Daily reminder the first country to eliminate their central bank and allow free market banking will have the highest living standards on earth within 5 years.
Massive high paying service sector jobs with dominate this country's economy to consume the goods the rest of the world has to produce for it.
The workweek would shrink to 2-3 days a week and people would retire much earlier. This will also lead to more jobs becoming available.
Everyone would have high saving rates. Houses would be inexpensive. Debt would be strongly discouraged economically.
Massive automation would take place as the cost of capital goods would be extremely cheap. This will lead to massive levels of technological innovation.
It would be extremely easy for the average person to start a business due to the cheap cost of capital goods.
Daily reminder REAL capitalism has prices falling all the time instead is going up.
Daily reminder America never had a system of free market banking. There were only patches of American history with free market banking. The panics that happened during the 1800s were due to government intervention in the banking sector. Sweden had the longest most successful period of free banking and that's what made them really rich.
Daily reminder the longest period of (relatively)free banking in America coincided with the INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION where wages rose and prices fell.
Daily reminder central banks are the very reason the economy is a pile of shit and our generation is so fucked.
>Jews I think just the other day Mark Levin called Ben Bernanke the "greatest fed reserve chairman ever."
Camden Martin
the free market doesn't work
Logan Thompson
cool bike but I don't get the joke
Joshua Turner
faggots unironically think the free market doesn't work while at the same time never actually having a true free market
Parker Campbell
Yeah, but people don't care about the central banks because it's not easy to understand.
Cooper Morgan
>phree merkelet
Owen Russell
The free market is also fiction. There is no such thing as a free market, especially not the internet which is a monopoly dominated infrastructure.
Oliver Green
>There is no such thing as a free market, A free market does not exist today, true. But it's possible and there have been periods of freer market than we have today.
James Morales
When? Even in the supposed lassiez-faire age of the late 19th century, we still had massive tariffs on imports.
The "free market" is always for the peons. The rich get socialism.
Ethan Gonzalez
>to eliminate their central bank and allow free market banking will have the highest living standards on earth within 5 years.
Historically proven false. Pic related.
Sage.
Nathan Diaz
>GDP is an accurate measure of economic growth >chile ended their central bank >chile liberalized their economy to any meaningful extent
TOP WEW
Tyler Allen
Don't give up your central bank goy. >gives loan You can't be trusted to control your own money supply. >gives bigger loan Only a racist anti-Semite would do such a thing. >raises interst
Thomas Martinez
Drumpf needs to get his balls out of Jeb Bush's purse, and take down these fucking bankers immediately!
>thinking trump isn't in full support of the federal reserve
without them he would be fucking done politically as the bubble will burst under him
Nathaniel Cruz
I can name probably a dozen infrastructure projects with a return on investment in excess of 20%.
How would the economy go if the federal government didn't have to charge taxes anymore? Or if we had 100% clean energy that cost less than half of coal, within 5 years?
Tyler Thomas
>Or if we had 100% clean energy that cost less than half of coal, within 5 years? The keynesian shitstains in government would get mad that this would cause deflation. They would literally print money to prevent people from getting the benefit of massively lower energy prices.
Lincoln Martin
It does if you have tarriffs and the central bank builds infrastructure projects that drive double digit economic growth.
i.e. the United States in the 1800s, China the last 2 decades, Meiji Restoration in Japan, etc.
Jason Baker
Check out the link I posted on the 1st Bank of the United States. A development bank doesn't print money for private banksters, it funds productive projects for the benefit of the people, and pays for itself with the proceeds it generates.
There's literally no reason to even have taxes, we could generate trillions of dollars in free cashflow from things like space-based solar power, hyperloops, hydrological engineering projects like NAWAPA, etc.
Tyler Lewis
>and the central bank builds infrastructure projects fucking awful
Do you enjoy china's ghost cities?
Mason Turner
Utterly irrelevant to whether or not their rapid industrialization and unprecedented economic growth was a consequence of major infrastructure developments.
Chase Bennett
Yes it is. They'd be doing a lot better without it. Infrastructure is usually a waste of money.
Christian Walker
It actually has a higher return on investment than private industry, and it's not close.
monetary policy is more about stability than economic growth. This is all a pipedream similar to the socialist utopia.0 facts 0 evidence
Grayson Young
>It actually has a higher return on investment than private industry Of course it does because the government is paying for it with inflated money. It doesn't mean it's good for the economy or for the average person.
