@ProofCollection said:
This is a great time to get into crypto if you're not already.
You ever seen one?
Yeah, it is like going to a casino, it can be fun. Now people are having fun. I bought $2K worth of DOGE at like $.15, IDGAF if I lose it but it is fun. BTW someone bought $200M in DOGE yesterday before Elon was announced as the head of DOGE - that person is a true gambler.
Crypto has had headwinds turn into tailwinds, that could be the first headwind for gold.
Was at a family event this week and met with some CNBC and other financial heavy-hitters. Bullish on gold....but SUPER bullish on crypto/BTC. I spoke to one guy with over $1 BB in BTC.
@ProofCollection said:
This is a great time to get into crypto if you're not already.
You ever seen one?
Yes, right next to my SLV and GLD
And God, right?
Yep - all intangibles that require faith.
You still ain't never seen one, and never will.
I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. Of course crypto isn't visible. And there's virtue in owning physical assets, but you can no longer ignore the importance of the virtual world and the technology that it brings with undeniable utility. It's not for everybody just like owning silver and gold bullion or even real estate is not for everyone.
I've often wondered why anyone would congratulate Gold (or Silver) on new highs. I'm thinking that congratulations should be issued to the holders of said metals. Dumb post? Yeah, but I've been up since 4:15 AM and my brain is grinding rusty gears
@ProofCollection said:
This is a great time to get into crypto if you're not already.
You ever seen one?
Yeah, it is like going to a casino, it can be fun. Now people are having fun. I bought $2K worth of DOGE at like $.15, IDGAF if I lose it but it is fun. BTW someone bought $200M in DOGE yesterday before Elon was announced as the head of DOGE - that person is a true gambler.
.
Not really a "gamble", if they had inside information.
@ProofCollection said:
This is a great time to get into crypto if you're not already.
You ever seen one?
Yes, right next to my SLV and GLD
And God, right?
Yep - all intangibles that require faith.
You still ain't never seen one, and never will.
I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. Of course crypto isn't visible. And there's virtue in owning physical assets, but you can no longer ignore the importance of the virtual world and the technology that it brings with undeniable utility. It's not for everybody just like owning silver and gold bullion or even real estate is not for everyone.
You can have your "virtual world". I'll take the real one.
@ProofCollection said:
This is a great time to get into crypto if you're not already.
You ever seen one?
Yeah, it is like going to a casino, it can be fun. Now people are having fun. I bought $2K worth of DOGE at like $.15, IDGAF if I lose it but it is fun. BTW someone bought $200M in DOGE yesterday before Elon was announced as the head of DOGE - that person is a true gambler.
.
Not really a "gamble", if they had inside information.
.
It probably is not insider trading with crypto since it is mostly not regulated.
@ProofCollection said:
This is a great time to get into crypto if you're not already.
You ever seen one?
Yeah, it is like going to a casino, it can be fun. Now people are having fun. I bought $2K worth of DOGE at like $.15, IDGAF if I lose it but it is fun. BTW someone bought $200M in DOGE yesterday before Elon was announced as the head of DOGE - that person is a true gambler.
.
Not really a "gamble", if they had inside information.
.
It probably is not insider trading with crypto since it is mostly not regulated.
I don't think insider trading applies to commodities.
@ProofCollection said:
This is a great time to get into crypto if you're not already.
You ever seen one?
Yeah, it is like going to a casino, it can be fun. Now people are having fun. I bought $2K worth of DOGE at like $.15, IDGAF if I lose it but it is fun. BTW someone bought $200M in DOGE yesterday before Elon was announced as the head of DOGE - that person is a true gambler.
.
Not really a "gamble", if they had inside information.
.
It probably is not insider trading with crypto since it is mostly not regulated.
I don't think insider trading applies to commodities.
.
I didn't claim that it was illicit "insider trading".
I don't think anyone would gamble like that without some "inside information" to put the odds in their favor.
