to yourself.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

When maintaining the position to back the currency with something of value one is not "braying" about the "virtues" of fiat currency, that is now simply deliberately disingenuous.

Your statements in this thread, unlike those in other threads that are succinct and intelligent, are based in deliberate ignorance and are deliberately disingenuous.

Fuck off, fascist brayer about the virtues of fiat money.

 

[Damocles]

Fuck off, fascist brayer about the virtues of fiat money.

Just Plain Inane. Deliberately so.

Tell me, oh wise one, the definition of fiat currency, and the difference between fiat currency and one that is backed by something of value.

You aren't just off your game, you are trying to convince people that unicorns are real because you know three people who think bartering is superfantastic.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

Just Plain Inane. Deliberately so.

Tell me, oh wise one, the definition of fiat currency, and the difference between fiat currency and one that is backed by something of value.

You aren't just off your game, you are trying to convince people that unicorns are real because you know three people who think bartering is superfantastic.

Sorry, oh masonic whore. All currency is an outdated fascist concept. it's too amenable to abuse. Even if you have hard currency there is still someone guarding the printing press at night who will be too tempted to "print a little extra". It will always become debased. Pure barter is the future. Sorry. It's best you get on the clue train now, as opposed to later.

 

[wiseones2cents]

Right, you and three others = many.

Nobody will take you seriously, because barter is cumbersome and limits economic growth and the ability to move within classes. So preach on, brother, you will never see your dreams become reality because they are based in deliberate ignorance of the society in which you live.

It's not even worth arguing, because unless there is a total collapse of society, we won't be returning to barter... It is far more realistic to ensure that the "money" is based in something of value, you might even get popular support for that one.

Yes, economic growth is much better when you can make money out of thin air and leave the tax payers the bill as a type of slavery, via inflation.

That is exactly what must happen. A total collapse or an uprising and a total revamp of the global economy.

The money being backed by gold can work but as we have seen in the past? The gold reserves(as is currency) are exaggerated(manipulated). So who can we trust to audit it?

They put safe guards in place to keep the deficit stable(a limit on how much you can borrow), but they keep passing laws to raise the ceilings, which should be ILLEGAL. They get richer and they leave us the bill.

The only way it would work is that if the actual currency were made of valuables again like gold, silver, gems, ect...

The main thing is that the country should have the ability to make their own currency. As it stands today? The government goes into debt for every dollar they acquire from the Federal Reserve. That is a losing system right there.

Your in debt before you even start.

 

[wiseones2cents]

Just Plain Inane. Deliberately so.

Tell me, oh wise one, the definition of fiat currency, and the difference between fiat currency and one that is backed by something of value.

You aren't just off your game, you are trying to convince people that unicorns are real because you know three people who think bartering is superfantastic.

The value of fiat currency, fluctuates(causing inflation). A currency that is backed by real wealth does NOT(or should not) fluctuate. Since it is impossible to increase the supply without increasing the actual supply of lets say gold( REAL wealth).

 

[Damocles]

The value of fiat currency, fluctuates(causing inflation). A currency that is backed by real wealth does NOT(or should not) fluctuate. Since it is impossible to increase the supply without increasing the actual supply of lets say gold( REAL wealth).

Right, which then immediately makes everything that AHZ has said about my posts in this thread simply and flatly wrong.

The reality is, before there was currency (when barter prevailed) is when there was the least amount of movement between economic classes. No matter how many times he tries to sell it, and how well it may work in smaller cases like communes, unless society falls entirely in a catastrophic failure we will never return to a barter system, yet there would be (and could be popular) support to return to a value based currency.

While that can be manipulated (if somebody tries to inflate it by printing more dollars than they have gold to back it for instance) it is still far more stable than simply backing money with nothing and protects people's savings far more than "controlled inflation" which they say is to "induce spending" as the values of your savings is lost due to inflation...

 

[Sammy Jankis]

Right, which then immediately makes everything that AHZ has said about my posts in this thread simply and flatly wrong.