William Nelson
>0 evidence Except the industrial revolution and gilded age but whatever you brainwashed idiot.
Julian Long
owait u are that retard i argued with couple of days ago who cant produce a single shred of evidence, graph or relevant datapoint for his potion hahahahhaa u still here?
Matthew Scott
This has been proven false, time and time again by countless real world examples. The only monetary policy that creates lasting growth is a development bank that build productive infrastructure.
Your theory doesn't explain even a single example like China's incredible growth the last few decades.
Alexander Flores
>Except the industrial revolution and gilded age but whatever you brainwashed idiot. and how is industrial revolution or the similar to today? owait its not we cant produce economic growth through capital accumulation to any meaningful extent anymore, thats why poorer countries have much higher growth rate >muh gilded ages u mean when europe was destroyed and usa was the only industrialized nation with 0 competitors?
Kayden Wood
>The only monetary policy that creates lasting growth is a development bank that build productive infrastructure. thats not monetary policy
Jacob Anderson
Inflation only occurs when you print money without corresponding growth. And there is nothing about infrastructure investments that requires you to print money.
The government can borrow long term at 2% in the free market without any money-printing.
And you have utterly failed to address how the economy is not better off with no taxes because the government funds itself, and energy inputs at a tiny fraction of current costs.
Mason Rogers
>leaf >"daily reminder.." stop reading at that point
Brody Powell
>doesnt know credit unions already exist.
its the fault of the people. they fall for the advertisements. all they have to do is use a credit union bank. this would kill the central banks.
James Brown
>Inflation only occurs when you print money without corresponding growth price push inflation was debunked in the 70s- see QE for easy refutation
but you are correct on all other accounts, except ancap point
Zachary Peterson
>similar to today? Why does that matter at all?
You honestly think we wouldn't have falling prices and rising living standards if we had free banking now? Why do you think this?
>we cant produce economic growth through capital accumulation Because the government actively suppresses capital accumulation and makes it so the best way to get profit is through the stock market instead of actual capital investment
>u mean when europe was destroyed Oh boy I LOVE this meme. Who gives a shit about europe? This argument basically says that we would be better off if we were the only economy on earth. Fucking delusional. Would we be better off of all of asia didn't have an economy? No.
Nicholas Diaz
It wouldn't. They would still control money creation.
Brandon James
Your claims are too bold to be believable, but I'm with you all the same. Seriously, why do we need the FED?
Nathan Ward
The Fed prints money for private banks. And the SEC and other regulatory bodies make it nearly impossible for anyone but the politically connected to run a bank.
>You honestly think we wouldn't have falling prices and rising living standards if we had free banking now? >Why do you think this? free banking isn't this best idealic system compared to today, it has its flaws and it has its benefits, and even if it would be better it would be very hard to argue that it would provide the stability we have today. All in all even if you had free banking we'd still be in the similar position we are today, since NO economic theory argues that central banking is a major factor of growth outside of stability- its just not as important as you make it out to be. >stock market instead of actual capital investment both can be used as a form of investment and its not liek its hard to get a loan for a company, i really dont see your point. The problem today is not the supply for loans, but the damn for it- nowadays banks are swimming in capital that they'd like to invest but there are just nobody willing to use it >Who gives a shit about europe? what is comparative advantage? USA could specialize in high productive industries and enjoyed stability throughout later part of 20th century while europe didnt
Ethan Jones
The whole reason Chile's GDP grew was because Kek blessed the country for removing communists.
James Cruz
**The problem today is not the supply for credit , but the demand for it
Isaiah Morgan
>The problem today is not the supply for loans, but the damn for it- nowadays banks are swimming in capital that they'd like to invest but there are just nobody willing to use it
That's because the government has stopped infrastructure projects. We should be building a space elevator, hyperloop transportation to go 600mph, space-based solar arrays, and then let the free market fill in when you've cut their input costs 90%.
Evan Hall
>free banking isn't this best idealic system compared to today yes it is
>it would be very hard to argue that it would provide the stability we have today There is no stability today lol.
The gilded age had a system of mostly free banking and it was very stable. The two panics that happened were mostly overblown.
Also sweden had the most successful period of free banking in history and ti was really stable.
>All in all even if you had free banking we'd still be in the similar position we are today No, prices would come down all the time as economic productivity increases. Also much higher savings rates.
