Daily reminder the first country to eliminate their central bank and allow free market banking will have the highest...

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 actual free markets have prices falling all the time instead is going up.

Daily reminder America never had a system of free market banking for most of it's history. 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.

Basically what I'm saying is if we had a free market, the entire fucking country would be disneyland or universal studios and people would barely have to work.

Why would you NOT support this unless you were a shill that hated white people?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=L_T3SugmMCg
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_bank#Bank_of_Amsterdam_(Amsterdamsche_Wisselbank)
youtube.com/watch?v=8GP87dgTqF8&feature=youtu.be&t=540
youtube.com/watch?v=JG5c8nhR3LE
youtube.com/watch?v=iK91Lq2Jz2Q
youtube.com/watch?v=OQWMd_NPSBA
youtube.com/watch?v=dGq5ymmcRBU&feature=youtu.be&t=100
youtube.com/watch?v=VrkTZJ1pGUM
youtube.com/watch?v=CQVAabQ0JcM&feature=youtu.be&t=90
youtube.com/watch?v=oJ5Hq0NDErA
worldclimatereport.com/wp-images/life_expectancy_2009.JPG
ourworldindata.org/slides/global-health/img/life-expectancy_FRA_DEU_ITA_SWE_GBR.png
aihw.gov.au/getmedia/62d4c940-5cf7-4f18-a766-7fa1f419b913/deaths-life-2017.png.aspx
youtube.com/watch?v=9J482O3DrWY
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_central_banking_in_the_United_States#1837.E2.80.931862:_.22Free_Banking.22_Era
mises.org/library/transformation-american-economy-1865-1914
strawpoll.me/14587931
strawpoll.me/14587913
strawpoll.me/14587939
strawpoll.me/14587948
strawpoll.me/14587959
strawpoll.me/14587973
strawpoll.me/14587981
strawpoll.me/14587996
strawpoll.me/14588006
strawpoll.me/14588013
strawpoll.me/14588019
strawpoll.me/14588033
strawpoll.me/14588037
strawpoll.me/14588073
youtube.com/watch?v=QpDEu8KmNj0
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>tfw no free market

>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.

sounds like a country that needs american freedom and democracy

America fucking sucks man, they're basically the USSR at this point.

Statist shithole.

Except for that whole Federal Reserve thing

>tfw no free market

The federal reserve is a private for profit bank. How is this not free market capitalism?

youtube.com/watch?v=L_T3SugmMCg

>how is the government creating a bank and giving them a monopoly on currency creation not the free market

>b-b-but it's a private bank
So?
What the fuck does this have to do with anything?
Are you honestly this stupid?

>>how is the government creating a bank and giving them a monopoly on currency creation not the free market

What's your opinion of the patent system?

>What the fuck does this have to do with anything?

The entire banking system is in the hands of private interests. Is this not what you mean by free banking?

>"private" bank in the free market
>given complete and total control of us money supply by an act of congress

Are you stupid?

it's going to happen onee chan, but first old scores must be settled mainly with a certain hook nosed species that controls the US gov and media.

>given complete and total control of us money supply by an act of congress

They don't have complete control over the money supply. Most money is created by commercial banks issuing loans. If for instance you go to a bank to get a 500k mortgage the bank has just created 500k new currency.

In fact it took Volcker, the fed chairman, a decade of increasing the federal funds rate in order to reduce inflation.

I suppose it's convenient for lolbertarians to believe the fed can exercise this much control over the money supply, otherwise they would have nothing to scapegoat whenever an economic crash happens.

>given complete and total control of us money supply by an act of congress

Suppose a pharmaceutical company develops a new drug and registers a patent. Now they have a monopoly on creating this new drug and this is totally consistent with the concept of private property rights. The same principle holds with the federal reserve, a private bank with private shareholders.

