Deflation and knuckle dusters

File: 1381449633558.jpg-(25 KB, 595x250, economics-currency.jpg)

 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:00 UTC-4 No.21595952Replies: >>21596459 >>21596700 >>21596758 >>21597225 >>21597445 >>21597654 >>21598387 >>21601874 >>21602147 >>21602895 >>21603814
What's so bad of deflation? Isn't it a good thing when the purchasing power of your savings and wages increases?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:02 UTC-4 No.21596019Replies: >>21596230 >>21596635 >>21597768
Stops people spending which is bad in an economy on the brinks of death.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:02 UTC-4 No.21596026Replies: >>21596093
What if you're paying off debts?
Then you're paying more.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:03 UTC-4 No.21596058
because somebody's going to have to take the fall
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:04 UTC-4 No.21596093Replies: >>21596173 >>21596514 >>21596550 >>21596823 >>21596964 >>21600299
>>21596026 #

Why should the bias be in favor of borrowers instead of savers, who exemplify virtues like patience, prudence and such?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:06 UTC-4 No.21596144Replies: >>21596368 >>21600372
Because our economy is based on consumerism and people borrowing and spending money on shit they probably don't even need. And monetary policy encourages this. The government and elites doesn't want you saving your money and letting it appreciate in value, they want you to spend it to pump up GDP, so they decrease interest rates and reduce incentive to save.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:07 UTC-4 No.21596173
>>21596093 #
because you can't take advantage of savers
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:07 UTC-4 No.21596179Replies: >>21596230 >>21597543 >>21597844 >>21598825
Nothing is wrong with it. It is only a problem because it decentralizes power and governments hate that shit. Deflation should be the sign of a power house economy. Your money is GAINING value in your hand without you even doing anything.

Also rich people don't like it because it means they have to keep producing more and more instead of just owning assets and being gaurenteed income (because as the dollar weakens, investments become more expensive, ergo they make money from existing, a transference of wealth from less wealthy to more wealthy).

So you have the two biggest power blocs (rich people and the state) who are usually in bed together, being disadvantaged from something. Now do you see why they always harp about how bad it is?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:08 UTC-4 No.21596230Replies: >>21596446
>>21596179 #
see
>>21596019 #

I agree that money gaining purchasing power is good, but when you have deflation and not adjustment it is bad
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:13 UTC-4 No.21596368Replies: >>21596899 >>21598825
>>21596144 #
>Because our economy is based on consumerism
So why is everyone apologizing for this instead of acknowledging it as a problem and thus not worth perpetuating?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:15 UTC-4 No.21596446Replies: >>21596726 >>21598825
>>21596230 #
Why would deflation stop spending? You still need to eat, sleep, and shit. Are rich people suddenly going to stop buying huge houses and cars or 10,000 dollar restaurant tabs? Demand will necessarily increase as prices continue to drop. You will be rewarded for saving and producing, rather than consuming and spending.

Our economy is in the tank because no one can invest in anything because the dollar is worthless. Because we blew all our savings last time everyone said to spend and borrow.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:16 UTC-4 No.21596459
>>21595952 (OP) #
75 y/o Germanfag detected. Stop killing Europe pls.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:18 UTC-4 No.21596514Replies: >>21596558
>>21596093 #
Are you bloody serious, m8 ?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:19 UTC-4 No.21596533Replies: >>21596758
jews dont like it
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:19 UTC-4 No.21596550Replies: >>21598825
>>21596093 #
What about the fucking countries ? They need to borrow, unlike private people who are fine hoarding money
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:20 UTC-4 No.21596558Replies: >>21596608
>>21596514 #
jidf pls go
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:21 UTC-4 No.21596608
File: 1381450918311.jpg-(24 KB, 367x451, hahahafaggot.jpg)

>>21596558 #
>jidf
I don't even need arguments, now, thank's to you.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:22 UTC-4 No.21596635Replies: >>21596703 >>21596749
>>21596019 #
people don't stop spending. the floor of the opportunity cost of investment just becomes the deflation rate of your money.

it empowers average citizens because they can invest money simply by using a savings account.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:24 UTC-4 No.21596683Replies: >>21596712 >>21596734 >>21598825
deflation rewards hoarding instead of spending. that's a bad thing.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:24 UTC-4 No.21596700Replies: >>21596730
>>21595952 (OP) #
>What's so bad of deflation? Isn't it a good thing when the magnitude of your debts increases?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:24 UTC-4 No.21596703Replies: >>21598363
>>21596635 #
DON'T PROMOTE THAT! HOW WILL I BE ABLE TO KEEP PEOPLE AS WAGE SLAVES FOR MY BUSINESS IF THEY START GAINING SAVINGS AND THE OPPORTUNITY TO INVEST IN COMPETING BUSINESS VENTURES?!!?!
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:25 UTC-4 No.21596712Replies: >>21596736
>>21596683 #

Bad for the elites, yes.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:25 UTC-4 No.21596726Replies: >>21596814
>>21596446 #
i think it would lead to a decline in spending in an aggregate sense, however the money would probably be directed by virtue of necessity and scarcity into the most productive parts of the economy. imagine how great it would be when all the bullshit departments of the universities get dumped.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:25 UTC-4 No.21596730
>>21596700 #
Maybe not get put in debt? Unless people are forcing you to go into debt, why would you ever choose to do it?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:25 UTC-4 No.21596734Replies: >>21596786
>>21596683 #

Why?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:25 UTC-4 No.21596736
>>21596712 #
The elite's will be just fine whether there is inflation or deflation. it's bad for everyone.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:26 UTC-4 No.21596749Replies: >>21598363
>>21596635 #
Deflation kills work and everyone having debts.
Are you chinese ?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:26 UTC-4 No.21596758Replies: >>21598525 >>21599167
>>21595952 (OP) #
If currency keeps going up why would you spend it? Also this >>21596533 #
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:27 UTC-4 No.21596786Replies: >>21596853 >>21596995 >>21597074 >>21599167
>>21596734 #
Would you spend 100 dollars if it'll have the purchasing power of 200 tomorrow? Everyone can't get rich by burying their money, that's not how an economy works.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:28 UTC-4 No.21596814Replies: >>21596939
>>21596726 #
Dare to dream, brother...

>tfw regular joe and their savings account become the bedrock of investment and economic growth again because of deflation
>ihavenoface.jpg
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:28 UTC-4 No.21596818
http://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0311/the-dangers-of-deflation.aspx
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:28 UTC-4 No.21596823
>>21596093 #
Because saving doesn't expand the economy.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:29 UTC-4 No.21596853Replies: >>21596902
>>21596786 #
That is a pretty insane deflation rate you gave going there.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:29 UTC-4 No.21596867Replies: >>21601200
Economic output depends on spending and investing, which deflation discourages. This among dozens of other problems with deflation.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:30 UTC-4 No.21596899
>>21596368 #
It's not a problem. It's only a problem when it goes *too far* like it was prior to 2008 when the U.S. saving rate was at 0% and there was an enormous credit bubble. But we've been deleveraging since then back to a more healthy balance.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:30 UTC-4 No.21596902
>>21596853 #
I tried to put it in simple, exaggerated terms since a retarded person was asking me a question and I wanted to make sure they understood.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:30 UTC-4 No.21596906Replies: >>21596979
People still buy computers even though prices have dropped significantly.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:31 UTC-4 No.21596939
>>21596814 #
Except Regular Joe has no savings at all and owes money to some filthy bank.
Inflation it is !
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:31 UTC-4 No.21596964
>>21596093 #
Borrowing is the most important driver of growth. How else are companies suppose to expand, buy capital equipment, real estate... you know function? When credit drys up so do the actual drivers of productivity. Money is just a means to an end, increasing output. If you tighten money too much to the point of deflation you ruin the point of money, facilitating economic activity.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:32 UTC-4 No.21596979Replies: >>21597210
>>21596906 #
Computers are unique because the rate at which they are improving is so fast.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:32 UTC-4 No.21596995
>>21596786 #
because for a ton of people they can buy something that is worth more to them than the extra $100 accumulated.

examples:
>medical products/services
>dinner date with your waifu
>gasoline to fill your gas tank
>drugs
>mortage payments
etc
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:35 UTC-4 No.21597074Replies: >>21597158
>>21596786 #
As I said earlier, a great turn of phrase I heard years ago, "People still need to eat, sleep, and shit."

If I wanted to buy a video game tomorrow, even in deflation, I'd want to again. Even more so, because now it is cheaper. Sure there might be "Well if deflation rate is 100% a day, I might as well wait a few more days", but in reality, I want to play that damn video game. lol.

Same with food. yah buying groceries might be better to do tomorrow, and the day after, etc, but at some point, I gotta eat.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:37 UTC-4 No.21597158Replies: >>21597443 >>21597468
>>21597074 #
If you don't believe deflation is bad, or maybe don't understand its implications, why don't you go look at the history of the great depression. Then get back to us.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:39 UTC-4 No.21597210Replies: >>21597263
>>21596979 #

And is "improving fast" a different effect from "getting cheaper" when describing how people act? They both encourage people to hold off spending.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:40 UTC-4 No.21597225Replies: >>21597489 >>21598525 >>21601297
>>21595952 (OP) #

No.

Why buy something today that will cost you half the price in a weeks time? And, in a weeks time, why not wait an extra week and get it even cheaper... and so on, and so on...

People stop buying, demand is sucked out of the economy,Wages are slashed for those in work this causes recession, unemployment rises....
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:41 UTC-4 No.21597263
>>21597210 #
While computers getting cheaper does make people hold off from buying them, the fast that computers are improving so rapidly makes people buy them more rapidly. It's a balance.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:42 UTC-4 No.21597301Replies: >>21597505
People buy less, borrow MUCH less, etc.

