CABAL OF NATIONS PLANNING SWITCH FROM DOLLAR - THIS IS HUGE

[rawbones]

I don't have time to read the entire thread and its probable fucked up twist, But for the foreseeable future the dollar will remain the reserve currency. Oil doesn't have shit to do with it. Oil can be bought in dollars and settled / converted to any currency at any time. In other words, Oil is sold and at that point the selling country can choose to hold their reserves in any currency they please. Quit believing this garbage spewed by people that are motivated by their own personal interest.
There are many models and theories regarding currencies but a few things have NEVER changed; GDP, Debt, Political Stability. Now of course you have fiscal and monetary policy which effects shorter term trends but GDP, Debt, P.S. are the primary levers.
Compared to the rest of the world the US pwns in what counts. End of fucking story.

China?, don't make me fucking laugh. Infant economy and a vast land full of peasants. China hustlers and Gold bugs are cut from the same cloth, utter bullshit. Have you ever dealt with the Chinese? Those fuckers will suck the shit out of your ass for a penny and then stab you in the back. No one on this planet trust them and there is damn good reason. China has very little political clout and won't be effecting shit.
Been listening to this shit for 25 years, 1st it was Japan, then the Euro, then the Amero and now its fucking China and a secret CABAL of Instability. WTF!

Having said that, the dollar could collapse, in fact will collapse if our course of borrowing does not change. BUT it is more likely we will see a serious event elsewhere, which could spread around the globe.
The dollar gets a lot of attention; as it should, but when you look at the big factors as mentioned above the dollar is king. Make no mistake, if forced to congress could enact legislation that would run the dollar sky high, the Fed could do it too, BUT like every country on the Globe we want our currency weak for exports to massage the pain of the lack of consumer demand.
Global instability is rampant, given the condition of the Global banking system it truly is a day by day situation. At any moment, the whole thing could come down. I'm not a fear monger either, but its starting to look like the events of last fall were just a preview of whats to come.

Guns & Tequilla bitches

btw..The trader in me tells me it may be time to look at a long USD trade. May be the trade of the year.

 

[LazyHippy]

Sorry if it's not clear, I'm not referring to the natural inequalities you speak off, but to economic inequality, caused by injustice.

So yes, we don't need to be naturally equal to start a free market, but the fact that some companies (individuals, states, etc) have an economic and political advantage means that the market will not be free.

For example, US pharma corps - lobbied politicians for decades, got things how they want. How can another company compete with them in a free market?

Or, customer support company in India. Much lower wages than the US or Europe, how could a US/European company compete with them in a free market?

The examples are endless, and these aren't natural inequalities but inequalities in wealth and power brought about by historical politics. Unless somehow this could be wiped away and everything be equal (economically, politically, socially, not physiologically) then true free markets couldn't exist.

 

[papajohn56]

I'll be laughing at you when those "nutjobs" are correct.

right, just like how you said 9/11 was an inside job. you're totally credible.

 

[guerilla]

G... I really am not getting at you personally, we see many things alike (drugs, politicians, even human nature). I just don't think free markets are realistic.

No one ran a 4 minute mile before Roger Bannister, but after he did it, several more people did it the next year. And every year since.

Oliver Wendell Holmes said,

Man's mind, once stretched by a new idea, never regains its original dimensions.

At one time, it was unrealistic to think that a person could run a 4 minute mile.

 

[AngryMac]

so how can we bank off this?

 

[oknetwork]

To replace $ you need another currency that will be backed up by large enough economy with stable and flexible political system and there is none out there besides US.

 

[LazyHippy]

No one ran a 4 minute mile before Roger Bannister, but after he did it, several more people did it the next year. And every year since.

Good job he wasn't competing against athletes who had been (genetically) engineered over decades with the help of their governments to beat any competition!

I'm with you though man, gotta be optimistic. Hopefully one day some small pharma company from Somalia will compete with Pfizer and their years of lobbying will count for nothing....

