Hatred for the FED and big banks is small brain

[Anonymous No.16568366]

Full disclosure, I work for a really big bank so of course I am biased but the argument I'll make here is entirely logical, based not even in my own experience. I gather that a lot of people hate the FED and big banks because they have unchecked power over the direction of the economy which they use to benefit themselves in legal ways. For example, if you are the FED then you can decide when to print money and, more importantly, which assets to buy with said money to essentially bail out the holders of those shitty assets. And, of course, the FED didn't print money to pump your bitcoins, or to pay your mortgage. The question is, of course, if this is bad and if this should be allowed. Let's go one by one:

>is this bad
I think this is just a meaningless question. Nothing is bad or good, what matters is the logic.

>should this be allowed
Well, think about this: even before the era of modern financial markets, there had been economic crashes. Money holders can act irrationally, the economy of a little nation can even be affected by the random effects of natural disasters, war, etc. In a sense, it is the FED and big banks like JP Morgan Chase's job to look over the economy and protect it. But protecting the economy is not an economic activity that itself can bring revenue, and thus no one has an incentive to do it. After all, if you fix an economy you can't then go on eBay and sell "fixed economies" for profit. So, if this is the case, why would anyone be incentivized to have the job of Protector instead of focusing on other real revenue-generating economic activities? Well, the incentive is this: by being the Lord Protector, you can sometimes enrich yourself by buying your own assets. (Well, really is having your cousin's uncle who works in the FED buy your assets, but you get the idea). This is the profit, this is the incentive.

And, given that you are not communist bastards, you must logically agree that it is okay for the FED to bail out big banks.

[Anonymous No.16568417]

>>16568366
Bankers didn’t go to jail last time, next time you’ll be dragged into the street and hanged.

[Anonymous No.16568419]

Kike thread
Sage

[Anonymous No.16568428]

>>16568417
Cool, can you point out the logical flaw in my argument? Because there is none, you are just working off feelings. Not any better than communists, and we all know who wins the eternal war.

[Anonymous No.16568462]

>>16568366
all i know is that cash settled futures are bullshit and infinite money printing enables them

[Anonymous No.16568465]

>>16568419
Ok Commie

[Anonymous No.16568498]

>>16568366
>>16568428
>>16568465
All bankers responsible for foisting central banking on the mass of unthinking rubes and creating clownworld will hang.

[Anonymous No.16568509]

Holy fuck you’re a retard, and not just a Retard but a vicious retard

I hope you die painfully, very painfully

[Anonymous No.16568518]

>>16568498
>>16568509
I still see no arguments, commies. Come on, look at the rigor of my post vs your
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

[Anonymous No.16568523]

>>16568428
Yes I can. But what’s the point. You’ll just disagree until the cows come home. You’re wrong, very wrong, wrong in the most simultaneously vicious and faggy way possible. You should be put to the sword for even having the biology to ever convince yourself of this bullshir and how it’s mutilated the human race

[Anonymous No.16568528]

How do you define a "fixed" economy in this scenario? Everyone has different values, the Fed believes themselves to be smoothing at the market as you mentioned, but to me it simply looks as if they have forced the united states down a consumerist economy rabbit hole. Thus I don't consider what they do to be fixing anything, and I am a valid market member. The action of them trying "fix" erratic behavior in the market looks simply like they are trying to negate my economic voice from this vantage point.

Furthermore, if you admit money holders can act irrationally in a way you feel needs protecting, then why are you supporting the acts of economic centralization by the fed? All that does is increase the attack vectors, increase the surface area, of plausible areas for economic instability. If people can act irrationally in the market then one person with 50% market share poses a much bigger threat if they act irrationally compared to 5 people with 10% market share each.

[Anonymous No.16568552]

>>16568523
>Yes I can. But what’s the point.
Go on, I am a man of logic. I serve the banks not because it enriches me, but because it is my way to serve the people using my intellect to help guide the economy they all need to sustain their modern lifestyles. If you can prove to me that I a wrong, I will accept it and buy bitcoin or whatever the fuck you people do.

[Anonymous No.16568590]

>>16568528
>How do you define a "fixed" economy in this scenario?
A fixed economy is simply a liquid economy. You really don't care about the specifics, you just want your money to be moving around as much as possible because in the end money is supposed to be exchanged for goods and services. It is pointless to just hoard money with no eventual plan of spending it. And yes, some money hoarding is inevitable, people will want to save. But you really want people spending at least a significant percentage of their income so that the power of money is not wasted. An economic crisis happens when the money stops moving around. In fact, it happens when money can't move around because there was an imbalance: some people hoard too many assets and some people owe too much that they can't even pay it back even if they wanted. You absolutely do not want this to happen ever on a wide scale. If some company becomes insolvent then you want the process of liquidation to pay back investors be as quick as possible. Similarly, if a bunch of people becomes insolvent at the same time you want the process of correction to be as swift as possible.

>if you admit money holders can act irrationally in a way you feel needs protecting, then why are you supporting the acts of economic centralization by the fed?

