It's just a label so that when the United States government does the same it's not communism and therefore all right. The left/right, comminist/fascist labels are irrelevant.
Here's the relevant chart. Screw GDP. GDP is a function of money creation... From debt creation. Jeez.
Federal debt (all debt growth) is an exponential curve. You notice Clinton did NOT reduce the debt, or even stop it growing, he merely slowed it a little.
You also notice that 8.3% fitted curve, means that the more recent 8.3% increase numbers are much larger than the earlier 8.3% increase numbers.
All the governments are the same. 8.3% increase. Obama's 2.5 trillion increase? 2 years.... Then it'll be 18.3 trillion, then 19.7 etc etc. Doubling every 8 years.
The only reason the GOP have run up 80% is they were most recently in power and therefore have been subject to the most recent part of the exponential curve.
The fact that the debt increases exponentially (and it is an almost perfect fit) means that both parties have increased it by the same percentage when in power.
That is... Both parties spend like there is no consequence. They are the same.
That means all governments have increased it by about the same percentage. Go watch Albert Bartlett on growth.
Bush. Reagan, Clinton, Obama. Republican, Democrat. All, completely irrelevant, they are all the same. Which makes perfect sense when you see that their contributors are the same people; the US government has been bought and paid for for decades.
The US government spends, what? 40% (and growing) more than it takes in?
The US hasn't deserved a AAA rating for years. Hell there are trillions in junk MBS which S&P rated as AAA. All you have to do is look at the direction of the chart to see if it is sustainable. Screw the rating agencies.
China doesn't seriously care about US debt
on
Debt Deal Reached
·
· Score: 1
They care about having customers to employ their workers. Past money spent is under the bridge. Sure they'll pick up commodities where they can with it, but really, by the time they finish spending it, the dollar is going to be toilet paper. It's the real stuff like the jobs, the factories, the infrastructure etc that they were after, and you gave them that... LOL. Paid them to take it.
Thing is, Americans are no longer the customers they were. So China has started appreciating their currency and is actively diversifying out of US debt.
Customers? There are 1.2 billion Chinese. Bout ~400 million modernised, that's more consumers than America, ~800 million still to go.
Basically, you've been betrayed. You have elected traitors, you work for traitors, but in a democracy you get the government you deserve.
Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting. -- Sun Tzu
China won, without a shot being fired. It is now only a matter of time, in less than a decade, as your public debt (never mind private and commercial debt) grows larger than 100% of GDP, China will become the pre-eminent nation on the planet... And it took only 50 years, basically only 1 generation, the Boomers, to do it.
Look up Fractional Reserve Banking. Money (credit) is borrowed into existence. When you take a loan out, your bank creates money and gives it to you. They didn't have the money before the loan was made.
I would argue that the people who lose are the ones with more dollars...
Yes, or those who's wealth is stored in dollars. The rich don't store their wealth in dollars. They store it in assets; Stocks, property, commodities. The poor on the other hand if they have anything spare at all will be stored as cash in a bank account, where inflation will erode the value. Inflation will also erode the value of their wages.
As for assets inflating in value that's not true, because at the same time your asset is inflating, everything else is inflating too
Nope. inflation is caused by money. Money does not move evenly everywhere. It goes to the next hot thing. Housing, tech, bonds, whatever. This is why trading works. It's effectively a Ponzi scheme, the first people into the correct sector see huge gains, the people late to the party simply get to hold the empty bag when it collapses.
Think about 5 trillion hitting the economy. Where does it go first? For the first spender, there is no inflation at all, it's only when the recipients of the money see that there is lots of it that the prices start going up. It spreads like a wave.
There is approximately 55 trillion dollars of public, private and commercial debt in America, and 14 trillion dollars worth of money. Americans are only just managing to pay the interest, and only by taking out bigger loans to do so.
There IS going to be significant and sustained inflation to resolve the situation. Irrelevant whether the US government technically defaults or not.
And wipe out the real economy even faster, which is already tanking.
It's pretty clear that the Fed or a proxy of the Fed is already buying a significant percentage of new issues in order to keep the interest rates down.
