The American Coinage System

Talk about anything in here.

Postby termyt » Sat Mar 29, 2008 5:27 pm

EricTheFred (post: 1211490) wrote:I know it will be weird after my lecture on floating currency vs. gold standard to hear that I'm a dues-paying Libertarian (this is one of those places where I disagree with most members of my party) but Termyt... you need to check us out. You sound like you would fit right in.
What makes you think I haven't? What makes you think I'm not?

Then again, there are so few card carrying members, you probably all know one another. :P

I'm a bit more conservative than your standard libertarian.
[color="Red"]Please visit Love146.org[/color]
A member of the Society of Hatted Members
Image
If your pedantic about grammar, its unlikely that you'll copy and paste this into your sig, to.
User avatar
termyt
 
Posts: 4289
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: oHIo

Postby ClosetOtaku » Sat Mar 29, 2008 6:59 pm

Technomancer (post: 1211530) wrote:The problem is that it wasn't Keynesian policy that created this mess. The US government removed reguations governing the industry and also refused to enforce other laws regarding the same. It wasn't government intervention that brought this mess about]lack[/i].


As economic analyst Peter Schiff noted this week:

"In the first place, the current mess did not result from a failure of the free market, but from too much government interference. The real estate bubble, and the shaky securitized products it spawned, resulted from the Fed artificially setting interest rates too low. Had interest rates been allowed to find their market levels, rather than be set by government decree, the real estate bubble never would have been inflated in the first place."


That's pure Keynesian theory in practice -- and Keynes is in the driver's seat as the Fed is given even more control over policy. That the government subsequently failed in its duties to enforce laws is not part of any economic school, but it was not the reason behind the most recent crisis. Now, with the Fed large and in charge, be prepared for even more problems.
"If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world." -- C.S. Lewis
User avatar
ClosetOtaku
 
Posts: 927
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:12 am
Location: Alexandria, VA

Postby Technomancer » Sat Mar 29, 2008 8:20 pm

ClosetOtaku (post: 1211629) wrote:As economic analyst Peter Schiff noted this week:



That's pure Keynesian theory in practice -- and Keynes is in the driver's seat as the Fed is given even more control over policy. That the government subsequently failed in its duties to enforce laws is not part of any economic school, but it was not the reason behind the most recent crisis. Now, with the Fed large and in charge, be prepared for even more problems.


It wasn't the government that pushed the banks into extending loans to people that their own criteria should have rejected. It wasn't the government that went on lending money to people under the assumption that interest rates wouldn't go up. The banks has a duty not to lend to people that couldn't afford a loan, and they certainly had a duty not to sell bad bonds (which is what they did with a lot of the loans).
The scientific method," Thomas Henry Huxley once wrote, "is nothing but the normal working of the human mind." That is to say, when the mind is working; that is to say further, when it is engaged in corrrecting its mistakes. Taking this point of view, we may conclude that science is not physics, biology, or chemistry—is not even a "subject"—but a moral imperative drawn from a larger narrative whose purpose is to give perspective, balance, and humility to learning.

Neil Postman
(The End of Education)

Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge

Isaac Aasimov
User avatar
Technomancer
 
Posts: 2379
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 11:47 am
Location: Tralfamadore

Postby Yeshua-Knight » Sat Mar 29, 2008 9:15 pm

Doubleshadow (post: 1210975) wrote:My apologies to any international members who aren't familiar with the American coinage system, although I would love input from the Canadians and New Zealanders on what the article says about their changes.

It's been quite a while since I first encountered an article about removing pennies from circulation, and I have to say the argument and counter-argument is fascinating due to covering everything from culture and sentimentality to hard-core economics and finance. The articles below have a lot of information, but I wish they had a little more history since it's hard to understand the problem without having an idea of how our current monetary system came to be. I also wish I could find reliable information on the private manufacture of money in the US.

So, I'll save my opinion for later, but what do my fellow Americans (and anybody else) think should be done about the problems with our monetary system?