I do not necessarily support it. My argument is that we need a Lord Protector. Whoever that is can make mistakes, just like professionals in other fields make mistakes, but we are better off having doctors than not having doctors. Don't you agree?

[Anonymous No.16568824]

>>16568590
So you value a healthy economy in terms of investment and velocity then yes? Why have money sitting risk free and growing when you could have a comfortable level of inflation promoting risk premium behavior right, which of course lends to your liquidity point that risk adjusted returns can only be accurately compiled in an economy where liquidity is a non-issue really.

My argument to that would be it really only shifts where money is saved and stored, most financial corps hold extremely large amounts of US bonds simply because they are risk free premiums that are as good as cash making them highly liquid. What's the difference between a bond yielding 2% yearly and a deflationary currency yielding 2% yearly really? Is it just interest risk? At it's core interest is simply an inflation calculation, as far as the FF goes at least. In a more ethereal sense this risk would still exist in deflationary currency, as we could price in future growth with accuracy as we do now to determine proper rates for Gov Bonds. Both have the exact same risk actually, people losing faith in the economic institutions of the united states would have the same catastrophic effect on returns as people losing faith in a deflationary currency. So at this point we can feel comfortable having distilled this argument into a social issue, Do you want a large central government to determine your return in regards to inflation, or do you want many small institutions facing a multitude of different scenarios to determine this for you? Wether the central bank is actually promoting spending and investment and will in the future is entirely subjective, the numbers will always line up with them in a positive light because they are the ones that decide how much risk you are taking for you. Any negatives you perceive are a failure by them to play their own game in a correct way.

I will say money velocity is an excellent argument not many people make. (1/2)

[Anonymous No.16568877]

>>16568366
>given that you are not communist bastards, you must logically agree that it is okay for the FED to bail out big banks.

Nice logical fallacy faggot. A real capitalist would have let the big banks crash and burn since the money is federally insured. Our economy would have risen from the ashes of WW3 and ushered in a new era of baby booming prosperity. None of that happened because of corporate welfare cocksuckers like (You).


Fucking kike.

[Anonymous No.16569012]

>>16568877
Okay commie.

>>16568824
>What's the difference between a bond yielding 2% yearly and a deflationary currency yielding 2% yearly really?

You are right that on paper there is no difference but in execution, there is a difference. One big one is that one of the tools to control an economy is to influence the interest rates. In a world without treasury bonds, bond valuation would obviously be tied to the cash so you could tinker with interest rates by tinkering with inflation and deflation but think about this:

To tinker with interest rates via Treasury Bonds all you have to do is change a number. If you had to tinker with interest rates via the inflation/deflation of the currency, you'd be fucked. Just think about it, it would be much harder to tinker with deflation. And governments fuck up their inflation all the time, now you want to see them fuck up deflation? I am much happier knowing that you would have to be especially retarded to fuck up changing a number, so the FED operation remains simple and straightforward. Even a monkey could do it, and that's how it should be. Let all the intellectualism be left for the models and the cute presentations, but God damn let the execution be as simple as possible.

[Anonymous No.16569031]

>>16568824
your points are dense so forgive me that this is long, I'm just trying to do a good job.

As I said money velocity is a very good argument. If something is valuable we want that value to manifest in a timely matter, if something that was valuable is now unprofitable or non-valuable we want that adjusted in a timely matter as well. This is a double edged sword though for central banking, my opinion lies on the facts that 1. Money velocity is actually derived from communication technology progress not standards and regulations and 2. Free liquidity does not exist. We do not need a central bank to middle man assets anymore as all market participants now have the required technology to make money transactions as conducive and quick as they wish. Furthermore liquidity has never been free, and that will continue. As you mentioned all market crashes have been a collapse in liquidity, most prominently 2008 with the collapse of CDS in the subprime market leading liquidty shortages. We payed for this with trillions in taxes to keep liquidity up, yes some mortgages had gone bad but the real kicker was the liquidity loss. Bankers never look at this through the lens of liquidity being an actual component in the market however, understanding what weight the market can safely support is an extremely important part of trading that I think its unfair to say we should simply erase from a modern economy. Sure I could theoretically buy 10 trillion dollars worth of beanie babies, but should I really not be punished for my bet when the beanie baby market is unable to support my volume?

Now, for your last point, don't we need doctors in the financial market? Yes we do, but we don't need a surgeon general. The people who are fluent in financial products, who can safely invest the average americans savings in a way they will have a retirement at 65, who have an understanding of what indicators are important, those are the financial doctors.

[Anonymous No.16569035]

>>16569012
Nice non-argument

[Anonymous No.16569061]

>banks inject billions of dollars, creating them out of thin air because they need money
>I slave away for 45k a year and barely scrape by
Where's the logic in that? Where's my bailout?

[Anonymous No.16569103]

>>16568366
bailing out banks is the definition of communism you nigger

[Anonymous No.16569107]

>>16569031
>1. Money velocity is actually derived from communication technology progress not standards and regulations
Technology has an effect but give whatever tech you want to someone who won't play ball and you'll get the same result as if he had carrier pidgeons. You need the regulation to ensure everyone plays.