You stupid piece of shit.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:45 UTC-4 No.21597443
>>21597158 #
>using post progressive era economies as case studies
>i dont think so Tim

you dug your grave, no go fucking lay in it.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:45 UTC-4 No.21597445
File: 1381452340224.jpg-(50 KB, 498x487, 4676774889.jpg)

>>21595952 (OP) #

isn't that question kind of silly willy??? With the Fed printing dollars like their falling off trees, and the government borrowing us into bankrupcy (to send all our money to Israel) we are'nt going to have deflation.

Check the price of food, Gasoline, Electricity, property tax, Health Obomba tax ( a brand new expensive tax ) red light camera taxes ( going up up up ) rent payments per month. Every "cost" is going up, the value of the dollar is collapsing. Why are you worried about non existant impossible deflation??
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:46 UTC-4 No.21597468Replies: >>21599399
>>21597158 #
Just read some Milton Friedman. Essentially business people could no longer use leverage to invest, causing the recession to drop into a depression.

But Hayek argued that it was a previous money expansion that caused the cheap credit bubble.

Who is right? Or are they both right? I'd be more comfortable if a /pol/lock explained it (aka you pretty please, with a cherry on top).
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:46 UTC-4 No.21597482
Because we don't have a free market system. In a free market system savings rates would determine interest rates, but since we don't live in that world there is no point in encouraging saving with deflation.

It will all come crashing down eventually, and we may return to a system where saving rates determine interest rates.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:47 UTC-4 No.21597489Replies: >>21597755
>>21597225 #

Yeah, everyone getting richer and having our cost of living go down would really suck dude. Please make my expenses and make me poor!!

Just take away my money if it's for the good!!!

>dumbass there is no deflation.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:47 UTC-4 No.21597505Replies: >>21597684
>>21597301 #
ok so if the problem is people not spending enough money why not just give every american a million dollar loan ?

plenty of money will be spent then
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:48 UTC-4 No.21597543Replies: >>21601700
>>21596179 #

This. There is nothing wrong with it otherwise.

If the money is deflating, it is gaining value. People won't "hoard" it because they still need goods are services. If anything, producers will compete to make superior products, worth buying now because it will keep or gain value in the future.

However, if their money is constantly losing value, people will buy more cheap crap or stupid short-term investments to try and stave off poverty. Some people (usually idiot socialists who whine about consumer culture) ironically think that cheap consumer crap IS the economy.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:51 UTC-4 No.21597654Replies: >>21597729 >>21597992
>>21595952 (OP) #
It breaks the system and that threatens people who make a living off of it.

If deflation was happening, a person would be better off putting money in their mattress rather than buying stocks, bonds, CDs, CDOs, any financial product you can think of.

At a certain point, deflation would end wall street, people would no longer need to "invest" to pace or outpace inflation. No broker or trader required, just stick your money in a safe.

In other words, deflation is the Jew apocalypse.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:52 UTC-4 No.21597684
>>21597505 #
Honestly the Federal Reserve just mailing everyone checks could have boosted the economy enormously and gotten us out of this depression years ago.

They didn't do it because it would have given the entire financial world a heart attack. It would be such an apparently reckless move from the usually calm United States that everyone would panic.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:53 UTC-4 No.21597729Replies: >>21598214
>>21597654 #
Sounds like a paradise, everyone being rich in trade from production and all of economics being summed up in "just save a little".
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:54 UTC-4 No.21597755Replies: >>21598074
>>21597489 #

>Yeah, everyone getting richer

Losing your job doesn't make you richer.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:54 UTC-4 No.21597768
>>21596019 #
Doesn't stop spending so much as it stops investment. Nobody is going to invest if they are going to lose money on the investment, they are just going to hang onto the cash,
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:56 UTC-4 No.21597844
>>21596179 #
The rich have the most to win during deflation as they can buy up assets with cash when things top out, then cash in when the currency drops back down.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:59 UTC-4 No.21597992Replies: >>21598365 >>21598468
>>21597654 #
You do realize we need money velocity? If everyone is stuffing their money in mattresses and not investing people and companies can't get capital to be productive.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:01 UTC-4 No.21598030Replies: >>21598136 >>21598157 >>21598167
File: 1381453270009.jpg-(43 KB, 400x250, 1380264169110.jpg)

erm...who is worried about deflation? it's not happening and won't. the US is going to be seeing absurd inflation rates before long
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:02 UTC-4 No.21598074
>>21597755 #

>American
>Actually have a job
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:03 UTC-4 No.21598136
>>21598030 #
yea no
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:04 UTC-4 No.21598157Replies: >>21598186 >>21598347
File: 1381453466931.jpg-(56 KB, 648x441, Gold Eagles Handful.jpg)

>>21598030 #

We already are in a long term steady inflation. Just look at health care costs, going the fuck up every year and then POW!! A new huge health care ten thousand dollar tax on top of that.

Every fucking thing in this country is getting more and more expensive.

>Not if you price everything in gold of course. Sux to be you fiat bound peasants.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:04 UTC-4 No.21598167Replies: >>21598337
>>21598030 #

>the US is going to be seeing absurd inflation rates before long

The US inflation rate is at 1.5%, it has been a historically low levels for nearly four years.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:05 UTC-4 No.21598186
>>21598157 #
Using a gold backed currency is what caused the deflation in the great depression...
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:05 UTC-4 No.21598214Replies: >>21598319 >>21598355
>>21597729 #
I'm sure that there are a few down sides to it a good economist can tell you. I'm sure there are ton of chicken little facts a shill/jew will tell you.

What I can say is that the current federal reserve policy of maintaining a low level of inflation (at least 1%) to prevent the risk of deflation (vs trying to have 0 inflation or deflation) reduces the buying power of a person's savings over their working lifetime by half.

That's right, 2% inflation, compounded annually over 30 years reduces the dollar's buying power by about half.

And the 1-2% inflation target is if everything goes well, if everything goes according to plan. If we get into real inflation, it's even worse.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:08 UTC-4 No.21598319Replies: >>21598430 >>21598547 >>21598645
>>21598214 #
It's not enough for you that 1-2% inflation is historically low, oh no. It's got to be 0%.

Guess what. Price stability is impossible. We're going to have either inflation or deflation, and inflation works with a growing economy. If you don't want to lose your savings, invest them. In fact, even savings accounts' interest rates are usually on par or better than inflation.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:09 UTC-4 No.21598337Replies: >>21598433
>>21598167 #

and inflation being at low levels for a couple years is reason to believe that there won't be a market correction?

with the levels of cash that the treasury is printing and the govt buying its own bonds something had to give eventually. market manipulation and the fed has kept the prime rate and inflation down...eventually the excess of cash in the market catch up with us and those dollars will be worth a lot less
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:09 UTC-4 No.21598347
>>21598157 #
Health care cost have been skyrocketing for years but that's not because of US inflation.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:09 UTC-4 No.21598355Replies: >>21598768
>>21598214 #

Inflation is a good thing if you have a high national debt. Low interest rates below inflation reduces debt without spending a dime of taxpayers money.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:10 UTC-4 No.21598363
>>21596749 #
lel
>>21596703 #
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:10 UTC-4 No.21598365
>>21597992 #

You only need "money velocity" if your economy is based on consumer crap and stock market shenanigans. It's basically a candid admission that you need people to be exchanging money so fast that they don't notice they're loosing it.

Basically, even if your money is gaining value, you still need to purchase things. You will just have to buy products that increase or at the very least don't lose value with time. Otherwise you're basically paying a premium for satisfying your immediate needs over your future wealth (which still happens all the time, look at all the people who buy first gen electronics).
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:10 UTC-4 No.21598387Replies: >>21598558
>>21595952 (OP) #

It is important to distinguish between two basic types of deflation (which Keynesians typically dishonestly conflate):

1/ Gradual, steady deflation as a result from increases in output, scalability, efficiency. Good examples of this the generally the 19th century and today the electronics industry

2/ Sudden, sharp deflation typically the immediate cause of monetary (money + credit) contraction and begetting business & banking failures, collapse in investment & consumption, recession, unemployment. Example: pretty much most recessions of the 20th century and beyond, banking panics of 19th century and earlier.

The deflation of the 19th century was good because it wasn't caused by fluctuations in the money supply - which was relatively stable due to commodity money. This general fall in prices was beneficial because it was due to output expanding; it resulted in low costs for businesses, greater purchasing power for consumers and thus businesses could sell more goods & services.

Today the world economy and financial markets depend upon continuous expansion of debt and money, halting or even contraction this trend results in financial assets collapsing in price, debt defaults, margin calls and many other bad consequences. Inflating away the value of debt is also important today.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:11 UTC-4 No.21598430
>>21598319 #

> savings accounts rates on par with inflation

apparently I need to find better banks
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:12 UTC-4 No.21598433Replies: >>21598646
>>21598337 #
>>21598337 #

>is reason to believe that there won't be a market correction?

I don't think you know what a "market correction is".

Idiots have been predicting hyperinflation since the start of the financial crisis back in 2007... we're still waiting...
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:13 UTC-4 No.21598468
>>21597992 #
High deflation would be a disaster for this reason. A small amount of deflation would stop people from losing their savings but allow companies to offer a slightly higher return on investments to compete with the mattress system.

The point is you could actually have cash without the cash being devalued and still have a decently functional economy. Once the Jews find out I'm advocating this I will be shot on sight.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:14 UTC-4 No.21598525Replies: >>21598888
>>21597225 #
>Why buy something today that will cost you half the price in a weeks time?
That would be hyperdeflation. What if it was 1 or 2 percent a year? Are you going to go without something you want to save 1% of it's cost?

