Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Does anyone on here actually have intelligent discussions?

Posted 6 years ago on April 17, 2012, 12:34 p.m. EST by EdiblePlanet (50)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Is there anyone on here that is acutally trying to understand exactly what is going on in the economy and what solutions are available? Let's start an intelligent discussion. Here's my "two cents" -

How to get the American economy rolling again. The first thing is Americans need access to money, especially those who are in businesses that have identified needs and can create employment - preferably cooperative businesses.

Now let's all understand what exactly money is. Money is not capital - capital is tangible resources that can be transformed (through labor and ingenuity) into consumable products. Money is only a means of exchange which allows one to STORE THE VALUE of a product or service they have applied labor to in order to exchange that VALUE at a later time for some other product of service. So basically money is needed to facilitate and simplify exhanges of labor (services) and/or labor and capital (products). MONEY BEING TREATED AS CAPITAL IS THE PROBLEM! AND RETURNING MONEY TO IT"S RIGHTFUL FUNCTION IS THE SOLUTION!

Now that we know what money is (and is not), how do we get the economy rolling. When creativity (ingenuity + labor + capital) can't access money then progress (new job creation) begins to stagnate. It's impossible for legacy businesses (current large corporations) to maintain the employment levels because there are only so many cars that can be sold until the market is saturated and the drop in auto sales plummets to a sustainable level. This example uses cars but can be used for any product. When sales begin to plummet the big companies must start laying off to remain viable. So to get the economy rolling we need new products and/or services which have demand by the public. Currently sustainable technologies that save money and resources are increasing in demand. There are a lot of creative people out there with great ideas but no money. Solution -

First - get rid of the federal reserve

Second - get rid of the national credit union administration

Third - get rid of the office of thrift supervision

Fourth - get rid of all credit

Fifth - turn all oversight of banks/credit unions/thrifts over to the treasury

Sixth - get rid of money markets ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_markets )

Seventh - get rid of bond markets ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bond_market ) - Hereafter the governemnt pays for it's expenses through a national sales tax on consumables other than staple (needed for life) consumables like food and shelter. Increases or decreases in the national sales tax is used to manage the supply of money (actual physical dollars in circulation)

Eighth - regulate capital markets ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_markets )

Ninth - get rid of reserve requirements which are the current reason that banks/credit unions/thrifts are so thight on lending policies.

Tenth - the u.s. treasury makes no-interest loans directly to banks/credit unions/thrifts who then loan it out to individuals and businesses using a fee based system (in contrast to interest) and based on credit worthy-ness

Now, let's all remember who prints the money - not the federal reserve - the Bureau of Printing and Engraving which is part of the Treasury. Allowing banks/credit unions/thrifts to borrow money "actual dollars" directly from the Treasury - at cost - would facilitate competition among banks/credit unions and the cost to Americans to borrow money would go way down. The banks/credit unions would charge borrowing fees (in contrast to interest) based on what income they needed to stay in business (salaries, expenses, overhead, etc...). The market (competition) would decide what each bank/credit union charged as fees. What banks/credit unions/thrifts do you think would thrive in such a situation? The small local ones of course as they can do "business" much cheaper than the larger ones. Local credit unions (nonprofit, cooperative financial institutions owned and run by its members) who don't expect dividends and aren't beholden to stockholders hungry for dividends would do better than banks ( http://www.bankrate.com/brm/static/compare.asp ) and this would tend to keep money in the local economy. Leave the credit rating system as it is. The money system is now public and every default reflects on public debt and therefore only allow banks/credit unions/thrifts to loan money that is security (home, car, etc..) backed.

Now let's hear all of your views - pros or cons - so that we can get an intelligent discussion going please.



Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by jph (2652) 6 years ago

The economy is seen as a mythical monster that needs to be fed or appeased in some way,. or it hurts us. It is just us.

What we need is not to 'get the economy rolling', what we need is a new way of exchanging and storing value that accounts for all the costs that are externalized in the production of that value. Our current money system is only concerned with storing and transferring value, it knows nothing about the costs left in the wake of the conversion of natural resources to currency.

[-] 1 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

What ideas do you have in mind?

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 6 years ago

There are many possibilities, however a so called 'free market' that does not account for the true costs to the planet and its life, is a system with a huge gaping flaw. Our monetary system is a pyramid/ponzi scheme that requires endless new debt to always be expanding, is just not realistic, given the finite resources and space on the planet.

