Today, you are most certainly not obliged to use US dollars. You can use any currency you wish, provided the other party in the transaction agrees. You can take payments in beans, Swiss francs, gold or oil.
False. The government will not enforce such a payment and will enforce payment in legal tender instead, at the rate its courts determine. Also it will accuse you of money laundering, and you will not be able to pay into its coffers in anything other than USD.
Gold is a commodity, and thus is not a safer store of wealth than currency -- if anything, it is less safe, since there are fewer controls over the world supply of gold then there are over the supply of currency.
Do the laws of physics look to you less reliable than some government regulation, or constitution for that matter? You cannot just add zeroes to gold, nor print it, nor bring about a big increase in its quantity without some heavy mining.
Allow the market to work in the security, police and court industry. Everyone agreed to recover the property, except the one that's *supposed* to be interested in it. Here's how:
Gandhi? "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind"? We are not barbarians.
We are not Nina's heirs either. We do not get to decide that he should not be killed in essentially the same way he killed his wife. That mercy is not ours to give, but the victims'.
Such a voluntary deal would maybe be very very useful. The point of a patent is that it is not voluntary. The patent office examiner decides for everybody else on this arrangement and whether to grant it or not.
The formula for Coca Cola has not died with anyone, and besides, there are several beverages just like it. I see no agression that needs a law.
As they should be able to. Any sovereign nation has the right to control who and what enters the country.
All well... you seem to know something about the subject, maybe YAAL. Of course, the above is a political judgment of value. Does it not suffice to see that a laptop is entering the country? Forcing you to reveal its contents doesn't follow. With your reasoning you can then advocate cavity search upon entering the country as a legitimate "right" of the State.
For example, you don't have to provide access for someone in a ventilator, because that would be impractical, but you do have to provide access for someone in a wheelchair, because it's really not all that hard.
That's why it is a bad law. Who gets to decide? Then let the owner decide, not write some law...
It's time the government's budget were capped at the rate of inflation making allowances only for population growth. It's time they learned how to manage their expenses like the rest of us have to.
The government budget deficit IS the cause of the growth of the money supply and of chronic inflation. Remember they can monetize their debt (create account or actual paper dollars).
But you're right. It is about time they learn to run without a budget deficit. Like we all do.
So, 5 years ago, Tb-E was 5 years away, and now its 7 years away. So by 2015, it should be about 10 years away, and by 2025 it should be about 14 years away, etc.
There's nothing stopping people from using gold as a medium of exchange. The private ownership, possession, and exchange of commodities, including precious metals such as gold, is totally legal.
Say that tho NORFED, who was raided. You also conveniently forget that it was illegal from the 30's up to the 70's, exactly when the government needed to make gold possesion illegal. Also, you cannot enforce a contract specifying gold, your party can easily default and then claim to compensate you with fiat, the legal system will not enforce your choice of another means of exchange.
If you honestly consider fiat money valueless, then it logically follows that you won't mind giving it all to me. So how about it? Email me.
It is valueless as a free enterprise money, however I am forced to receive it, forced to pay taxes with it, and forced so set my prices in it. I am forced to use it and keep it. If fiat moeny has value and is a good solution, how come there is a monopoly? Try having several firms produce it and see hyperinflation come.
If it is so valuable, will you take 1000 Hugonz from me in exchange for 1000 Federal Reserve Notes? Email me.
Incidentally, the myth of the gold standard being some sort of free enterprise money is bunk. The same legal tender laws that give fiat currency its value are what originally created and propped up the gold standard. Before federal laws changed, silver backed much of the currency due to bimetallism.
Simply false. Do you think it is coincidence that before any legal tender laws were written, pretty much everyone in the world traded in gold or silver? Don't you recognize that all international trade, between countries that recognized not a single law passed by another, was carried out in precious metals. The fact that everyone accepted it because they expected everybody else to accept it is what makes it money. Legal tender was never needed for that.
It is all about not trusting the government to debase currency by increasing the money supply.
I hate to break it to you, but mining gold increases the money supply under a gold standard, and mining silver increases the money supply under bimetallism (the gold/silver standard). One point that you gold bugs always like to harp on is that "the government" controls the money supply. It's the Federal Reserve that controls the money supply, and their decisions are completely independent of what the Congress or President decide to do. Other times, gold bugs try to claim that the Federal Reserve isn't part of the government, which exaggerates things the other way.
So is the Fed part of the Government or not, according to your views?
No one can mine millions out of thin air. You can print as many zeros as you want, at minimal cost. Also, there isn't a monopoly on gold mining or import. If you're for the free market (which I suspect you are) then these reasons should be enough.
