Ben Archer

ok the last 3 posts just confused me...

Ok, got it. Its the combinations that add up to some sort of relative price index. But then every pizza is different, with different topings and ingredients and coming from differently skilled pizza makers, and so is water, some is cleaner or more minerally rich than other, so there would need be some normalized value for all pizzas, but not specifically your pizza. That's ok though, jjst gives you the indicator of what pizzas have been selling for in the recent past. But how do you propose to initiate the transition from the present pricing statndard to the new one? It is too complex to be assumed spontaneously, without a ready interface, so the whole thing hinges on development of the platform, a pricing calculator. I think that would be the necessary first step. Just to have one out there, freely accessible online, and then issue monthly pricing reports etc. and hope it will catch on. Ideas are one thing, but implementation is the greatest challenge, because someone has to learn the tools and then do the work with no certainty of return. Are you up to it?

It's not my favorite bit of poetry, but that's how I tend to interpret it too. Unfortunately it's that one line that's always quoted, about the wretched huddled masses and all that. If you go to OFA's immigration website it's plastered all over the place like their slogan. I think we could look at the horrid state of Britain's exports right now and say it is largely because of their terrible immigration policies. You know their number one export right now is the recycled cardboard boxes from their Chinese imports?! Obviously their issues with the EU and Scotland's threat of devolution play a role, but the lack of innovation in their manufacturing, entertainment, education, and other exports is really telling.

oh god don't even remind me of what unions did to the GM bankruptcy. Actually it's still a nightmare what's going on there. They're borrowing even more billions from the government, who's somehow happy to lend it to them despite the recent hiccups, just so they can pay off the unions. Meanwhile actual shareholders have yet to see anything from that I know some people who shorted GM when they saw the bankruptcy coming yet got screwed because of this.

Aren't we all immigrants really? I'm sure the founding fathers asked similar questions, and drafted the constitution with the intention to keep rational defenders of liberty at the helm. Problems with immigration reform stem from the silly attitude of treating immigrants as a charity case. This whole idea of "send us your poor, sick, tired huddled masses", etc. Obviously you can't blame a bit of poetry, but the sentiment is echoed today...making us look like an asylum for the poor and wretched, when in reality America is a fairly young, diverse nation that was built with the muscles and ideas of immigrants . So now the whole approach towards immigration is one of selfless compassion (especially on the OFA website). Meanwhile obama's deported like 2 million since he took office. I say for illegal immigrants, just offer them permanent residency, and bar them from citizenship. I think the "dreamers" program is a good idea, but only solves a very small part of the problem

(yeah they're fake) I think she should've just let them be. Because if she ever has kids they'll inevitably grow, and they were fine as it is. But she's also gotten other stuff done, like her lips. I think culture plays a big role as well. In South Korea, they have some of the best plastic surgeons in the world, and more plastic surgery done than anywhere on earth I believe. You see ads for it all the time. It's openly encouraged by employers, mentors, parents. A lot of this is tied into their population growth problems, so that having a child is a serious financial consideration, and all efforts go into its perfection.

It's just my preference but to me a perfectly round boob is just oddly unnatural looking. Even with the modern implants you can always tell, eventually. I think naturals look way better, and it starts to show especially as women get older, and after pregnancy, Implants need to be replaced like every 10 years and every time they do it the woman loses breast tissue. And the weight of the implant does take its toll in older women. But the main thing for me is how they feel. They're way too tight usually and you can almost always feel the implant. If you're not expecting it, it can be a bit odd...and sometimes discourages further...manipulation however, it's not like I'm going to shy away from a woman just because she has fake boobs...because let's be honest.... Who cares? =P

my thoughts too lol

Wages are deflated by globalization. Higher wages will just tighten the flow of incomes and force businesses to raise their prices, fire more people, buy up their own stock. In fact this is already happening.

I dont know what you mean by that formula. Perhaps construct some examples. Let us say that I have a record collection for sale but do not want to buy anything just yet, but only to start saving fso one day I can buy a car. How would that work?

I would add that some inflations are worse than others, infact opposite in effect, depending on where the new money goes. If money is just pumped into the banking sector or to government, which then has to be earned by working for it dispite the dowside of depreciating value of what a real value provider has agreed to work for. Conversely, if the new money was injected as productivity grants to productive individuals and small businesses then economy would boom, the productive sector being the first recepient and primary beneficiary of new funds. Could be the same monetary inflation but if spent to stimulate productivity this would counteract the inflationary pressure on prices.

Raising wages will force Wal-mart and every other business to raise their prices to adjust Wage deflation is cause (mostly) by China. What these people don't get is that we need more jobs, and with the US now having the highest corporate tax in the world...well why would anyone set up a business here? The expense to businesses, 90% of it, is tax and regulation that other countries don't have. It has nothing to do with wages. CNET did a good interview with the head of Intel and other CEO's who echoed this.