>>21596758 #
>If currency keeps going up why would you spend it?

Because you want to live and to do that you need to buy stuff to enable you to live? Many people spend all they earn and then some, are they doing this because they are worried that next year everything will be 2% more expensive? Or because they want things and have the ability to buy it.

Anti deflation people are illogical and just parrot what thew Jews told them.

I've hear people call people that save 'currency hoarders'.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:15 UTC-4 No.21598547
>>21598319 #
OK Mr. Goldblatt, just tell me the address of your hedge fund management company and I'll send you all my monies right now. I wouldn't want to become a victim of inflation.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:16 UTC-4 No.21598558Replies: >>21598615 >>21599508
>>21598387 #

>in the electronics industry

No, deflation is the rise in value of currency due to restricted supply or circulation, not the drop in price of one good or service.

but yeah, enjoy your deflation and austerity, I'm sure your creditors and wealthy masters will love seeing their assets grow while you get laid off due to lowered sales volume
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:17 UTC-4 No.21598615
File: 1381454263820.jpg-(46 KB, 375x411, 1378754127249.jpg)

>>21598558 #

>wealthy masters
>encouraging the system that made them overlords to begin with

Keep fighting that power.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:18 UTC-4 No.21598645
>>21598319 #
Price stability is impossible which is why I suggest a very small amount of deflation (a 1-2% target like the fed has for inflation right now). In this fashion we can have a functional economy, maintain a system of capital investment, and people won't be subject to an inflation stealth tax.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:18 UTC-4 No.21598646Replies: >>21598748
>>21598433 #

I wouldn't predict hyperinflation on the scale of wermacht Germany or Zimbabwe....but to believe that we'll see no ill effects from current monetary policies is just putting your head in the sand
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:21 UTC-4 No.21598748Replies: >>21598961 >>21599230
>>21598646 #
It won't happen.

Actually the markets have developed a different problem. They're addicted to QE, to the point that better-than-expected growth is taken as a BAD sign in that it will lead to the end of QE, which causes the markets to fall and growth to suffer.

So there won't be inflation, but there won't be good growth, either.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:22 UTC-4 No.21598768
>>21598355 #
Unless there's a war on we shouldn't have a national debt to begin with. Why should we mortgage our nation's future and make our children pay for our system of government and benefits?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:24 UTC-4 No.21598825Replies: >>21601677
>>21596179 #

>(because as the dollar weakens, investments become more expensive, ergo they make money from existing, a transference of wealth from less wealthy to more wealthy).

Sort of but not the entire picture. Inflating (expanding the money supply) the currency will weaken it's value and general purchasing power. The important question is, where is all this extra created money going? Typically a large portion of it channels into financial assets, hence the gain in price, "become more expensive".

Prices don't rise because inflation cheapens the value of the dollar, it is more correct to observe that with inflation you have more money circulating and bidding up the prices of various commodities.

>>21596368 #

Cui bono? There are people who benefit from this arrangement and there are supporting economic ideologies that 'demonstrate' this arrangement is beneficial for all and not just a minority.

>>21596446 #

>Why would deflation stop spending? You still need to eat, sleep, and shit.

It won't grind spending to a complete halt, but people will generally cut back spending its bad deflation during a recession - as opposed to the good deflation we see in electronics. It's not the deflation that's causing the fall in spending: it's the greater causes behind the sudden deflation that also simultaneously lowers spending.

>>21596550 #

Hoarding money is not a problem, it's an old myth, popular with Keynesians. If money is 'hoarded' and not spent, it's power/value is not realised. The persons 'hoarding' it aren't just going to burn this money - they will spend it, invest it or otherwise put it to use at some point in the future.

>>21596683 #

Again, it's not 'hoarding', it is savings. That is a good thing, a country needs savings to expand infrastructure, capital and longer-term projects, rather than just blowing it all on conspicuous consumption like TVs and clothing.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:26 UTC-4 No.21598888Replies: >>21598931
>>21598525 #

Steady deflation up to 2% is within our future, combined with the rise of the dollar's intrinsic value and the fall of foreign currencies, will make the American economy the ONLY economy left in the world.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:27 UTC-4 No.21598931Replies: >>21599071
>>21598888 #
>destroy the rest of the world's economy

yeah, that's a great idea
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:28 UTC-4 No.21598961
>>21598748 #

poor growth will continue policies of low interest and printing of currency to encourage the economy...basically, just kicking the can down the road further...what happens when the can eventually gets to the end of the road?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:29 UTC-4 No.21598983
You know what, all this talk of deflation seems like someones trying to pull a fucking fast one on me!

Can't we just trade something else people can't fucking magically make out of thin air?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:31 UTC-4 No.21599071Replies: >>21599149
>>21598931 #

Why would you care if you're in America? There is no other way for the survival of America. You see how the OPEC fucked with America once in the 70s over oil? BRICS won't be able to get anywhere near that capability because of the war dollar. Everyone wants to destroy our economy, we might as well destroy theirs either by making ours too good for them or destroying our economy totally.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:33 UTC-4 No.21599149
>>21599071 #
fucking mercantilist. economics is not zero sum!
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:33 UTC-4 No.21599167Replies: >>21599212
>>21596758 #
>>21596786 #

> Everyone can't get rich by burying their money

This is a fallacy. If everyone buries their money and no one is producing, there won't be deflation, there will be shortages of goods and thus INFLATION.

Money is not desirable in and of itself - it is a claim upon resources. People don't just collect money like stamps, they get it because they will one day redeem it for resources. In another way at looking at it, increasing in savings represents a deferral of today's consumption in leiu of future consumption.

If everyone is increasing their claims upon resources (money) rather than spending it all at once on televisions, clothing and cars, then those respective industries will indeed suffer. But it frees up the resources (that are not cheaper, lower in price) for other industries to build factories, capital and infrastructure; more longer-term projects with higher risk & interest rates (which are lowered by the increase in savings) in anticipation of higher future consumption.

You cannot expand an economy without savings, unless you use debt. As we're seeing in the 21st century economies expand by debt instead and are running into severe problems because they can't pay it back and the expansion was rife with mis-allocations and mal-investments. After all, if you're not constrained by the reality of scarcity, represented by limited savings and instead go the route of debt - then all sorts of crazy unproductive ventures/investment that once were imprudent become very attractive. Then the bubble bursts!
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:35 UTC-4 No.21599212Replies: >>21599802
>>21599167 #
>This is a fallacy. If everyone buries their money and no one is producing, there won't be deflation, there will be shortages of goods and thus INFLATION.

Nobody says no one is producing. Producers who rely on producing to make their livelihoods would have to cut their prices to compete and thus get caught in the deflationary death spiral.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:35 UTC-4 No.21599230Replies: >>21599311
>>21598748 #
What I am stating to think we are doing is just maintaining the status quo with QE and debt in the hopes that there will be some new, huge technological breakthrough/economic shift that literally forces the economy to outgrow its debt. Like another industrial revolution (there were more than one 1780,1820,1870,1900). We are basically gambling that some huge new growth driver will arrive before out debt becomes unmanageable.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:38 UTC-4 No.21599311
>>21599230 #
Even a small adjustment back to 4% growth would be great. Actually it's likely that we'll find new sources of growth - we are again the world's biggest producer of oil and natural gas (considered together). The problem is that technology is also having a negative effect by killing off middle class jobs.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:40 UTC-4 No.21599399
>>21597468 #
previous money expansion?
sounds like today doesnt it?
i guess we'll see soon enough.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:42 UTC-4 No.21599508Replies: >>21599865 >>21600113
>>21598558 #

This is going to be confusing because unfortunately modern economics has changed the definition of inflation: once it was defined as the expansion of the money supply, now it is defined as the general rise in prices.

So classically, deflation is the contraction of the money supply, inflation is expansion of the money supply. From this, you may see the EFFECTS of inflation/deflation, such as price fluctuations, currency value fluctuations.

>but yeah, enjoy your deflation and austerity,

Clearly you misunderstood the intent message of my post. I did point out the 'bad' kind of price falls, typically accompanied by recessions.

Austerity will only work if there's widespread debt defaults, which no one is doing.

>I'm sure your creditors and wealthy masters will love seeing their assets grow while you get laid off due to lowered sales volume

Their assets grow because of inflation (expansion of money supply, which is channeled into financial assets), despite the fact that circulating money & credit is decreasing in supply (what you're calling 'deflation').
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:51 UTC-4 No.21599802Replies: >>21602616
>>21599212 #

>Nobody says no one is producing.

Actually you did. You said quite literally "everyone" can't get rich by burying money.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:53 UTC-4 No.21599865
>>21599508 #
Thank you for pointing that out. I always thought of deflation in the first way (contraction of money supply), but now people seem to use it to mean general dropping of prices.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:00 UTC-4 No.21600113Replies: >>21600485
>>21599508 #
>I did point out the 'bad' kind of price falls, typically accompanied by recessions.

aren't recessions caused by unwise decisions made during 'booms'? isn't recession caused in the first place by false signals sent into the economy by government efforts to 'stimulate' the economy? in modern times, lowering interest rates for example.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:05 UTC-4 No.21600299
>>21596093 #
Because when you fund your life out of your savings you aren't making jew bankers rich.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:07 UTC-4 No.21600372Replies: >>21600523
>>21596144 #
A decent economy isn't based in anything other than what people want it to be based in. Consumerism is a tool to enslave people and create neofeudalism.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:10 UTC-4 No.21600485Replies: >>21600872
>>21600113 #

>aren't recessions caused by unwise decisions made during 'booms'?

