Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-25-2011, 04:53 PM
 
Location: Southern California
1,435 posts, read 1,555,609 times
Reputation: 258

Advertisements

Quote:
from the article you just posted:


Quote:
Quote:
In our present economy, the banks‑‑which have a government licensed monopoly to mediate the money creation process‑‑get the credit for creating money.4 The rules of the licensing process give these banks the right to place a charge‑‑compound interest‑‑on the process. In our economy we have given the immediate risk in money creation to the mediator‑‑the bank‑‑in return for compound interest. The long term risk of catastrophic failure is still held by the market; witness the bailout of savings and loans in the 80's with taxpayer money.
you're saying you think the long term risk of catastrophic failure is still held by the market?
I don't know about that. I don't agree with everything that article said (especially the whole part where it goes off on a tangrint about ecosystems), I just know from research on other sites and sources that the way money is created is how it stated. You don't create money to give to poeple so that they can use it on whatever they want. If there isn't a demand, something to use that money on, it is worthless.

However, I do want to take the creation, regulation, and dissemination of money out of the hands of private, for-profit banks and into our elected reps in government.

So I guess, in some way, I do agree with you...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-05-2012, 05:03 PM
 
Location: Holiday, FL
1,571 posts, read 2,003,098 times
Reputation: 1165
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotair2 View Post
More austrian economics. He is advocating removing all safety nets so people will just hold on a little tighter...so what happens when they actually fall...Too bad I guess.

In reality he is calling for greater productivity (hold on tighter) for workers. How has that worked so far.

As you can see from the chart below, although productivity has gone up because hourly wages have stayed the same. I think the graph shows that Austrian economics is not going to end the income disparity.
That's a real nice purdy graph you got there (bottom of page 1). To bad it's incomplete. There's just a little more to it than just income and productivity. Where's the line that represents the cost of essential goods and services? And, if you get it from the government, remember that food and energy are not included. So, according to your government, you don't need to eat or keep warm.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top