@ProofCollection said:
This is a great time to get into crypto if you're not already.
You ever seen one?
I've seen the profits they can provide. Over and over.
Isn't that the way a Ponzi scheme (aka pyramid scheme) is supposed to work? Just don't be left holding the bag when it eventually collapses.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
@jmski52 said: the market that’s most manipulated by the Fed
Isnt that their job?
manipulated markets are dishonest from the get-go
Before the FED the USA frequently suffered 25% or greater declines in economic activity (recessions). Is that the economy you would prefer?
By comparison, the 2008 recession resulted in about a 5% decline in activity.
.
Before the FED, the entities responsible for mismanaging their affairs and causing recessions got what they deserved.
After the FED, they got bailouts. Even the FED itself got a bailout in 1933.
Economic growth and technological and industrial advancements in the United States were quite strong during the period of about 1878-1906 (before the FED existed).
@jmski52 said: the market that’s most manipulated by the Fed
Isnt that their job?
manipulated markets are dishonest from the get-go
Before the FED the USA frequently suffered 25% or greater declines in economic activity (recessions). Is that the economy you would prefer?
By comparison, the 2008 recession resulted in about a 5% decline in activity.
.
Before the FED, the entities responsible for mismanaging their affairs and causing recessions got what they deserved.
After the FED, they got bailouts. Even the FED itself got a bailout in 1933.
JP6 got absolutely crushed. He deserved that?
Economic growth and technological and industrial advancements in the United States were quite strong during the period of about 1878-1906 (before the FED existed).
.
Not sure your point....the US suffered major recessions then.
@jmski52 said: the market that’s most manipulated by the Fed
Isnt that their job?
manipulated markets are dishonest from the get-go
Before the FED the USA frequently suffered 25% or greater declines in economic activity (recessions). Is that the economy you would prefer?
By comparison, the 2008 recession resulted in about a 5% decline in activity.
.
Before the FED, the entities responsible for mismanaging their affairs and causing recessions got what they deserved.
After the FED, they got bailouts. Even the FED itself got a bailout in 1933.
JP6 got absolutely crushed. He deserved that?
Economic growth and technological and industrial advancements in the United States were quite strong during the period of about 1878-1906 (before the FED existed).
.
Not sure your point....the US suffered major recessions then.
.
Nobody in the general public ever got "crushed" to a degree that was even close to the Great Depression. And the FED was responsible for that depression.
It can certainly be debated whether the fed's "management" of the economy has been a net good or bad. Hiding true price discovery causes financial institutions to behave differently (probably more boldly/recklessly) than they would otherwise. Certainly markets in the past were a lot less efficient than they are today. But I'm still of the opinion that we shouldn't have a private banking entity (the fed) in charge of these decisions and mostly printing money that the US then borrows. Let interest rates go where they need to, let banks fail when they make bad decisions.
FED management of the economy boils down to their making sure banks are strong (or appear to be strong - optics). The economy is built around the condition of the banks. 2008 financial crisis proved this to be true.
The government is incapable of ever managing the economy. That is why communism collapsed. It is now socialism’s turn - Martin Armstrong
@derryb said:
FED management of the economy boils down to their making sure banks are strong (or appear to be strong - optics). The economy is built around the condition of the banks. 2008 financial crisis proved this to be true.
Sure, but would banks do what they do if they didn't have things like the overnight lending facility and someone there to bail them out? They'd probably keep much higher reserves and be a little more conservative (and of course, make less money). And would we have as many problems if the banks were more conservative?
@derryb said:
FED management of the economy boils down to their making sure banks are strong (or appear to be strong - optics). The economy is built around the condition of the banks. 2008 financial crisis proved this to be true.
Sure, but would banks do what they do if they didn't have things like the overnight lending facility and someone there to bail them out? They'd probably keep much higher reserves and be a little more conservative (and of course, make less money). And would we have as many problems if the banks were more conservative?
.
