The Fed

[Martin Hash]

It’s like people always miss “production > consumption.” My newspaper didn’t miss it when they did a write-up of my candidacy; they intentionally reversed the sign. Now I always say production = consumption, which is more accurate anyway. (My newspaper will intentionally misquote what I say anyway, then sue me when I attach the video proving them liars.)

[DBTrek]

It’s like people always miss “production > consumption.” My newspaper didn’t miss it when they did a write-up of my candidacy; they intentionally reversed the sign. Now I always say production = consumption, which is more accurate anyway. (My newspaper will intentionally misquote what I say anyway, then sue me when I attach the video proving them liars.)

Why do you hate the media, why do you hate the First Amendment?

[Fife]

[Martin Hash]

A .357 can take 'em both.

[Speaker to Animals]

Anybody with a large hoard of gold is not likely to be easily robbed of it with a .357.

[Martin Hash]

Anybody with a large hoard of gold is not likely to be easily robbed of it with a .357.

???

I grew up Mormon. I don't know if you guys know this but Mormon's store food and supplies in case there's a national emergeny (they think their church is going to take over the U.S. gov). My dad was not Mormon, and he did not have a food supply. When the church elders asked him why, he said, "I don't need a food supply; I've got a .357 and a Ward list."

People willing to commit violence will take what they need, and if they know someone is using gold to buy supplies, then that's information enough.

[Ph64]

Anybody with a large hoard of gold is not likely to be easily robbed of it with a .357.

???

I grew up Mormon. I don't know if you guys know this but Mormon's store food and supplies in case there's a national emergeny (they think their church is going to take over the U.S. gov). My dad was not Mormon, and he did not have a food supply. When the church elders asked him why, he said, "I don't need a food supply; I've got a .357 and a Ward list."

People willing to commit violence will take what they need, and if they know someone is using gold to buy supplies, then that's information enough.

I've always thought skills were more important, like knowing how to grow food, or make alcohol and biodiesel, fix things, etc. Sure, a stockpile of food is great for your fallout shelter when the nukes start flying, but it'll only last so long.

When the guy with the .357 shows up and the crops aren't ready, he might take what he can, but killing you would be stupid - once he kills everyone he'll starve eventually because he'll run out of food too. And he'll eventually run out of bullets too.

Socialism, even at the point of a .357, doesn't work in the long run. Eventually you run out of ammo or people to kill for supplies (or both), and if you can't produce value instead of consume you're dead.

[brewster]

When the guy with the .357 shows up and the crops aren't ready, he might take what he can, but killing you would be stupid - once he kills everyone he'll starve eventually because he'll run out of food too. And he'll eventually run out of bullets too.

Seems to me a guy with weapons among peasants is how you get feudalism. How is feudalism different than socialism? It's not "everybody is equal" Marxism, but there's noblesse oblige, the warlord at least takes care of his resource, his people, and makes sure everyone has enough, if at all possible.

[Ph64]

When the guy with the .357 shows up and the crops aren't ready, he might take what he can, but killing you would be stupid - once he kills everyone he'll starve eventually because he'll run out of food too. And he'll eventually run out of bullets too.

Seems to me a guy with weapons among peasants is how you get feudalism. How is feudalism different than socialism? It's not "everybody is equal" Marxism, but there's noblesse oblige, the warlord at least takes care of his resource, his people, and makes sure everyone has enough, if at all possible.

Poor terminology on my part, but looking at it as the guys with the .357s being the "takers" (both the "authority" (or government) and the ones receiving the taken goods), vs the producers handing over "the fruits of their labor" under force... Especially if the takers are killing to acquire their "take", eventually you'll run foul of "running out of other people's money/goods"...

If you leave them alive to produce and only take some, sure, you wind up with feudalism... At least for as long as the ones with the guns still have ammo. Or until the peasants get good with bow and arrow, trebuchets, etc.

Guns become useless other than as clubs without ammo. No matter how much you "stockpile" in advance, when TSHTF and things fall apart what you have stockpiled, be it food, water, ammo, etc, is gonna run out eventually, and if you don't have survival skills after that you might a well save one last bullet for your own skull, because it you can't maintain your power/authority and have no skills, any skilled producers you left alive are gonna do it anyways, and maybe in a more painful way.

[Fife]

Two Simple Questions Keynesians Can't Answer

Keynes never bothered to deal with this crucial question: "Where does the government get the money that it spends into the economy?" This remains the crucial question that Keynesians need to answer. Yet for all of their equations, for all of their incomprehensible jargon, and for all of their rhetoric, they never face this question.

It is such a simple question. It has a simple answer. A government can obtain money from only three sources: taxation, lending, and monetary inflation. There are no other sources.

1. What would lenders to the government have done with their money if the government had not offered the promise of guaranteed repayment?

[either private consumption or private production]

2. Why would either of these options be worse for the economy than spending by government bureaucrats?