Since that distraction has trailed of into the realm of the theoretical, I think the threat of a run on the dollar reserve still stands. As for the threat being neutralized by other countries relying on the dollar as a store of value ...given many trade agreements (listed above) that exclude US dollars, and the massive amounts of gold now China has now, show they don't intend to rely on the dollar anymore. (not to mention the many spoken intentions, especially during this last plenum, to "de-americanize the world"). I suppose it does seem a bit doom and gloom, but I'm a firm believer in the "normalcy bias."

Hey don, no idea why I didn't see your reply until now! And thank you for the encouragement on the social phobia battle I might write a blog or something on it one day Funny, because before stripping she was a Hooter's girl too. I eventually had to end it...she had a lot of other issues going on. Regardless, even if she hadn't been (batsh*t-crazy-psycho-stalker-ex) slightly odd, I never could have stayed with a woman who was willing to get naked for $30. "Objectively", there's nothing wrong with it, and I don't think less of women that do, but to me, I'd want a woman who found her body more sacred than that, and a privilege to only a few. If it had been just dancing (and not lap dances), like burlesque, then I'd have no problem with it, even if it was nude. The difference is in the intimacy I think, and the way they have to work for tips. I've yet to visit a strip club lol One thing I've learned is that it can be very hard to empathize with people who can't seem to get a handle on their anxiety. So when social phobia was an issue, knowing this, it made it much trickier to try to communicate the problem, for fear of the usual "just don't be so nervous!" or "just go do something fun", and etc, kind of advice. Usually it came from people who genuinely cared about me, but without educating themselves on the anxiety, couldn't relate. It's also the responsibility of the affected to get a proper diagnosis, though. Almost anyone could look at symptoms on a Wikipedia article for anxiety disorders and convince themselves they need therapy/medication. I think that's true. I suppose the OP isn't asking a question which has an Objective answer, as any group of rational people will still have a wide variety of preferences and tolerances.

I like how you think, you are not afraid to explore some radically new ideas. Couple of observatons so far. The idea of a momentary/temporary currency is very interesting, and i am intuitively drawn towards it, but so far can't see how that would still be a 'medium' of exchange. The function of currency or money is precisely the standarisation of value that extends accross multiple transactions, so that the double incidence of wants associated with straight barter can be accomplished via proxy and thus no longer a limitation. If the currency lasts only for one transaction then why is currency needed at all, its just straight barter. I am assuming you get something for something here otherwise whats the point 'selling' something for money that will dissappear a milisecond later. Now on what basis would temptrons be issued, how would one qualify to get temptrons to buy something? I suppose you could offer something for sale, a commodity of sorts, and get normalised temptrons on the spot, then trade those temptrons for what you want to buy. The spent temptrons are then automatically exchanged into a commodity of choice pre-determined by the seller of the product he sold. BUt let us say you have some extra temptrons left, which, if not spent within 30 minutes, are re-converted to the commodity of your choice. I like it. But that does require some serious facillitation behind the app, like multiple exchanges at market price going on 24/7 in the backgroud, all possible but looks like significant infrustructure necessary, trading regulations and some legislative oversight, would need to untilize the existing stock exchanges. Why not. For a small transaction fee that would make sense to any service provider. I can see how normalisatio could be a very effective tool to avoid favouring a particular commodity, in order not to concentrate power in one sector, like precious metals, and so mitigate any market manipulation. Relative pricing could be achieved only if the relevant commodities themselves were traded on the exchange, so only sufficiently fungible commodities could be the basis of value. Good start.

I've had a bit of time to think about this, with the holiday passing. I think what you are proposing is promissing but needs a lot of conceptual development still. To start with I wanted to clarify the issue of money vs. currency. I know you've put a lot of emphasis on the distinction between money vs. currency but I find your definition too narrow, a re-definition in fact. Firstly, there is no 'objective' meanings to words (at least in this discussion) because meaning is develped via social consensus, via use, and in that sense some definitions are indeed further or closer to what is commonly accepted, and that itself may change over time. I think your radical split between 'money' and 'currency' is a departure from what is accepted, and seems unnecessary, because what you mean by 'money' is commonly called 'commodity money' and what you call currency is called 'fiat money'. I find it more consistent to refer to all media of exchange as 'money' (gold, cattle, currency) but only some of money is 'currency', that is, money-by-law. I am not attached to this definition but it seems least controversial and covers the same range of meanings. I can see what you are trying to propose regarding technology being used as a means of insulating the user/investor/trader from hyperinflation, and I think that could work. Buying currency a microsecond prior to making the purchase of goods or selling it immediately (by investing it into equity or commodities) after the sale of goods could indeed make hyperinflation inconsequential, at least as long as the technology functions when you need it. But given such technology hyperinflation would indeed be desirable in order to effectively erase the fraudulent 'national debt' (fraudulent under the central banking and fractional credit model) which is purportedly owed to the banks. The inflation of base money in the U.S. could indeed be geared toward such an outcome, primarily because the national debt of that economy is already impossible to repay at zero inflation. It is a risky process and could result is major social instability, but the only other option is to get rid of fractional reserve banking, nationalise the FED, and declare national debt fraudulent, but clearly the 'greatest power on earth' is not willing to do it or too afraid of the banks. BUt all that does not mean that there is a need to have soem elaborate measurement mechanisms for the relative value of real goods and services (these can change depending of many factors). Currency is enough for that, that is its purpose, to universilise the measure of value, and it doesnt take much to adjust your currency holdings for inflation. Now consider also how private bills of exchange and promisory notes can be used to accomplish payment. These instruments need not be denominated in dollars but in any fungible commodity-money, or can take account of inflation of the measure of value (currency).