There would probably be a lot less debt overhanging everything. Total debt service payments and mortgage interest payments would be much lower. Multi-generational families would stay living together longer (like they do in other countries) until enough money was saved to pay for most or all of a new house. As it is now, many families spend a large chunk of their income on mortgage interest. Student loans would not be the norm. Instead of loaning out money for college, which causes students to bid up the cost of going to college, colleges would have to adjust and make attending them more affordable. Graduates wouldn't have to start their lives in a deep debt hole.
Of course, the banks wouldn't like that since their income would be diminished and they would no longer be the "middle-man" in all these transactions.
@jmski52 said: the market that’s most manipulated by the Fed
Isnt that their job?
manipulated markets are dishonest from the get-go
Before the FED the USA frequently suffered 25% or greater declines in economic activity (recessions). Is that the economy you would prefer?
By comparison, the 2008 recession resulted in about a 5% decline in activity.
.
Before the FED, the entities responsible for mismanaging their affairs and causing recessions got what they deserved.
After the FED, they got bailouts. Even the FED itself got a bailout in 1933.
JP6 got absolutely crushed. He deserved that?
Economic growth and technological and industrial advancements in the United States were quite strong during the period of about 1878-1906 (before the FED existed).
.
Not sure your point....the US suffered major recessions then.
.
Nobody in the general public ever got "crushed" to a degree that was even close to the Great Depression. And the FED was responsible for that depression.
.
So it's ok if J6P just gets crushed and not excessively crushed? OK
Yes, the FED was around then and so was CONGRESS. Remember those tariffs in 1930, that CONGRESS passed. CONGRESS was responsible. And now we have a new self-titled Tariff Man.
@jmski52 said: the market that’s most manipulated by the Fed
Isnt that their job?
manipulated markets are dishonest from the get-go
Before the FED the USA frequently suffered 25% or greater declines in economic activity (recessions). Is that the economy you would prefer?
By comparison, the 2008 recession resulted in about a 5% decline in activity.
.
Before the FED, the entities responsible for mismanaging their affairs and causing recessions got what they deserved.
After the FED, they got bailouts. Even the FED itself got a bailout in 1933.
JP6 got absolutely crushed. He deserved that?
Economic growth and technological and industrial advancements in the United States were quite strong during the period of about 1878-1906 (before the FED existed).
.
Not sure your point....the US suffered major recessions then.
.
Nobody in the general public ever got "crushed" to a degree that was even close to the Great Depression. And the FED was responsible for that depression.
.
So it's ok if J6P just gets crushed and not excessively crushed? OK
Yes, the FED was around then and so was CONGRESS. Remember those tariffs in 1930, that CONGRESS passed. CONGRESS was responsible. And now we have a new self-titled Tariff Man.
We never learn. We are weak, weak, weak.
This is gonna be fun!!!
Tariffs are but one piece of a larger economic strategy. The pundits and message board commentators like to discuss them in isolation. I'll take the wait and see approach for when the complete strategy is unveiled/implemented. Seemed like Tariffs worked pretty well prior to the 1900's.
As the course is today, the debt and economic situation is unsustainable. It will probably survive longer than anyone expects, but the fiat experiment in its current form won't last forever. At that point J6P will be absolutely crushed.
@jmski52 said: the market that’s most manipulated by the Fed
Isnt that their job?
manipulated markets are dishonest from the get-go
Before the FED the USA frequently suffered 25% or greater declines in economic activity (recessions). Is that the economy you would prefer?
By comparison, the 2008 recession resulted in about a 5% decline in activity.
.
Before the FED, the entities responsible for mismanaging their affairs and causing recessions got what they deserved.
After the FED, they got bailouts. Even the FED itself got a bailout in 1933.
JP6 got absolutely crushed. He deserved that?
Economic growth and technological and industrial advancements in the United States were quite strong during the period of about 1878-1906 (before the FED existed).
.
