4 participants
The Inconvenient Debt
[Grognard]_Argent- Général de brigade
- Nombre de messages : 775
Age : 36
Localisation : la Hollande
Date d'inscription : 17/11/2006
- Message n°2
Re: The Inconvenient Debt
i dont beleive Fox News
[Grognard]_Articho- Colonel
- Nombre de messages : 1960
Date d'inscription : 31/01/2008
- Message n°3
Re: The Inconvenient Debt
trop bon ... la génération spontanée
Jakob- Membre Honoraire
- Nombre de messages : 411
Age : 35
Localisation : La Finlande
Date d'inscription : 22/10/2007
- Message n°4
Re: The Inconvenient Debt
Glenn Beck is an idiot.
Invité- Invité
- Message n°5
Re: The Inconvenient Debt
Well he had 2 nice interventions recently, one was on Bush administration and the 2nd one is this video.
Invité- Invité
- Message n°6
Re: The Inconvenient Debt
The increase he has pointed out is a result of the Federal Reserve attempting to influence interest rates. By printing more money, the interest rate should go down in the short-term. One of the reasons for doing this has to do with the housing market; that is, those who bought home on adjustable rate mortgages but found themselves unable to sell the home because of the crash will find that the interest rates on their mortgages will go down, making it more manageable. Of course, people continued to invest in the housing bubble, and now it has collapsed.
Remember, also, that the government has only three main ways to raise money:
-Taxing
-Borrowing
-Printing
(It can also sell some of its assets - property and operating rights)
Since no candidate will ever get elected on the platform of the first one, and since the second one has already been horribly overdone, it is only natural to go to the third one. The medium-term result is, unfortunately, higher interest rates and higher inflation. Similar results can be achieved by raising taxes, but this will not result in higher inflation, and in the medium-term the interest rate ought to go down even further. So, the next time a candidate hints that he or she may raise taxes, vote for that candidate and disasters like this might be prevented.
-LaMarseillaise
Remember, also, that the government has only three main ways to raise money:
-Taxing
-Borrowing
-Printing
(It can also sell some of its assets - property and operating rights)
Since no candidate will ever get elected on the platform of the first one, and since the second one has already been horribly overdone, it is only natural to go to the third one. The medium-term result is, unfortunately, higher interest rates and higher inflation. Similar results can be achieved by raising taxes, but this will not result in higher inflation, and in the medium-term the interest rate ought to go down even further. So, the next time a candidate hints that he or she may raise taxes, vote for that candidate and disasters like this might be prevented.
-LaMarseillaise
Invité- Invité
- Message n°7
Re: The Inconvenient Debt
You make excellent points.
But you know that increasing the amount of money in a market procudes inflation, and inflation, when it gets out of hand, can become a very big problem as seen in the Weimar Republic. Inflation on long term as the USA experiences since the introducing of a fiat money system is in fact, a form of taxation. One day people wake up, and see that their average salary doesn't bring them their same standard of living as before...
Printing money without producing any goods is not a way of building a long lasting society.
By the way, I don't know how informed about the federal reserve you are, but it has nothing "federal". It's a privately owned bank.
Crooks playing on a crooked roulette.
But you know that increasing the amount of money in a market procudes inflation, and inflation, when it gets out of hand, can become a very big problem as seen in the Weimar Republic. Inflation on long term as the USA experiences since the introducing of a fiat money system is in fact, a form of taxation. One day people wake up, and see that their average salary doesn't bring them their same standard of living as before...
Printing money without producing any goods is not a way of building a long lasting society.
By the way, I don't know how informed about the federal reserve you are, but it has nothing "federal". It's a privately owned bank.
Crooks playing on a crooked roulette.
Invité- Invité
- Message n°8
Re: The Inconvenient Debt
Yes, and that is why I have stated that this solution is not ideal; in this case, it is simply the only option available. We should instead vote for candidates who will raise taxes. In the United States the Federal Reserve has no control over taxes; only Congress has the power to change tax rates, even income tax. It is a great misfortune that the voters will never elect a Congressman with a platform of higher taxes.[Grognard]_Liberalis a écrit:...increasing the amount of money in a market procudes inflation... Printing money without producing any goods is not a way of building a long lasting society.
The Federal Reserve is "Independent within the government." That is to say, its practices are at its own discretion, but Congress can, at any time, intervene to alter or abolish the Federal Reserve. Additionally, the administrators of the Federal Reserve are selected by none other than the President of the United States, and the chairman must be confirmed by the United States Senate.By the way, I don't know how informed about the federal reserve you are, but it has nothing "federal". It's a privately owned bank.