... or at the very least African cotton farmers will be able to compete with US ones without fucking subsidies getting in the way.

 

[guerilla]

OH FUCK ME I WANT TO WORK THIS IS ALL TURBOS FAULT.

So then who keeps the bad people from violating people's self ownership? Lack of government regulation won't solve the problem, because even assuming lack of regulation encourages competition, competition won't keep people(pimps for example) from enslaving/exploiting those that are weaker than them.

You got two things going on here.

1. Private defense. Private courts. That is a huge subtopic. If you are really interested, check out David Friedman's "Machinery of Freedom".

2. The prostitute can't go to the cops, because she is doing something illegal, so her pimp is operating outside the law, and assisted in his coercion, by the law. That's the problem with a monopoly defense system.

You can't stop bad people from doing bad things. What you can do is disincentivize bad things. Make them less profitable. For lack of a better phrase, make crime unprofitable.

Government regulation does create black markets, but that's not to say that the markets wouldn't exist just because they were not regulated or not outlawed. Prositution will always exist; there will always be some who will want to force the actions of others for their own gain; competition will not solve this problem unless you believe the people patronizing the exploited/exploiters will instead take their business to a place that has voluntary sex workers based on moral grounds(they wouldn't even necessarily know who's working against their will).

Ok, well we're mixing regulation and prohibition, and they are not necessarily the same thing. Pot is prohibited. Tobacco is regulated.

As above, private defense, new topic, too long today my friend.

Probably the best way to get rid of black markets is to decriminalize and regulate, like in the Netherlands or Nevada

That's a step in the right direction. Decriminalization would lower the risk premium found in black markets. But regulation is still privilege. If people are concerned with economic injustice (like Lazy) then they should be against monopoly privilege. After all, that's what a corporation is. A government granted legal monopoly in the form of corporate (legal) personhood.

 

[guerilla]

For example, US pharma corps - lobbied politicians for decades, got things how they want. How can another company compete with them in a free market?

Because they have a head start?

That didn't protect Chrysler and GM.

Or, customer support company in India. Much lower wages than the US or Europe, how could a US/European company compete with them in a free market?

If they don't have a comparative advantage, they shouldn't. They should outsource to India, and sell Indians german stuff like glockenspiels, heavy metal music and lederhosen.

You know the Germans always make good stuff!

Inequality is how we (naturally, instinctually) order activity in the market. It's why some people are good managers and some people are good planners, and some people are good cooks, and some people are mechanically inclined etc. To have a complex economy, built on cooperation, it is necessary to have labor allocated on these differences (the "division of labor")

As far as couldn't exist, whatever. I don't even know why we are arguing that. If you're not opposed to free markets, then there is no debate here. You're just less optimistic than I am.

 

[tygoldberg]

LOL@armchair geopoliticians on WF

What's plan to happen has already been planned to happen. All we need to do is STFU and enjoy the ride.



Edit- just hit a c-note will post tits when i'm on the puter.

 

[cyprex]

this has been in the works for years im pretty sure

 

[turbolapp]

Thanks for clarifying your position G. That was a good read and informative. I'm still a little hazy on the Law part of your Free Trade Trifecta, though. Some law is obvious like the human slavery is a violation of self ownership. But when it comes to the general laws of Free Trade, who would create them? Who would enforce them?

 

[LogicFlux]

1. Private defense. Private courts. That is a huge subtopic. If you are really interested, check out David Friedman's "Machinery of Freedom".

This idea scares the hell out of me. It's good there's almost no chance of this happening barring global nuclear war or some other huge catastrophe.
The silver lining would be getting to wear the mad max outfits without people looking at you funny for it.

 

[guerilla]

I'm trying to avoid going too far down the rabbit hole here.

But when it comes to the general laws of Free Trade, who would create them? Who would enforce them?

Well, much of the first international law was merchant law which was private. Anyway, I hate to do this to you, but this will give you better and more complete arguments than I can. I realize it is long, but you seem genuinely interested.

http://faculty.msb.edu/hasnasj/GTWebSite/MythWeb.htm

If you just want the key portions, sections XII and XIII.