Not sure your point....the US suffered major recessions then.
.
Nobody in the general public ever got "crushed" to a degree that was even close to the Great Depression. And the FED was responsible for that depression.
.
So it's ok if J6P just gets crushed and not excessively crushed? OK
Yes, the FED was around then and so was CONGRESS. Remember those tariffs in 1930, that CONGRESS passed. CONGRESS was responsible. And now we have a new self-titled Tariff Man.
We never learn. We are weak, weak, weak.
This is gonna be fun!!!
.
The goal of the FED and banks has always been to maximize debt service payments.
They want people to take on debt, and to service that debt (pay the interest).
But sometimes they go too far and J6P just can't pay any more. That situation would actually be worse for the banks than for J6P (who can just walk away and/or declare bankruptcy). Except, however, that when it goes bad like this, the banks are the ones that get the bailout, not J6P.
@derryb said:
Tariffs are anti-globalization. I'm all for anything that will create a new US industrial revolution.
Me too. But we are too weak to endure the accompanying pain..
Besides, who we gonna sell $3000 cell phones or $10,000 refrigerators to?
A more sensible and effective solution would be for all of us to stop buying so much crap. Keep your dang money in your pocket. That would solve almost all our ills.
would banks do what they do if they didn't have things like the overnight lending facility and someone there to bail them out? They'd probably keep much higher reserves and be a little more conservative (and of course, make less money).
Why in the world should banks be treated any differently than any other corporate entity under the law? Bailouts allow preferential treatment of winners at the expense of everyone else, primarily JP6. This is wrong, if you believe in such archaic concepts such as right or wrong. Moral hazard? There shouldn't even be a concept like moral hazard as it applies to money & banking. But, there is.
End the Fed.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
Before the FED, the entities responsible for mismanaging their affairs and causing recessions got what they deserved. After the FED, they got bailouts. Even the FED itself got a bailout in 1933. Economic growth and technological and industrial advancements in the United States were quite strong during the period of about 1878-1906 (before the FED existed).
You forgot the Panics (i.e., recessions/depressions) that also happened.
@jmski52 said:
_would banks do what they do if they didn't have things like the overnight lending facility and someone there to bail them out? They'd probably keep much higher reserves and be a little more conservative (and of course, make less money). Why in the world should banks be treated any differently than any other corporate entity under the law? Bailouts allow preferential treatment of winners at the expense of everyone else, primarily JP6. This is wrong, if you believe in such archaic concepts such as right or wrong. Moral hazard? There shouldn't even be a concept like moral hazard as it applies to money & banking. But, there is. End the Fed.
Show us 1 of these bailouts. Show us.
Banking is highly cyclical and that is why we have a Fed. Economic and monetary know-nothings can wail all they want but they won't put their $$$ where their mouths are.
" Banking is highly cyclical and that is why we have a Fed. Economic and monetary know-nothings can wail all they want but they won't put their $$$ where their mouths are. "
I suppose it can be argued that the FED just 'brokered' the deals.... but.... they provided loans to make it happen. Or, perhaps this is just a 'normal' expected function of the FED. Yes, the loans were paid back... but could still be viewed as a bailout. After all, the bank was not allowed to fail.... while others WERE allowed to fail. But I'm sure the 'experts' will show me the fallacy in my thinking.
" Bear Stearns—like Bank of America, Citigroup, and AIG—was deemed too big to fail. Its collapse, it was feared, posed systemic risks to the market. The Federal Reserve brokered a merger between Bear Stearns and JPMorgan Chase. To facilitate the deal, the Fed provided a $12.9 billion bridge loan, which was repaid with interest.27
Federal Reserve History. “Support for Specific Institutions.”
