I found this cheerful piece at Mangan's Miscellany. http://dealbreaker.com/images/thumbs/Hayman%20Letter%20to%20Investors%20Oct%2014%20final%20version.pdf
Wow! Thanks for posting that link. Very informative. Not sure I totally agree with the suggestion that govts be the sole creators of money though. Surely that way lies hyperinflation? Who would trust politicians not to just create more money whenever they needed it? And spend it on things that do not create wealth (as suggested in the video). Especially as politicians will do anything for short term popularity (and votes) at the expense of long term prudence. It would be too easy to increase nurses (say) wages by 10%, create the money to do so, and be very popular. But no new wealth would be created. The same number of patients would be treated. Inflation would result, but probably far enough down the line for the here today gone tomorrow politician not to have to worry about it. It seems to me that the creation of money via debt allows the economy to grow faster than would be the case otherwise. If you can only create new money by creating new value (ie digging ore out of the ground and smelting it, growing something, manufacturing something etc etc) then economic growth will be backbreakingly slow. As it was for centuries. We have all benefited from the increased standard of living that has accrued in the last 100 years or so, mostly on the back of fractional reserve banking. Unfortunately as we are finding out right now, that process can be reversed. Perhaps we will experience a revertion to the mean in economic growth. Perhaps we should go back to competing types of currency, issued by different bodies, and do away with a universal currency? If each issuing body knew that if it over inflated supply people would leave its money and put their wealth in another, then there would be an incentive for long term stability. Much food for thought anyway.
I really enjoyed watching Crash Course as he made it. The part about Fuzzy Numbers is very important. I showed it to a couple of friends when CM released it and their jaws dropped when he explained imputations. "That guy has to be lying," they all said. People find the government's foul's to be so flagrant that they have trouble believing it (which is probably the plan). Imagine that--GDP overstated by 30 percent. Yikes.
Sobers: have yet to watch the course myself, but intend to (watched Grignon's months ago). Interesting point you make about credit. Wonder if we shouldn't distinguish between credit-based production, and credit-based consumption.
Matt: Geez, adding lying to the pot make the soup really inedible. You'll turn me into a hardline gold bug yet.
The Masterson crash course is fantastic. For the ultimate in monetary education, though, I highly recommend "Creature from Jekyll Island" by G. Edward Griffin.
5 comments:
I found this cheerful piece at Mangan's Miscellany.
http://dealbreaker.com/images/thumbs/Hayman%20Letter%20to%20Investors%20Oct%2014%20final%20version.pdf
Wow! Thanks for posting that link. Very informative. Not sure I totally agree with the suggestion that govts be the sole creators of money though. Surely that way lies hyperinflation? Who would trust politicians not to just create more money whenever they needed it? And spend it on things that do not create wealth (as suggested in the video). Especially as politicians will do anything for short term popularity (and votes) at the expense of long term prudence. It would be too easy to increase nurses (say) wages by 10%, create the money to do so, and be very popular. But no new wealth would be created. The same number of patients would be treated. Inflation would result, but probably far enough down the line for the here today gone tomorrow politician not to have to worry about it.
It seems to me that the creation of money via debt allows the economy to grow faster than would be the case otherwise. If you can only create new money by creating new value (ie digging ore out of the ground and smelting it, growing something, manufacturing something etc etc) then economic growth will be backbreakingly slow. As it was for centuries. We have all benefited from the increased standard of living that has accrued in the last 100 years or so, mostly on the back of fractional reserve banking. Unfortunately as we are finding out right now, that process can be reversed. Perhaps we will experience a revertion to the mean in economic growth.
Perhaps we should go back to competing types of currency, issued by different bodies, and do away with a universal currency? If each issuing body knew that if it over inflated supply people would leave its money and put their wealth in another, then there would be an incentive for long term stability.
Much food for thought anyway.
I really enjoyed watching Crash Course as he made it. The part about Fuzzy Numbers is very important. I showed it to a couple of friends when CM released it and their jaws dropped when he explained imputations. "That guy has to be lying," they all said. People find the government's foul's to be so flagrant that they have trouble believing it (which is probably the plan). Imagine that--GDP overstated by 30 percent. Yikes.
DM: thanks, se following post.
Sobers: have yet to watch the course myself, but intend to (watched Grignon's months ago). Interesting point you make about credit. Wonder if we shouldn't distinguish between credit-based production, and credit-based consumption.
Matt: Geez, adding lying to the pot make the soup really inedible. You'll turn me into a hardline gold bug yet.
The Masterson crash course is fantastic. For the ultimate in monetary education, though, I highly recommend "Creature from Jekyll Island" by G. Edward Griffin.
Post a Comment