It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
Originally posted by Dance4Life
reply to post by mnemeth1
Currencies are only measured against other currencies. There has been very little dollar devaluation over the past 5-10 years in these terms. Everything else is speculation relating to commodities. If real inflation is here why isn't natural gas at 8 and still sitting inverse to all others? Supply / Demand etc. - 90% of commodities are speculation, just providing liquidity to wholesalers for hedging purposes.
You mean to tell me that after 2008-09 that we are heading for hyperinflation all of the sudden? Laughable.
So you believe that price rises across EVERY SINGLE COMMODITY SECTOR are due simply to speculators?
And yes, we are going to have hyper-inflation.
This is what happens when the Fed outright prints 600 billion dollars.
edit on 3-2-2011 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by ziggy1706
I work in a retail store in southwest CT. past week, ive noticed prices have gone up on most things, not all,...about 20-30 cents. In our store, disposable razors, priices dropped about 10 cents. dunno if it means anything.
To me the problem centers on greed vs sharing. The system is set up to encourage greed as the highest value and moral standard. Talk about lipstick on a pig!
This is a global war on labor or the "middle class" if you like. The middle class is a relatively recent phenomena in human history and something the elite fear. Greed is masked by words like ambition and competition. But the game is rigged and we are indoctrinated from an early age by sophisticated propaganda which blinds us to the game.
Leveraged buyouts involve an investor, financial sponsors or private equity firms making large acquisitions without committing all the capital required for the acquisition. To do this, a financial sponsor will raise acquisition debt which is ultimately secured upon the acquisition target... en.wikipedia.org...
...In January 1982, former US Secretary of the Treasury William Simon and a group of investors acquired Gibson Greetings, a producer of greeting cards, for $80 million, of which only $1 million was rumored to have been contributed by the investors. By mid-1983, just sixteen months after the original deal, Gibson completed a $290 million IPO and Simon made approximately $66 million. The success of the Gibson Greetings investment attracted the attention of the wider media to the nascent boom in leveraged buyouts. Between 1979 and 1989, it was estimated that there were over 2,000 leveraged buyouts valued in excess of $250 billion
....These days, corporations seem to exist for the investment bankers.... In fact, investment banks are replacing the publicly held industrial corporations as the largest and most powerful economic institutions in America.... THERE ARE SIGNS THAT A VICIOUS spiral has begun, as each corporate player seeks to improve its standard of living at the expense of another's. Corporate raiders transfer to themselves, and other shareholders, part of the income of employees by forcing the latter to agree to lower wages....
It has nothing to do with greed, your purchasing power is the same or better today than it was then. See my previous post and you will see. There is another argument about the attack on the middle class(which is happening but not on purpose), but that is not here. I'm sure there is another thread for that.
In 1976 A typical American CEO earned 36 times as much as the average worker. By 2008 the average CEO pay increased to 369 times that of the average worker. timelines.ws...
There is another argument about the attack on the middle class(which is happening but not on purpose)
..because the CDSs were unregulated—and this is because of a specific law back in the year 2000 called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which was sponsored by Phil Gramm. These instruments were unregulated. They were designated outside the regulation of—they couldn’t be regulated as futures commodities or as gaming, so there were no rules about this. So you could sell as much CDS protection as you wanted, but you didn’t have to actually post any capital when you did it....
...a lot of these contracts, these CDS contracts, are like gambling, in the sense that—normally when you buy an insurance policy, you’re buying a policy on a house that you actually own. With these CDS contracts, you could actually bet on somebody else’s mortgage.... www.democracynow.org...
Important Banking Legislation
The McFadden Act of 1927 or Amendment to the National Banking Laws and the Federal Reserve Act (P.L. 69-639, 44 STAT. 1224): Prohibited interstate banking.
[Clinton's Law: Negating above:]
Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 (P.L. 103-328, 108 STAT. 2338).
Permits bank holding companies to acquire banks in any state one year Beginning June 1, 1997, allows interstate mergers.
The Glass-Steagall Act or Banking Act of 1933 (P.L. 73-66, 48 STAT. 162): Separated commercial banking from investment banking, establishing them as separate lines of commerce.
Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (P.L. 84-511, 70 STAT. 133): Prohibited bank holding companies headquartered in one state from acquiring a bank in another state.
[Clinton's Law: Negating both of the above laws:]
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (P.L. 106-102, 113 STAT 1338)
(pdf version from Government Printing Office.)
Repeals last vestiges of the Glass Steagall Act of 1933. Modifies portions of the Bank Holding Company Act to allow affiliations between banks and insurance underwriters. Law creates a new financial holding company authorized to engage in: underwriting and selling insurance and securities, conducting both commercial and merchant banking, investing in and developing real estate and other "complimentary activities."
Allows national banks to underwrite municipal bonds.
Amends the Community Reinvestment Act to require that financial holding companies can not be formed before their insured depository institutions receive and maintain a satisfactory CRA rating.