Well bitcoins was just something I was also thinking about. I see a lot of problems there, but again it's a currency. Seems what you're proposing is basically an absence of currency (not of money), like a sophisticated barter system, or a "currency" of commodity–based derivatives. As for exposure to the dollar, that I think is an easy solution for anyone who's motivated and recognizes the need. I'm personally prepared to be very limited to any exposure, but that doesn't make the situation any cheerier, as I can't very well educated the rest of my family and friends (they rarely believe me anyway). Back to the OP though, I'm still very skeptical but I like the idea and am going to give it more thought, starting with arbitrage.

I see where you're going with this...it's similar to the OP. I've done similar small-scale testing with bitcoins and other cryptocurrencies and it's not encouraging. Right now I suspect the abuse of arbitrage could be a problem, especially if this is to applied to our current economic system. I'd have to think about how this would apply to futures and interest rates

All you're effectively doing is slicing the pie different ways with the burger example. It's all still pie, and subject to inflation. This abstract technology is meant to protect against inflation in our current system in the US, where money is not not backed by anything tangible. Money = credit/debt. How are you defining a value without a currency? (unless you mean bartering, and average lifespans of 30 years)

Bob: "Did you hear about the Obama administration scandal?, Jim: "You mean the Mexican gun running?" Bob: "No, the other one." Jim: "You mean SEAL Team 6?" Bob: "No, the other one." Jim: "You mean the State Dept. lying about Benghazi?" Bob: "No, the other one." im: "You mean voter fraud?" Bob: "No, the other one." Jim: "You mean the military not getting their votes counted?" Bob: "No, the other one." Jim: "The NSA monitoring our phone calls, emails and everything else?" Bob: "No, the other one." Jim: "You mean the of drones in our own country without the benefit of the law?" Bob: "No, the other one." Jim: "Giving 123 Technologies $300 Million and right after it declared bankruptcy and was sold to the Chinese?" Bob: "No, the other one." Jim: "You mean the president arming the Muslim Brotherhood?" Bob: "No the other one:. Jim: "The IRS targeting conservatives?" Bob: "No, the other one." Jim: "The DOJ spying on the press?" Bob: "No, the other one." Jim: "Sebelius shaking down health insurance executives?" Bob: "No, the other one." Jim: "Giving SOLYNDRA $500 MILLION DOLLARS and 3 months later they declared bankruptcy and then the Chinese bought it?" Bob: "No, the other one." Jim: "The NSA monitoring our phone calls, emails and everything else?" Bob: "No, the other one." Jim: "The president's ordering the release of nearly 10,000 illegal immigrants from jails and prisons, and falsely blaming the sequester?" Bob: "No, the other one." Jim: "The president's threat to impose gun control by Executive Order in order to bypass Congress?" Bob: "No, the other one." Jim: "The president's repeated violation of the law requiring him to submit a budget no later than the first Monday in February?" Bob: "No, the other one." Jim: "The 2012 vote where 115% of all registered voters in some counties voted 100% for Obama?" Bob: "No, the other one." Jim: "The president's unconstitutional recess appointments in an attempt to circumvent the Senate's advise-and-consent role?" Bob: "No, the other one." Jim: "The State Department interfering with an Inspector General investigation on departmental sexual misconduct?" Bob: "No, the other one." Jim: "Clinton, the IRS, Clapper and Holder all lying to Congress?" Bob: "No, the other one." Jim: "I give up! ... Oh wait, I think I got it! You mean that 65 million low-information voters who don't pay taxes and get free stuff from taxpayers and stuck us again with the most pandering, corrupt administration in American history?"

I don't think they're being quite that literal when they thank Jesus lol. And yeah happy turkey day everyone. I missed this holiday when I was in the UK.

