Do you understand Money, Debt, Inflation, and The Federal Reserve?

[jeromechickenbone]

Everybody in this forum needs to watch this and understand it.  If you have to watch certain parts 10x, it's worth it. 

My title might sound like a bunch of bullshit that you either A)Couldn't care less about, or B)Couldn't begin to understand, so why try?

I'm telling you guys that this vid is excellent at breaking everything down in a very simplistic manner.  Gain some knowledge.

[Teddy Roosevelt]

The link doesn't take me to a specific video.

[Chief]

The link doesn't take me to a specific video.

[TraceOneInfinite Flat Earther 96']

There's some questions I've always had about economics and nobody has been able to give me a sufficient answer on them.  I'll post them here.

1.  Everyone always makes the a billionaire is wasting money on a billion dollar house when he could be feeding the poor.  My question is.. Is the money really WASTED?  Because doesn't that money go to the biulders of the home, the decorators, the people that gather the wood for the home, etc., etc., etc... and then those people go out and spend that money on other things, and on and on, the money keeps getting filtered back into the economy and other people's pockets and maybe someone that would have been poor and without a job instead has a job pouring concrete for the home?


2.  My other question is, why do black people talk about going to college as the solution for all their problems.  Because, hypothetically, from an economic standpoint, just because everyone goes to colege doesn't mean they'll have jobs for all those people right?

3.  Even if every person in the country was motivated and wanted a job, a capatalist economy can not provide a job for every person, correct?


^^^ Anybody want to try and answer those questions for me.

[virtuoso]

It depends doesn't it, if the building company is part of a much bigger group, then the money is going to filter mostly into the hands of the owners and a fraction of it filters through into the hands of the builders, who can then in turn spend the money perhaps locally. As for your question about black people, well nevermind black people, people in general, yes your absolutely right, people think by attaining the necessary skills and qualifications that it opens up a wide world of prosperity, but the the reality is if everyone is gunning for particular areas, i.e. accountancy, business studies etc, then ultimately you still have a problem with capacity, there are after all only so many service sector jobs. What is really the long term killer, is the massive leakages which are not witnessed when business after business oursources it's manufacturing, this is why China and India are growing so rapidly.

I can not answer that question without knowing the statistics for the United States but I can answer that question in terms of the UK, from official government figures there are about 1.2 million jobs vacant at the moment, however when you factor in those whose savings exceed 16.000 and those who incapacitated and those who are currently undergoing some form of job training so they are omitted from the UK unemployment lists, the figure stands at somewhere around 6.1 million, so on that basis, it's more than reasonable to say yes that is correct not everyone can have a job.

However if you think about the fact that in this country over 90% of the wealth is held by 1% of the population, then clearly this tells you that the wealth is not being spent freely. It is problematic I grant you, because I am not in favour of this socialistic ideology of redistributing wealth because that simply means big government which comes with it's own set of problems, namely inefficiencies with the best of intentions, or just rampant corruption and centralising of power and wealth further.

[Chief]

There's some questions I've always had about economics and nobody has been able to give me a sufficient answer on them.  I'll post them here.

1.  Everyone always makes the a billionaire is wasting money on a billion dollar house when he could be feeding the poor.  My question is.. Is the money really WASTED?  Because doesn't that money go to the biulders of the home, the decorators, the people that gather the wood for the home, etc., etc., etc... and then those people go out and spend that money on other things, and on and on, the money keeps getting filtered back into the economy and other people's pockets and maybe someone that would have been poor and without a job instead has a job pouring concrete for the home?

no it's not wasted, it is tayloring to every persons wants and needs.

why would someone work so hard to become a billionaire, not to live a billionaires life?

there would be no point, thats why communism would never work.

also dont forget a large portion of a billionaires income is taxed, that is transferred to the poorer sector of the economy.

2.  My other question is, why do black people talk about going to college as the solution for all their problems.  Because, hypothetically, from an economic standpoint, just because everyone goes to colege doesn't mean they'll have jobs for all those people right?

not only does education benefit the person in college, it also benefits society.

I think a graduate has higher chances of finding work than someone without an education.

