America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 8 days ago by jeebling. 97 replies replies.
2 Pages<12
A Brief History of the Fed’s Uneasy Peace With the White House
Abrignac Offline
#51 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,468
I’ve no interest in reading a 600 page book about why and/or how the Fed should be dismantled. To fill that many pages it would either require a very nuanced plan or include quite a bit of opinion. So without some sort of preamble I’ll pass.

On the other hand it seems a fairly simple bullet list of objectives with plan of execution should be easy to articulate.

That said can anyone who believes we should dismantle the Fed post say a 10-15 step process? Not asking for details. Just a simple bullet list in the order things should be done.
RayR Offline
#52 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 9,006
Abrignac wrote:
I’ve no interest in reading a 600 page book about why and/or how the Fed should be dismantled. To fill that many pages it would either require a very nuanced plan or include quite a bit of opinion. So without some sort of preamble I’ll pass.

On the other hand it seems a fairly simple bullet list of objectives with plan of execution should be easy to articulate.

That said can anyone who believes we should dismantle the Fed post say a 10-15 step process? Not asking for details. Just a simple bullet list in the order things should be done.


So book learnin' and listening isn't your THING...huh? You want everything distilled down to a bullet list so you can digest it? SAD. Sad
rfenst Offline
#53 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,601
DrMaddVibe wrote:
My take on the Federal Reserve is what Ron Paul warned us all about. They need to be audited. It's a criminal enterprise.

I have zero problem with an audit, especially those performed on a regular basis, say quarterly?
rfenst Offline
#54 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,601
jeebling wrote:
My argument is that the FED is the instrument of financial disaster. It has failed in its mission. The market economy can’t self-regulate under the FED.

The market economy is not nearly liquid enough or sufficient to replace the fed in the short or intermediate run. If it could provide the liquidity in the long run, there is the question of what occurs in the time between now and how and when market liquidity would match demand.
rfenst Offline
#55 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,601
jeebling wrote:
Fraud, of course. They have cheated middle class Americans out of their savings and retirement plans for the purpose of the political gain of the government. These changes they make to the monetary system are not approved by representation but by political appointees. This is fraud.

No. "Fraud" is generally defined as an intentional, material, misrepresentation which induces another to act to his own detriment in a way that would not otherwise have occurred, but for the material, intentional, misrepresentation. There is no such thing as "fraud after the fact" like you are alleging.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#56 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,735
rfenst wrote:
I have zero problem with an audit, especially those performed on a regular basis, say quarterly?


Well...the Federal Reserve seems to feel that one isn't needed.

Ever.

What if...and I know it's a big if...but what if they opened the vault at Ft. Knox and there was NOTHING there?
rfenst Offline
#57 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,601
RobertHively wrote:
For Fenster #28:

Same here, but I've asked you multiple questions over the years and most of the time I get crickets. Though it is absolutely your prerogative if you don't want to answer. Sometimes, I don't get on CBID for up to close to a week. By then, too much in a thread has gone so "down hill' that I just don't want to start any new chit up again.

And I agree with that statement for the most part, but if you state your opinion up front it helps to eliminate the possibility of misinterpretation.(most of the time anyway) I thought if you posted an article that meant you agreed with it, at least to some extent, that's why I asked you in post #6 just to make sure. No. My posts of articles are subjects I find interesting and don't necessarily reflect my opinions.

Over the years I've read a lot, if not most, of your posts, and although a lot of the copy and paste leans liberal, you don't really seem that liberal to me, in the old school liberal sense. Is that accurate? Do you consider yourself a liberal? I am a "social liberal" in the sense that I am definitely pro-choice/anti-government interference as to abortion. I believe social policy can be used by government to address certain specific social issues, not nearly everything. I believe the border and all related unresolved immigration issues have been a mess for decades due to politics and such, and that it is getting worse. I believe that our country has no business spending more than it takes in/over-borrowing on a regular basis. I'd like to see government out of our lives as much as possible, but believe it is sometimes beneficial in certain matters, e.g. defense, infrastructure and the like, at a minimum.
...

So on your OP, the Federal Reserve, I think fractional reserve banking and the use of fiat money is a Ponzi scheme, destined for failure. I can't change that, but I can hedge against it with tangible commodities, like land, precious metals, growing my own food etc- just overall being more self reliant. To each his own on this one.

