THE DANGER of RECESSION, MEGA- INFLATION AND JOBLESSNESS
Being a Q&A from the ultimate money dummy, me. And being a simple explanation of why the BIG BOYS do not WANT AND / OR NEED INFLATION right now. Again, written by a card carrying dummie who figures that if I can understand it, you can!
Shut your eyes and for a moment, 'see' the bankers. Think of WHO CONTROLS THE MONEY supply AND SETS THE currency exchange RATES. THEY ARE BANKERS. Top hats, waist coats, pin striped pants, EVERYBODY ON THE whole PLANET owes them money now. They have billions so they don't really care about the whole issue, but they do have their banker's rule book, these lines that they draw. The punctuation in the contracts has been defined. The rule is that when a nation borrows, it must pay the bankers back at a goodly interest rate.
Right now, the citizens of the USA owe 3 trillion to some nations like CHINA but also to the INTERNATIONAL BANKERS, doing business as THE FEDERAL RESERVE. AND WORLD BANK. These are the entitites that plan how much a nation will pay back which is accomplished through taxes. That skyscraper being built on the edge of the city was built with totally borrowed bucks, folks have gotta pay it back, 100 million at 7% per annum means 7 million a year, right? Just for the unpaid balance, first year.
So it is incumbant upon the cities, states and countries to NICK THE BUCKS off you! Yes, Oh don't be dumb. California just DOUBLED all taxes ...property, income, sales tax. And they were running a game but it turned out it was illegal. They were pulling money from the UTILITY CORPORATIONS. millions. and the court said that they couldn't.
After all, they were already charging us good people 20% on the dollar earned and l0% on the dollar spent, that's what it means to 'get you coming and going,' I guess.. That revenue is paid to the FEDERAL RESERVE I think, or is it just income taxes that goes to them? We're like the cow that the farmer thinks he owns but the fed gets to come milk us, that's the deal when you use the FED.
Everything that you me/ WE and they owe now will get paid in today's dollars. Big fat meaningful dollars. The FED WANTS IT NOW.
IF THE FED UNLEASHES INFLATION, (it is THEY who do that, right?) tomorrow's dollars will be tiny and meaningless in comparison. So IF I OWE A MILLION now, why would they devalue currency everywhere so
that a million ten yrs from now is the price of lunch? So that I can give them a free lunch?
Which do they prefer for payback? TODAY DOLLARS or tomorrow dollars? I'd IMAGINE they prefer
today's fatter dollars. There is no reason for them to change the value of money when so much of us owe them. Not change it to be less valuable, anyway.
Say I owe you ten bucks today. And that could buy both of us a hamburger and a coke right now, A great meal. ONLY I OWE IT TO THE FED. Say that a year down the line that ten bucks will only buy a half a burger
meal for half of one of us. AND I OWE THAT TO THE FED. Which would I rather spend as a debtor? I'd rather pay back in tomorrow's skinny money when I'll only miss out on a half a burger.
THE FED WHO HAS THE ULTIMATE CHOICE prefers today's money as it's genuinely HEFTIER. If i inflate the money if i am in control of inflating money as the central bankers are, they prefer getting paid NOW. RIGHT, as soon the money will degenerate. Be worth less.
SO WHY WOULD THEY RIG INFLATION? WHO WINS? I go online and research it:
The demise of fiat-money regimes around the world has become
unmistakable. They can only be kept alive by central banks creating ever
greater amounts of base money and governments underwriting commercial
The US Federal Reserve, for instance, increased the stock of the
monetary base — which includes banks' demand deposits held with the Fed,
plus coins and notes in circulation — from $870.9 billion in August 2008
to $1735.3 billion in January 2009.
What the Fed does is produce inflation — and this is a truth that stands
in sharp contrast to what mainstream economists say, namely that the
rise in base money will just increase the liquidity in the interbank
market and will not affect the money holdings in the hands of consumers,
firms, and the government, which — they admit — could then inflate
In contrast, Austrian economists stress that inflation is a result of a
rise in the stock of money. This viewpoint rests on sound economics,
firmly rooted in the notion that, first and foremost, value is a
subjective concept. Money is a good, like any other, and it is therefore
subject to the law of diminishing marginal utility.
A rise in the money stock necessarily reduces the marginal utility of a
money unit — and therefore its value — from the viewpoint of the
individual; likewise, the marginal utility of a money unit — and
therefore its value — would increase if the money stock declines.
Changes in the value individuals assign to a money unit are reflected in
prices for vendible items. For instance, if the money stock in the hands
of an individual rises, he may wish to increase his holdings of other
goods. As he exchanges money against vendible items, the prices of the
latter are bid up.
In that sense, the change in the money stock is what must be called
inflation, while changes in the prices for goods and services are just
symptoms of the underlying cause, which is the change in the stock of
What the rise in base money has done so far is prevent prices of banks'
security holdings to decline to free-market levels. In other words, the
money injection helps to keep asset prices at artificially elevated
levels, thereby preventing prices in financial markets, credit markets
in particular, from adjusting. The Path Toward Ever-Higher Inflation
And if you understood that, you're surely smart enough to figure
out a way around the huge inflation heading our way in 2012.
When the Banksters get out from under this big party they're
throwing, called the LONDON OLYMPICS.
<==== BACK TO THE FUTURE WEBSITE