What is Digg?616 Comments
- tjClassic82, on 05/08/2008, -23/+136It amazes me how many people don't realize the Fed is not an actual government body. The dollar is backed by nada.
- AlwaysAwake, on 05/08/2008, -39/+116Why The Fed ( The Federal Reserve System of Banks ) must be abolihed NOW. They control our worthless paper currency, and our lives. They literally own The US Government.
- madfrogurt, on 05/08/2008, -40/+110Dollars are backed by the same force that everything is backed by: supply and demand. Just how gold really shouldn't be worth what it's worth (it's just a shiny metal a neat ability to avoid oxidation), dollars can be exchanged for goods and services even though you can't go to a bank and ask for something physical. And as long as we all agree to use dollars instead of chickens or gold as an exchange, then the system works.
But by all means please assume we're on the precipice of doom as a country just because we don't have a stockpile of shiny metal somewhere. Shiny, shiny metal. - duggtodeath, on 05/08/2008, -19/+87The dollar is backed by unicorn farts.
- j0ew00ds, on 05/08/2008, -8/+71dugg for making the front page without mentioning Hillary Clinton.
- crushtheenemy, on 05/08/2008, -21/+65this is one exact reason why i voted/will be voting again for Ron Paul
- jbur816, on 05/08/2008, -8/+52People don't even know what the dollar being backed by gold means. People in this country have absolutely no education in this subject matter. And there is a reason for that.
- Heysal, on 05/08/2008, -23/+66This is not true - the dollar is backed by something very solid - US, the slaves - corporate human inventory.
- imightbewrong, on 05/08/2008, -8/+44Why people should be forced to take more econ classes so they have a ***** clue what they are talking about
- homah, on 05/08/2008, -14/+49The difference is that you can't simply create more gold with the flip of a switch.
- Slitchy, on 05/08/2008, -18/+50It amazes me how many people can talk on this subject without having a graduate level constitutional law class or even an college economics class....
- Quick2822, on 05/08/2008, -12/+44Sadly if any candidate were to talk about the Federal Reserve, our fiat money system, they would be ignored and mocked much like Ron Paul was.
I don't want to claim a media/government conspiracy, but it is obvious that this type of talk gets you no where in the political world, no matter how true it is. - wishninja, on 05/08/2008, -19/+4958 minutes ***** that I think I'll just take Ron Paul's at his word.
- TsuruchiBrian, on 05/08/2008, -4/+29The problem is not gold backing. We have clearly demonstrated we can more or less manage a fiat money system. The problem is that the Federal Reserve is a private entity. We are paying the Fed to lend us our own money. We are giving away money that belongs to the people to privately owned banks. Our government does not work for the people anymore, it's new employer is the wealthy elite. I wouldn't have a problem with the Fed if it's profits were used to maybe lower taxes or pay for government programs (instead of taxes). Instead it is just being given to financial institutions.
If the printing of money was controlled by the government, then we could hold the government accountable when they abuse the system. The American people could have a direct effect on the stability of their economy by electing people who manage the the money supply responsibly. As it stands we have a group of people in control of the money supply that care primarily about their own profit and are accountable to no one. - inactive, on 05/08/2008, -2/+26So, the value of gold is completely arbitrary as well. Much like oil, the value of gold swings wildly, based on...nothing most of the time. Actually, it is a lot like oil.
- bullhead2007, on 05/08/2008, -5/+28The only stuff people seem to give a ***** about is their favorite sitcom and celeb gossip. Of course the MSM doesn't help.
- Low023, on 05/08/2008, -12/+33The founding fathers tried for a long time to stop centralized banking.
- Marijuana, on 05/08/2008, -1/+22Excerpt from my cousins highschool economics textbook:
" The American banking system is a compromise between supporters and opponents of a central bank. As a symbol of this compromise, the Federal Reserve System is the privately owned, publicaly controlled central bank of the United States."
Privately owned, publically controlled? No wonder nobody has a clue. Just how they want us :] - waluum, on 05/08/2008, -22/+43Is the Obama bury brigade going to make sure this video gets dugg down because it (a) makes sense and (b) Ron Paul supports it?
