Understanding Leftist Mentality

[Khadgar]

Anyone in their right minds knows that gold coinage can be cut with other metals, thus devaluing the currency. It's not even a new trick.

Sure, but you can't whim a billion ounces of gold into existence in one day, but you can whim a billion dollars into existence

True, about the only way to expand your economy is militarily. I'm sure that won't end in tears for all involved.

[Yandere Schoolgirls]

Sure, but you can't whim a billion ounces of gold into existence in one day, but you can whim a billion dollars into existence

So you want the world economy to collapse in a deflationary crisis because... gold makes it more difficult to expand the money supply, imposing needless limits on growth? Why do you hate capitalism?

First of all what the Federal reserve does isn't capitalism. It's socialism and wealth redistribution. They're taking away the value of dollar in order to fund public welfare programs it is a indirect tax.

Second of all, all paper currencies imposes limits on growth because it allows for governments to inflate the currency thereby underhandedly destroying savings and if there are no savings than no credit will be available to invest in infrastructure.

I'm not saying that we have to necessarily go back to the Gold standard. You will find societies prefer gold for the reasons I've stated in my prior posts. Personally I keep all of my savings in gold and silver and would prefer to deal in gold. The price of gold has more than doubled in the past 4 years. Also I would like to add that historically these currencies have always been the most reliable and the most preferred currencies in any free-market based society.

[Northern Dominus]

Sure, but you can't whim a billion ounces of gold into existence in one day, but you can whim a billion dollars into existence

True, about the only way to expand your economy is militarily. I'm sure that won't end in tears for all involved.

Not if you smash the poor slobs...I mean vile evil oppressors hard enough.

[Khadgar]

Sure, but you can't whim a billion ounces of gold into existence in one day, but you can whim a billion dollars into existence

So you want the world economy to collapse in a deflationary crisis because... gold makes it more difficult to expand the money supply, imposing needless limits on growth? Why do you hate capitalism?

All transactions would have to be done in cash, which would absolutely tank the global banking industry. Credit would collapse for individuals. Though I wonder, are we still using paper to represent gold, or are we on an actual coins and bars economy? Makes a difference. I can't imagine going to a gold based economy and still using paper.

[Alien Space Bats]

This is not the right thread to discuss the idiocy of attempting to maintain a sophisticated global economy based on the exchange of precious metals.

Rather, it's a moronic troll thread that started when someone attempted to strawman leftists by mischaracterizing their beliefs and attributing false motives to the "leftist hivemind".

If you want to discuss the foolishness that is the gold standard, make a new thread for it. If you do that, I'll explain why only those who lack any fundamental understanding of economics would ever advocate such a stupid thing.

---

tld&dr: I'd ask you to get back on topic, but the topic was never worth getting on in the first place.

[The Rich Port]

This is not the right thread to discuss the idiocy of attempting to maintain a sophisticated global economy based on the exchange of precious metals.

Rather, it's a moronic troll thread that started when someone attempted to strawman leftists by mischaracterizing their beliefs and attributing false motives to the "leftist hivemind".

If you want to discuss the foolishness that is the gold standard, make a new thread for it. If you do that, I'll explain why only those who lack any fundamental understanding of economics would ever advocate such a stupid thing.

---

tld&dr: I'd ask you to get back on topic, but the topic was never worth getting on in the first place.

Hey, give him SOME credit...

Actually, don't. Nevermind. OP doesn't deserve it.

[Khadgar]

I'd argue it fits, in an expansive sort of way. If conservatives want to understand the liberal mind the only way to do so is via discussion of points we disagree on.

[The Rich Port]

I'd argue it fits, in an expansive sort of way. If conservatives want to understand the liberal mind the only way to do so is via discussion of points we disagree on.

:D

[AiliailiA]

This is not the right thread to discuss the idiocy of attempting to maintain a sophisticated global economy based on the exchange of precious metals.

Rather, it's a moronic troll thread that started when someone attempted to strawman leftists by mischaracterizing their beliefs and attributing false motives to the "leftist hivemind".

They didn't even do that. The best-written paragraphs of the Original Post came from the a "source" at American Thinker. It was crap too.