This idea scares the hell out of me. It's good there's almost no chance of this happening barring global nuclear war or some other huge catastrophe.
The silver lining would be getting to wear the mad max outfits without people looking at you funny for it.

Actually, there is already private law. The law between different nations is a macro version of a private law system. There is no uniform code of global law (although some folks would like that).

I have to beg out of this. I have some essays if anyone is curious in reading on this further. Hit my up by PM, and I'd be happy to provide them.

 

[hellblazer]

Hellblazer is a good example of this, infact he said it in his OP, He said he doesn't want to be right and he really doesn't because then his time for enjoying the effects of his fear mongering would be over.

No, I don't want it to be right because the effects of true hyperinflation would mean millions of starving Americans and economic chaos here at home. Man, you're a retard. Do you do anything other than regurgitate Daily Kos talking points?

 

[johu]

(example: government regulation forcing banks to make mortgage loans to people that can't afford them)

You lost me at the claim that the government forced banks to make loans to people who couldn't afford them. If you're referring to the favorite right-wing talking point about the CRA, that was referring to racial discrimination of white people being approved for loans when minorities of the same credit/financial history were denied. Nobody went to the banks and told them to make certain risky mortgages - In fact, there were a number of banks (mostly smaller, regional banks & credit unions) that didn't make high risk mortgages at all. Nobody held a gun to those banks and forced them to make those loans, and those banks haven't been hurt like the Countrywides of the industry. Of course greed never occurs in this capitalist system, and the market never corrects things in the end...

 

[hellblazer]

You lost me at the claim that the government forced banks to make loans to people who couldn't afford them. If you're referring to the favorite right-wing talking point about the CRA, that was referring to racial discrimination of white people being approved for loans when minorities of the same credit/financial history were denied. Nobody went to the banks and told them to make certain risky mortgages - In fact, there were a number of banks (mostly smaller, regional banks & credit unions) that didn't make high risk mortgages at all. Nobody held a gun to those banks and forced them to make those loans, and those banks haven't been hurt like the Countrywides of the industry. Of course greed never occurs in this capitalist system, and the market never corrects things in the end...

You clearly don't know what you're talking about. When Clinton revised the Community Reinvestment Act in 1995, that legislation FORCED banks to lower their lending standards, regardless of race, sex, whatever. ACORN tried to justify it by whining about racism, but all it did was trigger the collapse of our economy. Bush was complicit, Obama was complicit, and now our economy's just getting worse and worse.

 

[johu]

You clearly don't know what you're talking about. When Clinton revised the Community Reinvestment Act in 1995, that legislation FORCED banks to lower their lending standards, regardless of race, sex, whatever. ACORN tried to justify it by whining about racism, but all it did was trigger the collapse of our economy. Bush was complicit, Obama was complicit, and now our economy's just getting worse and worse.

Last I checked, there was a president who presided over the country for 8 years between Clinton and Obama... Per your claim, please explain banks (like Zions Bank) that didn't screw themselves over with subprime mortgages.

 

[johu]

Edit: Last I checked, there was a president who presided over the country for 8 years between Clinton and Obama who had power to change things... If it was such a big liberal overreach of government, there were 8 years for a conservative to try and do something about it.

 

[LogicFlux]

Bush wasn't complicit though. Even though he gave a speech in 2002 about fannie to "increase their commitments to minority markets by 440 billion dollars".

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNqQx7sjoS8"]YouTube - Home Ownership and President Bush[/ame]


Oh and this graph showing inflation adjusted home prices rising almost $100k between 2002 and 2008 doesn't mean anything either.



Just more evidence to prove that republicans are always right and that's why jesus likes them best.

All the democratic presidents going back to FDR are obviously the ones who fucked up. It's not really their fault. It's just when you're a godless communist you tend to do stupid shit. You don't really know any better. I can't prove it but I think it's also somehow related to the rising influence of negro music.