Ultimately, I think a lot of these debates are about if one has trust in our system, our institutions and our government. I see all of the flaws and hypocrisy on both sides and I walk the other way. I try to focus on what I can do as an individual. There are many ways around the system. I'm living proof of that. As am I, 100%. We each just like different "flavors."
....

rfenst Offline
#58 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,601
DrMaddVibe wrote:
Well...the Federal Reserve seems to feel that one isn't needed.

Ever.

What if...and I know it's a big if...but what if they opened the vault at Ft. Knox and there was NOTHING there?

Why even bother?
Abrignac Offline
#59 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,468
rfenst wrote:
Why even bother?


Yep. A statement like that takes a special kind of stupid. That’s a perfect example of being backed into a corner with no rational alternative so some outlandish farfetched possibility is floated instead of conceding an indefensible position. It cultlike.
RayR Offline
#60 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 9,006
DrMaddVibe wrote:
Well...the Federal Reserve seems to feel that one isn't needed.

Ever.

What if...and I know it's a big if...but what if they opened the vault at Ft. Knox and there was NOTHING there?



Never mind the haters DMV.

Auditing The Federal Reserve to find out all the nefarious things they've done would hurt them like the dickens, but they have been taking names and know what skeletons are in certain politicians' closets to keep them in line.

I've heard the average Boobus Americanus believes that the dollar is backed by gold that is held in Ft. Knox. although the Federal Reserve Note representing the dollar isn't back by anything but DEBT.
In truth whatever U.S. government gold is left is buried in a vault under NYC along with reserves held for safe keeping owned by foreign entities. The Treasury mints some 24K gold into 1 troy oz. gold coins costing around $2400 currently but only have a legal tender value of $50.00, which is to deter the people from actually using gold as money to pay debts and taxes. GOD forbid that people would choose gold as their money over unbacked paper debt notes, the FED greenbacks would soon be depreciated to nothing.
Abrignac Offline
#61 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,468
One of the “evil” things the Fed does is to facilitate fractional lending. Fractional lending is essentially entity A securing a loan for funds not in possession to give to entity B. It then presumes the entity that took the loan is going to repay that loan so it can repay its loan.

How does that differ from a scenario where entity A goes to entity B and secures a loan, with the proceeds of that loan entity A secures products from entity C to sell to entity D and hopes entity D will make appropriate payment so it can repay its loan to entity B?
DrMaddVibe Offline
#62 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,735
rfenst wrote:
Why even bother?



Why should the Federal Reserve be audited?

Look at all of the damage to the US economy and the World they have created. You can down the list of chairman's and see the lies and wrong direction and inaction they have been a party to. Why, you'd firmly believe that they were a government agency! They're not.

That's why.
jeebling Offline
#63 Posted:
Joined: 08-04-2015
Posts: 1,770
rfenst wrote:
No. "Fraud" is generally defined as an intentional, material, misrepresentation which induces another to act to his own detriment in a way that would not otherwise have occurred, but for the material, intentional, misrepresentation. There is no such thing as "fraud after the fact" like you are alleging.


If the misrepresentation for political gain at the expense of taxpayers is not fraudulent by definition then it must be theft.
jeebling Offline
#64 Posted:
Joined: 08-04-2015
Posts: 1,770
rfenst wrote:
No. "Fraud" is generally defined as an intentional, material, misrepresentation which induces another to act to his own detriment in a way that would not otherwise have occurred, but for the material, intentional, misrepresentation. There is no such thing as "fraud after the fact" like you are alleging.


Your definition is not quite correct. Here’s from Black’s Law Dictionary. I had to look it up.

https://thelawdictionary.org/fraud/
jeebling Offline
#65 Posted:
Joined: 08-04-2015
Posts: 1,770
rfenst wrote:
The market economy is not nearly liquid enough or sufficient to replace the fed in the short or intermediate run. If it could provide the liquidity in the long run, there is the question of what occurs in the time between now and how and when market liquidity would match demand.