Yeah I would agree with that.

> isn't recession caused in the first place by false signals sent into the economy by government efforts to 'stimulate' the economy?

I think it's important to note that, even with a relatively stable price mechanism, i.e. little government interference - the dynamic nature of economies, changes in technology and resource availability can still result in misallocations and false price signals.

It's just that government interference often as not exacerbates this problem, severely distorts the price mechanism, interest rates, savings-investment levels etc etc.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:11 UTC-4 No.21600523Replies: >>21601799
>>21600372 #
Or, you know, it is a tool to give people goods and services that they want, while making them pay for it...
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:19 UTC-4 No.21600872
>>21600485 #

you seem to be well informed. could you suggest a reading list that could comprehensively educate someone in the fundamentals of economics?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:23 UTC-4 No.21601016
facebook /BeingAmericanByGO/posts/595471190507449

read these posts. i have no hope.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:28 UTC-4 No.21601200
>>21596867 #
Bullshit. All the money saved is eventually spent. Just not on the shit the jews want you to buy.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:31 UTC-4 No.21601297Replies: >>21602652
>>21597225 #
Because I can't wait next week to eat. Also there is only a finite supply of goods produced per unit time, I will eventually be forced to but something because the supply is limited.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:42 UTC-4 No.21601677Replies: >>21602023
>>21598825 #
>conspicuous consumption like TVs and clothing

I joke about antisemitism but I have to wonder if the obsession with conspicuous consumption is a result of Jewish influence on the economics profession. Jews have been outsiders in the West. This may have had led Jews to attempt to purchase the symbols of upper class status and become preoccupied with their purchasing power over the traditional Protestant concerns with work and productivity and prudence. This may have had an impact on how fields like economics with a large number of Jews view debt vs savings, spending vs consumption, investment vs speculation etc.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:43 UTC-4 No.21601700Replies: >>21602279
>>21597543 #
God, for someone that likes to slam socialism, you sure don't have any more economic knowledge than they do. For one, there's always hoarding of cash during times of deflation. Yes, people will still need to spend it on the essentials, but you end up seeing investments dry up because people are less likely to take on risk when their money is gaining value. And calling it "saving" doesn't change the fact that it's still hoarding.

File: 1381449633558.jpg-(25 KB, 595x250, economics-currency.jpg)

 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:00 UTC-4 No.21595952Replies: >>21596459 >>21596700 >>21596758 >>21597225 >>21597445 >>21597654 >>21598387 >>21601874 >>21602147 >>21602895 >>21603814
What's so bad of deflation? Isn't it a good thing when the purchasing power of your savings and wages increases?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:02 UTC-4 No.21596019Replies: >>21596230 >>21596635 >>21597768
Stops people spending which is bad in an economy on the brinks of death.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:02 UTC-4 No.21596026Replies: >>21596093
What if you're paying off debts?
Then you're paying more.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:03 UTC-4 No.21596058
because somebody's going to have to take the fall
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:04 UTC-4 No.21596093Replies: >>21596173 >>21596514 >>21596550 >>21596823 >>21596964 >>21600299
>>21596026 #

Why should the bias be in favor of borrowers instead of savers, who exemplify virtues like patience, prudence and such?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:06 UTC-4 No.21596144Replies: >>21596368 >>21600372
Because our economy is based on consumerism and people borrowing and spending money on shit they probably don't even need. And monetary policy encourages this. The government and elites doesn't want you saving your money and letting it appreciate in value, they want you to spend it to pump up GDP, so they decrease interest rates and reduce incentive to save.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:07 UTC-4 No.21596173
>>21596093 #
because you can't take advantage of savers
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:07 UTC-4 No.21596179Replies: >>21596230 >>21597543 >>21597844 >>21598825
Nothing is wrong with it. It is only a problem because it decentralizes power and governments hate that shit. Deflation should be the sign of a power house economy. Your money is GAINING value in your hand without you even doing anything.

Also rich people don't like it because it means they have to keep producing more and more instead of just owning assets and being gaurenteed income (because as the dollar weakens, investments become more expensive, ergo they make money from existing, a transference of wealth from less wealthy to more wealthy).

So you have the two biggest power blocs (rich people and the state) who are usually in bed together, being disadvantaged from something. Now do you see why they always harp about how bad it is?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:08 UTC-4 No.21596230Replies: >>21596446
>>21596179 #
see
>>21596019 #

I agree that money gaining purchasing power is good, but when you have deflation and not adjustment it is bad
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:13 UTC-4 No.21596368Replies: >>21596899 >>21598825
>>21596144 #
>Because our economy is based on consumerism
So why is everyone apologizing for this instead of acknowledging it as a problem and thus not worth perpetuating?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:15 UTC-4 No.21596446Replies: >>21596726 >>21598825
>>21596230 #
Why would deflation stop spending? You still need to eat, sleep, and shit. Are rich people suddenly going to stop buying huge houses and cars or 10,000 dollar restaurant tabs? Demand will necessarily increase as prices continue to drop. You will be rewarded for saving and producing, rather than consuming and spending.

Our economy is in the tank because no one can invest in anything because the dollar is worthless. Because we blew all our savings last time everyone said to spend and borrow.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:16 UTC-4 No.21596459
>>21595952 (OP) #
75 y/o Germanfag detected. Stop killing Europe pls.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:18 UTC-4 No.21596514Replies: >>21596558
>>21596093 #
Are you bloody serious, m8 ?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:19 UTC-4 No.21596533Replies: >>21596758
jews dont like it
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:19 UTC-4 No.21596550Replies: >>21598825
>>21596093 #
What about the fucking countries ? They need to borrow, unlike private people who are fine hoarding money
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:20 UTC-4 No.21596558Replies: >>21596608
>>21596514 #
jidf pls go
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:21 UTC-4 No.21596608
File: 1381450918311.jpg-(24 KB, 367x451, hahahafaggot.jpg)

>>21596558 #
>jidf
I don't even need arguments, now, thank's to you.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:22 UTC-4 No.21596635Replies: >>21596703 >>21596749
>>21596019 #
people don't stop spending. the floor of the opportunity cost of investment just becomes the deflation rate of your money.

it empowers average citizens because they can invest money simply by using a savings account.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:24 UTC-4 No.21596683Replies: >>21596712 >>21596734 >>21598825
deflation rewards hoarding instead of spending. that's a bad thing.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:24 UTC-4 No.21596700Replies: >>21596730
>>21595952 (OP) #
>What's so bad of deflation? Isn't it a good thing when the magnitude of your debts increases?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:24 UTC-4 No.21596703Replies: >>21598363
>>21596635 #
DON'T PROMOTE THAT! HOW WILL I BE ABLE TO KEEP PEOPLE AS WAGE SLAVES FOR MY BUSINESS IF THEY START GAINING SAVINGS AND THE OPPORTUNITY TO INVEST IN COMPETING BUSINESS VENTURES?!!?!
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:25 UTC-4 No.21596712Replies: >>21596736
>>21596683 #

Bad for the elites, yes.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:25 UTC-4 No.21596726Replies: >>21596814
>>21596446 #
i think it would lead to a decline in spending in an aggregate sense, however the money would probably be directed by virtue of necessity and scarcity into the most productive parts of the economy. imagine how great it would be when all the bullshit departments of the universities get dumped.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:25 UTC-4 No.21596730
>>21596700 #
Maybe not get put in debt? Unless people are forcing you to go into debt, why would you ever choose to do it?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:25 UTC-4 No.21596734Replies: >>21596786
>>21596683 #

Why?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:25 UTC-4 No.21596736
>>21596712 #
The elite's will be just fine whether there is inflation or deflation. it's bad for everyone.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:26 UTC-4 No.21596749Replies: >>21598363
>>21596635 #
Deflation kills work and everyone having debts.
Are you chinese ?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:26 UTC-4 No.21596758Replies: >>21598525 >>21599167
>>21595952 (OP) #
If currency keeps going up why would you spend it? Also this >>21596533 #
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:27 UTC-4 No.21596786Replies: >>21596853 >>21596995 >>21597074 >>21599167
>>21596734 #
Would you spend 100 dollars if it'll have the purchasing power of 200 tomorrow? Everyone can't get rich by burying their money, that's not how an economy works.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:28 UTC-4 No.21596814Replies: >>21596939
>>21596726 #
Dare to dream, brother...

>tfw regular joe and their savings account become the bedrock of investment and economic growth again because of deflation
>ihavenoface.jpg
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:28 UTC-4 No.21596818
http://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0311/the-dangers-of-deflation.aspx
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:28 UTC-4 No.21596823
>>21596093 #
Because saving doesn't expand the economy.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:29 UTC-4 No.21596853Replies: >>21596902
>>21596786 #
That is a pretty insane deflation rate you gave going there.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:29 UTC-4 No.21596867Replies: >>21601200
Economic output depends on spending and investing, which deflation discourages. This among dozens of other problems with deflation.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:30 UTC-4 No.21596899
>>21596368 #
It's not a problem. It's only a problem when it goes *too far* like it was prior to 2008 when the U.S. saving rate was at 0% and there was an enormous credit bubble. But we've been deleveraging since then back to a more healthy balance.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:30 UTC-4 No.21596902
>>21596853 #
I tried to put it in simple, exaggerated terms since a retarded person was asking me a question and I wanted to make sure they understood.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:30 UTC-4 No.21596906Replies: >>21596979
People still buy computers even though prices have dropped significantly.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:31 UTC-4 No.21596939
>>21596814 #
Except Regular Joe has no savings at all and owes money to some filthy bank.
Inflation it is !
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:31 UTC-4 No.21596964
>>21596093 #
Borrowing is the most important driver of growth. How else are companies suppose to expand, buy capital equipment, real estate... you know function? When credit drys up so do the actual drivers of productivity. Money is just a means to an end, increasing output. If you tighten money too much to the point of deflation you ruin the point of money, facilitating economic activity.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:32 UTC-4 No.21596979Replies: >>21597210
>>21596906 #
Computers are unique because the rate at which they are improving is so fast.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:32 UTC-4 No.21596995
>>21596786 #
because for a ton of people they can buy something that is worth more to them than the extra $100 accumulated.

examples:
>medical products/services
>dinner date with your waifu
>gasoline to fill your gas tank
>drugs
>mortage payments
etc
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:35 UTC-4 No.21597074Replies: >>21597158
>>21596786 #
As I said earlier, a great turn of phrase I heard years ago, "People still need to eat, sleep, and shit."

