Austrian & Keynesian Theories Vs. Mathematical Facts
George Orwell’s classic 1984 describes “doublethink” as holding two contradictory beliefs simultaneously and accepting both. To do so denies the existence of objective reality. A good example is the belief in economic theories that contradict mathematical facts.
Both Austrian and Keynesian economic theories hold fundamental beliefs that do not square up with math. The exponential growth of debt in our debt based money system is ignored and refuted by both theories. In place of math, we are offered beliefs such as the “quantity theory of money.”
To deny the exponential growth of debt cuts to the very core and credibility of monetary theories. If the exponential growth can be proven, then equally, Austrian and Keynesian theories are dis-proven. Economic theories hide the fact that a debt based money system is usury by definition and neither Austrian nor Keynesian theories are sustainable. Both systems create bankruptcies and defaults while enriching banks at the expense of the people.
The inherent and terminal mathematical flaw of debt based systems can be proven anecdotally. Our total money supply (M3) is around $15 trillion while our national and private debt total around $55 trillion. How do we pay an existing $55 trillion in debt with a total of $15 trillion? We are short $40 trillion, where will that money come from?
In our debt based monetary system there is only one way to add money and that is through new debt. Eventually, the $40 trillion must be borrowed. If the money is borrowed, it will add new debt of over $40 trillion (principal + interest). The debt can only grow, it can never be repaid as the gap between money and debt will continue to increase.
The two economic theories will try to explain away this reality by claiming that the velocity of money can be increased so that a given amount of money can be used for more transactions. This is true when we spend money but it is not true when we repay debt. When debt is repaid it is extinguished, that is that the money ceases to exist which means that money can only be used to repay principal debt once. Most of the interest debt returns to circulation but never the less, the gap between money and debt will still increase since only the principal is created through new debt which brings new interest.
The specie of money doesn’t matter. If our money were backed by gold, the gold would simply be transferred to those who collect the interest. We saw this in 1933 when the gold standard collapsed and we lost most of our gold.
The two prevailing economic theories give us a false sense of choice just like the two party system of Democrats and Republicans. The science of money has been replaced by a belief system just like in the dark ages when science was dominated and defined by religious beliefs. If the next renaissance is to happen, it will come when the science of money displaces unfounded beliefs.
We are suffering from an intellectual amnesia. The Babylonians of antiquity understood the destructive power of debt interest and at one time Christianity and Judaism forbid it as sinful usury. The Islamic faith still forbids debt interest and perhaps that is a reason that we are clashing.
Our debt based monetary system is a form of usury that will result in the transfer of all wealth from the many to the few. The intended outcome is debt slavery and tyranny under the cruel boots of oligarchs - a financial aristocracy.
People are becoming discontent and they sense that something is terribly awry. To rebel against the status quo invariably leads to another tyranny as we have seen through democratic elections and third world rebellions.
If a successful peoples revolution is to happen it will really be an awakening. A higher consciousness where we come to understand how and why the game has been rigged by flawed monetary theories.
Larry
Note: For real solutions stop by Money Talk$ by Byron Dale and Thomas Hedin - discover the difference between debt and wealth based money - take the red pill.
there is really nothing
there is really nothing wrong with the two theories, dept bassed money is not part of either of them. just end the goddamn fed so the government stops borowing money and then sending it into the market.. freaking messed up man..
It's a cryin' shame
what this thread has become. It's a supremely important subject, but now it's all about personalities instead of about ideas. Too, too bad. Everybody take several deep breaths and drink something soothing. Let's see if we can't stop the insults so we can get back to real discussion. I for one don't want to see this thread die an inglorious death.
May I ask a stupid question, Republicae? I will assume the answer is yes, so here goes:
If we end the Fed and Treasury regains the sole power to issue money, and the only money it issues is either gold or silver coin or 100% backed-no-fraud-accounting, gold certificates, and if the amount of gold available to Treasury will force a devaluation of the dollar to equate to a gold price of $100,000 per ounce, what effect do you think that that effective devaluation of the dollar would have on international trade and on domestic economic activity?