>its just not as important as you make it out to be. It's probably the most important thing.
Parker Ward
Gvoernment needs to massively cut spending and taxes so resources can be allocated to long term technology projects like these. Also in a free market with deflationary currency, prices for capital goods become cheaper so it becomes super easy to build something like a space elevator.
Camden Thomas
>yes it is econtalk.org/archives/2008/11/selgin_on_free.html i have nothing more to say to an ideologue, listen to this u might learn something] >We should be building a space elevator, hyperloop transportation to go 600mph, space-based solar arrays
why do you assume government programs would be useful at cutting input costs better than private sector?- all these project seem like down the road investments that won't show results in at least 90% of cases
William Lewis
...
William Wright
>i have nothing more to say to an ideologue, listen to this u might learn something] I'm not an ideologue. I desire logic and evidence before I believe something. Instead of linking me to some long article, explain your position.
Luis Howard
This image is retarded.
Why does everyone pretend capitalism == central banks?
Nathaniel Rivera
its not an article its a podcast about freaking free banking. Your position makes no sense even from free banking position. As is now you have a skewed position of inflation where you think that inflation has an effect of standard of living, which is simply not true if its stable and controlled inflation we have today. I mean i like to argue but you are wrong on the basic assumptions and you are too stubborn to look it up
>Gvoernment needs to massively cut spending and taxes so resources can be allocated to long term technology projects like these.
Or they can build the projects, earn trillions in income from them while pushing GDP growth by reducing input costs, and reduce taxes to 0 because they're so flush with cash.
>listen to an entire podcast because I'm too lazy to form an argument no
>where you think that inflation has an effect of standard of living So increasing prices every year while wages stagnate doesn't negatively effect living standards? So a massive decline in savings rates for the working class doesn't effect living standards? So making housing prices more expensive doesn't effect living standards? come on now
Christian Ward
>Or they can build the projects FUCK THEM They're terrible at everything they do. We need people like Elon Musk to build this shit, not inefficient government bureaucrats. We need the cost of capital goods to come down so it becomes super easy for companies to build things like this.
>and reduce taxes to 0 because they're so flush with cash. taxes should be lower anyway lol
Julian Parker
>but focus on stability? Stability is a meme. Also we have no stability we have stagnation now.
Evan Wilson
>We need people like Elon Musk to build this shit, not inefficient government bureaucrats.
Elon Musk exists entirely because of massive subsidies from NASA. They've designed a bunch of his shit for him.
>We need the cost of capital goods to come down so it becomes super easy for companies to build things like this.
Can't think of a better way to do this than to reduce transportation costs and energy costs, both of which are major inputs into the construction of capital assets.
>taxes should be lower anyway lol
If this is your thesis (and it should be) then I've shown you the best way to get there. Anything else is pro-taxation, and thus inferior.
Julian Morales
Yes because nothing would hurt the Jews more than freeing up their private banks.
Jordan Sanchez
>So increasing prices every year while wages stagnate doesn't negatively effect living standards?
why do you think wages are not affected by inflation? if you add a double the money supply are you twice as poor?
>>So a massive decline in savings rates for the working class doesn't effect living standards? hard to say either way. >So making housing prices more expensive doesn't effect living standards?
what is real versus nominal? also houseing prices are a consequence of a high living standard
Levi Ward
>Also we have no stability we have stagnation now. when was the last time a bank failed or somebody lost a deposit? when was the last bank run? thats stability
Dylan Miller
Stability is a fairly minor contributing factor to growth. If the economy is roaring at 20%, no one will give a shit if one of these banks goes down.
Jaxon Watson
How is an individual more efficient?
Parker Jenkins
>the economy is roaring at 20%, no one will give a shit if one of these banks goes down. EXACTLY CORRECT, thats the reason monetary policy has little influence of economic growth
Benjamin Martinez
>Elon Musk exists entirely because of massive subsidies from NASA. Yes today. If the government got out of the way he would have a fuckton more money. All the subsidies he's getting pale in comparison to what he would be getting if spending and taxes were cut.
>Can't think of a better way to do this than to reduce transportation costs and energy costs The only way to do this is to allow a free market in banking to exist so prices come down. Government scumbags and leftists want to print money so prices go UP. They're delusional. They won't allow prices to come down from greater energy production.