>2. Free liquidity does not exist.
But we make it as cheap as possible by ensuring that it never runs out.>>16569031

>but should I really not be punished for my bet when the beanie baby market is unable to support my volume?

But you were punished. Deusche Beanie's stock fucking collapsed as a result of their retarded risk management during the 2008 beanie baby crisis.

>Now, for your last point, don't we need doctors in the financial market? Yes we do, but we don't need a surgeon general.

I know we don't need a surgeon general, I'm saying we are better off having them even if we don't need them. It is better to have someone looking at the bigger picture at all times than having just tiny individuals just looking at their own tiny numbers. See, for example, the tragedy of the commons. A bunch of individuals trying to maximize their own returns will inevitably collapse society. Add to that system a Lord Protector who is looking at the generalities of everyone's numbers and you easily get a more logical system.

[Anonymous No.16569116]

>>16569061
>Where's the logic in that? Where's my bailout?


You don't understand OP, anon. When the government gives us money it's considered communism. However when it's one of the big friendly altruistic banks recieving money, it's (((capitalism).

Do you understand now? You eat shit and like it, sonny.

[Anonymous No.16569121]

>>16569061
If only you knew what would have happened to your 45k had those bailouts not been made. Oh boy...

I will give you a horror story: google the average yearly income in other countries.

[Anonymous No.16569128]

>>16569116
Right, I figured. Just more bullshit pilpul to justify the enslavement of the populace. There are no words for these people. The time for words has past.

[Anonymous No.16569183]

>>16568366
>Well, think about this: even before the era of modern financial markets, there had been economic crashes. Money holders can act irrationally, the economy of a little nation can even be affected by the random effects of natural disasters, war, etc. In a sense, it is the FED and big banks like JP Morgan Chase's job to look over the economy and protect it. But protecting the economy is not an economic activity that itself can bring revenue, and thus no one has an incentive to do it. After all, if you fix an economy you can't then go on eBay and sell "fixed economies" for profit. So, if this is the case, why would anyone be incentivized to have the job of Protector instead of focusing on other real revenue-generating economic activities? Well, the incentive is this: by being the Lord Protector, you can sometimes enrich yourself by buying your own assets. (Well, really is having your cousin's uncle who works in the FED buy your assets, but you get the idea). This is the profit, this is the incentive.
>The FED shouldn't be profitable
>Here's how the FED is corrupt and makes profit
Are you retarded?

[Anonymous No.16569198]

>>16569183
Here's a lesson for you retarded commies: no one will EVER logically do ANYTHING unless it pays them something in return. This is why your countries fail.

[Anonymous No.16569201]

>>16569012
Ah see, that is where your lack of knowledge is starting to cut in. The Fed doesn't actually set the prime rate/FF just by saying the number and thy will be done, they do fuck with inflation and deflation to set the rate actually in the form of how much money they inject into money markets. The FF is a corridor set by MM lending rates and, currently, how much money the fed will pay you to keep deposits with them. How that manifests right now is if interest rates go up, the bank prospers because they make higher rates on all their assets and each dollar they make on their small spreads grows much quicker, the "traditional" way that banks make "risk free" money. If rates go down however, banks lend it out more aggressively at larger sums, increasing their total capital. Sure they are only making 1% yoy now, but they are making 20% on a total increase in loan and bond holdings because of cheap money. This is actually how they control rates, they set that corridor which determines wether the monetary supply is inflationary or deflationary, of course. If you caught that though, the banks are making an inflationary increase in portfolios when they should be making less then 5% however all things considered including consumer and buisness growth in tangent with the banks marketshare. This is because of credit, which leads to bubbles such as insane growth during deflationary periods.

So they do fuck with inflation and deflation actually to set the rate, its just in a very sneaky way and often times disguised as credit lending and inflows to MM and reserves. Which you can tell they've run out of ammunition because they aren't even hiding it right now, it's why repo has blown up into this giant debacle, they cant cut credit quality anymore and are just proceeding straight to dumping money into the market.

[Anonymous No.16569207]

>>16568366
>fixed economies

[Anonymous No.16569218]

>>16569198
So we shouldn't have this position in our society because it will be fundamentally corrupt? Based anon making arguments to disband the FED!!

[Anonymous No.16569232]

I don't buy the argument that the Fed being private makes it especially sinister. The UK's central bank is nationalized, they get up to the same bullshit economic tricks.

[Anonymous No.16569235]

>>16569121
If the big banks hadn't been bailed out then the entire world economy would have crashed, and likely a few more wars would have happened thus destroying other economies even more. You economist cucks don't know how to place the economics in the context of history.

The business cycles of the 20th century you use to make models and theories are completely meaningless today. At multiple points during the previous century Europe and Asia were recovering from two world wars, and living under the scourge of communism. The US basically had no competition for most of the twentieth century. Nowadays and going forward, the US will have much stiffer competition in the global economy, and reasons to use US dollars as a backing currency are running out for many nations. If the US dollar ceases to be the world currency, there will be no bailout next time.