The capitalist idea of endless growth is a dead end. We should be working to balance the systems that sustain life, not to maximize profits for the few capitalist that own everything. This is short sited, destructive, and decidedly anti-democratic.

One world, One people, One.

Net Search; Permaculture, Degrowth, Relocalize, SlowMoney,. .

[-] 2 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 6 years ago

you're right , it is like a ponzi scheme .. the wealth from the bottom keeps flowing to the top where it stays on top .. sooner or later ther is nothing left on the bottom .. for a ponzi scheme to work there has to always be new growth at the bottom .. new providers.. so those at the top will see continual growth .. ..an excellent comparison.

I have suggested a cap on profits, this will limit the growth at the top and spread the growth amongst the bottom .. thus allowing the entire system to achieve sustainability by reaching a maximum level of comfort for everyone , which at that point growth is no longer needed . a level of contentment will be achieved by all .. the reason we see the bottom continually struggling to achieve a level of contment is because the profits are taken away by the top .., leaving those at the bottom perpetually broke.. and perpetually struggling.. the cap on profits would create standard of living growth at the bottom level of workers thus reaching a level of contenment and sustainability .. It's a simple fix to the present capitalist system we now have globally.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 6 years ago

Yup, I agree; one idea I have is for a strong progressive tax system, I post it often so sorry if you already seen this; Basically we limit the top by taxing at 90% all income (including capital gains!) over a decided top level,. 500k or a million, and conversely we also provide a minimum income to the lowest income level folks,. this eliminates the extreme poverty and simplifies many systems, taxation, food-stamps, and welfare, etc. While still providing the wannabee 'capitalist' the motivation they claim to require to do anything,. I know people are very willing to achieve without that constant need for financial reward, by if we leave such a large range of possible income levels 20k to 1000k there is lots of wiggle.

The idea bring what you sate; to bring about an eventual leveling of the table that is currently rather tilted to one side, that of the 1%.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverB (1871) 6 years ago

I think we have the similiar goal in mind: To achieve equal-ality.

The cap onprofits protects the consumer and thus gives the dollar a stronger value elimininating the perpetual "not enough syndrome".

The raising of taxes does not protect the consumer.

[-] 0 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

A True Free Market is self-regulating and inclusive of Permaculture, Degrowth, Relocalize and SlowMoney. What does a true free market mean to you? I mean personally to you as an individual? Isn't a True Free Market a place where everyone, and I mean everyone is free from the dictates of others and free to explore his/her own unique creativity and use the resources provided by Nature to express that creativity and share it with others. A creative world is a much different concept than a "bottom line" world.

[-] 2 points by jph (2652) 6 years ago

a 'free market' is only about the freedom of capital, not the freedom of people. as long as 1% are able to claim ownership of the bulk of the planet and our resources, there is nothing free about it. as long as we have 'owners' and 'workers' and the two are not the same, then we are talking about the opposite of freedom, it it the tyranny of the capitalist class.

I am all for creative freedom and that has absolutely nothing to do with capitalism or markets.

[-] 0 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

Is that your definition of free market or the definition fed to you by the media? What exactly is a market? Isn't a market where people offer the fruits of their labor/creativity to others and success is determined by the value others place on each individuals labor/creativity? Wikipedia defines a free market as "a market where prices are determined by supply and demand"

What exactly is capitalism? Wikipedia once again - "In a fundamental sense, capital consists of any produced thing that can enhance a person's power to perform economically useful work—a stone or an arrow is capital for a caveman who can use it as a hunting instrument" So capitalism is when anyone uses resources - either natural or the product of another - to make/create a product through the use of his/her own creativity and labor that (hopefully) others will find value in.

As for workers being owners - it's happening all over the globe. The Mondragon Cooperative is a great example as is the current movement in Argentina which you view a great documentary called "The Take" at http://vimeo.com/10061195 -)

[-] 2 points by jph (2652) 6 years ago

No that is hardly a definition, it is an observation. I see you are a fan of 'free' markets, however it is the capitalism that is the problem.

How does a free market help anyone who has no money? How can these people gain money when 1% of the population claims ownership of the bulk of the land and the planets resources? How can a young person compete with an old capitalist that has amassed a giant heap of resources and lands that they can use to produce more capital, by doing very little (renting)??