If you want to discuss the foolishness that is the gold standard, make a new thread for it. If you do that, I'll explain why only those who lack any fundamental understanding of economics would ever advocate such a stupid thing.

Actually, Yandere Schoolgirls wasn't initially talking about backing any currency with gold, just that people should save to protect themselves against future crises. Instead of relying on any state to bail them out.

Or I guess buying shares in companies. Nope, people should store their excess wealth in the basement of their heavily-guarded house.

I probably should have left this alone, and instead pursued the earlier assertion that there would be no poverty or low wages if only government would gtfo.

One more thing I want to mention: huge amounts of the available gold are held by reserve banks (ie government instruments). Nice way to look after your friends, Yandere Schoolgirls. Suggest they buy gold at the top of a boom, then get 40% more gold (at least) released onto the market when governments magically disappear.

[Khadgar]

Actually, Yandere Schoolgirls wasn't initially talking about backing any currency with gold, just that people should save to protect themselves against future crises. Instead of relying on any state to bail them out.

Or I guess buying shares in companies. Nope, people should store their excess wealth in the basement of their heavily-guarded house.

I probably should have left this alone, and instead pursued the earlier assertion that there would be no poverty or low wages if only government would gtfo.

One more thing I want to mention: huge amounts of the available gold are held by reserve banks (ie government instruments). Nice way to look after your friends, Yandere Schoolgirls. Suggest they buy gold at the top of a boom, then get 40% more gold (at least) released onto the market when governments magically disappear.

Of course people should save for rainy days, and I think most people would. Well they would were they better at math. A lot of people are just really shit at handling money, even otherwise intelligent capable people. Never understood it myself. Being bad with money means saving is pretty impossible. Okay, being bad with money and having poor impulse control.

Our society is pretty damned instant gratification these days, and the idea that you shouldn't overextend yourself doesn't sink in if they don't think about the impact it'll have on their finances in the future. Are they bad at math or just bad at planning past right now? The latter is pretty endemic, look at politicians, never look past the next election cycle, never go for the long term gain.

[Alien Space Bats]

I'd argue it fits, in an expansive sort of way. If conservatives want to understand the liberal mind the only way to do so is via discussion of points we disagree on.

On the contrary, they only need to learn one thing: The ability to listen to somebody other than themselves.

Those who do have already quit this thread; it's the ones who don't that remain the problem.

Our society is pretty damned instant gratification these days, and the idea that you shouldn't overextend yourself doesn't sink in if they don't think about the impact it'll have on their finances in the future. Are they bad at math or just bad at planning past right now? The latter is pretty endemic, look at politicians, never look past the next election cycle, never go for the long term gain.

No, what people are into is not giving up their standard of living. Downward pressure on wages and salaries has eroded real income; people resist this by saving less, or drawing down their savings once matters reach the point where saving less is no longer enough.

Of course, that state of affairs can't last: Once the savings are gone and once credit is gone, demand will evaporate. In that sense, 2008 was the warning shot, presaging a coming decline of far greater magnitude.

[AiliailiA]

So you want the world economy to collapse in a deflationary crisis because... gold makes it more difficult to expand the money supply, imposing needless limits on growth? Why do you hate capitalism?

All transactions would have to be done in cash, which would absolutely tank the global banking industry. Credit would collapse for individuals. Though I wonder, are we still using paper to represent gold, or are we on an actual coins and bars economy? Makes a difference. I can't imagine going to a gold based economy and still using paper.

Actually, Yandere Schoolgirls wasn't initially talking about backing any currency with gold, just that people should save to protect themselves against future crises. Instead of relying on any state to bail them out.

Or I guess buying shares in companies. Nope, people should store their excess wealth in the basement of their heavily-guarded house.

I probably should have left this alone, and instead pursued the earlier assertion that there would be no poverty or low wages if only government would gtfo.

One more thing I want to mention: huge amounts of the available gold are held by reserve banks (ie government instruments). Nice way to look after your friends, Yandere Schoolgirls. Suggest they buy gold at the top of a boom, then get 40% more gold (at least) released onto the market when governments magically disappear.

