Trump's Stock Market

Slavery is a system of stratification in which one person owns another, as he or she would own property, and exploits the slave's labor for economic gain.

Do you see people as property of the state to exploit? Is democracy a way to justify this? Does socialistic intentions justify the exploitation of human labor and time?

I hope you don't actually believe AOC would go after banking in any meaningful way? Everything the lady and you advocate for is predicated on a government monetary system that inflates the currency to pay for her vision with no private backing. She literally has to rely on money made out of nothing to push a multi trillion dollar idea. When she and I suspect you say evil bankers I am certain she and you only refer to the evil rich white guys, not the trillions that have flooded the government officials pockets and paid for their failed policies on the backs of generations whose parents are not even born yet.

 

Lol c'mon dude do I really have to lay it out for you? NO, i don't think they pocketed trillions, they use the money to pay for shit like the healthcare system you advocate for. They propped up the banks, oil and such to continue to feed their system of reallocating wealth and issuing debt. Its all built on the backs of the wealthy and upper middle class, they are the ones who fund the government.
Representatives do make millions in back deals and pay offs and get future jobs in businesses they helped give monopoly rights or majority market shares too through government force.

Furthermore manipulation of the interest rate, which is a free market phenomenon, is precisely why we get boom and bust cycles in the first place, all encouraged by the state. Don't for one second think that the bank is not beholden to our elected officials. It would take less than 2 months to put forth enough info to villainize and shut down the whole banking system and return issuance of money to congress. This is not what the progressives or the neocons want. It is a happy marriage between bank and state. It would destroy their (your) agendas and means to force whole generations to work for progressive and statist views. The free markets don't support your philosophies. It is nothing more than modern day slavery through money manipulation and in the future when liberty finally prevails over the state and the new victor can write history, books will say as such. You are on the wrong side of history lol.

 

[QUOTE="Green Wizard, post: 24562693, member: 171903"



Wait, you just said our elected officials are taking bribes to do the bidding of their donors to secure economic dominance in the markets right? Ok, so how are our elected officials beholden to the banks when the folks who actually have influence over the banks are doing all the bribing? Boom bust cycle would happen regardless of interest rate manipulation. There are case studies throughout history that support this. Look up the tulip bust in Denmark. Market Crashes: The Tulip and Bulb Craze



You make an interesting point here, albeit not entirely clear. So 1913 the federal reserve was created. What are you proposing?[/QUOTE]
I am very aware of the tulip boom and bust, glad to hear you have read about it.
Boom and bust cycles do happen in small scale local economies, there were less than 400 people involved in the tulip boom and bust. However for it to happen on a national or global scale it take years of manipulation of free market signals and monetary blunders from state officials.

Austrian-school capital-structure macroeconomics has long provided an explanation for economic boom-to-bust phenomena stemming from excessive credit expansions. The Austrian Business Cycle Theory (ABCT), as initially conceived by Ludwig von Mises, combined Wicksell's (1898) concept of the natural rate of interest with Bohm-Bawerk's ([1884] 1959) stages-of-production theory to create an explanation for unsustainable and self-reversing economic expansions. Mises ([1912] 1953) argued that unsustainable booms resulted from central bank credit expansions that caused the market rate of interest to fall below the natural rate. The artificially lower interest rate incentivized firms to invest too much in early stage production relative to the amount saved by income earners. Ultimately, when it becomes clear that the increased investments are malinvestments (not in harmony with the saving decisions of income earners), the boom turns into a bust that devalues the malinvested capital. See Garrison (2001, 2004) for a detailed discussion of the current standard (sans sequestered capital) rendition of ABCT. See McClure and Thomas (2017) for a reframing of ABCT that brings sequestered capital and sticky consumption into play.

Recently, McClure and Thomas (2016) discovered that the Austrian school's stages-of-production specification of the capital structure fails to account for the fact that the capital that businesses use to create new products is signal-less capital. Those researching and developing the new products keep this capital secret. Bringing this distinction into play provides an explanation of how a boom-to-bust event might arise even in the absence of an excessive expansion of credit by a monetary authority. 1 The key to the argument is that capital used in new-product research and development (R&D) is sequestered by the entrepreneurs employing it. New-product R&D capital is uncoordinated and unconstrained by the market's price and production signals that coordinate and constrain capital used to produce products that are already in the market. With sequestered capital in play the potential for an unsustainable boom arises whenever the interest rate falls below the natural rate.

