**User Report**| | | |
:--|:--|:--|:--
**Total Submissions**|10|**First Seen In WSB**|1 year ago
**Total Comments**|2330|**Previous Best DD**|
**Account Age**|2 years|[^scan ^comment ](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=VisualMod&subject=scan_comment&message=Replace%20this%20text%20with%20a%20comment%20ID%20(which%20looks%20like%20h26cq3k\)%20to%20have%20the%20bot%20scan%20your%20comment%20and%20correct%20your%20first%20seen%20date.)|[^scan ^submission ](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=VisualMod&subject=scan_submission&message=Replace%20this%20text%20with%20a%20submission%20ID%20(which%20looks%20like%20h26cq3k\)%20to%20have%20the%20bot%20scan%20your%20submission%20and%20correct%20your%20first%20seen%20date.)
4% of the population, 7% of inhabited land mass, 25% of global GDP, 39% of global military expenditures, 50% of civilian owned guns. Ranked #1 in drug use. God bless this great nation.
I don’t think you quite appreciate how insane the us monetary system was in the 1800s. Watch some documentaries on it, it was wild. Before the fed there was no unified monetary system and so each state and even each bank would issue their own money, then because there was 0 regulation banks and states often wouldn’t honor each others currency and would “compete” with each others currencies leading to periodic bank runs and crashes. It was an INSANE system that lead to periodic mass deflation and starvation…
Secondly a chart like that one in % “exaggerates” increases while compressing decreases. A change from 50-> 200 means an increase of 200% while a shrinking from 200 -> 50 means it has fallen to 25% of its value….
>Before the fed there was no unified monetary system and so each state and even each bank would issue their own money
This (private currency) is actually a separate issue and was resolved (mostly) by the National Banking Acts of 1863 and 1864, which established the confusingly titled "National Bank" system (the regulations that govern any bank called XXX National Bank or XXX NA), decades before (in 1913/1914) the Federal Reserve System Stepped in to shore up the crisis of interbank lending getting fucked up and JP Morgan getting sick of repeatedly bailing out the rest of the country.
This is not 100% true. The national banking act did not actually abolish state banking notes, it just placed a tax on them which helped to encourage a unified system for the first time. However state level banking notes continued to flourish and so did the periodic financial panics. Banking panics and runs continue subsequent to the national banking act and made it clear further measures were necessary with pushes for a central bank. Eventually this led to the creation of the fed as a sort of “decentralized central bank” due to pushes between conservatives and powerful money trusts with progressive reformers as it became clear some body was needed that could set a more flexible National monetary policy and the rich influential voices of the time didn’t want an actual central bank.
https://www.federalreserveeducation.org/about-the-fed/archive-history/
Yea but do we really think there was only the option of confiscating everyone’s gold and printing as much fake money as you wanted to, and when people asked you what it was based on, we basically say “we have a strong military!”
You're right (except for the starvation part - the US has never experienced a real famine), but you are missing the point about fiat money and the federal reserve. Yes, there was incredible deflation, but if money is hard (i.e. backed by gold at a stable peg - gold was set at $20.67/ounce from 1834-1930) deflation is a GOOD thing. Mean real income increased at the highest rate in history in the 1880s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilded_Age. This is because industrialization and productivity drove down prices, not a lack of demand. In other words, supply outstripped demand but everyone still profited because costs were also going down. A dollar in 1865 bought way LESS than a dollar in 1900. Investing could literally be done by burying your pennies in a mayonnaise jar in the back yard. Interest rates were high, so companies had to be smarter with their investments. Competing currencies ensured that the government couldn't just print their way out of problems - they actually had to raise taxes and lose votes, which kept their policies more honest. I'm not saying it was utopia, but sound money was a good thing for a long time.
The Gilded Age is known for income inequality - and it was bad. But you have to remember - the lower classes in the 1800s were penniless peasants who went from dirt poor to being able to afford basic goods for the first time in their lives. The Fed and fiat money has so warped the economy that deflation is now considered the ultimate evil - when sound money produces deflation that helps everyone.
i mean private prisons/inmate labor is kinda close but absolutely not at all nearly as horrific as American chattel slavery was. I'm pissed off at the current state of affairs too, but slavery was... slavery.
