Why We Left The Gold Standard

Going off the gold standard gave the government new tools to steer the economy. If you're
not tied to gold, you can adjust the amount of money in the economy if you need to. You
can adjust interest rates.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/...-gold-standard

JAM

"Frank Galikanokus" wrote in message
...

Going off the gold standard gave the government new tools to steer the
economy. If you're
not tied to gold, you can adjust the amount of money in the economy if you
need to. You
can adjust interest rates.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/...-gold-standard

JAM

You can leap tall buildings in a single bound, change the course of mighty
rivers, bend steel in your bare hands and totally destroy the economy of the
United States!

Some Guy wrote:

"Frank Galikanokus" wrote in message
...

Going off the gold standard gave the government new tools to steer the
economy. If you're
not tied to gold, you can adjust the amount of money in the economy if you
need to. You
can adjust interest rates.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/...-gold-standard

JAM

You can leap tall buildings in a single bound, change the course of mighty
rivers, bend steel in your bare hands and totally destroy the economy of the
United States!


I think this quote from the article makes more sense than you little quip.

"Almost all economists agree, the system we have today is better than the gold standard.
Not perfect, but much better."

What has laid this country low is republican deregulation in 1999 and 2000 and the Bush
tax cuts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm–Leach–Bliley_Act

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/...ct-of-1999.asp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodi...on_Act_of_2000

http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2...rnization-act/

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/cfma.asp

http://www.time.com/time/specials/pa...877331,00.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Gramm

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/17/bu...y/17gramm.html

http://dir.salon.com/story/tech/feat...8/wendy_gramm/

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/0...nd-Wendy-Gramm

http://www.apfn.org/enron/gramm.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_default_swap

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_(finance)

Or you could look it up for yourself.

JAM

On Jul 22, 4:13*pm, Frank Galikanokus
wrote:


What has laid this country low is republican deregulation in 1999 and 2000 and the Bush
tax cuts.


Despite your perpetual liberal slant and Bush-bashing, the real
problem is runaway spending. Republicans and Democrats alike feel that
it's their job to spend our money, especially if it is beneficial to
their constituency, regardless of what it means to the country as a
whole. I would love to hear your take on the Carter administration
economic policies. Can't blame Bush for them! Oh, and can you also let
me know at what point in time the current administration will accept
responsibility for their own unpopular and failed policies?

How's that stimulus package working out for you?

On Jul 23, 1:15*pm, Jud wrote:
On Jul 22, 4:13*pm, Frank Galikanokus
wrote:



What has laid this country low is republican deregulation in 1999 and 2000 and the Bush
tax cuts.

Despite your perpetual liberal slant and Bush-bashing, the real
problem is runaway spending. Republicans and Democrats alike feel that
it's their job to spend our money, especially if it is beneficial to
their constituency, regardless of what it means to the country as a
whole. *I would love to hear your take on the Carter administration
economic policies. Can't blame Bush for them! Oh, and can you also let
me know at what point in time the current administration will accept
responsibility for their own unpopular and failed policies?

How's that stimulus package working out for you?

As is said on Facebook, "LIKE."

The current Obama administration has also been dubbed "Carter's Second
Term." Now that I've fueled the political fire, I'm going to sit back
and watch the fight.

Jerry
I'm such an a$$hole.

Jud wrote:

On Jul 22, 4:13 pm, Frank Galikanokus
wrote:


What has laid this country low is republican deregulation in 1999 and 2000 and the Bush
tax cuts.


Despite your perpetual liberal slant and Bush-bashing, the real
problem is runaway spending. Republicans and Democrats alike feel that
it's their job to spend our money, especially if it is beneficial to
their constituency, regardless of what it means to the country as a
whole. I would love to hear your take on the Carter administration
economic policies. Can't blame Bush for them! Oh, and can you also let
me know at what point in time the current administration will accept
responsibility for their own unpopular and failed policies?

How's that stimulus package working out for you?

Actually, all reports have said that the stimulus helped, but not enough.

JAM

"Frank Galikanokus" wrote in message
...
Jud wrote:

On Jul 22, 4:13 pm, Frank Galikanokus
wrote:


What has laid this country low is republican deregulation in 1999 and
2000 and the Bush
tax cuts.