The idea that central banks are inimical to capitalism is absurd. The history of capitalism is almost intrinsically linked to the history of the central banking system.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_bank#Bank_of_Amsterdam_(Amsterdamsche_Wisselbank)

>What's your opinion of the patent system?
Anti-free market bullshit that must be abolished

>The entire banking system is in the hands of private interests.
Yes and it's protected by a government monopoly, therefore not free market.

The money is loaned from the federal government to the banks, and the fed controls the interest rates and reserve requirements, so the money supply is pretty much controlled by the government.

>Anti-free market bullshit that must be abolished

So in other words if someone develops a new drug, you believe the intellectual content of the drug should now reside in the public domain and should effectively be public property. Not private property.

Next you'll be arguing that people shouldn't own land because that's anti-free market. "private property should be abolished!"

Are you quite sure you're a libertarian?

> not understanding that the US uses its fiat currency in tandem with its military power to keep useless burgers at 1st world standard of living

then i see meme flag

>from the government to the banks
Wrong.
Ultimately, the Fed issues loans.

what about roads oniichan?

>The money is loaned from the federal government to the banks

No you got it back words. The central bank loans the government money and charges interest.

>the money supply is pretty much controlled by the

No, only a small percent of the money that's created is from the central bank.

youtube.com/watch?v=8GP87dgTqF8&feature=youtu.be&t=540

Btw most banks just create money out of thin air and this includes the privately owned central bank.

youtube.com/watch?v=JG5c8nhR3LE

The central bank just creates money out of thin air and charges the government interest on it.

The government still sets the interest rate and reserve requirements that leads to credit expansion

> So in other words if someone develops a new drug, you believe the intellectual content of the drug should now reside in the public domain and should effectively be public property. Not private property.
Yes, precisely. Patents stifle innovation, its one of the biggest reasons drugs can be so expensive in America.

> Next you'll be arguing that people shouldn't own land because that's anti-free market.
You're making a false-equivelance.
Intellectual "property" is not a scarce resource. There is no forseeable bounds to a man's imagination. The same cannot be said about land.

That's not to say that I don't believe in giving credit where credit is due. If you use information or concepts to write an essay that are out of what is socially considered "public domain", it is courteous, and usually in your own best interest to cite them less you could be shunned for plagiarism.

>The government still sets the interest rate

The central bank does that by setting the interest rate on the federal funds rate.

>reserve requirements

Reserve requirements prevent commercial banks from loaning out more and more money (effectively creating new money) it doesn't really have. The video I linked here explains this concept. If there is no reserve requirement this gives commercial banks license to create practically an Infinite amount of money!

Another video on this concept youtube.com/watch?v=iK91Lq2Jz2Q

youtube.com/watch?v=OQWMd_NPSBA

>credit expansion

Credit expansion is a completely different concept

Look I don't like this system either but I also don't like hypocrisy. Lolbertarians are trying to say

>free market is perfect if only there wasn't a central bank.

Meanwhile the central bank is a private for-profit institution. The central bank is an easy scapegoat to use to avoid thinking critically about their ideology.

The bank problems of the late 1800's was because a run on cash. This is actually a good thing because runs on cash only happen during high growth. The lack of central banking during this run kept the problems isolated thus preventing major harm like the Fed caused when they created the depression. Also the banks that did not have enough reserves were not bailed out and rewarded, they went out of business, leaving better ran banks in their place.

The Federal Reserve sets the rates not the government. And the rates should never be set. They should be what the market dictates.

This is indeed true

The fed sets the the interest rates lower than they would in a savings based economy, the government sets the reserve extremely low, which allows banks to loan out as much money as they can aka credit expansion which leads to the inflationary depression, then when banks mal investments fall through they get bailed out. Its all a game from the governments and banks.

libertarians are antifa level of stupidity

The bank does not just make profits. It creates monetary policy, this is actually a bigger problem than the profit thing.

>Yes, precisely. Patents stifle innovation, its one of the biggest reasons drugs can be so expensive in America.

I'm in favor of deregulating the patent system and reducing the number of years a patent is private domain. Outright doing away with it, I'm not in favor of.