The scales are slowly tipping and people like you are only worried about lining some kike's pockets with inflationary monopoly money. Buy gold and silver.

[Anonymous No.16569240]

>>16569207
>CPI increases as lifestyle shoots up exponentially
Well, what did you expect? Sorry, you don't get the internet and phones at an economy of the same level as the 1800s.

[Anonymous No.16569258]

>>16569240
>lifestyle shoots up exponentially
>cmon guys look at all this cool stuff you have
>technology wouldnt have progressed if we didnt devalue the dollar
Retarded

[Anonymous No.16569309]

>>16569107
see here is where I think we are having a disconnect:
1. People will always play ball. Just because that ball game is not good for YOU does not mean they aren't playing ball.
2. But then liquidity is limited to those who the fed believes is playing ball, the banks they've decided have enough cash to sit with them in the government entitys arena. That's not liquidty in the market, that's liquidity for them and their bets. Its cheap to free for them and their goals. It supports an entity which should by volition of the game rules should not be supported any longer.

3. That's not a punishment though, that's a side effect. A punishment would have been a bank frozen up due to having 20% of its portfolio in subprime mortages so it couldn't cover it's other capital producing assets when risk adjusted returns turned out to be bullshit.

4. Everyone looks at the bigger picture. To some that looks like getting as much money in the short term for hedonistic reasons yes, to others it looks like getting money in an responsible and scalable way so you can build a better world. To suggest every person is unable to see their own situation correctly and has need for this lord protectorate is extremely disengenious at best. You can look at everyone's numbers for reasons other then financial gain for yourself. Even if that's all you want however, we all agreed to this system because we believe it turns greed into common wealth. Appointing a "protectorate" undermines that system, saying greed is bad for everyone and the system is broken, in which case why even have a capitalist system and not just an entirely centrally planned economy? Your making fun of communism in this very thread while also peddling the ideology that every man is equally worthless and needs a master to plan for them, if by force even.

[Anonymous No.16569315]

>>16569258
>the commie quotes capitalists to defend his position
If I was Jewish, I'd say good goy.

[Anonymous No.16569353]

>>16569315
My position was here >>16569207 and your response was "well lifestyle has improved." kys faggot

[Anonymous No.16569360]

>>16569232
Your right, and I believe that is because economics has become a militarized pursuit in todays world. To play devils advocate however, if one country owned the others assets then they would play along with them no matter the system of government, so the fed could be private and those private entity could influence the British system to do their bidding in theory.

[Anonymous No.16569369]

>>16569258
>technology wouldnt have progressed if we didnt devalue the dollar

It's more like the dollar wouldn't have devalued if we didn't progess technology.

In 1850, the only things you needed to live comfortably was a cabin, a small farm, and a family. You could probably do all of this on $500 dollars a year.

Today, the basic standard of living is much much higher. A basic life includes a car, internet, phone, TVs, and all kinds of random electronics. The dollar has definitely lost value, but there is truth in saying that it is simply more to exist today than it was 100 years ago.

[Anonymous No.16569383]

>>16569369
>It's more like the dollar wouldn't have devalued if we didn't progess technology.
So there were no technological improvements from 1775-1913?

[Anonymous No.16569386]

>>16568366
>the fed has an incentive to enable risky business practices that ruin economic life for all but the most fed-proximal actors
>therefore, the fed is okay
all those words and you don't even ask what effect the central banking system has or if it's worth it. good job retard

[Anonymous No.16569389]

>>16569309
>2. But then liquidity is limited to those who the fed believes is playing ball, the banks they've decided have enough cash to sit with them in the government entitys arena. That's not liquidty in the market, that's liquidity for them and their bets. Its cheap to free for them and their goals. It supports an entity which should by volition of the game rules should not be supported any longer.

There's a level of exclusivity you need to have to ensure you are not giving money to the wrong people. You have no idea how easy it would be for us to erode our trust with the FED and have them completely fuck us over. We play ball, so they play ball. We then supply the economy with the money they supply to us. You get the best period of humanity yet. And that's our labor, not yours.

>3. That's not a punishment though, that's a side effect. A punishment would have been a bank frozen up due to having 20% of its portfolio in subprime mortages so it couldn't cover it's other capital producing assets when risk adjusted returns turned out to be bullshit.

The market gave its response to their stupidity. Hitting them any harder would just cause more stress to the economy. Think bigger.

>4. Everyone looks at the bigger picture.
No they don't, this is actually impossible. The government keeps records on everything precisely so that THEY can look at the bigger picture. No one has access to everyone else's numbers. You need the Lord Protector attached to the entity with all the information but also with the knowledge to take real action.

[Anonymous No.16569395]

>>16568366
>which they use to benefit themselves in legal ways
What's legal? The rules they make themselves for themselves??
You dumb brainlet.

[Anonymous No.16569401]

>>16569395
By that I mean that they get benefit without having to shoot you and fuck your wife.

[Anonymous No.16569416]

>>16568590
>works for centralized FED

>I do not necessarily support it. My argument is that we need a Lord Protector.

Think REAL hard there buddy.

