3 ms·

> Is this distinct from the sub-prime crisis they already alluded to in their post? Perhaps. There have been more than one... > Inflation may still happen but

> Is this distinct from the sub-prime crisis they already alluded to in their post? Perhaps. There have been more than one... > Inflation may still happen but what I'm trying to get at is: if inflation turns out to not be the problem do you have another case against fiat currency? Inflation is already here. Cost of living, rent, gas, food, lumber, taxes, etc. are rising today. Coupled with the government mandated shutdown, particularly of select "non-essential" (aka small) business, we saw a large contraction in the economy. The government's official numbers are self-serving & moving goal-posts. http://www.shadowstats.com/ http://www.shadowstats.com/ measures the economic numbers according to benchmarks consistent with the past. Inflation is here & has been here for a while. > The early days of this were quite literally a mess which is why the government began instituting regulated monopolies. It was even more of a mess before the invention of electricity. The regulation of utilities could be considered a success. At least the government did one thing right. Problem is despite the Trillions going into taxes over the years, we have a grid that is vulnerable to long term blackouts. With the Grand Solar Minimum being here & a geomagnetic excursion occurring, we can expect space weather to create more issues (e.g. Carrington Event). We are also vulnerable to CME attacks caused by foreign governments. Not good. > Citation rather than glossy overtures are strongly needed here My citation is the amount of time that people have to spend working to pay taxes & their unhappiness in doing so. Who makes things happen in everyday life? The citizenry/people, not bureaucrats.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
briantakita 6y ago
> You understand there are targets for inflation, right? Meaning the goal is not 0%. The problem with the last decade is that inflation has been lower than expected and the strengthening dollar has caused its own problems. Except John Williams is showing real inflation to be around "9.0% in Aggregate, 16.0% in Goods and 5.6% in Services". Is 9% the target? > Your citation is that proper don’t like spending their money? Really? That’s exactly my original point about the issue with cognitive biases. Not sure what you are trying to convey here. It's not like you used any citations. I'm not asking for one anyways. I was hoping to be able to discuss simple logic & simple observations without the need to invoke the "experts" with their narrow fields of expertise. You obviously have cognitive biases as well. I hope you don't think you are some arbiter of truth because you are way off the mark. >People don’t want to pay and simultaneously don’t want to give up government programs. That is not a rational stance Government programs are expensive & ultimately don't work. I'd rather have a free(ish) market create solutions. There are few true free markets, since almost every market is regulated (except the "black market"). There are more solutions than the electric grid as it currently stands. The best solution is for people to be educated on how our climate systems work, our solar cycles, our movement through the cosmos, & the impact of electricity & magnetism on our planetary systems. Not this APGW nonsense that has wasted so much money & time.
- bumby 6y ago
  >It's not like you used any citations. I'm not asking for one anyways. You cite biased sources that fit your predetermined worldview. I’ve already conceded inflation has happened, but it tends to be transitory type. Or did you miss that part of the discussion? Even if your source was reliable, it doesn’t display the type of evidence I think you assume it does. It’s fairly clear you start with a conclusion and work backwards, disregarding anything that’s inconvenient from the conversation. I’ve given you citations elsewhere. But the larger point your statement portrays is that there literally no evidence that can be provided to change your mind. That’s not a productive person to try and maintain a dialogue with.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

briantakita 6y ago

> You understand there are targets for inflation, right? Meaning the goal is not 0%. The problem with the last decade is that inflation has been lower than expected and the strengthening dollar has caused its own problems. Except John Williams is showing real inflation to be around "9.0% in Aggregate, 16.0% in Goods and 5.6% in Services". Is 9% the target? > Your citation is that proper don’t like spending their money? Really? That’s exactly my original point about the issue with cognitive biases. Not sure what you are trying to convey here. It's not like you used any citations. I'm not asking for one anyways. I was hoping to be able to discuss simple logic & simple observations without the need to invoke the "experts" with their narrow fields of expertise. You obviously have cognitive biases as well. I hope you don't think you are some arbiter of truth because you are way off the mark. >People don’t want to pay and simultaneously don’t want to give up government programs. That is not a rational stance Government programs are expensive & ultimately don't work. I'd rather have a free(ish) market create solutions. There are few true free markets, since almost every market is regulated (except the "black market"). There are more solutions than the electric grid as it currently stands. The best solution is for people to be educated on how our climate systems work, our solar cycles, our movement through the cosmos, & the impact of electricity & magnetism on our planetary systems. Not this APGW nonsense that has wasted so much money & time.

bumby 6y ago
>It's not like you used any citations. I'm not asking for one anyways. You cite biased sources that fit your predetermined worldview. I’ve already conceded inflation has happened, but it tends to be transitory type. Or did you miss that part of the discussion? Even if your source was reliable, it doesn’t display the type of evidence I think you assume it does. It’s fairly clear you start with a conclusion and work backwards, disregarding anything that’s inconvenient from the conversation. I’ve given you citations elsewhere. But the larger point your statement portrays is that there literally no evidence that can be provided to change your mind. That’s not a productive person to try and maintain a dialogue with.