Link to Articles on Pennies
Brief History of the Fiat System



the real problem unfortunately is that there is so much american money printed that the government has no way to cover ever since we went off the gold standard, getting rid of pennies and other such changes are simply cosmetic in comparison to real issues concerning american currency

my apologies to all who posted previous to me, i didn't read your posts because my goal here was to simply express my opinion and be done with the thread
'nuff said
User avatar
Yeshua-Knight
 
Posts: 720
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2004 8:13 pm
Location: Somewhere within the universe

Postby ich1990 » Sat Mar 29, 2008 11:15 pm

blkmage (post: 1211441) wrote:Foreign demand for the US dollar has nothing to do with whether the US is well liked or not. Demand for the US dollar has everything to do with demand for US exports. The only way the US dollar's strength can suddenly evaporate because of unpopularity is if the States became so unpopular that no one wanted to buy anything from them. As long as you guys continue to make things that the rest of us wants to buy, you have nothing to worry about. A currency's value is based directly on the exports and imports of that country, not on it's political popularity.


What exactly does America produce nowadays? From what I can tell, pretty much every major factory has gone to China or some other similar country. That leaves us with services: lawyers, doctors, computer repairers, construction workers, etc. The problem with services, is that they are tied to the person who can perform them. If the dollar is to survive, foreigners will have to buy our goods and services. Since we don't have any goods to speak of, that means that foreigners will be hiring our professionals to do foreign work. This means that the money trail will start leading out of America. This has been a problem for a long time, and has caused America to shift from producer to consumer. Continue reading for a full explanation.

Technomancer wrote:This is true, but you've also ignored the flipside, which has a lot to with why the gold standard was abandoned. By not being able to increase the money supply when it is needed, large-scale economic disruptions also occur. Banks can't lend money they don't have, which can reduce economic growth to a snail's pace.


The gold standard isn't a perfect solution. But something needs to be done. Inflexibility and a snail's pace economic growth are minor issues compared to the total destruction of the dollar and the big pit of debt that America has dug itself into.

Explanation:

The value of fiat currency is based on popularity. Not necessarily the popularity of the national policies, but the popularity of its economy. There are plenty of countries who hate America's guts, however, when it comes down to it, they still invest their money in American dollars. They do this because America has built up faith in the dollar by surviving every depression and recession that has been thrown at it. The American economy was the first SuperEconomy of the new industrial era to develop, as such it has quite a bit of momentum and notoriety behind it.

However, America isn't the only SuperEconomy anymore. A new conglomerate of small nations have banded together and adopted a new monetary standard, the Euro. The Euro has the advantage of being diversified and backed by many different countries comprising the European Union. This new “Euro” doesn't have the long track record of dependability that the American dollar has, but it has a much more stable base. Whereas the Euro has become stronger as it has become accepted, the dollar has begun to weaken (see below for extrapolation).

It won't take long before investors start noticing this discrepancy. When they do, they will start diversifying away from the dollar in order to gain the better growth benefits of the Euro. They probably won't totally abandon the dollar because the dollar has the home field advantage, but even if half of our investors started buying Euros instead of dollars, it would be disastrous.

The dollar is weakening, and the ways to stop this trend are decreasing (a return to the gold standard is one possible solution). Currently, America produces far less than it spends. It was once an industrial society, now China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and other such countries have taken on that role. We are now a consuming society. This means that we buy more than we produce. That is why our government is trillions of dollars in debt. In order to get out of this debt, the government is doing two things, it is getting foreign investors to finance our debt, and it is inflating the dollar (printing off money to pay off the debt). Both these things are adversely affecting the value and stability of the dollar.

The only way our economy has survived this long, is because people have faith in the dollar. We have been the “top pick” as far as international economies are concerned, so we have been able to get plenty of investors to continue the pyramid scheme. With the Euro, however, the dollar in no longer the only reasonable choice; people may decide that the dollar isn't the best deal. If that happens, we will have trouble finding enough investors to borrow money from to pay the interest on all of our other debt.

Our government is also printing off more money. Because our economy consumes much more than it produces, the government is printing money in order to make up the difference. This is a very short term solution, however. The more money that the government prints, the more money they rob from current dollars in the way of inflation. If I was an investor, I wouldn't want to invest my money into something that is losing 3-10% of its value every year. If it were me, I would invest in Euro. This is compounding problem number one (getting foreign financing for current debt, see paragraph above).

All of this makes the outlook seem very bad for the dollar. There is one bright side, however. Our massive spending has become the foundation of man other countries' economies. Lots of places, like China, can not afford us to stop buying their goods. We are locked in a death dance. We can't afford to keep spending money, and they can't afford for us to stop spending money. In a way, our greatest export is our willingness to buy imports with the dollar. In other words, our export is the dollar. The affects of this are everywhere: more and more people are trying to get fewer and fewer jobs that pay money that is worth less and less. Eventually, we will hit the end of the road. What happens at that point is uncertain.