>Intellectual "property" is not a scarce resource. There is no forseeable bounds to a man's imagination.

Yes there is. Most people are profoundly unimaginative. Intellectual property is absolutely a scarce resource. How many new inventions (and I don't mean just a shitty app) have you developed? If you don't have one that proves my point that intellectual ideas are a scarce resource.

If you do have one, if it's making any money would you mind giving away all of the details on here for free

So is there somewhere I can find an explanation for everything Andrew Jackson did during his presidency? Especially the stuff about the banks, I want to read that in-depth

Read Creature of Jekyll Island. It will tell you all about the Fed Reserve and then some. Be aware, the book is a massive red pill.

>sets the reserve extremely low, which allows banks to loan out as much money as they can aka credit expansion

So what you're arguing is that the banks should be regulated more and that reserve requirements are too low (ie should be increased). This may not be such a bad idea

However, how is this a free-market/free-banking solution? This is an argument for more regulation.

Either regulated more or free banking because if banks were indpendant of government they would have to be safer because there's no one to bail them out, the banks that bad lending practices would go out of business, eventually the best banks with the best lending practices would be used out of common sense.

Exactly what I was looking for, thank you

Both could potentially work but will require an almost complete overhaul of the entire monetary system.

I'm almost of the opinion that we should go back to a barter-based system. I don't know if this is really feasible.

>The idea that central banks are inimical to capitalism is absurd. The history of capitalism is almost intrinsically linked to the history of the central banking system.
Complete horseshit.
Late 1800s in USA, no central bank, yet they had an industrial revolution.

You don't need central banks.

Central banks are anti-free market.

>So in other words if someone develops a new drug, you believe the intellectual content of the drug should now reside in the public domain and should effectively be public property. Not private property.
Yes, yes I do.
This is the free market.

IP is a myth.

>Next you'll be arguing that people shouldn't own land because that's anti-free market. "private property should be abolished!"
No, land is land, ideas are ideas.
Land is property.

someone make this ancap flag in background

But how exactly do you quantify an idea? By extension, what metric can you possibly use to claim people are "unimaginative"?

If you own the rights to, say, an image (or song, formula, quote etc), and I legally obtain said image and edit a single pixel of it...could I not then turn around and patent "my" new creation? If not one pixel, how many? And...why?

If it is true that people are by and large unimaginative, then it follows they could really benefit from having as unrestricted access to information as possible, because it could inspire them, ease the process of creation by giving them the tools they didn't have access to before. Society is far better off with unrestricted access to the prototype for a wheel, then forcing everyone to reinvent it.

> shitty app
guilty as charged lol

> If you do have one, if it's making any money would you mind giving away all of the details on here for free
If I had one worth sharing, I'd be more than happy to. Sup Forums is right, open source is the way of the future.

No I was very consistent I said that you cannot discuss the history of capitalism without also discussing the history of central banks.

It's possible that capitalism just puts too much power into the banking sector because of their ability to create money. This allows them to consolidate and create a central bank

Here's an anecdote from the time period you're referring to (late 1800s) which illustrates the sort of power private bankers wielded over the US government:

youtube.com/watch?v=dGq5ymmcRBU&feature=youtu.be&t=100

Daily reminder that the first country to eliminate their central bank and allow free market banking will lose to a war against the country willing to sell the blood of their children.

That's the joke. Any country without a central bank will be fucked in the ass by a country with a central bank.

nvm I just did it

poorly

That isn't to say I think open source should be mandatory or anything. I think its a good idea and we'd be better off if tech companies embraced it, but it's not sin to me if Microsoft or DRM obscures their source code either any more than it is that an artist expects compensation for their work, or a study citations to those who reference it. I do take issue with the fact that they can press charges against anyone who so much as attempts to decompile/decrypt it, let alone build off of it.

>No I was very consistent I said that you cannot discuss the history of capitalism without also discussing the history of central banks.
Sure, but central banks have always been anti-free market.

>It's possible that capitalism just puts too much power into the banking sector because of their ability to create money.
Under a free market, it's illegal to print money out of thin air.