If I wanted to buy a video game tomorrow, even in deflation, I'd want to again. Even more so, because now it is cheaper. Sure there might be "Well if deflation rate is 100% a day, I might as well wait a few more days", but in reality, I want to play that damn video game. lol.

Same with food. yah buying groceries might be better to do tomorrow, and the day after, etc, but at some point, I gotta eat.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:37 UTC-4 No.21597158Replies: >>21597443 >>21597468
>>21597074 #
If you don't believe deflation is bad, or maybe don't understand its implications, why don't you go look at the history of the great depression. Then get back to us.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:39 UTC-4 No.21597210Replies: >>21597263
>>21596979 #

And is "improving fast" a different effect from "getting cheaper" when describing how people act? They both encourage people to hold off spending.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:40 UTC-4 No.21597225Replies: >>21597489 >>21598525 >>21601297
>>21595952 (OP) #

No.

Why buy something today that will cost you half the price in a weeks time? And, in a weeks time, why not wait an extra week and get it even cheaper... and so on, and so on...

People stop buying, demand is sucked out of the economy,Wages are slashed for those in work this causes recession, unemployment rises....
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:41 UTC-4 No.21597263
>>21597210 #
While computers getting cheaper does make people hold off from buying them, the fast that computers are improving so rapidly makes people buy them more rapidly. It's a balance.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:42 UTC-4 No.21597301Replies: >>21597505
People buy less, borrow MUCH less, etc.

You stupid piece of shit.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:45 UTC-4 No.21597443
>>21597158 #
>using post progressive era economies as case studies
>i dont think so Tim

you dug your grave, no go fucking lay in it.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:45 UTC-4 No.21597445
File: 1381452340224.jpg-(50 KB, 498x487, 4676774889.jpg)

>>21595952 (OP) #

isn't that question kind of silly willy??? With the Fed printing dollars like their falling off trees, and the government borrowing us into bankrupcy (to send all our money to Israel) we are'nt going to have deflation.

Check the price of food, Gasoline, Electricity, property tax, Health Obomba tax ( a brand new expensive tax ) red light camera taxes ( going up up up ) rent payments per month. Every "cost" is going up, the value of the dollar is collapsing. Why are you worried about non existant impossible deflation??
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:46 UTC-4 No.21597468Replies: >>21599399
>>21597158 #
Just read some Milton Friedman. Essentially business people could no longer use leverage to invest, causing the recession to drop into a depression.

But Hayek argued that it was a previous money expansion that caused the cheap credit bubble.

Who is right? Or are they both right? I'd be more comfortable if a /pol/lock explained it (aka you pretty please, with a cherry on top).
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:46 UTC-4 No.21597482
Because we don't have a free market system. In a free market system savings rates would determine interest rates, but since we don't live in that world there is no point in encouraging saving with deflation.

It will all come crashing down eventually, and we may return to a system where saving rates determine interest rates.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:47 UTC-4 No.21597489Replies: >>21597755
>>21597225 #

Yeah, everyone getting richer and having our cost of living go down would really suck dude. Please make my expenses and make me poor!!

Just take away my money if it's for the good!!!

>dumbass there is no deflation.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:47 UTC-4 No.21597505Replies: >>21597684
>>21597301 #
ok so if the problem is people not spending enough money why not just give every american a million dollar loan ?

plenty of money will be spent then
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:48 UTC-4 No.21597543Replies: >>21601700
>>21596179 #

This. There is nothing wrong with it otherwise.

If the money is deflating, it is gaining value. People won't "hoard" it because they still need goods are services. If anything, producers will compete to make superior products, worth buying now because it will keep or gain value in the future.

However, if their money is constantly losing value, people will buy more cheap crap or stupid short-term investments to try and stave off poverty. Some people (usually idiot socialists who whine about consumer culture) ironically think that cheap consumer crap IS the economy.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:51 UTC-4 No.21597654Replies: >>21597729 >>21597992
>>21595952 (OP) #
It breaks the system and that threatens people who make a living off of it.

If deflation was happening, a person would be better off putting money in their mattress rather than buying stocks, bonds, CDs, CDOs, any financial product you can think of.

At a certain point, deflation would end wall street, people would no longer need to "invest" to pace or outpace inflation. No broker or trader required, just stick your money in a safe.

In other words, deflation is the Jew apocalypse.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:52 UTC-4 No.21597684
>>21597505 #
Honestly the Federal Reserve just mailing everyone checks could have boosted the economy enormously and gotten us out of this depression years ago.

They didn't do it because it would have given the entire financial world a heart attack. It would be such an apparently reckless move from the usually calm United States that everyone would panic.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:53 UTC-4 No.21597729Replies: >>21598214
>>21597654 #
Sounds like a paradise, everyone being rich in trade from production and all of economics being summed up in "just save a little".
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:54 UTC-4 No.21597755Replies: >>21598074
>>21597489 #

>Yeah, everyone getting richer

Losing your job doesn't make you richer.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:54 UTC-4 No.21597768
>>21596019 #
Doesn't stop spending so much as it stops investment. Nobody is going to invest if they are going to lose money on the investment, they are just going to hang onto the cash,
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:56 UTC-4 No.21597844
>>21596179 #
The rich have the most to win during deflation as they can buy up assets with cash when things top out, then cash in when the currency drops back down.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:59 UTC-4 No.21597992Replies: >>21598365 >>21598468
>>21597654 #
You do realize we need money velocity? If everyone is stuffing their money in mattresses and not investing people and companies can't get capital to be productive.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:01 UTC-4 No.21598030Replies: >>21598136 >>21598157 >>21598167
File: 1381453270009.jpg-(43 KB, 400x250, 1380264169110.jpg)

erm...who is worried about deflation? it's not happening and won't. the US is going to be seeing absurd inflation rates before long
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:02 UTC-4 No.21598074
>>21597755 #

>American
>Actually have a job
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:03 UTC-4 No.21598136
>>21598030 #
yea no
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:04 UTC-4 No.21598157Replies: >>21598186 >>21598347
File: 1381453466931.jpg-(56 KB, 648x441, Gold Eagles Handful.jpg)

>>21598030 #

We already are in a long term steady inflation. Just look at health care costs, going the fuck up every year and then POW!! A new huge health care ten thousand dollar tax on top of that.

Every fucking thing in this country is getting more and more expensive.

>Not if you price everything in gold of course. Sux to be you fiat bound peasants.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:04 UTC-4 No.21598167Replies: >>21598337
>>21598030 #

>the US is going to be seeing absurd inflation rates before long

The US inflation rate is at 1.5%, it has been a historically low levels for nearly four years.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:05 UTC-4 No.21598186
>>21598157 #
Using a gold backed currency is what caused the deflation in the great depression...
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:05 UTC-4 No.21598214Replies: >>21598319 >>21598355
>>21597729 #
I'm sure that there are a few down sides to it a good economist can tell you. I'm sure there are ton of chicken little facts a shill/jew will tell you.

What I can say is that the current federal reserve policy of maintaining a low level of inflation (at least 1%) to prevent the risk of deflation (vs trying to have 0 inflation or deflation) reduces the buying power of a person's savings over their working lifetime by half.

That's right, 2% inflation, compounded annually over 30 years reduces the dollar's buying power by about half.

And the 1-2% inflation target is if everything goes well, if everything goes according to plan. If we get into real inflation, it's even worse.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:08 UTC-4 No.21598319Replies: >>21598430 >>21598547 >>21598645
>>21598214 #
It's not enough for you that 1-2% inflation is historically low, oh no. It's got to be 0%.

Guess what. Price stability is impossible. We're going to have either inflation or deflation, and inflation works with a growing economy. If you don't want to lose your savings, invest them. In fact, even savings accounts' interest rates are usually on par or better than inflation.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:09 UTC-4 No.21598337Replies: >>21598433
>>21598167 #

and inflation being at low levels for a couple years is reason to believe that there won't be a market correction?

with the levels of cash that the treasury is printing and the govt buying its own bonds something had to give eventually. market manipulation and the fed has kept the prime rate and inflation down...eventually the excess of cash in the market catch up with us and those dollars will be worth a lot less
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:09 UTC-4 No.21598347
>>21598157 #
Health care cost have been skyrocketing for years but that's not because of US inflation.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:09 UTC-4 No.21598355Replies: >>21598768
>>21598214 #

Inflation is a good thing if you have a high national debt. Low interest rates below inflation reduces debt without spending a dime of taxpayers money.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:10 UTC-4 No.21598363
>>21596749 #
lel
>>21596703 #
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:10 UTC-4 No.21598365
>>21597992 #

You only need "money velocity" if your economy is based on consumer crap and stock market shenanigans. It's basically a candid admission that you need people to be exchanging money so fast that they don't notice they're loosing it.