F*ck electability, my vote sides with the strongest principle and integrity to the end! You have my vote Ron Paul! - orxor, on 05/08/2008, -0/+20 "All the perplexities, confusion and distresses in America arise not from defects in the constitution or confederation, nor from want of honor or virtue, as much from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit, and circulation." -John Adams
- CobaltBlue, on 05/08/2008, -5/+25We need to follow the shining examples of countries who don't have a fiat currency. Which ones were they again?
- imightbewrong, on 05/08/2008, -15/+35so apparently digg, just like Hillary, doesn't care about what "elite economists" think
- ultimateMJ, on 05/08/2008, -13/+32The critics of the federal reserve and the fiat economy never mention why we went off the gold standard. Uncontrollable inflation and price fluctuation isn't better than our current system. Unfortunately gold simply can't keep up with our economy anymore.
- Chandon, on 05/08/2008, -3/+20As usual, the US comes up with the worst possible compromise between a market solution and a socialist solution. A competitive market would self-regulate. A socialist solution would be regulated by democracy. But the US instead gives monopoly power to a single private entity and then then appoints a committee to "regulate" it - which the private entity immediately captures.
The best example of this is Telecoms and the FCC, but banking sounds pretty close too. In some other areas (Pharmaceuticals) the whole-area monopoly is replaced by a swarm of little monopolies (Patents). - VitriolAndAngst, on 05/08/2008, -2/+19I'm not a usual Ron Paul fan -- but I like that he is bringing up this issue.
We have to have some sort of controlled monetary system -- but the idea that it is a private corporation like the reserve -- or even that we have private banks are absurd. We WANT loans to sometimes go to people who are a credit risk -- they are citizens trying to start businesses. But the Banks and Reserve get to skim the cream, and we the taxpayer take the risks.
The gold standard idea is un-workable. But it might work with a mix of precious metals or other things of intrinsic value and a daily rate for exchange. I'll argue with others who think this doesn't provide enough liquidity. Right now, the model of absolute, year over year growth is not sustainable. Our system seeks to get more out than put in, and one person can get rich as long as 10 more go into debt. When we hit 9 Billion people -- we are going to have to level off the growth curve. That means no more third world or kids to exploit. The US will probably have a slightly negative growth curve some years -- and our current system of ever more expansion and profit won't work. - Low023, on 05/08/2008, -4/+21A sovereign nation has the right to print it's own money, not borrow from a private bank that charges it interest.
This is the point a lot of you are missing. - smagilly, on 05/08/2008, -10/+26Sorry, but you're wrong. The dollar is backed up by something: our faith in the US legal system. The following sentence is printed on every bill: "This note is legal tender for all debts public and private." This means that if you're selling something and I pay you in US currency, you have a legal obligation to fulfill your part of the bargain. By accepting my money, you are entering into a binding contract with me that is enforceable in a court of law.
Those who argue that money being backed by gold is somehow more secure than the paper money we use today never mention one crucial point: gold-backed dollars are only useful as currency if we all agree that gold itself is currency. But why should gold be so special? What magical powers does it have to make all contracts enforceable? If I take your gold and give no goods in return, who is going to defend your side of the deal? Gold won't -- only governments can.
Arguments against so-called "fiat currency" tend to come down to the evils of inflation. By giving the government (or, in this case, a non-government agency) the power to print money, we are them the power to control the rate of inflation. With gold, inflation is never a problem, right? Wrong. Supply and demand still applies. Only with gold our money is not valued based in part on the (measurable, controllable) influence of a central source, but rather by the whims of geography and geology. The golden rule: whoever has the gold, make the rules.
The Great Depression happened while the US was under the confines of the gold standard (read http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2005/12/the_go ... for a take on that you won't hear from your most-awesome Ron Paul). Simply put, the gold standard offers us no security at all. - inactive, on 05/08/2008, -4/+20:)
- KragTheDigger, on 05/08/2008, -9/+25Thought this was going to be about the Italian carmaker...
