3 ms·

I wish you had just replaced Peter Schiff with, "Ron Paul's economic advisor" to save me some time. What you assert is simply untrue. It would be a good thing,

by rortian 17y ago

I wish you had just replaced Peter Schiff with, "Ron Paul's economic advisor" to save me some time. What you assert is simply untrue. It would be a good thing, currently, for the dollar to be devalued somewhat. Our exports would be cheaper to others and thus more attractive. Please cite credible people when you attempt to make extraordinary claims like 'the US itself will be wiped out'.

dpatru 17y ago
Look up "peter schiff was right" and "peter schiff mortgage bankers speech" on youtube. At the time when "credible" people were predicting no recession and prosperity in perpetuity, Schiff was a contrarian voice predicting recession and a fall in housing prices. For example: see http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7879752717244782545# http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7879752717244782545# which shows side-by-side prognoses from Schiff and bullish pundits on CNBC and Fox News before the recession. You can't get to prosperity by devaluing your currency because prosperity depends on savings and investment and a falling currency encourages the opposite.
- rortian 17y ago
  Alright, here's a problem for you, no one will assert that bullish pundits on CNBC are credible. http://www.cepr.net/index.php/dean-baker/ http://www.cepr.net/index.php/dean-baker/ Dean Baker is an actual economist and he called the housing bubble. I find your last sentence bizarre as it asserts as a truism something that is not really true at all. You believe people who are on the on the fringe of economics and seem to enjoy it so more power to you.
  - kiba 17y ago
    Your comment reeks of appeal to authority. You should at least demonstrate why "bullish" pundits are wrong. It doesn't matter if an economist is on the fringe of economics, especially a field that is notorious for not being able to predict much of anything. It matters if they are right, or wrong, how much, or it is just plain storytelling(and wrong!) in addition to lucky predictions.
    - rortian 17y ago
      It does and I'm not above making that move with certain positions. If you don't have a problem with bullish pundits then I wonder where you were in the late 90s. Regardless, predicting the future is a bit of a silly exercise and not many people come away from in being right. Appeal to authority is the way to stay sane against crazy ideological camps: Ron Paulites, 911 truthers, creationists, etc. I am not going to take the time to rebut all the nonsense they manufacture. It is important to point out where these people are coming from.
      - kiba 17y ago
        Appeal to authority is the way to stay sane against crazy ideological camps: Ron Paulites, 911 truthers, creationists, etc As if libertarians are some crazy right-wing nutcases who wants drugs, believe in every single conspiracy theory about the government, and as well think free markets can perform miracles. Yes, there are probably tons of crazy and wrong ideas out there, ranging from anarcho-commiunism, labor theory of values, and the paradox of thrift. But, there are also ideas out that are right or just worth exploring. Black Swan theory, the problem of economic calculation, the broken window fallacy, etc, are examples. This is not physics or biology where everyone agree with each other and they'll be right 99.99% of the time(except the cutting edge of their field). We're discussing economics here, where politics intervenes, the subject matters difficult to study, and whole mathematical models can be invalidated because humans are positive feedback loops. You can't make shorthand judgement in that field.(With the exception of free trades. Every economists say it is a good thing and they'll be right) And where I was in the 90s? I was in elementary school.
        rortian 17y ago
        This is really sad. Did you see libertarian in there? Ron Paul is not the only libertarian and is despised by many libertarians. I'll go into that further if you so desire. >Black Swan theory, the problem of economic calculation, the broken window fallacy, etc, are examples. These have nothing to do with what I was talking about. I'm quite familiar will some of these topics and they are interesting to consider. As I said before I'm down with econ not being a precise science. However, some opinions just aren't that serious.
- Locke1689 17y ago
  Oh please, Peter Schiff has been trumpeting the fall of the US economy since 1999 at least. If you cry wolf enough times eventually there's actually going to be a wolf. Schiff was a contrarian voice That's at least correct. Schiff is part of the same anti-regulation crusade that got discredited two years ago.
  - kiba 17y ago
    Schiff is part of the same anti-regulation crusade that got discredited two years ago. And you expect me to believe this when the federal reserve exists?

by rortian 17y ago

dpatru 17y ago

Look up "peter schiff was right" and "peter schiff mortgage bankers speech" on youtube. At the time when "credible" people were predicting no recession and prosperity in perpetuity, Schiff was a contrarian voice predicting recession and a fall in housing prices. For example: see http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7879752717244782545# http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7879752717244782545# which shows side-by-side prognoses from Schiff and bullish pundits on CNBC and Fox News before the recession. You can't get to prosperity by devaluing your currency because prosperity depends on savings and investment and a falling currency encourages the opposite.

rortian 17y ago
Alright, here's a problem for you, no one will assert that bullish pundits on CNBC are credible. http://www.cepr.net/index.php/dean-baker/ http://www.cepr.net/index.php/dean-baker/ Dean Baker is an actual economist and he called the housing bubble. I find your last sentence bizarre as it asserts as a truism something that is not really true at all. You believe people who are on the on the fringe of economics and seem to enjoy it so more power to you.
- kiba 17y ago
  Your comment reeks of appeal to authority. You should at least demonstrate why "bullish" pundits are wrong. It doesn't matter if an economist is on the fringe of economics, especially a field that is notorious for not being able to predict much of anything. It matters if they are right, or wrong, how much, or it is just plain storytelling(and wrong!) in addition to lucky predictions.
  - rortian 17y ago
    It does and I'm not above making that move with certain positions. If you don't have a problem with bullish pundits then I wonder where you were in the late 90s. Regardless, predicting the future is a bit of a silly exercise and not many people come away from in being right. Appeal to authority is the way to stay sane against crazy ideological camps: Ron Paulites, 911 truthers, creationists, etc. I am not going to take the time to rebut all the nonsense they manufacture. It is important to point out where these people are coming from.
    - kiba 17y ago
      Appeal to authority is the way to stay sane against crazy ideological camps: Ron Paulites, 911 truthers, creationists, etc As if libertarians are some crazy right-wing nutcases who wants drugs, believe in every single conspiracy theory about the government, and as well think free markets can perform miracles. Yes, there are probably tons of crazy and wrong ideas out there, ranging from anarcho-commiunism, labor theory of values, and the paradox of thrift. But, there are also ideas out that are right or just worth exploring. Black Swan theory, the problem of economic calculation, the broken window fallacy, etc, are examples. This is not physics or biology where everyone agree with each other and they'll be right 99.99% of the time(except the cutting edge of their field). We're discussing economics here, where politics intervenes, the subject matters difficult to study, and whole mathematical models can be invalidated because humans are positive feedback loops. You can't make shorthand judgement in that field.(With the exception of free trades. Every economists say it is a good thing and they'll be right) And where I was in the 90s? I was in elementary school.
      - rortian 17y ago
        This is really sad. Did you see libertarian in there? Ron Paul is not the only libertarian and is despised by many libertarians. I'll go into that further if you so desire. >Black Swan theory, the problem of economic calculation, the broken window fallacy, etc, are examples. These have nothing to do with what I was talking about. I'm quite familiar will some of these topics and they are interesting to consider. As I said before I'm down with econ not being a precise science. However, some opinions just aren't that serious.
Locke1689 17y ago
Oh please, Peter Schiff has been trumpeting the fall of the US economy since 1999 at least. If you cry wolf enough times eventually there's actually going to be a wolf. Schiff was a contrarian voice That's at least correct. Schiff is part of the same anti-regulation crusade that got discredited two years ago.
- kiba 17y ago
  Schiff is part of the same anti-regulation crusade that got discredited two years ago. And you expect me to believe this when the federal reserve exists?