Basically, even if your money is gaining value, you still need to purchase things. You will just have to buy products that increase or at the very least don't lose value with time. Otherwise you're basically paying a premium for satisfying your immediate needs over your future wealth (which still happens all the time, look at all the people who buy first gen electronics).
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:10 UTC-4 No.21598387Replies: >>21598558
>>21595952 (OP) #

It is important to distinguish between two basic types of deflation (which Keynesians typically dishonestly conflate):

1/ Gradual, steady deflation as a result from increases in output, scalability, efficiency. Good examples of this the generally the 19th century and today the electronics industry

2/ Sudden, sharp deflation typically the immediate cause of monetary (money + credit) contraction and begetting business & banking failures, collapse in investment & consumption, recession, unemployment. Example: pretty much most recessions of the 20th century and beyond, banking panics of 19th century and earlier.

The deflation of the 19th century was good because it wasn't caused by fluctuations in the money supply - which was relatively stable due to commodity money. This general fall in prices was beneficial because it was due to output expanding; it resulted in low costs for businesses, greater purchasing power for consumers and thus businesses could sell more goods & services.

Today the world economy and financial markets depend upon continuous expansion of debt and money, halting or even contraction this trend results in financial assets collapsing in price, debt defaults, margin calls and many other bad consequences. Inflating away the value of debt is also important today.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:11 UTC-4 No.21598430
>>21598319 #

> savings accounts rates on par with inflation

apparently I need to find better banks
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:12 UTC-4 No.21598433Replies: >>21598646
>>21598337 #
>>21598337 #

>is reason to believe that there won't be a market correction?

I don't think you know what a "market correction is".

Idiots have been predicting hyperinflation since the start of the financial crisis back in 2007... we're still waiting...
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:13 UTC-4 No.21598468
>>21597992 #
High deflation would be a disaster for this reason. A small amount of deflation would stop people from losing their savings but allow companies to offer a slightly higher return on investments to compete with the mattress system.

The point is you could actually have cash without the cash being devalued and still have a decently functional economy. Once the Jews find out I'm advocating this I will be shot on sight.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:14 UTC-4 No.21598525Replies: >>21598888
>>21597225 #
>Why buy something today that will cost you half the price in a weeks time?
That would be hyperdeflation. What if it was 1 or 2 percent a year? Are you going to go without something you want to save 1% of it's cost?

>>21596758 #
>If currency keeps going up why would you spend it?

Because you want to live and to do that you need to buy stuff to enable you to live? Many people spend all they earn and then some, are they doing this because they are worried that next year everything will be 2% more expensive? Or because they want things and have the ability to buy it.

Anti deflation people are illogical and just parrot what thew Jews told them.

I've hear people call people that save 'currency hoarders'.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:15 UTC-4 No.21598547
>>21598319 #
OK Mr. Goldblatt, just tell me the address of your hedge fund management company and I'll send you all my monies right now. I wouldn't want to become a victim of inflation.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:16 UTC-4 No.21598558Replies: >>21598615 >>21599508
>>21598387 #

>in the electronics industry

No, deflation is the rise in value of currency due to restricted supply or circulation, not the drop in price of one good or service.

but yeah, enjoy your deflation and austerity, I'm sure your creditors and wealthy masters will love seeing their assets grow while you get laid off due to lowered sales volume
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:17 UTC-4 No.21598615
File: 1381454263820.jpg-(46 KB, 375x411, 1378754127249.jpg)

>>21598558 #

>wealthy masters
>encouraging the system that made them overlords to begin with

Keep fighting that power.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:18 UTC-4 No.21598645
>>21598319 #
Price stability is impossible which is why I suggest a very small amount of deflation (a 1-2% target like the fed has for inflation right now). In this fashion we can have a functional economy, maintain a system of capital investment, and people won't be subject to an inflation stealth tax.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:18 UTC-4 No.21598646Replies: >>21598748
>>21598433 #

I wouldn't predict hyperinflation on the scale of wermacht Germany or Zimbabwe....but to believe that we'll see no ill effects from current monetary policies is just putting your head in the sand
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:21 UTC-4 No.21598748Replies: >>21598961 >>21599230
>>21598646 #
It won't happen.

Actually the markets have developed a different problem. They're addicted to QE, to the point that better-than-expected growth is taken as a BAD sign in that it will lead to the end of QE, which causes the markets to fall and growth to suffer.

So there won't be inflation, but there won't be good growth, either.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:22 UTC-4 No.21598768
>>21598355 #
Unless there's a war on we shouldn't have a national debt to begin with. Why should we mortgage our nation's future and make our children pay for our system of government and benefits?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:24 UTC-4 No.21598825Replies: >>21601677
>>21596179 #

>(because as the dollar weakens, investments become more expensive, ergo they make money from existing, a transference of wealth from less wealthy to more wealthy).

Sort of but not the entire picture. Inflating (expanding the money supply) the currency will weaken it's value and general purchasing power. The important question is, where is all this extra created money going? Typically a large portion of it channels into financial assets, hence the gain in price, "become more expensive".

Prices don't rise because inflation cheapens the value of the dollar, it is more correct to observe that with inflation you have more money circulating and bidding up the prices of various commodities.

>>21596368 #

Cui bono? There are people who benefit from this arrangement and there are supporting economic ideologies that 'demonstrate' this arrangement is beneficial for all and not just a minority.

>>21596446 #

>Why would deflation stop spending? You still need to eat, sleep, and shit.

It won't grind spending to a complete halt, but people will generally cut back spending its bad deflation during a recession - as opposed to the good deflation we see in electronics. It's not the deflation that's causing the fall in spending: it's the greater causes behind the sudden deflation that also simultaneously lowers spending.

>>21596550 #

Hoarding money is not a problem, it's an old myth, popular with Keynesians. If money is 'hoarded' and not spent, it's power/value is not realised. The persons 'hoarding' it aren't just going to burn this money - they will spend it, invest it or otherwise put it to use at some point in the future.

>>21596683 #

Again, it's not 'hoarding', it is savings. That is a good thing, a country needs savings to expand infrastructure, capital and longer-term projects, rather than just blowing it all on conspicuous consumption like TVs and clothing.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:26 UTC-4 No.21598888Replies: >>21598931
>>21598525 #

Steady deflation up to 2% is within our future, combined with the rise of the dollar's intrinsic value and the fall of foreign currencies, will make the American economy the ONLY economy left in the world.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:27 UTC-4 No.21598931Replies: >>21599071
>>21598888 #
>destroy the rest of the world's economy

yeah, that's a great idea
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:28 UTC-4 No.21598961
>>21598748 #

poor growth will continue policies of low interest and printing of currency to encourage the economy...basically, just kicking the can down the road further...what happens when the can eventually gets to the end of the road?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:29 UTC-4 No.21598983
You know what, all this talk of deflation seems like someones trying to pull a fucking fast one on me!

Can't we just trade something else people can't fucking magically make out of thin air?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:31 UTC-4 No.21599071Replies: >>21599149
>>21598931 #

Why would you care if you're in America? There is no other way for the survival of America. You see how the OPEC fucked with America once in the 70s over oil? BRICS won't be able to get anywhere near that capability because of the war dollar. Everyone wants to destroy our economy, we might as well destroy theirs either by making ours too good for them or destroying our economy totally.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:33 UTC-4 No.21599149
>>21599071 #
fucking mercantilist. economics is not zero sum!
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:33 UTC-4 No.21599167Replies: >>21599212
>>21596758 #
>>21596786 #

> Everyone can't get rich by burying their money

This is a fallacy. If everyone buries their money and no one is producing, there won't be deflation, there will be shortages of goods and thus INFLATION.

Money is not desirable in and of itself - it is a claim upon resources. People don't just collect money like stamps, they get it because they will one day redeem it for resources. In another way at looking at it, increasing in savings represents a deferral of today's consumption in leiu of future consumption.

If everyone is increasing their claims upon resources (money) rather than spending it all at once on televisions, clothing and cars, then those respective industries will indeed suffer. But it frees up the resources (that are not cheaper, lower in price) for other industries to build factories, capital and infrastructure; more longer-term projects with higher risk & interest rates (which are lowered by the increase in savings) in anticipation of higher future consumption.

You cannot expand an economy without savings, unless you use debt. As we're seeing in the 21st century economies expand by debt instead and are running into severe problems because they can't pay it back and the expansion was rife with mis-allocations and mal-investments. After all, if you're not constrained by the reality of scarcity, represented by limited savings and instead go the route of debt - then all sorts of crazy unproductive ventures/investment that once were imprudent become very attractive. Then the bubble bursts!
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:35 UTC-4 No.21599212Replies: >>21599802
>>21599167 #
>This is a fallacy. If everyone buries their money and no one is producing, there won't be deflation, there will be shortages of goods and thus INFLATION.

Nobody says no one is producing. Producers who rely on producing to make their livelihoods would have to cut their prices to compete and thus get caught in the deflationary death spiral.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:35 UTC-4 No.21599230Replies: >>21599311
>>21598748 #
What I am stating to think we are doing is just maintaining the status quo with QE and debt in the hopes that there will be some new, huge technological breakthrough/economic shift that literally forces the economy to outgrow its debt. Like another industrial revolution (there were more than one 1780,1820,1870,1900). We are basically gambling that some huge new growth driver will arrive before out debt becomes unmanageable.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:38 UTC-4 No.21599311
>>21599230 #
Even a small adjustment back to 4% growth would be great. Actually it's likely that we'll find new sources of growth - we are again the world's biggest producer of oil and natural gas (considered together). The problem is that technology is also having a negative effect by killing off middle class jobs.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:40 UTC-4 No.21599399
>>21597468 #
previous money expansion?
sounds like today doesnt it?
i guess we'll see soon enough.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:42 UTC-4 No.21599508Replies: >>21599865 >>21600113
>>21598558 #

This is going to be confusing because unfortunately modern economics has changed the definition of inflation: once it was defined as the expansion of the money supply, now it is defined as the general rise in prices.