[Anonymous No.16569417]

>>16568428
How about is the majority that tolerates this being hurt in any way by inconsiderate decisions by people in power of these printers?

[Anonymous No.16569420]

>>16568428
Only because it took 100 years to devalue the dollar does not mean it is not theft. We know know. And you guys will be hanged and put into concentration camps. This time people all over the world know the implications of a globalist endgame. You flooded western societies with racist, conservative and antisemitic shitskins to create a brown slave race. People will call hitler a hero in 100 years.

[Anonymous No.16569433]

>>16569198
Good, competent people exist. They are willing to protect the economy for little to nothing. The great problem is changing the system so power positions like at the fed get filled by competent public servants, not corrupt selfish egomaniacs.

[Anonymous No.16569435]

>>16569420
based

[Anonymous No.16569443]

>>16569401
Wow, so benevolent. Now fuck off my board, kike.

[Anonymous No.16569462]

>>16568366
With that kind of structure, vocabulary and insights the only bank you could be working for is Lehman Broskis. Stop pretending to be a Bateman. Bot overall I slightly agree.

[Anonymous No.16569464]

>>16569420
If dollar goes down but wages go up then it doesn't even matter. Don't you retards realize that inflation is just a math trick?

>>16569433
I'm sorry but the people who love being poor absolutely do not get into finance. Honestly I don't know if they even exist. Do you like being poor?

>>16569443
We took you from a world in which at any time barbarians could storm the gate and rape your family to a world of security where your wife and daughter barely have to even worry about rape. We did that FOR YOU. And all we ask is that we get a dividend for our hard work. I guess you really like that invader dick in your wife's ass.

[Anonymous No.16569478]

>>16569383
There were plenty, but the differences in lifestyle for the average person living in 1775 to one living in 1913 are gonna be fairly minimal compared to the differences between living in 1913 and 2019.

In 1900 40% of people still worked on farms. Today it's under 2%. Today's COL is insane because we just need more stuff to live. Indoor plumbing and electricity aren't cheap.

[Anonymous No.16569481]

>>16568417
cope

[Anonymous No.16569491]

>>16569464
All of your kind will burn.

[Anonymous No.16569494]

/biz/ is too stupid and lazy to learn about economics

it's easier to screech about da joos

[Anonymous No.16569553]

>>16569464
A math trick that's underemployed. Trust has been betrayed. The demand for trustless options was created, because laws/regulation cannot protect the majority.

[Anonymous No.16569575]

>>16569478
>Today's COL is insane because we just need more stuff to live.
Todays COL is higher because the dollar is worth less. If from 1900-2019, every single person made 12k/year, prices would adjust accordingly and account for cheaper production of goods as well as more goods being required for living. Just look at college costs.

[Anonymous No.16569600]

>actual business and finance discussion on /biz/
Color me genuinely impressed, and pleased.

[Anonymous No.16569604]

>>16569389
Your entirely correct, but your argument is circular now. I stated that "playing ball" does not exist, and the oppurtunity cost of having the centralized Federal reserve policy makes the market worse off then without many of those policies. You are stating that banks must play ball with them to produce good. This is circular, and the exit from that circular logic as I see it is admitting that the fed should not be strong arming anyone in the economy into "playing ball".

>the market gave their response
I don't think so. I see where you are getting with thinking bigger, and as I pointed out in another post I do believe economics has been militarized to a degree that would explain these occurrences. I do however think it is you that is not thinking big enough, society is built around structure and what is not structural is one off agreements in banana court saving a now un-logical system.

As for the last point, if something has zero market value then it does not need to be tracked. Of course this extends itself to military arenas. In general I think you would be very suprised at the type and scope of data most market participants utilize, and this is not ment to be an attack but in general I believe your view point of the markets to be very limited in many ways. Most participants are vitally aware of much going on, and as you have noticed it is mostly large groups that end up making dumb decisions, I.e. your reasoning for a lord protectorate. This would be remiadiated almost entirely in a more individually focused and less government intervention enviroment.

At this point both of our arguments are deteriorating quite heavily so I'm not sure how many more posts I can make in this thread. I will say you do seem knowledgable and I enjoyed the discussion, please do keep it up anon I found this fruitful, as I hope it was for you too.

[Anonymous No.16569615]

>>16569464
Selfish powermongers often claim that they are, despite their corruption, still the best, perhaps only person for the job. They viciously lock out any competition to perpetuate a nasty self fulfilling prophecy.

The absence of competitive opportunity and the abuse of collective power are what made communism so historically dangerous.

"If we let other people in, they'll ruin the nation! And our money tree! I assure you, keep paying me billions per month there is noone who can offer a better deal... I'll make sure of it... how's your kid doing? ... don't cry this is simply what i must do to protect this country..."

[Anonymous No.16569641]

>>16569604
I have enjoyed our discussion, and I get your points. My opinion is just that the tragedy of the commons is too much of a mathematical fact to let small market participants guide the economy. The Lord Protector is required. The Lord Protector need not make any decisions about what or what is not produced as in a communist nation. The Lord Protector will simply check everyone's numbers, and pump when a pump is needed but dump when a dump is needed. The Lord Protector will be eternal.