The solutions to this problem are difficult to come by. We could switch to the gold standard and trigger Armageddon early (and face the problem before it gets much bigger). We could deliberate and argue until the dollar dies, at which point the whole economic structure of the world would become undone. We could adopt the Euro, which the fiercely independent Americans would never agree to. We could try to somehow become a producer again (which would be the best option, but extremely hard to implement). Perhaps we could come up with a different solution that hasn't been discovered yet. Take your pick, none of them are painless.
Where an Eidolon, named night, on a black throne reigns upright.
User avatar
ich1990
 
Posts: 1546
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 2:01 pm
Location: The Land of Sona-Nyl

Postby blkmage » Sun Mar 30, 2008 6:31 am

Your argument makes sense, but it seems like you're really underestimating your economic output, which is the basis of your argument. America really produces no goods of any importance? All manufacturing has left the States? You may not be the principle manufacturing state you once were, but I'm fairly certain the States has replaced that with say, technology companies and professional services. Even then, American output of physical goods hasn't evaporated to insignificance like you seem to think it has. Yes, we all may be tied to China because of it's cheap labour and numerous factories, but at the same time, everyone else can't afford to stop buying American goods. And it follows that everyone can't afford to stop buying Japanese goods, or Canadian goods, or European goods anyway.
User avatar
blkmage
 
Posts: 4529
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 5:40 pm

Postby ich1990 » Sun Mar 30, 2008 9:29 am

blkmage (post: 1211709) wrote:Your argument makes sense, but it seems like you're really underestimating your economic output, which is the basis of your argument. America really produces no goods of any importance? All manufacturing has left the States? You may not be the principle manufacturing state you once were, but I'm fairly certain the States has replaced that with say, technology companies and professional services. Even then, American output of physical goods hasn't evaporated to insignificance like you seem to think it has. Yes, we all may be tied to China because of it's cheap labour and numerous factories, but at the same time, everyone else can't afford to stop buying American goods. And it follows that everyone can't afford to stop buying Japanese goods, or Canadian goods, or European goods anyway.


It doesn't matter how much we produce. As long as we spend more than we produce, the federal deficit will keep getting larger, and the dollar (and thus our ability to get foreign investors to finance our debt) will keep getting weaker. Sure, not all of our production is gone, but enough is to cause a major problem.

You are right, everyone else can't afford to stop buying our goods. Unfortunately, we are producing fewer and fewer goods and services. Thanks to the population boom, inflation, cheap labor in foreign countries, and the high expectations of American workers, more and more people are competing for fewer and fewer jobs that pay money that is worth less and less. There just aren't enough technology companies and professional services to train and hire the millions of displaced industrial workers, at least, there won't be for quite a while. By the time there is, there is a good chance that the American economic system will have succumbed to the huge amount of debt that it is carrying.

That is assuming that we get any tech and professional jobs at all. Many technology and professional jobs have gone to cheap labor countries as well. Americans "need" to be paid 20$ an hour in order to support their families (and their current lifestyle). Mexicans, on the other hand, are willing to work for a few dollars a day. There comes a point when it is cheaper to train other people to do a job than it is to hire people who already know how to do it. It is capitalism at work, America is no longer the most efficient, so the work is going elsewere.
Where an Eidolon, named night, on a black throne reigns upright.
User avatar
ich1990
 
Posts: 1546
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 2:01 pm
Location: The Land of Sona-Nyl

Postby ClosetOtaku » Sun Mar 30, 2008 3:45 pm

Technomancer (post: 1211641) wrote:The banks has a duty not to lend to people that couldn't afford a loan, and they certainly had a duty not to sell bad bonds (which is what they did with a lot of the loans).


Really? A "duty"? Next thing I'll be hearing is that your local Realtor has a 'duty' to list a house at an 'affordable' price, forgetting the seller and ensuring the buying family secures the mortgage at 'reasonable' and 'fair' rates -- and if these can't be obtained, to politely decline to be a particpant in the transaction.

Yeah, well...

Like most businesses, banks are out to make a profit. They accept a certain degree of risk when making these loans. When they bundle these mortgages into investments for the derivatives market, another party buys the mortgages, assumes the risk, and makes a profit from the interest payments made by the people who own the house.

In a truly free market, those businesses that make poor decisions (e.g. lend to the wrong people) lose money and, hopefully, are driven out of the market (e.g. go out of business).