Andrew Bell
You're an idiot. They get their power from the state. They would be forced to function based on consumer demand if they had to function in a free market. They would also be decentralized and there would be many more of them. Many more WHITE banks.
Benjamin Powell
I wouldn't say that. You're speaking of monetary policy only within the narrow framework of the monetarist school.
Replacing the Federal Reserve with a development bank is the type of thing that would create the 20% economic growth I mentioned. It's not a minor issue, it's a central one.
Landon Gomez
tahts fiscal policy not monetary policy
Josiah Torres
>why do you think wages are not affected by inflation? They're effected but effected last. Wall street and large corporations get the money first.
>if you add a double the money supply are you twice as poor? For a while, yes, yes you will be in terms of your wages until wages come up with inflation. Your savings will be wiped out though and you will be a prole just like the rest of them.
>also houseing prices are a consequence of a high living standard If we had high living standards prices should be coming down. Prices naturally come down in a free market.
Also look how shitty Canada's housing market is. My generation can't get a house, it's almost impossible and buying a house is basically debt slavery.
Ayden Edwards
>when was the last time a bank failed That's not the only factor in stability. We're literally in a depression right now and it sucks.
The government should have let these banks fail.
>If the economy is roaring at 20% lol
Matthew Sullivan
Price increases, or inflation, can happen because of rising wages.
Chase Cox
How, they already have massive well established banks. The barrier for entry is huge for "white banks" and you think anyone is going to put money in those banks when the jew ones can offer greater interest?
Colton Hall
yeah but it's usually the other way around
what you're describing is rare
Bentley Ward
>they already have massive well established banks. If we got rid of the federal reserve TODAY, every major bank would fail and their owners would go bankrupt.
>he barrier for entry is huge for "white banks" There have been plenty of white banks in american history. Ther reason there's so few banks and they have so much power is thanks to central banking and government controls. We need banking competition.
>when the jew ones can offer greater interest What in the world makes you think this?
Jack Williams
The last time there was any real problem with inflation was what I was saying. That is largely what stagflation was.
Jack Perry
>Wall street and large corporations get the money first. actually debtors get the money 1st, but thats not the main point >For a while, yes, yes you will be in terms of your wages until wages come up with inflation >wages come up with inflation so you are saying wages adjust to inflation?so you are saying that in the long run infaltion has no effect on wages? >If we had high living standards prices should be coming down. absolutely wrong, housing prices are determined by scarcity- if you have high living standards compared to the rest of the world your housing prices are higher .Also look how shitty Canada's housing market is yeah i agree with you on that, some zoning laws could be fixed, but getting a house in a city or a premium location would still liekly be extremely expensive. The premium locations would still remain premium locations in the free market >We're literally in a depression right now and it sucks. literally wrong 2% growth is 2%(unless u are in alberta)
Colton Cook
It's both. I'm talking about moving from a Federal Reserve to a Development Bank. That is monetary.
David Barnes
Yes the 70s stagflation, when nixon got off the gold standard and the rest of the decade was massive inflation.
>The last time there was any real problem with inflation Inflation is always a problem. Savings rates should always increase, not decrease. Savings is how people retire. Inflation basically prevents you from retiring.
Nathan Peterson
The problem with capitalism is that its the most efficient way possible for the most consumers to consume the most products in the least amount of time.
You guys can argue all you want about specifics and methods of implementation/corruption etc, but when that's the stated goal, it will necessarily all fall apart eventually as supply shortages start to occur.
In 1970 Pierre Elliot Trudeau signed effective control of the Canadian money supply over to the BIS in Switzerland. Thanks to this, the Canadian government can't create currency to improve life for Canadians without incurring compound debt to this international bank.
Here's where it gets interesting: there's a lawsuit pending on behalf of the people of Canada. It's inching along so slow you'd almost think it's designed to go nowhere, obstructionist by design...
Who is behind the lawsuit? A 103 year old guy who was a Marxist Propagandist in the 1930s.
Brayden Reyes
>If we got rid of the federal reserve TODAY, every major bank would fail and their owners would go bankrupt.
Or they would start making loans to productive enterprises, instead of gambling on options and trying to scalp people with mortgages and student loans.
tldr they'd do their fucking job.
Noah Edwards
jsut because money is involved and its called a bank doesnt mean its monetary policy uness your developmental banks manages the stock of money and interest rates. what you are describing is textbook fiscal policy spending on ifnrastrucure
Ryan Edwards
>Or they would start making loans to productive enterprises Loans with WHAT MONEY? Even 1% increase in interest rates will collapse them at this point. They're basically dangling by a thread.
