The Federal Reserve

[Leetonidas]

Does anyone think this band of ungoverned thieves will ever be dissolved by the government? They have slowly turned our country from the richest with the most valuable, gold-standard money to nothing but a nation swimming in fiat money that only gets more worthless as they print more.

Thoughts? :wakeup

[SnakeBoy]

No the Fed will never be dissolved and the gold standard isn't the panacea you think it is.

[Leetonidas]

So you're cool with us having nothing to back our money besides our citizens' desperate belief that U.S. Dollars have worth?

[DMC]

Thoughts? I need another 70" TV. That will make it an even 6.

That's how we roll tbh.

[SnakeBoy]

So you're cool with us having nothing to back our money besides our citizens' desperate belief that U.S. Dollars have worth?

Yeah, I'm good.

[mavs>spurs]

it's not exactly that they "print" more it's that under the fractional banking system, for every dollar you put in a bank it gets multiplied by 10. say you put 100 dollars in the bank, they are only required to hold onto 10 as "reserves" while loaning out the other 90. then the recipient of your money puts it in their bank, who keeps 9 and loans out the other 81. this goes on and on until your 100 dollars is now 1000 dollars, all shared amongst different people at different banks. there are only 1 trillion physical paper dollars in existance, but the M1 (checkable deposits and liquid things like money market accounts i think) is like 12 trillion or more? not sure on that exact number.

[Winehole23]

Yeah, I'm good.Still feeling good about the value of the US promise to pay?

[boutons_deux]

the financial sector with owns govt, including the Fed they depend on, will NEVER let the Fed be killed. So Ron Paul and the rest of you dreamers are silly fucks.

[Nbadan]

Still feeling good about the value of the US promise to pay?

As long as the U.S. can take what it pretty much wants, the value of the dollar is all good...

[TDMVPDPOY]

they are the biggest thieves int the financial market, funni enough this industry is too loose even with regulatory they will always go around it and do whats best in their own interests only...

reserves sets the interest rates, now the banks decide pass on the full rate cuts or not, but when rates go up...they have no problem adjusting their packages very quick compared to decreasing rates, hence the banks never listen to the feds anyway....

[boutons_deux]

thieves isn't the word, it's a band of insiders, where the Fed lends money at very little interest rate and the banks lend to the market (or back to Treasury) and pocket the spread.

[TDMVPDPOY]

an entity made up of ex bankers lmao....

should goto every bank AGM, why they always agree salary increases and bonuses, cause the idiots with the biggest shares % is usually the bank consortiums...lol

[CosmicCowboy]

And NOW the Fed steps in to "rescue" Europe by loaning them MORE money before they agree on substantial cuts...talk about just kicking the can down the road...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-30/fed-five-central-banks-lower-interest-rate-on-dollar-swaps.html

[scott]

Does anyone think this band of ungoverned thieves will ever be dissolved by the government? They have slowly turned our country from the richest with the most valuable, gold-standard money to nothing but a nation swimming in fiat money that only gets more worthless as they print more.

Thoughts? :wakeup

So is your problem with the idea of fiat money?

Their mission of economic stabilization?

The fact they bailed out big banks?

Or you just think they are thieves?

I'm trying to understand the specific issue you have.

In any event: no, I personally don't think the government will ever dissolve the Fed.

[RandomGuy]

No the Fed will never be dissolved and the gold standard isn't the panacea you think it is.

Bingo. I think we can safely agree on both.

Should there be a bit more oversight of the Fed? A little.

I don't think most people understand the function of the Fed well enough to have a valid opinion of its operations.

[RandomGuy]

So you're cool with us having nothing to back our money besides our citizens' desperate belief that U.S. Dollars have worth?

I don't see that as any different than someones desperate belief that gold has worth.

Do you?

[scott]

gold has intrinsic value and has always been considered rare and sought after throughout mankind. currencies can be created and manipulated, not the same thing at all.

And what happens when the commodity we are using as money fluctuates in value?

[SnakeBoy]

And what happens when the commodity we are using as money fluctuates in value?

Doesn't the govt fix the price under a gold standard?

[SnakeBoy]

no not anymore

True there is no govt fixed price for gold anymore and there's no gold standard anymore.

[scott]

currencies don't fluctuate in value?

Not within our economy. We have a very stable currency with, by economic standards, very moderate levels of inflation/deflation over time. For example, a new Playstation 3 has been $59.99 for years, because a stable currency allows it to be. But if you are using gold, for example, and the price of gold goes up 30% (like it has over the last year, using the SPDR Gold Shares index as a proxy), then a PS3 game would take 30% less gold to buy.

This inflicts a cost upon the shopkeeper, what we call "menu costs" in economics. When prices change a lot, the cost to update those prices ("print new menus") is real. With relatively low inflation (like we see with our managed currency), these costs are minimal because the menu costs usually are greater than the costs of inflation (the shop keeper won't update all his prices every month based on a 0.16% increase in the general price level). Over time, the shop keeper will eventually raise his prices when the lose of value from inflation is greater than his menu costs.

[scott]

Doesn't the govt fix the price under a gold standard?

What's the difference between an artificially valued commodity currency and a fiat currency, other than by artificially changing the value of the commodity, you disrupt that market in the process? Keep in mind, metals do have intrinsic value beyond just looking pretty on some chick's neck.

[RandomGuy]

gold has intrinsic value and has always been considered rare and sought after throughout mankind. currencies can be created and manipulated, not the same thing at all.

how does the intrinsic value of gold get determined?

[RandomGuy]

gold has ... always been considered rare

Poop from albino tigers is rare too.

That doesn't mean I want to base a currency on it.

Meh, gold had its uses as currency, just as horses had their uses as transportation.

I feel no need to go back to either when other alternatives that seem to work better are available.

[Winehole23]

I feel no need to go back to either when other alternatives that seem to work better are available.like what?

[scott]

what about in the global markets, exchange rates? that's what i was going for. I'm sure if we were under a gold standard and used gold as money, gold would still be stable "within our economy" as you put it but what about elsewhere?

I'd argue that exchange rate fluctuation is an important too in ensuring PPP - and that is one of several reasons I don't support the idea of a global currency scheme (which in practice would just lead to oddly fluctuating prices).

