Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[maxxoccupancy]

Historically, governments that get so far into debt that they can barely make their bond payments end up printing money.  As soon as that cycle starts, their fiat currency becomes worthless, and the bonds themselves become worthless.

That's why the international marketplace is abandoning the Federal Reserve Note (just as so many of us are), and switching to either the Euro or precious metals.

[etc]

There are a lot of disturbing signs the game might be close to the conclusion, with the collapse being the end-game.

Gold / silver going nuts in the last few weeks, hitting new highs.  Silver alone went from 18 FRNs this summer to almost 25/oz.

USDX going down fast and drastically.

Helicopter Ben talking about 'quantitative easing'   which is just another code word we are gonna run the printing press.

These regimes printed bills of credit endlessly, devalued the currency and collapsed:

The 1777-1789 colonies under the Articles of Confederation. That regime collapsed and was replaced by a new gov under the Constitution and a dictatorial central government, really a step in the wrong direction.
The southern government during the war between the states
The french government during the french revolution (collapsed and replaced by Napoleon)
Russian empire post 1914, printed to finance WWI and collapsed.

And so on and so on... Maybe it's just a correlation in some cases but too many coincidences.  It's obvious that the collapse of the FRN is the only logical, most probable outcome. It's just the question of timing how long they can keep the Ponzi scheme going, 2 or 5 or 10 years.

So when that happens, the power balance will be fundamentally shifted. The business-as-usual mode is about ready to go away, soon.

[John Edward Mercier]

Either of you gentlemen wish to inform me of when the Federal Reserve Notes (warehouse receipts) stopped being backed by metal?

[Mdj]

John, I believe the last nail in that coffin was something Nixon did about 40 years ago. Not sure on the specifics there. But I agree with Bill Still in his presentation of the The Money Masters. I believe he argues against a metal backed currency. But there are many ways to handle money.

I believe we are having a currency crisis. I listen to Gerald Celente. For me he has demonstrated the connection between currency and war. I think others may agree.

etc, I hear your TSHTF scenario, and the printing press going more crazy than it already has... hyperinflation is likely under that scenario however the likely hood of another war, and possibly the home grown / false flag kind, is great. Or will the US take issue with the countries now pushing for another currency? Plus ratings are down, maybe at an all time low.
http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/1-global-plans-to-replace-the-dollar/

Really great site BTW.

To quote from the article, "The United States was denied admission to the meetings." Russia, China and some other members of the "six-nation Shanghai Cooperation Organisation". Shit is lining up with the conditions necessary for war on a global scale.  I wonder if anyone saw this on TV? Draw your own conclusions. The story I referenced is the #1 of Top 25 Censored Stories of 2010. Did you read about it in the paper? It seems mainstream media is failing a little but still has a stanglehold on the people who trust NBC for news or the NY Times for a factual rag.

Getting back to the ideas that war is related to currency. I know this attachment shows the approximate value of the dollar at periods of different wars. The question I wonder what will the establishment do to keep power? We can look historically at the other examples of country/money meltdowns or we the US might be on the losing end of that stick.

If people lose confidence in the economy, it's game over for the federal govt. Who's wars of empire will run out funding and other countries know this. No one will be buying crap they don't need. They will continue to print it until something happens. What that is I don't know. Besides, we very well could be entering into a period of austerity or precious metal confiscation. FDR did it. Executive Order 6102
http://www.the-privateer.com/1933-gold-confiscation.html

"Act of October 6, 1917" that seems linked to the Federal Reserve Act. And notice in the opening sentences it seems vague?
Think of the implications of rising precious metal costs in relation to the failing FRN (federal reserve note).

[John Edward Mercier]

Actually, the answer is NEVER. And hyperinflation isn't likely... its what the FED is hopeful the consumer believes will happen.

[rossby]

Either of you gentlemen wish to inform me of when the Federal Reserve Notes (warehouse receipts) stopped being backed by metal?

Trick question, and you know it!

[etc]

" Shit is lining up with the conditions necessary for war on a global scale. "

I think so too..

Anyway, the political landscape will get redrawn sooner than later, I think. So business-as-usual model and status quo will go away.

Back to the topic, things that are not possible today might become possible then.  I am moving to NH but I think I will rent for the next few years. The real estate market is not even close to a collapse, we just a minor preview thus far IMO.

[10stateswithnh]

I think renting for awhile is wise, at least till we see what the next Congress is doing to the economy (with Obama still as President), just in case home values keep falling. As Peter Schiff said over and over on the videos on his youtube channel (and got mocked for it, years before the housing collapse), home values are overpriced and equity is not real wealth.

Federal Reserve Notes only came out in 1970, didn't they, when Nixon ended the foreign investor window for gold and silver exchange of the previous silver certificates. Or maybe they came out in 1933 when FDR confiscated the gold of the American people. Maybe somebody knows the history better than me.

Why is hyperinflation unlikely, John? I agree the Fed has a reason to want people to think there will be (along with low interest rates), then we spend all our earnings and not save anything, which isn't very good advice though.
What do you mean by warehouse receipts, and what does it have to do with FRNs?

If there are really global large-country meetings to which the US is not a part, that is an ominous sign that the world socialist elite are working on a plan to inflict their centralized govt fantasies on the whole world by cutting off the one large economy that is most opposed to them (and also producing a vast quantity of the wealth that subsidizes their fantasies and makes socialism seem economically sustainable). The result of such an unprecedented experiment will possibly involve a short-term economic gain for the other world economies but ulitimately it will have an adverse affect on the global economy. Then I can see the countries who enacted this starting to blame each other and dividing up into warring factions accusing each other of ruining their one-world government hopes (whether or not they realize they were wrong to exclude or even try to ruin the United States). I am not saying every country would go along with this. I don't know if it will happen, but it seems plausible that it could happen if the US govt keeps intervening in world affairs, generating more hatred for us, and allowing our country's wealth to be drained to causes that attack the very system that produced that wealth.

Max, I think you could get a loose confederation of New England states (obviously they would disagree on how to run their internal affairs, but perhaps a compact just for mutual defense?). I agree that an independent NH makes more sense if ME and / or VT comes along. Otherwise, you have an 11-mile coastline and the small border with Quebec as the only borders not with the US (That coastline is small enough it would not be hard for the US navy / coast guard to blockade the port). Then you have air travel over US and Canadian airspace, and only one highway to the Canadian border (how hard would it be for the federal govt to hold on to the one US customs station and not allow any trucks across the border?) as the only other ways of traveling out of NH in a combative situation. For this reason, I think if there was any sign of the US govt using military force sanctions to keep NH in the Union, we would have to have at least one of the 3 neighboring states as an independent ally to have any chance.

I don't know why NH wouldn't want to be independent - isn't it a net tax-contributing state, when subtracting federal payouts to the state and local govts from the income and other federal taxes paid by NH residents?

[10stateswithnh]

On the original poster's topic, I agree that a county project would achieve greater results within the powers of that county (provided that the residents don't get so alarmed by the prospect of a tripled population literally "taking over" the county that they enact ordinances against new movers). But since the county powers are so limited, and have no Constitutional claim to sovereignty (whether or not you like it, some of the people who would help bring about a more free society will still subscribe to the idea of constitutionally-limited republics rather than anarchy and will be more likely to support the cause if the seceding entity has a legal claim to that right), it seems unlikely to achieve much.

You have a valid point about the power of the Federal govt overwhelming whatever we do at the state level, assuming things continue along the current track (but we don't have enough libertarians to rein in the Federal govt, and I don't know how much the soon-to-be conservative and Tea-Party partial takeover will do for even economic freedom, longterm), so we are doing all we can with this project.

Realistically, what could a free county do if the parent state refused to let it go? And how is a county of 10k going to support a sudden tripling of the population? There are some issues with your idea too.

You know what, the FCP is not mutually exclusive with the FSP.

That is - there is nothing preventing a large percentage of the FSP signers from moving to the same NH county, provided that's what they want to do, so I don't see this idea as a reason NOT to do the FSP. Why don't you start a NH FCP project and see how many signers you get? There is only a conflict if you insist on doing it in another state. Even then, you're going to have the same major problem that the FSP has had getting movers, which is a large percentage of liberty-loving people not wanting to or able to leave the state they live in now.

If the FCP project works, great. However, if you choose to do it outside of NH, you're not going to get many people from this forum to participate, as most of us are already committed to the FSP (and in my case, the Next 1000 and a move date as well).

If your FCP is not successful, then you haven't made things any better by not doing the FSP. By the way, I wasn't trying to suggest everyone has to do political activism, but there is a much-higher concentration of pro-liberty civil disobedience, agorism, and media there in NH too (You can certainly try these things other places, many people are, but I don't see them being nearly as effective as when done in greater concentrations).

I'm not trying to convince you that you have to do a Free anything project, certainly lots of people in other states are doing a lot to raise awareness - the Austrian economists and plenty of libertarian media out there for example. As far as I can see, though, the FSP is the only project with a realistic chance of showing that these ideas actually work in the real world

The other free state projects don't have enough people or are tackling states that are geographically too large to even gather the activists together - I mean WY, ID, MT are all HUGE states. Some of those low-population counties you talk about are pretty big, too. Even there you'd probably have to concentrate on the population centers of the county, and then you might as well make it a handful of free town projects. This is being done in NH already, so where's the beef, unless you just think NH is the wrong state?

