Topic: Stefan Molyneux Bitcoin vs. Political Power (Must see if you haven&#039;t yet) - page 4. (Read 7883 times)

However I don't politicize the information

Well, it was a talk on political power...

Having fewer wars? Lack of money never stopped anyone from going to war. But if you go to war you need to finance it somehow

But that's kinda the point. These magical ways to create new money (inflation of money supply is effectively wealth confiscation by stealth) mean that a government always has the ability to fund its wars. If currency is limited, that no longer holds true.

Do you realized that govt sells war bonds in order to BORROW from private sector. Don't buy them if you don't wanna support

5flags

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

Professional anarchist

However I don't politicize the information

Well, it was a talk on political power...

Quote from: 5flags on May 13, 2014, 02:33:50 AM

Having fewer wars? Lack of money never stopped anyone from going to war. But if you go to war you need to finance it somehow

But that's kinda the point. These magical ways to create new money (inflation of money supply is effectively wealth confiscation by stealth) mean that a government always has the ability to fund its wars. If currency is limited, that no longer holds true.

twiifm

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 500

What he says is factual but he politicizes it. That's why you shouldn't listen to him.

So you agree he's right, but you want to ignore him because you don't like how he said it?

Quote from: twiifm on May 13, 2014, 02:27:07 AM

He's a doom and gloomer w no valid proposal to fix the problems he bitches about.

I'm pretty sure the primary purpose of his talk was to illustrate that currencies in limited supply, e.g. gold or Bitcoin, were specifically one way to "fix the problems he bitches about".

This is pretty trivial to understand. If a government had to get money from the people to fund a war, rather than just magically creating it, there would be far, FAR fewer wars.

I don't agree that he's right. I just said what he says is factual. I just explained how fiat came into existence during Civil War. Yes it was result of war financing. However I don't politicize the information

Having fewer wars? Lack of money never stopped anyone from going to war. But if you go to war you need to finance it somehow

Elwar

legendary

Activity: 3598

Merit: 2386

Viva Ut Vivas

Quote from: Elwar on May 13, 2014, 01:54:57 AM

Quote from: AtomicDoge on May 11, 2014, 03:50:18 AM

He claims that war is supported by fiat currency and money printing.

I was curious about this as well.

Wars and currencies I am curious about, the civil war, the 100 years war.

I know the confederacy had confederate dollars, did the union have fiat currency not backed by gold?

Salmon P Chase, Sec of Treasury, he took out a bank loan and convert it to gold thereby depleting gold reserves of all the NY banks. Then he created the greenback so banks issued greenback notes instead of gold notes

The Union has the upper hand because they finance the war w gold while the Confederacy had to use cotton barter

Interesting, thank you.

5flags

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

Professional anarchist

What he says is factual but he politicizes it. That's why you shouldn't listen to him.

So you agree he's right, but you want to ignore him because you don't like how he said it?

Quote from: Elwar on May 13, 2014, 01:54:57 AM

He's a doom and gloomer w no valid proposal to fix the problems he bitches about.

I'm pretty sure the primary purpose of his talk was to illustrate that currencies in limited supply, e.g. gold or Bitcoin, were specifically one way to "fix the problems he bitches about".

This is pretty trivial to understand. If a government had to get money from the people to fund a war, rather than just magically creating it, there would be far, FAR fewer wars.

twiifm

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 500

Quote from: AtomicDoge on May 11, 2014, 03:50:18 AM

He claims that war is supported by fiat currency and money printing.

I was curious about this as well.

Wars and currencies I am curious about, the civil war, the 100 years war.

I know the confederacy had confederate dollars, did the union have fiat currency not backed by gold?

Salmon P Chase, Sec of Treasury, he took out a bank loan from the NY banks and convert it to gold instead of spending the deposit. The effect was that it depleted the gold reserves of all the NY banks. Because the banks has no reserve they had to "supend convertibility". Then he created the greenback legal tender so banks can back their deposits. He forced the banks to accept fiat money thereby giving value to the greenback. Pretty shrewed guy.

The Union has the upper hand because they financed the war w gold while the Confederacy had to use cotton barter

Beliathon

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 1000

https://youtu.be/PZm8TTLR2NU

Quote from: AtomicDoge on May 11, 2014, 03:50:18 AM

Plus there are several outrageous claims with no basis in reality.
He claims that war is supported by fiat currency and money printing.

Yes, and then he explains the reasons why, in brief.

If you want further information on the topic, a google search on "military industrial complex" should prove fruitful.

Quote from: Elwar on May 13, 2014, 01:54:57 AM

I know the confederacy had confederate dollars, did the union have fiat currency not backed by gold?

Not until after the turn of the century, when they needed to fund "The Great War".

