Total Posts:24|Showing Posts:1-24
Jump to topic:

Is Gold Money? Ron Paul Owns Ben Bernanke

jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2011 2:10:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
4:30 - 5:30 - debate over whether gold is money.

One thing I'll miss about this guy in congress is the way he makes Ben Bernanke squirm when he owns his stupid @$$.

The expression on Ron's face at 5:11 is actually priceless - he knows Bernanke's about to get schooled.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2011 4:24:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Platinum, Silver, Uranium, Thorium, Palladium, Scandium, Yttrium, Lanthanum, Cerium, Praseodymium, Neodymium, Promethium, Samarium, Europium, Gadolinium, Terbium, Dysprosium, Holmium, Erbium, Thulium, Ytterbium, Lutetium, & Lithium should back our currency.
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2011 6:38:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/13/2011 5:10:51 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Ron Paul: If gold isn't money then yhy does the federal bank hold gold reserve?

Ben bernake: Tradition

Epic!

Haha I saw that, great stuff.
Paul-Why don't they hold diamonds?
pause
pause
pause
Bernanke-Well it's tradition, long term tradition
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2011 11:08:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/13/2011 6:38:25 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 7/13/2011 5:10:51 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Ron Paul: If gold isn't money then yhy does the federal bank hold gold reserve?

Ben bernake: Tradition

Epic!

Haha I saw that, great stuff.
Paul-Why don't they hold diamonds?
pause
pause
pause
Bernanke-Well it's tradition, long term tradition

Even better, even better...

Paul - Do you think gold is money?
...
....
.....
.................
Bernanke - No.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2011 3:39:44 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I love listening to Ron Paul, it's like that deranged grandfather who says we could get back into manufacturing if we just brought the slaves back.

"Gold is money."

Jesus.

Money is the demand for loans. It's not M1, it's not gold, it's not diamonds. We left the gold standard awhile back. You can't just count up all the gold, find a multiplier, and say "voila, that's how much money exists."

Gold is a commodity which, like every other commodity, has a value in currency.

The reason the world was on the gold standard and not the silver standard was that a certain point in history the relative existing amounts of gold and silver lead to a drain via Gresham's Law. The silver standard kept turning up on and off, but silver almost always got shunted out of the market.

If the world's economic history was slightly different, Ron Paul would be bitching about silver.

http://www.philipji.com...
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2011 10:08:13 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/15/2011 3:39:44 PM, Wnope wrote:
I love listening to Ron Paul, it's like that deranged grandfather who says we could get back into manufacturing if we just brought the slaves back.

"Gold is money."

Jesus.

Money is the demand for loans. It's not M1, it's not gold, it's not diamonds. We left the gold standard awhile back. You can't just count up all the gold, find a multiplier, and say "voila, that's how much money exists."

Gold is a commodity which, like every other commodity, has a value in currency.

The reason the world was on the gold standard and not the silver standard was that a certain point in history the relative existing amounts of gold and silver lead to a drain via Gresham's Law. The silver standard kept turning up on and off, but silver almost always got shunted out of the market.

If the world's economic history was slightly different, Ron Paul would be bitching about silver.

http://www.philipji.com...

What? Gold is more money than are Greenbacks, is the point.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2011 11:11:16 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/15/2011 10:08:13 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 7/15/2011 3:39:44 PM, Wnope wrote:
I love listening to Ron Paul, it's like that deranged grandfather who says we could get back into manufacturing if we just brought the slaves back.

"Gold is money."

Jesus.

Money is the demand for loans. It's not M1, it's not gold, it's not diamonds. We left the gold standard awhile back. You can't just count up all the gold, find a multiplier, and say "voila, that's how much money exists."

Gold is a commodity which, like every other commodity, has a value in currency.

The reason the world was on the gold standard and not the silver standard was that a certain point in history the relative existing amounts of gold and silver lead to a drain via Gresham's Law. The silver standard kept turning up on and off, but silver almost always got shunted out of the market.

If the world's economic history was slightly different, Ron Paul would be bitching about silver.

http://www.philipji.com...

What? Gold is more money than are Greenbacks, is the point.

No, it's more subtle than that. Ron Paul wanted Bernanke to say that money is the same as gold. If Bernanke agrees, then his own statements about loans make no sense.

However, if he maintains that gold is a commodity, and the money is more than that (which is how reality works), then his statement are consistent with each other.
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2011 11:48:30 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/15/2011 11:11:16 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/15/2011 10:08:13 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 7/15/2011 3:39:44 PM, Wnope wrote:
I love listening to Ron Paul, it's like that deranged grandfather who says we could get back into manufacturing if we just brought the slaves back.