The Fed then lent $28.82 billion to a Delaware limited liability company created to buy financial assets from Bear Stearns.28 "
Actually the Federal Reserve History " Support for Specific Institutions." makes some interesting reading of what they have been involved with. Just another snippet:
"On November 23, 2008, the Treasury, the Federal Reserve, and the FDIC jointly announced that the U.S. government would provide support to Citigroup to contribute to financial market stability. In December 2009, the Treasury, the Federal Reserve, and the FDIC agreed to terminate the Master Agreement dated January 15, 2009, with Citigroup. In consideration for terminating the Master Agreement, the FRBNY received a $50 million termination fee from Citigroup."
If I recall, (but don't remember for sure without doing some more looking into it), even though Citigroup paid the FRBNY $50 million, it was to 'release' Citigroup from an agreement they had made, which saved them (Citigroup) a lot of money that they still owed. In other words, a 'sweetheart' deal, and some in the public were not too happy about that.
@jmski52 said:
_would banks do what they do if they didn't have things like the overnight lending facility and someone there to bail them out? They'd probably keep much higher reserves and be a little more conservative (and of course, make less money). Why in the world should banks be treated any differently than any other corporate entity under the law? Bailouts allow preferential treatment of winners at the expense of everyone else, primarily JP6. This is wrong, if you believe in such archaic concepts such as right or wrong. Moral hazard? There shouldn't even be a concept like moral hazard as it applies to money & banking. But, there is. End the Fed.
Show us 1 of these bailouts. Show us.
Banking is highly cyclical and that is why we have a Fed. Economic and monetary know-nothings can wail all they want but they won't put their $$$ where their mouths are.
Before the FED, the entities responsible for mismanaging their affairs and causing recessions got what they deserved. After the FED, they got bailouts. Even the FED itself got a bailout in 1933. Economic growth and technological and industrial advancements in the United States were quite strong during the period of about 1878-1906 (before the FED existed).
You forgot the Panics (i.e., recessions/depressions) that also happened.
No bailouts of the banks or of the Fed, BTW.
.
You are, at best, "uninformed".
April, 1933.
From 1914 up to that point, the Federal Reserve Bank had issued gold obligations in the form of gold-clause currency notes ("redeemable in gold on demand"). The FED had no gold of its own. But that didn't stop them from issuing 56,000 metric tons worth. That was 56,000 metric tons of gold that was on the FED balance sheet as a liability. When France and other countries started demanding gold for the notes, FDR bailed out the FED by cancelling those gold obligations.
A person might wonder why would the FED issue that much un-backed currency ? For every such Federal Reserve Note that was accepted in circulation and in commerce, the corresponding face value amount would show up on the FED's balance sheet as a liability. However, this amounted to a zero-percent interest loan from the general economy to the FED. And the FED could then take the loaned money and invest it in anything that paid interest, such as US Treasury Bonds.
And this was also a time when the FED kept 100% of its profits.
As I have stated before:
I sure wish I could borrow billions of dollars with no interest, invest that money in Treasury Bonds, keep all the proceeds, and have the government bail me out if things go sour.
Off the top of my head, it was Goldman Sachs who was indirectly bailed out in 2008 when a division of AIG was going belly-up and was bailed out so that Goldman could be made whole. Otherwise, they'd have been in serious financial trouble.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
Banking is highly cyclical and that is why we have a Fed. Economic and monetary know-nothings can wail all they want but they won't put their $$$ where their mouths are.
We don't need need a Federal Bank to create money out of thin air and lend it to us. We need full transparency and good regulation.
What do they do that a government entity couldn't? Why does the US have to borrow all of its money rather than issuing its own currency?
Exactly! Eliminating the Fed and making the Treasury Dept. transparent would change monetary policy from a corrupt shell game into a more honest accounting system that would begin to hold Congress more accountable, which is badly needed.
The system is going to change one way or the other, and it might as well be for the better. Eliminate fiat currency, debt financing and fractional reserve banking. See what happens when things get real. They are going to get real anyway.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
Comments
And God, right?
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Yep - all intangibles that require faith.