Elwar

legendary

Activity: 3598

Merit: 2386

Viva Ut Vivas

Quote from: AtomicDoge on May 11, 2014, 03:50:18 AM

He claims that war is supported by fiat currency and money printing.

I was curious about this as well.

Wars and currencies I am curious about, the civil war, the 100 years war.

I know the confederacy had confederate dollars, did the union have fiat currency not backed by gold?

twiifm

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 500

Quote from: justusranvier on May 13, 2014, 12:32:00 AM

What he says is factual but he politicizes it. That's why you shouldn't listen to him. He's a doom and gloomer w no valid proposal to fix the problems he bitches about. Typical cynic that tries to rile up controversy

You've clearly never listened to any of his work, so why are you talking about him as if you have?

Yes I have. I like w some of his shows. Like the one about Trayvon Martin. But he's like all political commentators. He says things he knows are controversial.

counter

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 500

Time is on our side, yes it is!

Quote from: counter on May 13, 2014, 12:09:23 AM

Quote from: acoindr on May 11, 2014, 10:48:42 AM

Oh lord. Do people actually take this guy seriously? Just another shock jock like Alex Jones et al

What exactly did you find shocking? It's quite obvious the U.S. government has ballooned in size over 40 years and taken us to war over, quite frankly, lies. The dollar has been massively inflated, losing over 96% of its purchasing power since 1913. The fact is war is expensive. Yet there are those who do profit from it. That means in order to have war, where the people don't feel the financial cost you need to inflate the currency, something not possible if it's restrained by a hard gold standard.

Shocking? You don't find it shocking the government took us to war over lies? Or has been spying on us in violation of the 4th Amendment, treating innocent people like criminals including invasive pat downs at airports? What's shocking to me is you feeling everything is as it should be.

Seems like people are shocked by the truth and will have no problem trying to tear the head of the messenger.. I'm always amazed how someone can hear such damning information and attack the person bringing them the info.

I like him but don't really follow this work alot. I do respect what he has to say because he seems knowledgeable and well spoken. He may just be a doom and gloomer but he has facts to back up his arguments and that is what makes me listen to what he has to say.

What he says is factual but he politicizes it. That's why you shouldn't listen to him. He's a doom and gloomer w no valid proposal to fix the problems he bitches about. Typical cynic that tries to rile up controversy

justusranvier

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1013

Quote from: counter on May 13, 2014, 12:09:23 AM

What he says is factual but he politicizes it. That's why you shouldn't listen to him. He's a doom and gloomer w no valid proposal to fix the problems he bitches about. Typical cynic that tries to rile up controversy

You've clearly never listened to any of his work, so why are you talking about him as if you have?

twiifm

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 500

Quote from: acoindr on May 11, 2014, 10:48:42 AM

Quote from: acoindr on May 11, 2014, 10:48:42 AM

Oh lord. Do people actually take this guy seriously? Just another shock jock like Alex Jones et al

What exactly did you find shocking? It's quite obvious the U.S. government has ballooned in size over 40 years and taken us to war over, quite frankly, lies. The dollar has been massively inflated, losing over 96% of its purchasing power since 1913. The fact is war is expensive. Yet there are those who do profit from it. That means in order to have war, where the people don't feel the financial cost you need to inflate the currency, something not possible if it's restrained by a hard gold standard.

Shocking? You don't find it shocking the government took us to war over lies? Or has been spying on us in violation of the 4th Amendment, treating innocent people like criminals including invasive pat downs at airports? What's shocking to me is you feeling everything is as it should be.

Seems like people are shocked by the truth and will have no problem trying to tear the head of the messenger.. I'm always amazed how someone can hear such damning information and attack the person bringing them the info.

What he says is factual but he politicizes it. That's why you shouldn't listen to him. He's a doom and gloomer w no valid proposal to fix the problems he bitches about. Typical cynic that tries to rile up controversy

counter

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 500

Time is on our side, yes it is!

Oh lord. Do people actually take this guy seriously? Just another shock jock like Alex Jones et al

What exactly did you find shocking? It's quite obvious the U.S. government has ballooned in size over 40 years and taken us to war over, quite frankly, lies. The dollar has been massively inflated, losing over 96% of its purchasing power since 1913. The fact is war is expensive. Yet there are those who do profit from it. That means in order to have war, where the people don't feel the financial cost you need to inflate the currency, something not possible if it's restrained by a hard gold standard.

Shocking? You don't find it shocking the government took us to war over lies? Or has been spying on us in violation of the 4th Amendment, treating innocent people like criminals including invasive pat downs at airports? What's shocking to me is you feeling everything is as it should be.

Seems like people are shocked by the truth and will have no problem trying to tear the head of the messenger.. I'm always amazed how someone can hear such damning information and attack the person bringing them the info.

acoindr

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1002