You have 23 posts so far. Does that mean 23 new threads?
My strategy is to piss off as many conservative/libertarians as possible. The solution is providing as many logical threads as possible. Good Day :2wave:
Strategy for what. I can't even follow your idea on this one. Cut the debt in half how? How would you constitutionally restrict inflation? Etc.
It takes people off beat when you make 12 forums denouncing conservative idealism. How about you answer my questions on the other forum, while I answer yours here....
[1] The debt is maintained at a flat rate as a part of the budget. For example, if we added two trillion dollars into the economy through a national bank, you wouldn't need to keep maintaining a high debt, allowing us to decrease the ceiling overtime. A slow process, but one that can get us to 50% debt. I.E Something Rand Paul claims he can do by abolishing taxes -_-
[2] You can limit the power of setting inflation rates by law. Like everything else in the US. Pretty irrelevant anyways, as that would be of the assumption that the US economy was out to hurt you.
You really think that inflation rates are set? Other than wage and price controls, inflation rates are based on what happened with prices, not determined beforehand. Supply and demand, a much more concrete theory than your home brew.
So your strategy is to attack conservative idealism. Sounds like a tactic without an objective.
You can't predefine a set rate, but flexible rates. Like 1-8%. Ensuring that no matter how much inflation, the citizens can't be abused. Is that satisfactory?
You can't predefine a set rate, but flexible rates. Like 1-8%. Ensuring that no matter how much inflation, the citizens can't be abused. Is that satisfactory?
Solution: You change the law!!!! *clap* *clap*
Inflation rates can be changed as easily as federal budgets can.Laws expire and need to be renewed, usually with changes. Stop dropping points, as this is the only one you have defended.
?Not sure if you are arguing with yourself but perhaps the definition of inflation would be helpful for you:
2.
ECONOMICS
a general increase in prices and fall in the purchasing value of money.
"policies aimed at controlling inflation"
Unless you plan on repealing the law of economics, your plan obviously fails.
My strategy is to piss off as many conservative/libertarians as possible. The solution is providing as many logical threads as possible. Good Day :2wave:
Ok, let me know when you start with the logical threads.
Of course my threads don't seem logical to a conservative. As a ultra progressive, I even tick off the moderates. :lamo
Yeah, I won't deny that there are things about the liberal/progressive mindset that are completely incomprehensible to me.
I'd rather go to a free market system, where reserves would be higher, banks would be smaller, and rates of interest for loans and savings would be in line with the true wealth of the economy.
You really think that inflation rates are set? Other than wage and price controls, inflation rates are based on what happened with prices, not determined beforehand. Supply and demand, a much more concrete theory than your home brew.
So your strategy is to attack conservative idealism. Sounds like a tactic without an objective.
If I could have one wish before I die, it would be the abolition of free market banking. Don't get me wrong, I love capitalism and socialism alike, but the perks here are substantial. With a sole National Bank, we can cut the debt ceiling in half, cut taxes, start up new programs, circulate inner growth to an all time high, and wall street wouldn't be pissing on you anymore. I see but two arguments in its way....
"Oh golly, if the federal reserve was our sole bank, than they would freely set interest rates and the stock market would collapse"
Two Problems....
1. This would only be true if the government was trying to destroy the economy.
2. The opportunity-cost/trade off, far outweigh that of the stock market investment stream.
Two Solutions...
1. Basic constitutional clauses restrict overtly high inflation rates, or overtly low ones.
2. If the stock market issue was truly a burden, I suppose some sort of investment commitee, board, or even elected body could be formed -_-
Anyways, I want the populous opinion, so lay it on me.
The Federal Reserve tries to keep inflation around 2% using price indexes to set the target rates and interest rates to keep inflation in check. Inflation targeting helps make the federal reserve's moves more transparent which helps take some of the uncertainty out of the market.
Yes they do, since 2012. Our OP is looking to mandate the inflation rate, not just influence it. So many factors go into how inflation happens including such external factors as currency exchange rates. Not even the most totalitarian states have succeeding setting inflation rates. Most countries try to keep it from any big changes.
Would you be in favor of national banking if there was a set process of controlling inflation?
As you can see, I don't even want the national bank to be the sole bank.
I wish for tax incentives to push people towards the federal reserve.
Unfortunately, this is not realistic, as the house refuses to put anymore into the federal reserve bank.
That sounds wonderful. But who would make sure the banks towed the line in a free market system?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?