User talk:192.162.19.21

From Thikipedia

(Difference between revisions)
(lMniBKGH)
(fXhmWsdtKNAhWwOiBS)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
-
Ideally the concept is to rmovee the mess that has been created with factional reserve banking.  Right now so much power is in the hands of the central banks.  This power gives them the ability to control the amount of currency that is in circulation.  In essence money is created out of thin air with no weight to it like the gold standard created.  Money is built on trust in the value of that currency, which is very scary.  You can even see in recent times how this type of system has created massive problems and will only get worse as time goes on.  The only way I personally feel that currency can be fixed since we left the gold standard is to create a new currency with a relative value unit assigned to it.  The relative value can be tied to something tangible.  To supply a certain good or service it requires certain resources.  Those resources being natural, human and others.  For example it takes a specific amount of resources to produce a car.  Machines, equipment, people working on it, natural resources like metal, plastics and time.  These factors can be used to produce a RV for that car.  Unfortunately I think there is so much money in circulation, that it would be near impossible to go back to the gold standard as there may not be enough gold available in circulation to match out the currency to.  Why not create a balance of the commons of ALL available tangible resources and not just gold?The concepts I like of BitCoin are the fact that there is no central authority for currency.  What you produce is what you own.  You actually own that currency that you have produced using your resources and it has value based on the fact that others had to go through the same create that currency as you did.  The idea of using CPU cycles is very geeky and not sustainable. The idea though that you have this resource and by using that resource you are producing something that holds value amongst those doing the same type of work place the value and trust in that currency.  So when you go to work based on your education, work experience, skills, time spend doing your job, the actual work being done and even the value your employer feels you are worth to them can all be used as factors.  That value of currency that you produce has no value that is set by factional reserve banking and the amount of currency in circulation.  It is based on a true tangible asset like the gold standard used to be.Just my two cents.
+
Well I know that in the late 19th century (possibly the grateest economic period in American History), we had the gold standard.  The main reason why the gold standard is better than purely fiat paper currency is that it cannot be subject to the whims of whoever has monopoly power over the printing press.  The government can't use alchemy to inflate gold and devalue the savings of many Americans to finance wars, that's why a period of war (such as the civil war) often involves a departure from the gold standard.  The gold standard won't quickly end the debt, but it will control inflation and heavily restrict government spending since the government will no longer be able to borrow money from the Fed's printing press.  Also consider banking, if we had a gold standard and a person's deposit had to be backed up 100% by gold, there wouldn't any worry about a run on the bank like what happened during the great depression.  People would know that they could withdraw all of their money and whenever the bank loaned someone's money, it would get that person's permission, and the person would know that X number of dollar in their account was being loaned out and would not expect to be able to withdraw it.The problem is the interest allied against this, namely the banks as well as people who want to get bank loans quickly to finance their projects.  Fractional reserve banking can generate real short term wealth, but it is nonetheless fraudulent.  Also, governments wouldn't be able to print the money they need so they prefer to have a fiat system.  They and the people who get the new money first would benefit because the market hasn't yet caught on to the increased money supply, but by the time it trickles down to the average citizen, inflation would've sent in and the new money would do nothing to improve their buying power.

Current revision as of 07:08, 1 September 2012

Well I know that in the late 19th century (possibly the grateest economic period in American History), we had the gold standard. The main reason why the gold standard is better than purely fiat paper currency is that it cannot be subject to the whims of whoever has monopoly power over the printing press. The government can't use alchemy to inflate gold and devalue the savings of many Americans to finance wars, that's why a period of war (such as the civil war) often involves a departure from the gold standard. The gold standard won't quickly end the debt, but it will control inflation and heavily restrict government spending since the government will no longer be able to borrow money from the Fed's printing press. Also consider banking, if we had a gold standard and a person's deposit had to be backed up 100% by gold, there wouldn't any worry about a run on the bank like what happened during the great depression. People would know that they could withdraw all of their money and whenever the bank loaned someone's money, it would get that person's permission, and the person would know that X number of dollar in their account was being loaned out and would not expect to be able to withdraw it.The problem is the interest allied against this, namely the banks as well as people who want to get bank loans quickly to finance their projects. Fractional reserve banking can generate real short term wealth, but it is nonetheless fraudulent. Also, governments wouldn't be able to print the money they need so they prefer to have a fiat system. They and the people who get the new money first would benefit because the market hasn't yet caught on to the increased money supply, but by the time it trickles down to the average citizen, inflation would've sent in and the new money would do nothing to improve their buying power.

Retrieved from "http://editthis.info/thikipedia/User_talk:192.162.19.21"
Personal tools