So I did give your theory a look. I don't understand how a fast transaction time exempts a currency or goods from inflation, since whatever this undefined technological method you're using to establish nominal values will define a currency. Looking at this now I don't see how you could link it honestly thinking it's a good argument against the chance of hyperinflation in the US, simply because you have a porous theory on how it might not happen, if it was implemented "en masse." Also, the supply of money (M0, MB, M1, etc) is irrelevant. What is the difference now between a dollar bill and a ten-year treasury bond? They are essentially both credit instruments.A dollar bill is just a bond that you get no interest on (with a bond today, you get next to no interest). So credit is money, as of 1971. I think 2008 should have made that obvious. The point is, what saved us in 2008, printing more money, will not help when this next bubble pops (or if we lose the Dollar as the reserve before then). You say that hyperinflation couldn't happen in the US. Nevermind the 12 times across the globe it's happened this century, and more recently with British sterling. There are many parallels between the crises. One common them is massive credit expansion and big government. Almost every industry in the US gets government subsidizes; the Fed is driving the economy. One thing to consider is that globalization is suppressing much of the inflation by putting a lot of (downward) pressure on wages. This is one of the reasons we've able to get away with all this Quantitative Easing ("printing $85 billion a month"). This is one of the main reasons inflation hasn't risen so sharply recently. Deflationary wage wars with China may never let up. While it may be deflationary in general, it is growth deflation, not credit deflation, and does nothing to prevent credit expansion. Another thing is that even if these market forces prevent inflation, there is nothing to stop credit collapse, aka deflation. In a deflation, you have a domino effect of debts wiping out leverage leaving things like gold, silver as stores of value ("sophisticated investors" obviously know of other hedges, but they will still have to weather the same storm). Now since money = credit/debt, and debt default destroys money, you have money decreasing, which tends to drop prices. So now the real value of remaining debts goes up, which few can repay, causing even more defaults. (Banks would close). Panic would lead to runs on the bank. Now here it'd be nice to believe that the Fed could step in and save the day. And there are really only two ways to get rid of bad debt: default or inflation. Historically hyperinflation is usually what happens. Regardless, deflation, which can come prior, is devastating enough. The Fed can only save the day as long as the world is willing to buy our debt. As money depreciates, people will exchange out of it for anything. Other countries will obviously need to buy up dollars to save themselves from an exchange crises as people get out of the dollar. This is already happening to an extent, and it's helped keep prices down in the US. However if all central banks start inflating there'd be hyperinflation all over the world. The fact that the US dollar is the reserve currency makes this worse. What foreign investor would consider dollars safe if the Fed stars having to drop bills out of helicopters? Would countries try to exchange it for Euros? I highly doubt it. Maybe the yuan, but with China exposed to 1.3 trillion of US bonds, and 3+ trillion in FX reserves, it is likely that gold, silver and platinum will be used. (And this is why they're buying so damn much). There are a number of scenarios, besides the "currency wars" that could overwhelm this Fed policy of low interest rates and QE4ever. There could be protectionist trade wars, similar to the 1930's. Another asset bubble. The $200+ trillion in derivatives could melt down. A simple policy blunder. Or too low interest rates. Nothing would be able to push aggregate demand, so the only question is hyperinflation or deflation, a lose/lose.

I'm not sure. I try to avoid the bickering, sarcasm and personal attacks. I come here to learn. By the way, if there is a failure to expand credit/consumption there could be several years of deflation. I'm not sure if you've given any thought to how horrible that is , as well. I see that your original assertion was based on a post you made in August on your views with inflation. You admitted the possibility to "holes" in your theory, so I'll reply on that, since I don't think we agree on the impact of deflation or hyperinflation.

A quick note: Rand's lexicon covers the topic of evasion and blanking out. As with the first page of this thread, with the topic of credit expansion/consumption, you again seem intent on reducing the discussion to trolling (usually trolling a straw man argument). This reminds me of the same guy who recently got nasty with Mark K, and that other guy who brazenly cited ACLU.

Your numbers on the world's wealth distribution are suspect at best. Even if I did watch Fox News, and even if people have been warning of runaway inflation for exactly "six years", what bearing does that have on the arguments I made about the failure of the dollar as the reserve currency, and China's role in it? I'm very interested in how exactly you diversify your portfolio, if you think a "bank" is any safer than a mattress. A foreign bank, maybe. Nevermind the uselessness of grouping yourself with "every large company", for there are many "large companies" in the US and abroad that could be very vulnerable to a run on the dollar. I think that there will be a near–complete shutdown of the American economy. Federal and state governments will shut down. Banks will not open. Business will at least temporarily shutter their doors. There will most likely be military enforced martial law. What do you think would happen?