The first person who spends the devalued money does so without inflation, it is only as the money enters circulation that the inflation becomes apparent and the value of the money decreases. The people who lose are those at the bottom of the pyramid, furthest away from the fountain of money. Typically those on fixed incomes, the poor, pensioners, wage earners who's wages increase at a lower rate than the rate of devaluation etc.
Those who benefit on the other hand, are those who hold assets, they simply inflate in value. Stocks, shares, houses, commodities; oil, gold etc. There is nothing magical about "growth" or stock market increases, it's all simple devaluation of the currency.
it would only increase inflation if it hit the economy.
The whole point is to allow the government to spend more money.
Anyway. It's ridiculous, won't happen. US bonds would become worthless overnight and the US dollar would die in fiery hyperinflation if the government attempted to inflate away it's debts in this manner.
What they will do instead is try to inflate away the debts without people noticing, the same as the UK is doing. i.e. Over 5-10 years.
The concept of a non centralized electronic form of money could effectively remove the ability of government and banks to tax people through the issue of debt & through inflation. it would remove the central authority and control authorizing and monitoring transactions.
At the moment, our money is issued as debt, you may not have thought about why that is the case, but it is quite deliberate. So I am of the opinion that there are some very wealthy and powerful people paying Slashdot to disparage Bitcoin. They don't want even the idea to become popular never mind the particular implementation itself.
Otherwise, bitcoin is as you say completely irrelevant. Why would anyone bother?
Slashdot Mirror
It's around 0.0001 times what they gave to the banks for free.
How much do the oil companies get?
How much do the agribusinesses get to make ethanol?
It's laughable.
Good for you! Keep up the optimism. You must still be young.
No really. It's for your own good.
You might want to think about the meaning of the word "better" in this context.
Canadian tar sands that everyone are depending on to save America from peak oil;
http://s.ngm.com/2009/03/canadian-oil-sands/img/candian-oil-sands-615.jpg
It's just a label so that when the United States government does the same it's not communism and therefore all right. The left/right, comminist/fascist labels are irrelevant.
The question is authoritarian or free.
Here's the relevant chart. Screw GDP. GDP is a function of money creation... From debt creation. Jeez.
Federal debt (all debt growth) is an exponential curve. You notice Clinton did NOT reduce the debt, or even stop it growing, he merely slowed it a little.
http://www.project.org/images/graphs/US%20National%20Debt%20.jpg
And here's one with an 8.3% pa increase exponential curve fitted to it.
http://8m.quarkweb.com/images/FedDebt_02b.png
You also notice that 8.3% fitted curve, means that the more recent 8.3% increase numbers are much larger than the earlier 8.3% increase numbers.
All the governments are the same. 8.3% increase. Obama's 2.5 trillion increase? 2 years.... Then it'll be 18.3 trillion, then 19.7 etc etc. Doubling every 8 years.
The only reason the GOP have run up 80% is they were most recently in power and therefore have been subject to the most recent part of the exponential curve.
The fact that the debt increases exponentially (and it is an almost perfect fit) means that both parties have increased it by the same percentage when in power.
That is... Both parties spend like there is no consequence. They are the same.
That means all governments have increased it by about the same percentage. Go watch Albert Bartlett on growth.
Bush. Reagan, Clinton, Obama. Republican, Democrat. All, completely irrelevant, they are all the same. Which makes perfect sense when you see that their contributors are the same people; the US government has been bought and paid for for decades.
The US government spends, what? 40% (and growing) more than it takes in?
The US hasn't deserved a AAA rating for years. Hell there are trillions in junk MBS which S&P rated as AAA. All you have to do is look at the direction of the chart to see if it is sustainable. Screw the rating agencies.
They care about having customers to employ their workers. Past money spent is under the bridge. Sure they'll pick up commodities where they can with it, but really, by the time they finish spending it, the dollar is going to be toilet paper. It's the real stuff like the jobs, the factories, the infrastructure etc that they were after, and you gave them that... LOL. Paid them to take it.
Thing is, Americans are no longer the customers they were. So China has started appreciating their currency and is actively diversifying out of US debt.