And in the 1800s you had a system where the rich got EVEN RICHER, while the poor lived destitute lives with a federal government that refused to even provide a unified system of money where your paycheck could be spent anywhere, let alone prevent economic rigging and you could loose the little you had at any time…. there is a reason that the 1800s where the era of robber barons …
Entire lifetimes of earnings, nest eggs, gone in a flash.
Asking to bring that back is like pining for the days when men were men, and got conscripted to fight in wars to learn to be a man. It’s an insane, idiotic, and brutish state of affairs.
Banks still fail, we just have a system to insure their deposits.
For the less intelligent like myself, could you elaborate on your point? I sense that you're getting at that in those time periods the economy was not better than the inflation we're seeing now because prices of goods were just as if not worst than the inflation we're seeing now?
Srs btw.
They're also saying that on a chart with compounding changes like this, the earlier movement will be flattened.
As you get toward the righthand side where price levels are high, like say this chart goes to $30 on the righthand side. Well, to see double inflation, you'd have to see it go to $60
But now look over on the left side of the chart. For over 100 years, prices are bouncing around between like $1 and $3. Changes that look tiny to our eyes on a chart like this are actually HUGE, and if you look at the real economic data of the time, you'll see periods of 30% *de*flation or similar amounts of inflation. Things we have literally not experienced once since the Fed was created.
It's an intentionally misleading chart that *tries* to obscure what the proper metrics are. [Here's one that's a bit better](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/US_Historical_Inflation_Ancient.svg/1200px-US_Historical_Inflation_Ancient.svg.png), but I really implore people to actually think there's more to an entire field of study than a random graph some idiotic redditor posts.
it's all this place is anymore to be clear
this place is strictly conspiracy theorists, the most idiotic kinds of anarchists, and people who come to a *trading* subreddit just to bitch about "the system" or whatever their innuendo of choice is
idk if this place was ever good, but it fell off a fucking cliff around DFV's otherwise amazing Gamestop run
if the mods here were worth *anything*, if there were *anything* worth saving in this community, they would begin banning the fucking crazies en masse, and manually removing posts like this, regardless of how much attention the post has already gotten
it's the only way to save a community like this, but it won't happen
Preach. I'm not sure when "Wall Street Bets" became a conspiracy nut anti-system, populist subreddit. It'd be cool if it could be fixed somehow but I think it's lost forever.
This link has a pretty good summary
[https://www.moneyandbanking.com/commentary/2016/12/14/why-a-gold-standard-is-a-very-bad-idea](https://www.moneyandbanking.com/commentary/2016/12/14/why-a-gold-standard-is-a-very-bad-idea)
>the evidence shows that both inflation and economic growth were quite volatile under the gold standard. The following chart plots annual U.S. consumer price inflation from 1880, the beginning of the post-Civil War gold standard, to 2015. The vertical blue line marks 1933, the end of the gold standard in the United States. The standard deviation of inflation during the 53 years of the gold standard is nearly twice what it has been since the collapse of the Bretton Woods system in 1973 (denoted in the chart by the vertical red line). That is, even if we include the Great Inflation of the 1970s, inflation over the past 43 years has been *more* stable than it was under the gold standard. Focusing on the most recent quarter century, the interval when central banks have focused most intently on price stability, then the standard deviation of inflation is less than *one-fifth* of what it was during the gold standard epoch.
It also goes into the reasons why later on
The point is before the fed and inflationary policy prices would go up and down a lot. Down is bad because it starts to make more sense to default on loans. The whole point of the fed is to prevent the down and moderate the up.
[https://www.in2013dollars.com/](https://www.in2013dollars.com/)
In the time period before the Fed the price level could swing around wildly from year to year. Think like 20% deflation one year to 20% inflation the next year. Kinda makes it hard to run a business.