Please answer my question with an answer, not another question.
ultimatecynic
Great post ultimatecynic
Thanks for your leadership and articulate post. I'm taking your advice, I popped a Corona and you are right...it's soothing good.
No more slurs by me (except for a mulligan once every several holes for Republicae), issue based discussions preferred!
Larry
END the FED before it ENDS US
END the FED before it ENDS US
Since republitard can't read I'll post it again.
Maybe you're like a kid who can't listen?
oh I got it........
C students become millionaires, A students become professors.
You're an a+ student.
Anyways, I've posted this before but here goes again.
Total Debt in Billions.
Year--------------------Total Debt----%Increase in Billions
1946--------------------$359.8------------------n.a.
1956--------------------$611.4------------------4.3%
1966--------------------$1,187.0---------------94.1%
1976--------------------$2,904.9---------------144.7%
1986--------------------$9,816.1---------------237.9%
1996--------------------$19,744.2-------------101.1%
2006--------------------$44,747.0-------------126.6%
2016 (est.)-----------------$101,000.0----------------125.7%
Modern Money Secrets - Get The Book.
www.wealthmoney.org
Modern Money Secrets - Get The Book.
www.wealthmoney.org
That does not show
That does not show exponential growth, on the contrary, it simply shows a growth rate that fluctuates, take year by year the fluctuation is even more dramatic therefore, the theory put forth by DrKrbyLuv and yourself is not only full of holes, but does not make for a substantive argument.
The most hilarious aspect of this entire argument is the fact that both you and DrKrbyLuv are so wrapped up in mathematics, or so you say, and yet neither of you have the slightest idea or, as it appears in your comments, the understanding of the mathematical formula to arrive at an exponential rate of debt accumulation. In fact, it now appears that you don't even know what exponential or compounding really is, but yet you put forth your pitiful proposals combined with your dreary and diversionary diatribes as though you have a clue. But ya don't do you?
http://www.1776solution.blogspot.com
"Rags make Paper; Paper makes Money; Money makes Banks; Banks make Loans; Loans make Beggars; Beggars make Rags"
http://militantjeffersonian.com
"Men do not willingly read unpalatable truths of themselves. The People like those best who fool them most, by pandering to their vices and flattering their foibles" Raphael Semmes
For tomozope.
Daily Paul posting guidelines: http://www.dailypaul.com/node/78343
"Engaging in flame wars or personal attacks on other members, racist or sexist remarks, posting obscene materials, inciting or encouraging violent or illegal acts, posting spam, bumping your own thread to keep it on the front page, posting the same non-related comment on multiple threads to promote your website or event (This is considered spam. The forums are a place for discussion, not advertising), blatant advertising and/or EXCESSIVE USE OF CAPITAL LETTERS. If you cannot consistently spell or check your grammar, you may also be banned.
Repeated offenses will result in the termination of your account. As I stated at the beginning, participation in this site is a privilege, not a right. Ultimately, anything that I decide reflects poorly on Dr. Paul and/or sullies the good and peaceful name of Ron Paul, the Daily Paul or said supporters is not welcome here. At the end of the day, this is my house. I set it up to honor, respect and promote Ron Paul and the principles of freedom and liberty. Play fair and you're welcome to stay. Do not abuse what is offered."
Stop calling Republicae names.
Ron Paul "Sign Wave Across the USA" -- November 5th!
Thanks, but I really don't
Thanks, but I really don't mind the name-calling and pay little attention to it. Besides, their diatribes only show the weakness of their positions, the lack of understanding of the argument they are attempting to make and the groundlessness of any comment they make regarding the numerous rebuttals that have been offered up to them on this thread.
Essentially, they have constructed no argument that can, in the remotest sense, be considered sound enough to base their own beliefs upon. Yet, it is common for such tactics to be used.