Besides, you're assuming the 20,000 movers won't be able to influence a large number of the 1.3 million natives to join their cause. I've always understood that one of the reasons govts grow is because the people wanting smaller govt have less incentive to lobby the govt, and spend less time in the political process than the people looking for a handout. In NH, we can change that! With organizations like the NH Liberty Alliance, the NH Taxpayers Coaltion, etc, and a more accountable govt structure, the apathy / despair the common people have in other states is already much less in NH, even with less than 1000 movers!

[10stateswithnh]

I am finding that, although Montana has some small counties, the 7 largest counties, out of 56, are each about half the size of NH (4k-5k sq mi). Their combined area, 35k sq mi is about a quarter of the state's total land area. Obviously you would have to pick your county carefully if doing a FCP in one of the big western states.

Also, the other states named so far have all been heavily conservative states - for example Wyoming only has 1 county that hasn't been dominated by Republicans lately. Isn't that going to have an impact on the success of your project?

Most of the small counties probably couldn't even accommodate 20,000 people moving in unless the federal govt stops controlling all the rural land it currently has. Or it might be privately owned farmland. So you won't even need or be able to have 20,000 people. There is a county with just over 1000 people, less than 900 square miles, in eastern Montana. Maybe you can get 1000 people if you can make a case for people to move to a cold state and sell them on your project. I'm not sure there are many jobs there, so getting even 1000 signers will probably be tough unless you pick a county with better opportunities - which usually means there is a larger population you have to overwhelm with larger numbers (at least with your suggested tactic of trying to outvote the natives, which I'm sure will generate a lot of hostility). In any case, you're not going to get many takers from this forum unless it's a county in NH.

Good luck, wherever you pick. Will you consider trying your FCP inside of the FSP?

[John Edward Mercier]

Federal Reserve Notes (Series 1914) replaced previous issued United States Notes.
Warehouse receipt: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warehouse_receipt

It basically means you can exchange the note directly for constitutional money (coin). The devaluation occurs when Congress enacts changes in coinage contents. Along with the fact that multiple metals are used to represent value. Would it be better just to circulate coinage? Oddly many have argued for that as costing the US Treasury less...

[John Edward Mercier]

Sorry, missed the question on hyperinflation. Utilization levels are far too low.

[Mdj]

If there are really global large-country meetings to which the US is not a part, that is an ominous sign that the world socialist elite are working on a plan to inflict their centralized govt fantasies on the whole world by cutting off the one large economy that is most opposed to them (and also producing a vast quantity of the wealth that subsidizes their fantasies and makes socialism seem economically sustainable). The result of such an unprecedented experiment will possibly involve a short-term economic gain for the other world economies but ulitimately it will have an adverse affect on the global economy. Then I can see the countries who enacted this starting to blame each other and dividing up into warring factions accusing each other of ruining their one-world government hopes (whether or not they realize they were wrong to exclude or even try to ruin the United States). I am not saying every country would go along with this. I don't know if it will happen, but it seems plausible that it could happen if the US govt keeps intervening in world affairs, generating more hatred for us, and allowing our country's wealth to be drained to causes that attack the very system that produced that wealth.

10states, I beg to differ. The one economy that is most pro-central bank is the US (edit: besides some European countries). The other countries are attempting to replace the dollar as the worlds reserve currency because they see it tanking and they know they can end the run on US wars for empire by speeding the decline of the US. The whole global economy is tanking for that matter. Which is why gold is increasing.

[time4liberty]

Actually, the answer is NEVER. And hyperinflation isn't likely... its what the FED is hopeful the consumer believes will happen.

Oh yes? Would you care to inform me where I can take my FRNs to be redeemed in gold?

I'm also curious as to why you think the Fed would like us to consider its paper unsound and dangerous to hold.

[10stateswithnh]

10states, I beg to differ. The one economy that is most pro-central bank is the US (edit: besides some European countries).

I wasn't referring to the US view of central banking (widely accepted by the political elite worldwide), but rather the view of what the proper role of government is, in general. The US has a much larger conservative and religious element who still feel limited government is an important ideal, however much their party has let them down. The US has not gone as far in establishing cradle-to-grave social programs, in large part because the "progressives" in the US have had a harder time getting these things passed. That is the difference where I think the US would have to be excluded for the world elite to plan their one-world utopia. However, I did overlook the possibility you raised that they are just trying to knock the dollar off its pedestal as a world currency to establish a new currency, one which people in the US would seriously object to. So perhaps I was wrong about why they are excluding the US.

On hyperinflation, John's argument seems to be about how much money people are spending right now, is that right? Is that what you mean by utilization levels? Sorry, it's not a very self-explanatory phrase in my opinion. What about the sharp increase in the money base over the last couple of years? What about all the reserves banks are sitting on - won't that cause hyperinflation when they start lending it out again, and if not, why not?