The Federal Reserve

[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/show...9&postcount=29

[Winehole23]

Are you really?

[Winehole23]

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...1&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?

[Winehole23]

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...2&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]

[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 quan y 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 ed.) 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.

[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.