We will never escape the fact that the market requires different prices in different places.

One of the functions of money (be it currency or fiat) is to acts as a unit of measure. In the United States, we generally know what a dollar is worth, no matter where in the country we are. But, as we know, a Big Mac in rural Nebraska does not cost the same as a Big Mac in New York City. It can be confusing when the same stuff has different value based on its geography, but because we have borders around our mindset of the value of the dollar (being the borders of the United States), we are able to wrap our minds around those price fluctuations. But if we had one currency, now we have an infinite number of different prices on an infinite number of different goods. It can get confusing, and the unit of measurement function of money becomes diluted and more arbitrage opportunities may occur.

With different currencies, all the same stuff is happening (and as the quantity theory of money and monetary neutrality tell us - in the long run, changes in nominal prices have no real impact) but the currency exchange rates give us a "short cut" of sorts to understand the price differences between one geographic area to another. If we wanted to go overboard, if there was a Rural Nebraska Dollar and a New York City Dollar, the exchange rate between the two would immediately explain to us the difference between the price of a Big Mac in both places (though there still could be some slight price fluctuation away from simply the exchange rate conversion).

Gold wouldn't be "stable within our economy" because the demand and the supply of gold are exogenous to the currency scheme, and the value of gold is determined by those factors - not to mention there is no differentiating between "US Gold" and "Euro Gold". It's all just gold, and you could really damage foreign economies just by taking all their gold way (so China could come and acquire all our nice Commodity Money, then take it back to China, melt it down, and have all the Gold and we're fucked.) The way to stabilize prices would be to implement some mechanism to control the demand and supply available, but then all you've done is make a commodity more into a fiat currency - what's the point of that? In addition, you've disrupted a normally functioning market in the process.

It's important to remember that money has 3 functions:

1) Store of value (ability to use it to transfer your purchasing power from now into the future. So, milk, would be a bad commodity money since it goes bad)
2) Medium of exchange
3) Unit of measure

If money fails in any of those 3 areas, it isn't a good choice for money. Where, in my opinion, Gold falls short is:

1) Store of value: Like all money, it can be destroyed. But unlike other forms of money, it can't really be created as its a metal found in nature.
2) Medium of exchange: obviously we aren't talking about using gold coins, per se, because that would be impractical - so a representation of our gold stores (a debit card) would work just fine. It passes this test.
3) Unit of measure: because gold has intrinsic value beyond being used as currency, the value of it will fluctuate based on the supply and demand of its intrinsic values, making it difficult to use as a unit of measure.

If you remember in your US history, the agricultural sector really pushed for a silver standard, because silver tended to be quite inflationary. This is good for a farmer, who borrows funds at the beginning of the season and pays them back after the harvest and he sells his crops. Who would want to pay a loan back with money that is worth a fraction of what it was when you borrowed it?

[scott]

yeah, explain how this current flawed fractional banking system is "working better"

1) Using fiat money is completely unrelated to having a fractional reserve banking system.
2) Can you explain what is flawed about our fractional reserve banking system?

[scott]

supply and demand i guess, the same way the value of currencies does. except one is just paper and one is a rare element. gold just seems more stable, it'll hold value through any major financial crisis. the current system seems like it may be unsustainable, we just keep kicking the can down the road.

In September of this year, Gold (using the SPDR Gold Shares as a proxy) fell 11% in value. That was just in one month. How does that qualify as "stable" to you?

[The Reckoning]

the US would be the only nation in the world to use commodity money if it set a gold standard....that would be terrible.

[Drachen]

In September of this year, Gold (using the SPDR Gold Shares as a proxy) fell 11% in value. That was just in one month. How does that qualify as "stable" to you?

It fell 11% in value relative to the dollar.

I agree with you scott, but I just felt it necessary to point out that this comment shows the instability of the dollar more than it shows the instability of gold.

[scott]

I just think that backing our paper money with something real rather than just the lies of a corrupt government would add stability to it. I think the fractional banking system is due to crash in the next decade, we just keep kickin that can down the road. It's a system of debt.

Our fiat money is backed by something real: the full faith and credit of the United States Government, which has never defaulted on a loan in its 235 year history.

I fail to see how backing it with an unstable commodity would add stability.

Why do you think the fractional reserve banking system is due to crash?

[scott]

It fell 11% in value relative to the dollar.

I agree with you scott, but I just felt it necessary to point out that this comment shows the instability of the dollar more than it shows the instability of gold.

Fair point. Though I think can we agree that the value of gold is not static nor particularly stable.

[scott]

Note: I don't vouch for the accuracy of this graph, it's just the first one I found:

http://inflationdata.com/inflation/images/charts/Gold/Gold_inflation.jpg

[Drachen]

Fair point. Though I think can we agree that the value of gold is not static nor particularly stable.

I would think that it could not be stable and that it would always go up.

If we have 100 million Tons of gold in the world and 7 Billion people, then maybe one gold coin buys you a few groceries.

Now if we have 100 million tons of gold in the world and 14 Billion people, then half a gold coin would HAVE to buy you the same groceries.

Fiscal policy wouldn't cause inflation, Birthrates would.

[scott]

because its a smoke and mirrors economy, there isn't actually any money in the banks. they took on tons of risk because of the FDIC insurance, and damn near all went bankrupt and had to be bailed out by the fed, which still has repercussions today. we're on the brink of a global financial crisis.

How is it smokes & mirrors? It actually works exactly the way economists predict it would.

Using fiat money, having a fractional reserve banking system, having FDIC/NCUA insurance, banks taking unsound risks... all of these are separate items that don't necessarily have anything to do with one another.

Babies and bathwater.

[SnakeBoy]

the system has worked so well that the fed had to loan the banks trillions of dollars to prevent a collapse,

[Winehole23]

was it prevented, or just delayed somewhat?

[Winehole23]

the figure is close to $8 trillion since 2007, $16T if you count foreign institutions

[scott]

How do they not have anything to do with each other? Under the current system, banks don't even hold onto your money they loan it out and use it to purchase sometimes risky securities..nobody knows or pays attention to what the bank is doing because they all think that they are FDIC insured..therefore the bank is free to take on risk and it's smoke and mirrors because every time you make a deposit, the money supply increases by 10 times what you put in. you and 9 other people are sharing the same deposit essentially, i say sharing because everyone can't go withdraw there money at the same time we share it. the system has worked so well that the fed had to loan the banks trillions of dollars to prevent a collapse, worked so well that it didn't take even 100 years before it has finally spiraled out of control, and we are about to be facing a global crisis.

