How Federal Reserve Notes Work

Don't understand how when I was born would change the argument I made but in fact, i was mowing lawns, washing cars and selling lemonade, and earning about 50¢ for the lawns and the cars, and selling lemonade at a nickel a cup.

Let's take your $6000 versus $50,000 and look at the through a time frame.
We'll assume a 2000 hour work year (it's actually 2080) for ease of calculation.
So, at minimum wage of $1.25 in 1964, and minimum wage of $7.25 now, let's analyze how many hours it would take to buy a gallon of gas
We'll ignore taxes for now.

1964 min wage
$1.50/30¢ = 5 gallons of gas

2012 min wage
$7.25/$4= 1.81 gallons of gas

For your average wage figures we get:
$6000/2000= $3 an hour
$50,000/2000 = $25

1964 average wage
$3/.3 = 10 gallons

2012 average wage
$25/$4 = 6.25


So again we see that actual money has held its value far better than the fiat paper of the Federal Reserve.
We could do the same comparison with bread, meat, wheat whatever and come to the same conclusion. The Federal Reserve has devalued the dollar by a large amount in my lifetime, and even worse in my parent's lifetime. My parents actually had gold circulating when they were born, I had silver, you get copper. That is a devaluing of the coins, a true debasement.

lol the Hunt brothers. So, how'd that work out for them, trying to corner the silver market?

That is not the norm, you understand. Happened that once (recently) and they met the inevitable doom. It will always happen that way.

Silver and gold are highly stable both in their longevity and in their insistence on being hard to get. The marginal cost of an ounce of gold is pretty near the market price of gold so when you get a new ounce, it has probably cost you $1000 or more, hence the huge amount of effort needed limits the new supply of gold (not sure about Silver, but it is probably similar) to 1.5% more gold each year.

Contrast that with a new dollar bill. That costs the treasury a nickel, whether they print a $1, $5, $10 or $100 bill.

Do you know the term seigniorage?

So the seigniorage is limited by nature for real money, but the seigniorage on a new hundred dollar bill is 2000%. $100/.05
Or put another way, the government gets $99.95 profit for every hundred dollar bill it prints.

During the 19th century prices went down. The reason is that prices were in silver. More goods with the same amount of silver means that every unit of silver buys more, hence deflation. This was a good thing for every consumer in the US, and since everyone is a consumer, it was good for everyone

 

During the 19th century prices declined due to industrialization which led to greater efficiency in the production and transportation of goods. You have confused productivity increases with monetary deflation, which is a profoundly ignorant expression of a complete misunderstanding about how economies actually function.

 

You have confused fiat currency with money.

Let me ask you. Were there no productivity gains in the 20th Century?

 

So you are calling him profoundly ignorant for suggesting that more goods chasing the same amount of money leads to deflation? You are so wise, and we so ignorant, so what would you call it? I don't see where he calls that "monetary deflation", just "deflation." I would refer to it as secular deflation, myself.

 

Quite a few. Early cell phones cost $3,000, now they cost $20. Computers cost hundreds of thousands of dollars in the 1970s now far more powerful ones can be had for a few hundred.

The standard of living has increase enormously since 1800. People these days have things like glass windows and doors and wood floors in their hovels. Most even have heating and air conditioning and refrigerators and televisions and a phone and a bedroom for the kids and maybe a separate living room and a kitchen with a range and a sink with running water. These things cost real money.

But all you can focus on is a few commodities whose prices have increased enormously without regard to anything else. You ignore things like that 6.25 gallons of gas will get you further than 10 gallons did in 1964, a lot further.

How does your conception of money explain all that?

 

yea, i'm sure there are a lot of things you don't understand

 

Well, the other poster said that the productivity gains were responsible for the price deflation, yet the 20th Century arguably saw even more productivity gains, and except for the 30s, we had relentless inflation all through the 20th Century,

The obvious difference is the Fed came, along with the income tax in 1913, we broke the link to gold in 1933, in 1964 we lost silver, and in 1971 the last link to gold was broken.

So, the evidence is pretty clear that the stable money was why prices deflated.

And I agree a gallon of gas will get you farther, but I also said you will see the same progression with wheat, which is identical then as now.

just to put some number on it, prices went down by about 35% in the 19th Century, Prices went up by an order of magnitude (10x) or better in the 20th Century.
What changed?

 

dude, what did I do to you? lol

I know, right?
And secular deflation would be a good term.

 

you didn't do anything to me, i just don't like under-educated idiots that spread propaganda

 

What if I were an overeducated moron? Wouldn't you feel rather silly then?

So if you disagree with someone, you call them names. OK, then...



Please tell me what propaganda I have spread. Be specific.

 

the u.s. dollar is the most dependable, trusted, accepted national currency on earth

your propaganda attempts to paint is as only worth a few cents

 

Investors are rapidly losing their faith in the dollar. The only thing that has stopped them from dumping the dollar is the imminent debt crisis with the Euro.

The dollar is being backed with equal parts artificially propped up residential mortgages, and promises of future taxation on American citizens. This is not a solid foundation for any currency, let alone a world reserve currency.

 

i remember hearing that in the 1970's

gold bugs will say anything to sell more over-priced, ultra-risky investments to chumps

 

Take a look at the solvency of the U.S. Treasury. Half of the dollar is Treasury bonds. Do your really think all that government debt is sustainable?

 

Opinion and insults.

tell me what part of what I said is propaganda. Be specific. I gave specifics that show the devaluation of the currency. give me specifics to refute what I said.

All you are doing is throwing out insults. I'm impressed with your ability to repeat your insults repeatedly, but if that is all you have, then you have nothing. Refute a single thing I said.

 

it has already been done

show me where i've posted anything that even remotely suggests i think that

 

All you did was give me an opinion. I am not impressed. I gave you facts and figures and conclusions based on those facts and figures and you give me...hot air.

 

no, all you did was parrot propaganda

 

He's an economics expert, practically a scientist. You should be honored to be insulted by him. Why should he be bothered to say anything substantive (and he never reduces himself to such a mundane task). His internet credentials are enough. That he has deigned to come to this forum, and berate and belittle those who disagree with him until they see the error of their ways is a great boon to mankind. Change your ways, oh foolish proponent of Unacceptable Economic Ideas or be prepared to be insulted yet again!

 

Dujac certainly appears to be an ADL propagandist here on PF...He engages anyone who dares to expose the fraudulant Federal Reserve scam with the same disinfo schpeel that he's attempted to spew at you....He's been doing it for years...

Cheers

 

no, i refute propaganda and misinformation

 

Are you affiliated with the ADL?

 

no, you should try to get a grip on reality

 

Then please go ahead and do so.

 

i've been doing it for over 30 years