Of course people should save for rainy days, and I think most people would. Well they would were they better at math. A lot of people are just really shit at handling money, even otherwise intelligent capable people. Never understood it myself. Being bad with money means saving is pretty impossible. Okay, being bad with money and having poor impulse control.

"Saving" is pretty dumb when you can invest.

Putting your excess income (that you don't need to live on) into a managed fund is a form of investment. Someone else decides which shares or resources to invest it into, you just choose between high-risk-high-return, low-risk-low-return, or somewhere in between.

Or you could sit down in the basement looking at your gold, and dreaming of global financial collapse to make it worth more.

Our society is pretty damned instant gratification these days, and the idea that you shouldn't overextend yourself doesn't sink in if they don't think about the impact it'll have on their finances in the future. Are they bad at math or just bad at planning past right now? The latter is pretty endemic, look at politicians, never look past the next election cycle, never go for the long term gain.

People still buy insurance. They work overtime in the hope of getting that promotion next year. They take care of their health like no generations before did. I think you're wrong in saying "society is pretty damned instant gratification". I think it's just in the matter of finance that people overextend themselves and perhaps you're blaming people for not forseeing the big recession. If they'd made the exact same financial decisions in '05 you'd be applauding them for seizing an opportunity instead of deprecating them for overextending themselves.

[Grave_n_idle]

Anyone in their right minds knows that gold coinage can be cut with other metals, thus devaluing the currency. It's not even a new trick.

Sure, but you can't whim a billion ounces of gold into existence in one day, but you can whim a billion dollars into existence

But the value of gold is predicated on it's alleged rarity. Go read an actual history book. Look at the 'panics' at the end of the 19th century.

You think the idea of a currency that can be manipulated by the government is a bad idea? You've obviously never really thought through the ramifications that can be even more effectively manipulated by unaccountable private individuals.

[AiliailiA]

Of course, that state of affairs can't last: Once the savings are gone and once credit is gone, demand will evaporate. In that sense, 2008 was the warning shot, presaging a coming decline of far greater magnitude.

Excellent. My years of training as a penniless bum will finally pay off, and I can take payment in gold watches for lessons in how to catch, dress and cook a rat.

No, actually. Quit with the prophet of doom shit please.

[Grave_n_idle]

Of course, that state of affairs can't last: Once the savings are gone and once credit is gone, demand will evaporate. In that sense, 2008 was the warning shot, presaging a coming decline of far greater magnitude.

Excellent. My years of training as a penniless bum will finally pay off, and I can take payment in gold watches for lessons in how to catch, dress and cook a rat.

No, actually. Quit with the prophet of doom shit please.

It's realistic, unfortunately. Not necessarily that we're hellbound in handbaskets - but certainly that our experience for the last 30 years or so... has been built on bubbles that were always inevitably going to be unsustainable. Realistically, we shouldn't be hoping for an apparent rebound that drives the economy to great new heights, because the crash will be even greater. We should be hoping for a readjustment down to a stable level that is obviously going to be below the peak bubble value.

That's not a prophecy of doom. That should actually be inspirational, if you think about it.

[Khadgar]

All transactions would have to be done in cash, which would absolutely tank the global banking industry. Credit would collapse for individuals. Though I wonder, are we still using paper to represent gold, or are we on an actual coins and bars economy? Makes a difference. I can't imagine going to a gold based economy and still using paper.

Of course people should save for rainy days, and I think most people would. Well they would were they better at math. A lot of people are just really shit at handling money, even otherwise intelligent capable people. Never understood it myself. Being bad with money means saving is pretty impossible. Okay, being bad with money and having poor impulse control.

"Saving" is pretty dumb when you can invest.

Putting your excess income (that you don't need to live on) into a managed fund is a form of investment. Someone else decides which shares or resources to invest it into, you just choose between high-risk-high-return, low-risk-low-return, or somewhere in between.

Or you could sit down in the basement looking at your gold, and dreaming of global financial collapse to make it worth more.

I think you're confusing me with someone else, or you're projecting. Since I've never advocated buying gold.

People still buy insurance. They work overtime in the hope of getting that promotion next year. They take care of their health like no generations before did. I think you're wrong in saying "society is pretty damned instant gratification". I think it's just in the matter of finance that people overextend themselves and perhaps you're blaming people for not forseeing the big recession. If they'd made the exact same financial decisions in '05 you'd be applauding them for seizing an opportunity instead of deprecating them for overextending themselves.