Correct. So this will take years to unwind. Throwing the balance sheet on the market one morning is not what I had in mind. Continuing status quo just makes the problem worse leading to a crisis that we can’t truly recover from.
Speyside2 Offline
#66 Posted:
Joined: 11-11-2021
Posts: 2,506
I have no idea what the new system should be, not my expertise. My thought is a well planed phase in over say 20 years. This would be a slower ate of change, 5% per year. I do not know if this is doable or not.
jeebling Offline
#67 Posted:
Joined: 08-04-2015
Posts: 1,770
I’m far from an expert. I’m just enjoying an interesting topic and sharing my opinions, trying to see other perspectives I may not have given enough attention to or may need to reconsider. I have thought a lot about it though and I’m not thinking these things for the first time as I type them out in this thread. Still, I remind myself that it is easier for me to throw darts at the FED than it is for those responsible to fix it or decommission it.
rfenst Offline
#68 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,601
jeebling wrote:
Your definition is not quite correct. Here’s from Black’s Law Dictionary. I had to look it up.

https://thelawdictionary.org/fraud/

Your link is not even secure.
Moreover, it isn't even related to Black's.
LMFAO!!!
RayR Offline
#69 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 9,006
Did someone say Federal Reserve Fraud?
I heard they had to pass the Federal Reserve Act so they could find out what was in it.

Monopoly Men (Federal Reserve Fraud) (1999)

https://youtu.be/CpvVsUxPL_0?si=6dsp1G8Zml0AgOr7
jeebling Offline
#70 Posted:
Joined: 08-04-2015
Posts: 1,770
rfenst wrote:
Your link is not even secure.
Moreover, it isn't even related to Black's.
LMFAO!!!

Had to edit my response here…

You are right and I was wrong. The definition I quoted is from Black’s but it did not include the 4th part. I stand corrected, sir. Fraud includes the part where the “victim” took action on the information provided by the fraudsters.
rfenst Offline
#71 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,601
jeebling wrote:
Had to edit my response here…

You are right and I was wrong. The definition I quoted is from Black’s but it did not include the 4th part. I stand corrected, sir. Fraud includes the part where the “victim” took action on the information provided by the fraudsters.

Good catch!

Moreover, the misinformation provided by the fraudster has to be "material" (critically important) and "induce" (cause another to act)...
rfenst Offline
#72 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,601
The Economic Slowdown Is Finally Here. Welcome It.
Services sector cools as consumers pull back, putting rate cuts back on the table

WSJ

Evidence is stacking up that the U.S. economy has slowed, led by the formerly red-hot services sector.

Yet overall activity levels remain healthy, and some cooling is welcome news to investors because it opens the door back up to possible rate cuts by the Federal Reserve.

The most obvious indicator was Friday’s employment report, which showed the economy added 175,000 jobs in April, down significantly from 315,000 in March. Particularly notable was the shift to just 5,000 jobs being added in the leisure and hospitality sector compared with 53,000 in March.

This is consistent with earnings reports over the past week from food-services providers including Starbucks and McDonald’s, which both cited growing caution among consumers. Even Kraft Heinz said out-of-home venues such as restaurants are buying less from it.

“The consumer is certainly being very discriminating in how they spend their dollar. And the inflation that has occurred over the last couple of years in the U.S., I think, has certainly created that environment,” McDonald’s Chief Executive Christopher Kempczinski told analysts on a conference call on Tuesday. Starbucks, for its part, reported a 3% decline in North American comparable-store sales in the first quarter which, along with weakness in China, prompted a 15.9% plunge in its stock price.

Also on Friday, a monthly survey by the Institute for Supply Management showed services-sector activity dipping into contractionary territory in April for the first time in 15 months. “The composition of the report was weak, as the employment, new orders, and business activity components all declined,” Goldman Sachs economists said in a note.

Of course, it wasn’t all doom and gloom. True, the unemployment rate ticked up to 3.9% in April from 3.8% the prior month. But, as the Bureau of Labor Statistics noted, this indicator has been in a narrow range of between 3.7% and 3.9% since August of last year. Economists at Bank of America said they see evidence that the great “catch up” in services-sector employment following the pandemic is finally ending. “In our view, this is not an outright negative sign for the economy,” they added.

One very welcome sign from the Fed’s point of view is the continued slowdown in wage growth, with average hourly earnings rising just 3.9% from a year earlier in April, compared with 4.1% in March and 4.3% in February. This suggests pricing pressures could keep subsiding, despite the stubbornly high inflation reports of recent months.