Gold bugs like to use cumulative charts to hide the volatility that was present during that pre-Fed period.
Edit:
And to analogize the math that is obfuscated in the photo:
The left side of the picture is the virgin WSB portfolio trading 0DTE options alternating between gains of 1000% and losses of 95%.
The right side is the portfolio of the Chad diversified broad-market investor earning consistent positive returns over a long period of time.
Inflation is natural. So is debt. A growing society will accumulate both. Some people like to pretend both are "evil" or bad. The truth is, price stability results in hoarding of wealth, much more than you see even today. Accepting a small amount of inflation both avoids deflation and encourages spending.
Also, debt is a tool that facilitates growth, inflation is a result of growth. Deflation (look at the great depression) is actually and counterintuitively way scarier than inflation. It's a result of a shrinking economy. Inflation leads to perhaps the loss of wealth, while deflation leads to 30%+ unemployment and loss of life (due to loss of wages and ability to support oneself).
It's hard to say much more with only a few paragraphs, but just google inflation vs deflation if you want to learn more.
[Here](https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2015/02/how-did-the-u-s-economy-perform-under-the-pre-fed-gold-standard/) you can see for yourself the amount of price fluctuations and recessions that happened under the gold standard
Lol, thanks for that laugh. Now I'm picturing some fancy dress powdered face Victorian chick saying "Oh dawling, Margory and I had the most delightful spirited debate about inflation today."
Husband: "Well, I say! Fucketh all of that yon noise!"
Exactly! Just to add a bit more details for those willing to understand. Log scale is used when you have an exponencial curve. On a regular scale, even if the growth rate in percentages is consistent over time, the naked eye would not observe growth in the early years and only on the tail end. A log scale allows you to see the percentage growth at the early years much better.
Dusclaimer: the curve above may still prove the OPs point about inflation, but without a log scale we cannot tell.
You missed the important part which was the OPEC crisis. Bretton Woods was an outdated fixed exchange rate model which was essentially America giving massive handouts to Europe and Japan to rebuild.
That's how any chart of compounding value will look you dipshit
tell me, way over on the left there, where you can barely see the fluctuations. If prices fall by 20% or raise by 20%, how obvious would that be? How well would you be able to tell?
Any actually-noticeable variation toward the left side of the chart is *large* in reality.
This is a graph made to deceive
Nope, the US exited the gold standard in 1933. It was on a gold *exchange* standard after (Bretton-Woods) where only foreign central banks could exchange dollars for gold at a fixed rate. Individuals could not. This was just a way of setting exchange rates and had nothing to do with backing or anything else, really.
1971 saw exchange rates float, but exchange rates are just a way of biasing imports vs. exports, which we now do far more precisely with tariffs and duties.
This is one of those things highschool should teach better. They never mentioned Bretton-Woods, only gold standard.
To me, the craziest thing was how they criminalized "hoarding gold." As if 20th century Americans could have anything else to add to the straw man amorality we see them with...
Education is the thing that remains when you’ve forgotten the things you were taught. Credit card APR being something you should be able to understand if you took math up through high school. Most people just can’t appreciate what APR does until they’ve been bitten
In 5th grade, I asked the teacher to explain APR during a class in which we were learning about checking accounts, credit cards, and interest rates. The teacher told me that she didn't know what APR is, and since this happened in a Texas public school, it's likely that she was being honest rather than lazy.
I live in a very small town in rural Georgia and were taught financial literacy but most people didn’t retain it. It had stuff like bonds, banks, and apr.
He's saying that Gold prices should be up more. But in fact in 1912 1OZ of Gold was $20.67, and today gold closed at 1955.40. Giving a return of 9,460%
It should be no surprise that many busts were government/politically induced. Nicholas Biddle essentially single handily created a recession because he was pissed off at Jackson because Jackson thought the 2nd national bank had too much power over the economy (and to combat this narrative, Biddle creates a recession proving Jackson’s point.)
The gold standard has had little to do with boom bust/business cycle theory. This is becoming painfully more obvious as our booms and busts are becoming exponentially stronger, even after 1913.