I think IP laws should be weakened. I don't think they should be altogether removed.

Prior to the existence of IP laws people were for example publishing author's writings without providing them with any royalties.

Secondly, IP protects smaller inventors because it prevents a larger more established business from copying a recent invention. A lot of large companies devote a significant amount of their money to purchasing recent patents or buying up startups. Many of these inventions are completely unprofitable (pic related) but the startup is still rewarded for their ideas. If they did not need to purchase IP, the startup wouldn't even be able to sell their IP to Microsoft/Google etc.

Now I have to admit I am slightly out of my element here because my knowledge of IP law is pretty limited.

>Under a free market, it's illegal to print money out of thin air.

Printing money is just a bank lending back out deposits. If you prevent banks from lending back out deposits, you literally do not have banks anymore.

You've essentially banned banking altogether.

This might not be a bad thing and is more consistent with a barter-system which I suggested right here.

>eliminate their central bank
not enough user
history proves this, pic related

we need to kill the bankERS, their families, relatives, secret societies, cabals and fellowships

THEN we can proceed with your plan

...

...

...

I don't know enough about economics to know if OP is correct or not, but I do know that Osaka a cute. A cute!

Aren't you incitement.

> Under a free market, it's illegal to print money out of thin air.
to be fair it wouldn't be illegal, but I sincerely doubt we'd ever witness it in any real magnitude given that inflation couldn't be publicly subsidized as it is today. I remember Hoppe talking about how feudal lords tried to get people to use their fiat currencies but no one fell for the meme.

>Hoppe talking about how feudal lords tried to get people to use their fiat currencies but no one fell for the meme.

Hoppe is full of shit. Fiat currencies have a long history.

youtube.com/watch?v=VrkTZJ1pGUM

youtube.com/watch?v=CQVAabQ0JcM&feature=youtu.be&t=90

>Fiat currencies have a long history.
Hoppe never said they didn't.

> Under a free market, it's illegal to print money out of thin air.
>to be fair it wouldn't be illegal

If a bank is allowed to loan out its deposits at interest, then it can create money.

youtube.com/watch?v=JG5c8nhR3LE
youtube.com/watch?v=oJ5Hq0NDErA

If you prevent banks from doing this and make this illegal, I scarcely see how you can have a bank. If it cannot loan out deposits, why would it even accept deposits in the first place?

He was full of shit when he said that people never accepted fiat currencies. My opinion is that all currencies whether fiat or backed by a commodity will collapse. It's almost cyclical.

I'm unsure if I would call what the US dollar a fiat currency, it's sort of a gray area. The US dollar right now is backed by oil.

>OP cites the industrial revolution as proof we should deregulate everything
no thanks I'm glad i wasn't crushed in a loom at the age of 12

Statistically you were LESS likely to die at these gilded age factory jobs than living on a farm or living anywhere else in the world.

Americans had the highest living standards on earth.

We could have had this today but you cucks want to be slaves.

I'm all about free market, but it has to be truly free and no compromise. The second there is compromise it becomes not free and therefore the masters should ensure their servants are well off.

A free market in of itself would actually increase the intellect of many people simply because saving, a component most people don't do, would have to be utilized. There might be more schemes, but these people usually aren't bright and they still aren't even to this day when it's done behind the law. People still know, don't know why they think they're smart or something.

Creating money out of thin air means the mortgage isn't worth anything. This is part of the problem why prices keep going up while pay keeps stagnating. Also, private property rights should apply to something physically tangible, not an idea or formula as those are intangible. They're meant to be shared and improved upon whilst disregarding economic gain. Otherwise, you have fake science for shitty products that do nothing good for you, the environment, or anything but a few people who honestly don't deserve what they got.

>Statistically you were LESS likely to die at these gilded age factory jobs than living on a farm or living anywhere else in the world.

