Galt's Gulch

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

    -
  • Posted by Lucky 5 years, 5 months ago
    The article says-
    raising interest rates brings on recession.
    This is not a sensible statement, the problem is not the raising but the lowering that was brought on earlier.

    As FFA asks,
    Is having a central authority making these decisions, however well intentioned and expert, worse than simply leaving interest rate decisions to individual banks, and let them evaluate the return and risk potential according to locality and sector? A fed reserve set rate, one size fits all , seldom works.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ blarman 5 years, 5 months ago
      I would argue that the sheer fact of interference and manipulation exacerbates problems. It has been well studied that the Great Depression was not only caused, but prolonged by the Federal Reserve's manipulation. One can argue the same about the 2009 recession (which was further extended by President Obama's interference).

      "Is having a central authority making these decisions, however well intentioned and expert, worse..."

      History has demonstrated repeatedly that the answer is an unabashed "YES".
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by freedomforall 5 years, 5 months ago
      Giving the banking cartel the sole ability to create legal tender fiat from nothing to benefit themselves is the entire issue. They use the wealth created from this to manipulate governments, incite wars that provide profits and murder millions of innocent people. These are the ultimate in human evil beings.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by Lucky 5 years, 5 months ago
        Fractional reserve banking.
        I have some idea of what it is and remain very uneasy, so, yes to the criticism.
        But, is it ok to abolish regulators and let the banks do it?
        Or if not, should there be a government regulator to stop it? Or, no regulator but moan from the sidelines, maybe after a collapse the market will correct.

        2. I cannot work out what is the intent of this sentence.

        3. The ultimate evil? Careful, or there will be a Nobel for it.
        (Too late- they call it the Peace Prize).
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by freedomforall 5 years, 5 months ago
          Read The Creature From Jekyll Island and you will get a more detailed understanding of this.
          The banks are their own regulators (although there are bureaucrats in government agencies that pretend to regulate the banking cartel.)
          Research the background of the Treasury Secretaries for the past 50 years to get an idea of which is the tail and which is the dog.
          Only the banking cartel creates money in the current system and they only do it when debt is created. The system is designed to create debtors and does not create enough liquidity to pay interest and principle without more debt being created first. It is, in essence, a Ponzi scheme to benefit the banking cartel. Raising interest rates (controlled by the banking cartel) guarantees that there will not be enough liquidity to service debt and banks will foreclose on loans, effectively stealing property from honest people and productive companies.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by jimjamesjames 5 years, 5 months ago
      when getting my BA in Econ 50+ years ago, it was explained that the FED was created to be a "lender of last resort" to member banks when they got in trouble, to mitigate a "local banking crisis" in the short term. If that is what they did/do, I would have no issue.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by chad 5 years, 5 months ago
    People of any country suffer when a central bank issues fiat currency and charges for its use. There is no way to function without debt which must continue to increase along with the payment of interest which requires the increase of taxes on the population and devalues (government and central banks use the incorrect term of inflation to make people to accept the incorrect cause) the currency stealing from those who would save. This act causes any who would get ahead to take higher risks to constantly try to improve their income at a rate faster than the devaluation which keeps getting under-reported by manipulating how the data should be interpreted. With real money if a bank did something you didn't like you can move your money to another bank. With fiat banking you have no input and even if you take your fiat currency out of the bank it can still be devalued, there is no recourse against their decisions.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by straightlinelogic 5 years, 5 months ago
    Here's my two cents. Two cents: since inception, the Federal Reserve has depreciated the dollar 98 percent, so a current dollar buys about what 2 cents did in 1913. That 98 cents was picked out of Americans' pockets in a process so impercible that most Americans don't even know it happened. Currency depreciation is a tax. Central banks are just another mechanism for government to extract money from the populace. For more, please see Chapter 27, "Fools' Gold," of my novel The Golden Pinnacle.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by Lucky 5 years, 5 months ago
      Back in 1913, how much did an iPhone cost?
      In 1913, how much would you have to pay to get the service that an iPhone gives today?
      Rather than saying that 2c today buys what one dollar would in 1913, I put it to you that we are fifty times better off, richer, with fifty times as much money than in 1913.
      This does not mean that central banking has produced that improvement.
      It is technology. Other causes such as property rights and incentives are similar. But technology has momentum.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by freedomforall 5 years, 5 months ago
        Would free enterprise already have explored and colonized other planets if the banking cartel (and its government lackeys) had not stolen resources from productive individuals and companies for 105 years?
        Technology has advanced In spite of the looting, but if the free market had been left alone the iphone would be as ancient as buggy whips.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mia767ca 5 years, 5 months ago
    the dollar was worth a dollar in 1913 when the latest "central bank" was created...today the dollar is worth less than $.04 of the 1913 dollar...that is theft...and harm...

    every recession, depression, and economic disaster has been caused by the "central bank"...we will suffer a collapse the "central bank" manipulation of our money...which will set us back to the 1800s and cause the death of 90% of the population...

    so I would say "suffer"...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by bsmith51 5 years, 5 months ago
    ...and what if the Supreme Court were to rule that the Treasury only has authority - as the Constitution says - to Coin, not Print, money?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ allosaur 5 years, 5 months ago
    Me dino takes it from reading the article that "some commentators" want Trump to shut up because the Fed is this wonderful for beneficial entity that is above politics.
    Do believe we can all go figure who these "some commentators" work for.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 5 years, 5 months ago
    If the central bank was manned by honest conscious humans, uncorrupted and immune to politicians and the global central banking system, I don't think there would be a problem. Although there is something to be said about Small Free Market Banks with a common currency...which wasn't the case in the beginning.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by Solver 5 years, 5 months ago
      “If the central bank was manned by honest conscious humans, uncorrupted and immune to politicians and the global central banking system...”
      ...and if human nature could reprogrammed in just the right way, we would have Utopia. Although, the many methods to attempt this on a global scale would likely create hell on earth.

      Or we could just design systems based on our human nature that we’ve had since mankind discovered reason; Enlightened systems.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 5 years, 5 months ago
        Correction...our system has been designed for "Parasitical 'Humanoid'" nature, for those with no conscience, not conscious and not really human.

        Conscious Humans are a minority on this planet.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo