Forum Replies Created
Thanks so much. I think that’s a very fair point. It does help answer my question because there can be no denying that efforts of places the the Wiesenthal Center definitely are substantial and not availaable to very many causes.
It seems like you are in agreement that the event itself was unique in terms or its scope, brutality and nation of origin (wealthy, cultured democracy) and I suppose that helps the message resonate more than it otherwise would. On the other hand there are interests trying to keep it in the public conscience.
One thing I would like to add in terms of cause/affect. I do think that the Jewish interests (I can’t speak for the Christians) are motivated by the fact that “it can happen anywhere”. The idea that it happened in that type of country make you feel like nowhere is 100% safe. I guess there are just a lot of factors that come together with something as nuanced as this.
That’s a very fair point. Let me try this a different way that also let’s you know where I’m coming from in a more meaningful way.
About a week ago was the 70th anniversary of the Liberation from Auschwitz. As usual, it got its memorials with World Leaders and the media all over the world, which I found very touching. (Full disclosure: My grandmother lost her first Husband, 3 children, parents and siblings in the Holocaust. She was from Poland).
That day, the BBC posted this tweet: ” “Is the time coming to lay the Holocaust to rest?””.
At first I was outraged, but then I decided to really give it some objective thought. Why does the Holocaust get so much more attention than other genocides and atrocities? Obviously it’s personal for me, but the whole world seems to regard it in a meaningfully different way than other tragic situations like the Congo in recent years.
Then I had a thought. Maybe the difference here is similar to another interesting piece of human psychology. Often when a person hears that someone has died, they very quickly ask “what did he die of?”. A large part of that question comes from a persons innate fear of their own mortality. The question, at least in part, is asking: “did this person die of anything that might also be a danger to me?”.
Here too, I was wondering if the fact that the Holocaust happened in a wealthy, sophisticated, Democratically powered country had anything to do with people’s focus on the Holocaust. When I hear about atrocities in dirt poor or communist countries I can say to myself “that’s horrible, but thankfully it wouldn’t happen in a country like the U.S.” (although I wonder about that sometimes too). But in the case of Germany, they sort of match our profile as a rich, well respected, Democratic country with a Bill of Rights and supposed respect for justice etc.
I was thinking that maybe that’s what hits the nerve here. That what resonates with people is the notion that “if it happened there, maybe it really could happen anywhere”.
Or maybe I’m just wrong lol.
Got it, thank you so much
Hi Professor Casey, I just went back to this post and noticed your response. I am still very interested in the emails and would like to give you another email address. I know it has been quite some time but I would still love to see those PDF’s. firstname.lastname@example.org
I was told that he can predict booms and busts and has done so before several times. Does his theory clash with ABCT?
Wow, that was really great stuff, thanks!
I am also very interested in an answer from the Professors as to whether or not reasonable suspicion is offensive to the Natural Law and individual liberty as well as the answer to my second question.
What about the expansion of the money supply in our case would specifically put up the prices of stocks and luxury housing as opposed to other things?
Also, what was the benefit of giving so much to the banks? Once they got passed the point of being liquid enough to boost confidence and insure solvency, why was money continually pumped in? Was it just to buy more MBS and prop up the housing market?
Since the money being printed is just being held by banks, thereby stemming inflation, why has the stock market gone up so much?
What about the affect of their manipulation of the federal funds rate? Does that also lower interest rates?
Well at the point in time that interest rates on treasuries went up it seems the cost to pay the interest would become so enormous that there would be no choice but default or inflate. I heard that 5 trillion of the debt rolls over every year because it has become short term. If that is the case wouldn’t the new higher rates almost certainly lead to immediate inflation?
Also, about the bond market. When you say “it would not necessarily lead to arbitraging into other bonds and higher rates for them. ” What would determine whether it would have a ripple effect or not?
Question 1: You wrote “The jury is still out on whether the potential for monetary inflation in the form of excess reserves in the banks and a reduction of money demand will yet result in a significant monetary inflation when economic normality returns. ” If economic normalcy returns why would there even be a doubt as to whether or not we would see massive price increases?
Question 2: If the dollar collapses and as a result, interest rates rise, would this not put downward pressure on gold or would gold spike because the interest rate spike is based on the weakness of fiat currencies?
Sterling: Thank you so much for your answers. I think that your response to my first question was thoughtful and persuasive. I sort of felt that way beforehand, but I think your example really solidified things for me 🙂
As far as question 3 however, I am not sure. I do believe that there are things in your statement that would go against the understanding of IP that I took from reading Stephan Kinsella but I could be wrong.
Let me address the 3 answers you gave again.
1. I seem to have not understood what “demand for money was”, I thought it was demand for credit. Thank you for clearing that up.
2. So much of the money that we talk about being printed by the fed was the asset swaps and lending to other central banks. But these are not sufficient to raise the interest rates for record lows because in the bigger picture the public’s desire to hold money has meant relatively low lending overall. The swaps have given only 1.2 trillion to the banks, which could become over 10 trillion but haven’t due to lack of lending and other central banks can’t issue fiduciary media. Wasn’t there a Bloomberg article that said the central bank gave away 7.7 trillion in 2008? Where did that go to?
3. I understand now that the people don’t want to borrow that much, but do the banks themselves want to lend if they could or are they satisfied with so little in interest from the fed when there is no risk?
Thank you so much for all of your patience in answering my questions, this is very greatly appreciated
I think she perceives that products are getting shoddier. She mentioned clothing and other products being shipped overseas. She did mention how phones and electronics seem to break quicker in her mind these days. I think it’s tied to inflation, extra costs associated with gov’t and unions, preferences of people for cheaper products in certain circumstances, and maybe her individual experience but I want to just tie it together on a macro level and then bring it down to individual examples