They don't. You can have fiat money without any of the other things. You can have a fractional reserve system without the other things. You can have deposit insurance without the other things. You can have corruption and unnecessary risk without the other things.

It's pretty straight forward. You're making the critical flaw of lumping them all together.

[SnakeBoy]

was it prevented, or just delayed somewhat?

Ask me in a couple of years. The Fed probably couldn't have prevented (or delayed) it under a gold standard though.

[mavs>spurs]

Oh give me a fucking break you gov dick suckers. The bankers and
Their fraud is 100% to blame for this mess, get off your knees and have a little dignity fractional banking is a HOAX.

[SnakeBoy]

was it prevented, or just delayed somewhat?

I've gambled $20k on prevented...but I could be wrong.

[Winehole23]

Anybody could be wrong, except for YH. He's 100% certain banks are 100% to blame...for something.

[scott]

Thus sprach ze 3.8 GPA

[mavs>spurs]

Yup not being a retard enables you to see that the system is broken...just wait and see

[Winehole23]

I've gambled $20k on prevented...but I could be wrong.http://new.gloomboomdoom.com/public/pSTD.cfm?pageSPS_ID=1000

[Nbadan]

Yup not being a retard enables you to see that the system is broken...just wait and see

The system is broken, but as Occupy is showing, the bankers own the muscle and the guns, and what the bankers want, they'll just take.....so they can print as much money as they want...they control the whole system...

What other option do people have right now?

[SA210]

Well we saw what happened to this man when he wanted to stop using the Fed.

ggADLt4s4pM

10qlpk4f-4A&feature=related

[mavs>spurs]

But tell that to an "economist" like scott who has had it drilled in his head that fractional banking = good from day one and he thinks the system is just fine :lmao

[scott]

It's all a massive conspiracy by us professionals. We knew one day a finance/economics undergrad would pull back the curtain, we just didn't think it would be so soon.

[mavs>spurs]

No it's just like doctors..they go all through medical school being taught a certain way, most of them only know how to prescribe medications or have sometimes unneeded surgeries in order to fix a problem. They spend a total of like 2 weeks on nutrition in all of medical school and don't know how to fix anything naturally like a holistic doctor. I can bring up a concern to my doctor and he'll totally dismiss it and look at me like I'm crazy, but when you ask him but what about such and such study and then he'll be like oh yeah, well..um...that CAN work...um..but here let me prescribe you this instead. I had recurring GERD and stomach ulcers that the dude couldn't do anything about until i read up on it and cured it on my own. Bottom line is, you only know what you're taught. That's why some of you economists are staunchly pro-status quo and don't even realize it, it's pure confirmation bias. Anything other than the status quo is just ridiculous to you and it's apparent in your words.

[scott]

As has been established, you're just too smart for the rest of us. You're theories are so great, they defy having to be backed up with any evidence. We are all in awe of your glory. I await your self-prescribed cure to the disease that is the Fractional Reserve Hoax.

[mavs>spurs]

Prove that it's good. My evidence? I got:: looming global economic crisis. what do you got?

[scott]

What is the looming global economic crisis supposed to be evidence of?

[scott]

Also, what do you think about Chemtrails?

[Winehole23]

Fluoridation?

[Winehole23]

Jewish bankers and the British Crown?

[ChumpDumper]

What does a double rainbow mean?

[mavs>spurs]

What is the looming global economic crisis supposed to be evidence of?

A failed system. Show me how it's working again mr economist?

[scott]

A staged moon landing?

[Winehole23]

Mining gold from the sun?

[Winehole23]

Maybe some friendly UFO guys will show our government how.

[scott]

A failed system. Show me how it's working again mr economist?

How what is working? You have to take a minute and type it real slow cuz I don't think so good.

I have a broken refrigerator in my garage. Evidence of a broken system.

But wait, there is a working one in my kitchen. Evidence of a working system?

[Winehole23]

We've been negotiating with them for years, I hear.

[scott]

What if there are robots among us?

[Winehole23]

been mining gold on the sun for years. I have it on a good source.

[ChumpDumper]

Am I really in Austin?

[scott]

To be fair, I am technically part of the 1% so not only am I part of the mechanism implementing the conspiracy, I am also part of the force behind the same conspiracy.

[scott]

Am I really in Austin?

Is Austin even a real place?

[scott]

If Parker posts under an alias, but no one is around to read his posts, did they really happen?

[ElNono]

If Parker posts under an alias, but no one is around to read his posts, did they really happen?

Proof of a broken system, IMO

[scott]

Is the system broken, or is broken the system?

[ElNono]

Yes

[ChumpDumper]

Seriously guys, where am I?

[Winehole23]

If Parker posts under an alias, but no one is around to read his posts, did they really happen?Not precisely to the point, but by the right philosopher:

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/4724/4724-h/4724-h.htm

[Winehole23]

I was considering the odd fate of those men who have in all ages, through an affectation of being distinguished from the vulgar, or some unaccountable turn of thought, pretended either to believe nothing at all, or to believe the most extravagant things in the world. This however might be borne, if their paradoxes and scepticism did not draw after them some consequences of general disadvantage to mankind. But the mischief lieth here; that when men of less leisure see them who are supposed to have spent their whole time in the pursuits of knowledge professing an entire ignorance of all things, or advancing such notions as are repugnant to plain and commonly received principles, they will be tempted to entertain suspicions concerning the most important truths, which they had hitherto held sacred and unquestionable.

[Winehole23]

PHILONOUS. I entirely agree with you, as to the ill tendency of the affected doubts of some philosophers, and fantastical conceits of others. I am even so far gone of late in this way of thinking, that I have quitted several of the sublime notions I had got in their schools for vulgar opinions. And I give it you on my word; since this revolt from metaphysical notions to the plain dictates of nature and common sense, I find my understanding strangely enlightened, so that I can now easily comprehend a great many things which before were all mystery and riddle.

HYLAS. I am glad to find there was nothing in the accounts I heard of you.



