Earlier quoted context omitted.
What happened in 1929?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_crash_of_1929
That is correct.
The Demoralization is just Beginning
541–550 of 812 posts
Re: The Demoralization is just Beginning
#542Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, you can't just manufacture more gold. I mean you can dig more up or buy more but you're limited to how much gold there is. That's the argument used. There seems to be over 200,000 metric tons of it ever mined. What many gold bugs and crypto bros don't seem to understand is that: 1. The US dollar was never 100% backed by silver (originally) or gold; 2. What really backs the US dollar is the US military. Th…
Of course the same can be said for BTC: finite supply, needs to be mined.
Unlike gold, the "finite supply" of BTC is socially constructed.
That's my whole argument for gold. The finite supply isn't socially constructed, and getting more requires building real infrastructure.
Re: The Demoralization is just Beginning
#543I prefer my economic takes from economists, or people who actually study these things. -there is more to an economy than manufacturing. Using manufacturing metrics to rate an economy is like scoring a soccer game based on how far your players run: in some contexts correlated with “winning” but in others it’s not. -gold is not a good currency or basis for monetary policy. -these ideas only sound self consistent withou…
The issue with mainstream economy is that it is way too abstract. It does not discriminate between USD 100 worth of marketing consulting and USD 100 worth of crops.
Yes, water it cheap. But you die if you can't access it for just a couple of weeks - this is a risk based approach. And this is something traditional economists do not look at too much.
Re: The Demoralization is just Beginning
#544This started out interesting but then the red flags started to pop up. Going to jail in Europe for posting memes, gold standard, salivating over doing something that benefits the US and hurts countries that are already poorer than the US. He has strong opinions on economics, but doesn't understand it. His points about economics are partially true but either subtly incorrect or interpreted incorrectly.
is there any reliable source for that "going to jail in europe for posting memes"? I keep seeing this argument in online arguments, but can not find a credible source
"A man has been jailed today after pleading guilty to posting grossly offensive messages on social media."
- The Crown Prosecution Service
https://www.cps.gov.uk/north-west/news/man-jailed-offensive-...
Re: The Demoralization is just Beginning
#545Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s true for Germany. There recently was a case of a podcaster whose acquaintances were tapped and was apprehended while walking with his 1yo for posting memes. An AfD politician was fined 6000€ for posting crime statistics. A man had his house searched for sharing a meme of calling a politician something along the lines of „idiot“. There’s also the 60 minutes interview where prosecutors brag about confiscating devi…
The only people who are in jail for political reasons in the UK are fossil fuel company protestors, who were jailed for planning a protest during a Zoom meeting. Others have been jailed for relatively minor but high profile actions, such as throwing paint at paintings (protected behind glass). People have been jailed for racist rioting and planning racist riots, but not many people in the UK see that as a bad thing.…
[dead]
Re: The Demoralization is just Beginning
#546Earlier quoted context omitted.
It didn't even start out interesting. The main product of the US is weapons not "the dollar". Electricity generation is a metric for what exactly? China's popoulation is rapidly urbanizing. That's all that shows. But the killer is the gold standard. The author seems to be confusing this with fractional reserve banking. Interestingly, they're anti-crypto, which is kinda odd because most gold bugs became crypto bros. C…
> China invests in creating infrastructure in countries to help make them future customers for Chinese products ... Really? Because the vast majority of "Belt and Road" destinations connect China to raw resources. I'm sure that's just a coincidence. China is making it pretty damn clear that they do not intend to pay for those resources, or at least not in money, especially now that the "Belt and Road" initiative has…
China offers significantly better terms than the IMF and it comes with far less onerous conditions, most notably the IMF imposes "economic reforms" that tend to be absolutely devastating in the same way that economic austerity measures in the developed world have been devastating to working people and nothing more than a vampiric drain on the economy to the benefit of the wealthiest.
The IMF (and World Bank) is economic imperialism doing things like preventing African countries from growing crops to feed themselves. Instead they need to produce export crops and then they can buy excess food created by Europe and the US. This has resulted in famines and utterly destroyed, for example, the economy of places like Somalia [1].
Yes, China is seeking preferential access to natural resources and considering the strategic importance of the borrower. But the general consensus seems to be China's terms are better than the West's.
