Newsflash for the anti-Fed conspiracy nuts

[Toddsterpatriot]

of course if true you would present your best example. Think before you write!

When you find your proof that there was no inflation or deflation under the gold standard, be sure to let me know.

you don't seem to understand that the definition of a gold standard is that inflation is impossible. You present a graph of US history as if there was solid gold stanbdard in place for all of it. Was there? PLease say yes or no?

In truth we had a quasi gold standard with many variations over the years.

A solid gold standard makes inflation impossible and liberals all but illegal.

Wasn't the US under a gold standard?
Didn't prices flucuate, up and down, during this time?
If you're claiming price changes are impossible, you're wrong.
Is that your claim?

 

[DSGE]

...a link to that quote, or is that another one of those "everyone-knows-it-so-it's-true" things? Considering that a living market means prices are always changing, a complete lack of inflation/deflation couldn't mean stable money --it would have to mean frozen money.

...his famous K-Percent Rule, where the money supply would grow at the same rate as long run GDP growth. This would result in zero inflation on average. Later in his life he wanted to freeze the quantity of high powered money (A k-percent rule where k = 0): Milton Friedman on Money | EconTalk | Library of Economics and Liberty

You said Friedman wanted "no inflation". The links you gave had Freidman advocating "low inflation" or "declining inflation". That's different because zero inflation is impossible.

I said no such thing. That was my first post on the thread.

And "no inflation" isn't impossible at all. You could very easily give the central bank a constant price level target.

 

[DSGE]

The Gold Standard will not give you that.[/B][/SIZE] There is no such thing as a money supply with no inflation or deflation.

the Gold Standard for all intents and purposes prevents inflation and deflation because it ties the amount of money to the amount of gold.
Econ 101 class 1 day 1.

Really? They didn't teach you about the wild swings in monetary velocity or changes in the relative price of gold creating periods of high inflation/deflation? Might want to ask for your money back.

There is no reason ever to tie money to gold. If you want no inflation or deflation, then go with the most obvious and direct way to achieve it: Make the central bank mandate a target for a constant price level.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The Gold Standard will not give you that.[/B][/SIZE] There is no such thing as a money supply with no inflation or deflation.

the Gold Standard for all intents and purposes prevents inflation and deflation....

No it does not. There is absolutely no historical evidence of this. The U.S. went through periods of both inflation and deflation under the gold stanard. You are serioulsy ill informed.

...because it ties the amount of money to the amount of gold.

The supply of gold is not static, and even it it were, the prices of goods would change in response to supply and demand for the goods.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

don't be silly, Friedman wantred no inflation or the closest thing possible. Liberals want inflation so they can spend money on idiotic programs without raising taxes.

The government doesn't get more money when inflation happens you moron. If anything it makes it HARDER for the government to borrow. jesus christ you are stupid.

actually it called monetizing the debt. The liberals deficit spend, the Fed buys the debt, so taxes are not necessary and thus keeps interest rates low for all. More Econ 101. Sorry

Almost all of the debt is NOT bought by the Fed.

You're one of the most ignorant and dumb posters on this board.

 

[DSGE]

don't be silly, Friedman wantred no inflation or the closest thing possible. Liberals want inflation so they can spend money on idiotic programs without raising taxes.

The government doesn't get more money when inflation happens you moron. If anything it makes it HARDER for the government to borrow. jesus christ you are stupid.

actually it called monetizing the debt. The liberals deficit spend, the Fed buys the debt, so taxes are not necessary and thus keeps interest rates low for all. More Econ 101. Sorry

Is that the only course you took? Luckily Mark Thoma puts his Monetary Theory and Policy course online: Economics 470 - Monetary Theory and Policy - Fall 2011 - YouTube. Go and learn something.

The Fed doesn't monetize debt. They're not allowed to buy debt directly from the government.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

No inflation or deflation under the gold standard?
Where'd you hear that?

when the amount of money is tied to the amount of gold there is generally no inflation because inflation requires more money. Econ 101 class one day 1

You keep saying "Econ 101" as if that proves something, even though the facts contradict your claims. The U.S. had many years of inflation under specie backed currency. 21.69% in 1800 for instance. Measuring Worth - Measures of worth, inflation rates, saving calculator, relative value, worth of a dollar, worth of a pound, purchasing power, gold prices, GDP, history of wages, average wage

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

when the amount of money is tied to the amount of gold there is generally no inflation because inflation requires more money. Econ 101 class one day 1

So you can show that prices didn't change under the gold standard?
Should be easy, Econ 101.

THE?????what gold standard are you talking about???

One that really existed, instead of the white board theoretical model in your head. PROVE your way is better based on something that HAPPENED.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

THE?????what gold standard are you talking about???

The same one you're talking about.

I've been talking about one that Ron Paul wants to impliment!! Sorry! It is one where money is tied to gold so inflation is impossible.

Can you prove inflation is impossible under the Ron Paul Standard without saying "Econ 101" ?

 

[DSGE]

of course if true you would present your best example. Think before you write!

When you find your proof that there was no inflation or deflation under the gold standard, be sure to let me know.

you don't seem to understand that the definition of a gold standard is that inflation is impossible.

No it's not. The definition of a gold standard is that in order to issue base money you have to back it with a specified quantity of gold.

A solid gold standard makes inflation impossible

Might want to retake Econ 101, since you clearly failed.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

I've been talking about one that Ron Paul wants to impliment!! Sorry! It is one where money is tied to gold so inflation is impossible.

