the neoliberal vision of the future

[ViolentPanda]

LOL at your source.

It's a bit , isn't it?

 

[Blagsta]

This is like right wing idiocy bingo. 'Hitler was a lefty, 88'. I just need a couple more for a full house. Something about unions having a monopoly on labour and how child labour laws are anti-freedom please.

He's already said that unions act against worker's interests.

 

[ViolentPanda]

"Ayn Rand monthly"


Oh, god, that conjures up visions from VP's post again

Now it's you who've made me puke!

 

[Blagsta]

It's a bit , isn't it?

I'm curious as to where these objective standards by which Randists judge art come from.

 

[rekil]

He's already said that unions act against worker's interests.

Missed it, I was out last night in a public (communist!!?1!) house. Waiting for one then!

 

[onarchy]

no i don't mean the exchange rate stupid. i mean the purchasing power of the $. are you saying that the gold standard miraculously did away with inflation and that the price of gold remained the same throughout the period?

The gold standard did away with inflation, and it did not do so miraculously. There is no inflation under a gold standard because you can't print gold. The purchasing power of the dollar increased after the civil war due to falling prices, among other things in kerosene. Generally speaking the value of gold remains very stable over time. Had the US still been on a gold standard as it was prior to 1913 the current financial and debt crisis would have been impossible.

 

[Blagsta]

What happened in the gold rush?

 

[ViolentPanda]

The gold standard did away with inflation, and it did not do so miraculously. There is no inflation under a gold standard because you can't print gold. The purchasing power of the dollar increased after the civil war due to falling prices, among other things in kerosene. Generally speaking the value of gold remains very stable over time. Had the US still been on a gold standard as it was prior to 1913 the current financial and debt crisis would have been impossible.

So you're unaware of the fact that the gold standard was purely nominal from around the middle of the 19th century, and that inflation was indeed possible because reserves of gold were only required to be fractional to the quantity of money in circulation?

 

[Pickman's model]

The gold standard did away with inflation, and it did not do so miraculously. There is no inflation under a gold standard because you can't print gold. The purchasing power of the dollar increased after the civil war due to falling prices, among other things in kerosene. Generally speaking the value of gold remains very stable over time. Had the US still been on a gold standard as it was prior to 1913 the current financial and debt crisis would have been impossible.

bollocks. what about the depression of 1873?

what about the depression of 1893?

 

[ViolentPanda]

What happened in the gold rush?

Dead cat without a bounce.

 

[ViolentPanda]

bollocks. what about the depression of 1873?

what about the depression of 1893?

We imagined them.

 

[onarchy]

That's a fairly slick summation, lacking only any context whatsoever. All you've done is said "he did this", you haven't explained how he did it.

The article I referenced goes into detail as to how he managed to revolutionize the oil industry and bring down the prices. He was accused of monopolistic practices. The truth is that most of what he did was simply good business practices that was of great benefit to Rockefeller, his partners and his customers. The only ones who didn't directly profit from Rockefeller's "monopolistic" behavior were his competitors.

Is this opinion or fact?

You be the judge. Read the article I referenced. It contains tons of references to the primary literature.

I wouldn't call that an article, I'd call it by it's true name: Polemic propaganda. About what could be expected from an impartial journal - an apologia that excuses any practices conforming to Objectivist preferences.

Isn't that interesting. You've not read the article, and you know next to nothing about the history of Standard Oil. Yet your are prepared to declare an article on the subject (which is full of references to academic papers and books) as "polemic propaganda." Dare I suggest that you are being slightly prejudiced?

 

[onarchy]

bollocks. what about the depression of 1873?

what about the depression of 1893?

I didn't say that there would be no economic cycles. If you want to learn more about an important cause of business cycles, even on a gold standard, I would suggest the following article:

http://www.dallasfed.org/research/indepth/2005/id0501.html

Here you will also see the reason that the business cycle has been severely reduced in strength in recent decades, despite the insane Keynesian central banking system.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Here you will also see the reason that the business cycle has been severely reduced in strength in recent decades,

Eh?

Good grief man, is there no beginning to your understanding?

 

[onarchy]

So you're unaware of the fact that the gold standard was purely nominal from around the middle of the 19th century, and that inflation was indeed possible because reserves of gold were only required to be fractional to the quantity of money in circulation?

As it happens I have recently written a quite extensive article on the pure gold standard versus fractional reserve banking. In this I prove that a proper fractional reserve banking on a gold standard is no more inflationary than a pure gold standard.

 

[rekil]

Rockefeller approved of the Ludlow Massacre did he not.

 

[ViolentPanda]

The article I referenced goes into detail as to how he managed to revolutionize the oil industry and bring down the prices. He was accused of monopolistic practices. The truth is that most of what he did was simply good business practices that was of great benefit to Rockefeller, his partners and his customers. The only ones who didn't directly profit from Rockefeller's "monopolistic" behavior were his competitors.