Yeah, it is like going to a casino, it can be fun. Now people are having fun. I bought $2K worth of DOGE at like $.15, IDGAF if I lose it but it is fun. BTW someone bought $200M in DOGE yesterday before Elon was announced as the head of DOGE - that person is a true gambler.
Crypto has had headwinds turn into tailwinds, that could be the first headwind for gold.
Was at a family event this week and met with some CNBC and other financial heavy-hitters. Bullish on gold....but SUPER bullish on crypto/BTC. I spoke to one guy with over $1 BB in BTC.
.> @taxmad said:
You still ain't never seen one, and never will.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Not denying that. You won't see any intangible (stock, bond, etc) either.
I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. Of course crypto isn't visible. And there's virtue in owning physical assets, but you can no longer ignore the importance of the virtual world and the technology that it brings with undeniable utility. It's not for everybody just like owning silver and gold bullion or even real estate is not for everyone.
I've often wondered why anyone would congratulate Gold (or Silver) on new highs. I'm thinking that congratulations should be issued to the holders of said metals. Dumb post? Yeah, but I've been up since 4:15 AM and my brain is grinding rusty gears
.
Not really a "gamble", if they had inside information.
.
You do all the time. So does everyone else.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
You can have your "virtual world". I'll take the real one.
We'll see who laughs last.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
It probably is not insider trading with crypto since it is mostly not regulated.
I don't think insider trading applies to commodities.
.
I didn't claim that it was illicit "insider trading".
I don't think anyone would gamble like that without some "inside information" to put the odds in their favor.
.
I've seen the profits they can provide. Over and over.
Have you ever seen a share of TSLA?
The government is incapable of ever managing the economy. That is why communism collapsed. It is now socialism’s turn - Martin Armstrong
Isn't that the way a Ponzi scheme (aka pyramid scheme) is supposed to work? Just don't be left holding the bag when it eventually collapses.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Just like any market. Some buy, some sell. No more a ponzi than printing new dollars to cover the debt created by the previous press run.
The government is incapable of ever managing the economy. That is why communism collapsed. It is now socialism’s turn - Martin Armstrong
I've seen tesla cars and their cars and battery manufacturing plants. It ain't virtual.
And yes, I can get a share of tsla and put it in my pocket, burn it, or make an airplane.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Interest rates, the price of money, are the most important market. And, perversely, they’re the market that’s most manipulated by the Fed
Isnt that their job?
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
the market that’s most manipulated by the Fed
Isnt that their job?
manipulated markets are dishonest from the get-go
I knew it would happen.
That's how they see it. How do you see it?
The government is incapable of ever managing the economy. That is why communism collapsed. It is now socialism’s turn - Martin Armstrong
Before the FED the USA frequently suffered 25% or greater declines in economic activity (recessions). Is that the economy you would prefer?
By comparison, the 2008 recession resulted in about a 5% decline in activity.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
.
Before the FED, the entities responsible for mismanaging their affairs and causing recessions got what they deserved.
After the FED, they got bailouts. Even the FED itself got a bailout in 1933.
Economic growth and technological and industrial advancements in the United States were quite strong during the period of about 1878-1906 (before the FED existed).
.
JP6 got absolutely crushed. He deserved that?
Not sure your point....the US suffered major recessions then.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
.
Nobody in the general public ever got "crushed" to a degree that was even close to the Great Depression. And the FED was responsible for that depression.
.
It can certainly be debated whether the fed's "management" of the economy has been a net good or bad. Hiding true price discovery causes financial institutions to behave differently (probably more boldly/recklessly) than they would otherwise. Certainly markets in the past were a lot less efficient than they are today. But I'm still of the opinion that we shouldn't have a private banking entity (the fed) in charge of these decisions and mostly printing money that the US then borrows. Let interest rates go where they need to, let banks fail when they make bad decisions.
FED management of the economy boils down to their making sure banks are strong (or appear to be strong - optics). The economy is built around the condition of the banks. 2008 financial crisis proved this to be true.