I have found that there are several, like Tomozope, AuntieX and another person named Plato that once visited the DP in support of DrKrbyLuv's posting to only attack on one, maybe two threads. If you track Tomozope, AuntieX and Plato you will quickly learn their purpose is not to contribute to the DP in any meaningful way, but to cause derision and diversion otherwise they would be contributing on several different threads containing various issues, not just this one or two. In other words, we know who they are and why they are here!
http://www.1776solution.blogspot.com
"Rags make Paper; Paper makes Money; Money makes Banks; Banks make Loans; Loans make Beggars; Beggars make Rags"
http://militantjeffersonian.com
"Men do not willingly read unpalatable truths of themselves. The People like those best who fool them most, by pandering to their vices and flattering their foibles" Raphael Semmes
I'm sorry republicae
I know you're right. The problem is to much money. So since you're such an economic genious, and we'll follow your great austrian way of thinking, to solve all our economic problems we'll all collectively pull our half our money and tear it up. That should do it!
I really like that austrian way of thinking. Less is more.....
If less is more, then nothing is everything right?
The Mises. Banker ran, banker funded, banker double think controlled.
Where else can a guy give up any ability to think and blindly follow a 'belief system'?
The mises, creating blind masses of gold fever fanatics one dumb moron at a time.
Modern Money Secrets - Get The Book.
www.wealthmoney.org
Modern Money Secrets - Get The Book.
www.wealthmoney.org
How woefully inadequate your
How woefully inadequate your arguments are Tomozope, almost as flaccid as those of DrKrbyLuv. The above statements are yet another example of those inadequacies and the funny thing about it is that you are not even aware of what the argument you are making by the statements above really indicate. Read what you just wrote once again Tomozope, deconstruct it and tell me what you arrive at regarding money and the economic mechanics that allow it to function as a medium of exchange.
Come on now, surely you can do that? Surely, you can read what you just wrote and tell me the significance of what you are saying. Does is make sense or are there fundamental conflicts between the statements of the comments you made in your post?
http://www.1776solution.blogspot.com
"Rags make Paper; Paper makes Money; Money makes Banks; Banks make Loans; Loans make Beggars; Beggars make Rags"
http://militantjeffersonian.com
"Men do not willingly read unpalatable truths of themselves. The People like those best who fool them most, by pandering to their vices and flattering their foibles" Raphael Semmes
DrKrbyLuv…sorry, I mean
DrKrbyLuv…sorry, I mean Tomozope, again your statements are so utterly devoid of any understanding of money, economics or even what has been said in contesting this absurd thread. So, you once again resort to nothing that remotely resembles an adequate argument either for the case you so desperately wish to make, nor can you make an argument that rises to the level of rebutting the discourse that have been leveled against your argument. So, what do you have? It appears that you have nothing engaging enough to be considered an argument so you falter and stumble in hopes that someone might just believe that you are making some argument, but given the evidence in your statements above you really don’t have much to offer do you? If you did then you would be presenting something that, at the very least, approached an intelligent argument, but you can’t even do that!
JUST LOOK AT WHAT YOU ARE WRITING, MY GOD MAN, CAN’T YOU DO ANY BETTER THAN THAT TO SUPPORT YOUR CLAIMS, IS THAT ALL YOU HAVE? DON'T YOU HAVE A SINGLE ARGUMENT OF INTELLECTUAL SUBSTANCE INSTEAD OF THIS JUVENILE DRIBBLE THAT YOU SPOUT OUT?
JUST LOOK AT WHAT YOU WRITE...JUST LOOK AT THE MANNER OF YOUR WRITING....LOTS OF HINTS THERE!
http://www.1776solution.blogspot.com
"Rags make Paper; Paper makes Money; Money makes Banks; Banks make Loans; Loans make Beggars; Beggars make Rags"
http://militantjeffersonian.com
"Men do not willingly read unpalatable truths of themselves. The People like those best who fool them most, by pandering to their vices and flattering their foibles" Raphael Semmes
No problem, but thanks for mentioning it
Thanks for taking the time to clarify that...I appreciate the courtesy.
Cheers,
Larry
END the FED before it ENDS US
END the FED before it ENDS US
Retardlicae
Well I'm sorry but you asked for the evidence showing exponential growth of debt, and I gave it to you.
How is it my fault that you can't read/comprehend simple numbers?
P.S. I'm not drkrbyluv. I promise you that, but he did write a very good article.