Do you think it is wise to trust the government with your money?
Considering that governments have issued currency and had the power to pass legal tender laws by one means or another since ancient civilization, this is kind of a settled issue, isn't it?
So because it can legislate you consider it wise to trust them? I would say the other way around.
They have also had the power to wreck money since ancient times (think of recalling gold coins and recoining with less metal, thus creating and spending money for wars) As you say, they have issued money, but at the same time they have always debased it. And specially in modern times they have proved not to be trustworthy: money crises and inflation in all continents: Argentina, Germany, Zimbabwe come to mind, and the record of the U.S. is not good, either.
Yes, it is a settled issue. No central authority is not to be trusted with money. They will use your confidence to advance their own interest, just live everybody else.
How about the market distortion of moving wealth from one sector of the population to another (creation of money hurts savers and employees and rewards government contractors)?
How about the market distortion of a nonproductive actor making money out of nothing, giving no valuable voluntary service?
How about the market distortion of forcing economic actors to accept said fiat money even if they consider it valueless?
The term "gold standard" is a shorthand for "commodity standard" or "free enterprise money". It is all about not trusting the government to debase currency by increasing the money supply. Do you think it is wise to trust the government with your money?
You want to talk about an undistorted market, then let it choose its medium of exchange. Normally that medium has been gold or another precious metal. Let's give a shot and see what the market chooses. Anything else is central planning and social engineering.
The US moved away from the Gold Standard before the Great Depression. It happened officialy only until Nixon, but the expansion of the money supply started much earlier.
In the nineteenth century, prices usually fell, not rose. Take a look at www.mises.org
Non-RIAA does not mean free. There's paypal and live performances and many options to profit.
The RIAA performs a valuable function for those who don't want to get into the financial stuff of profitiong from music. But since they're abusing their position, the value of their services is going down and down and down everyday.
Slashdot Mirror
If only our politicians were a 1/10th of the man that he was.
They would not be politicians. They would be too moral for that, not craving power over running other people's lives and all that.
"What are you trying to tell me? That I can dodge bullets?"
One last point, won't charging a bunch of cars require all of the coal plants to go into overdrive?
You won't have a bunch of electric cars in the streets overnight, so the utility companies will have a chance to adjust gradually
Today, you are most certainly not obliged to use US dollars. You can use any currency you wish, provided the other party in the transaction agrees. You can take payments in beans, Swiss francs, gold or oil.
False. The government will not enforce such a payment and will enforce payment in legal tender instead, at the rate its courts determine. Also it will accuse you of money laundering, and you will not be able to pay into its coffers in anything other than USD.
The reason people abandoned the gold standard was because of two things[...]
People did not abandon the gold standard, governments did. Otherwise there would have been no point in making gold ownership a felony.
Gold is a commodity, and thus is not a safer store of wealth than currency -- if anything, it is less safe, since there are fewer controls over the world supply of gold then there are over the supply of currency.
Do the laws of physics look to you less reliable than some government regulation, or constitution for that matter? You cannot just add zeroes to gold, nor print it, nor bring about a big increase in its quantity without some heavy mining.
Allow the market to work in the security, police and court industry. Everyone agreed to recover the property, except the one that's *supposed* to be interested in it. Here's how:
http://www.freedomainradio.com/Traffic_Jams/stateless_society_take_2_320.mp3
Well, it's the only kind of reparation the injust court system allows: closure.
We are not Nina's heirs either. We do not get to decide that he should not be killed in essentially the same way he killed his wife. That mercy is not ours to give, but the victims'.
You should have begun your post with IAAML (I am a movie lawyer)...
Such a voluntary deal would maybe be very very useful. The point of a patent is that it is not voluntary. The patent office examiner decides for everybody else on this arrangement and whether to grant it or not.
The formula for Coca Cola has not died with anyone, and besides, there are several beverages just like it. I see no agression that needs a law.
All well... you seem to know something about the subject, maybe YAAL. Of course, the above is a political judgment of value. Does it not suffice to see that a laptop is entering the country? Forcing you to reveal its contents doesn't follow. With your reasoning you can then advocate cavity search upon entering the country as a legitimate "right" of the State.
That's why it is a bad law. Who gets to decide? Then let the owner decide, not write some law...
Cheap(er) credit than private lenders are willing to grant is always bad. Its "economic stimulus" is unsound and will be liquidated in a recession.
The government budget deficit IS the cause of the growth of the money supply and of chronic inflation. Remember they can monetize their debt (create account or actual paper dollars).
But you're right. It is about time they learn to run without a budget deficit. Like we all do.
All that information IS necessary for the government to provide all the services they provide today in a reasonable and efficient manner.