PHIL. Pray, what were those?



HYL. You were represented, in last night's conversation, as one who maintained the most extravagant opinion that ever entered into the mind of man, to wit, that there is no such thing as MATERIAL SUBSTANCE in the world.



PHIL. That there is no such thing as what PHILOSOPHERS CALL MATERIAL SUBSTANCE, I am seriously persuaded: but, if I were made to see anything absurd or sceptical in this, I should then have the same reason to renounce this that I imagine I have now to reject the contrary opinion.



HYL. What I can anything be more fantastical, more repugnant to Common Sense, or a more manifest piece of Scepticism, than to believe there is no such thing as MATTER?



PHIL. Softly, good Hylas. What if it should prove that you, who hold there is, are, by virtue of that opinion, a greater sceptic, and maintain more paradoxes and repugnances to Common Sense, than I who believe no such thing?

[Winehole23]

THE SECOND DIALOGUE


HYL. I beg your pardon, Philonous, for not meeting you sooner. All this morning my head was so filled with our late conversation that I had not leisure to think of the time of the day, or indeed of anything else.



PHILONOUS. I am glad you were so intent upon it, in hopes if there were any mistakes in your concessions, or fallacies in my reasonings from them, you will now discover them to me.



HYL. I assure you I have done nothing ever since I saw you but search after mistakes and fallacies, and, with that view, have minutely examined the whole series of yesterday's discourse: but all in vain, for the notions it led me into, upon review, appear still more clear and evident; and, the more I consider them, the more irresistibly do they force my assent.



PHIL. And is not this, think you, a sign that they are genuine, that they proceed from nature, and are conformable to right reason? Truth and beauty are in this alike, that the strictest survey sets them both off to advantage; while the false lustre of error and disguise cannot endure being reviewed, or too nearly inspected.



HYL. I own there is a great deal in what you say. Nor can any one be more entirely satisfied of the truth of those odd consequences, so long as I have in view the reasonings that lead to them. But, when these are out of my thoughts, there seems, on the other hand, something so satisfactory, so natural and intelligible, in the modern way of explaining things that, I profess, I know not how to reject it.

[Winehole23]

Seriously guys, where am I?http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5487789&postcount=29

[Winehole23]

Are you really?

[Winehole23]

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5487801&postcount=31

[SnakeBoy]

I had recurring GERD and stomach ulcers that the dude couldn't do anything about until i read up on it and cured it on my own.

Manuka Honey?

[Winehole23]

Are you sure?
(http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5487801&postcount=32)

[Winehole23]

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5487802&postcount=33
(http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5487801&postcount=33)

[SA210]

No it's just like doctors..they go all through medical school being taught a certain way, most of them only know how to prescribe medications or have sometimes unneeded surgeries in order to fix a problem. They spend a total of like 2 weeks on nutrition in all of medical school and don't know how to fix anything naturally like a holistic doctor. I can bring up a concern to my doctor and he'll totally dismiss it and look at me like I'm crazy, but when you ask him but what about such and such study and then he'll be like oh yeah, well..um...that CAN work...um..but here let me prescribe you this instead. I had recurring GERD and stomach ulcers that the dude couldn't do anything about until i read up on it and cured it on my own. Bottom line is, you only know what you're taught. That's why some of you economists are staunchly pro-status quo and don't even realize it, it's pure confirmation bias. Anything other than the status quo is just ridiculous to you and it's apparent in your words.

[SA210]

09NuAdKgqhI&feature=iv

VBRZYrblZ24&feature=related

[RandomGuy]

yeah, explain how this current flawed fractional banking system is "working better"

It allows the monetary supply to expand with the economy.

[RandomGuy]

I'd argue that exchange rate fluctuation is an important too in ensuring PPP - and that is one of several reasons I don't support the idea of a global currency scheme (which in practice would just lead to oddly fluctuating prices).

We will never escape the fact that the market requires different prices in different places.

One of the functions of money (be it currency or fiat) is to acts as a unit of measure. In the United States, we generally know what a dollar is worth, no matter where in the country we are. But, as we know, a Big Mac in rural Nebraska does not cost the same as a Big Mac in New York City. It can be confusing when the same stuff has different value based on its geography, but because we have borders around our mindset of the value of the dollar (being the borders of the United States), we are able to wrap our minds around those price fluctuations. But if we had one currency, now we have an infinite number of different prices on an infinite number of different goods. It can get confusing, and the unit of measurement function of money becomes diluted and more arbitrage opportunities may occur.

With different currencies, all the same stuff is happening (and as the quantity theory of money and monetary neutrality tell us - in the long run, changes in nominal prices have no real impact) but the currency exchange rates give us a "short cut" of sorts to understand the price differences between one geographic area to another. If we wanted to go overboard, if there was a Rural Nebraska Dollar and a New York City Dollar, the exchange rate between the two would immediately explain to us the difference between the price of a Big Mac in both places (though there still could be some slight price fluctuation away from simply the exchange rate conversion).

Gold wouldn't be "stable within our economy" because the demand and the supply of gold are exogenous to the currency scheme, and the value of gold is determined by those factors - not to mention there is no differentiating between "US Gold" and "Euro Gold". It's all just gold, and you could really damage foreign economies just by taking all their gold way (so China could come and acquire all our nice Commodity Money, then take it back to China, melt it down, and have all the Gold and we're fucked.) The way to stabilize prices would be to implement some mechanism to control the demand and supply available, but then all you've done is make a commodity more into a fiat currency - what's the point of that? In addition, you've disrupted a normally functioning market in the process.

It's important to remember that money has 3 functions:

1) Store of value (ability to use it to transfer your purchasing power from now into the future. So, milk, would be a bad commodity money since it goes bad)
2) Medium of exchange
3) Unit of measure

If money fails in any of those 3 areas, it isn't a good choice for money. Where, in my opinion, Gold falls short is:

1) Store of value: Like all money, it can be destroyed. But unlike other forms of money, it can't really be created as its a metal found in nature.2) Medium of exchange: obviously we aren't talking about using gold coins, per se, because that would be impractical - so a representation of our gold stores (a debit card) would work just fine. It passes this test.
3) Unit of measure: because gold has intrinsic value beyond being used as currency, the value of it will fluctuate based on the supply and demand of its intrinsic values, making it difficult to use as a unit of measure.