[Anonymous No.16569643]

honestly if the dollar causes so many problems, why dont we abolish it then run countries off social points

[Anonymous No.16569651]

>>16569575
>every single person made 12k/year, prices would adjust accordingly and account for cheaper production of goods as well as more goods being required for living.


I honestly don't think so. You're not understanding that basic COL is evolving. You can only afford so much on 12k/yr. In 1900 you wouldn't have indoor plumbing, electricity, a car, a college education, and a device that can instantly tell you anything you want to know in your pocket. Your cellphone bill and car note aren't going to go down just because you only make 12k. You're arguing that wages should stay stagant, and business should limit their profit to whatever consumers can afford. They will never do that.

These things are all priced into the current COL, and in the future more unforeseeable expensive good and services will be seen as necessary for life. To afford the new "middle class" lifestyle wages have to go up. In response to wages going up, prices also go up.


The fed controls inflation to some degree, but they aren't the only source of it.

[Anonymous No.16569656]

>>16569615
We gave you the modern world.

>>16569643
Hey Xi, buddy, how are you doing? I didn't know you still posted here.

[Anonymous No.16569681]

>>16568518
Sleep tight knowing that anyone with an IQ over 125 who is not in your club wants to wipe you off the face of the earth.
The fact that you think my brand of hatred for you and your ilk comes from "communism" shows that you are a midwit who will likely not make it through the coming turmoil.
Tick tock, little bitch.

[Anonymous No.16569687]

>>16569651
>Your cellphone bill and car note aren't going to go down just because you only make 12k.
If anyone believes this, theyre retarded.

[Anonymous No.16569688]

>>16569464
1860-1910 was one of the most prosperous times in history without the help of a central bank. Bailing out banks is literally socialism and has led to economic stagnation we see today. KYS

[Anonymous No.16569696]

>>16569688
/thread

[Anonymous No.16569714]

>>16569656
im not that guy

[Anonymous No.16569725]

>>16569688
Yeah, during that period the industrial revolution was in full swing so you had a bunch of new wealth essentially for free and STILL JP Morgan had to bail out the entire american economy. Imagine if we still had such a retarded system today, when the financial markets are much more complex.

[Anonymous No.16569742]

>>16569641
Trade some links with me if you would so I can read up a bit more on your viewpoint.

I've shared this one a couple times recently, but I think it's also pertinent here:
https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2019/11/11/158-an-air-of-unreality/

The entire blog is great but it goes really in depth with how the author percives the fed to be distorting rather then sustaining markets

[Anonymous No.16569752]

>>16569656
The modern world is the product of millions of people who made a lasting impact. Money people often think they're much smarter than they actually are. With all the profiteering you mention I doubt much skill went into prioritizing public wellbeing... The results are here already. Rising suicides, plummeting real disc incomes... people pin their hopes on technology nowadays. Engineers have always been fixing and compensating for your shit.

Admit it. You failed.

[Anonymous No.16569753]

>>16569725
Bailing out banks is central planning -> socialism. Setting interest rates is central planning -> socialism. I see you failed to address that point. Furthermore who is to say we wouldnt have had a continuous industrial revolution without a central bank sapping off our productivity? The industrial revolution ended when we got a central bank and then the central bank caused the great depression with central planning(socialism). KYS

[Schiff will win !!L6zziHG8/KZ No.16569770]

>>16568366
>nothing is bad or good
Most jewish post ive ever seen on here, (((federal reserve))) is pure evil and they have killed countless great men to achieve and protect their assets
>>16568417
Fpbp

[Anonymous No.16569777]

>>16569753
>The industrial revolution ended when we got a central bank and then the central bank caused the great depression with central planning


No, the revolution ended when World War one broke out, and continued in full swing immediately after. The Great Depression happened because people had bought as many cars, refrigerators, and other durable goods as they needed, and manufacturing took a nosedive once consumer demand went down.


I'm trying not support either side, but it seems like my only options are too with the kikes or a bunch of conspirator retards.

[Anonymous No.16569788]

>>16569742
I have no links. The ideas I've shared here are pieced from the information I personally know from working in banking and you could consider my OP as me writing out one of the recurrent thoughts I have every day during my commute to work.

>>16569752
You can have hundreds of brilliant people working but without a Lord Protector you get the tragedy of the commons We made the modern world for you.

>>16569753
But the point is that the planning has nothing to do with production or even labor. As people have pointed out, cash is just monopoly money. I say that it is just a math trick. The FED controls the math trick to ensure that it works out for everyone, let each industry work their own issues out. No central planning needed except for the super macro (interest rates and inflation).

>>16569770
>Most jewish post ive ever seen on here
Interesting as I'm not even Jewish but nice delusion you have going on here. I will point out a fun fact for you though: I see more big noses at work than anywhere else.

[Anonymous No.16569794]

>>16569777
First, WW1 started right after the creation of the central bank. Wars are used to run up debts and enslave nations. Second, how exactly did people finance all these fancy new toys? Artificially low interest rates set by a central bank. Jesus Christ dude, I learned this shit in high school what were you doing?