However, when the Fed manipulated the money supply, the race was on. Money for loans (good and bad) abounded. Profit margins soared (for a while). Corporations like Bear-Stearns made profits in the millions of dollars.

Now, a financial institution performing along the lines of the "duty" theory would have certainly avoided the riskier loans. But investors and shareholders would have asked their respective boards: are you crazy? People are making huge profits! Why aren't you in the game?

And why not ask the question? You can see why, now. The Government is bailing out the failing economy (through those checks that many people are getting this Spring). The Government is bailing out Wall Street (Bear-Stearns and others). The Government is looking at bailing out foreclosed families. So long as Uncle Sam picks up the tab, why shouldn't people engage in risky behavior?

And so once again the Keynes school, so fond of Government intervention in financial matters, leads us to where the Austrian school would not: rewarding poor business decisions, discouraging market forces, and (unintentionally, but oh well) bringing the economy, not just of one or two corporations but of the entire country (and perhaps the world), to the brink of a major crisis.

If you define "duty" in the sense of -- "you must obey market forces", then I would agree -- but when those market forces are deliberately removed, does the duty remain? If you define "duty" in the sense of "morally correct", then where is the penalty for non-compliance? There is none -- you've put the hungry kid in the candy store, what did you expect? The Austrian school has no need for such a concept -- duty means heeding the rules of the market, and paying the penalty for not doing so.

And that is why I believe the Keynesian philosophies that are driving U.S. leadership, the Fed, and Wall Street are ultimately leading all of us (responsible or not) into financial disaster.
"If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world." -- C.S. Lewis
User avatar
ClosetOtaku
 
Posts: 927
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:12 am
Location: Alexandria, VA

Postby Technomancer » Sun Mar 30, 2008 7:06 pm

ClosetOtaku (post: 1211798) wrote:Really? A "duty"? Next thing I'll be hearing is that your local Realtor has a 'duty' to list a house at an 'affordable' price, forgetting the seller and ensuring the buying family secures the mortgage at 'reasonable' and 'fair' rates -- and if these can't be obtained, to politely decline to be a particpant in the transaction.


I don't mean duty like this at all. What I mean is in the same sense that a manufacturer must not sell defective merchandise, the banks shouldn't have sold falsely labeled bonds. Look, the banks bundled the mortgages together and sold them as bonds to a variety of institutional investors such as foreign banks, municipalities, etc. This is pretty much standard practice, and is a reasonably safe investment given proper lending procedures. However, the banks disregarded those procedures, but still sold the bonds under the same low-risk conditions as standard bonds of this type. The spill-over of your country's mess has already gone well beyond your own borders.

However, when the Fed manipulated the money supply, the race was on. Money for loans (good and bad) abounded. Profit margins soared (for a while). Corporations like Bear-Stearns made profits in the millions of dollars.


Money may have abounded, and that's good. But the oversight in terms of the original laws that forbade certain lending practices was removed (in the name of "deregulation"!) as was any reasonable standard of risk-management by the banks.


And why not ask the question? You can see why, now. The Government is bailing out the failing economy (through those checks that many people are getting this Spring). The Government is bailing out Wall Street (Bear-Stearns and others). The Government is looking at bailing out foreclosed families. So long as Uncle Sam picks up the tab, why shouldn't people engage in risky behavior?


At the moment, the U.S. government is bailing out the banks, because if it doesn't it may very well have a worse mess on its hands. This has to be done, but it needs to come at the price of both better regulation and enforcement of existing laws to ensure that this doesn't happen again. By all means though, have those responsible clapped in irons, and make sure that those banks straying from the straight and narrow find themselves in the appropriate level of hot water .


There is none -- you've put the hungry kid in the candy store, what did you expect?


And it's a foolish shopkeeper that doesn't keep an eye on him!
The scientific method," Thomas Henry Huxley once wrote, "is nothing but the normal working of the human mind." That is to say, when the mind is working; that is to say further, when it is engaged in corrrecting its mistakes. Taking this point of view, we may conclude that science is not physics, biology, or chemistry—is not even a "subject"—but a moral imperative drawn from a larger narrative whose purpose is to give perspective, balance, and humility to learning.

Neil Postman
(The End of Education)

Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge

Isaac Aasimov
User avatar
Technomancer
 
Posts: 2379
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 11:47 am
Location: Tralfamadore

Postby KeybladeWarrior » Sun Mar 30, 2008 11:10 pm

I would keep the penny. It helps when you need odd numbered change.
@)}~`,~ Carry This Rose In Your Sig, As Thanks, To All
The CAA Moderators.