3.  Even if every person in the country was motivated and wanted a job, a capatalist economy can not provide a job for every person, correct?


^^^ Anybody want to try and answer those questions for me.

i cant think of any pure capitalist economies. but if a market is at 100% efficiency everyone can have a job, things like removing minimum wage would help.

here in Western Australia we have 2.5% unemployment, thats pretty damn close to full employment.

[jeromechickenbone]

My bad homies, shit is fixed now.

[Teddy Roosevelt]

1.  Everyone always makes the a billionaire is wasting money on a billion dollar house when he could be feeding the poor.  My question is.. Is the money really WASTED?  Because doesn't that money go to the biulders of the home, the decorators, the people that gather the wood for the home, etc., etc., etc... and then those people go out and spend that money on other things, and on and on, the money keeps getting filtered back into the economy and other people's pockets and maybe someone that would have been poor and without a job instead has a job pouring concrete for the home?

Good point. And in a lot of cases this is the absolute truth. Plus the tax thing that Cheirf said. The problem is most billionaires tend to make other rich people richer. Not the construction workers etc. They don't recruit the small businesses or the struggling ones. They go to the large, successful ones. At the least it balances out.

2.  My other question is, why do black people talk about going to college as the solution for all their problems.  Because, hypothetically, from an economic standpoint, just because everyone goes to colege doesn't mean they'll have jobs for all those people right?

It's simple statistics homie. If you go to college you will make a lot more money then if you don't. I don't approve people thinking that if they go to college it is the only way of being successful. I can probably live quite comfortably without going to college through my everyday hustle, but I've determined for me personally, I'm better off in college.

3.  Even if every person in the country was motivated and wanted a job, a capatalist economy can not provide a job for every person, correct?

Correct.

[Chief]

3.  Even if every person in the country was motivated and wanted a job, a capatalist economy can not provide a job for every person, correct?



Correct.

i disagree, if every person is willing and able to work, they could. here in australia the government provides work for those on welfare who are able to work, but cannot find it.

[Shallow]

1.  Everyone always makes the a billionaire is wasting money on a billion dollar house when he could be feeding the poor.  My question is.. Is the money really WASTED?  Because doesn't that money go to the biulders of the home, the decorators, the people that gather the wood for the home, etc., etc., etc... and then those people go out and spend that money on other things, and on and on, the money keeps getting filtered back into the economy and other people's pockets and maybe someone that would have been poor and without a job instead has a job pouring concrete for the home?

I think you just described Reaganomics.

[Teddy Roosevelt]

3.  Even if every person in the country was motivated and wanted a job, a capatalist economy can not provide a job for every person, correct?



Correct.

i disagree, if every person is willing and able to work, they could. here in australia the government provides work for those on welfare who are able to work, but cannot find it.

If the government is providing work to the unemployeed and has a welfare system, then it is not truely capatalistic.

[TraceOneInfinite Flat Earther 96']

Everybody in this forum needs to watch this and understand it.  If you have to watch certain parts 10x, it's worth it. 

My title might sound like a bunch of bullshit that you either A)Couldn't care less about, or B)Couldn't begin to understand, so why try?

I'm telling you guys that this vid is excellent at breaking everything down in a very simplistic manner.  Gain some knowledge.

Thanks for the video.  I've watched about 95% of it now.  I tried to play it while I was doing other things, but I had to keep rewinding because you really can't miss any of it.  It's very important information.

This also kind of brings up an interesting idea in my mind.  They mentioned that this type of money out of debt creation system really took off in the late 1600's.  Well guess what, the 1600's really marks the changing of the gaurd, where Islamic lead civilizations like the Ottoman Empire or the Mughal Empire started to go into decline, and the Western nations such as Britian really started to take off.  The Ottoman Empire went into debt, the gold and silver trade increased wealth in Britian (through it's American colonies) and so on and so forth.

But here's one other thing I noticed not mentioned in the video.  For some reason, when I read the history of the 1600's up.. it seems like Britian was somehow able to engage in endless war and there was always enough money for all of their war endeavors.

