I live to serve. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-17 17:47:17 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714337297263431856
Reply addressees: @RemttidAcul @whatifalthist
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714326701247766978
I live to serve. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-17 17:47:17 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714337297263431856
Reply addressees: @RemttidAcul @whatifalthist
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714326701247766978
—“(I don’t want to pay x) Taxes”—
Well then you can leave. The truth is that it is quite costly to produce order, rule of law, property rights, cooperative institutions at every scale, and to suppress human pervasive immorality at every sale while doing so. If you find it more costly to leave, then you are de facto saying that you prefer the current condition to the available alternatives – and of course are not able to create alternatives by yourself.
Now, you could say that many of us are enduring economic challenges today, but that has nothing to do with fiat currency and everything to do with the 20th century and the mistakes and experiments in it, combined especially with the postwar strategy, failure to exit it, and immigration that vastly suppresses wages, combined with offshoring industsry that gutted the lower middle, working, and laboring classes.
Rights obligations and inalienations under the natural law of individual sovereignty in display word and deed are not abitrary but necessary for competitive survival. The operating system for government is that law, a constitution to administer it, and the legislation, and regulation resulting from it.
There is no insurer of those things other than men with weapons, delivering a just and lawful demand, under the natural and common law, for redress of grievances, carrying rope for the noose, or wood for the guillotine, and fuel for the fires. If you are not willing to insure all others as required for the reciprocal exchange of defense (insurance) of those natural, common, rights obligations and alienations, then you have no rights whatsoever than others grant you by doing so.
This is not a philosophical statement. It is simply the science of human behavior in any condition where we are to possess the sovereignty in our demonstrated interests – reciprocal defense of that sovrereignty by force of arms, limiting us and the state to reciprocity in isplay workd and deed and markets for voluntary cooperation, mediated by the court, who suppresses all irreciprocity whether intentional or accidental.
Cheers.
Reply addressees: @Nate7383 @neoCamelist
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-17 17:46:58 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714337217886220289
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714327725773611397
One of the first principles of economics, that is a given in physics, is a full accounting (balance sheet) of causes and consequences. Not a selection bias. If zombie companies are destroying private wealth and others wish to make short term profits by financing their decline, or gambling on their recovery (which is what they do), then that is a private matter. People do so because it’s in their interest to maximize their personal returns as an organization vs the alternatives. Just as you may defer maintenance on yourself, relationships, assets, and home.
However, when rents are extended to the public, and impose a cost on the commons, that’s a public matter.
I am not sure why this is hard to comprehend but it is possible that I’ve been doing this so long that I’m not seeing what you’re intuiting.
My suspicion is that you are accidentally dealing with an ideal or moral idea and not a concrete category – possibly because this is one of the cataegorical deceptions in libertarian thought, just like the categorical deception of ‘society’ in Marx’s work. This mistake is common for most people – because tehy do not realize they are merely justifying a moral presumption – though I havent detected this line of thinking in you before.
It’s a Very Jewish > Christian-Theological > Philosophical-Moral > Rationalistic Justification > but not necessarily empirical > and certainly scientific, and therefore fully accounted.
HIERARCHY OF ASSETS AND RIGHTS: Personal (life, body, actions) > Private (self or familial regulation, usus, fructus, mancipio, abusus) > Semi-Private (private regulation, usus, fructus, mancipio) > Semi-Plublic Commons (self regulating, usus + fructus) > Public Commons (usable, usus) > Public ‘sacred’ Commons (inviolable).
Reply addressees: @William68332190 @neoCamelist
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-17 17:36:33 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714334596081340416
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714329125886845358
Canonical Response (not necessarily so)
The comparison between economic growth under the gold standard and under a fiat money system is a complex issue that doesn’t lend itself to straightforward answers. A multitude of variables, including technology advancements, global trade dynamics, population growth, political stability, and fiscal policies, contribute to economic growth rates, making it challenging to attribute changes to the monetary system alone.
However, some broad observations can be made:
Time Periods: The gold standard was in widespread use during a period that was quite different from today, both technologically and socially. Therefore, comparing growth rates across such different eras can be misleading.
Stability vs. Flexibility: The gold standard is often praised for its stability and its ability to limit government spending, potentially leading to more responsible fiscal policies. However, it lacks the flexibility that a fiat system provides, especially the ability to adjust monetary policy during economic downturns.
Deflation and Inflation: Under the gold standard, deflation was more common, which could slow down economic growth by increasing the real burden of debt and encouraging hoarding of money. Fiat systems allow for more control over inflation rates, which can be adjusted to theoretically promote spending and investment, thereby potentially stimulating growth.
Financial Crises: The gold standard is often criticized for exacerbating financial crises because it restricts the ability of governments to adjust monetary policy.
Global Trade: The gold standard can constrain international trade as nations can run out of gold reserves, which is not an issue in a fiat system.
Empirical Studies: Some empirical studies suggest that growth was lower and recessions were more frequent under the gold standard, but these findings are subject to a variety of interpretations and are not universally accepted.
Reply addressees: @William68332190 @neoCamelist
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-17 16:37:27 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714319723540721664
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714317594142941582
Since I have done this extensively that’s just not true. GAP encourages it. But it’s not necessary.
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-17 16:29:50 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714317807679132120
Reply addressees: @William68332190 @neoCamelist
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714317346830000550
Can you rephrase the question?
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-17 16:24:12 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714316388154712136
Reply addressees: @rjunkapoor
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714288355935142156
Chicken Egg. A gold standard constrains growth particularly in competition with others. FUrther more it provides rent seeking opportunities to currency producers and holders.
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-17 16:20:24 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714315433371680977
Reply addressees: @William68332190 @neoCamelist
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714313488296812689
And that is why growth is limited by commodity money (and gold standards) and why they failed repeatedly in history, and even more so once the industrial revolution kicked in.
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-17 16:19:46 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714315275691073905
Reply addressees: @William68332190 @neoCamelist
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714314771091079188
Yes and those currencies will absorb the shortage without having contributed to production – as rent seeking. Why should anyone, in particular the public, pay you interest instead of the treasury at lower interest?
You have alternative to currency. you have commodities and…
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-17 16:18:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714314965799117016
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714313088202371162
The mechanism is to remove the debt capacity from the govt, and force the GOVT into producing returns.
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-17 16:03:53 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714311275344269691
Reply addressees: @neoCamelist @albin_dave
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1714308805733810567