> instead of gambling on options and trying to scalp people with mortgages and student loans. Hmmm I wonder which government organization gave them the trillions of dollars to do this. Also the big reason tuition is so expensive is because government guarantees student loans.
Isaiah Hughes
How would that work? Everyone owes money to these banks.
There may have been in history but that doesn't mean there isn't massive barrier of entry for a new private bank today, especially if you are talking private currencies and shit.
They can offer greater interest because they already make a fuck load of money from all their customers. A new bank starts from scratch. It is like thinking a new Amazon can beat Amazon on prices, Amazon can take losses on specific products and make it up on others. The internet itself is an example of how a "free" system just produces monopolies.
Isaiah Garcia
>Switzerland I can't wait till mining makes a BIG comeback in their euro mountain paradise.
Sebastian Wright
>Loans with WHAT MONEY?
The banks are flush with cash. The federal government can borrow at 2%. They can print money.
We do not have anything approaching a liquidity problem.
Eli Richardson
...
Logan Phillips
You mean FDR. The thing Nixon changed was a foreign currency exchange program.
Inflation has fallen since 2008 and savings returns have got worse. They were better when it was higher. So not really a good argument.
Hudson Diaz
Chinese state own corporations strip mining switzerland.
Now that would be hilarious.
Christian Perez
>Everyone owes money to these banks. Exactly, the banks wouldn't get any money because people wouldn't be able to pay them. Then the people who owe money to these banks will be debt free when the banks collapse. There's going to be a massive economic collapse soon.
>there isn't massive barrier of entry for a new private bank today Exactly, it's called the government.
>A new bank starts from scratch. So, after maybe a year of initial startup they'll be able to offer competitive interest rates.
Joseph Price
>You mean FDR. The thing Nixon changed was a foreign currency exchange program. The usa was still on a semi-gold standard that kept the system somewhat in balance. That all went away when nixon did what he did.
>Inflation has fallen since 2008 Nah, there's inflation, ignore the doctored CPI numbers. Not only that, most of the inflation goes into the stock market and housing sector. Remember, Zimbabwe had the most profitable stock market when it was inflating.
>savings returns have got worse People are still bogged down with debt and there's more debt around and its gotten worse.
James Jenkins
thanks its all true
Parker Thompson
>Not only that, most of the inflation goes into the stock market and housing sector. not how inflation works >Nah, there's inflation, ignore the doctored CPI numbers produce the correct numbers than >-gold standard that kept the system somewhat in balance. somehow other countries follow same trend as usa, except they havn't been on a gold standard hmmmmm could there be an alternative explenation?
Evan Cooper
Incorrect.
The first country to eliminate their central bank will be invaded by the United States and its population will be mercilessly massacrated until a puppet democracy is instored and the central bank is up again.
Happened a few times already. As long as the jewish golem (USA) is alive every country is gonna keep its central bank.
Leo Green
>get rid of these regs /monopolies and make a TRULY free market with true competition >Politicians can only serve 4 years and must use money from a publicly available account during that time/no briber--i mean corp donations >ban personal taxes >public banks with 0.5% 30 year mortgage for the American people to cover expenses >cut military budgey to 100b /remove every base the host country wont foot the entire bill for it >build more aircraft carriers and use them as floating bases,moving them wherever they need to be >have "free" public universities people can go to and pay it off wtih a low-simple tax for 10-15 years
>private SS with one-time payout of those currently in the system >give rights back to the states >Abolish fed and print our own money >abolish.CIA,NSA ,FBI,DEA,BLM(the tree fucks) DMV ,Dept Education,etc etc >abolish NGO's and other Soros-funded anti human shit >make the UN base move to saudi arabia and pull the funding for it > MY UTOPIA!!
Mason Roberts
Everyone just stops paying debts sounds like a great time for any bank and the economy at large to flourish. That is just a massive depression. Here I was thinking you were wanting to help people. You do know you could actually take the banks over and have them operate in the interests of the people rather than destroying who knows how many lives?
What do you mean exactly? You admit your own argument was wrong to try and argue a barrier for entry wouldn't exist?
Do you think your new startup cola brand will be of much success against Pepsi or Coca-Cola?