Indeed, Friday’s soft jobs data was enough to get investors thinking about rate cuts again. Stocks rose and bond yields fell on the data, with the S&P 500 gaining 1.3% and yields on benchmark 10-year Treasurys declining by 0.07 percentage point. A move at the Fed’s next meeting in June still seems to be off the table. But the likelihood of a cut by September as implied by the Fed Funds futures market rose to 67.1% late Friday from 61.6% a day earlier, according to CME Group.

If the economic data cooperates between now and then, the possibility of a sneaky July cut could keep creeping higher. Right now, markets put that at just a 36.6% chance, but it is Goldman Sachs’s base case.

A little summer slowdown could be just what this economy needs.
jeebling Offline
#73 Posted:
Joined: 08-04-2015
Posts: 1,770
rfenst wrote:
Good catch!

Moreover, the misinformation provided by the fraudster has to be "material" (critically important) and "induce" (cause another to act)...


Well, it was a good catch but you caught it. And I’m a little bit smarter now lol
Speyside2 Offline
#74 Posted:
Joined: 11-11-2021
Posts: 2,506
At the right price precious metals are good investments. Especially if the economy goes belly up. There is a very good chance the stock market crashes after the elections. The increase since boomers started retiring makes no sense. Cash is leaving the market faster than cash is coming into the market. This should cause a decrease in the market, it has not. I think right now semi-precious gems may be a good investment also. I seldom see a stock that interests me. The P/E ratios are way too high, also debt is huge for so many companies. Crypto is risky because it is so volatile, but I have more faith in it than fiat money.
rfenst Offline
#75 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,601
Speyside2 wrote:
... Crypto is risky because it is so volatile, but I have more faith in it than fiat money.

Really?
Abrignac Offline
#76 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,468
Speyside2 wrote:
At the right price precious metals are good investments. Especially if the economy goes belly up. There is a very good chance the stock market crashes after the elections. The increase since boomers started retiring makes no sense. Cash is leaving the market faster than cash is coming into the market. This should cause a decrease in the market, it has not. I think right now semi-precious gems may be a good investment also. I seldom see a stock that interests me. The P/E ratios are way too high, also debt is huge for so many companies. Crypto is risky because it is so volatile, but I have more faith in it than fiat money.


I’m curious as to why you believe that?
Speyside2 Offline
#77 Posted:
Joined: 11-11-2021
Posts: 2,506
I think investors may panic if Biden wins the election. As a generality most investors are reactionary and not proactive. Also, I am taking into consideration the rest of what I wrote after the statement you highlighted. I strongly believe the market is due for a large correction for those reasons. If enough investor start selling off it seems to me that panic will set in, and others sell off also. As you know my grammar/English is poor. I did not mean to sound so smug/sure about that. It is only my opinion. Rather I should have started that sentence with, I think. That would have best portrayed what I was thinking.
Abrignac Offline
#78 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,468
Speyside2 wrote:
I think investors may panic if Biden wins the election. As a generality most investors are reactionary and not proactive. Also, I am taking into consideration the rest of what I wrote after the statement you highlighted. I strongly believe the market is due for a large correction for those reasons. If the average investor starts selling off it seems to me that panic sets in and others sell off due to that. As you know my grammar/English is poor. I did not mean to sound so smug/sure about that. It is only my opinion. Rather I should have started that sentence with, I think. That would have best portrayed what I was thinking.


You’re fine. I was just curious as to why you felt that way.

I don’t see an investor panic simply because Biden got re-elected. I think it any correlation does manifest would be more due to a cooling off of the economy. If so, it could happen if Trump gets elected.

As far as PE’s are concerned I wouldn’t read too much into that other than perhaps those stocks with higher PE’s may fall further simply to become more realistically priced in line with actual value. Keep in mind the price of a publicly traded stock rarely reflects the actual value of its assets and earnings.
jeebling Offline
#79 Posted:
Joined: 08-04-2015
Posts: 1,770
Just reflecting on this overall topic and referring back to the relationship of the Treasury and the FED printing and distributing new money that was not created by economic output but rather by adding numbers to ledgers. Those trillions of dollars don’t stay in the pockets of taxpayers. They percolate back to banks. The banks don’t just sit on the money. They loan it out and invest it. That inflation that makes a bag of Doritos cost $7.49 also raises the price of stock shares. Some would call this type of inflation growth. But, interest rates and unemployment numbers, if they are not favorable, could result in a horrific bubble for Wall Street. Of course this only hurts us suckers at the bottom of the wealth / income scale. This is an over simplified statement. My point is that the risk seems to be pretty high at the moment.
rfenst Offline
#80 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,601
Inflation Rate in the United States averaged 3.30 percent from 1914 until 2024 (reaching an all time high of 23.70 percent in June of 1920 and a record low of -15.80 percent in June of 1921).