If you remember in your US history, the agricultural sector really pushed for a silver standard, because silver tended to be quite inflationary. This is good for a farmer, who borrows funds at the beginning of the season and pays them back after the harvest and he sells his crops. Who would want to pay a loan back with money that is worth a fraction of what it was when you borrowed it?


At 1997 prices, a relatively small metallic asteroid with a diameter of 1.6 km (0.99 mi) contains more than 20 trillion US dollars worth of industrial and precious metals.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_mining (also details why our crust is so poor in these types of metals)

What would the implication be of dragging and mining such near-earth asteroids on a gold/silver currency?

1997 prices = a fraction of todays prices.

Quite frankly, given the expected value of some of these things, I am astonished that no serious investor has considered some of the more doable plans.

[RandomGuy]

No it's just like doctors..they go all through medical school being taught a certain way, most of them only know how to prescribe medications or have sometimes unneeded surgeries in order to fix a problem. They spend a total of like 2 weeks on nutrition in all of medical school and don't know how to fix anything naturally like a holistic doctor. I can bring up a concern to my doctor and he'll totally dismiss it and look at me like I'm crazy, but when you ask him but what about such and such study and then he'll be like oh yeah, well..um...that CAN work...um..but here let me prescribe you this instead. I had recurring GERD and stomach ulcers that the dude couldn't do anything about until i read up on it and cured it on my own. Bottom line is, you only know what you're taught. That's why some of you economists are staunchly pro-status quo and don't even realize it, it's pure confirmation bias. Anything other than the status quo is just ridiculous to you and it's apparent in your words.

http://www.aboutgerd.org/site/about-gerd/treatment/

Your doctor probably told you the exact same things you probably found on your own, you just didn't listen.

If you actually do have GERD, it didn't "go away", you just modified your habits to make the symptoms and problems go away.

[SA210]

No it's just like doctors..they go all through medical school being taught a certain way, most of them only know how to prescribe medications or have sometimes unneeded surgeries in order to fix a problem. They spend a total of like 2 weeks on nutrition in all of medical school and don't know how to fix anything naturally like a holistic doctor. I can bring up a concern to my doctor and he'll totally dismiss it and look at me like I'm crazy, but when you ask him but what about such and such study and then he'll be like oh yeah, well..um...that CAN work...um..but here let me prescribe you this instead. I had recurring GERD and stomach ulcers that the dude couldn't do anything about until i read up on it and cured it on my own. Bottom line is, you only know what you're taught. That's why some of you economists are staunchly pro-status quo and don't even realize it, it's pure confirmation bias. Anything other than the status quo is just ridiculous to you and it's apparent in your words.

:tu

[Agloco]

1) Store of value: Like all money, it can be destroyed. But unlike other forms of money, it can't really be created as its a metal found in nature.
2) Medium of exchange: obviously we aren't talking about using gold coins, per se, because that would be impractical - so a representation of our gold stores (a debit card) would work just fine. It passes this test.
3) Unit of measure: because gold has intrinsic value beyond being used as currency, the value of it will fluctuate based on the supply and demand of its intrinsic values, making it difficult to use as a unit of measure.

Ahem,

That's not true actually. The details of that morsel are beyond the scope of this thread however.

[Agloco]

No it's just like doctors..they go all through medical school being taught a certain way, most of them only know how to prescribe medications or have sometimes unneeded surgeries in order to fix a problem. They spend a total of like 2 weeks on nutrition in all of medical school and don't know how to fix anything naturally like a holistic doctor. I can bring up a concern to my doctor and he'll totally dismiss it and look at me like I'm crazy, but when you ask him but what about such and such study and then he'll be like oh yeah, well..um...that CAN work...um..but here let me prescribe you this instead. I had recurring GERD and stomach ulcers that the dude couldn't do anything about until i read up on it and cured it on my own. Bottom line is, you only know what you're taught. That's why some of you economists are staunchly pro-status quo and don't even realize it, it's pure confirmation bias. Anything other than the status quo is just ridiculous to you and it's apparent in your words.

This statement confirms that you have not yet learned anything.

[Winehole23]

The details of that morsel are beyond the scope of this thread however.I would think that the artificial production of gold would be of great interest to the original poster, and quite possibly of some consequence for the argument that gold specie exercises a disciplinary effect on government.

[RandomGuy]

Ahem,

That's not true actually. The details of that morsel are beyond the scope of this thread however.

How about:

It can't be created without disgusting/prohibitive expensive amounts of energy.

??

[Winehole23]

I assume so, but would still like to hear about it.

[SnakeBoy]

Maybe WC will chime in and tell you about it.

[ElNono]

^ Do you have satellite photos?

[RandomGuy]

I assume so, but would still like to hear about it.

All heavy elements in the universe were created in the hearts of stars by massive crushing forces of gravity, and by the implosive effects of novas.

We are only beginning to harness energy on a scale that can duplicate those conditions, and it takes a LOT of energy. Think fusion.

There are other methods, such as radioactive decay of larger atoms, but that also takes time/energy.

If I am missing something Ag, let me know. I like this stuff.

[Agloco]

How about:

It can't be created without disgusting/prohibitive expensive amounts of energy.

??

Yes, a glaring oversight on my part considering the context of the article.

Nuclear Spallation is quite prohibitive in terms of cost.

I'll need to cut down on my drive-bys tbh.

[Agloco]

I assume so, but would still like to hear about it.


All heavy elements in the universe were created in the hearts of stars by massive crushing forces of gravity, and by the implosive effects of novas.

We are only beginning to harness energy on a scale that can duplicate those conditions, and it takes a LOT of energy. Think fusion.

There are other methods, such as radioactive decay of larger atoms, but that also takes time/energy.

If I am missing something Ag, let me know. I like this stuff.

Yes, RG hits on some pertinent points. We can also use lead in a nuclear spallation porcess to "knock out" 3 protons from it's nucleus.

Other processes use 196Hg with thermalized neutrons (neutron activation). They're added to the nucleus, and after beta emission (radioactive decay), it becomes 197Au.

We see this in reactors too, where the lead shielding may transmute into gold over time.