Credit cards are a perfect example of what I'm talking about and what you're not understanding. People use credit cards, rent-to-own check cashing (cash advance) services and all manner of other shit. So they can have that which they can't actually afford. Well that's not quite accurate, if they saved then bought they could afford it, by buying on credit (or RTO) they're getting things now, and paying much more for it later. That's what I was talking about, no clue where the fuck you got this from:

If they'd made the exact same financial decisions in '05 you'd be applauding them for seizing an opportunity instead of deprecating them for overextending themselves.

[The UK in Exile]

"Saving" is pretty dumb when you can invest.

Putting your excess income (that you don't need to live on) into a managed fund is a form of investment. Someone else decides which shares or resources to invest it into, you just choose between high-risk-high-return, low-risk-low-return, or somewhere in between.

Or you could sit down in the basement looking at your gold, and dreaming of global financial collapse to make it worth more.

I think you're confusing me with someone else, or you're projecting. Since I've never advocated buying gold.

saving doesn't work because inflation de-values the money you've saved.

investment doesn't always work because market fluctuations wipe out the money you've saved. buying gold is a form of investment, one thats based on A) the market going down and B) the magical properties of gold.

[AiliailiA]

Excellent. My years of training as a penniless bum will finally pay off, and I can take payment in gold watches for lessons in how to catch, dress and cook a rat.

No, actually. Quit with the prophet of doom shit please.

It's realistic, unfortunately. Not necessarily that we're hellbound in handbaskets - but certainly that our experience for the last 30 years or so... has been built on bubbles that were always inevitably going to be unsustainable. Realistically, we shouldn't be hoping for an apparent rebound that drives the economy to great new heights, because the crash will be even greater. We should be hoping for a readjustment down to a stable level that is obviously going to be below the peak bubble value.

That's not a prophecy of doom. That should actually be inspirational, if you think about it.

So, economic growth, interest rates, unemployment stays about where it is now, indefinitely? Maybe unemployment goes down a bit.

Alright for you perhaps. But I was looking to set up my own Rat-Kebab business

[Grave_n_idle]

It's realistic, unfortunately. Not necessarily that we're hellbound in handbaskets - but certainly that our experience for the last 30 years or so... has been built on bubbles that were always inevitably going to be unsustainable. Realistically, we shouldn't be hoping for an apparent rebound that drives the economy to great new heights, because the crash will be even greater. We should be hoping for a readjustment down to a stable level that is obviously going to be below the peak bubble value.

That's not a prophecy of doom. That should actually be inspirational, if you think about it.

So, economic growth, interest rates, unemployment stays about where it is now, indefinitely? Maybe unemployment goes down a bit.

Alright for you perhaps. But I was looking to set up my own Rat-Kebab business

There are 30 million Americans for whom it would be worth it if the only difference was employment picking up.

*shrugs*

[Khadgar]

I think you're confusing me with someone else, or you're projecting. Since I've never advocated buying gold.

saving doesn't work because inflation de-values the money you've saved.

investment doesn't always work because market fluctuations wipe out the money you've saved. buying gold is a form of investment, one thats based on A) the market going down and B) the magical properties of gold.

Buying gold is a bit like buying diamonds. You're buying something with no worth beyond that which people instill in it. And it's an item that's been artificially inflated in price. Gold is experiencing a bubble right now, and when that pops. Well, comedy ensues.

[Alien Space Bats]

It's realistic, unfortunately. Not necessarily that we're hellbound in handbaskets - but certainly that our experience for the last 30 years or so... has been built on bubbles that were always inevitably going to be unsustainable. Realistically, we shouldn't be hoping for an apparent rebound that drives the economy to great new heights, because the crash will be even greater. We should be hoping for a readjustment down to a stable level that is obviously going to be below the peak bubble value.

That's not a prophecy of doom. That should actually be inspirational, if you think about it.

That's one way of looking at it: Choose your inspirational model.