The markets free or not, are not the real problem, the problem is capitalism, or more accurately private hording of wealth by the capitalists.

[-] 0 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

That's just it - it's not a free market and it's not capitalism - it's greed. There are many avenues that have been growing for individuals to make change - cooperatives, local businesses, local foods, local political involvement, consuming less, using less energy, etc... All of these tools cut deeply into the current system.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 6 years ago

Yes, I agree that there are many alternatives, and yes many people are just moving forward, and building some of them. This is a good thing. The problem is the bulk of our power is still tied up in the corporate/bankster pyramid scam. As well this greed based system continues to attack any alternatives to itself.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

There is not, nor will there ever be a "free market".

Once you get that pervasive piece of propaganda out of your head, we'll be able to move forward. in conversation

[-] 0 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

Not going to argue but it really doesn't appear that the propaganda is in my head. Propaganda is that which attempts to skew ones perception. My perception about what a True Free Market is is just fine thank you very much. Shall I send you a mirror.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago


No, I prefer not to live in the world of your illusions.

But you really should refrain from trying to off such propaganda around here.

It's been done to death, and it's illusory nature is irrefutable.

So, how's the viagra sales going?

[-] 1 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

The sales are fantastic! Is that what you want to hear? Guess we'll just have to continue on with our own viewpoints.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

Here's the IMPORTANT question for you.

In what way do you see you're "viewpoint" as supportive of OWS?

Are you suggesting we should all start selling viagra and such on the internet?

Multi level marketing perhaps?

I'm just not seeing this "viewpoint" as having anything at all to do with changing, the status quo.

It's more of an endorsement of it.

Why do you offer us a World of mirrors and illusions, masquerading as a "viewpoint"?

[-] 0 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago


[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

I'm just sayin'!!!

How do you see your "viewpoint", as an asset to OWS?

[-] -1 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

I just figured it out - YOU ARE A TROLL trying to marginalize viewpoints so that others won't begin to think for themselves and see the alternatives that are available.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22871) 6 years ago

Shooz 6294 points. Edible Planet 3 points. Come on. Shooz is no troll.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

You don't answer questions.

I wonder why that is?

[-] 0 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

By the way - OWS isn't the point - liberty and equity in our social structure are and always have been the point.

[-] 1 points by alexrai (851) 6 years ago

30 more years of economic rolling and we won't be worrying about home foreclosures, because our home (the earth) is gonna puke us into outer space!

I think what we need is a framework that manages resources for the public benefit, but allows private individuals to compete within the framework. Like for example, greenhouse gas ceiling set at level X, and if that threshold is exceeded, then someone starts shutting down factories in order of least socially useful products... to most socially useful products.

Medical services might be another example. Like figure out a way to be competitive while providing 25% of your services for free. If you can't do it, someone else will figure out a way. (Lots of foreign doctors more than happy to work for less wages, lots of hospital supply companies would rather take a pay cut than lose a revenue stream).

Just contrived examples, but human beings could sit down and set the boundaries at socially acceptable levels, and allow people to compete within those.

[-] 2 points by OccNoVi (415) 6 years ago

Intelligent discussion? It's been at least a month since I've seen one.

Moving money to local banks/S&Ls -- yes, indeed. That is truly a no-brainer.

The international banks are about nothing but generating revenue for themselves. Cheating is part of it. Screwing whole economies... yes, indeed.

[-] 1 points by Misaki (893) 6 years ago

How to get the American economy rolling again. The first thing is Americans need access to money, especially those who are in businesses that have identified needs and can create employment - preferably cooperative businesses.


Businesses already have plenty of money (at least some businesses do). The problem is lack of work due to lack of spending by the consumers who have money: the rich. When there is enough work to do (and when people have the skills to do them, 68% of high school graduates enter college altho not all of them graduate) then people will naturally earn a reasonable wage through suppy and demand.

The solution is to make money harder for the rich to get. (trying a different link, but same idea)

[-] 1 points by Johnw (44) 6 years ago

Here is an intelligent solution to forming a new third party. http://thenewthirdparty.blogspot.com

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 6 years ago

I would support this...

At this point, I am willing to support anyone with good, real change ideas.

