Many economists predicted a recession would follow the economic boom. As far as a total economic collapse, that is not fact only speculation at this time. Those who disagree are the real knuckleheads.
|
|
|
The global Debt Clock
- Thread starter BLUE_KAWI
- Start date
The danger with any education is did they teach you to think or what to think... If anyone is taught that a specific economic model is the right model and they buy into it they will make all the mistakes said model has. On the other hand if they are are taught the model and how to look for answers beyond the model or where the model is broken...
In the early days of my career I ran across more than a few well educated old timers (some actual electrical engineers) that insisted that electricity flows from positive to negative. That is what they were taught and they were taught to not question it. It happens in every profession.
Back on topic, any choice (buying gold, bullets, whatever) should be based on what you think the end game is keeping in mind in a full economic/fiat currency collapse bags of gold are hard to run with. Gold is a hedge that will pay of when--only if you sell it at the right time.
I can't recall ever being forced to learn anything. Learning is a two way street - the school gives you the opportunity to learn, but the amount you learn, and what you learn, is to a great degree, up to you. The decision of being taught how to think, or what to think, resides with the student, not the teacher.
Entirely true to a point. In many cases to pass the course you have to do it their way. After enough of this it is possible (likely) many people will consider that as the only way. In the end it does depend on the person.
For economists most I assume are not but I do here many insist they believe in X "school of economics" and that is that.
Certainly you have to play the game to get the marks, but that's totally separate from "learning something". I think we both get what we're saying.
As for the "X school of economics", almost everyone in economics "believes" in a certain school. This doesn't mean an actual school, like University of Toronto or University of Chicago. This means they subscribe to a certain school of thought. So, for example, there are Keynesians, who subscribe to the Keynsian school of thought. Then there are monetarists, who subscribe to more of a Milton Friedman school of thought. This doesn't mean they learned economics from these teachers, it just means that as they studied economics, they came to believe that one or another theory is more correct than the other. Most people absorb a variety of schools of thought, and form their own opinion of what works in a particular situation.
This happens in almost every field of study. There are competing theories, and students of the discipline usually fall into a certain school of thought. In motorcycling, there are people who fall into the v-twin school, or the inline-four school.
Economics is interesting because there is no laboratory in which theories can be tested by experimentation. The only way to test a theory is through real-world implementation. Because of this, the results of the experiment are always in dispute, and the schools of thought never really get a clear answer as to whether or not they're correct. Keynesians will tell you that their theories have proven correct since WWII. Monetarists will tell you that Keynesian economics have been a failure over the long run. It's hard to find objective evidence proving either camp definitively right or wrong.
But that doesn't mean that none of them know what they're talking about, and that their theories can be easily discounted by reading a bunch of articles. That is the worst kind of blindness and thoughtless followership.
imkruzen
Well-known member
At best, economics is a loose collection of observations about past experience related to matters economists believe are in their field of interest. The rest of economics (i.e. the math) is simply a collection of techniques to prevent people from figuring out how little there is at the core of what economists really know. Has nothing to do with trades, exact science or skill sets. You read their material and follow events to determine whether the individual is on track.
QE to infinity!
Wow, you really are paranoid. You think other people have dual personalities!
You're still not listening. Gold is not a currency. Banks do not hold gold as currency. They hold it as a currency reserve, an asset, a store of value. There are several things you can call gold. Currency is not one of them.
And for the record, I don't put a lot of weight in formal economics publications written by people who don't know the difference between "lose" and "loose".
Last edited:
I know you don't know what currency is. Now I'm becoming convinced you don't even know what economics is.
imkruzen
Well-known member
J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. announced on February 7, 2011 that it will accept physical gold as collateral for investors that want to make short-term borrowings of cash or securities.
Presenting gold to satisfy demands for performance bond collateral has been allowed on the London CME in a limited way since October 2009. As of November 22, 2010, the Intercontinental Exchange Inc. (ICE) has accepted gold bullion as collateral on all credit default swaps and energy transactions.
I don't recall the G-20 declaring gold a new currency. Yet JPMorgan Chase and a couple of financial market exchanges have effectively declared that gold is an alternative currency.
In other words, gold is money.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/gold...accepts-bullion-as-money-2011-2#ixzz1VQI4KIZ9
Explaining to Untermeyer the difference between credit and money, the man who prevented a United States Treasury default in 1895 and saved the banking system from collapse in 1907 replied: "Money is gold, and nothing else."
QE to infinity!
Last edited:
From this statement we can determine you dont have an understanding of what economics is as taught in our education system. Yes, you have said you dont believe in this, but you clearly dont understand what you claim to not believe.
A lot of "theories" in both micro and macro economics make a lot of sense to the majority of the population and prove themselves to be 100% accurate on a daily basis.
Your suggestion that economics is such a mystery only deminstrates your lack of understanding.
Do you actually believe those who you follow are the only ones who know the causes of hyperinflation? Do you realize the causes, and historic examples are taught in most basic courses?
They also teach why we have outgrown gold as a currency.
imkruzen
Well-known member
One thing that I'm sure of, is that one school of thought is incorrect. The wrong one is the one that causes decline in wealth.
QE to infinity!
imkruzen
Well-known member
Written by a well know figure.
"In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value. If there were, the government would have to make its holding illegal, as was done in the case of gold. If everyone decided, for example, to convert all his bank deposits to silver or copper or any other good, and thereafter declined to accept checks as payment for goods, bank deposits would lose their purchasing power and government-created bank credit would be worthless as a claim on goods. The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves.
This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold
standard."
Article:
QE to infinity!
"In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value. If there were, the government would have to make its holding illegal, as was done in the case of gold. If everyone decided, for example, to convert all his bank deposits to silver or copper or any other good, and thereafter declined to accept checks as payment for goods, bank deposits would lose their purchasing power and government-created bank credit would be worthless as a claim on goods. The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves.
This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold
standard."
Article:
QE to infinity!
You don't say.
Well, that removes all doubt. You really don't know what money is.
Just because you can use something as collateral, doesn't mean that it is money. Let me ask you this: if my house is collateral for my mortgage, does that mean that my house is money?
The tirade against gold? Now gold has a persecution complex? Who is embarking on a tirade against gold. The only person here on a tirade is you.
imkruzen
Well-known member
I didn't write the article I just posted what others are seeing. JPM tends to differ, as do the CB's that are buying the stuff for some reason. Your house is a non-portable asset (exchangeable for fiat) or liability depending on the equity in it. You can't ship it for payment, gold is transportable and accepted in any country in exchange for local fiat. That is the reason for the preference. Fiat is backed by nothing and is exchangeable for goods and services as long as there is confidence in the paper. Gold rises when confidence begins to dwindle in the underlying currency and Gov. Policies. Judging by the barometer of faith in fiat, I have observed that the confidence in fiat is not positive.
QE to infinity!
imkruzen
Well-known member
I understood it as a tirade against fiat paper. Did you read it?
There are more than 2 schools of thought when it comes to economics.
You're not really making sense any more. No I didn't read it - your link doesn't work.
imkruzen
Well-known member
Must be your browser. The link works fine.
Criticizing the contents of an article you didn't read is just bias ignorance.
In the event that wish to discover that it is your post that makes the incorrect interpretation of what the article pertains to, here is the link.
Enjoy.
http://www.usagold.com/gildedopinion/greenspan.html
QE to infinity!
|
|
|
|
|