[1]: https://twn.my/title2/resurgence/2011/251-252/cover06.htm
Re: The Demoralization is just Beginning
#547"Trading is not a job. Passive income is not a thing." Never a truer word spoken. Making money by moving money around. It shouldn't exist. It shouldn't be possible or at least should come with severe limitations that make it not possible to live off as a vocation. When person A 'wins', person B 'loses'. It is a specific skill set that some humans have, but it's not one that should be valued because it gives nothing b…
> when person a wins, person b loses
Only if one assumes that capital markets are zero-sum. They clearly are not.
What you presumably are referring to when you talk about "moving money around" is purchase of an asset such as a stock or a bond. Rather than moving it around, you are making capital available to some entity in exchange for the expected (but not guaranteed) return on investment. Such transactions are mutually beneficial.
Companies need capital to operate so they sell equity to willing investors in exchange for it. This is what makes growth rates seen over last century possible.
That said, they are not fair in that only those with capital can participate. If one is living hand-to-mouth, one cannot afford to participate. Would be ideal if we could find a way to level the playing field and equalize access
Re: The Demoralization is just Beginning
#548Earlier quoted context omitted.
While not an answer to your specific question, this popped into my head as being similar in tone to what I think you're asking about. https://reason.com/2024/10/17/british-man-convicted-of-crimi... (An example of something that might be perceived by some as a judicial over-reaction based on perceived offensiveness to others.)
From what I understand the Public Spaces Protection Order is a law that exists exactly for this reason, how would this be a judicial overreaction? Seems similar to the German law that makes it illegal to wear politcal symbols or talk politics outside of polling places. There is an undefined "buffer zone" outside of the voting location where, if you display political symbols, you will be arrested. This is a limitation…
The man in the linked article did not display any signs or symbols, did not engage in speech, and did not "express" himself. If standing solemn is an arrestable offense, then anyone doing anything is subject to arrest. The police may think fascist thoughts are running through any random person's mind at this very moment.
Re: The Demoralization is just Beginning
#549Earlier quoted context omitted.
While not an answer to your specific question, this popped into my head as being similar in tone to what I think you're asking about. https://reason.com/2024/10/17/british-man-convicted-of-crimi... (An example of something that might be perceived by some as a judicial over-reaction based on perceived offensiveness to others.)
From what I understand the Public Spaces Protection Order is a law that exists exactly for this reason, how would this be a judicial overreaction? Seems similar to the German law that makes it illegal to wear politcal symbols or talk politics outside of polling places. There is an undefined "buffer zone" outside of the voting location where, if you display political symbols, you will be arrested. This is a limitation…
Germany is indeed like the UK in that it also does not believe in basic free speech protections. These anti-speech laws don't produce much domestic outrage because the people of Europe just like their politicians don't believe free speech is important. They believe anti-speech laws "make total sense". In many European countries you get visited by the police if you post the wrong kind of memes. You get arrested if you wave a Palestinian flag. Insulting a politician or police officer has been criminalized. These things all have a chilling effect on free expression.
The US has much stronger free speech protections than Europe. (At least for now.)
Re: The Demoralization is just Beginning
#550Earlier quoted context omitted.
The two UK cases: - Nazi pug man got a fine of £800; no jail. - Cheshire people; in the context of rioting and the consequences of rioting. For the record I think (personal view only) that the Nazi pug man should never have been prosecuted, I personally find it grossly offensive but I think that the harm of stopping people saying these things is greater than the harm of the idiot saying them. The Cheshire thing I fin…
>Also, what about folks like Snowdon and Assange? I mean if freedom of speech is absolute in the USA why can't they just tell the CCP about USA nuclear control? Why do people constantly and intentionally misconstrue arguments? It's so obnoxious and intellectually dishonest. I didn't say it was absolute. It's like people can't even have a conversation anymore without dealing with this. >I think that the harm of stoppi…
I did not see that as an attack towards you or miscontruing any argument you made, rather putting things in perspective for people who may believe JD Vance & co when he talks about freedom of speech. I also did not see your statement "seems abhorrent to americans" as a value judgement you hold in regards to european freedom of expression laws.