[Anonymous No.16569808]

>>16569788
Central planning is COMMUNISM YOU STUPID KIKE

[Schiff will win !!L6zziHG8/KZ No.16569821]

>>16569725
You federal reserve kikes also whacked JFK for this shit,
1912 titanic sinks with the federal reserve opposition in it, money drys up (((federal reserve activists))) buy out all the politicians
1913 federal reserve act passes with ease, all the politicians that were against it now were bought out
1914 federal reserve uses the (((money))) to fund (((world war 1))) and then (((world war 2))) shortly after
Federal reserve is the strongest (((asset))) the top has to run this shit, we kill the federal reserve we kill the shackles on our feet

[Anonymous No.16569830]

>>16568366
Bankers are a minor annoyance, lawyers are the real dicks and don't get me started on doctors.

[Anonymous No.16569832]

>>16569788
you are a communist and a jew.

[Anonymous No.16569845]

>>16569770
I have mixed thoughts on central banking. Theory goes, as long as people are free to choose WHEN and WHERE to spend their money we risk recession/depression. Money must flow quickly and uniformly enough for all households to at least get by. Fractional RB, central banking etc. are imperfect, corruptible mechanisms to address this issue. We need to find a more reliable mechanism for consistent, uniform flow.

[Anonymous No.16569847]

>>16569794
>First, WW1 started right after the creation of the central bank. Wars are used to run up debts and enslave nations


So I guess that random Serbian dude was sleeper agent for the Jews?

>Second, how exactly did people finance all these fancy new toys? Artificially low interest rates set by a central bank.

This is not a problem by itself. Using credit to finance a purchase based on the assumption that you will continue being employed is not unreasonable. Where things get fucked up is when you don't realize that buying a refrigerator, a new steam iron, and a car then keeping for them 20 years "hurts" the manufacturers because you're a one time customer. Once the market corrects itself and people lose their jobs, all the credit purchases retroactively become a bad idea, but they weren't at the time.

[Anonymous No.16569848]

>>16569821
Whatever corruption may have existed back in the day, I don't much care in this thread. We can talk history and politics another day. Today, at the time I am posting, the FED is working out quite well for us. Also, both WW1 and WW2 were attempts at answering the German question. Still unanswered today, so I'm open for WW3 as someone pointed out, but I'm not willing to throw away this economic prosperity just to fuck Germany. But if you tell me that the FED was behind fucking Germany in the ass then congrats, you turned me into an even bigger fan.

[Anonymous No.16569861]

>>16569848
>so I'm open for WW3 as someone pointed out, but I'm not willing to throw away this economic prosperity just to fuck Germany.

A true WW3 were nukes fly would give us unparalleled prosperity the likes of which baby boomers have never seen. This is assuming that the US manages to survive relatively intact somehow.

[Anonymous No.16569873]

>>16568366
Unironically read a book

[Anonymous No.16569877]

>>16569848
>Please ignore all our past crimes against humanity and lets focus on the future

[Anonymous No.16569880]

>>16568366
fuck the economy

[Anonymous No.16569890]

>>16569808
There's central planning in every government noob. Anarcho Capitalism is for masturbatorial theorizing jackasses, just like the communistic academics in tweed jackets.

[Anonymous No.16569894]

>>16569788
You dodged or missed the real question and instead spouted some truism about giving some people more power to project their skill. I'm disappointed where this semi serious banter concluded.

[Anonymous No.16569915]

>>16568366

[Anonymous No.16569917]

>>16568366

Just stop printing crispy $2 bills and pennies please.

[Anon No.16569922]

Why is it the default argument that the economy needs to be protected. This is not a valid argument yet OP believes this to be fact. If shit happens let it happen. Better than blowing a bubble. There is nothing wrong with failure... Even when it comes to the economy.

[Anonymous No.16569950]

>>16568366
usury or interest on money is immoral, unethical. Gentiles have always known that, but you're a kike so its only natural for you to be a leech

[Anonymous No.16569989]

>>16568366
>I think this is just a meaningless question. Nothing is bad or good, what matters is the logic
Relativist morality is the root of all our rot. Dropped and saged, juden

[Anonymous No.16570465]

>>16568523
this

[Anonymous No.16570475]

>>16568366
>bro quantitative easing is good it just appreciates assets that the super wealthy and depressing the value of wages of workers
ok walk into the ocean with a cinderblock though

[Anonymous No.16570875]

HALF A TRILLION IN (((TOTALLY NOT QE))) CURRENCY JUST PRINT. LIKE THAT. OUT OF THIN AIR BEFORE YEAR'S END. IT'S ALL OGRE. BREAD WILL COST A WHEEL BAROW OF HUNDRED DOLLAR BILLS.
YOU ALL WANTED TO BECOME MILLIONAIRES, RIGHT? WELL, BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR. YOU JUST MIGHT GET IT.