Despite your perpetual liberal slant and Bush-bashing, the real
problem is runaway spending. Republicans and Democrats alike feel that
it's their job to spend our money, especially if it is beneficial to
their constituency, regardless of what it means to the country as a
whole. I would love to hear your take on the Carter administration
economic policies. Can't blame Bush for them! Oh, and can you also let
me know at what point in time the current administration will accept
responsibility for their own unpopular and failed policies?

How's that stimulus package working out for you?

Actually, all reports have said that the stimulus helped, but not enough.

JAM

Those hundreds of billions helped who and what?

On Jul 22, 3:13*pm, Frank Galikanokus
wrote:

I think this quote from the article makes more sense than you little quip..

"Almost all economists agree, the system we have today is better than the gold standard.
Not perfect, but much better."

Which poll asked 'almost all economists' this question about the gold
standard? Which economists were polled and what was the selection
criteria?

Here's an example where President 0bama claimed that 'all economists
agree', and about 200 wrote him back and told him they didn't agree:

http://www.cato.org/special/stimulus...e_version.html

What has laid this country low is republican deregulation in 1999 and 2000 and the Bush
tax cuts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm–Leach–Bliley_Act

Gramm-Leach-Bliley was signed by Bill Clinton. It is clear that the
repeal of Glass-Steagall was not at fault for the economic meltdown of
2008-2009. The tactic of packaging mortgages into securities was
invented by GNMA (Government National Mortgage Association) in the
1970s.

And furthermore, it can easily be seen that allowing financial firms
to do both commercial and investment banking had nothing to do with
the problems. The securities firms that got into the most trouble
(Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch) had little or no
involvement in commercial banking. And the savings & loan/mortgage
companies that got into the most trouble (Washington Mutual,
Countrywide) had little or no involvement in investment banking.

Jim wrote:

On Jul 22, 3:13 pm, Frank Galikanokus
wrote:

I think this quote from the article makes more sense than you little quip.

"Almost all economists agree, the system we have today is better than the gold standard.
Not perfect, but much better."

Which poll asked 'almost all economists' this question about the gold
standard? Which economists were polled and what was the selection
criteria?

Here's an example where President 0bama claimed that 'all economists
agree', and about 200 wrote him back and told him they didn't agree:

http://www.cato.org/special/stimulus...e_version.html

What has laid this country low is republican deregulation in 1999 and 2000 and the Bush
tax cuts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm–Leach–Bliley_Act

Gramm-Leach-Bliley was signed by Bill Clinton. It is clear that the
repeal of Glass-Steagall was not at fault for the economic meltdown of
2008-2009. The tactic of packaging mortgages into securities was
invented by GNMA (Government National Mortgage Association) in the
1970s.

And furthermore, it can easily be seen that allowing financial firms
to do both commercial and investment banking had nothing to do with
the problems. The securities firms that got into the most trouble
(Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch) had little or no
involvement in commercial banking. And the savings & loan/mortgage
companies that got into the most trouble (Washington Mutual,
Countrywide) had little or no involvement in investment banking.

This can only be seen with both of you eyes covered and your head in a
place where the sun don't shine.

JAM

On Jul 30, 9:20*am, Jim wrote:
On Jul 22, 3:13*pm, Frank Galikanokus
wrote:



I think this quote from the article makes more sense than you little quip.

"Almost all economists agree, the system we have today is better than the gold standard.
Not perfect, but much better."

Which poll asked 'almost all economists' this question about the gold
standard? Which economists were polled and what was the selection
criteria?

Here's an example where President 0bama claimed that 'all economists
agree', and about 200 wrote him back and told him they didn't agree:

http://www.cato.org/special/stimulus...e_version.html

What has laid this country low is republican deregulation in 1999 and 2000 and the Bush
tax cuts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm–Leach–Bliley_Act

Gramm-Leach-Bliley was signed by Bill Clinton. It is clear that the
repeal of Glass-Steagall was not at fault for the economic meltdown of
2008-2009. The tactic of packaging mortgages into securities was
invented by GNMA (Government National Mortgage Association) in the
1970s.

And furthermore, it can easily be seen that allowing financial firms
to do both commercial and investment banking had nothing to do with
the problems. The securities firms that got into the most trouble
(Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch) had little or no
involvement in commercial banking. And the savings & loan/mortgage
companies that got into the most trouble (Washington Mutual,
Countrywide) had little or no involvement in investment banking.

Actually, the idea of creating securities out of debt was known in the
1920s and contributed to the crash of 1929. It was a relatively small
factor then, but was improved to better aid our susequent disaster in
2007.