"Gold is money."

Jesus.

Money is the demand for loans. It's not M1, it's not gold, it's not diamonds. We left the gold standard awhile back. You can't just count up all the gold, find a multiplier, and say "voila, that's how much money exists."

Gold is a commodity which, like every other commodity, has a value in currency.

The reason the world was on the gold standard and not the silver standard was that a certain point in history the relative existing amounts of gold and silver lead to a drain via Gresham's Law. The silver standard kept turning up on and off, but silver almost always got shunted out of the market.

If the world's economic history was slightly different, Ron Paul would be bitching about silver.

http://www.philipji.com...

What? Gold is more money than are Greenbacks, is the point.

No, it's more subtle than that. Ron Paul wanted Bernanke to say that money is the same as gold. If Bernanke agrees, then his own statements about loans make no sense.

However, if he maintains that gold is a commodity, and the money is more than that (which is how reality works), then his statement are consistent with each other.

What is money then, you can't define it.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/16/2011 12:11:17 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/15/2011 11:48:30 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 7/15/2011 11:11:16 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/15/2011 10:08:13 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 7/15/2011 3:39:44 PM, Wnope wrote:
I love listening to Ron Paul, it's like that deranged grandfather who says we could get back into manufacturing if we just brought the slaves back.

"Gold is money."

Jesus.

Money is the demand for loans. It's not M1, it's not gold, it's not diamonds. We left the gold standard awhile back. You can't just count up all the gold, find a multiplier, and say "voila, that's how much money exists."

Gold is a commodity which, like every other commodity, has a value in currency.

The reason the world was on the gold standard and not the silver standard was that a certain point in history the relative existing amounts of gold and silver lead to a drain via Gresham's Law. The silver standard kept turning up on and off, but silver almost always got shunted out of the market.

If the world's economic history was slightly different, Ron Paul would be bitching about silver.

http://www.philipji.com...

What? Gold is more money than are Greenbacks, is the point.

No, it's more subtle than that. Ron Paul wanted Bernanke to say that money is the same as gold. If Bernanke agrees, then his own statements about loans make no sense.

However, if he maintains that gold is a commodity, and the money is more than that (which is how reality works), then his statement are consistent with each other.

What is money then, you can't define it.

Read the link at the end of my post. It's a thick read, but very informative. It's the demand for loans.
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/16/2011 12:20:18 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/16/2011 12:11:17 AM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/15/2011 11:48:30 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 7/15/2011 11:11:16 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/15/2011 10:08:13 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 7/15/2011 3:39:44 PM, Wnope wrote:
I love listening to Ron Paul, it's like that deranged grandfather who says we could get back into manufacturing if we just brought the slaves back.

"Gold is money."

Jesus.

Money is the demand for loans. It's not M1, it's not gold, it's not diamonds. We left the gold standard awhile back. You can't just count up all the gold, find a multiplier, and say "voila, that's how much money exists."

Gold is a commodity which, like every other commodity, has a value in currency.

The reason the world was on the gold standard and not the silver standard was that a certain point in history the relative existing amounts of gold and silver lead to a drain via Gresham's Law. The silver standard kept turning up on and off, but silver almost always got shunted out of the market.

If the world's economic history was slightly different, Ron Paul would be bitching about silver.

http://www.philipji.com...

What? Gold is more money than are Greenbacks, is the point.

No, it's more subtle than that. Ron Paul wanted Bernanke to say that money is the same as gold. If Bernanke agrees, then his own statements about loans make no sense.

However, if he maintains that gold is a commodity, and the money is more than that (which is how reality works), then his statement are consistent with each other.

What is money then, you can't define it.

Read the link at the end of my post. It's a thick read, but very informative. It's the demand for loans.

It's not the demand for loans, it's a medium of exchange, a store of value, a unit of account etc.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2011 6:01:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Good lord, money is the demand for loans? So in an economy where credit is successfully banned (not something I advocate mind you, just for the sake of argument) money doesn't exist, regardless of how exchanges are conducted?

Which ivory tower did they pass out the weed in?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2011 6:07:45 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/17/2011 6:01:51 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Good lord, money is the demand for loans? So in an economy where credit is successfully banned (not something I advocate mind you, just for the sake of argument) money doesn't exist, regardless of how exchanges are conducted?

Which ivory tower did they pass out the weed in?

If someone says "how much money is there in the world" then your answer cannot be "the amount of gold with some mathematical connection to a variable representing the commodity price."