[Wild Cobra]

Ahem,

That's not true actually. The details of that morsel are beyond the scope of this thread however.
Details please in a new thread if there is non radioactive ways.

Are you speaking of Hudson's claim, or some of these BS alchemy claims?

I'll bet you mean this process:

Mercury 198 + 6.8MeV gamma ray ---> to 1 neutron + Mercury 197 (half-life 2.7 days ---> to Gold 197 + 1 positron)

Maybe WC will chime in and tell you about it.
I have heard a couple ways that seem to me are false claims, but I'm all ears. Problem with any process known to work is they cost more than the gold is worth. I wonder at what price it can pay off, but you guys probably don't care. So many of you are for subsidizing things anyway.

There is also a goofball (Hudson) out there who has claimed that there is so much more gold out there than we recognize. He calls it white gold and claims the nucleus is in a 4:9 superspin, and as a monatomic element instead of metallic clusters. I don't believe such a concept, but it would be fascinating if real.

[SnakeBoy]

I have heard a couple ways that seem to me are false claims, but I'm all ears.

How bout this one?

http://www.gata.org/node/5272

[Wild Cobra]

How bout this one?

http://www.gata.org/node/5272
Makes as much sense as any requiring radioactive methods.

[Agloco]

How bout this one?

http://www.gata.org/node/5272

Only in the wonderful world of WoW......

http://www.wowwiki.com/Transmute:_Iron_to_Gold

One cannot simply add protons to heavy nuclei without some issues popping up. :lol


Details please in a new thread if there is non radioactive ways.

I know of none.




Are you speaking of Hudson's claim, or some of these BS alchemy claims?

Neither.



I'll bet you mean this process:

Mercury 198 + 6.8MeV gamma ray ---> to 1 neutron + Mercury 197 (half-life 2.7 days ---> to Gold 197 + 1 positron)

I mentioned neutron activation. This is not it.



I have heard a couple ways that seem to me are false claims, but I'm all ears. Problem with any process known to work is they cost more than the gold is worth.

The point I was making earlier is that gold necessarily has an upper bound in terms of value.


There is also a goofball (Hudson) out there who has claimed that there is so much more gold out there than we recognize. He calls it white gold and claims the nucleus is in a 4:9 superspin, and as a monatomic element instead of metallic clusters.

lol superspin. There's plenty of gold. Problem is, most isotopes are radioactive. Heck, I use gold nanoshells in HIFU therapy research. The only gold isotope that decays directly to stable 197Au is metasable 197Au.


Its necessary to look at isotones of Au197 if you're interested in transmutation stuff.

[Agloco]

How bout this one?

http://www.gata.org/node/5272


Makes as much sense as any requiring radioactive methods.

It makes no sense tbh. But what do I know?

[SnakeBoy]

Makes as much sense as any requiring radioactive methods.

<sigh> You never really read anything do you? I'll highlight some of the parts that shouldn't have made sense.


Scientists find economic process for creating gold from base metals
Submitted by cpowell on Wed, 2007-07-18 02:04. Section: Daily Dispatches
By Ben Dover
San Francisco Comical
Tuesday, July 17, 2007


LIVERMORE, California -- Scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory have discovered a process for inexpensively converting base metals into gold, the lab announced Tuesday night at a hastily called news conference.

Since medieval times the dream of alchemists has been to make gold, the exemplar of the precious metals, out of lead, the basest of the base metals. Heretofore this has been possible only through the use of particle accelerators and other devices of nuclear mechanics to remove three protons from each lead atom, a process requiring so much energy that it was far more costly than any gold that could be produced.

But Lab Director Stew Pidasso said Tuesday night the lab's scientists have produced economic quantities of the precious metal in a different way.

"The alchemists and the early nuclear scientists failed to realize that there's more than one way to skin a proton," Pidasso said. "Instead of trying to knock protons out of lead, protons can be borrowed from metals with lower atomic numbers and added to make gold."

Pidasso said the lab, a division of the U.S. Department of Energy, first achieved the transformation by borrowing protons from copper and nickel and adding them to bars of iron. But when copper and nickel supplies ran out, the lab began using protons from calcium, which is abundant in seashells along the nearby California coastline.

According to Pidasso, using proton borrowing and high-quality varnishes, the lab will be able to manufacture about 1,500 metric tonnes of gold per year, which, he predicted, might indefinitely fill what is estimated to be the gap between annual world gold demand and mine and scrap supply.

Pidasso said the laboratory's gold research long has been funded by grants from JPMorganChase & Co. and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. but that recently "enormous" help had been provided by Bear Stearns Cos.

The lab's announcement was expected to plunge the precious metals markets into chaos. A spokesman for the World Gold Council in London, reached late in the evening on his cell phone at a local club, would say only, "Young women in slinky outfits will look good in gold no matter how much of the stuff is available or where it comes from. Those details hardly matter to us."

[Parker2112]

:nope

The Fed is the root of the following evils:
1) massive bureaucracy which tends to eat up our civil liberties, our economic freedoms, etc,
2) endless(?) funding for endless wars which destabilize our security, serve war profiteers bank accounts, and put a huge burden on our future generations to pay for our immoral murder and exploitation of brown people across the globe
3) the extraction of the wealth of the lower and middle class through inflation tax, which most of the public does not understand and cannot discover through the controlled MSM,
4) enables the blatant insider fraud that our fed legislators currently engage in
5) charges interest for providing a function that could otherwise be done at cost, without putting America in extreme debt. Any monkey can pull zeroes out of his/her ass.
6) Encourages bad investments, causing bubbles which burst leaving us all wet, as it artificially keeps interests rates low, encouraging imprudent borrowing/investment without sufficient savings to justify low interest rates, after which it...
7) performs a manipulation of the business cycle, from boom to bust, in order to facilitate the concentration of wealth at the top of the financial ladder, through fluctuation of currency liquidity
8) As Greenspan admitted, BEST CASE SCENARIO is that the Fed could effectively mimic gold as a slow source of gradual inflation,
9) one of the major functions purported to justify the Fed is economic stability, however a study of history will show that over history we have averaged 1-2 major disruptions per decade.
10) the fed has reduced the dollar's value more than 90% since it took hold of our currency. This robs citizens on fixed income and who diligently and save responsibily.