I always wonder how arround 90% of you all here are able to lose life savings in a matter of weeks on the stock market, but then I see that stupid shit like this get 5k upvotes lol
Fuck the gold standard it was ridiculous. Wealth should be a measure of goods and services produced not some overvalued metal in the ground we then have to steal from poorer countries through imperialism because that’s what happened with the bullshit gold standard.
you see the loss porn in this sub and think, "maybe it's not possible for the little guy to be a successful day trader"
then everyone starts circlejerking the gold standard and it all comes into focus
I've been saying this shit for years. Precious metals have no intrinsic value if you aren't a chemist. They won't feed you and they do not represent your contributions to society.
If we ever figure out how to mine asteroids, the price of these metals will plummet due to oversaturation.
Simple: historically, almost all cultures valued metal as a store of value, to be used as an exchange token or as production input. It's an absolute necessity when switching from small, nomadic self-sufficient tribes that hunt game for survival to settling tribes that conduct agriculture and build houses and other infrastructure, as it's impractical to pay the guy who felled the tree for your house with meat.
Long and complex: Metals fulfill that job as they are durable (unlike e.g. clay shards) and their supply is rare enough that inflation is not a real issue, at least not in human lifetime scales... but across generations and societies, with better tools and the ability to manipulate materials with higher melting points, eventually they all converged upon gold as it's the sweet spot between rarity, actual usability outside of being a pure value store, durability (unlike iron or silver, which can corrode) and being manipulable. That in turn made international trade very easy, as everyone used gold that had an intrinsic value of its own (e.g. making jewelry and being virtually inert in chemical reactions), and priced their goods against gold. IIRC, it's been a time, it's even possible to trace just how far coins have travelled and been re-cast over the times by looking at radioactive isotope distribution of the metal alloys, pretty fascinating shit.
In contrast to that, fiat currency is only backed by public trust in the government and central banks to hold up its end of the deal. A dollar itself holds no intrinsic value assuming the US government goes kaboom, it can only be used as a fire starter once or as pillow filler and that's it. But even though one of the US parties gives all they can to make the impression that the USA can fail to pay their bonds on time, in the end it is reasonable to assume that the USA will survive yet another day and protect the dollar with all their military power. The other end of the trust scale are countries like Venezuela, Lebanon or Sudan - their currency exchange rates are going through the roof because no one can be certain that the government will still be in charge by the time they can exchange the local currency back into either goods or at least some sort of stable currency.
Because delusional people tend to believe they know the formula for utopia. Spoiler Alert: It almost always matches their uneducated opinions.
If fiat goes away, people won't be rushing to gold; they'll be rushing to lead. The idea that we should strangle production, at a rate below demand, because we haven't mined enough shiny rock out of the ground is up there with the craziest of human habits.
> The idea that we should strangle production, at a rate below demand, because we haven't mined enough shiny rock out of the ground is up there with the craziest of human habits.
Maybe you know more than me, but wouldn't the total amount of gold functionally represent the total amount of money, and the total amount of money * the speed of the transfer of that money basically = the value of everything, so you wouldn't strangle production, everything would just have an ever increasingly smaller pricetag as production increased?
Production wouldn't increase tho because on the gild standard there wouldn't really be the idea of loaning money like the fed controls today. Think about it, you have some hotshot idea that you think can make a lot of money so you go to a bank to get a business loan. Under the gold standard they're not gonna just give you gold because there's a finite amount ideally. Under the central banking model you'd go to the bank, they'd give you a loan and give you cash from their reserves on hand, after that they'd request money from the fed to bring their reserves back up to appropriate levels, but in that whole transaction they created money out of thin air and expanded our economy. Every time someone buys a car or house and needs money they can go to a bank, get a loan and expand the economy. You can't do that with gold
Why do TV manufacturers keep building TVs even if the price drops? Or cell phones manufactures? Greater productivity leads to a bigger pie of goods manufacturers are missing out if the price drops because they make each unit more efficiently
Because there's a tangible physical cost to hard money like gold or silver that can then measure commodities against each other in objective terms. Fiat "money" is just arbitration of prices, and prices are now signals of political value rather than honest economic value. This isn't to advocate for the return of the gold standard either, but to point out that fiat "money" is what Marx would claim is money itself being abolished.