The government is incapable of ever managing the economy. That is why communism collapsed. It is now socialism’s turn - Martin Armstrong
Sure, but would banks do what they do if they didn't have things like the overnight lending facility and someone there to bail them out? They'd probably keep much higher reserves and be a little more conservative (and of course, make less money). And would we have as many problems if the banks were more conservative?
.
There would probably be a lot less debt overhanging everything. Total debt service payments and mortgage interest payments would be much lower. Multi-generational families would stay living together longer (like they do in other countries) until enough money was saved to pay for most or all of a new house. As it is now, many families spend a large chunk of their income on mortgage interest. Student loans would not be the norm. Instead of loaning out money for college, which causes students to bid up the cost of going to college, colleges would have to adjust and make attending them more affordable. Graduates wouldn't have to start their lives in a deep debt hole.
Of course, the banks wouldn't like that since their income would be diminished and they would no longer be the "middle-man" in all these transactions.
.
So it's ok if J6P just gets crushed and not excessively crushed? OK
Yes, the FED was around then and so was CONGRESS. Remember those tariffs in 1930, that CONGRESS passed. CONGRESS was responsible. And now we have a new self-titled Tariff Man.
We never learn. We are weak, weak, weak.
This is gonna be fun!!!
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Tariffs are but one piece of a larger economic strategy. The pundits and message board commentators like to discuss them in isolation. I'll take the wait and see approach for when the complete strategy is unveiled/implemented. Seemed like Tariffs worked pretty well prior to the 1900's.
As the course is today, the debt and economic situation is unsustainable. It will probably survive longer than anyone expects, but the fiat experiment in its current form won't last forever. At that point J6P will be absolutely crushed.
.
The goal of the FED and banks has always been to maximize debt service payments.
They want people to take on debt, and to service that debt (pay the interest).
But sometimes they go too far and J6P just can't pay any more. That situation would actually be worse for the banks than for J6P (who can just walk away and/or declare bankruptcy). Except, however, that when it goes bad like this, the banks are the ones that get the bailout, not J6P.
.
Tariffs are anti-globalization. I'm all for anything that will create a new US industrial revolution.
The government is incapable of ever managing the economy. That is why communism collapsed. It is now socialism’s turn - Martin Armstrong
Me too. But we are too weak to endure the accompanying pain..
Besides, who we gonna sell $3000 cell phones or $10,000 refrigerators to?
A more sensible and effective solution would be for all of us to stop buying so much crap. Keep your dang money in your pocket. That would solve almost all our ills.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
would banks do what they do if they didn't have things like the overnight lending facility and someone there to bail them out? They'd probably keep much higher reserves and be a little more conservative (and of course, make less money).
Why in the world should banks be treated any differently than any other corporate entity under the law? Bailouts allow preferential treatment of winners at the expense of everyone else, primarily JP6. This is wrong, if you believe in such archaic concepts such as right or wrong. Moral hazard? There shouldn't even be a concept like moral hazard as it applies to money & banking. But, there is.
End the Fed.
I knew it would happen.
Agree. If it's ever going to happen, it's going to be in the next 4 years or never (under this government anyway).
Are we prepared?
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
You forgot the Panics (i.e., recessions/depressions) that also happened.
No bailouts of the banks or of the Fed, BTW.
Show us 1 of these bailouts. Show us.
Banking is highly cyclical and that is why we have a Fed. Economic and monetary know-nothings can wail all they want but they won't put their $$$ where their mouths are.
we do this every time we buy gold.
The government is incapable of ever managing the economy. That is why communism collapsed. It is now socialism’s turn - Martin Armstrong
" Show us 1 of these bailouts. Show us.
