Originally posted by whodeyYour money? I doubt anyone who can't afford a subscription is funding the government. Isn't that what many rich people whine about all the time?
Why? It is because you have buraucrats using OUR money to invest in things when their butt is not on the line. So Solyndra fails, so what? What does Obama care? I would feel much more comfortable if Obama had a personal finacial stake in the matter instead of using my money. My guess is that if that were the case, Solyndra would not have happened.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungI got news for ya, you pay the most money at the pumps to the government than you do "Big Oil". Government is everywhere!!
Your money? I doubt anyone who can't afford a subscription is funding the government. Isn't that what many rich people whine about all the time?
Originally posted by whodey"All I know is an ounce of gold buys as much oil today as it did in 1961 due to government inflation of the dollar."
Media Matters? Does it really?
All I know is an ounce of gold buys as much oil today as it did in 1961 due to government inflation of the dollar.
yada, yada, yada.
The Government is 'devaluing' the dollar, mainly in order to reduce the deficit by devaluing what it owes; i.e dollars.
The reason that "an ounce of gold buys as much oil today as it did in 1961" is chiefly because gold prices have gone through the roof since the financial debacle as nervous/savvy investors have gone back to gold as a shelter for their money from the uncertainty of the stock markets.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraInflation adjusted???
The inflation-adjusted gold price is vastly higher now than it was in 1961.
Here's a thought. If some paranoid raving lunatics tell you something, perhaps it is a good idea to verify if it's actually true before you believe it.
How is inflation measured? By a basket of other countries currencies, right? If most of those currencies fall along with the US dollar and the Euro what do you have? I'll tell you what you have, a faulty measure of inflation. That is why gold is the best measure of inflation, despite what you would like to believe.
Consider it the monetary version of the theory of relativity. Think about it.
Originally posted by Metal BrainI think they are intelligent enoght to understand, they just don't like admitting that their "progressive" mandate of spending what we don't have is actually the least progressive form of taxation on the poor that there is.
Inflation adjusted???
How is inflation measured? By a basket of other countries currencies, right? If most of those currencies fall along with the US dollar and the Euro what do you have? I'll tell you what you have, a faulty measure of inflation. That is why gold is the best measure of inflation, despite what you would like to believe.
Consider it the monetary version of the theory of relativity. Think about it.
Originally posted by whodeyI have explained why the price of gold is so high and why the dollar has been devalued; and who bears the bulk of responsibiliy for the U.S deficit; if you right wing moneterists have a credible counter argument put it forward.
I think they are intelligent enoght to understand, they just don't like admitting that their "progressive" mandate of spending what we don't have is actually the least progressive form of taxation on the poor that there is.
Alternatively you could continue to talk utter crap and ignore the facts; in short be a 'conservative'.
Originally posted by Metal BrainThat's not how inflation is measured.
Inflation adjusted???
How is inflation measured? By a basket of other countries currencies, right? If most of those currencies fall along with the US dollar and the Euro what do you have? I'll tell you what you have, a faulty measure of inflation. That is why gold is the best measure of inflation, despite what you would like to believe.
Consider it the monetary version of the theory of relativity. Think about it.
Originally posted by Metal BrainIt may be different in the U.S but in Britain 'Inflation' refers to the rate of rise in the prices of retail goods and services. It is measured in percentage points i.e if the average annual cost of living is $21000 as opposed to $20000 last year that is an annual inflation rate of 5%.
Then tell us all how it is measured if you are so sure of yourself.
Clearly it is strongly related to the value of your currency against other currencies if the basket of goods and services they are using to measure inflation contains a lot of imported goods. So in that case a devaluation of the dollar by the central bank, for example, keeping interest rates low and printing extra money in order to stimulate growth, then your dollar will buy less imported goods and international commodities than it did the year before and this will be reflected in the rate of inflation.
It is important to keep in mind that if your currency is devalued it in effect reduces your national debt. This is partly why Eurozone countries like greece are in so much bother with their debt because they cannot control the value of the Euro.
Originally posted by kevcvs57It should also be considered that the money supply must be increased simply to prevent deflation. One of the reasons the gold standard was abandoned was because the supply of gold could not be increased to keep up with the growth rate. This means the ratio between all currencies in the world and gold are increasingly wider in gap. That alone should justify higher gold prices. Add inflation onto that and one could argue gold [and including silver] is undervalued rather than overvalued.
It may be different in the U.S but in Britain 'Inflation' refers to the rate of rise in the prices of retail goods and services. It is measured in percentage points i.e if the average annual cost of living is $21000 as opposed to $20000 last year that is an annual inflation rate of 5%.
Clearly it is strongly related to the value of your currency against ...[text shortened]... reece are in so much bother with their debt because they cannot control the value of the Euro.
Originally posted by wittywonkaFrederick Bastiate in the 1840s wrote dozens of really humorous stories of the folly of subsidies and protectionism, and all showed that the consumer and nation was ultimately worse off for both practices, however, whatever is true of oil, is also true of farming, pharma, auto manufacturing, clean energy, and so on.
As one of the articles I posted mentioned, the consumer-level price increase would be miniscule--an average increase of $2 per person per year. I find it hard to work up a sweat over paying an additional $0.0055 per day. So again, I agree, that prices probably won't go down after eliminating the subsidies, but I don't see how they're going to skyrocket, either.
Originally posted by kevcvs57Laymen generally consider inflation to be rising prices at retail. Economists generally view those rising prices as a symptom of inflation, actual inflation being increases in the supply of money circulating in a market, nation or the world.
It may be different in the U.S but in Britain 'Inflation' refers to the rate of rise in the prices of retail goods and services. It is measured in percentage points i.e if the average annual cost of living is $21000 as opposed to $20000 last year that is an annual inflation rate of 5%.
Clearly it is strongly related to the value of your currency against ...[text shortened]... reece are in so much bother with their debt because they cannot control the value of the Euro.
There are lot's of tricks and power plays to manipulate and direct the effects of inflation and hide the effects from those it harms the most, consumers in the poorest economies, and poorest parts of any country.
Originally posted by Metal BrainActually a gold standard doesn't require that there be enough gold to handle every transaction, anymore than there need be an equivalent number of $1 federal reserve notes.
It should also be considered that the money supply must be increased simply to prevent deflation. One of the reasons the gold standard was abandoned was because the supply of gold could not be increased to keep up with the growth rate. This means the ratio between all currencies in the world and gold are increasingly wider in gap. That alone should justi ...[text shortened]... onto that and one could argue gold [and including silver] is undervalued rather than overvalued.
What a gold standard does is make the holder of paper able to claim in gold the value stated on the paper. If he can without trouble, he will seldom do so, as paper is easier to handle. If he can't, then runs on banks result, based on rational lack of confidence in banks or a banking system which can't redeem its paper with specie.
An interesting and informative read on this is The History of Banking in America, Murray Rothbard.
Originally posted by normbenignI know it doesn't. That is the nature of fractional reserve banking. It has always been that way. That is also why inflation from an increase in the money supply can result with a gold standard as it has done in the past. Sooner or later it forces a country to default on it's promise to redeem in gold just as the USA did. If a country intends to do that sooner or later anyway there is little incentive to hold back on the printing of money.
Actually a gold standard doesn't require that there be enough gold to handle every transaction, anymore than there need be an equivalent number of $1 federal reserve notes.
What a gold standard does is make the holder of paper able to claim in gold the value stated on the paper. If he can without trouble, he will seldom do so, as paper is easier to ha ...[text shortened]... teresting and informative read on this is The History of Banking in America, Murray Rothbard.
That does not change the ratio of gold to currency though. I stand by my statement.