Federal Reserve Section in United States Code:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/12/usc_sup_01_12_10_3.html
-LaMarseillaise
Dernière édition par [Grognard]_LaMarseillaise le Lun 23 Fév 2009 - 13:04, édité 1 fois
[Grognard]_Jean-Charles I- Général de division
- Nombre de messages : 6240
Age : 38
Localisation : Fontainebleau
Date d'inscription : 04/04/2007
- Message n°9
Re: The Inconvenient Debt
By the way, I don't know how informed about the federal reserve you are, but it has nothing "federal". It's a privately owned bank.
The Federal Reserve is "Independent within the government." That is to say, its practices are at its own discretion, but Congress can, at any time, intervene to alter or abolish the Federal Reserve. Additionally, the administrators of the Federal Reserve are selected by none other than the President of the United States, and the chairman must be confirmed by the United States Senate.
Ok, for sure, one of you is wrong.
Please, quote your sources and documents when you affirm something ( it's a general statement )
Invité- Invité
- Message n°10
Re: The Inconvenient Debt
I have included a link to the United States Code section on the Federal Reserve System. I would give the precise links to the sections describing the properties I have mentioned, but I must sleep now.
-LaMarseillaise
-LaMarseillaise
Invité- Invité
- Message n°11
Re: The Inconvenient Debt
Well, I have a good source that details the points mentioned above.
http://www.abolishthefederalreserve.com/ :affraid:
http://www.abolishthefederalreserve.com/ :affraid:
Invité- Invité
- Message n°12
Re: The Inconvenient Debt
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 5 of the United States Constitution:
I do not see any conflict with this line of the Constitution. If one wants to get into the strictest definitions, then I would like to see the Congressmen put on the factory uniforms and start making the money themselves. Like nearly all government executive tasks, this one is done through an intermediate institution, which is subject to the regulation and review of the United States Congress. Similarly, the Internal Revenue Service, also known as the IRS, is permitted to execute its day-to-day activities without the consent of Congress. And then, there is the United States Military, which is generally (although not as much recently) been permitted to wage war as the military leadership sees fit.
The problem with the Federal Reserve System is not so much poor or corrupt decisions on the part of its administrators, but rather its legal inability to control certain, very important economics factors, such as taxes. The chairmen of the Federal Reserve are among the most respected and revered economists in the world. Their decisions in the past thirty years have been generally forced by political decisions over which they have no control, in this case the general decrease of taxes. If taxes had been adjusted solely according to inflation over the past 55 years (since the Income Tax Act of 1954), then the tax on income above about USD $10,000,000 per year would be 98%. It is currently 35%. Consider, also, that for the United States the 1950s were the period of the greatest prosperity for any civilization in human history.
Nevertheless, it would not be fair to blame the politicians, either. As I have said, no candidate will ever be elected on the platform of higher taxes, whereas tax cuts always win votes. This is the fundamental problem of Republics - in some cases, there is too much incentive to vote against what is good for society. One could blame the voters, but remember the prisoners' dilemma.
[The Congress shall have Power] To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign
Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
I do not see any conflict with this line of the Constitution. If one wants to get into the strictest definitions, then I would like to see the Congressmen put on the factory uniforms and start making the money themselves. Like nearly all government executive tasks, this one is done through an intermediate institution, which is subject to the regulation and review of the United States Congress. Similarly, the Internal Revenue Service, also known as the IRS, is permitted to execute its day-to-day activities without the consent of Congress. And then, there is the United States Military, which is generally (although not as much recently) been permitted to wage war as the military leadership sees fit.
The problem with the Federal Reserve System is not so much poor or corrupt decisions on the part of its administrators, but rather its legal inability to control certain, very important economics factors, such as taxes. The chairmen of the Federal Reserve are among the most respected and revered economists in the world. Their decisions in the past thirty years have been generally forced by political decisions over which they have no control, in this case the general decrease of taxes. If taxes had been adjusted solely according to inflation over the past 55 years (since the Income Tax Act of 1954), then the tax on income above about USD $10,000,000 per year would be 98%. It is currently 35%. Consider, also, that for the United States the 1950s were the period of the greatest prosperity for any civilization in human history.
Nevertheless, it would not be fair to blame the politicians, either. As I have said, no candidate will ever be elected on the platform of higher taxes, whereas tax cuts always win votes. This is the fundamental problem of Republics - in some cases, there is too much incentive to vote against what is good for society. One could blame the voters, but remember the prisoners' dilemma.
If you lived in District 1, would you vote for Candidate A or Candidate B? Benefit for District 1 is the first value listed in each box. | District 2 | ||
Candidate C | Candidate D | ||
District 1 | Candidate A | $30, $30 (Total: $60) | $10, $40 (Total: $50) |
Candidate B | $40, $10 (Total: $50) | $20, $20 (Total: $40) |
Jakob- Membre Honoraire
- Nombre de messages : 411
Age : 35
Localisation : La Finlande
Date d'inscription : 22/10/2007
- Message n°13
Re: The Inconvenient Debt
Are you studying law? Cuz if you aren't, you should.