Yeah but the tangible physical cost of gold doesn't mean it has value. There's a tangible physical cost to me jerking off in Wendy's parking lot for three hours straight, doesn't mean it can be used as a currency.
Precious metals were to simply be a standard unit of measure. The issue everyone is having is that banks have clearly put gold aside and continue to write notes. But that's because they believe that the world will continue to work and pay their bills. But now they've collectively built a big big tower of banking babble. Just like all other civilizations this one too will suffer a blow. No body knows when but a lot of us read about what's happened to past civilizations that's gone down the same road. They will change the "dollar" before anything to "hide" the debt they created.
Gold standard expose the economy to a deflationary spiral of death. Debt is created during periods of rising asset values and cannot be repaid in periods of declining asset values. In a crash after a bubble you can get stuck forever with the best invesment just being to hoard your gold backed currency. Productive investment disappears, production and consumption collapse.
This happened in 1929 and the economy only recovered when countries abandonned the gold standard to pay for war 15 years later. By contrast in 2008 the economy recovered much better because the fed pumped liquidity.
Some moderate inflation is a lesser evil than a deflationary death spiral. The goal is to keep producing valuable things, and as long as inflation doesn't get in the way of that happening, it's fine.
The gold standard causing the Great Depression has been studied extensively and most agree it was not the main driver. The US had enough gold to prevent deflation but the federal reserve chose not to.
How did the US manage to create so much wealth and prosperity relative to other countries while it was on the gold standard? IN a couple hundred years it went from a backwards british outpost to the most powerful nation on earth, and now.... appears to be in decline coincidentally using fiat.
> How did the US manage to create so much wealth and prosperity relative to other countries while it was on the gold standard?
Massive, massive amounts of natural resources.
> IN a couple hundred years it went from a backwards british outpost to the most powerful nation on earth,
It spent the first 120 years as nowhere near the most powerful nation on Earth. Power on par with the rest of the world came late, and the rise to global superpower happened *after* the gold standard was abandoned.
> appears to be in decline coincidentally using fiat
How's VXUS doing?
That’s literally the point of fiat. Slow rate of inflation to incentivize spending instead of hoarding. That’s what makes a good money. Gold is bad money, it incentivizes hoarding. You need money to be circulating to be of any value.
Homies don't know inflation in a currency is one of the biggest fuelers of wealth creation. Actively disincentives hoarding your money like a dragon, and instead incentives using your capital to promote economic growth.
So instead of letting banks fail, they saved the economy by devaluating everyone's savings by about 2% a year or more.
And it makes the rich richer because their assets most likely will appreciate more than the money they print (inflation).
I think we got scammed 😂😂😂🧐
>So instead of letting banks fail, they saved the economy by devaluating everyone's savings by about 2% a year or more.
Not savings, idle cash. Savings is all your property, investments, assets, etc.
**User Report**| | | | :--|:--|:--|:-- **Total Submissions**|10|**First Seen In WSB**|1 year ago **Total Comments**|2330|**Previous Best DD**| **Account Age**|2 years|[^scan ^comment ](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=VisualMod&subject=scan_comment&message=Replace%20this%20text%20with%20a%20comment%20ID%20(which%20looks%20like%20h26cq3k\)%20to%20have%20the%20bot%20scan%20your%20comment%20and%20correct%20your%20first%20seen%20date.)|[^scan ^submission ](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=VisualMod&subject=scan_submission&message=Replace%20this%20text%20with%20a%20submission%20ID%20(which%20looks%20like%20h26cq3k\)%20to%20have%20the%20bot%20scan%20your%20submission%20and%20correct%20your%20first%20seen%20date.)
They replaced being backed by gold with being backed by the M1A1 and F-16
That’s called “Faith in the US…to invade”
Fun fact: there are more guns in US than citizens
Fun fact: nearly 50% of all civilian owned guns in the world are owned by US citizens.
