What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
He sings, he strums, and he works at Best Buy. view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - Musician and Best Buy employee, Keith Parsons, rocks his Best Buy holiday campaign audition.
316 Comments
- inactive, on 12/11/2008, -33/+134Buy some gold/silver, you won't be sorry.
- kemp34, on 12/11/2008, -11/+107Amazing that someone would openly call for such wanton theft of the people's wealth.
- w1010, on 12/12/2008, -3/+94Inflation is an invisible tax. This author's proposal is horrible for savers like me.
Also saving is not hoarding it is financially prudent behavior. - cuecat, on 12/12/2008, -2/+79"It can be done on a country-by-country basis, but a coordinated devaluation would work best."
Does the author know what devaluation means?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devaluation
--Devaluation is a reduction in the value of a currency with respect to other monetary units.
How does the world coordinate a currency devaluation with respect to the world? - Kishoba, on 12/12/2008, -0/+68So overnight - this idiot wants to devalue everyone's savings and hard earned money by 30 percent? Once again, making the the honest tax paying citizen who has been saving for his future and providing for their own means the victim of those who actually created the problem in the first place.
- tgc1, on 12/12/2008, -6/+67Author is a moron.
- NSResponder, on 12/12/2008, -1/+55"The people who will suffer most from this plan are those who are hoarding cash"
So, it penalizes those who are doing the right thing, saving money and waiting until they can afford what they want to buy, instead of going into debt.
***** YOU.
-jcr - Sogui, on 12/12/2008, -9/+59That's what they say during every recession, people end up buying these metals on their highs and get stuck with them when they drop 50% during the following boom.
Small company stocks return like 16% on average per year, if you invested in gold in 1980 you'd be keeping up with inflation if you had held it until now.
So yes, you will be sorry, it's like the reverse credo on Digg it seems these armchair investors think it's wise to "buy high, sell low" - RogerStrong, on 12/12/2008, -3/+51This idea doesn't work when you actually think about it.
First, any NAU or Amero would do NOTHING to solve the US "crisis".
The US economy and population is so much larger than Canada's and Mexico's that any common currency would merely be the US dollar renamed.
It would inherit the same American financial crisis, the same super-massive, ever-growing US national debt, the same US trade imbalance, the same massive offshoring of manufacturing to China and the same war.
The US *already* has free trade with Canada and Mexico. Whatever economic benefits are to be had - we've already got.
Second, there's no reason for Canada to join at the best of times. Why would it join now?
Canada didn't have the institutionalized mortgage fraud turned institutionalized investment fraud as in the States. Canada's banks were just rated the soundest in the world.
While the US has been bankrupting itself by piling record deficit after record deficit on its national debt, Canada has had budget surplus after budget surplus, and has been paying down its debt.
Canada doesn't have the near-free-trade with China that's been sucking jobs out of the US. And it didn't go into Iraq.
It's not going to tie itself to a sinking ship. Canada has been doing the OPPOSITE - distancing itself from the US economy by signing free trade agreements with OTHER countries - four in Europe and two in South America this year alone. And now its negotiating a "deep economic integration" with the EU that goes well beyond mere free trade. - paradigmxx, on 12/12/2008, -8/+53Wow. This settles it.
Digg is comprised of some of the finest economic professors around.
/s - PuterPrsn, on 12/11/2008, -8/+53This would be a colossal error, reminiscent of the Carter years.
- RogerStrong, on 12/11/2008, -23/+67It's only the conspiracy theorists talking about the "Amero" and "North American Union".
They've yet to find a single person in power in the US or Canada who's interested in either idea.
They've yet to find a credible reason why Canada would join such a union at the best of times, let alone with the US economy being run into the ground.
With any Amero inheriting the US's trade imbalance, financial crisis, super-massive national debt and war, the conspiracy theorists have yet to come up with away that it would change ANYTHING, or even make their illuminatti rich. - Richandler, on 12/12/2008, -2/+43Wait did Forbes magazine essentially propose hyper inflation? You don't just devalue something unless you print more of it or people stop using it. Unfortunately both of those things are going to happen. The people who will be hurt the most will be the retired or retiring and any wage earner since it's basically a universal pay cut.
- RogerStrong, on 12/12/2008, -8/+47"Powerful indviduals" can make any secret plans they want. It's a free country. Other individuals with equal power and stature want the opposite: protectionism and isolationism. In fact the latter crowd seem to be winning at the moment in the US.
But for any NAU or Amero to come into effect, it would have to be voted on and approved by a two-thirds majority of the US senate, AND the Canadian parliament and senate, AND the Mexican federal chambers and senate.