[Parker2112]

It's all a massive conspiracy by us professionals. We knew one day a finance/economics undergrad would pull back the curtain, we just didn't think it would be so soon.

You dont understand the case laid out above? Its completely incredible?

WC overuses the term "indoctrinated" but scott you are proof positive. You need to do some homework, professor.

[Parker2112]

How is it smokes & mirrors? It actually works exactly the way economists predict it would.



They predicted that they, the cream, would rob the crop perpetually through a manipulated business cycle?

[Parker2112]

As has been established, you're just too smart for the rest of us. You're theories are so great, they defy having to be backed up with any evidence. We are all in awe of your glory. I await your self-prescribed cure to the disease that is the Fractional Reserve Hoax.

Turn over the currency to the place that the Constitution called for...the U.S. treasury. Eradicate our fatally escalating national debt in one fell swoop.

[Agloco]

Makes as much sense as any requiring radioactive methods.

Snake took you for a ride with an article from Ben Dover of the San Francisco Comical. :lol

[Wild Cobra]

<sigh> You never really read anything do you? I'll highlight some of the parts that shouldn't have made sense.
Are you saying that method is not one that is radioactive?

Color me ignorant if you must, but it seems to me any time you forcibly combine two or more elemental particle at the nucleus level, you will have radioactive results. Now if I'm wrong, please enlighten me. Just because my assessment of the link differs than your does not mean I didn't read it. I did.

[Agloco]

Are you saying that method is not one that is radioactive?

Color me ignorant if you must, but it seems to me any time you forcibly combine two or more elemental particle at the nucleus level, you will have radioactive results. Now if I'm wrong, please enlighten me. Just because my assessment of the link differs than your does not mean I didn't read it. I did.

Careful......I'm watching a train wreck in slow motion here........

[Drachen]

It's all a massive conspiracy by us professionals. We knew one day a finance/economics undergrad would pull back the curtain, we just didn't think it would be so soon.

Dang it scott! Y'all were supposed to do a better job hiding it. I am only 9 mos away from a finance MBA, about to join the ranks and, well, watching the "professionals" is like watching the three stooges.


Shoulda gotten a poetry degree.

[Drachen]

Are you saying that method is not one that is radioactive?

Color me ignorant if you must, but it seems to me any time you forcibly combine two or more elemental particle at the nucleus level, you will have radioactive results. Now if I'm wrong, please enlighten me. Just because my assessment of the link differs than your does not mean I didn't read it. I did.


Careful......I'm watching a train wreck in slow motion here........

I think he wants a third coat.

[SnakeBoy]

Just because my assessment of the link differs than your does not mean I didn't read it. I did.

:lmao:lmao:lmao

I don't even know what to say to that

[Wild Cobra]

Snake took you for a ride with an article from Ben Dover of the San Francisco Comical. :lol
So I didn't pay that much attention to who wrote it. I went strait to the body of text. Are you now telling me there is no way to combine two elements into a heavier one? I hope not. There is so much science news out there from time to time just to get investors involved that never work. I didn't even know what the legitimacy would be.

Sorry you think all people have to be a closed minded as you appear to be.

[SnakeBoy]

Is it possible he still deosn't get it?

[Wild Cobra]

:lmao:lmao:lmao

I don't even know what to say to that
Then I take that as to mean you don't understand even the basic scientific theories involved, should it have been a real story.

[Wild Cobra]

Is it possible he still deosn't get it?
No, I get it. You just don't accept that I still see a tangent discussion.

[Agloco]

So I didn't pay that much attention to who wrote it. I went strait to the body of text. Are you now telling me there is no way to combine two elements into a heavier one? I hope not. There is so much science news out there from time to time just to get investors involved that never work. I didn't even know what the legitimacy would be.

Sorry you think all people have to be a closed minded as you appear to be.

I've had a few rounds of GM150. Given that and the fact that its the holiday season, I'm feeling.......generous. So I'll just ask, where in that article does it make mention of "combining" any elements. Read VERY carefully..........

[Wild Cobra]

I've had a few rounds of GM150. Given that and the fact that its the holiday season, I'm feeling.......generous. So I'll just ask, where in that article does it make mention of "combining" any elements. Read VERY carefully..........
It didn't, but to "borrow" (take) protons from other elements, there would need to be nuclear collisions, or interactions. Right?

I'm not one that only sees the step by step laid out. I can see there are things in between unsaid.

[SnakeBoy]

Sorry you think all people have to be a closed minded as you appear to be.

Not only are you open minded to using bars of iron, seashells, and high grade varnish to make gold, you think it makes sense.

[Agloco]

It didn't, but to "borrow" (take) protons from other elements, there would need to be nuclear collisions, or interactions.

So fusion now entails a "borrowing" of protons? Funny, I could have sworn it involved the entire nucleus and orbital electrons of each atom in question.

It's not a "nuclear ionic bond". :lol

[Wild Cobra]

Not only are you open minded to using bars of lead, seashells, and high grade varnish to make gold, you think it makes sense.
You know what, You can think what you wish. Granted, varnish as a paint type material would not work. I am not one who assumes because I don't know of other meanings for a word, they don't exist. As for finding ways of using the elements from various sources, so what?

You are showing you are so closed minded, that you knowing the story was false from the start, means it is impossible to do something similar. I'm sorry, but I don't buy your untested version of impossible.

You depress me. Wanting to argue only from the viewpoint of a false story. What about the "what ifs." What if science someday did find a way to easily combine elements and make heavier ones?

Do you need a punching bag today? It appears you have some hostilities not worked out.

[Wild Cobra]

So fusion now entails a "borrowing" of protons? Funny, I could have sworn it involved the entire nucleus and orbital electrons of each atom in question.

It's not a "nuclear ionic bond". :lol
I see...

So anytime there is a scientific breakthrough, unknown before, it is still impossible in your world?

Why do you focus on one possibility when there are others? You call yourself a scientist? I say bullshit.

How many times do we see authors write something incorrect because they didn't understand?

If it makes you happy to see this from only one narrow minded perspective, then have at it. And you people claim I'm not open minded.

[Agloco]

I see...

So anytime there is a scientific breakthrough, unknown before, it is still impossible in your world?

Why do you focus on one possibility when there are others? You call yourself a scientist? I say bullshit.

