It would seem that using the printing press on currency always leads to trouble ( inflation, assault on savings ect ) , can you ever justify printing money?
Dustin S. Jussila: It would seem that using the printing press on currency always leads to trouble ( inflation, assault on savings ect ) , can you ever justify printing money?
No.
Abstract liberty, like other mere abstractions, is not to be found.
- Edmund Burke
Juan:But we can treat banknotes just like any other good which means anyone can manufacture as many notes as he wants. It's interesting that Lord Rochester apparently didn't like that suggestion and retorted that banks would, like drug dealers (or generally gangsters) just literally kill the 'competition'... And probably Lord Rochester expects the courts to rule in favor of the banks suppressing competition, in the name of protecting their 'reputation'... Which means that Lord Rochester's "free banking" is no different than banks having a monopoly on the issuance of partially backed notes...
My point was that, like someone selling product on the street (say very pure heroin with a brand name label to it), if someone else starts using that name for a different product produced by a different person, he will be negotiated with and then strong armed if the problem persists. This is the way the real free market works - which is fine with me, but it seems others who like free markets don't like to face up to the dirtier side of the business.
The same situation exists for bank notes. Bank Co. of Rochester will have every justification for killing Juan if he starts issuing his own Rochester notes to people who think they are getting a Bank Co. of Rochester product.
The movie American Ganster had a very similar situation to what I'm talking about.
That situation could eventually lead to a type of court system to make it all a little more aesthetic, but reduce everything down to its core and it's all about staking your claim with a pointed gun.
existence is elsewhere
I'm not saying that the current banking system is perfect, but I am saying that it's better than warehouse pipe dreams in Rothbardia.
February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church. Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
Spideynw: banned:Banks don't have to issue credit they promise is backed by something. People can use banknotes as the commodity they're exchanging instead of as a reciept for the commodity. Well, anyone can issue notes, in a free society. If they are not backed by something, then no one will accept them, in a free society. So it is really pointless to talk about notes that have no backing.
banned:Banks don't have to issue credit they promise is backed by something. People can use banknotes as the commodity they're exchanging instead of as a reciept for the commodity.
Well, anyone can issue notes, in a free society. If they are not backed by something, then no one will accept them, in a free society. So it is really pointless to talk about notes that have no backing.
They accept them today. They accepted them in Scotand during the first half of the 19th century. It worked out great. The best of both worlds. Dynamic markets and free markets.
It's just that the gold bugs want neither.
Juan:I'm not saying that the current banking system is perfect, but I am saying that it's better than warehouse pipe dreams in Rothbardia. blah blah blah .... How about insurance ? Is that right ?? From $1400 to $10 ?
So you're using a five year window to judge an industry that has existed for 20 times that amount of years? Again, look at the statistical mean - if you know what statistics are.
Juan: Actually there is. If I offer 'credit' which is not backed by savings I'm offering a fraudulent product. No different from offering a car with no wheels and pretending it's a perfectly good car.
You're wrong here. "Perfectly good" is subjective. What you mean to say is "offering a car with no wheels and pretending it has wheels". Issuing bank notes is not fraudulent, unless you violate a contract with your depositers or explicitly mislead your customers. Simply giving out slips of paper that people can exchange in is wholly valid. Anyone who decided to invest in such a thing would be a fool, but that's beside the point.
Wilmot of Rochester:So you're using a five year window to judge an industry that has existed for 20 times that amount of years? Again, look at the statistical mean - if you know what statistics are.
The distant past is largely irrelevant. There are too many variables to account for.
For most of human history there has been slavery, or women have been denied sexual freedom and property rights.
Certainly you wouldn't argue for the mean in those trends, would you?
rochester:Talk about misrepresenting my point.
it's all about staking your claim with a pointed gun.
Wilmot of Rochester:They accept them today.
Because of something called Legal Tender and the IRS.
banned:You're wrong here. "Perfectly good" is subjective. What you mean to say is "offering a car with no wheels and pretending it has wheels".
Issuing bank notes is not fraudulent,
unless you violate a contract with your depositers or explicitly mislead your customers.
Simply giving out slips of paper that people can exchange in is wholly valid.
Anyone who decided to invest in such a thing would be a fool, but that's beside the point.
rochester:So you're using a five year window
liberty student: Wilmot of Rochester:So you're using a five year window to judge an industry that has existed for 20 times that amount of years? Again, look at the statistical mean - if you know what statistics are. The distant past is largely irrelevant. There are too many variables to account for. For most of human history there has been slavery, or women have been denied sexual freedom and property rights. Certainly you wouldn't argue for the mean in those trends, would you?
But we're talking about one industry of an economy for one century... 20 times five is 100. Slavery isn't really applicable and I don't know what voting rights have to do with the conversation.
Are you saying means aren't important?
Juan: rochester:So you're using a five year window Oh Boy.
Uh huh... Your point being what?
EDIT: It looks to me like circa 1995 the market has been above 30 more than it has been at 10.
Juan: LOL. I did not
LOL. I did not
LOL. Yes you did. What is it about the internet that makes people... Eh. Nevermind.
Juan: So, how did I misrepresent your point ? You said that. I repeated it, and now you say it again.
So, how did I misrepresent your point ? You said that. I repeated it, and now you say it again.
No. You left out the part about trademarks and misrepresentation itself.
Juan: The only thing you royally fail to grasp is that you are not talking about a free market. Perhaps you are some variety of neocon ? You seem to be the kind of savage who believe that it's all about staking your claim with a pointed gun. Uh oh. You got me. I'm a card carrying neocon who believes that Israel is a blight on the face of the Earth that should be wiped off of the map and that the state is a terrible war machine that inflicts heavy casualties all in the name of keeping things on the status quo or going back to some romanticized dream of a more "moral" past. Guess I got greedy with the cooky jar. existence is elsewhere | Post Points: 20
The only thing you royally fail to grasp is that you are not talking about a free market. Perhaps you are some variety of neocon ? You seem to be the kind of savage who believe that
I'm a card carrying neocon