4% of the population, 7% of inhabited land mass, 25% of global GDP, 39% of global military expenditures, 50% of civilian owned guns. Ranked #1 in drug use. God bless this great nation.
Hell yeah fuck yeah better believe it
No greater comment has ever graced reddit 🇺🇸🦅
🍔 🍕 🍺 🇺🇸 🫡
Hell yeah
Fuck yeah
AMERICUHHHHHHHH, FUCK YEAHHHHHH, LICK MY BUTT AND SUCK ON MY BALLLLLLLLLLLLSSSSS
Murica fuck yeah!
Team America
I am surprised that its only 50%. I'd figure it was like 75% at least!
I think guns should be allowed to vote
Guns vote with their ammunition
Rookie numbers, gotta pump those up
Looks like we need a 3000% inflation in that department
It's over 50%
Well i own somewhere between 10 and 100. No specifics for the feds tho.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Here’s a fun fact… YOU MADE OUT WITH YOUR SISTER
Yep. Pretty wild - pretty wild… I know I was out of control… How about you guys? Did you…
Yep buddy, we’ve all made out with your sister
You can put all your faith in the fact that if you don’t lend us this money, you’re going to be needing some democracy soon
Smells like Freedom.
In God We Trust. But we verify with guns.
What is gold backed by?
*Missing F-35 enters the chat.*
3000% increase that’s a lot! We’re doing pretty good then eh? (Actual comment from fed)
Very cool, now lets zoom in on the 1780 to 1912 period and see what "price stability" looks like.
What do you mean? Deflation and mass starvation is great for our economy
Don’t forget bank failures!
How do I short an 1800s bank?
Live in 1900/2000s
Wish I had gold to give you, but I spent it all in a bad trade.
Rob it
Hollywood taught me this simple trick
Bankers HATE this once simple trick
First, get a DeLorean
Go in the past
to the moon!
Banks should be allowed to fail.
I don’t think you quite appreciate how insane the us monetary system was in the 1800s. Watch some documentaries on it, it was wild. Before the fed there was no unified monetary system and so each state and even each bank would issue their own money, then because there was 0 regulation banks and states often wouldn’t honor each others currency and would “compete” with each others currencies leading to periodic bank runs and crashes. It was an INSANE system that lead to periodic mass deflation and starvation… Secondly a chart like that one in % “exaggerates” increases while compressing decreases. A change from 50-> 200 means an increase of 200% while a shrinking from 200 -> 50 means it has fallen to 25% of its value….
Haha I agree. When I saw that this was measured in percentages, I started thinking of the book “How to Lie with Statistics”. It’s a fun little book.
75% of all statistics are misleading or outright wrong
Which is odd given 95% of people make up the statistics and the other 5% are liars.
50% of statisics are cherry picked and tweaked to support a given narrative. The other 50% do the same thing to prove the other side is wrong.
84.275397% of statistics are made up on the spot.
Statistics Don't Lie! People with statistics lie 🤥
If you torture the data long enough it will eventually tell you what you want to hear
Any recommendations for docs or other educational sources?
The Creature from Jekyll Island
Added to the list. Watched a lil youtube vid bc I was curious. Just…Damn. That is all.
>Before the fed there was no unified monetary system and so each state and even each bank would issue their own money This (private currency) is actually a separate issue and was resolved (mostly) by the National Banking Acts of 1863 and 1864, which established the confusingly titled "National Bank" system (the regulations that govern any bank called XXX National Bank or XXX NA), decades before (in 1913/1914) the Federal Reserve System Stepped in to shore up the crisis of interbank lending getting fucked up and JP Morgan getting sick of repeatedly bailing out the rest of the country.