I see three possible models: Europe (try to maintain a social safety net and rich public services with a massive public infrastructure, battling debt and austerity all the way down [Dances with Debt]), Russia (exhaust the nation by trying to dominate the world militarily, collapsing into cronyism, criminality, and strongman rule [Dances with Fascism]), or China (embrace cheap labor, destroying trade unions and suppressing dissent; allow a small but vibrant middle and upper clash to flourish, while ruthlessly crushing everybody else under a jackboot [Dances with Revolution]).

I know which of those models I'd choose; somehow, though, I believe there are a lot of people who still think there's another option - one in which we get rid of government and then all get rich selling each other rocks through some kind of pyramid business scheme.

[Wikkiwallana]

Without paper pushers the "workers" wouldn't get paid.

Not true. Money has no value. Workers got "paid" since the dawn of time. It was called food, shelter, etc.

Money may not have value but it has utility. Smooths things out and keeps transactions simple. The barter system was a mess, that's why it got replaced.

Edit: typo

[The Black Forrest]

Of course, that state of affairs can't last: Once the savings are gone and once credit is gone, demand will evaporate. In that sense, 2008 was the warning shot, presaging a coming decline of far greater magnitude.

Excellent. My years of training as a penniless bum will finally pay off, and I can take payment in gold watches for lessons in how to catch, dress and cook a rat.

No, actually. Quit with the prophet of doom shit please.

Oh you were a philosophy student.

[The Black Forrest]

I'd argue it fits, in an expansive sort of way. If conservatives want to understand the liberal mind the only way to do so is via discussion of points we disagree on.

On the contrary, they only need to learn one thing: The ability to listen to somebody other than themselves.

Those who do have already quit this thread; it's the ones who don't that remain the problem.

Our society is pretty damned instant gratification these days, and the idea that you shouldn't overextend yourself doesn't sink in if they don't think about the impact it'll have on their finances in the future. Are they bad at math or just bad at planning past right now? The latter is pretty endemic, look at politicians, never look past the next election cycle, never go for the long term gain.

No, what people are into is not giving up their standard of living. Downward pressure on wages and salaries has eroded real income; people resist this by saving less, or drawing down their savings once matters reach the point where saving less is no longer enough.

Of course, that state of affairs can't last: Once the savings are gone and once credit is gone, demand will evaporate. In that sense, 2008 was the warning shot, presaging a coming decline of far greater magnitude.

It's a vicious cycle. Why save when savings gives you what is it .02%?

When I opened my very first savings account; I think it was 5% or was it 3%?

Credit is on the decline especially as they a quick to halve it if not cancel at first sign of trouble. I had a couple cards. Forgot to send in the payment on 1 and the halved my line to "protect my interests" They were stuned when I called in and canceled the line.

The other was an emergency card. It was halved because I wasn't using it. Canceled that as well.

Cash is kind in this household.

They must be getting desperate as I noticed the junk mail credit applications are more frequent these days.

[Tmutarakhan]

It's realistic, unfortunately. Not necessarily that we're hellbound in handbaskets - but certainly that our experience for the last 30 years or so... has been built on bubbles that were always inevitably going to be unsustainable. Realistically, we shouldn't be hoping for an apparent rebound that drives the economy to great new heights, because the crash will be even greater. We should be hoping for a readjustment down to a stable level that is obviously going to be below the peak bubble value.

That's not a prophecy of doom. That should actually be inspirational, if you think about it.

That's one way of looking at it: Choose your inspirational model.

I see three possible models: Europe (try to maintain a social safety net and rich public services with a massive public infrastructure, battling debt and austerity all the way down [Dances with Debt]), Russia (exhaust the nation by trying to dominate the world militarily, collapsing into cronyism, criminality, and strongman rule [Dances with Fascism]), or China (embrace cheap labor, destroying trade unions and suppressing dissent; allow a small but vibrant middle and upper clash to flourish, while ruthlessly crushing everybody else under a jackboot [Dances with Revolution]).

I know which of those models I'd choose; somehow, though, I believe there are a lot of people who still think there's another option - one in which we get rid of government and then all get rich selling each other rocks through some kind of pyramid business scheme.

You left out the "return to our hunter-gather past" model [Dances with Wolves].