[Anonymous No.16570910]

>>16568366
what the fuck is fixed about your faggot american economy? its a complete fucking shitshow and having an unacvountable all powerful beauracracy outside the government and not beholden to working in the interesr of citizens is clown world levels of stupidity.

[Anonymous No.16570921]

>>16570910
also gladly going to boil bankers alive if day of the rope happens in my lifetime. ill move back to america just for the occassion.

[Anonymous No.16570931]

>>16570921
Undeniably based as fuck.

[Anonymous No.16570937]

Why does OP call everyone who disagrees with him a commie while he's advocating for central planning?

[Anonymous No.16570945]

>>16570921
But most bankers are white.

[Anonymous No.16571028]

>>16570945
(((white)))

[Anonymous No.16571454]

>>16571028
Yeah, I know you people have some sort of mental illness regarding the Jews but as cold hard numbers, more bankers are non-Jewish whites than Jews.

[Anonymous No.16572020]

No protection is occurring. Economic downturns are still happening continuously. The fed shamelessly lies about the health of the economy right up until it happens again. It only incentivizes bad behavior to know you'll never suffer any consequences for your actions. Humans must suffer to correct their own behavior.

[Anonymous No.16572450]

>>16568366
lol

[Anonymous No.16572541]

>>16568366
so to sum it up in your pov, your saying why not take advantage of somewhat knowing what the fed is up to as your own advantage. Alot of youtube vids on the past week (yeah i know, its been said for decades) but the volume of different people saying it is noticeably higher. what else can be done to take advantage, esp as a millennial or those with joke of an asset? all we have is crypto/silver to moon for the most part, or housing market to totaly collapse. any inputs anon?

[Anonymous No.16572597]

people against the fed are just moronic Lolbertarians that are mad they missed out on the stock market bullrun

[Anonymous No.16572825]

>>16569600
this. Positively devouring this thread

[Anonymous No.16572951]

That’s why with crypto you won’t need a central bank. You have the primary crypto which is the support or backing, and then you issue tokens or forks as needed to inject liquidity directly where needed rather than issue liquidity through regional banks which then disperse it to their fellow kin while dipping their hand in the pie who then dip their hand in the pie and then disperse it who then dip their hand in the pie and the disperse it until the average Tyrone shiquan and his wife Stacey Margaret gets 20 dollars. Crypto enables direct drops to the wallets as needed, when needed, and how much needed without any dilution of the primary.

[Anonymous No.16573087]

I'm reading Marx (fuck it's boring though), and having read the Manifesto and 17 Demands, I don't see why a version of it couldn't work (exc. the whole army/militia thing, that's just dumb imo BUT does exist in a form in Scandinavia so ymmv).

I mean, I'm just sick of neoliberalism and Trickle Down Economics fucking up the free market and free enterprise with their crony-capitalists constantly consolidating into effective-monopolies (which even as far back as Adam Smith was a known issue, so I'm not ancap that's for sure) and leveraging their wealth/assests to buy off politicians, control the media narrative, and create some Huxlian hellscape of thralls.

Like, thanks for the good stuff and couldn't have done it without you. But, uh, things are changing and it's time to retire y'know?

[Anonymous No.16573371]

>>16569433
>good, competent people exist

depends on what you define as ''good''
you cannot build a country by hoping for an intelligent, powerful yet benevolent individual to come in and save everyone

[Anonymous No.16573471]

>>16568465
>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO YOU CAN'T LOVE AND RESPECT YOUR PHILIA YOU MUST DIE TO THE WAVES OF 3RD WORLDERS IN YOUR COUNTRY SO I DESTROY THE MIDDLE CLASS AND THUS THOSE WHO WORK FOR THE COMMON BENEFIT OF THE NATION.

God I hate kikes so much. You will get the rope, be scared because it is going to happen again but on steroids, worst part is you probably won't suffer this time because of muh human dignity.
Rich people have no homeland and the same happens to poor people because of their circumstances but the only ones wanting the poor to get better are the middle class and that is being destroyed by your kind in the whole world.

[Anonymous No.16574226]

>>16570945
The top positions in every field are ...
This isn’t about the bank teller

[Anonymous No.16574707]

>>16573471
Ok Commie.

>>16574226
I am not talking about bank tellers either. I'm talking analysts and above.

[Anonymous No.16574800]

>>16569315
Foreskin with timestamp or GTFO

[Anonymous No.16575041]

>>16574800
Posting from work but I have no foreskin but that's because my family is Christian and for some reason they cut our dicks too.

[Anonymous No.16575048]

>>16575041
You are a traitor nevertheless and traitors get the rope.

[Anonymous No.16575070]

>>16575041
nvm, I was already with my phone IP so it didn't even change my id.

>>16575048
Traitor of what? My job is actually helping the economy.

[Anonymous No.16575093]

>>16574707
Yea plenty of goys benefit and work for the (((system))). The pyramid stays the same.

[Anonymous No.16575129]

>>16575070
>nothing is bad or good

Do you really think there is no such thing as morality?

[Anonymous No.16575678]

>>16575129
>Do you really think there is no such thing as morality?
This is a business and finance board, mate.