Customers? There are 1.2 billion Chinese. Bout ~400 million modernised, that's more consumers than America, ~800 million still to go.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/43877263/
Basically, you've been betrayed. You have elected traitors, you work for traitors, but in a democracy you get the government you deserve.
Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting. -- Sun Tzu
China won, without a shot being fired. It is now only a matter of time, in less than a decade, as your public debt (never mind private and commercial debt) grows larger than 100% of GDP, China will become the pre-eminent nation on the planet... And it took only 50 years, basically only 1 generation, the Boomers, to do it.
It's that simple.
Look up Fractional Reserve Banking. Money (credit) is borrowed into existence. When you take a loan out, your bank creates money and gives it to you. They didn't have the money before the loan was made.
No, really it does.
e.g.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/04/110427171638.htm
Unmotivated people are unlikely to screw around with their computers.
I would argue that the people who lose are the ones with more dollars...
Yes, or those who's wealth is stored in dollars. The rich don't store their wealth in dollars. They store it in assets; Stocks, property, commodities. The poor on the other hand if they have anything spare at all will be stored as cash in a bank account, where inflation will erode the value. Inflation will also erode the value of their wages.
As for assets inflating in value that's not true, because at the same time your asset is inflating, everything else is inflating too
Nope. inflation is caused by money. Money does not move evenly everywhere. It goes to the next hot thing. Housing, tech, bonds, whatever. This is why trading works. It's effectively a Ponzi scheme, the first people into the correct sector see huge gains, the people late to the party simply get to hold the empty bag when it collapses.
Think about 5 trillion hitting the economy. Where does it go first? For the first spender, there is no inflation at all, it's only when the recipients of the money see that there is lots of it that the prices start going up. It spreads like a wave.
There is approximately 55 trillion dollars of public, private and commercial debt in America, and 14 trillion dollars worth of money. Americans are only just managing to pay the interest, and only by taking out bigger loans to do so.
There IS going to be significant and sustained inflation to resolve the situation. Irrelevant whether the US government technically defaults or not.
You only elected them. Someone else is paying them.
And wipe out the real economy even faster, which is already tanking.
It's pretty clear that the Fed or a proxy of the Fed is already buying a significant percentage of new issues in order to keep the interest rates down.
Next big paradigm shift.
Austrians: Even Milton Friedman did not think that theory had much to do with reality
That theory? What theory is Austrian theory?
It is most definitely a tax.
The first person who spends the devalued money does so without inflation, it is only as the money enters circulation that the inflation becomes apparent and the value of the money decreases. The people who lose are those at the bottom of the pyramid, furthest away from the fountain of money. Typically those on fixed incomes, the poor, pensioners, wage earners who's wages increase at a lower rate than the rate of devaluation etc.
Those who benefit on the other hand, are those who hold assets, they simply inflate in value. Stocks, shares, houses, commodities; oil, gold etc. There is nothing magical about "growth" or stock market increases, it's all simple devaluation of the currency.
it would only increase inflation if it hit the economy.
The whole point is to allow the government to spend more money.
Anyway. It's ridiculous, won't happen. US bonds would become worthless overnight and the US dollar would die in fiery hyperinflation if the government attempted to inflate away it's debts in this manner.
What they will do instead is try to inflate away the debts without people noticing, the same as the UK is doing. i.e. Over 5-10 years.
Just like the government killed the previous currency alternative, Beanie Babies.
I don't recall Slashdot running weekly, or daily Beenie Baby stories.
As I said. Bitcoin is completely irrelevant, it's bull. So why all the attention? Answer, they are getting paid.
The rich tax the populace by sitting on their inflating assets.
HTH.
The concept of a non centralized electronic form of money could effectively remove the ability of government and banks to tax people through the issue of debt & through inflation. it would remove the central authority and control authorizing and monitoring transactions.
At the moment, our money is issued as debt, you may not have thought about why that is the case, but it is quite deliberate.
So I am of the opinion that there are some very wealthy and powerful people paying Slashdot to disparage Bitcoin. They don't want even the idea to become popular never mind the particular implementation itself.
Otherwise, bitcoin is as you say completely irrelevant. Why would anyone bother?
As I understand it, it's quite legal for them, so they are probably complaining that their snouts are not in the trough any more.