When We Could Completely Rely On Others

Discussion in 'Politics & Government' started by Harry Havens, May 29, 2017.

  1. Harry Havens

    Harry Havens Well-Known Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    May 24, 2017
    Messages:
    337
    Likes Received:
    271
    Think about that for a minute and then consider the context of Merkel's statement that seems to have shook up the U.S. press...
    A simple statement from Merkel strikes fear into the U.S. press. Why, is a puzzle to me. Breaking it down... “completely rely on others” should have ended long ago. For years the U.S. has been asking “Europe” to step up and do more for their own defense.

    Why it is such a surprise, baffles me. The German mouth piece, Der Spiegel, dropped a very big hint prior to Trump’s visit.
    Again... "dependence on the U.S."

    The EU economy is near equal to that of the U.S. Why then should the EU be dependent upon the U.S.?
     
    #1
    Sheldon Scott and Yvonne Smith like this.
  2. Tim Burr

    Tim Burr Well-Known Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2016
    Messages:
    738
    Likes Received:
    1,493
    I can only speak from a 'boots on the ground' perspective.

    From what I saw visting or being stationed at numerous NATO bases,
    most countries were very happy to have us do the 'heavy lifting'.

    The exception was the UK. I felt more of a partnership than with the other
    EU members.

    Just what I observed. Not a political judgement.

    I am glad that our President asked for some to pay what is owed to NATO.

    Not surprised by the fallout.
     
    #2
  3. Patsy Faye

    Patsy Faye Veteran Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2015
    Messages:
    7,646
    Likes Received:
    8,304
    I'm not surprised either - bloomin EU can well afford to pay their share !
     
    #3
    Sheldon Scott and Harry Havens like this.
  4. Kalvin Mitnic

    Kalvin Mitnic Well-Known Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2017
    Messages:
    401
    Likes Received:
    291
    America expanded it' sphere of influence by extending our military force throughout Europe after WW2 with the world threat of communism.
    It suited the USA then to be the one carrying the big stick as Europe had been devastated and had little means at their disposal as deterent. that situation should have gradually changed as economics changed along with the threat once the USSR broke up.

    US military personnel and weaponry extends to many countries that could/should fund their own countries security, or in Europe's case in in concert with other at threat. Russia being the boogie man, should be ostracized from the financial market. Russia has played their trump card by getting into the Middle East where the will have influence that the USA/Europe can't threaten.

    The many funding US bases and military involvement in foreign countries should be reviewed and minimized if it doesn't serve the USA's interests.
     
    #4
    Frank Sanoica likes this.
  5. Harry Havens

    Harry Havens Well-Known Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    May 24, 2017
    Messages:
    337
    Likes Received:
    271
    My concerns are related to a growing national debt and its sustainability. There is an illusion that persists that the US Dollar is a global currency reserve, it can simply print more money and default is not really an issue... so why worry about debt?

    We don't really print that much currency, but create credit which creates opportunity to print dollar based debt instruments. That's why.
     
    #5
    Frank Sanoica likes this.
  6. Frank Sanoica

    Frank Sanoica Very Well-Known Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2016
    Messages:
    3,823
    Likes Received:
    3,418
    @Harold Hayden " ....opportunity to print dollar based debt instruments."

    All debt instruments introduced without fixed monetary-value backing, such as fixed-value precious metal of one kind or another, such as GOLD, create an illusory vision of currency and monetary sustainability: a false one at that. This allows governments to control, absolutely, the debt-instrument basis in use within their countries. IOW, no one individual may reasonably expect that the day-to-day value of his MONEY remains reasonably constant in it's "power" with respect to "buying power" in neither Domestic nor Foreign markets. IOW (2), absolute control of a country's currency falls under government grasp.

    Some monetary and fiscal experts, as well as financial historians, have spoken out that in their belief, complete removal of real-material "backing" has been the single-most contributory factor to financial breakdowns which have occurred historically. Was it a "good-thing" that FDR devalued the U.S. currency by declaring that the value of the official "backing" material, Gold, would suddenly change from $20.00 per ounce to $35.00 per ounce? What this meant in reality, was that FDR STOLE $0.75 out of every single Americans' $1.00. 75%! The result? Well, it certainly did not "pull us out of the Depression". In fact, that was accomplished by entering the War, under absolutely new financial and fiscal conditions where, lacking "backing", ANY AMOUNT of dough could be spent at will by the government. Even if it far exceeded the revenues collected in taxes. This trend continues today. The
    concept FAILED in Greece recently, may be close to closure in several other countries, might eventually reach our shores, too. Who knows?
    Frank
     
    #6
  7. Harry Havens

    Harry Havens Well-Known Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    May 24, 2017
    Messages:
    337
    Likes Received:
    271
    I'll not print out the inaccuracies in your statement, but rather point out the depression (and many before) happened when there was a gold standard in place.