P.S.S. I've supported my claims with facts son...with facts.
Modern Money Secrets - Get The Book.
www.wealthmoney.org
Modern Money Secrets - Get The Book.
www.wealthmoney.org
You gave no such evidence,
You gave no such evidence, as I stated above. You have only provided the same evidence that I, myself provided in the historical record of the Treasury that reaches back to when the Treasury was founded. That record, including the so-called proof you have presented, only reflects a fluctuation in the levels of debt, not an exponential rate of growth in debt.
You have yet to provide facts, only information that you appear to interpret in a manner that is totally consistent with both your and DrKrbyLuv's dogmatic views regarding the subject. Thus far, both of your comments on the subject bear witness to a lack of comprehension of the subject and an absence of evidence to support your case. If you could support it then the evidence you present would actually and clearly support your claims, but it doesn't.
The fact that you must resort to the tactics that you do is plenty evidence of the understanding you do, you are losing the argument and you know it therefore, you must fall back on slurs. You have attempted to slur everything and everyone, but that only provides the good People on the DP with the nature of your character and the character of your argument.
http://www.1776solution.blogspot.com
"Rags make Paper; Paper makes Money; Money makes Banks; Banks make Loans; Loans make Beggars; Beggars make Rags"
http://militantjeffersonian.com
"Men do not willingly read unpalatable truths of themselves. The People like those best who fool them most, by pandering to their vices and flattering their foibles" Raphael Semmes
What made Austrian economists so great
is their ability to use natural selection mirroring that of an ecosystem to predict economic patterns and liquidity preferences.
In simple words, Gold was a stepping stone for fiat. Why? Because bankers were able to use social ills (bank runs of the 30’s) to implement a standard, the Gold Standard. Without any standard the amount of currency floating in our economy would be solely based on liquidity preferences starting from the most liquid to the hardest of assets.
My theory is that when banks are completely efficient in a free market, the ultimate currency would not be gold, but rather seeds. Seeds that can either be invested into the ground or traded on an open exchange.
Either way it is frivolous to continue redefining a sound currency based on impractical standards
The role of a farmer, in Fukuoka's mind, is an observer, not an intervener, of the natural order in his/her particular landscape. How is that any different than Hayek in regards to Economics?
If Austrian economics is the same as Keynesian, then why......
.....do so many Keynesian economists say the Austrian theory is unsound ( just like you )? If it is so stupid to tie the dollar to a precious commodity such as gold, then why do all the banks and governments own most of the gold?
Austrian & Keynesian are not the same, but equally incorrect
END the FED before it ENDS US
END the FED before it ENDS US
Have you read anything in Austrian Economic Theory?
This comment is for the originator of the post and not the person I am responding to. I concur (agree) with the person's response above mine and offer the following analysis:
I have read many books written by Austrian economics from Hayak, Rothbard, to Mises and their entire analysis is based upon a mathematical (statistical) understanding. They care more about understanding cause and effect relationships (causality) and study the basis of human action (praxeology) which is different than psychology for psychology focuses more about the moral leanings of the public at a particular time while those who study human action only report the results of the data before them and because of this method, they are less prone to advancing their understanding of economics through their own personal bias. This is why Austrian Economic Theory is brilliant and offers real mathematical & statistical approaches in describing their theories compared to Keynesians or other interventionists approaches.
In answer to your initial
In answer to your initial question: NO, HE HAS OBVIOUSLY NEVER READ MUCH, IF ANY OF THE AUSTRIAN ECONOMISTS and apparently wouldn't understand it if he did!
I hate to sound abusive, but DrKrbyLuv has earned the sound on enmity in my tone, most of my tone of consternation stems from his abject and seemingly deliberate repetitiveness of his argument without a hint of circumspection to his own words.
I appreciate your comments on Austrian Economics, it is right on!
http://www.1776solution.blogspot.com
"Rags make Paper; Paper makes Money; Money makes Banks; Banks make Loans; Loans make Beggars; Beggars make Rags"
http://militantjeffersonian.com
"Men do not willingly read unpalatable truths of themselves. The People like those best who fool them most, by pandering to their vices and flattering their foibles" Raphael Semmes
No need to name call
Competing currencies would help, regardless of your economic ideology.