https://www.google.com/search?q=us+inflation+rate+long+run&oq=us+inflation+rate+long+run&gs_lcrp=EgZjaH
JvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIICAEQABgWGB4yCAgCEAAYFhgeMg0IAxAAGIYDGIAEGIoFMg0IBBAAGIYDGIAEGIoFMg0
IBRAAGIYDGIAEGIoFMg0IBhAAGIYDGIAEGIoFMgoIBxAAGIAEGKIEMgoICBAAGIAEGKIEMgoICR
AAGIAEGKIE0gEJMTY1OThqMGo3qAIAsAIA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8



30 Year Mortgage Rate in the United States averaged 7.73 percent from 1971 until 2024 (reaching an all time high of 18.63 percent in October of 1981 and a record low of 2.65 percent in January of 2021.)


https://www.google.com/search?
q=average+historical+morgage+rate&oq=average+historical+morgage+rate&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyB
ggAEEUYOTIJCAEQABgNGIAEMgkIAhAAGA0YgAQyCQgDEAAYDRiABDIICAQQABgWGB4yCAgFEAAYFhgeMggI
BhAAGBYYHjIICAcQABgWGB4yCAgIEAAYFhgeMggICRAAGBYYHtIBCTIwNzAzajBqN6gCALACAA&sourceid=
chrome&ie=UTF-8
jeebling Offline
#81 Posted:
Joined: 08-04-2015
Posts: 1,770
Here’s the 90 year chart for S&P 500 PE. Looks like it is doing just fine at the moment.

https://www.macrotrends.net/2577/sp-500-pe-ratio-price-to-earnings-chart


This is the 5 year chart for S&P 500 vs durable goods. I think the thicker chart isn’t really helpful IRT this conversation…at this point anyway. Looks like a minor correction is in the works. Either an increase in durable goods or a decrease in earnings. All part of the business cycle, I understand. And I suppose, just like any cycle, there will be boom and bust events.

https://www.macrotrends.net/2601/sp-500-vs-durable-goods-chart
jeebling Offline
#82 Posted:
Joined: 08-04-2015
Posts: 1,770
Here’s a graph on money supply for anyone who’s curious.

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/money-supply-m2
DrMaddVibe Offline
#83 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,735
jeebling wrote:
Here’s the 90 year chart for S&P 500 PE. Looks like it is doing just fine at the moment.

https://www.macrotrends.net/2577/sp-500-pe-ratio-price-to-earnings-chart


This is the 5 year chart for S&P 500 vs durable goods. I think the thicker chart isn’t really helpful IRT this conversation…at this point anyway. Looks like a minor correction is in the works. Either an increase in durable goods or a decrease in earnings. All part of the business cycle, I understand. And I suppose, just like any cycle, there will be boom and bust events.

https://www.macrotrends.net/2601/sp-500-vs-durable-goods-chart


Shutting down the World's economies due to a plandemic is going to have longer lasting issues. It's not like it's a lawnmower being started up for the 1st time in Spring...yeah, some people need to pay for what they did to create that mess.
jeebling Offline
#84 Posted:
Joined: 08-04-2015
Posts: 1,770
I believe you are correct. I think with one little bursting bubble we will start seeing other bubbles popping. Congress and POTUS can’t keep spending the way they do.

“ Federal spending is classified in two basic categories: mandatory and discretionary. About 63 percent of the federal budget is mandatory spending, 30 percent is discretionary spending, and the rest is interest payments on debt.”


https://www.cbpp.org/research/policy-basics-introduction-to-the-federal-budget-process#:~:text=Federal%20spending%20is%20classified%20in%20two%20basic%20categories%3A,rest%20is%20interest%20payments%20on%20debt%20%28see%20chart%29.
RayR Offline
#85 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 9,006
Is Joey B's chair of the United States Council of Economic Advisers just DUMB or does he have DIMENTIA like Joe?

