Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Evidence for man-made global warming hits 'gold standard'

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 92 posts

Re: Evidence for man-made global warming hits 'gold standard'

#81

Post by sbenitoj »

arcticbull wrote: post #72
sbenitoj wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“It inflates away debts, too, in that the principal always decreases in value in constant dollars.” Need I mention that the US Govt is the biggest debtor in the world? They have a massive incentive to inflate away their debt — they’re not doing something noble by inflating the monetary supply, it’s self-serving.

Sure, but so what? If you just use the money you get to invest in anything yielding more than 2%, or even gold, what difference does it make to you? If you can take advantage of this information, all the better. For instance if you're a well-paid tech worker in the 35% federal income tax rate bin in California (11% more there) in a world with 2% inflation, a 30-year fixed 4% APR mortgage is 'free' money (4.0 becomes…

I don’t think you fundamentally understand what I’m saying, fiat money steals from savers (otherwise where does the value of the new money that’s printed come from? There’s no free lunch.) and the boom/bust cycle is greatly exacerbated by central banks who can print money at will.

There are obviously various strategies that can be implemented to deal with the disaster money situation everhone’s in, but that really has nothing to do with what I’m saying or why a hard money standard is superior to fiat.

Re: Evidence for man-made global warming hits 'gold standard'

#82

Post by sbenitoj »

arcticbull wrote: post #75
sbenitoj wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re defining risky from your perspective, just because YOU don’t perceive an asset designed to keep pace with inflation as risky doesn’t mean it’s not and it also doesn’t mean those investors wouldn’t prefer to keep it in cash. If being your own bank weren’t threatening to govts, why don’t they just let gold backed currencies circulate and compete (eg see the Liberty Dollar — https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libert…

Based on a cursory skim of the wikipedia article you linked the liberty dollar was taken down because it was a haven for "...money laundering, mail fraud, wire fraud, counterfeiting, and conspiracy." You still haven't explained how you're any worse off by buying literal gold, or if you don't want to carry it around yourself, shares in a gold ETF like GLD. In what way is a share certificate of GLD any different than a…

My point is that it is NOT legal to circulate claims to gold in storage as money, that’s why it doesn’t exist.

GLD is not the same as a gold backed currency because you cannot use GLD as money in everyday transactions, it is literally illegal to compete with fiat currency.

If hard money is non-threatening, why not let the two standards compete and see who wins?

Re: Evidence for man-made global warming hits 'gold standard'

#83

Post by arcticbull »

sbenitoj wrote: post #81
arcticbull wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but so what? If you just use the money you get to invest in anything yielding more than 2%, or even gold, what difference does it make to you? If you can take advantage of this information, all the better. For instance if you're a well-paid tech worker in the 35% federal income tax rate bin in California (11% more there) in a world with 2% inflation, a 30-year fixed 4% APR mortgage is 'free' money (4.0 becomes…

I don’t think you fundamentally understand what I’m saying, fiat money steals from savers (otherwise where does the value of the new money that’s printed come from? There’s no free lunch.) and the boom/bust cycle is greatly exacerbated by central banks who can print money at will. There are obviously various strategies that can be implemented to deal with the disaster money situation everhone’s in, but that really ha…

No, it doesn't blanket hurt savers because they don't tend to save just piles of cold hard cash. Increasing inflation benefits holders of equities and commodities (yes, like gold, which again, you're free to invest in). Holders of fixed-rate debt benefit too. Yes, those who hold cash and long-term bonds are affected negatively, and so are holders of variable-rate debt. However, you can hedge against that with an appropriate investment strategy. [1] These are exactly the kinds of things you should know as you begin investing, or defer to a financial advisor or a roboadvisor.

Yes, they could "print money" at will (it's not like they just run over to the Epson and hit Print, they don't even have the authority to create money, that's done by the Treasury). However, the Fed's goal is to keep inflation at 2% per year. This is hardly the hellscape you make it out to be.

Here's a full write-up explaining what's actually happening out there [2].

[1] https://www.bankrate.com/investing/winners-and-losers-if-inf...

[2] https://seekingalpha.com/article/4113280-federal-reserve-nev...