So, Jrome, since you watched the video... don't you think it's possible that Britian was able to engage in perpetual war and just keep creating all the money it needed for it's war efforts?

[jeromechickenbone]

Everybody in this forum needs to watch this and understand it.  If you have to watch certain parts 10x, it's worth it. 

My title might sound like a bunch of bullshit that you either A)Couldn't care less about, or B)Couldn't begin to understand, so why try?

I'm telling you guys that this vid is excellent at breaking everything down in a very simplistic manner.  Gain some knowledge.

Thanks for the video.  I've watched about 95% of it now.  I tried to play it while I was doing other things, but I had to keep rewinding because you really can't miss any of it.  It's very important information.

This also kind of brings up an interesting idea in my mind.  They mentioned that this type of money out of debt creation system really took off in the late 1600's.  Well guess what, the 1600's really marks the changing of the gaurd, where Islamic lead civilizations like the Ottoman Empire or the Mughal Empire started to go into decline, and the Western nations such as Britian really started to take off.  The Ottoman Empire went into debt, the gold and silver trade increased wealth in Britian (through it's American colonies) and so on and so forth.

But here's one other thing I noticed not mentioned in the video.  For some reason, when I read the history of the 1600's up.. it seems like Britian was somehow able to engage in endless war and there was always enough money for all of their war endeavors.

So, Jrome, since you watched the video... don't you think it's possible that Britian was able to engage in perpetual war and just keep creating all the money it needed for it's war efforts?

I think it's absolutely plausible.  What is largely taught in history books is that America's founding fathers / pilgrims / whomever came here out of religious persecution.  While that may have been certain groups justificiation, I believe the ultimate reason was much simpler, which was escape from a tyrannical rule.  Not solely on a relgious front because you have tons of Catholics & Protestants but from endless other buraucracies. 

But yes, war ties into that flawlessly.  War is fantastic for the economy.  It provides the landscape for constant growth and production.  As money is spent, and goods destroyed more of both must be produced.  And as each soldier is killed, the government exploits those deaths in an effort to instill hatred amongst it's citizens toward it's enemy.  This all keeps the ball rolling.

[jeromechickenbone]

And I can't speak on the influence of Islam during this time, as I haven't researched it.  But understand what this is illustrating. 

What is the golden rule?  "Do unto others as you'd have done to you"....SHUT THE FUCK UP! The golden rule is "He who has the gold, RULES!!!!!!"

Well what was done by Britain in this time and ultimately in the United States in 1960's was the dissolution of the gold standard.  Our fiat money today equals that of monopoly money...nothing.  We used to be able to transfer our currency to gold.  Not anymore.  See the Federal Reserve & The IRS.  The Federal Reserve is a private bank, just like any bank that we cash our checks at every week.  Nothing special about the Federal Reserve.  Except this:  Our government has the right and the ability to print it's own money.  They elect not to do that.  Instead, they elect the Federal Reserve to print our currency, and Washington BORROWS this money.  When I say borrow, I mean finance.  Washington borrows the money, and has to REPAY that money PLUS INTEREST to the federal reserve.  Who owns the federal reserve?  We don't know, because that is undisclosed information.  So tell me why, our govt. would elect to hire someone else to print our currency and pay them interest?  Who is making profit from that interest?  Why don't they want to disclose who the owners are?

And on top of that, who do you think foots the bill for that interest expense?  WE DO.  That is where your tax dollars go.  Not to roads, not to welfare, not to the poor, not to the have nots.  It goes to pay the interest expense that our government incurs all because they choose the Fed to print our money even though they have the wherewithal to do themselves.

I'll post some more stuff on the Federal Reserve and the IRS later.  But understand that when a guy like Ron Paul wants to remove the Federal Reserve, yes, it will affect out bi-weekly paychecks, but that is not what is driving him.  He believes that our currency should be backed by a tangible good.  Silver & Gold?  Maybe, but there have also been very intersting arguements that we base our currency on all of the great infrastructure of the United States, which makes a ton of sense to me.

[MC TenderLust]

i understand money bought me these fresh white air forces, and this delicious orange slice milkshake