Nah it's about the same. Life expectancy in the US in 1895 was around 45-50

worldclimatereport.com/wp-images/life_expectancy_2009.JPG

The life expectancy in various European countries:

ourworldindata.org/slides/global-health/img/life-expectancy_FRA_DEU_ITA_SWE_GBR.png

Here's the data for Australia:

aihw.gov.au/getmedia/62d4c940-5cf7-4f18-a766-7fa1f419b913/deaths-life-2017.png.aspx

>Americans had the highest living standards on earth.

Burgers really need to get over themselves.

>Nah it's about the same.
It wasn't.
Even if it was then there is literally no issue.

>Life expectancy in the US in 1895 was around 45-50
Most people died from other reasons though.

>Burgers really need to get over themselves.
Holy fuck you're dumb.
Gilded age america had the most productive economy in the world and the highest living standards in the world.
We had the freest markets with no central bank.

true

Get over yourself Mutt!

A person living in France or the UK in 1895 had roughly the same quality of life and life expectancy as an American.

If you disagree go through the links I posted and argue with that.

>A person living in France or the UK in 1895 had roughly the same quality of life and life expectancy as an American.
Bullshit.
France's economic output was much lower.
French people had lower living standards.

America was the most productive economy in the world.

Why the fuck do you think millions of people came from europe to live and work in USA?
Because living standards were higher than your shithole.

>Why the fuck do you think millions of people came from europe to live and work in USA?

youtube.com/watch?v=9J482O3DrWY

>America was the most productive economy in the world.

Empirically false. UK, Belgium, and the Netherlands all had a higher GDP/capita than America. America had roughly the same GDP/capita as the average country in Western Europe in 1870. Note that the free banking period started in the late 1830s.

Not watching that murderer's video.

I was talking about 1890 when the second american industrial revolution was underway.

Also the free banking era started after the civil war and ended in 1913.

8 hour work day, establishment of child labor, and the weekend where both brought about by legislation, i.e. government regulation. Taking it away would yield a return of shitty horrendous working conditions. Learn history faggot.

>I was talking about 1890 when the second american industrial revolution was underway.

The gilded age utopia you claimed should arise from a free banking system never came about. You're splitting hairs because you lost.

>Also the free banking era started after the civil war and ended in 1913.

1837 was when Andrew Jackson defeated the 2nd Central bank leading to the free banking era.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_central_banking_in_the_United_States#1837.E2.80.931862:_.22Free_Banking.22_Era

1863-1913 was the national banks era

>establishment of child labor

Surely you mean abolition?

I mean it must've been a cool thing to starve to death rather than work until your 40's and die of work related health issues due to, say, working in a coal mine.

>The gilded age utopia you claimed should arise from a free banking system never came about.
What?
Are you denying the entire gilded age and industrial revolution that happened?
Just read the wikipedia page, dummy.

>1837 was when Andrew Jackson defeated the 2nd Central bank leading to the free banking era.
Wrong, it was a period of massive government intervention in the banking industry until after the civil war when an actual free banking system was implemented.

>1863-1913 was the national banks era
No lol

>Wrong, it was a period of massive government intervention in the banking industry until after the civil war when an actual free banking system was implemented.

Here I copied the wikipedia page

Wikipedia is bullshit and written by neo-keynesians.

It wasn't free banking, it was government controlled banking.

The period of time with actual free banking was the end of the civil war until 1913.

>Just read the wikipedia page, dummy.
>Wikipedia is bullshit and written by neo-keynesians.

Wow, you are like, legitimately retarded even for Sup Forums standards

look at all of the government intervention in the National bank era You are a complete lemming

"The act allowed the creation of national banks, set out a plan for establishing a national currency backed by government securities held by other banks, and gave the federal government the ability to sell war bonds and securities (in order to help the war effort). National banks were chartered by the federal government, and were subject to stricter regulation; they had higher capital requirements and were not allowed to loan more than 10% of their holdings. A high tax on state banks was levied to discourage competition, and by 1865 most state banks had either received national charters or collapsed"

On July 13, 1866, the banking Act of 1865 was extended beyond requiring every national banking association, state bank, or state banking association to pay a 10% tax on any notes paid out by them. The act of 1866 added that any persons, as well as of state banks and state banking associations used for circulation to also be taxed 10%. This act was considered enforced by the court case Veazie Bank v. Fenno, supra. The official enactment by Congress read, "That every national banking association, state bank, or state banking association shall pay a tax of ten percent on the amount of notes of any person, state bank, or state banking association used for circulation and paid out by them after the 1st day of August, 1866, and such tax shall be assessed and paid in such manner as shall be prescribed by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue."