Re: Evidence for man-made global warming hits 'gold standard'

#84

Post by arcticbull »

sbenitoj wrote: post #82
arcticbull wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on a cursory skim of the wikipedia article you linked the liberty dollar was taken down because it was a haven for "...money laundering, mail fraud, wire fraud, counterfeiting, and conspiracy." You still haven't explained how you're any worse off by buying literal gold, or if you don't want to carry it around yourself, shares in a gold ETF like GLD. In what way is a share certificate of GLD any different than a…

My point is that it is NOT legal to circulate claims to gold in storage as money, that’s why it doesn’t exist. GLD is not the same as a gold backed currency because you cannot use GLD as money in everyday transactions, it is literally illegal to compete with fiat currency. If hard money is non-threatening, why not let the two standards compete and see who wins?

Right, you exchange gold (or GLD shares) for money, then you trade that money for goods and services. The recipient is free to obtain new shares of GLD if that's what they want, or anything else they'd prefer to invest in. That's kind of the definition of a medium of exchange (compare to: an asset). A medium of exchange need not be an asset. You're again describing the intention of the system: this is how it's designed.

By standardizing on USD (or any other currency) as your medium of exchange it dramatically simplifies accounting. If one person trades a few dozen eggs for a hat, then a hat for some gold, then that gold for a few dozen eggs, how can you possibly determine taxes due? And in what 'currency' are they due? Eggs? Or even just how a business is doing? By making every transaction happen using a common intermediate (USD, etc) the whole system is just so much simpler. It all really only works if everyone is doing it, though, for every transaction. Mixing and matching is inefficient.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record... You still haven't explained how you're any worse off by buying literal gold, or if you don't want to carry it around yourself, shares in a gold ETF like GLD.

Why are you trying to force everyone to invest in gold for some reason, instead of whatever they want, through a neutral medium of exchange?

Re: Evidence for man-made global warming hits 'gold standard'

#85

Post by sbenitoj »

arcticbull wrote: post #84
sbenitoj wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is that it is NOT legal to circulate claims to gold in storage as money, that’s why it doesn’t exist. GLD is not the same as a gold backed currency because you cannot use GLD as money in everyday transactions, it is literally illegal to compete with fiat currency. If hard money is non-threatening, why not let the two standards compete and see who wins?

Right, you exchange gold (or GLD shares) for money, then you trade that money for goods and services. The recipient is free to obtain new shares of GLD if that's what they want, or anything else they'd prefer to invest in. That's kind of the definition of a medium of exchange (compare to: an asset). A medium of exchange need not be an asset. You're again describing the intention of the system: this is how it's design…

“Why are you trying to force everyone to invest in gold for some reason, instead of whatever they want, through a neutral medium of exchange?”

We are working with wildly different definitions of “forcing” — the market (millions of people acting voluntarily over thousands of years) settled on gold at the world’s medium of exchange, store of value, and unit of account (aka money). Governments using coercion made it illegal to transact with gold as money.

Explain how this is me “forcing” people to invest in gold?

The history is exactly opposite of your claim, governments have forced people to use fiat. If it were otherwise, it would be legal to use gold as money, which it is not.

Re: Evidence for man-made global warming hits 'gold standard'

#86

Post by sbenitoj »

arcticbull wrote: post #83
sbenitoj wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think you fundamentally understand what I’m saying, fiat money steals from savers (otherwise where does the value of the new money that’s printed come from? There’s no free lunch.) and the boom/bust cycle is greatly exacerbated by central banks who can print money at will. There are obviously various strategies that can be implemented to deal with the disaster money situation everhone’s in, but that really ha…

No, it doesn't blanket hurt savers because they don't tend to save just piles of cold hard cash. Increasing inflation benefits holders of equities and commodities (yes, like gold, which again, you're free to invest in). Holders of fixed-rate debt benefit too. Yes, those who hold cash and long-term bonds are affected negatively, and so are holders of variable-rate debt. However, you can hedge against that with an appr…

Where does the value of newly printed money come from — is it a free lunch (in which case, why not print quadrillions and make everyone a millionaire) or does the value come from savers (in which case it’s stolen from them by debasing the value of their savings)?

Re: Evidence for man-made global warming hits 'gold standard'

#87

Post by arcticbull »

sbenitoj wrote: post #86
arcticbull wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it doesn't blanket hurt savers because they don't tend to save just piles of cold hard cash. Increasing inflation benefits holders of equities and commodities (yes, like gold, which again, you're free to invest in). Holders of fixed-rate debt benefit too. Yes, those who hold cash and long-term bonds are affected negatively, and so are holders of variable-rate debt. However, you can hedge against that with an appr…

Where does the value of newly printed money come from — is it a free lunch (in which case, why not print quadrillions and make everyone a millionaire) or does the value come from savers (in which case it’s stolen from them by debasing the value of their savings)?