So arguably they've never got any information...
Rename it to Scripple. That's it!
So, 5 years ago, Tb-E was 5 years away, and now its 7 years away. So by 2015, it should be about 10 years away, and by 2025 it should be about 14 years away, etc.
Talk about exponential backoff...
Ok, the whole retroviral thingie.. and .. legalize drugs. I'd think no one has got HIV from an insulin shot. Same with heroin, if it were legal.
There's nothing stopping people from using gold as a medium of exchange. The private ownership, possession, and exchange of commodities, including precious metals such as gold, is totally legal.
Say that tho NORFED, who was raided. You also conveniently forget that it was illegal from the 30's up to the 70's, exactly when the government needed to make gold possesion illegal. Also, you cannot enforce a contract specifying gold, your party can easily default and then claim to compensate you with fiat, the legal system will not enforce your choice of another means of exchange.
If you honestly consider fiat money valueless, then it logically follows that you won't mind giving it all to me. So how about it? Email me.
It is valueless as a free enterprise money, however I am forced to receive it, forced to pay taxes with it, and forced so set my prices in it. I am forced to use it and keep it. If fiat moeny has value and is a good solution, how come there is a monopoly? Try having several firms produce it and see hyperinflation come.
If it is so valuable, will you take 1000 Hugonz from me in exchange for 1000 Federal Reserve Notes? Email me.
Incidentally, the myth of the gold standard being some sort of free enterprise money is bunk. The same legal tender laws that give fiat currency its value are what originally created and propped up the gold standard. Before federal laws changed, silver backed much of the currency due to bimetallism.
Simply false. Do you think it is coincidence that before any legal tender laws were written, pretty much everyone in the world traded in gold or silver? Don't you recognize that all international trade, between countries that recognized not a single law passed by another, was carried out in precious metals. The fact that everyone accepted it because they expected everybody else to accept it is what makes it money. Legal tender was never needed for that.
It is all about not trusting the government to debase currency by increasing the money supply.
I hate to break it to you, but mining gold increases the money supply under a gold standard, and mining silver increases the money supply under bimetallism (the gold/silver standard). One point that you gold bugs always like to harp on is that "the government" controls the money supply. It's the Federal Reserve that controls the money supply, and their decisions are completely independent of what the Congress or President decide to do. Other times, gold bugs try to claim that the Federal Reserve isn't part of the government, which exaggerates things the other way.
So is the Fed part of the Government or not, according to your views? No one can mine millions out of thin air. You can print as many zeros as you want, at minimal cost. Also, there isn't a monopoly on gold mining or import. If you're for the free market (which I suspect you are) then these reasons should be enough.
Do you think it is wise to trust the government with your money?
Considering that governments have issued currency and had the power to pass legal tender laws by one means or another since ancient civilization, this is kind of a settled issue, isn't it?
So because it can legislate you consider it wise to trust them? I would say the other way around. They have also had the power to wreck money since ancient times (think of recalling gold coins and recoining with less metal, thus creating and spending money for wars) As you say, they have issued money, but at the same time they have always debased it. And specially in modern times they have proved not to be trustworthy: money crises and inflation in all continents: Argentina, Germany, Zimbabwe come to mind, and the record of the U.S. is not good, either.
Yes, it is a settled issue. No central authority is not to be trusted with money. They will use your confidence to advance their own interest, just live everybody else.
How about the market distortion of moving wealth from one sector of the population to another (creation of money hurts savers and employees and rewards government contractors)?
How about the market distortion of a nonproductive actor making money out of nothing, giving no valuable voluntary service?
How about the market distortion of forcing economic actors to accept said fiat money even if they consider it valueless?
The term "gold standard" is a shorthand for "commodity standard" or "free enterprise money". It is all about not trusting the government to debase currency by increasing the money supply. Do you think it is wise to trust the government with your money?
You want to talk about an undistorted market, then let it choose its medium of exchange. Normally that medium has been gold or another precious metal. Let's give a shot and see what the market chooses. Anything else is central planning and social engineering.
The US moved away from the Gold Standard before the Great Depression. It happened officialy only until Nixon, but the expansion of the money supply started much earlier.
In the nineteenth century, prices usually fell, not rose. Take a look at www.mises.org
Nice jingle. Could I have some music along with it?
What "vital institutions" are you talking about? I suspect you have no clue.
Double of a small number is still a small number.
Nah, in base 2, it's an order of magnitude higher!
Non-RIAA does not mean free. There's paypal and live performances and many options to profit.
The RIAA performs a valuable function for those who don't want to get into the financial stuff of profitiong from music. But since they're abusing their position, the value of their services is going down and down and down everyday.