4 ms·

The Fed and bank bailouts are transferring wealth to the wealthy from everyone else. Fiat makes it all possible. It's not hard money. We must get back in a hard

The Fed and bank bailouts are transferring wealth to the wealthy from everyone else. Fiat makes it all possible. It's not hard money. We must get back in a hard money system. Read or listen to "The Bitcoin Standard." Can also find author and podcasts on YouTube.

whoisninja 7y ago
totally, highly recommend listening to this podcast everyone. The guest explains the repo situation very well in addition to Bitcoin as hard money: https://www.whatbitcoindid.com/podcast/nik-bhatia-on-bitcoin-is-a-response-to-central-banks https://www.whatbitcoindid.com/podcast/nik-bhatia-on-bitcoin...
smaddox 7y ago
Deflationary currency is even worse than Fiat currency. We don't need irrecoverable recessions. We just need our governments to stop relying on trickle-down nonsense, and start injecting money at the bottom. We need to rely on and leverage the trickle-up economy that we've always had.
- jjeaff 7y ago
  I don't think trickle down economics are what was being used for these bailouts. The rationale behind the bailouts was that the failure of many of these large banks would have caused lots of trouble and additional damage to the system as a whole. Markets are controlled by consumer sentiment. The failure of any huge banks or other huge organizations like AIG would have caused a catastrophic run on the banks and even farther fall in the market. Additionally, I believe overall the US government has netted more than $100B in bailouts. The bailouts were most definitely a good idea according to essentially every expert out there. But if anything, they should have extracted more from the companies they bailed out to limit the moral hazard that was created.
  - smaddox 7y ago
    The bank bailouts is distinct from Quantitative Easing. The former was government backed loans to large banks. The latter is the Federal Reserve buying extremely over-valued financial assets (over-valued because of fraud), and then just financial assets in general, in order to prop up the price of these assets. The former was probably a necessary evil, but it should have come with more changes. The latter is less clear. Because of the massive amounts of fraud that occured, many citizens pension funds were extremely exposed to junk financial assets. So the Fed decided they couldn't let the market correct itself. But a better solution would have been a market correction combined with a direct stimulus to the lower and middle class.

whoisninja 7y ago

totally, highly recommend listening to this podcast everyone. The guest explains the repo situation very well in addition to Bitcoin as hard money: https://www.whatbitcoindid.com/podcast/nik-bhatia-on-bitcoin-is-a-response-to-central-banks https://www.whatbitcoindid.com/podcast/nik-bhatia-on-bitcoin...

smaddox 7y ago

Deflationary currency is even worse than Fiat currency. We don't need irrecoverable recessions. We just need our governments to stop relying on trickle-down nonsense, and start injecting money at the bottom. We need to rely on and leverage the trickle-up economy that we've always had.

jjeaff 7y ago
I don't think trickle down economics are what was being used for these bailouts. The rationale behind the bailouts was that the failure of many of these large banks would have caused lots of trouble and additional damage to the system as a whole. Markets are controlled by consumer sentiment. The failure of any huge banks or other huge organizations like AIG would have caused a catastrophic run on the banks and even farther fall in the market. Additionally, I believe overall the US government has netted more than $100B in bailouts. The bailouts were most definitely a good idea according to essentially every expert out there. But if anything, they should have extracted more from the companies they bailed out to limit the moral hazard that was created.
- smaddox 7y ago
  The bank bailouts is distinct from Quantitative Easing. The former was government backed loans to large banks. The latter is the Federal Reserve buying extremely over-valued financial assets (over-valued because of fraud), and then just financial assets in general, in order to prop up the price of these assets. The former was probably a necessary evil, but it should have come with more changes. The latter is less clear. Because of the massive amounts of fraud that occured, many citizens pension funds were extremely exposed to junk financial assets. So the Fed decided they couldn't let the market correct itself. But a better solution would have been a market correction combined with a direct stimulus to the lower and middle class.