Why are they saving money (a medium of exchange) and not assets (a store of value) like gold as you suggest? It's a regular haircut for unproductive capital. It's a punishment for not investing. It comes from people who don't put their money to work, and it comes from people who issued fixed-rate debt as an investment. It's a risk they specifically took on. All this was covered in the linked articles. Inflation is a constant (small) pressure to keep money moving.

Re: Evidence for man-made global warming hits 'gold standard'

#88

Post by arcticbull »

sbenitoj wrote: post #85
arcticbull wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, you exchange gold (or GLD shares) for money, then you trade that money for goods and services. The recipient is free to obtain new shares of GLD if that's what they want, or anything else they'd prefer to invest in. That's kind of the definition of a medium of exchange (compare to: an asset). A medium of exchange need not be an asset. You're again describing the intention of the system: this is how it's design…

“Why are you trying to force everyone to invest in gold for some reason, instead of whatever they want, through a neutral medium of exchange?” We are working with wildly different definitions of “forcing” — the market (millions of people acting voluntarily over thousands of years) settled on gold at the world’s medium of exchange, store of value, and unit of account (aka money). Governments using coercion made it ill…

You keep completely ignoring my core point. You still haven't explained how you're any worse off by buying literal gold, or if you don't want to carry it around yourself, shares in a gold ETF like GLD. I'll happily engage the other aspects of the conversation once you address this. It's not different, though, is it -- it's literally the same thing. The modern economy decouples store of value from medium of exchange, the old economy coupled the two, that's the only thing that's changed from a practical perspective.

Re: Evidence for man-made global warming hits 'gold standard'

#89

Post by sbenitoj »

arcticbull wrote: post #87
sbenitoj wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where does the value of newly printed money come from — is it a free lunch (in which case, why not print quadrillions and make everyone a millionaire) or does the value come from savers (in which case it’s stolen from them by debasing the value of their savings)?

Why are they saving money (a medium of exchange) and not assets (a store of value) like gold as you suggest? It's a regular haircut for unproductive capital. It's a punishment for not investing. It comes from people who don't put their money to work, and it comes from people who issued fixed-rate debt as an investment. It's a risk they specifically took on. All this was covered in the linked articles. Inflation is a…

Why is inflation (the government printing money) legal but me counterfeiting $100 bills and passing them off a legit illegal and considered theft?

Re: Evidence for man-made global warming hits 'gold standard'

#90

Post by sbenitoj »

arcticbull wrote: post #88
sbenitoj wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Why are you trying to force everyone to invest in gold for some reason, instead of whatever they want, through a neutral medium of exchange?” We are working with wildly different definitions of “forcing” — the market (millions of people acting voluntarily over thousands of years) settled on gold at the world’s medium of exchange, store of value, and unit of account (aka money). Governments using coercion made it ill…

You keep completely ignoring my core point. You still haven't explained how you're any worse off by buying literal gold, or if you don't want to carry it around yourself, shares in a gold ETF like GLD. I'll happily engage the other aspects of the conversation once you address this. It's not different, though, is it -- it's literally the same thing. The modern economy decouples store of value from medium of exchange,…

Fair’s fair — I’m not trying to ignore what you’re saying, I just don’t think it’s particularly important.

Regarding buying shares of an ETF like GLD, I have my concerns regarding the ETF actually holding what they claim to hold — so I believe you’re taking on additional risk by holding GLD vs actual gold.

As far as holding regular gold, my claim is you are worse off for a number of reasons — (1) you cannot seamlessly transact with it (2) because it’s illegal to transact in gold, and you’re required to transact in fiat, savers are being stolen from every time they print dollars, just like savers are stolen from when someone counterfeits money (3) it’s WAY more costly to attempt to live by some gold standard by buying/selling real gold every time you earn money/spend money (imagine trying to sell an equivalent $ amount of gold every time you buy a cup of coffee or buy an equivalent $ amount of gold every time you receive a paycheck) (4) you’re worse off because fiat causes us to live in a much more volatile world, the ability to print $ at will and hold only a fraction of it in reserves (fractional reserve banking) greatly exacerbated financial crises, to the detriment of everyone who isn’t a large bank which can get bailed out through political connections.

Post reply on HN