"YEAH TOAST! TOCAA!"
User avatar
KeybladeWarrior
 
Posts: 1176
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 7:04 pm

Postby ClosetOtaku » Tue Apr 01, 2008 5:20 pm

Technomancer (post: 1211879) wrote:And it's a foolish shopkeeper that doesn't keep an eye on him!


Quite right! :)

Today, the Market was up considerably -- lots of reasons given, but I think in the back of many investors' minds was: Paulson's proposal for empowering the Fed has just made the American Taxpayer the "lender of last resort". When your risky securities are leveraged by the blood, sweat, and tears of hundreds of millions of hard workers, hey, what's there to worry about?

It may be true that the rich get richer at the expense of the poor -- but the rules are about to change where that will be guaranteed. :mutter:
"If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world." -- C.S. Lewis
User avatar
ClosetOtaku
 
Posts: 927
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:12 am
Location: Alexandria, VA

Postby Technomancer » Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:05 pm

ClosetOtaku (post: 1212634) wrote:Quite right! :)

Today, the Market was up considerably -- lots of reasons given, but I think in the back of many investors' minds was: Paulson's proposal for empowering the Fed has just made the American Taxpayer the "lender of last resort". When your risky securities are leveraged by the blood, sweat, and tears of hundreds of millions of hard workers, hey, what's there to worry about?

It may be true that the rich get richer at the expense of the poor -- but the rules are about to change where that will be guaranteed. :mutter:


The Bank of Canada was set up after the great depression to be just that: the lender of last resort. However, it must be backed by more than just money for bailouts. There has to be real regulatory control over what activities are permissible and real personal penalties when those bounds are overstepped.
The scientific method," Thomas Henry Huxley once wrote, "is nothing but the normal working of the human mind." That is to say, when the mind is working; that is to say further, when it is engaged in corrrecting its mistakes. Taking this point of view, we may conclude that science is not physics, biology, or chemistry—is not even a "subject"—but a moral imperative drawn from a larger narrative whose purpose is to give perspective, balance, and humility to learning.

Neil Postman
(The End of Education)

Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge

Isaac Aasimov
User avatar
Technomancer
 
Posts: 2379
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 11:47 am
Location: Tralfamadore

Postby termyt » Wed Apr 02, 2008 9:30 am

Technomancer (post: 1211641) wrote:It wasn't the government that pushed the banks into extending loans to people that their own criteria should have rejected.

Actually, it was the government. Our government decided back in the 90's that not enough people could "live the American dream" so they went about "fixing" it. The President decided that that meant that people should be able to buy houses.

So the government relaxed the regulations on mortgages.

A lot of the major banks did not change their lending practices, but open the market and you will always find someone willing to exploit it.

I've been trying to find out exactly when the regulations where lessened, but the information is old and long since buried.
[color="Red"]Please visit Love146.org[/color]
A member of the Society of Hatted Members
Image
If your pedantic about grammar, its unlikely that you'll copy and paste this into your sig, to.
User avatar
termyt
 
Posts: 4289
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: oHIo

Postby Technomancer » Wed Apr 02, 2008 2:49 pm

The first two were under Clinton. The first encouraged the banks the lend to low-income neighbourhoods, and prohibited the practice of "red-lining", which involved policies that denied loans to specific neighbourhoods regardless of the applicant's income:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act

The repeal of the Glass-Steagel (also Clinton) act allowed the investment banks to get in on the act of lending. This was crucially important because its repeal now meant the securitization of the bad mortgages could go forward. This is what has made a troublesome banking problem into a major crisis. Individual states also had laws on the books similar to this, but were ordered not to enforce them (Bush this time)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act

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

edt: on the ubject of the penny, a private member's bill was recently introduced into the House to eliminate Canada's penny:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/kill_the_penny
The scientific method," Thomas Henry Huxley once wrote, "is nothing but the normal working of the human mind." That is to say, when the mind is working; that is to say further, when it is engaged in corrrecting its mistakes. Taking this point of view, we may conclude that science is not physics, biology, or chemistry—is not even a "subject"—but a moral imperative drawn from a larger narrative whose purpose is to give perspective, balance, and humility to learning.

Neil Postman
(The End of Education)

Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge

Isaac Aasimov
User avatar
Technomancer
 
Posts: 2379
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 11:47 am
Location: Tralfamadore

Previous

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 241 guests