So classically, deflation is the contraction of the money supply, inflation is expansion of the money supply. From this, you may see the EFFECTS of inflation/deflation, such as price fluctuations, currency value fluctuations.

>but yeah, enjoy your deflation and austerity,

Clearly you misunderstood the intent message of my post. I did point out the 'bad' kind of price falls, typically accompanied by recessions.

Austerity will only work if there's widespread debt defaults, which no one is doing.

>I'm sure your creditors and wealthy masters will love seeing their assets grow while you get laid off due to lowered sales volume

Their assets grow because of inflation (expansion of money supply, which is channeled into financial assets), despite the fact that circulating money & credit is decreasing in supply (what you're calling 'deflation').
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:51 UTC-4 No.21599802Replies: >>21602616
>>21599212 #

>Nobody says no one is producing.

Actually you did. You said quite literally "everyone" can't get rich by burying money.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:53 UTC-4 No.21599865
>>21599508 #
Thank you for pointing that out. I always thought of deflation in the first way (contraction of money supply), but now people seem to use it to mean general dropping of prices.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:00 UTC-4 No.21600113Replies: >>21600485
>>21599508 #
>I did point out the 'bad' kind of price falls, typically accompanied by recessions.

aren't recessions caused by unwise decisions made during 'booms'? isn't recession caused in the first place by false signals sent into the economy by government efforts to 'stimulate' the economy? in modern times, lowering interest rates for example.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:05 UTC-4 No.21600299
>>21596093 #
Because when you fund your life out of your savings you aren't making jew bankers rich.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:07 UTC-4 No.21600372Replies: >>21600523
>>21596144 #
A decent economy isn't based in anything other than what people want it to be based in. Consumerism is a tool to enslave people and create neofeudalism.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:10 UTC-4 No.21600485Replies: >>21600872
>>21600113 #

>aren't recessions caused by unwise decisions made during 'booms'?

Yeah I would agree with that.

> isn't recession caused in the first place by false signals sent into the economy by government efforts to 'stimulate' the economy?

I think it's important to note that, even with a relatively stable price mechanism, i.e. little government interference - the dynamic nature of economies, changes in technology and resource availability can still result in misallocations and false price signals.

It's just that government interference often as not exacerbates this problem, severely distorts the price mechanism, interest rates, savings-investment levels etc etc.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:11 UTC-4 No.21600523Replies: >>21601799
>>21600372 #
Or, you know, it is a tool to give people goods and services that they want, while making them pay for it...
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:19 UTC-4 No.21600872
>>21600485 #

you seem to be well informed. could you suggest a reading list that could comprehensively educate someone in the fundamentals of economics?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:23 UTC-4 No.21601016
facebook /BeingAmericanByGO/posts/595471190507449

read these posts. i have no hope.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:28 UTC-4 No.21601200
>>21596867 #
Bullshit. All the money saved is eventually spent. Just not on the shit the jews want you to buy.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:31 UTC-4 No.21601297Replies: >>21602652
>>21597225 #
Because I can't wait next week to eat. Also there is only a finite supply of goods produced per unit time, I will eventually be forced to but something because the supply is limited.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:42 UTC-4 No.21601677Replies: >>21602023
>>21598825 #
>conspicuous consumption like TVs and clothing

I joke about antisemitism but I have to wonder if the obsession with conspicuous consumption is a result of Jewish influence on the economics profession. Jews have been outsiders in the West. This may have had led Jews to attempt to purchase the symbols of upper class status and become preoccupied with their purchasing power over the traditional Protestant concerns with work and productivity and prudence. This may have had an impact on how fields like economics with a large number of Jews view debt vs savings, spending vs consumption, investment vs speculation etc.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:43 UTC-4 No.21601700Replies: >>21602279
>>21597543 #
God, for someone that likes to slam socialism, you sure don't have any more economic knowledge than they do. For one, there's always hoarding of cash during times of deflation. Yes, people will still need to spend it on the essentials, but you end up seeing investments dry up because people are less likely to take on risk when their money is gaining value. And calling it "saving" doesn't change the fact that it's still hoarding.

Competing to make a superior product also doesn't make any sense during deflation because that money would be better put to use saving it in some fashion.

Thanks to the lack of demand caused by deflation, you see economic depressions occurring and lasting longer because nobody is buying anything. While you may believe that "cheap consumer crap" is not part of the economy, you would be wrong. If nobody buys that "crap", the people who make and sell it go out of business, and they become unable to buy other pieces of "crap", and so on and so forth.

If you want to see how deflation fucks up the economy, just look at the monetary policy pursued by the Fed after the Great Depression. Rather than pumping money into the economy to get the engine working again, they drained money out and exacerbated and extended the problem.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:46 UTC-4 No.21601799
>>21600523 #
It's makes them overpay for it by leading to a treadmill of debt that can't be paid off nor can anyone break from the cycle. That's where the neofeudalism comes in
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:48 UTC-4 No.21601874
>>21595952 (OP) #
True deflation, or a reduction of the money supply, makes it harder for debts to be paid off and causes unnecessary defaults. The general reduction of prices helps everyone. Knowing the difference can save you from der juden.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:53 UTC-4 No.21602023Replies: >>21602172 >>21602333
>>21601677 #

I hardly think it has to do with Jews. Materialism and frivolity has been identified in decaying civilisations for thousands of years.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:57 UTC-4 No.21602147
>>21595952 (OP) #

Deflation and inflation are each bad, it's best to keep the money supply stable relative to population growth and price increases.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)22:58 UTC-4 No.21602172Replies: >>21602257
>>21602023 #

protip: Rome was fiscally dominated by Jews
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:01 UTC-4 No.21602257Replies: >>21602343
>>21602172 #

and Egypt, Babylon, Persia, China, India?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:01 UTC-4 No.21602279Replies: >>21602392
>>21601700 #
>If you want to see how deflation fucks up the economy, just look at the monetary policy pursued by the Fed after the Great Depression. Rather than pumping money into the economy to get the engine working again, they drained money out and exacerbated and extended the problem.


pumping money into the economy? like at present right?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:03 UTC-4 No.21602333
>>21602023 #
True. But in the US Protestant culture specifically countered those trends. Work and savings were considered almost literally religious duties. The shift from this towards consumption and get rich quick as social norms is interesting. But specifically in the field of economics, I wonder if this shift corresponded with the decline of Protestant influence in the field.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:03 UTC-4 No.21602343Replies: >>21602576
>>21602257 #

Egypt: probably
Babylon (where the Jews originated): probably
Persia: probably, but to a smaller extent
China: when did materialism get really bad there, aside from modern times?
India: Unlikely, though not sure tbh
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:05 UTC-4 No.21602392Replies: >>21602482
>>21602279 #
If the Fed had pursued the same monetary policy in 2008 and onward that they pursued after 1929, we would be in the middle of another great depression. While things are kinda shitty today, at least we don't have bread lines going down the street every Tuesday and 25% unemployment.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:06 UTC-4 No.21602447
File: 1381460804600.png-(26 KB, 633x758, dat-feel-jew.png)

deflation is bad because merchants require usury to profit and inflation is a driver of usury.

If there is deflation, lending is not profitable and it is better to just keep the money.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:08 UTC-4 No.21602482Replies: >>21602718
>>21602392 #
How many people today are on food stamps?
How many people are underemployed?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:11 UTC-4 No.21602576
>>21602343 #

Now you're grasping at straws
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:12 UTC-4 No.21602616Replies: >>21602831
>>21599802 #
That wasn't actually me, but it was clearly hyperbole.

In a less literal sense, it means that the economy is driven by investment, but with deflation, there is an incentive against investing in new businesses since your money becomes more valuable on its own and shares in a business become less valuable.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:13 UTC-4 No.21602652Replies: >>21602882
>>21601297 #
But you'll be buying less than you would otherwise, and so will everyone else.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:16 UTC-4 No.21602718Replies: >>21602950 >>21603079
>>21602482 #
Less than there would be if the Fed clamped down on the money supply, that's for sure.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:19 UTC-4 No.21602831
>>21602616 #

Explain then the extraordinarily economic growth of the 19th century?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:21 UTC-4 No.21602882Replies: >>21603458
>>21602652 #
And that's bad how? Instead of buying a new tv, I'll save up money to start a business. In deflation people still spend money but they spend it on other things like improving their quality of life instead of unproductive crap.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:21 UTC-4 No.21602895
>>21595952 (OP) #
Our current economy is built on inflation and to change it at this point would put most of the population into the unemployment line.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:23 UTC-4 No.21602950Replies: >>21603458
>>21602718 #
But you mentioned the absence of soup lines. If we didn't have SNAP cards would you be measuring the length of the lines to determine that the current fed's policies were better?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:26 UTC-4 No.21603079Replies: >>21603644
>>21602718 #

That may be so, but surely you can recognise the dire long-term consequences of unrestrained monetary expansion? I guess the Fed really has no other option at this point, still keep in mind that 0% interest rates and Q.E.1,2,3 to infinity can't last forever.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:36 UTC-4 No.21603458Replies: >>21603603 >>21603692
>>21602882 #
>And that's bad how? Instead of buying a new tv, I'll save up money to start a business.
That's an idea, but it's unlikely that you'll have enough money on your own to start a new business. Most people take out loans for such things for good reason: it takes a lot of capital to start a business.