    Timeline..
    the economy started collapsing in 1929 4Q
    it continued its downward trajectory until 1933 2Q by which time nearly 9,000 banks were closed and millions of Americans lost all bank assets.
    FDR was inaugarated in March, 1933 and ordered a bank holiday to halt run on remiaining banks.
    https://www.bloomberg.com/view/arti...in-roosevelt-secretly-ended-the-gold-standard
    FDR publicly removed us from the "strict" Gold Standard on June 5, 1933
    The banking act was signed into law in June16, 1933... which effectively ended the downward trajectory of the economy.
    An upward trend which continued until the 1937 recession and lasted about 2 quarters, before resuming upward.
    War broke out and the U.S. national debt rose to over 100% of GDP.

    http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/04/27/135604828/why-we-left-the-gold-standard
    http://econbrowser.com/archives/2005/12/the_gold_standa

    http://gold-standard.procon.org/sourcefiles/crs-brief-history-of-gold-standard-in-us.pdf

    As I stated, there exists an abundance of illusions, that cloud the current situation.
     
    #7
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2017
  8. Frank Sanoica

    Frank Sanoica Very Well-Known Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2016
    Messages:
    3,823
    Likes Received:
    3,418
    @Harold Hayden "As I stated, there exists an abundance of illusions, that cloud the current situation."

    Hardly. Supporting acceptance of propagandized reporting amounts to little more than admission of acceptance of being a subject instead of a citizen.

    Fact is, having no standard "backing" currency allows the King to issue ever-more currency to use as he desires. Fact is, by now there exists no possible way to utilize backed currency simply because the valuation of the backing material would have to be astronomical. Fact is, as my parents told me, they and everyone else they knew turned their gold coins in to the banks under fear of prosecution by the King for not doing so. The propaganda presents the view that folks happily delivered their gold to the banks.

    Who should I believe? Media or my parents?
    Frank
     
    #8
    Ken Anderson likes this.
  9. Frank Sanoica

    Frank Sanoica Very Well-Known Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2016
    Messages:
    3,823
    Likes Received:
    3,418
    The other side of the premise:

    "....only proper monetary reform—specifically, restoring the international gold standard without official-reserve currencies—will end three interconnected problems which have long undermined the United States: first, endlessly expanding federal deficit spending; second, chronic episodes of inflation (or deflation), typically ending in recession; and third, declining U.S. international competitiveness."

    See: https://eppc.org/publications/major-problems-congress-created-ending-classical-gold-standard/
     
    #9
  10. Harry Havens

    Harry Havens Well-Known Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    May 24, 2017
    Messages:
    337
    Likes Received:
    271
    Actual data trumps your media, your views and apparently your parents. Whether you believe it or not... is not my concern.
     
    #10
  11. Frank Sanoica

    Frank Sanoica Very Well-Known Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2016
    Messages:
    3,823
    Likes Received:
    3,418
    @Harold Hayden
    Just where is that actual data, sir? You trust "data" pertaining to monetary issues implicitly and blindly? In view of the fact that monetary experts have been situated 180 degrees apart forever? Finally, if what I believe is not your concern, why are you hovering over a dead horse?
    Frank
     
    #11
  12. Harry Havens

    Harry Havens Well-Known Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    May 24, 2017
    Messages:
    337
    Likes Received:
    271
    As the thread has descended into various economic heterodoxys (Austrian v "others"), probably a good time to review the foundation of the Austrian school from one of their former disciples. http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/bcaplan/whyaust.htm

    The issue of Gold as an underpinning of currency in 2017:
    Current Currency in circulation: $1.54 Trillion
    Current Gold Reseves held: 261,498,926 Troy ounces.
    Current Government Marketable Debt: $14.298 Trillion.
    Current nominal GDP 1Q 2nd est.: $19.027 Trillion - Section 1, 1.1.5
    Total Demand deposits and savings deposits in U.S. Banking Institutions: $10.357 Trillion

    The Mises school states that the depression was not really caused by a gold standard... but other factors. IF gold coins were in use in 1929, instead of paper money... the exact same thing would have happened and the economy would have continued its nosedive, into survival of the fittest. Which best describes the Mises School of thought, with regards to economics.

    The Mises school of thought states that banking is best left to the private sector. Yet it was the repeated failures of the banking sector that led to numerous depressions while on the gold standard and a disdain for keeping money in banks.

    As to the subject of convertibility... our current trade deficit would wipe out the gold reserves in less than one year at current gold prices and force the U.S. to confiscate all privately held gold. The U.S. would be faced with a rapid devaluation of the dollar and hyperinflation.

    There is much more, but the bottom line is... with or without gold, the outcome is likely similar, but the when is different.

    For the gold bugs, what would be the "new" price of gold? Would it be based on currency in circulation or the deposits in banks of Americans?
     
    #12
    Last edited: Jun 2, 2017
  13. Harry Havens

    Harry Havens Well-Known Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    May 24, 2017
    Messages:
    337
    Likes Received:
    271
    historic annual inflation/deflation rates of U.S. (red deflation and Yellow is inflation over 10%)
    [​IMG]
     
    #13
  14. Harry Havens

    Harry Havens Well-Known Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    May 24, 2017
    Messages:
    337
    Likes Received:
    271
    #14
    Frank Sanoica likes this.

Share This Page