The 1864 act, based on a New York State law, brought the federal government into active supervision of commercial banks. It established the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency with the responsibility of chartering, examining and supervising all national banks.

Notice this little nugget right here.

"During the free banking era, some local banks took over the functions of a central bank. In New York, the New York Safety Fund provided deposit insurance for member banks. In Boston, the Suffolk Bank guaranteed that bank notes would trade at near par value, and acted as a private bank note clearinghouse."

This confirms what I said right here

>The idea that central banks are inimical to capitalism is absurd. The history of capitalism is almost intrinsically linked to the history of the central banking system.

Even when Andrew Jackson destroys the 2nd national bank, you start seeing local banks acting as mini-central banks as a lender of last resort. Central banks are a feature of capitalism, not a bug.

You just got btfo. This is it you can't recover.

>Although the period from 1837 to 1864 in the U.S. is often referred to as the Free Banking Era, the term is something of a misnomer, for it refers not to a general system of "free" banking in the literal sense described previously, but rather to various state banking systems based on so-called "free banking" laws, which, though they made it unnecessary for new entrants to secure charters (each of which was subject to a vote by the state legislature), nonetheless restricted their undertakings in important ways. Most importantly, U.S. "free" banks were denied the right to establish branch networks, and had to "secure" their notes by purchasing and surrendering to state banking authorities certain securities those authorities deemed eligible for the purpose. The securities in many cases included bonds of the authorizing state governments themselves; and it has been determined that the depreciation of these very securities was the chief cause of "free bank" failures, and indeed of bank failures generally, during the period in question. The lack of branch banking, in turn, caused state-issued banknotes to be discounted at varying rates once they had traveled any considerable distance from their sources. In short, the shortcomings of banks and bank-supplied paper currency during the so-called "free banking era" in the U.S., far from establishing the need for special regulation of banks, testifies to the dangers of unwarranted or unwise regulation. Then, from 1863 to 1913, known as the National Banks Era, state-chartered banks were still operating under a free banking system. Some scholars have found that the system was mostly stable.[8]

Just an excuse for why a lolbertarian utopa didn't come about during the free banking era(about as free as it gets)

But a libertarian utopia DID come about during the free banking era(end of civil war to 1913).

It created such a massive amount of wealth that people came from all over the world to work in america.
Read this book
mises.org/library/transformation-american-economy-1865-1914

Sweden's free banking era was even more amazing.

Sweden had two periods of free banking, 1830–60 and 1860-1902. Following a bank crisis in 1857, there was a rise in popular support for private banks and private money issuers (especially Stockholms Enskilda Bank, founded in 1856). A new bank law was adopted by parliament in 1864, deregulating the interest rate. The following decades marked the height of the Swedish free banking era. After 1874, no new private banks were founded. In 1901, issuing of private money was prohibited. Work on the Swedish free banking era has been done by Per Hortlund and Erik Lakomaa. Erik Lakomaa (The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, Summer 2007), has demonstrated that the Swedish experiment in free banking was successful. It reduced booms and busts. Only one bank went bankrupt for 70 years, an event related to fraud and not to excessive lending as has happened wherever central banking has been practiced.

That is not the free banking era dumbass.

Banks during the free banking era could issue their own currency notes (pic related) backed by their own collateral.. yes there were some restrictions on the kinds of collateral they could use to back their currency.

After the National Bank Act which created a national currency there were more restrictions.