I can save up for 20 years to buy a house or start my own business, or I can take out a loan for either of things, pay more money for the interest, and make money while running my business or profiting off of the increasing value of my house.

Personal Finance 101 man, debt is best taken when the value of what you're taking debt out on is going to increase more than the cost of interest in repaying the product.

>>21602950 #
I can guarantee you that fewer banks collapsed from 2008 to today than collapsed between 1929 and 1933. And back then, we didn't have the FDIC to insure the accounts of most citizens. That meant that when people made a run on the banks, those banks fell apart because they couldn't take out a temporary loan from the Fed to have enough cash to hand out because the money supply tightened. So then lots of people lost their money and were completely fucked.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:40 UTC-4 No.21603603
>>21603458 #
How the hell do you know that? Really you're just pulling at straws here. Also if other people have savings then can pool their savings with mine without the need of a bank. And that what frightens you, we won't need you and you won't get a cut of our work.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:41 UTC-4 No.21603644Replies: >>21604788
>>21603079 #
Well, you could take a neo-classical view long-term and just assume that the market will correct itself over time. QE may cause nasty inflation if it keeps going, but if employment and growth stay high, that's a sacrifice I'd be willing to make.

The only real concern would be that the market won't be able to come off the QE high for some time. I'm almost certain we'll see a minor recession when the money supply starts to normalize.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:43 UTC-4 No.21603692Replies: >>21604280
>>21603458 #
So we moved from food lines to bank failures to defend the fed?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:46 UTC-4 No.21603814
>>21595952 (OP) #
well when you have a fiat currency Inflation is sort of the whole point
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:59 UTC-4 No.21604280
>>21603692 #
Biggest reason why we had food lines was because people literally had no money to draw on. There is a noticeable difference between receiving food stamps every month because you don't make much money (reminder that the barrier to entry was lowered to increase the number of people eligible thanks to the stimulus package) and going to a soup kitchen because you don't have a dollar to your name.

And yes, there is a connection between needing to go to a food line and watching banks close. People's savings dried up because other people got to the bank first.
>>
 Anonymous  10/11/13(Fri)00:12 UTC-4 No.21604788
>>21603644 #

Does the term currency debasement have any meaning to you, are you familiar with history?

File: 1381435419077.jpg-(35 KB, 1040x583, G019_Brass_Knuckles_for_Guys__65936(...).jpg)

 Anonymous 10/10/13(Thu)16:03 UTC-4 No.18294389Replies: >>18294947 >>18295029 >>18296581 >>18298039 >>18300036
What are /k/s opinions on brass knuckles?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)16:05 UTC-4 No.18294402Replies: >>18296228
Don't think I'd ever really want to use them unless I suddenly had to torture some guy tied down to a chair or something.

Most of /k/ already frowns upon people carrying knives to defend themselves, brass knuckles seem like even more of a step down.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)16:13 UTC-4 No.18294463Replies: >>18294947 >>18294977 >>18295738
Kind of worthless.

>will break your knuckles if you use them
>illegal in many jurisdiction (though you can usually get away with owning one if you claim it to be a paperweight, and if you don't actually use it)

Really, if you want one for the hell of it, get one, but as far as practicality go, they're nothing useful.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)17:13 UTC-4 No.18294947Replies: >>18296436
>>18294389 (OP) #
Useless unless you already know how to fight. They're a force amplifier.

>>18294463 #
>will break your knuckles if you use them

Only if you hold them wrong.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)17:16 UTC-4 No.18294977
>>18294463 #
>will break your knuckles if you use them
thisisbait.jpeg
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)17:20 UTC-4 No.18295023
Part of my EDC, learn to use them correctly and learn different ways to use them. Hammerfist with knucks and you will split someone wide open. Seeing your own blood is a great deterrent, ultimately a superficial wound.

A very dangerous paperweight....
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)17:21 UTC-4 No.18295029
>>18294389 (OP) #
If you know what you're doing you can cut someone up pretty good. Blood in your eyes/running down your face takes the fight out of a lot of people.
Almost nobody knows how to used them right though.
I also don't advise getting in a fight, because it's stupid, and that's all these are good for.
Chances are if you're in a situation where you're using these you would be justified in just shooting the fucker, or you're doing something where it would be justifiable for someone to shoot you.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)17:51 UTC-4 No.18295346Replies: >>18295573 >>18296272
did soldiers in ww1/2 actually keep a pair of knucks on when fighting?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)18:11 UTC-4 No.18295573
>>18295346 #
What is Trenchknife, Alex?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)18:24 UTC-4 No.18295738
>>18294463 #
>(though you can usually get away with owning one if you claim it to be a paperweight
belt buckle
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)18:31 UTC-4 No.18295829Replies: >>18296149 >>18296259
File: 1381444271775.jpg-(81 KB, 1200x900, 9337163_1.jpg)

I got me a real brass knuckle-duster from my grandpa that he carried with him in the second world war. Traded a beer for them in a tavern during leave in England to an American who was also there. Never used them, but he carried it with him his entire time in the CEF.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)18:57 UTC-4 No.18296149Replies: >>18296240
>>18295829 #
troll/10
nice try though
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)19:03 UTC-4 No.18296228
>>18294402 #
I'm not exactly an expert on brass knuckle usage, but it seems like it'd be a lot harder for someone to disarm you while using them (compared to using a knife).
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)19:04 UTC-4 No.18296240
>>18296149 #
pls explain. I'm not mad in anyway so I dont see how this a troll
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)19:06 UTC-4 No.18296259
>>18295829 #
Cool
Got any pictures?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)19:07 UTC-4 No.18296272
>>18295346 #
no,but sailors used a roll of quarters during bar fights.

CAPTCHA: cumlustra 164
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)19:21 UTC-4 No.18296436Replies: >>18297277
>>18294947 #
>only if you hold them wrong

WELL THANKS FOR TELLING ME HOW TO HOLD THEM RIGHT.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)19:30 UTC-4 No.18296581
>>18294389 (OP) #
A great way to break your fingers. They have a habit of slipping down when you hit something, forcing your fingers to bend up, which they can't do.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)19:36 UTC-4 No.18296652
when properly sized a very effective weapon
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)19:43 UTC-4 No.18296761Replies: >>18296795
OP here

So, they're essentially very effective for situations, but they're restricted out the wazzoo to the point where it just makes more sense to have a pistol?
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)19:46 UTC-4 No.18296795
>>18296761 #
Yes and chances are if you're in a situation where you're using these you would be justified in just shooting the fucker, or you're doing something where it would be justifiable for someone to shoot you.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:24 UTC-4 No.18297277Replies: >>18297619
>>18296436 #
Thumb goes to the side, not under like a regular fist. If you place the thumb under then the palm portion of the brass knuckles can break the thumb's metacarpal bone. With the thumb to the side, the force is spread over the whole palm.

I got that info from a /k/ user. He said he was in some country's navy (not the US, some european country) and sailors are always breaking their thumbs on brass knuckles.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)20:53 UTC-4 No.18297619Replies: >>18299962
>>18297277 #
you never put the thumb under a fist no matter what
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)21:25 UTC-4 No.18298039Replies: >>18299960
File: 1381454742173.jpg-(2.29 MB, 3264x2448, image.jpg)

>>18294389 (OP) #
I've had a set since I was 13.
>>
 Anonymous  10/10/13(Thu)23:59 UTC-4 No.18299934
The correct way to hold them is in a half-fist, with the second joint of your fingers going through the holes.

The holes should be long enough that your fingers don't touch the metal.

Most brass knuckles are useless in a fight.
The ones that were designed properly make incredibly devastating weapons if you use them right.

Also, don't try to dual-wield them, that shit doesn't work.
>>
 Anonymous  10/11/13(Fri)00:01 UTC-4 No.18299952Replies: >>18300059 >>18300141
I wish FL wasn't fucking retarded with brass knuckles... I would LOOOVVVVEEEE some.
>>
 Anonymous  10/11/13(Fri)00:02 UTC-4 No.18299960Replies: >>18300161
>>18298039 #
do you fix lava lamps on the side?
>>
 Anonymous  10/11/13(Fri)00:02 UTC-4 No.18299962
>>18297619 #
Yes you do you fucking tard

you just don't put it *in* a fist
>>
 Anonymous  10/11/13(Fri)00:08 UTC-4 No.18300036Replies: >>18300125
>>18294389 (OP) #
I saw a cop get smoked with a pair at a shitty bar in Bowling Green, OH a few years back.

Didn't look like much fun.
>>
 Anonymous  10/11/13(Fri)00:10 UTC-4 No.18300059
>>18299952 #
Make your own.
>>
 Anonymous  10/11/13(Fri)00:19 UTC-4 No.18300105
Great way to break your hand.
>>
 Anonymous  10/11/13(Fri)00:20 UTC-4 No.18300125
>>18300036 #
what bar? komies? downtown?
>>
 Anonymous  10/11/13(Fri)00:22 UTC-4 No.18300141
>>18299952 #
Sale, manufacture, and concealed possession is illegal but plain possession is not mentioned. You could buy them and own them legally, although the seller would be in some shit. Not sure about bringing them into the state. You could also make them and say you bought them from a flea market. Also plastic knuckles are legal, that stuff only applies to "metallic knuckles"

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?StatuteYear=2013&AppMode=Display_Results&Mode=Search%2520Statutes&Submenu=2&Tab=statutes&Search_String=knuckles
>>
 Anonymous  10/11/13(Fri)00:25 UTC-4 No.18300161
>>18299960 #
Nope. I collect them.
>>
 Anonymous  10/11/13(Fri)00:31 UTC-4 No.18300217
That seems really unnecessary. Learning how to punch properly is way more useful. Sign up for a month or two at a boxing gym.