So why was inflation possible under previous gold standards?

of course inflation is only possible if you deviate from the gold standard. Is this really over your head?

The U.S. fixed the value of the dollar at $20.67 per troy ounce of gold from 1800 until 1914 you moron.

You seem to think the only thing that affects prices is the supply of money. You completely ignore the blatant fact that the supply of goods and services also effects prices. ECON 101 MORON. If there are less pork bellies available for sale - all else being equal, including the supply of money - pork bellies will cost more.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

You keep saying "Econ 101" as if that proves something, even though the facts contradict your claims. The U.S. had many years of inflation under specie backed currency. 21.69% in 1800 for instance.]

In the 1800s, even commercial banks in Canada and the United States issued their own banknotes, backed by their promises to pay in gold. Since they could lend more than they had to hold in reserves to meet their depositers demands, they actually could create money[or inflation]. This inevitably led to "runs" on banks when they could not meet their depositers demands and were bankrupt.

Econ 101????

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

You keep saying "Econ 101" as if that proves something, even though the facts contradict your claims. The U.S. had many years of inflation under specie backed currency. 21.69% in 1800 for instance.]

In the 1800s, even commercial banks in Canada and the United States issued their own banknotes, backed by their promises to pay in gold. Since they could lend more than they had to hold in reserves to meet their depositers demands, they actually could create money[or inflation]. This inevitably led to "runs" on banks when they could not meet their depositers demands and were bankrupt.

Econ 101????

Econ 101 - if you can't lend more than you have on deposit - you can't lend at all.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

You keep saying "Econ 101" as if that proves something, even though the facts contradict your claims. The U.S. had many years of inflation under specie backed currency. 21.69% in 1800 for instance.]

In the 1800s, even commercial banks in Canada and the United States issued their own banknotes, backed by their promises to pay in gold. Since they could lend more than they had to hold in reserves to meet their depositers demands, they actually could create money[or inflation]. This inevitably led to "runs" on banks when they could not meet their depositers demands and were bankrupt.

Econ 101????

Econ 101 - if you can't lend more than you have on deposit - you can't lend at all.

actually dear our subject was whether there was inflation under what you called a gold standard. Now perhaps you understand it was not really a gold standard. Sorry!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You keep saying "Econ 101" as if that proves something, even though the facts contradict your claims. The U.S. had many years of inflation under specie backed currency. 21.69% in 1800 for instance.]

In the 1800s, even commercial banks in Canada and the United States issued their own banknotes, backed by their promises to pay in gold. Since they could lend more than they had to hold in reserves to meet their depositers demands, they actually could create money[or inflation]. This inevitably led to "runs" on banks when they could not meet their depositers demands and were bankrupt.

Econ 101????

Since they could lend more than they had to hold in reserves to meet their depositers demands

Ummmm....if reserves are 10%, of course they can loan more (90%) than reserves.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

In the 1800s, even commercial banks in Canada and the United States issued their own banknotes, backed by their promises to pay in gold. Since they could lend more than they had to hold in reserves to meet their depositers demands, they actually could create money[or inflation]. This inevitably led to "runs" on banks when they could not meet their depositers demands and were bankrupt.

Econ 101????

Econ 101 - if you can't lend more than you have on deposit - you can't lend at all.

actually dear our subject was whether there was inflation under what you called a gold standard. Now perhaps you understand it was not really a gold standard. Sorry!

Now that we know there was inflation, what was it good for?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

In the 1800s, even commercial banks in Canada and the United States issued their own banknotes, backed by their promises to pay in gold. Since they could lend more than they had to hold in reserves to meet their depositers demands, they actually could create money[or inflation]. This inevitably led to "runs" on banks when they could not meet their depositers demands and were bankrupt.

Econ 101????

Econ 101 - if you can't lend more than you have on deposit - you can't lend at all.

actually dear our subject was whether there was inflation under what you called a gold standard. Now perhaps you understand it was not really a gold standard. Sorry!

Sure, when you get to change the defintions of words, anything can be anything you like.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Econ 101 - if you can't lend more than you have on deposit - you can't lend at all.

actually dear our subject was whether there was inflation under what you called a gold standard. Now perhaps you understand it was not really a gold standard. Sorry!

Sure, when you get to change the defintions of words, anything can be anything you like.

actually it was you who was pretending to yourself that we had a solid gold standard when we literally had 10,000 banks all issuing their own currency at will!!! Thats hardly a gold standard

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You keep saying "Econ 101" as if that proves something, even though the facts contradict your claims. The U.S. had many years of inflation under specie backed currency. 21.69% in 1800 for instance.]

In the 1800s, even commercial banks in Canada and the United States issued their own banknotes, backed by their promises to pay in gold. Since they could lend more than they had to hold in reserves to meet their depositers demands, they actually could create money[or inflation]. This inevitably led to "runs" on banks when they could not meet their depositers demands and were bankrupt.

Econ 101????

Econ 101 - if you can't lend more than you have on deposit - you can't lend at all.

Loans are less than deposits, not more.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

In the 1800s, even commercial banks in Canada and the United States issued their own banknotes, backed by their promises to pay in gold. Since they could lend more than they had to hold in reserves to meet their depositers demands, they actually could create money[or inflation]. This inevitably led to "runs" on banks when they could not meet their depositers demands and were bankrupt.

Econ 101????

Econ 101 - if you can't lend more than you have on deposit - you can't lend at all.

Loans are less than deposits, not more.

I meant if you can't lend from your deposits you can't lend at all. A bank that lends at all from deposits has a reserve less than 100%.