[-] 0 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

There are a lot of good people with good ideas out there - buy local campaign, urban garden initiatives, know your farmer - know your food, cooperatives, etc... I've been here on this forum less than a day and I can see all the bickering that goes on here and it's already starting to drive me away. I was really hoping to find some serious discussions here as most of my research has only led me to articles, websites, videos, etc... of the real change that is going on but not any people actually engaging in discussions to share ideas. Maybe they're smarter than us and spend their time actually doing instead of talking -)

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 6 years ago

You are about 6 months late to the party here, my friend. It has turned into a bit of a mess.

Try the search bar at the top right. You can type in topics, and the relevant posts will come up. Not a bad way to find some decent threads.

You are right on, with the doing vs typing thing. Lots of wasted time.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 6 years ago

My understanding is that the term "capital" does not refer to manufactured consumable goods, but rather to manufactured "productive" resources. These would include items like machine tools for producing other machines, agricultural machinery for producing food, etc.

America has indeed broken down in its economic system of capital goods. We need to rebuild our manufacturing sector, family farms, and our grade C and D infrastructure.

[-] 1 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

Agreed. Capital also includes resources provided by Nature which we don't manufacture. Capital is basically anything (other than sentient beings of course) that is used in the production of something else.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 6 years ago

That sounds reasonable, but in the case of our current economic crisis, I think it is important to emphasize that our lack of "capital" in terms of machinery is a big part of the break down of our society. We need factories with machines to provide jobs for people and to reduce our trade deficit.

Also, with progress, machines will increasingly become capable of synthesizing resources we would normally get from nature. Such as fuel and metals.

[-] 1 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

Agreed. More factories with machines owned entirely by the people that work there -)

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 6 years ago

That sounds good, but I don't think it means that capitalists have to be excluded completely from the system, they just have to play by rules that are based on principles supported by the people.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 6 years ago

interesting ideas

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

Probably not with you. You need to make some sensible comments on other people's threads for a while. Right now everybody is convinced that you are a troll with a brand new alias. We have seen dozens here. They have poisoned the well. You might also tell us where you have been the last six months?

That is how you get involved in an intelligent discussion here. You pay a few dues and then you start threads. Good luck.

[-] 1 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

I couldn't find too many sensible threads to respond to.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

You are a keen observer. But I might suggest looking for sensible commentors (real word?) on threads whose starts that may not be, and jumping in to dialog with them. Then look for threads that they start. Occasionally I find one where the pot stirrers have tired and left and do the above. Trolls tend to burn out and go start trouble somewhere else. Hope this helps.

[-] 1 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

Well since I'm new here can you tell me how I go about finding those "sensible" commentors without reading through pages of dribble?

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

Sorry, it's placer mining it its best. It's a part of the dues, I guess. Scan for posters with big numbers 1000). They have already made the investment. I think it's drivel?

[-] 1 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

Got it! I just kudoed you on another post -)

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 6 years ago

I second that motion. Edible Planet needs to learn how to do this. His ideas are well, radical! He's ridding government of allot of things. I guess he felt he was on a roll. I see it as brainstorming session where no ideal is considered bad just get them all down and see what sticks.

In this case, Nada. Round two, three, four, ... ???

The Puzzler

(at least we know this name: Edible Planet. (Whatever meaning that's suppose to transport to us....)

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

Thanks for the support. I think those ground rules should have been posted. They aren't unreasonable. In a democracy everyone's rights are equal. But when you start yelling in someone's ear, there needs to be some rules. Those rules should be appropriate to the technology you are yelling in. Room for some work here, I think. Frankly, I think making use of the "profile" would help.

Some form of vetting, like one alias per DNS address? Something like that maybe. If this were my site I would try something.

[-] 2 points by JadedGem (895) 6 years ago

I ended up on a troll list once myself! Normal people can sometimes do that if they are new to all these discussions. I know the trolls are annoying but they usually have the same spiel. Like they go to meetings and get marching orders or something. I've even noticed them adopting little themes, most recently "Everyone is a greedy little squirrel trying to get every last nut he can, everyone does it, its coping mechanism not psychopathy or unbridled despicable greed ...." The idea itself is interesting in concept and the reasons it would be deemed unacceptable are long and lengthy.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

They are annoying and disrupting but maybe most importantly, they just waste time and keep us from making the connection and organizing our strategies.