Makes significant changes in the operation of the Federal Home Loan Bank System, easing membership requirements and loosening restrictions on the use of FHLB funds.
[MORE on The Clinton Years:]
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (P.L. 102-242, 105 STAT. 2236).
Also known as FDICIA. FDICIA greatly increased the powers and authority of the FDIC. Major provisions recapitalized the Bank Insurance Fund and allowed the FDIC to strengthen the fund by borrowing from the Treasury.
The act mandated a least-cost resolution method and prompt resolution approach to problem and failing banks and ordered the creation of a risk-based deposit insurance assessment scheme. Brokered deposits and the solicitation of deposits were restricted, as were the non-bank activities of insured state banks. FDICIA created new supervisory and regulatory examination standards and put forth new capital requirements for banks. It also expanded prohibitions against insider activities and created new Truth in Savings provisions.
[TRANSLATION: Allowed big banks to gobble up smaller banks more easily.]
Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-550, 106 STAT. 3672).
RTC Completion Act (P.L. 103-204, 107 STAT. 2369):
implement provisions designed to improve the agency's record in providing business opportunities to minorities and women.. Expands the existing affordable housing programs of the RTC and the FDIC by broadening the potential affordable housing stock of the two agencies.
Increases the statute of limitations on RTC civil lawsuits. In cases in which the statute of limitations has expired, claims can be revived for fraud and intentional misconduct resulting in unjust enrichment or substantial loss to the thrift.
I know gold is a really popular fall back method and has a long history in banking, but it also has some problems. It is a commodity that fluctuates in price, open to manipulation through various scams and is better put into manufacturing than stuck in a bank vault. I just had an idea and what I propose is that money is based on people.
The only value in money is the value people put in it. The purpose of money is to balance supply and demand, when there is lots of people, lots of money is needed, when there is few people, a few bits of money is needed....
NO NEW MONEY IS REQUIRED
"As the operation of the market tends to determine the final state of money's purchasing power at the height at which the supply of and the demand for money coincide, there can never be an excess or deficiency of money. Each individual and all individuals together always enjoy fully the advantages which they can derive from indirect exchange and the use of money, no matter whether the total quantity of money is great or small." The conclusion is obvious, and he makes it: "The quantity of money available in the whole economy is always sufficient to secure for everybody all that money does and can do" (p. 421).
[WHY FIAT CURRENCY IS THEFT]
New money does not appear magically in equal percentages in all people's bank accounts or under their mattresses. Money spreads unevenly, and this process has varying effects on individuals, depending on whether they receive early or late access to the new money
It is these losses of the groups that are the last to be reached by the variation in the value of money which ultimately constitute the source of the profits made by the mine owners and the groups most closely connected with them
This indicates a fundamental aspect of Mises's monetary theory that is rarely mentioned: the expansion or contraction of money is a zero-sum game. Mises did not use this terminology, but he used the zero-sum concept. Because the free market always maximizes the utility of the existing money supply, changes in the money supply inescapably have the characteristic features of a zero-sum game. Some individuals are made better off by an increase in the money supply; others are made worse off. The existing money is an example of a "fixed pie of social value." Adding to the money supply does not add to its value.
Mises on Money: www.lewrockwell.com...
Don't believe banks create the money they lend? Neither did the jury in a landmark Minnesota case, until they heard the evidence. First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Daly (1969) was a courtroom drama worthy of a movie script.3 Defendant Jerome Daly opposed the bank's foreclosure on his $14,000 home mortgage loan on the ground that there was no consideration for the loan.
"Consideration" ("the thing exchanged") is an essential element of a contract. Daly, an attorney representing himself, argued that the bank had put up no real money for his loan. The courtroom proceedings were recorded by Associate Justice Bill Drexler, whose chief role, he said, was to keep order in a highly charged courtroom where the attorneys were threatening a fist fight. Drexler hadn't given much credence to the theory of the defense, until Mr. Morgan, the bank's president, took the stand. To everyone's surprise, Morgan admitted that the bank routinely created money "out of thin air" for its loans, and that this was standard banking practice. "It sounds like fraud to me," intoned Presiding Justice Martin Mahoney amid nods from the jurors. In his court memorandum, Justice Mahoney stated:
Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, . . . did create the entire $14,000.00 in money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. That this was the consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note.
Justice Mahoney, who was not dependent on campaign financing or hamstrung by precedent, went so far as to threaten to prosecute and expose the bank. He died less than six months after the trial, in a mysterious accident that appeared to involve poisoning.4
....Since that time, a number of defendants have attempted to avoid loan defaults using the defense Daly raised; but they have met with only limited success. As one judge said off the record:
If I let you do that – you and everyone else – it would bring the whole system down. . . . I cannot let you go behind the bar of the bank. . . . We are not going behind that curtain!5
If the Federal Reserve is determined to print its way out of this depression, why won’t hyperinflation occur in the U.S.?