That's well over a thousand politicians in opposing parties from all over the political spectrum in three different countries.
More than half of them would have to not only want it, but be willing to commit political suicide by voting for it.
For it to be done in secret, ALL of them - even those who OPPOSE it - and their staffers - would have to agree to keep it a secret. Again, committing political suicide in doing so.
And that's without anyone being able to come up with a decent reason for either idea.
Without being ratified by all three countries, any such agreement won't be honored by any of them.
This is why "They're Planning It In Secret!!!" is such a BS arguement. - inactive, on 12/11/2008, -9/+45Just how far can we go before we begin to look like Zimbabwe? How do you distinguish between individuals who have been able to actually save money as opposed to banks that ate not in the red? Or do you care?
- inactive, on 12/11/2008, -12/+47Yep, all that talk of the Amero that surfaced after some guy in Colorado made one in his garage and circulated it on the internet. Oh the travesty. On another note, god forbid that we actually do get something Amero-like. I'd hate to see our currency unit turn into something as horrible and valueless as the Euro. Speaking of which, just look at what happened to all the sovereignty of the European countries after the establishment of the European Union. Europe is lucky to still house industrialized states after all the destruction the EU has brought upon them.
/sarcasm
and an added /facepalm for perpetuating a tired interwebs conspiracy. - ObamaYouth, on 12/12/2008, -3/+34We would be very lucky if dollar only devalues by 30% in the next five years.
- tetroidBurke, on 12/12/2008, -3/+29I feel sorry for you, seriously. This country has made the decision to sacrifice those who saved for those who over-consumed. Failure is rewarded; success is punished. The road to false prosperity will be paved with the bodies of sacrificial lambs like you.
But hey, they'll just say it's for the greater good. - ninjaturtles1, on 12/12/2008, -1/+27That's the biggest load of steaming horse ***** I have ever read!
- paulotto2007, on 12/12/2008, -5/+30Devaluation ended the Great Depression in the U.S. - in what year did the author write - 1933? WTF? Another question, if devaluation is such a good strategy for raising asset prices... then why don't the central banks just do a round of devaluation every five or ten years? This whole fiat fiasco smells like teen spirit.
- Truedirt, on 12/11/2008, -11/+35You mean make it official? The dollar has been loosing ground to foreign currencies in a while now.
- clintmaher, on 04/21/2009, -46/+70It's coming and they are just getting us ready for it. Talk of the Amero currency has been around for a little while now, together with the forming of the North American Union. Will you be changing your US$ for a foreign currency while this happens?
- Phernoree, on 12/12/2008, -2/+25"A $200,000 home with a $230,000 mortgage would become a $286,000 home with the same mortgage. Presto! "
And PRESTO! the cost of living would rise concomitantly with that increase in home prices! Housing prices would remain artificially high, preventing foreclosed homes from being purchased by new buyers.
Let home prices devalue, let the price of goods devalue, but allow the dollar to get stronger. - DangerCollie, on 12/12/2008, -0/+21It sure does punish people for living below their means and saving money. That'll learn 'em to be responsible and do the right thing.
- Trichomonas, on 12/12/2008, -2/+22Bury...accidentally hit 'reply' on the wrong comment.
- Protector, on 12/12/2008, -4/+22Yep. Just conspiracy theorists.
U.S. Council of the Mexico-U.S. Business Committee, Council of the Americas, A Compact for North American Competitiveness,April 2005; Grubel, Herbert G., The Fraser Institute, The Case for the Amero: The Economics and Politics of a North American Monetary Union, September 1999 - inactive, on 12/12/2008, -4/+22Who's marshal??
Ohh that's right, you're retarded...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law - samard2002, on 12/12/2008, -1/+18Amen. ***** YOU.
Hoarding cash? You mean saving?
Saying "hoarding cash" is the same double-speak as saying "devalue the dollar". If you devalue the dollar by 30%, then it more dollars to buy the same items. Why not just make a plan calling for 30% inflation? Because ***** who use phrases like "hoarding cash" might understand the implications then. - AaronCo, on 12/12/2008, -0/+17Deflation is the market's way of correcting things when they're generally overpriced. And this idiot wants to re-overprice them? What a disaster.
People need to stop screwing w/ the markets. Let them sort out everything on their own. - fieldmill, on 12/12/2008, -0/+16The author seems to be mistaking devaluation with inflation.
- foofightrs777, on 12/12/2008, -1/+17Hoarding cash? As in, saving? Investing?