White House Econ Chair Can’t Answer Simple Question on Monetary Policy

Michael McKay

Quote:
Incredible.

Jake Bernstein, President Biden’s Econ Council Chairman can’t answer a basic econ question.

Watch this 2 minute abomination

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/white-house-econ-chair-cant-answer-simple-question-on-monetary-policy/
jeebling Offline
#86 Posted:
Joined: 08-04-2015
Posts: 1,770
^That is laughable yet tragic. He is begging the question. He sounds like a drug addict explaining why he needs a hit to get over withdrawal symptoms. Disgraceful. Definitely not what Keynes had in mind. Keynes was something of a deficit hawk and his ideas about government spending are fundamentally misunderstood and misrepresented.
RayR Offline
#87 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 9,006
jeebling wrote:
^That is laughable yet tragic. He is begging the question. He sounds like a drug addict explaining why he needs a hit to get over withdrawal symptoms. Disgraceful. Definitely not what Keynes had in mind. Keynes was something of a deficit hawk and his ideas about government spending are fundamentally misunderstood and misrepresented.



Javier Milei when asked, "who was John Maynard Keynes?": replied, "He was a criminal". Javier knows a lot about Keynes.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/political-theatre/javier-milei-on-john-maynard-keynes-he-was-a-criminal/

jeebling Offline
#88 Posted:
Joined: 08-04-2015
Posts: 1,770
Javier Milei..I’m a fan
RobertHively Offline
#89 Posted:
Joined: 01-14-2015
Posts: 1,976
New Hampshire Goldback: https://www.goldback.com/new-hampshire-goldback-gallery

Supposedly a new medium of exchange, for people that wont go along with Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) after the dollar collapses.

They are aLLegEdlY backed by gold and silver, and are accepted as currency in New Hampshire, Utah, Nevada, Wyoming and South Dakota.

They're for sale at APMEX among other places: https://www.apmex.com/category/19605/goldbacks

If I didn't live in one of those five states, I'd keep stacking the actual metal though.

Read an article on Zero Hedge that mentioned them.

"Live Free or Die" and stuff.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#90 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,735
This is why you should bother...It's Obama's wet dream of Cloward-Piven come to life!

The Fed is already insolvent. Here’s how we think this plays out



On Tuesday, September 15, 1992, the two most powerful financial officials in the British government held an urgent meeting that night to review their plan for when the markets opened the next morning.

The tone of the meeting must have felt frantic… even desperate… because the value of the British pound had been falling for weeks.

Investors and speculators were rapidly losing confidence in the UK government, mostly due to the ridiculous “Exchange Rate Mechanism” (ERM) which essentially pegged most European currencies to the German Deutschemark.

Rational investors viewed the ERM as an almost comical impossibility.

Germany’s economy was light years ahead of everyone else. Germany had vastly higher productivity, far greater savings, low inflation, high growth, and much more responsible monetary policy.

So, to even pretend that a country like Italy or even Britain could fix its exchange rate to the Deutschemark, i.e. to essentially mirror Germany’s economic performance– was a total joke.

Britain joined the Exchange Rate Mechanism in October 1990. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher had spent years trying to keep Britain out of the ERM, viewing it as giving up national sovereignty.

But Thatcher was about to retire. And the new batch of leaders insisted that pegging Britain’s economy to Germany was the way forward.

Their experiment didn’t even last two years. By the summer of 1992, inflation in Britain was more than 3x German’s. Plus, Britain had a major budget deficit.

Financial speculators correctly recognized, given the massive disconnect between the British and German economies, that Britain would not be able to maintain its fixed exchange rate with the Deutschemark.

So, traders began short selling the British pound, i.e. betting that the value of the pound would fall because the British government would devalue its currency.

The sell-off reached a crisis on September 15th, when the head of Germany’s central bank suggested to the Wall Street Journal that weaker countries (like Britain) would have to devalue their currencies.

That’s what led the British Chancellor of the Exchequer and head of the Bank of England– the two most powerful policymakers in British government finance– to meet that evening.

They knew that the German central bank’s comments would encourage even more traders to dump the British pound. So, the two men pledged to do ‘whatever it takes’ to defend the pound and defeat the speculators.

It didn’t work.

The following morning on September 16th, the Bank of England did everything it could. They raised interest rates, they bought back pounds, they bought government bonds, they made all sorts of outlandish promises.