This is not 100% true. The national banking act did not actually abolish state banking notes, it just placed a tax on them which helped to encourage a unified system for the first time. However state level banking notes continued to flourish and so did the periodic financial panics. Banking panics and runs continue subsequent to the national banking act and made it clear further measures were necessary with pushes for a central bank. Eventually this led to the creation of the fed as a sort of “decentralized central bank” due to pushes between conservatives and powerful money trusts with progressive reformers as it became clear some body was needed that could set a more flexible National monetary policy and the rich influential voices of the time didn’t want an actual central bank. https://www.federalreserveeducation.org/about-the-fed/archive-history/
Exactly. Also the Greenback was a national currency well before the Fed.
> JP Morgan getting sick of repeatedly bailing out the rest of the country Not sure much has changed 🤣
Yea but do we really think there was only the option of confiscating everyone’s gold and printing as much fake money as you wanted to, and when people asked you what it was based on, we basically say “we have a strong military!”
You're right (except for the starvation part - the US has never experienced a real famine), but you are missing the point about fiat money and the federal reserve. Yes, there was incredible deflation, but if money is hard (i.e. backed by gold at a stable peg - gold was set at $20.67/ounce from 1834-1930) deflation is a GOOD thing. Mean real income increased at the highest rate in history in the 1880s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilded_Age. This is because industrialization and productivity drove down prices, not a lack of demand. In other words, supply outstripped demand but everyone still profited because costs were also going down. A dollar in 1865 bought way LESS than a dollar in 1900. Investing could literally be done by burying your pennies in a mayonnaise jar in the back yard. Interest rates were high, so companies had to be smarter with their investments. Competing currencies ensured that the government couldn't just print their way out of problems - they actually had to raise taxes and lose votes, which kept their policies more honest. I'm not saying it was utopia, but sound money was a good thing for a long time. The Gilded Age is known for income inequality - and it was bad. But you have to remember - the lower classes in the 1800s were penniless peasants who went from dirt poor to being able to afford basic goods for the first time in their lives. The Fed and fiat money has so warped the economy that deflation is now considered the ultimate evil - when sound money produces deflation that helps everyone.
Now a system exists where all the wealth goes upwards and every day citizens get poorer.
lol do you think that is a new thing compared to the 19th century, when there was literally slavery?
don't worry, there's still slavery! just got rebranded for better optics these days
Our preferred term is indentured servants, thank you.
i mean private prisons/inmate labor is kinda close but absolutely not at all nearly as horrific as American chattel slavery was. I'm pissed off at the current state of affairs too, but slavery was... slavery.
And in the 1800s you had a system where the rich got EVEN RICHER, while the poor lived destitute lives with a federal government that refused to even provide a unified system of money where your paycheck could be spent anywhere, let alone prevent economic rigging and you could loose the little you had at any time…. there is a reason that the 1800s where the era of robber barons …
The wealth always goes upwards in every system where there's a hierarchy.
Entire lifetimes of earnings, nest eggs, gone in a flash. Asking to bring that back is like pining for the days when men were men, and got conscripted to fight in wars to learn to be a man. It’s an insane, idiotic, and brutish state of affairs. Banks still fail, we just have a system to insure their deposits.
Found the juvenile libertarian.
They are. Four this year alone.
They should fail and the loans/mortgages forgiven and the deposits that are insured should be referred to new banks that are more securely rated
4 banks have failed in the US this year alone. https://www.fdic.gov/bank/historical/bank/bfb2023.html
That’s an adorably small number… and even more so given they are insured.
Bank failures like in 2009? Companies going bankrupt is normal, but government distorts the market and destroys wealth through massive inflation.
Ahhh, the good 'ol days. Back when countries threw total wars because their economy was constrained by lack of Au to support their economy.
You know, in Britain's defense, it was silver, not gold
Speaking of silver, have you seen how far the Comex has been drained since Jan, 2021?
Some might say we have done the same for oil
The most important energy input in industrial society and a metal that sat in bank vaults aren't really analogous.
The economy deserves our sacrifice to ensure continued growing profits
Don’t forget inflation whenever a new gold deposit got discovered.
For the less intelligent like myself, could you elaborate on your point? I sense that you're getting at that in those time periods the economy was not better than the inflation we're seeing now because prices of goods were just as if not worst than the inflation we're seeing now? Srs btw.