The reality is, before there was currency (when barter prevailed) is when there was the least amount of movement between economic classes. No matter how many times he tries to sell it, and how well it may work in smaller cases like communes, unless society falls entirely in a catastrophic failure we will never return to a barter system, yet there would be (and could be popular) support to return to a value based currency.

While that can be manipulated (if somebody tries to inflate it by printing more dollars than they have gold to back it for instance) it is still far more stable than simply backing money with nothing and protects people's savings far more than "controlled inflation" which they say is to "induce spending" as the values of your savings is lost due to inflation...

Barter just had the bad luck of being historically coincident with feudalism. It is not inherently poverty inducing. You want to compare the organic real growth of barter to the inflated figures of on paper fiat money growth, and all the overvaluations that go along with that. you're intellectually mired in idiotthought and cant see your way through the haze of lies you were indocrtrinated with.

Global barters is the future.

 

[Damocles]

Barter just had the bad luck of being historically coincident with feudalism. It is not inherently poverty inducing. You want to compare the organic real growth of barter to the inflated figures of on paper fiat money growth, and all the overvaluations that go along with that. you're intellectually mired in idiotthought and cant see your way through the haze of lies you were indocrtrinated with.

Global barters is the future.

Rubbish, currency freed people to travel from place to place as their wealth could be carried easily with them. Banking systems made this even easier. This was the first step towards economic freedom unheard of during times where people were trapped due to all their wealth residing in their land and things they owned.

Barter simply traps people because all of their "value" is within what they own and cannot be easily carried.

It is unrealistic to ignore the fact that barring the total collapse of society (built around this economic freedom) barter will never again be the economic system... It's a joke to even pretend to talk seriously about it. The closest we will ever come, and even that will be difficult, is to once again back our currency with something of value.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

Rubbish, currency freed people to travel from place to place as their wealth could be carried easily with them. Banking systems made this even easier. This was the first step towards economic freedom unheard of during times where people were trapped due to all their wealth residing in their land and things they owned.

Barter simply traps people because all of their "value" is within what they own and cannot be easily carried.

It is unrealistic to ignore the fact that barring the total collapse of society (built around this economic freedom) barter will never again be the economic system... It's a joke to even pretend to talk seriously about it. The closest we will ever come, and even that will be difficult, is to once again back our currency with something of value.

Society is like, totally collapsing dude. We can either agree to banker slavery or do something different. Given the currently viewable downside of currency stupidity, you should amend your hardline against the true economy only possible with barter. Specialization makes people dependant on society and it's brainwash memes. It's not always a good thing.

All individuals should be educated in agriculture. Then we can all grow our own food and tell the bankers to fuck straight off.

 

[wiseones2cents]

Right, which then immediately makes everything that AHZ has said about my posts in this thread simply and flatly wrong.

The reality is, before there was currency (when barter prevailed) is when there was the least amount of movement between economic classes. No matter how many times he tries to sell it, and how well it may work in smaller cases like communes, unless society falls entirely in a catastrophic failure we will never return to a barter system, yet there would be (and could be popular) support to return to a value based currency.

While that can be manipulated (if somebody tries to inflate it by printing more dollars than they have gold to back it for instance) it is still far more stable than simply backing money with nothing and protects people's savings far more than "controlled inflation" which they say is to "induce spending" as the values of your savings is lost due to inflation...

The problem was not bartor. It was slavery in the old and days. people would be forced to work for next to nothing. Sort of like the direction we are headed now. That is why there wasn't much movement around the classes, plus, peasants were heavily taxed. That way they were kept poor and working for the king who sat on his butt doing nothing.

Wrong. If you inflate more money than actual gold you have? It weakens the currency. The value of the gold remains, but its value is divided into more shares(paper money).

Obviously money backed by gold is better than money backed by nothing.

Though it still causes inflation to the currency.

But currency using real wealth(like gold coins) is the best.