You are right about the themes. On another thread I posted that any dialog with them is counterproductive. They can't change or be changed, so I shouldn't waste any time with them. I gave Edible Planet the benefit of the doubt and gave him a serious answer to help him play his cards in the right order, if he is sincere.

I think the vetting thing is a serious issue. Having a completely open forum is a starting place but moving qualified players out of it to a trusted, more productive area is essential if you are going to grow an effective movement.

By the way, he is either taking a very long nap or our leg has been severely pulled.

[-] 1 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

So do you determine what order my cards are played? I do agree with the creation of a more productive area. Not napping had to get some work done.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

Nope. it was a well intended suggestion, you are a free person. I admire work, from afar.

[-] 1 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

I appreciate the suggestion then -)

[-] 1 points by JadedGem (895) 6 years ago

I got called a racist! (Kinda funny for someone who has to put up with being called Zebra because I find Wigger totally unacceptable) I provoked it in search of someone who would discuss a race sensitive topic or two in an honest manner. They replied to another comment in an eloquent way even though they wanted me to vote for the lesser of two evils. I'm guessing they aren't actually a troll. I encouraged the eloquent reply and identified my racial status of seriously mixed up after the rude comment. Hopefully they won't laps into name calling in the future given their verbal skills.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

I admit to a warped sense of humor, and I answered a gun promoter who said that U.S. Parks were safer with guns in them. I said they were safer before there were people in them and "you know what they do." It was a play on the old NRA "Guns don't kill people, people do." So, I get jumped for stereotyping "they" and generalizing.

I don't think he was a troll but definitely had the NRA talking points close at hand.

[-] 1 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

The people who feel the need to keep guns are just afraid of what they see happening to the same system that Occupiers are working to change. A good talent to foster is stepping in the shoes of another to try and view life from their perspective -)

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 6 years ago

Walk a mile in somebody else's moccasins. I see you are doing it.


[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 6 years ago

Sounds pretty suspect to me.
Who in the hell is gonna be running this thing, monitoring these banks, making sure that these rules are being followed, and where does the average person fit in?

Follow the rules of the Constitution and believe me, you can't go wrong.

You mention too many individual entities (i.e. businesses, which eventually turn into corporate) with all hands dippin in this new deal you propose.

I don't trust anything that piggy backs off the banks or capital markets since that is what got this country all screwed up in the first place.

How can you create spanking brand new bread, out of old molded loaves???

[-] 3 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 6 years ago

'Follow the rules of the Constitution and believe me, you can't go wrong.'

As with any text, especially one written in the 18th century, it is subject to a great deal of interpretation... and yes that leads to problems. The 'founding fathers' did not face the same issues we face today.

[-] 1 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

Exactly. I must also mention that the foundation of this country was built on violence against the native population who placed a much higher value on the natural world (life) than the founders did. Foundational principles have far reaching effects.

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 6 years ago

The founding fathers? Do you really know who wrote that document, how it came about and what its true meaning is? The founding fathers? What in the hell did they find when they got here is the real question. The truth has yet to be told, and most will never believe it or want to hear it! Now, once again....read the Constitution first, then see where this country went wrong..Read it again....and see where this country is headed.

Don't believe me......Uh.h.h.h...just look around.

[-] 3 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 6 years ago

Thats your response... re-read the Constitution for the N'th time again?

The Colonies were an agrarian society.... we are not

Mercantilism was the economic system they operated in. Adam Smith wrote 'The Wealth of Nations' in 1776, capitalism was an underground theory at the time of the Revolution..... we are no longer a mercantile economy, nor capitalistic according to Smith.

Slavery was common, women couldn't vote, equal rights were only for white men during the 18th century..... our social interactions are extremely different than our forefathers of the American Revolution

The fledgling US was thirteen small colonies where England, France, and Spain were world powers..... today we are a superpower with reach that goes round the world.

Our world today has nothing in common with the colonies of 1776 or 1787 when the US Constitution was adopted, and your answer is 'Follow the rules of the Constitution and believe me, you can't go wrong', with no other explanation but riddles, and allusions to unbelievable stories about what was found here....

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 6 years ago

The wealth of this nation began with slavery, and it will end with slavery (of its own people) as will other Euro-pean created cultures. End one civilization and begin another, pure and simple, no other way to disguise it or rename it or claim it. Get your heads out of the sand Ostriches...... Nothing that magical or great about how this country got started... Sure, 2000 years of wonder, but at what cost? So why do you think it won't bleed to death now?