Here we argue that the planting of the tulip bulbs in the fall of 1636, sequestering them literally out of sight, is crucial to understanding the tulipmania boom and bust. A thorough grasp of the historical and institutional context in which the financial crisis occurred is necessary to understand how sequestered capital applies. If the financial history and institutions surrounding tulipmania were unimportant, the annual planting of ordinary agricultural crops might rationally arouse concerns about the likelihood of unsustainable speculative booms at the planting of every crop. Our explanation for the tulipmania boom and bust depends not only upon the concept of sequestered capital, but also upon the historical context that made it crucial to this case.

 

Which is precisely why Demand Side economics is flawed.

Ordinary people who don't study economics have a hard time understanding what interest rates signify and regulate in a free market.
As the video you posted pointed out, banking was developed as a storage facility that safeguarded other people's money at a set agreed upon price. Bankers soon learned that depositors rarely withdrew all of their money at once, and as a whole the citizens at large never did uniformly (a bank run). This invited fraudulent behavior of SOME bankers and lead to the invention of fractional reserve banking, one in which only a fraction of the deposits were actually stored at any given moment in time. This was seen as a crime until it was made legal by the state and put into law and backed by force and now practiced by 100% of the banks. Interest in our current system is manipulated by state economist to spur growth that is not sustainable or warranted through market forces.

In warehouse banking, and money that is not manipulated by people, the accumulation of savings represents people as a whole being satisfied with their current state of affairs and that they prefer to save their purchasing power for a later time. They are consuming less and freeing up more capital type goods. This leads to a surplus of money at hand and banks lower interest rates to producers who burrow for long term investment of future products.
So what we have is citizens indicating to the markets that they are not consuming more now showed by a increase in savings and banks offer those savings at a lower interest rate which business spend on long term capital investments for future consumption. This is how the free markets connect the wants of millions to production so uniquely and why socialism or any top down planned economy produces surpluses in things people don't want and shortages in things people need and always fails.
When interest rates are set at artificial rates manipulated by man and the fed chairman sets them at bellow the natural rate, production forces of the economy are torn in both directions. Consumers are still consuming now, not saving and signifying to the markets capital goods are not readily available for future investments. Companies should be producing at full capacity now not in the future.
But also at the same time artificial low interest rates are signifying long term investment to investors and producers in future goods and that capital goods that are not available for finishing long term projects are falsely available. Projects started now under artificially low interest rates do not have enough capital goods or demand in the future indicated by the free markets, the voice and the free will of the people. We then have the classic boom bust cycle created by market and money manipulation.

 

interest is the price of money...... think about it before you reply.

Also Im talking supply side as in factors of production not your lame made up trickle down economics lol.
Supply side is economics that focuses on the limited known resources and knowledge that is used to create surpluses out of shortages, create wealth, prosperity and determine the availability of future goods. Supply side deals with knowns and measurable factors.
Demand is unlimited and not measurable. It is important for sure in allocating resources but not as a means to increase wealth and living standards. To spend is not how we create. We save and expand the means of production, the supply of limited goods.

 

lol and you of all people all of a sudden follow the bible? Against usury are we??? lmao
You are confusing interest with inflation.
Interest is the price of money now vs later. Interest is the cost of borrowing. Interest has been around long before banking was established. When you lend money to someone do you not want a return? Why would you risk your hard earned dollar and give it to someone else and perhaps never see it again? For the goodness of your heart? lol.
Banks take money and lend it to people who qualify and are viewed as a low risk due to credit. They also lend for things that have intrinsic value, like property. The money although not theirs is held with the understanding that it is being lent to other people and trust is had in the banks assessment of the lender and it reasoning. Interest is charged by the bank and part of the interest is given to the depositors. This is a free market process and although I do not participate in it by not using banks, for other reasons , interest is not one of them.
Inflation of a fiat currency and fractional reserve banking on the other hand are not part of the free markets and are only gained through the use or threat of violence. On top of that it is fraud and theft. Inflation is the hidden tax, interest is a payment for deferment.

 

one set by politicians and not the market. Its the price of money dude, how are prices set? How are the cost of your shoes determined, your computer?

 

the markets set prices, interest is the price of money
its really not\ that hard

 

That would be determined by how much the public is saving and the available resources signified by uninflated money. I already answered this

 

the market would set a price, say 10%. Only so many would borrow and people would continue to save. As money accumulated banks being in the business of not only storing but lending would drop the price (interest) of borrowing money to say 7%. If money still accumulated in savings and loans stayed stagnant interest, the price to borrow would yet again drop until a equilibrium was reached and prices would be set at a "market price"....... for fucks sake lol

 

lol you are awesome my man! I assure you the creators of the video advocate for sound money and wearhouse banking.... they adamantly appose your flavor of politicking my friend.

sidenote
Did you here Marx grave site marker got vandalized again?
thoughts?