But speculators didn’t believe any of it. They could see the numbers, and they knew that the Bank of England simply didn’t have the financial resources to maintain such an unrealistic exchange rate.

One of those speculators was George Soros, who famously bet $10 billion against the British pound… far exceeding the Bank of England’s financial resources.

By the end of that day, the British central bank had exhausted its capital and was essentially bankrupt. The British government had to bail them out to the tune of 3 billion pounds, and then announce that they were formally leaving the ERM– proving the speculators right.

This is an important story to understand, because it’s likely that something similar may happen to the Federal Reserve and US dollar over the next several years.

The Federal Reserve is already insolvent.

According to its most recent annual financial statements, the Fed has just $51 billion in equity, versus a whopping $948 billion in mark-to-market losses. This means the Fed is insolvent by roughly $900 billion.

This is a big problem. Remember that the Fed is still a bank, i.e. it has financial obligations, liabilities, and depositors that it needs to pay.

For example, commercial banks like JP Morgan and Bank of America have deposited a total of $3.4 trillion of their customers’ money, i.e. YOUR money, with the Fed. And the Treasury Department holds another $700 billion deposit at the Fed.

The Fed owes money to foreign governments. They owe trillions of dollars from repurchase agreements to banks and businesses across the global financial system.

So, yeah, the insolvency of the Federal Reserve is a pretty big deal. Yet, at least for now, no one is saying a word about it.


But just like the Bank of England in 1992, sooner or later, someone is finally going to say something… and do something… about the Fed’s insolvency.

There’s a good chance that means betting against the dollar… just like speculators bet against the pound three decades ago. And that would ultimately reduce the value of the dollar, increase inflation, and trigger a new ‘Bretton Woods’ agreement in which the US dollar is no longer the world’s reserve currency.

George Soros became known as “The Man Who Broke the Bank of England”. (Though given his malign proclivity to fund progressive activists, he is known by several other names in my household, none of them reverent.)

Within the next several years there could be some Chinese or Russian financier who becomes known as “The Man Who Broke the Fed”.

This isn’t sensational. The Fed is already insolvent by $900+ billion, according to its own financial statements. Social Security is insolvent. The US government is insolvent by tens of trillions… and they further anticipate the national debt to grow by $20 trillion over the next decade.

These are facts, not fantasies.

And this is why it makes so much sense to hedge these risks by owning real assets which are scarce, valuable, and uncorrelated to the US dollar.

Gold is a great example. And as we’ve argued before, even though it’s already near its all-time high, we believe it can go much higher from here.

More on that soon.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2024-05-22/fed-already-insolvent-heres-how-we-think-plays-out


Xi...Putin...The Supreme Leader...Soros...or a mix of all of them will take great delight picking apart America and bankrupting it.

So, lets pay for MORE college loans, fund nations that chant death to us, keep the borders wide open, More Leftist Green New Deal crap and while we're at it dump more 100's of billions into that neonazi haven called Ukraine!
Abrignac Offline
#91 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,468
RobertHively wrote:
New Hampshire Goldback: https://www.goldback.com/new-hampshire-goldback-gallery

Supposedly a new medium of exchange, for people that wont go along with Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) after the dollar collapses.

They are aLLegEdlY backed by gold and silver, and are accepted as currency in New Hampshire, Utah, Nevada, Wyoming and South Dakota.

They're for sale at APMEX among other places: https://www.apmex.com/category/19605/goldbacks

If I didn't live in one of those five states, I'd keep stacking the actual metal though.

Read an article on Zero Hedge that mentioned them.

"Live Free or Die" and stuff.


The problem with gold being used as currency is its speculative value as well as its weight along with the extra bulk required to facilitate transactions.

Suppose someone were to seek to purchase a bushel of corn. The average bushel of corn weighs 56 pounds. Today the spot price for such is around 21 cents per pound so the corn itself is worth about $11.76. For sake of argument the person buying the corn brings their own empty bushel so the don’t have to pay for packaging.

So how do we facilitate the exchange of gold for the corn? At the moment, gold is trading for $2,361.66 per Troy ounce. So how much does $11.56 worth of gold weigh? That would be .00497955 of a Troy Ounce. So a pretty accurate scale will be needed to weigh out gold dust. Probably gonna need some type of spectrum analysis tool as well to make sure the gold dust is .99999% pure gold otherwise it’s not worth $2,361.66 per Troy ounce.