[-] 0 points by Reneye (118) 6 years ago

I want to hear it! When will we hear it?

[-] 1 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

There are foundational concepts that impel organizational structures to move in various directions. Cooperatives (credit unions) don't hold the same foundational concept as banks do.

I agree with following the spirit of the Declaration of Independence.

Small local financial institutions are easy to "oversight" by the local populace.

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 6 years ago

It is and are, those very same concepts that have created the great financial mess and collapse as we know it. No matter how you disguise or rename greed, it still is there, no matter how you disguise or rename oppression, it still is there. No matter how you disguise capitalism (every man for himself) or rename it, it still is there. In theory, all perceptions of how to fix this mess are great...but alas...this mess was initially started with the global desecration of other cultures and civilizations...guess what....that must be addressed and corrected first! When are people going to get it in their thick skulls that this is it, the end, fini, ka-puts, over and done with, the elevator no longer will go to the penthouse. TIME IS UP MY FRIEND....all must find another network, or at least start praying!!


[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 6 years ago

Where do you stand regarding a gold standard? Removing the central bank that is more responsive than a more politically influenced Treasury Dept to control our fiat currency is a sticky problem... don't ya think? (not saying that the central bank isn't influenced by the banks themselves... thats true as well)

[-] 2 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

I feel that the main attractor for gold is the inherent value it holds as it's ability to manage inflation. The problem I personally see with gold or any commodity is, because it has a market value, it must compete with the market if used as a medium of exchange. There is also the fact that more gold is being mined all the time which also causes changes in it's market value. I feel fiat currency can be better suited to be used as a medium of exchange than a commodity currency as long as the people will accept it as a medium of exchange and as long as it is managed well - printing up only enough to maintain a steady system of exchange based on GDP. The question for me is how do we maintain fiat money creation integrity. I feel one of the main things we need to do is to make sure that the young people are well educated in how the monetary system (not the behemoth we have now) works and it's importance in our daily lives. One idea I've had for oversight is by lottery - choosing ordinary individuals by lottery by state that will frequent the Treasury over the course of 4 years to perform audits with the previous lottery "winners" providing a two week or so auditing educational period for the newcomers.

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 6 years ago

Your ideas sound like some Alice in wonderland illusionary vision that will never materialize. While you all pretend to be in some type of virtual Avengers world of rhetoric, the real world and the financial system is collapsing, brick by brick, layer by layer, euro by euro, dollar by dollar. Why do you continue to act as if this cycle of events have nothing to do with you and that you have the answers? It does and you don't! Furthermore, the gold standard is such that any day it could be declared null and void by those in power...ever think of that? Remember 1929, it is all a cycle of events...what goes around, comes around. Besides, the gold doesn't belong to the USA anyway....it was just a loan, oh excuse me....I meant a confiscation that must be returned!!!

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 6 years ago

Good answer.

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 6 years ago

Hi, geo. What's your opinion on a gold standard? I've heard both pro and con. What I thought was an intriguing idea was using a variety of tangible assets instead of a single one, although theoretically it could be manipulated as well, I guess. And as far as getting rid of the Fed, wouldn't returning that power back to us, at it's absolute worst, at least be the lesser of two evils? By the way, I've seen your comments on other threads and it seems like you have a good grasp of economics and politics.

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 6 years ago

Each monetary system, whether single commodity backed or multiple commodities has its issues, the biggest being that they can be manipulated as you stated. Fiat currency has it's own issues as well, one of the biggest being easily prone to over inflationary policies, if not run correctly.

There is not enough gold to cover the amount of currency we currently have out, and it would be a huge shock to the system to give parity: $2000 per oz of gold. So I'm more leaning to keeping the system we now have but running it more efficiently.

Part of the problem we've had is that the people in the Fed are monetarists or neo-liberals with zero experience and theoretical knowledge on how to efficiently run a fiat based system.

[-] 1 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

Hi Geo - what do you feel is the best way to run the fed efficiently?

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 6 years ago

The easiest and quickest way IMO would be to replace the board of directors, who were trained in the Austrian/Chicago Schools of Economics with MMT'ers. The neo-liberal schools have little experience with fiat monetary systems.