- Mujokan, on 12/12/2008, -2/+17If you bought it earlier this year you would be a little sorry. A lot got dumped when people had to make margin calls.
http://goldmoney.com/en/charts/0usd12.png - Rocketbird, on 12/12/2008, -0/+15I was also confused by this. He uses the term devalue, but he speaks of a stronger dollar coming from it? As someone posted up higher, devaluation is the weakening of a currency in relation to other currencies. How would making the dollar even weaker compared to other countries raise the true value of our assets?? And isn't it pointless if everyone gets it? I donno man, I'm confused by all this.
- Trichomonas, on 12/12/2008, -4/+19Seriously...all these people on Digg (TheDataWhore) giving out random advice probably never stepped into an economics class.
I specialized in molecular biology but I still remember enough from my Eco101 class to spot BS when it turns up. - 120decibel, on 12/12/2008, -6/+21Could somebody please shoot the guy, he has no clue about what he is talking! Today currencies are bound to much more then just gold, for example the dollar - euro exchange rates are strongly dependent on the oil price. With a devaluation or an inflation the dollar would free fall and major oil producing countries would switch to euro... welcome to 40 Dollars a gallon!
Due to the inflation not only your loan will get worth less but your savings and your paycheck as well!
So since your wadges will be the last thing to increase but everything else will get much more expensive instantly!
Welcome to some tough times! - RogerStrong, on 12/11/2008, -9/+23>> Just how far can we go before
>> we begin to look like Zimbabwe?
That would probably take a nuclear war.
Unlike Zimbabwe, the US has lots of manufacturing capability. (And its gone UP, not down in recent years. But more automation meant less jobs.)
Unlike Zimbabwe, the US has lots of infrastructure.
Unlike Zimbabwe, the US has lots of people who know how to take care of that infrastructure.
Unlike Zimbabwe, the US has a huge, massive amount of natural resources. And the equipment and infrastructure already in place to take advantage of it.
Unlike Zimbabwe, the US has an ongoing war and spends as much on its military as the rest of the planet combined. That's bad, but telling: pulling out of Iraq and trimming the fat just a little bit could make a huge difference in the budget.
Unlike Zimbabwe, the US is a democracy (OK, a republic) with plenty of experts and experience on how to recover from a recession.
Unlike Zimbabwe, more people are worried about how they can afford their second car, let alone their first. - MFoody, on 12/12/2008, -3/+17Does it bother any of the other commentators that they clearly have no idea what their talking about. I work in economic policy. The problems are crazily complex. I know enough to shut up about the 90% of stuff that I don't understand. But all this conspiratorial nonsense is crazy.People are crying that increasing the money supply by fiat in a recession would lower wages. That's true. But it's sort of a bug not a feature.There are going to be lots of lay offs. The reason is that companies can't afford as many workers. Of course they could negotiate a pay cut but that's proven for psychological reasons very difficult to do. Inflation would function as an unnegotiated pay cut. In a vacuum this would be bad, but you could think of it instead as taking 10% pay cut in exchange for losing a ten percent chance of getting laid off. That makes it seem more palatable. Now of course there is a lot wrong with what I wrote. Because it's a gross simplification. Because ***** is complicated and hard. But holy *****. Know this. No one on this site knows anything. A little education is a dangerous thing. These comments are like getting an email from your mom with an attachment that says viruswarning.ppt.exe warning you about some computer virus.
- Godwhacker, on 12/12/2008, -0/+14WRONG! The people it will hurt the most are those living on fixed income; the poor, the retired, the disabled. Those with hordes of money don't give a f--k! They've got plenty to go around.
- inactive, on 12/12/2008, -8/+22This guy probably has lots of gold and is losing a lot on it, so he's trying to drive up the demand.
- Stormwern, on 12/12/2008, -3/+17Lol, who would want to merge with the US now? Not sure even mexico would do it.
- johndi, on 12/12/2008, -0/+13That's what happens when the government keeps printing money like it's free.
- herojon, on 12/12/2008, -1/+14Ludwig Von Mises is rolling over in his grave. Do yourselves a favor Forbes. Read this book. http://mises.org/books/Theory_Money_Credit/Content ...
- wefarrell, on 12/12/2008, -3/+15I for one welcome our Mexican/Canadian overlords.
- theone3, on 12/12/2008, -5/+17Goffy - it takes a big ego to assume the rest of the world is as stupid as you seem to think it is.