... and I haven't read any posts here that have countered the debt-based money we have, and the inherent flaw of money entering the economy with a negative balance (100 dollars enters, yet 105 is due back to the Fed/...)
The money providers should be part of the economy and remunerated accordingly in the free market, not a central planning machine that creates a negative balance when it adds currency to the system.
hadabazinka says: ... and I
You're not likely to hear debt based money countered here - most think this phenomenon will magically be mitigated by gold backed money. The problem with debt based money is not the species of currency but rather a function of compound growth.
Talking about currency flavors is putting the cart in front of the horse - first, the way in which new money is added must be addressed.
END the FED before it ENDS US
END the FED before it ENDS US
As stated below, you have
As stated below, you have yet to show us evidence in the record of debt in this country's history where debt has been compounded, or has accumulated at an exponentially constant rate. The reason being is that the evidence does not support the position you present. Your conclusions are based upon a theory that there has been an accumulation of exponential debt, yet you cannot show where there has been a consistent constant of the percentage of such debt that meets the requirements of exponential or compounding, for that matter.
Now, in order to do that you might want to look up the definition of the words exponential and compound.
http://www.1776solution.blogspot.com
"Rags make Paper; Paper makes Money; Money makes Banks; Banks make Loans; Loans make Beggars; Beggars make Rags"
http://militantjeffersonian.com
"Men do not willingly read unpalatable truths of themselves. The People like those best who fool them most, by pandering to their vices and flattering their foibles" Raphael Semmes
re: As stated below, you have
I've posted this here before but it is becoming obvious that you are incapable to doing any independent research but just to show you that the debt does grow exponentially, here is the data........right from the mouth of the beast........again....
http://www.federalreserve.gov/RELEASES/z1/current/accessible...
We can back up anything we say, but you can't. You're a fraud and a phony. Go back to teaching your college economics class.
Modern Money Secrets - Get The Book.
www.wealthmoney.org
Modern Money Secrets - Get The Book.
www.wealthmoney.org
How utterly oblivious you
How utterly oblivious you appear to be Tomozope [DrKrbyLuv], your statements still give absolutely no substance to your fake and fraudulent attempt at argument. Look at the historic record from the Treasury, it is all there and yet you avoid it like the plague, why is that?
There is no evidence of an exponential constant within the record of debt going back for the last 210 years, yet you persist in saying that there is...where is your proof that there has been either a compounding of debt, or an exponential constant? Show us, put up or shut up! I have given plenty of evidence that does not support your claims, yet you have provided nothing to prove, or for that matter, to even lend the least degree of support for the claims you make.
Okay, take a look at the flow funds that you present, go ahead, take a look and then come back and show us where the exponential or compounding of debt is taking place. There is a great deal of difference between what you [DrKrbyLuv] states as exponential and what is evidenced in the Federal Reserve Flow Funds Accounting. What is witness is indeed a growth of debt, but, as always, you avoid the obvious within those documents, not only do you avoid the obvious, but you avoid so much that it is amazing that you would even consider using such Flow Fund documents in support of your case.
Indeed, you put this out as if it is, in some way, a support of your position and yet, you don't seem to be able to convey just how you make the claim that it does indeed support your claims. Look at each period within the Flow Funds Accounts, tell me what you see, if you can actually read the Accounts that is.
The amazing thing is that you actually presented it in an attempt to support your position and yet I have to wonder if you have the remotest ability to decipher what you are looking at when you read the various Flow Fund Accounts? Tell us what all of that means please, can you do that? I am interesting to see just how you manage such an interpretation in the light of your premise that there is an actual, verifiable exponential constant in what you are reading in the Flow Funds.
Your last statement, by the way, does not, as you suppose, castigate me, but it is simply a very accurate reflection of your own inadequacies both in your argument and your intellectual abilities. Can't you do any better? I mean even your attempt at casting slurs is placid and impotent!