You be the judge. Read the article I referenced. It contains tons of references to the primary literature.




Isn't that interesting. You've not read the article, and you know next to nothing about the history of Standard Oil.

I note that (yet again) you've elided part of my post. In this case the part where I mention that I've speed-read it. Now, I don't know whether your faculties aren't up to much, but mine are sharp enough that I can speed read a 10 page paper in 10 minutes, and retain the substance of it well enough to hold an academic conversation on it months later.

As for Standard Oil, please quantify (if you're able, and if your claim isn't, as is likely, merely the petulance of an ideologue caught in the net of his own rhetoric) how my knowledge of Standard Oil (or at least your assumptions about my knowledge of Standard Oil) equates to "next to nothing".

Thanks awfully.

Yet your are prepared to declare an article on the subject (which is full of references to academic papers and books)

Is that the criterion by which you gauge the validity of an article, the volume of references? Any knucklehead can cobble together a fully-referenced article. That doesn't make the article coherent, accurate or in any way worthy of respect, and if you believe that it does, then you're a fool.

as "polemic propaganda." Dare I suggest that you are being slightly prejudiced?

Of course you can suggest that. It doesn't alter the facts that:

a) The article is of the type known as "polemic".

b) That the article propagandises for "virtues" that map closely to Objectivist beliefs.

c) That the article is an apologia for the nature of capitalism.

 

[onarchy]

Eh?

Good grief man, is there no beginning to your understanding?

Yes, yes, I am fully aware of the severe depression that started in 2008 and that is still ongoing. This was indeed caused by Keynesian politics that had been pursued for a long time, with a loan financed deficit spending spree, but if you look at the market prior to 2008 it had been virtually one long bull market since the beginning of the 1980s.

 

[Blagsta]

What happens to the gold standard when the market is flooded with gold?

 

[Pickman's model]

I didn't say that there would be no economic cycles. If you want to learn more about an important cause of business cycles, even on a gold standard, I would suggest the following article:

http://www.dallasfed.org/research/indepth/2005/id0501.html

Here you will also see the reason that the business cycle has been severely reduced in strength in recent decades, despite the insane Keynesian central banking system.

but you are saying that there was no inflation: 'the gold standard did away with inflation'. which is bollocks too.

 

[onarchy]

Rockefeller approved of the Ludlow Massacre did he not.

I'm sure he did. Like Henry Ford, Rockefeller was a progressive politically. Rockefeller was, like Ford, only a hero as an industrialist. In politics he was awful.

 

[ViolentPanda]

As it happens I have recently written a quite extensive article on the pure gold standard versus fractional reserve banking. In this I prove that a proper fractional reserve banking on a gold standard is no more inflationary than a pure gold standard.

Hmm. You prove, you say? Is your proof examinable? Has it been tested by peer review, or outside of your circle of friends?

I ask because I'm used to proofs equating to testable hypotheses, with results that are replicable. All else is what is known as "speculation" (however learned it is) and opinion (however informed it is).

 

[Pickman's model]

As it happens I have recently written a quite extensive article on the pure gold standard versus fractional reserve banking. In this I prove that a proper fractional reserve banking on a gold standard is no more inflationary than a pure gold standard.

put up or shut up

 

[littlebabyjesus]

You don't understand Keynesian economics at all if you think Keynes advocated a 'loan-financed deficit spending spree'. Keynesian economics is, at its essence, very simple: when the private sector is borrowing too little – during a recession – the state must step in and borrow; when the private sector is borrowing too much – during a boom – the state must step in and tax the private sector both in order to stop it from borrowing so much and in order to repay any deficit created during a recession. In that way, boom and bust cycles are smoothed out as much as possible.

 

[onarchy]

but you are saying that there was no inflation: 'the gold standard did away with inflation'. which is bollocks too.

A business cycle is not the same as inflation. Under a gold standard inflation is virtually gone. Even a gold rush doesn't necessarily produce inflation since it takes energy and money to dig out the gold.

 

[ViolentPanda]

put up or shut up

Note the proviso of "proper", however. The usual route for claiming "well, reality didn't accord to my model. Bad reality, naughty reality!".

 

[onarchy]

put up or shut up

Oh, sorry, I forgot to include the article.

http://onarki.no/blogg/2011/04/fractional-reserve-banking-vs-pure-gold-standard/

 

[Blagsta]

A business cycle is not the same as inflation. Under a gold standard inflation is virtually gone. Even a gold rush doesn't necessarily produce inflation since it takes energy and money to dig out the gold.

What happens to the price of gold when the market is flooded with gold?

 

[Pickman's model]

Oh, sorry, I forgot to include the article.

http://onarki.no/blogg/2011/04/fractional-reserve-banking-vs-pure-gold-standard/

what's brorskap?

 

[Idris2002]

Are you going to retract your insinuation that mainstream French socialist movement between the wars disseminated the kind of foul antisemitic propaganda you posted up?