How many times do we see authors write something incorrect because they didn't understand?

If it makes you happy to see this from only one narrow minded perspective, then have at it. And you people claim I'm not open minded.

Nope...I'm not playing anymore. You're trying too hard to troll at this point. This is where I drop you off on the curb and give you some cab fare.

[Wild Cobra]

Nope...I'm not playing anymore. You're trying too hard to troll at this point. This is where I drop you off on the curb and give you some cab fare.
So be it. Cannot take the heat when I make a valid point, or maybe it's too much of the GM 150.

What is GM 150 anyway?

[Agloco]

What is GM 150 anyway?

http://www.shoppersvineyard.com/store/pc/GRAND-MARNIER-150-YEAR-1p15761.htm?utm_source=Vinquire&utm_medium=WineFeed&utm_content=Grand+Marnier+150+Year&utm_campaign=base&v_traceback=c1128_0720_f1128_1243

Now quit flailing your arms about.

[SnakeBoy]

You depress me.

Sorry WC, I didn't mean to upset you so. I only did it because I knew I could.

[Wild Cobra]

http://www.shoppersvineyard.com/store/pc/GRAND-MARNIER-150-YEAR-1p15761.htm?utm_source=Vinquire&utm_medium=WineFeed&utm_content=Grand+Marnier+150+Year&utm_campaign=base&v_traceback=c1128_0720_f1128_1243

Now quit flailing your arms about.
Looks like cools stuff.

Not flailing. I just can't believe anyone takes articles at 100%. Doesn't matter if they are fact or fiction. You expect to crack a joke for a fictional article, when articles of so called fact also have errors.

Yes, I am an oddball at times. I do like the "what ifs." Cracking a joke about it is meaningless. I see you and snake as the ones flailing. just our differing perspectives. can we try to understand those differences?

Why I wonder, does in your view, a question promoted by fiction have zero scientific basis?

[Wild Cobra]

Sorry WC, I didn't mean to upset you so. I only did it because I knew I could.
I guess I was poor at wording that. You depress me because I know you're better than you have portrayed yourself lately.

I'll ask you the same question.

Why does in your view, a question promoted by fiction have zero scientific basis?

[RandomGuy]

<sigh> You never really read anything do you? I'll highlight some of the parts that shouldn't have made sense.

You missed:

But Lab Director Stew Pidasso


Heh.
*say it out loud, like Ben Dover.

[RandomGuy]

what's even more funny is that some dumbasses keep quoting this article as "truth *they* don't want you to know".

I'm surprised Parker hasn't glommed onto this well-written piece of satire.

[RandomGuy]

:nope
10) the fed has reduced the dollar's value more than 90% since it took hold of our currency. This robs citizens on fixed income and who diligently and save responsibily.

1) Ain't nobody on fixed income now that was on fixed income then.

Most "fixed" income has colas. "Fixed" doesn't mean what you think it does

[RandomGuy]

Is Austin even a real place?

It must be. I saw it on the Alex Jones show.

[SnakeBoy]

Lab Director Stew Pidasso


I can't believe I completely missed that one...I feel like a stupid ass :lol

[SnakeBoy]

I guess I was poor at wording that. You depress me because I know you're better than you have portrayed yourself lately.


Oh good, you weren't really depressed. Just playing the victim card to avoid admitting you didn't really read the article before commenting on it.


Why does in your view, a question promoted by fiction have zero scientific basis?

I really don't want debate the scientifc merit of an article by Ben Dover on Stew Pidasso's research.

[Drachen]

Oh good, you weren't really depressed. Just playing the victim card to avoid admitting you didn't really read the article before commenting on it.



I really don't want debate the scientifc merit of an article by Ben Dover on Stew Pidasso's research.

Will you at least read the abstract? I mean it was written by Professor Emerita Amanda Huhgenkis. Can't get any better than that!

[Agloco]

Is it possible he still deosn't get it?


Not only are you open minded to using bars of iron, seashells, and high grade varnish to make gold, you think it makes sense.

Probability- High

[Agloco]

Why I wonder, does in your view, a question promoted by fiction have zero scientific basis?

This isn't fiction. It's junk. I've seen no reaction, nuclear or otherwise which selectively "borrows" 4 protons from one nucleus and gives them to another.

[Agloco]

After viewing the posts again I realize that I was responsible for detailing this thread. Apologies.

[Winehole23]

you were egged on. the tangent improved the thread ihmo.

[Wild Cobra]

I really don't want debate the scientifc merit of an article by Ben Dover on Stew Pidasso's research.
I see.

Instead of even trying to understand I was taking a view of how science could be applied to a fictional story, you only want to play the mongoose.

[Wild Cobra]

This isn't fiction. It's junk. I've seen no reaction, nuclear or otherwise which selectively "borrows" 4 protons from one nucleus and gives them to another.
Yes, the article is junk. Does that mean ideas prompted by it are automatically junk?

Interesting scientific views you have there.

[Wild Cobra]

After viewing the posts again I realize that I was responsible for detailing this thread. Apologies.
You mean derailing, right?

Snake and I are to blame too. Maybe I should have started the new thread I asked for.

[Winehole23]

http://www.keyframeonline.com/piq/animprofile/706_a.jpg

[Wild Cobra]

you were egged on. the tangent improved the thread ihmo.
LOL...

True.

Usually I am the one complaining about derailing a thread. I didn't this time though. I am probably the worse offender for the hypocrisy aspect.

[Wild Cobra]

http://www.keyframeonline.com/piq/animprofile/706_a.jpg
LOL...

He was the one who gave up though.

I think I've seen that cartoon before, but can't place it.

[Winehole23]

riki tiki tavi

[Winehole23]

from The Jungle Book

[Agloco]

Yes, the article is junk. Does that mean ideas prompted by it are automatically junk?

I derived nothing meaningful from it tbh. To my knowledge, no one else has stepped forward and proposed any sound hypotheses based on the information contained within........your "borrowing some protons" idea included.

If you have something not born of bedtime tales, I'm all eyes.


Interesting scientific views you have there.

You're operating with an awfully small sample size.

[Agloco]

LOL...

He was the one who gave up though.



Wasn't in the mood for your shenanigans really. I'd had enough "silly" for one day.