If we lived in a world without fractional banking and it had an ideal gold standard, then you could calculate "how much money exists" in that fashion.

I only came about this recently, and it goes against several oldies (Keynes to an extent, Miser, Friedman, the bunch).

If you've taken undergrad economics, I suggest my link. If I had not had access to that course, I would not have been able to understand the article. I can try and explain it, but it isn't easy.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2011 6:09:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/17/2011 6:01:51 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Which ivory tower did they pass out the weed in?

And don't worry, we buy our sh*t on the streets.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2011 6:11:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/17/2011 6:07:45 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/17/2011 6:01:51 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Good lord, money is the demand for loans? So in an economy where credit is successfully banned (not something I advocate mind you, just for the sake of argument) money doesn't exist, regardless of how exchanges are conducted?

Which ivory tower did they pass out the weed in?

If someone says "how much money is there in the world" then your answer cannot be "the amount of gold with some mathematical connection to a variable representing the commodity price."

If we lived in a world without fractional banking and it had an ideal gold standard, then you could calculate "how much money exists" in that fashion.

I only came about this recently, and it goes against several oldies (Keynes to an extent, Miser, Friedman, the bunch).

If you've taken undergrad economics, I suggest my link. If I had not had access to that course, I would not have been able to understand the article. I can try and explain it, but it isn't easy.

None of that answers my question. Links are long, my problem is short and either easily soluble or not soluble.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2011 6:12:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
although I agree you could not calculate "total money" by reference to gold alone... I would say "total money" is not a coherent question.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2011 6:39:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/17/2011 6:12:39 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
although I agree you could not calculate "total money" by reference to gold alone... I would say "total money" is not a coherent question.

Economists usually talk about money as "M1" which is defined as the total available money in the economic at a certain point.

Let's say Congress passes a law mandating that the reserve currency (not commodities or savings) must be live chickens. However, chickens are valued at a constant dollar amount and must be treated as legal tender.

Ron Paul would be asking "Are live chickens money?"
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2011 6:40:47 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/17/2011 6:39:02 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/17/2011 6:12:39 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
although I agree you could not calculate "total money" by reference to gold alone... I would say "total money" is not a coherent question.

Economists usually talk about money as "M1" which is defined as the total available money in the economic at a certain point.

Let's say Congress passes a law mandating that the reserve currency (not commodities or savings) must be live chickens. However, chickens are valued at a constant dollar amount and must be treated as legal tender.

Ron Paul would be asking "Are live chickens money?"

One other note. Let's say we sell three chickens and receive the dollar equivalent. Bernanke can say that they haven't lost money, but Ron Paul would response that live chickens are money, and we lost 3 live chickens.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2011 6:45:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/17/2011 6:39:02 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/17/2011 6:12:39 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
although I agree you could not calculate "total money" by reference to gold alone... I would say "total money" is not a coherent question.

Economists usually talk about money as "M1" which is defined as the total available money in the economic at a certain point.
Economists usually don't make sense ^_^.


Let's say Congress passes a law mandating that the reserve currency (not commodities or savings) must be live chickens. However, chickens are valued at a constant dollar amount and must be treated as legal tender.

Ron Paul would be asking "Are live chickens money?"
In a sense, they are. Certainly aren't currency though.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2011 6:49:58 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Notably, chickens can't be reserved very well. limited lifespan and all that.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2011 7:09:30 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/17/2011 6:49:58 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Notably, chickens can't be reserved very well. limited lifespan and all that.

Depreciation.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2011 10:16:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/17/2011 6:49:58 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Notably, chickens can't be reserved very well. limited lifespan and all that.

Plus you have to calculate the chicken feed, potential for becoming sick, offspring, etc . . . etc . . .
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2011 10:46:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/17/2011 10:16:39 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 7/17/2011 6:49:58 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Notably, chickens can't be reserved very well. limited lifespan and all that.

Plus you have to calculate the chicken feed, potential for becoming sick, offspring, etc . . . etc . . .

If things go haywire, the government can switch to uranium as a reserve currency. Two in one policy win.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2011 11:49:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/17/2011 10:46:14 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/17/2011 10:16:39 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 7/17/2011 6:49:58 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Notably, chickens can't be reserved very well. limited lifespan and all that.

Plus you have to calculate the chicken feed, potential for becoming sick, offspring, etc . . . etc . . .

If things go haywire, the government can switch to uranium as a reserve currency. Two in one policy win.

Uranium, Thorium, Iridium, and Rare Earth Elements shall be used as the backing for currency.
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.