[-] 1 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

By MMT'ers do you mean money marketers? Money is a medium of exchange, a store of value - nothing more. Doesn't treating it as something which it is not distort the true economy.

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 6 years ago

MMT= Modern Monetary Theory or Modern Monetary Realism (MMR)

Here is a good primer:



[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

Afternoon geo......:)

Here's couple more links to MMT.



It won't cure them all, but I believe it would take serious chunk out of the problems that plague us.

[-] 3 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 6 years ago

Good afternoon shooz.....On the same side again are we? :)

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

I think we're on the same side, more often than not..........:)

If we didn't find some points of contention, it would too much like talking to ourselves....................:)

[-] 0 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

Thanks shooz. Wow I feel all fuzzy now.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

That's not because of me.

That's because, inside, you actually are fuzzy.

Mirrors and illusions.

[-] 0 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

Whatever you say buddy.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

I have a feeling I'm not your buddy, buddy.

I also have a feeling you're no friend to OWS.

You came here to disseminate fuzzy mirrors and illusions.

And for some odd reason, to sell illegal viagra.

[-] 0 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

What are you talking about? If you want to know more about me as a human being you can visit our website - EdiblePlanet.org or you can visit our Facebook page facebook.com/EdiblePlanet. Or you can visit diy.edibleplanet.org. Or you can visit our other Facebook page Facebook/Homestead101. Can you give me anyplace to find out about your background because your comments and prejudices already tell me a bunch - no matter how many "points" you have.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

I already did that. It followed through to your viagra sales page.

Or did you discover your mistake and change the link?

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 6 years ago

That makes sense. I've heard good and bad about abolishing the Fed, but an overhaul sounds like the best option out of the three. Do that first, and see how it works out. If it turns out to be a failure, then maybe consider other options. That would be less traumatic to the system anyway, it seems; vastly easier than scrapping it altogether, which would require a worldwide restructure.

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 6 years ago

just my $0.02

[-] -1 points by darrenlobo (204) 6 years ago

Why not go over to a free market in banking & currency? It is regulation that messed everything up in the first place. The boom & bust cycle is caused by the govt's manipulation of money & banking. As long as it's in their hands this will continue.

Austrian Business Cycle Theory: A Brief Explanation http://mises.org/daily/672

[-] 1 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

What does a free market in banking and currency mean to you? What does it look like? Are you sure that the boom & bust cycle is only the result of government manipulation? I'd say financial institution credit default swaps, which actually uses no fiat currency, has been a huge distorter of the housing market. Credit, in a monetary sense, needs to go. Getting loans using real currency is different than credit. Credit is a fiction and a distorter of what is Real and True

I'm not saying that the people in government are innocent - complacency and ignorance in their real duties has allowed many injustices but they are definitely not the hand that initiated the problems.

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 6 years ago

It means no govt regulation, IE completely voluntary interactions.

The distortion of the housing market was the result of the Fed's monetary manipulations. Much of what people say caused the bust are actually its symptoms, greed of the speculators, for example. No, a free market in money & banking, most likely resulting in gold backed currencies, would be much more stable than the 3 ring circus we have now.

[-] 1 points by HolmanRick (2) 6 years ago

How about the fact that thousands of people are being deprived of a living due to their non-compete agreements that keep them out of the industry for 2 years even if they are fired. When can we discuss this?

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 6 years ago

We can discuss this now. Non-competes are the result of too few job opportunities. If companies can get away with them they will. A stronger economy with greater opportunity in which there would be competition for good employees is the best way to get rid of them.


[-] 1 points by engineer4 (352) 6 years ago

As you likely know, Non compete contract and clauses are required to protect the company from an employee using (or selling) proprietary information at another company for competitive advantage. The length of the restriction is generally set depending on the position level you were in at the company. A lot of people that have non compete clauses have been compensated with severance packages, so I don't believe they are deprived. ethical businesses generally frown upon people that offer up inside information to them.

[-] 1 points by HolmanRick (2) 6 years ago

Yes, there are people who are given severance packages but many others are not given severance packages. They're thrown out of their jobs, given next to nothing, and told that they can't work in their industry for 2 years. In addition, everyone is not signing the non-compete and that's discrimination.

[-] 1 points by EdiblePlanet (50) 6 years ago

Cooperatives and Worker's Cooperatives in general have been a good response to corporate hegemony.