>But a libertarian utopia DID come about during the free banking era(end of civil war to 1913).

Life Expectancy was the same in America in 1895 as it was in France, UK, and Australia. The life expectancy in all of these countries was 45 years old. That's the pinnacle of the lolbertarian utopia you're peddling.

>It created such a massive amount of wealth that people came from all over the world to work in america.
>Read this book

America got all of the retards of Europe. You're a lemming

...

>After the National Bank Act which created a national currency there were more restrictions.
What?
During the gilded age, many banks issued their OWN notes all of the time.

>Life Expectancy was the same in America in 1895 as it was in France, UK, and Australia.
LE doesn't matter.
What matters is wage rates and what you could buy with them.

>That's the pinnacle of the lolbertarian utopia you're peddling.
LOL Life expectancy in general was poor back then because medicine and technology was poor.
Capitalism and mass production eventually increased living standards to today's levels but it took time.

>America got all of the retards of Europe. You're a lemming
If people are daring enough to actually leave their place of birth for a better life then they are the most intelligent members of their countries.

Ever hear of brain drain?

Also Free banking worked wonders in Sweden.
Sorry this fact makes you angry.

Please only fill out the survey for the ethnicity that best represents your heritage.

Germanic:
strawpoll.me/14587931

Anglo:
strawpoll.me/14587913

Nordic:
strawpoll.me/14587939

Celtic:
strawpoll.me/14587948

Gallic (French):
strawpoll.me/14587959

East Slavic:
strawpoll.me/14587973

West Slavic:
strawpoll.me/14587981

South Slavic:
strawpoll.me/14587996

Latin (Italian):
strawpoll.me/14588006

Iberian:
strawpoll.me/14588013

Greek:
strawpoll.me/14588019

Baltic:
strawpoll.me/14588033

Finno-Urgric:
strawpoll.me/14588037

Romanian:
strawpoll.me/14588073

og thread for anyone interested

Dude you're an ideological wreck.

Somehow this is "free banking"

>government prints 450 million in legal tender and hands it out

"The Second Legal Tender Act,[3] enacted July 11, 1862, a Joint Resolution of Congress,[4] and the Third Legal Tender Act,[5] enacted March 3, 1863, expanded the limit to $450 million. The largest amount of greenbacks outstanding at any one time was calculated as $447,300,203.10."

>coverts state run banks to national banks
>created national currency

>puts a goverment regulator in charge of it

The 1864 act, based on a New York State law, brought the federal government into active supervision of commercial banks. It established the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency with the responsibility of chartering, examining and supervising all national banks.
>levees a tax on banks

"On July 13, 1866, the banking Act of 1865 was extended beyond requiring every national banking association, state bank, or state banking association to pay a 10% tax on any notes paid out by them."


Somehow despite all of this you have free banking system. You are a lemming.

>If people are daring enough to actually leave their place of birth for a better life then they are the most intelligent members of their countries.

youtube.com/watch?v=QpDEu8KmNj0

>LE doesn't matter.
>What matters is wage rates and what you could buy with them.
>LOL Life expectancy in general was poor back then because medicine and technology was poor.

This right here is a total cop-out statement. Obviously technology was shite back then but why didn't the US increase faster than Europe?

The rate at which life expectancy rose in the United States was the same as that in Europe. You would think if US was much wealthier and productive, this should have translated into increased goods/sewage systems/technology

Fact is, it didn't. You're entire argument is a joke.

Life Expectancy US:
worldclimatereport.com/wp-images/life_expectancy_2009.JPG

Life Expectancy Europe:
ourworldindata.org/slides/global-health/img/life-expectancy_FRA_DEU_ITA_SWE_GBR.png

Here's the data for Australia:
aihw.gov.au/getmedia/62d4c940-5cf7-4f18-a766-7fa1f419b913/deaths-life-2017.png.aspx

>Sorry this fact makes you angry.

See pic related

get rid of the Fed, and we'll be exploring the solar system, and having life spans well into the hundreds of years within a decade