 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Ludwig von Mises: "Marx and Engels never tried to refute their opponents with argument. They insulted, ridiculed, derided, slandered, and traduced them, and in the use of these methods their followers are not less expert. Their polemic is directed never against the argument of the opponent, but always against his person."
Post a stream of incoherent diatribes in poor English, and folks will tire of it--including moderators.
That you don't grasp this, and speak conspiratorially of others trying to "silence you" doesn't really speak well of your overall comprehension of the reality in which you find yourself.
My reply is that the statement is nonsense on its face. There is no meaningful notion of "accurate" currency. I already offered an opinion of the web site you initially suggested, which argues that interest rates should be legally capped at 0%.
My hat is off to you for creating such a breathtakingly meaningless sentence.
Terms already exist for such concepts. Learn them and use them. You will not be taken seriously when you use terms that demonstrate ignorance of basic economic concepts.
Just a note: identifying your ignorance of basic economics for what it is isn't a "personal attack." If I decided to start debating circuit design with a bunch of electrical engineers, I'd experience a similar reality check, and I'd dislike it as much as you probably dislike my observations. Sometimes the truth hurts our egos.
That was not an attack: it was an order. As a mod, I'm one of the persons you implicitly accused of wishing to censor or silence you. If you blather enough about how "the mods will probably lock the thread and shut me up, etc., etc.," then a mod--possibly I--will indeed take some sort of action. Thus you are encouraged to stow it.
Only if you're one of the people behind the "Mathematically Perfected Economy™". If you are, I had no idea; I was mocking them without reaizing that you were one of them.
Let me say this plainly, so as to leave no doubt. Never ask that question again. Completely and utterly drop that subject. If you have something to say about economics, say it. Clear?
Mr. Kelley:
Re most of your post, your disrespect towards the mods is tiring. Your arrogance towards other forum users is appalling. The fact that you continue to "speak" (type) in a manner that the vast majority of the English-speaking world does not is annoying. You should really start thinking about saying something relevant, and while you're at it we'd appreciate it if it made sense.
You are being disruptive, and you did hijack this thread. I will broach no further discussion of the matter; refrain from doing so yourself, or face the consequences. The moderating team has been far too patient with you for far too long. Since you suggested it, I will tell you to cease making off-topic remarks about "accurate currencies" or whatever it is you're "talking" about in this (and by implication all other) threads, or face the consequences.
The hypocrites sent me to the corn field.
Fuck off – you get what you earn stupid ass.
How about this: What comes around - goes around.
For anyone not interested in following the logic here I can try to condense.
Ron Paul is attractive to the Austrian economists because they think that Ron Paul will enforce their interest/profit/wage paying system. They are ‘up in arms’ because Ron Paul is being censured by the authorities.
HA! That is soooooooo funnnny to me.
I’ve tried many times to discuss the competitive advantage of ‘free money’ markets such as Equitable Commerce (where anyone can print their won money) and the Austrian Guru’s attack me personally instead of discussing the issue (in this case the issue of accurate currency).
The really, really, real stupid part is how Mises was FOR accurate currency or “Free Market” currency WHILE the supposed Austrian’s support the opposite and the same Austrians, at the same time, support Mises!
See that!
It is as if the Austrians are fighting their own selves – on purpose.
I have to point, again, to this:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north512.html
WHAT IS THE SOLUTION?
In theory, there are two possible solutions, neither of which has any possibility of being implemented in my lifetime or yours.
One solution is free banking. This was Ludwig von Mises’ suggestion. There would be no bank regulation, no central bank monopolies, no bank licensing, and no legal barriers to entry. Let the most efficient banks win! In other words, the solution is a free market in money.
Another solution is 100% reserve banking. Banks would not be allowed to issue more receipts for gold or silver than they have on deposit. Anything else is fraud. There would be regulation and supervision to make sure deposits matched loans. This was Murray Rothbard’s solution. The question is: Regulation by whom? With what authority?
There would be no government-issued money. There would be no government mint. There would be no legal tender laws. There would be no barriers to entry into coin production.
There would also be no free services. There is no such thing as a free lunch
It appears to me, and perhaps other people, that the Austrians have become schizoid or split in personality. They have grown attached to their enforced monopoly called ‘capitalism’ which employs ‘the profit motive’ whereby price is derived from scarcity rather than cost.
In other words the ‘free market’ must be controlled by half the Austrian personality and therefore protect the ‘gold standard’ and other interest/profit/wage paying SYSTEM principles and interests.
The other half of the Austrian personality must champion the ‘free market’ (so long as the freeness is limited to ‘them’ being free) because un-free allows the competition to gain the same control of the System.
See?
Free means ‘free to enforce their desired SYSTEM’ half the time.
Free mans free to exclude any other SYSTEM the other half of the time.
I think the split (the psychosis) occurred when Carl Menger began constructing his scarce economy SYSTEM.
Here:
“every individual will attempt to secure his own requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of others.” Carl Menger (1840 -1921)
Menger publishes even greater falsehoods later on in the same work.
The above alone is farcical; how can someone explain reproduction given the claim being excreted by Menger?
Anyway – an actual free market for money would exclude no one. Excluding people, on purpose, is profitable whereby those having the power to exclude, on purpose, manage to gain the expense of the excluded. It is called extortion.
It is called crime.
It becomes legalized crime when enough people are bamboozled into adopting the falsehoods. Many people know what it is exactly and they go on with the flow of things because their knowledge allows them to keep the shitty end of the stick pointed in the ‘right’ direction.
When the exploited (excluded) wise up, then, they may become extremely pissed off.
At about that time a ‘savior’ may ride the wave and take back the lost control.
Why do all that over and over again as if no other SYSTEM were possible?
HELLO?
Mises was right and Menger is dead wrong. The solution to the problem is to stop fixing the problem with the problem. Fixing the problem by supporting the problem is false.
Free Money Markets, because they are free, will empower the most able to supply the money demand with the best money and it will be accurate and cost-less.
If that happens to be GOLD as money (currency), then, that will happen in a free money market. If someone offers a more accurate currency (money) at a lower cost, then, Gold doesn’t win; hence – the need to enforce a desired winner that manages to secure someone’s requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of others – on damn purpose fuckheads.