- tomski, on 12/12/2008, -1/+13Bollocks. The Dollar was already at 1.6 for 1 Euro this year. See where we are? And how to devalue? We have floating exchange rates today. Silly idea, really!
- Angostura, on 12/12/2008, -4/+16Goffy, you had me reading right up until this point:
"In fact, most so called "conspiracy's" are actually true:"
We're all out to get you mate. - herojon, on 12/12/2008, -2/+14You do know Zimbabwe used to be the wealthiest country in Africa don't you?
- spuddly, on 12/12/2008, -2/+14Good old digg. Even if your comments don't make any sense you can still get dugg just for being hot.
- arkwald, on 12/12/2008, -3/+15This is still all pie in the sky *****. The real white elephant in the room is wages in comparison to costs of living. From the wage earners perspective they need to make enough money to cover basic living expenses and with that might be left over would go into discressionary spending or savings. Now in the past when the cost of living was only a a minor fraction of averages wages you had people with a lot of discressionary money left over. Practically the whole damn service economy we traded our industrial base from was spawned from that. $100 football tickets, $300 ipods, $37 widgets... the whole damn thing exists because we had money left over after buying our mortgage/rent, paying our taxes and buying our food.
So what happens when you start ***** around with the necessity level items? Spike mortgages because you found a slick new way to sell people an overpriced turd. Double food costs due to oil/ethanol in the tank? What the totally short-sighted idiot class forgot to take into account was that no one is going to go hungry so they can listen to an ipod. No lie my neighbor bought his house in 2001 for 91k but he has to sell it due to his work relocating. So what did the realtor tell him he could sell his house for in 2008? 190k. That more then double the price in 7 years. The funny thing is the Philadelphia area market which I am in wasen't even the most loopy. So across the country you have situations just like this were the cost of living he far outstripped any sort of pay increase. So of course that whole discressionary economy we built up is now starving to death since. No one can buy widgets at any price when almost everything they make is being eaten up by historically higher necessity prices.
If the business world had an avatar it would be one with a multiple personality disorder. With globalization we have seen the work force for a given job literally expand to all possible solutions. You can as a employer finally, what MBAs are told, mitigate that huge albatross around your bottom line, payroll. You can get the same 'work' done for a fraction of the costs if you can re-invent a given job so that it can be offshored. However in a macroeconomic sense it is literally poisonous to an economy. Traditionally local wage earners spend their money within a given economy and recycle that value back into the economy. In the offshoring model what was once recycled ends up being bled out of the local economy, it instead ends up getting diluted into the total economy. Now keep that basic model in hand because I believe it explains everything.
Globalization historically is the greatest expansion of western civilization ever. It is literally imposing our frame work over a giant and dissimilar group of people economically. In an ideal world all we would need to do is organize the people of the world to be able to fulfill their necessities of life by the application of labor and you would eliminate the most horrible practices of mankind. I would trade warfare, rampant poverty, famine and plague level diseases for simple theft, mostly innocuous drug usage and the occasional psychopath any day. However this is far from an ideal world and why that dream of the global village will never happen in a meaningful way, scarcity. There is simply too many people trying to pull down too many resources to let that happen. To adequately feed the population level we have in a sustainable manner (hint: intensive agriculture is going to break down in the next several decades) we need multiple Earths worth of farmland. Not to mention all the rare Earth metals we use everyday. Combined with the losses due to imperfect recycling we have an ever diminishing resource base to support an ever expanding population. So ultimately the big social benefit to globalization as it is presented was a bold faced lie. Everyone since Eisnenhower in politics and business has effectively sold us out to other interests.
Who are these other interests and who really benefits from globalization? The wealthy, really. I mean what globalization really comes down to is the divorcing of the wealth producing base of the wealthy from any given nation or even given culture. It isn't about stealing your freedom or introducing the Amero (seriously why recreate something your able to manipulate so well anyway?). This is all about the wealthy being able to make and insulate themselves from whatever is socially fancy in a given culture. The only alternative to such a conspiracy theory was that, as a group, everyone in their rush to cut costs forgot that those costs were literally the lifeblood of the economy they just pissed out the window. In concert with hoisting the costs of living way above inflation. It could happen by coinscidence but that should highlight just how much lack of direction our civilization actually has.
What point I am trying to make here is that the bailouts are a sad, sad joke. They will fix nothing, as nothing will go back to being the same. Devaluing the currency is right up there with it. As long the market insists that wages should only cover the necessities of life and nothing more expect an economy that will produce nothing more. - ATLien74, on 12/12/2008, -2/+13How about we cut the problem off at the source.... END THE FED!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 329 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 