Seems a bit involved for simple transactions. There has to be a better way. Not sure the goldbacks are the answer since they only considered legal tender in a few states. Other than in those states they are worthless in terms of normal commerce.

I’m thinking, though not perfect, our current monetary system which is accepted in all 50 states and mostly worldwide is the best thing going until an alternative that accomplishes what cash does today with the same relative ease is implemented.
RayR Offline
#92 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 9,006
Argg... You don't necessarily need physical gold or silver to make a transaction, Like in the olden days, paper money was 100% backed by gold and was guaranteed redeemable for gold coin at a bank if the bearer requested it. (that was before the horrible FDR stole the peoples gold)
That was intended to keep the system honest.

You want to talk about speculative? The only reason precious metal prices fluctuate is their value is being measured in fiat dollars.
Gold and silver will appear to climb as they have been because Federal Reserve Notes are continually losing purchasing power.

HockeyDad Offline
#93 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,269
We don’t have the gold to put the dollar back on the gold standard! Maybe if gold went to $50k an ounce.

The dollar is backed by the full faith of the US military.
RayR Offline
#94 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 9,006
HockeyDad wrote:
We don’t have the gold to put the dollar back on the gold standard! Maybe if gold went to $50k an ounce.

The dollar is backed by the full faith of the US military.


Considering that central banks have been buying up and hoarding precious metals like gold with their fiat money, they must be seeing that the writing is on the wall. No fiat monetary system has ever survived in history.

That's where legal tender laws come into play,, the dollar is backed by the full faith and guns of the regime because they fear the peasants might just get fed up and choose real money instead.


RobertHively Offline
#95 Posted:
Joined: 01-14-2015
Posts: 1,976
Abrignac wrote:
The problem with gold being used as currency is its speculative value as well as its weight along with the extra bulk required to facilitate transactions.

Suppose someone were to seek to purchase a bushel of corn. The average bushel of corn weighs 56 pounds. Today the spot price for such is around 21 cents per pound so the corn itself is worth about $11.76. For sake of argument the person buying the corn brings their own empty bushel so the don’t have to pay for packaging.

So how do we facilitate the exchange of gold for the corn? At the moment, gold is trading for $2,361.66 per Troy ounce. So how much does $11.56 worth of gold weigh? That would be .00497955 of a Troy Ounce. So a pretty accurate scale will be needed to weigh out gold dust. Probably gonna need some type of spectrum analysis tool as well to make sure the gold dust is .99999% pure gold otherwise it’s not worth $2,361.66 per Troy ounce.

Seems a bit involved for simple transactions. There has to be a better way. Not sure the goldbacks are the answer since they only considered legal tender in a few states. Other than in those states they are worthless in terms of normal commerce.

I’m thinking, though not perfect, our current monetary system which is accepted in all 50 states and mostly worldwide is the best thing going until an alternative that accomplishes what cash does today with the same relative ease is implemented.



About 11 or 12 grams of silver would pay for a bushel of corn based on todays spot price.

https://www.monarchpreciousmetals.com/1-gram-999-fine-silver-round-monarch-salmon-fish/

Around here I might be able to get by with trading a fifth of whiskey for 3 bushels of corn. One never knows.

But yeah, like you, I'm going to trade with dollars while I can.

If they get by with the CBDC/Social Credit Score system I truly will drop out of society, completely.
Speyside2 Offline
#96 Posted:
Joined: 11-11-2021
Posts: 2,506
If it all falls apart, I think a barter system would be effective. Currency in any form would have no value.
jeebling Offline
#97 Posted:
Joined: 08-04-2015
Posts: 1,770
I think you’re correct, Spey. Especially if it doesn’t completely fall apart. As long as there was an economy limping along with the damaged system the bartering economy would have the opportunity to flourish. People would quickly learn the value of precious metals and how to trade them. Precious metal brokerages would have the opportunity to accept deposits and people could trade paper on their accounts. You could buy a used car from your neighbor with a check, more or less, that would transfer the value of spot price from one account to another. That’s a very simple way of explaining a complex system but I think you can fill in the blank spots.
Users browsing this topic
Guest (2)
2 Pages<12