- Cerebron, on 05/08/2008, -7/+22"Uncontrollable inflation and price fluctuation" is our current system.
- AustinMandi, on 05/08/2008, -0/+15Which is why it is amendable.
- homah, on 05/08/2008, -0/+14Was the first national bank a private institution that could not be audited? (I'm seriously curious, I don't know)
- ultimateMJ, on 05/08/2008, -12/+25Wow, I didn't realize slavery involved benefits, salaries, vacations and the freedom to quit. The history books made slavery sound a lot worse.
- MrPotato, on 05/08/2008, -5/+18Or, dare I say it, Obama
- andy314159pi, on 05/08/2008, -4/+17Economics is a fairly accessible discipline. The underlying concepts of the various schools of thought are not too terribly complicated and everyone takes part in the economy. Some of that argument applies to understanding and interpreting our constitution.
- BetterOffEd, on 05/08/2008, -4/+16Exactly where in the Constitution is the Federal Reserve System established?
. - randumbusername, on 05/08/2008, -2/+14its amazing that one would or should have to go to educational indoctrination to understand the constituition
- inactive, on 05/08/2008, -4/+16Ummmmm that 3/5ths rule you speak of was written by Abolitionist to prevent the south from being able to win elections.
Look it up dick head. - docliberty, on 05/08/2008, -4/+16While gold standard is not a panacea for all our ills there certainly is valid arguments that it would be better in many regards to our current system. As mentioned by others gold is also not the only commodity that could be used either. The biggest advantage to a commodity system would be to limit inflation I think.
As for needing college economics 101 or a economics PhD to understand various monetary systems.... nope, not needed. Just the willingness to read and learn, preferably from many sources and even those that disagree so that we get better understanding of various views. - Marijuana, on 05/08/2008, -3/+15I don't why, but I lol'd.
- docliberty, on 05/08/2008, -1/+12True, but I also believe those parts were amended in a constitutional fashion.
- jeffiek, on 05/08/2008, -2/+13Then CHANGE IT. It's been done before. Note that the "3/5" routine is gone.
But that would be the honest, law abiding, thing to do. We can't have that now can we? - xutopia, on 05/08/2008, -5/+16That can't be! Unicorns never fart!
Omg... this means the dollar is backed by nothing at all! - Hockey13, on 05/08/2008, -4/+15Your argument fails on this most crucial point: gold vs. fiat is not the issue. The real issue here is whether we should all use a single currency enforced (rather brutally) by the government, or whether we should allow currency competition. People tend to go right to gold because in systems with competing currencies throughout the history of mankind, gold tends to come out on top. Silver also tends to come out on top (hence the French word "argent"), but much less often. There are many other options freely available today that could adequately provide us with a stable and liquid storage of wealth (which is after all the most important function of money).
The key principle that most people fail to recognize is that competition in currency yields the same maximum efficiency as other forms of competition. This means that, for example, if the supply of gold becomes too restricted or too large, people will store their wealth in other forms of currency. Because of the freedom to choose, an equilibrium (at any given point in time) is achieved between multiple currencies and the one that has the most predictable money supply (that is, predictable inflation OR deflation) tends to rise to the top. - Marijuana, on 05/08/2008, -7/+18Monetary oversight? So bailing out private banks is monetary oversight? Give me a break.
- inactive, on 05/08/2008, -0/+10I use my worthless paper currency to snort coke.
- TsuruchiBrian, on 05/08/2008, -4/+14There are plenty of elite economists who think the federal reserve system sucks for different reasons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_Syste ...
The people making those criticisms are elite economists. Even former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan apologized for the role the Federal reserve played in the 1929 stock market crash and subsequent depression. - kemp34, on 05/08/2008, -1/+11It's backed by U.S. taxpayer labor and the guns of the Federal government...
- fromonesource, on 05/08/2008, -3/+13Don't be a sheep. Educate yourself. Ron Paul is smart but he is not god.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 614 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is