What is the definition of massive inflation?
It depends on who you ask and the nation under consideration. In my opinion, massive inflation would resemble what the U.S. faced in the late 1970s and early 1980s, which is not even in the same universe as hyperinflation. Alternatively, we could experience a more protracted but less severe period of inflation. Either way, hyperinflation in the U.S. is not a reasonable possibility in our life time.
Third, the Federal Reserve is able to print an excessive amount of currency without creating a proportionate increase in the inflation rate because of two factors. First, the U.S. runs trade deficits with much of the world. This is especially the case with Asia. This alone serves to export inflation out of the U.S. This dynamic is aided by the dollar-oil link. Second, China’s currency peg has actually diminished the chances of a hyperinflationary event in the U.S. While China will eventually lift this peg, it will be a gradual process. Even if both of these relationships were to change abruptly, they would not lead to hyperinflation.
The principal force making hyperinflation a virtual impossibility in the U.S. is the dollar-oil link. As a consequence of this link, it could be argued that the dollar is not exactly a true fiat currency. At the same time, the dollar is not backed by a finite asset directly under its possession, although the Saudis realize that any threat to decouple the dollar from oil sales would be met with very severe and immediate consequences. Therefore, the U.S. has a good deal of influence in maintaining this vital economic link.
Originally posted by crimvelvet
reply to post by Leo Strauss
If you do any in-depth research you will find the actual problem is not "GREED" it is "FRAUD" You will also find that Capitalism is the scapegoat that takes the blame for the injustices caused by Fractional Reserve Banking!
You do not get rapid massive accumulation of wealth if you have to invest Real wealth that is wealth you created through your own labor.
Don't underestimate the greed game in casino America. The conditions that brought this "inflation" about are directly and almost solely tied to commodities futures arbitrage speculations being played on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange of all these worldwide necessities, like wheat, corn, rice, cocoa, sugar, etc, as well as the US subsidies that categorically "prop up" the worldwide prices for them. It has been well documented for decades that this system causes worldwide food shortages, leading to massive worldwide hunger and deaths because of it....
Originally posted by kwakakev
reply to post by Dance4Life
From some reports of the Derivatives market, there is more money tied up their than in the rest of the world combined. I don't know how true this is, but it does suggest that this market is a big financial force and can make a big difference for how the economy goes. I am a noob when it comes to the workings of Wall Street, basically I see it as the worlds biggest casino with a small group of the central American banks holding the house. I see part of the GFC problem was due to this house going bust. The futures market does help some corporations plan their productions, but can also bring famines through hoardings. Like any power it can do good and bad. It is complex currently being the main demand for mathematicians. One problem I see with it is how this small central group, which where the biggest receivers of the bailout funds manages the pools in the derivatives market. Maybe I am wrong? but it is how I currently see it.
Originally posted by kwakakev
We are part of a multinational global community all dependant on each other to some degree.
Funding the war machine is killing you. It may be profitable for a few, but is disastrous to the many at home and abroad.
International discussions have been going on for a while and no consensus has been reached yet. I do think an international currency is the best way out for all concerned, but it needs to be based on a strong foundation free of corruption if it is to work, not pushed through the back door like the Euro. Maybe the world can get there one day, maybe it can't. The future is uncertain.
The regulations put into place after the last great depression were removed by Saint Ronnie Reagan and voila another depression. We need regulation, oversight and transparency....
AMY GOODMAN: So you have—Cassano [AIG] sells $500 billion of CDS protection with at least $64 billion of that tied in the subprime mortgage market.
MATT TAIBBI: Right, and right. And because the CDSs were unregulated—and this is because of a specific law back in the year 2000 called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which was sponsored by Phil Gramm. These instruments were unregulated. They were designated outside the regulation of—they couldn’t be regulated as futures commodities or as gaming, so there were no rules about this. So you could sell as much CDS protection as you wanted, but you didn’t have to actually post any capital when you did it. You know, when you sell a bond, somebody actually has to—you know, a $100 bond, somebody actually has to have $100. Well, that’s not the case with CDSs. You could sell as much of the stuff as you wanted, and you didn’t have to have any money at all. And that’s why AIG got in so much trouble. www.democracynow.org...
As I said the critters in the District of Criminals are either to IGNORANT to be allowed to run a government or are OATH BREAKERS. They certainly have not defended the USA against enemies domestic, instead they have aided in the rape of the US citizen.edit on 4-2-2011 by crimvelvet because: (no reason given)
I think you are confused about what money is and what its role in society is.
The quantity of money available in the whole economy is always sufficient to secure for everybody all that money does and can do
The existing money is an example of a "fixed pie of social value." Adding to the money supply does not add to its value.
You see the international community as a good one. Whereas I see it only as an opportunity to create more wealth.