Can't you give answer instead of insisting on the most childish
http://www.1776solution.blogspot.com
"Rags make Paper; Paper makes Money; Money makes Banks; Banks make Loans; Loans make Beggars; Beggars make Rags"
http://militantjeffersonian.com
"Men do not willingly read unpalatable truths of themselves. The People like those best who fool them most, by pandering to their vices and flattering their foibles" Raphael Semmes
What is funny.
What is funny is the republicae can't even read the very first line of that report.
Modern Money Secrets - Get The Book.
www.wealthmoney.org
Modern Money Secrets - Get The Book.
www.wealthmoney.org
How predictable you are!
How predictable you are! Yet, you still cannot associate what you have proposed as evidence to support your claims with your claims, if you could then would you not have done just that?
Actually, Tomozope, I get the reports from the FED as they are released.
Take the years between 2005 and 2008, what do you see in terms of borrowing and accumulated debt? Is its growth based on an exponential constant? Surely you can tell me that, can't you?
Tell me the differences in accounting procedures within the various sectors? Can you do that and it would be nice if you could do so in detail, surely you can actually do that Tomozope, can't you?
http://www.1776solution.blogspot.com
"Rags make Paper; Paper makes Money; Money makes Banks; Banks make Loans; Loans make Beggars; Beggars make Rags"
http://militantjeffersonian.com
"Men do not willingly read unpalatable truths of themselves. The People like those best who fool them most, by pandering to their vices and flattering their foibles" Raphael Semmes
Exponential constant?
Do you understand that in math exponential and contant are two different things?
Can you ever think outside double speak?
Modern Money Secrets - Get The Book.
www.wealthmoney.org
Modern Money Secrets - Get The Book.
www.wealthmoney.org
Hmmmm....have you ever heard
Hmmmm....have you ever heard of exponential constant e?
Would you like for me to spell it out for you?
http://www.1776solution.blogspot.com
"Rags make Paper; Paper makes Money; Money makes Banks; Banks make Loans; Loans make Beggars; Beggars make Rags"
http://militantjeffersonian.com
"Men do not willingly read unpalatable truths of themselves. The People like those best who fool them most, by pandering to their vices and flattering their foibles" Raphael Semmes
Exponential constant?
Go ahead and spell them out for me. I give you permission.
Modern Money Secrets - Get The Book.
www.wealthmoney.org
Modern Money Secrets - Get The Book.
www.wealthmoney.org
Wait Tomozope, surely you
Wait Tomozope, surely you know your math, I mean after all you are proposing that there is an accumulation of debt based on an rate of exponential growth aren't you?
y = ax
a = the base, positive greater than 1
continuous exponential of all values = x
Tell me, what do you have? Surely you can tell me when it comes to the theory that you and conjoined twin DrKrbyLuv propose concerning exponential growth of debt? Can't you? It is the primary foundation of your entire theory. After all, in order for you to be presenting your case for the exponential growth of debt based upon mathematical fact, you will have to show where the exponential functions actually exhibit the properties involved with exponential growth. Essentially, that would mean that you must show that a quantity of a measurable value grows exponentially at a rate that is proportional to its original size. Additionally, it must be presented mathematically that the exponential growth is proportionally larger at any given time in the observed frame.
Would you really like for me to spell it out for you Tomozope? I am perfectly capable of doing that if you like.
COME ON NOW, SURELY YOU ARE NOT SAYING THAT YOU PROPOSE SUCH A THEORY AND DON'T UNDERSTAND THE FUNDAMENTAL FOUNDATIONS OF THAT THEORY.
http://www.1776solution.blogspot.com
"Rags make Paper; Paper makes Money; Money makes Banks; Banks make Loans; Loans make Beggars; Beggars make Rags"
http://militantjeffersonian.com
"Men do not willingly read unpalatable truths of themselves. The People like those best who fool them most, by pandering to their vices and flattering their foibles" Raphael Semmes
spell it out.
Yes please spell it out. Show me all your math.
Modern Money Secrets - Get The Book.
www.wealthmoney.org
Modern Money Secrets - Get The Book.
www.wealthmoney.org