"
" Banking is highly cyclical and that is why we have a Fed. Economic and monetary know-nothings can wail all they want but they won't put their $$$ where their mouths are. "
I suppose it can be argued that the FED just 'brokered' the deals.... but.... they provided loans to make it happen. Or, perhaps this is just a 'normal' expected function of the FED. Yes, the loans were paid back... but could still be viewed as a bailout. After all, the bank was not allowed to fail.... while others WERE allowed to fail. But I'm sure the 'experts' will show me the fallacy in my thinking.
" Bear Stearns—like Bank of America, Citigroup, and AIG—was deemed too big to fail. Its collapse, it was feared, posed systemic risks to the market. The Federal Reserve brokered a merger between Bear Stearns and JPMorgan Chase. To facilitate the deal, the Fed provided a $12.9 billion bridge loan, which was repaid with interest.27
Federal Reserve History. “Support for Specific Institutions.”
The Fed then lent $28.82 billion to a Delaware limited liability company created to buy financial assets from Bear Stearns.28 "
Actually the Federal Reserve History " Support for Specific Institutions." makes some interesting reading of what they have been involved with. Just another snippet:
"On November 23, 2008, the Treasury, the Federal Reserve, and the FDIC jointly announced that the U.S. government would provide support to Citigroup to contribute to financial market stability. In December 2009, the Treasury, the Federal Reserve, and the FDIC agreed to terminate the Master Agreement dated January 15, 2009, with Citigroup. In consideration for terminating the Master Agreement, the FRBNY received a $50 million termination fee from Citigroup."
If I recall, (but don't remember for sure without doing some more looking into it), even though Citigroup paid the FRBNY $50 million, it was to 'release' Citigroup from an agreement they had made, which saved them (Citigroup) a lot of money that they still owed. In other words, a 'sweetheart' deal, and some in the public were not too happy about that.
.
You are, at best, "uninformed".
April, 1933.
From 1914 up to that point, the Federal Reserve Bank had issued gold obligations in the form of gold-clause currency notes ("redeemable in gold on demand"). The FED had no gold of its own. But that didn't stop them from issuing 56,000 metric tons worth. That was 56,000 metric tons of gold that was on the FED balance sheet as a liability. When France and other countries started demanding gold for the notes, FDR bailed out the FED by cancelling those gold obligations.
A person might wonder why would the FED issue that much un-backed currency ? For every such Federal Reserve Note that was accepted in circulation and in commerce, the corresponding face value amount would show up on the FED's balance sheet as a liability. However, this amounted to a zero-percent interest loan from the general economy to the FED. And the FED could then take the loaned money and invest it in anything that paid interest, such as US Treasury Bonds.
And this was also a time when the FED kept 100% of its profits.
As I have stated before:
I sure wish I could borrow billions of dollars with no interest, invest that money in Treasury Bonds, keep all the proceeds, and have the government bail me out if things go sour.
.
Show us 1 of these bailouts. Show us.
Off the top of my head, it was Goldman Sachs who was indirectly bailed out in 2008 when a division of AIG was going belly-up and was bailed out so that Goldman could be made whole. Otherwise, they'd have been in serious financial trouble.
I knew it would happen.
Oh no, not this. Someone has to be the Wizard behind the curtain.
We don't need need a Federal Bank to create money out of thin air and lend it to us. We need full transparency and good regulation.
I don't think this is possible in the global economy. I think what we need is to bring transparency to the FED.
Why? What do they do that a government entity couldn't? Why does the US have to borrow all of its money rather than issuing its own currency?
There is a new industrial revolution going on now. The rise of artificial intelligence and big data technologies is already changing your life.
What do they do that a government entity couldn't? Why does the US have to borrow all of its money rather than issuing its own currency?
Exactly! Eliminating the Fed and making the Treasury Dept. transparent would change monetary policy from a corrupt shell game into a more honest accounting system that would begin to hold Congress more accountable, which is badly needed.
The system is going to change one way or the other, and it might as well be for the better. Eliminate fiat currency, debt financing and fractional reserve banking. See what happens when things get real. They are going to get real anyway.
I knew it would happen.