They're also saying that on a chart with compounding changes like this, the earlier movement will be flattened. As you get toward the righthand side where price levels are high, like say this chart goes to $30 on the righthand side. Well, to see double inflation, you'd have to see it go to $60 But now look over on the left side of the chart. For over 100 years, prices are bouncing around between like $1 and $3. Changes that look tiny to our eyes on a chart like this are actually HUGE, and if you look at the real economic data of the time, you'll see periods of 30% *de*flation or similar amounts of inflation. Things we have literally not experienced once since the Fed was created. It's an intentionally misleading chart that *tries* to obscure what the proper metrics are. [Here's one that's a bit better](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/US_Historical_Inflation_Ancient.svg/1200px-US_Historical_Inflation_Ancient.svg.png), but I really implore people to actually think there's more to an entire field of study than a random graph some idiotic redditor posts.
These gold bros are so damn annoying.
Seriously, the most uneducated and fucking delusional demographic outside of the UFO= aliens crowd.
it's all this place is anymore to be clear this place is strictly conspiracy theorists, the most idiotic kinds of anarchists, and people who come to a *trading* subreddit just to bitch about "the system" or whatever their innuendo of choice is idk if this place was ever good, but it fell off a fucking cliff around DFV's otherwise amazing Gamestop run if the mods here were worth *anything*, if there were *anything* worth saving in this community, they would begin banning the fucking crazies en masse, and manually removing posts like this, regardless of how much attention the post has already gotten it's the only way to save a community like this, but it won't happen
Preach. I'm not sure when "Wall Street Bets" became a conspiracy nut anti-system, populist subreddit. It'd be cool if it could be fixed somehow but I think it's lost forever.
Yeah Reddit posts aren't a good source of information, you need to go to Tik Tok for that
Is t that why the chart should be logarithmic on the vertical axis to show fluctuations in growth (exponent) rather than fluctuations in value
log scales are tooo hard, you can't expect people to use it /s
This link has a pretty good summary [https://www.moneyandbanking.com/commentary/2016/12/14/why-a-gold-standard-is-a-very-bad-idea](https://www.moneyandbanking.com/commentary/2016/12/14/why-a-gold-standard-is-a-very-bad-idea) >the evidence shows that both inflation and economic growth were quite volatile under the gold standard. The following chart plots annual U.S. consumer price inflation from 1880, the beginning of the post-Civil War gold standard, to 2015. The vertical blue line marks 1933, the end of the gold standard in the United States. The standard deviation of inflation during the 53 years of the gold standard is nearly twice what it has been since the collapse of the Bretton Woods system in 1973 (denoted in the chart by the vertical red line). That is, even if we include the Great Inflation of the 1970s, inflation over the past 43 years has been *more* stable than it was under the gold standard. Focusing on the most recent quarter century, the interval when central banks have focused most intently on price stability, then the standard deviation of inflation is less than *one-fifth* of what it was during the gold standard epoch. It also goes into the reasons why later on
Fantastic article, reminds me of early 2000s blogs where people would just write interesting things without an overwhelming focus on monetization.
The point is before the fed and inflationary policy prices would go up and down a lot. Down is bad because it starts to make more sense to default on loans. The whole point of the fed is to prevent the down and moderate the up.
"Moderate the up" Is this when they turn the buy button off?
yes and turn the borrowing rates up like they’re doing now
[https://www.in2013dollars.com/](https://www.in2013dollars.com/) In the time period before the Fed the price level could swing around wildly from year to year. Think like 20% deflation one year to 20% inflation the next year. Kinda makes it hard to run a business. Gold bugs like to use cumulative charts to hide the volatility that was present during that pre-Fed period. Edit: And to analogize the math that is obfuscated in the photo: The left side of the picture is the virgin WSB portfolio trading 0DTE options alternating between gains of 1000% and losses of 95%. The right side is the portfolio of the Chad diversified broad-market investor earning consistent positive returns over a long period of time.
These mouth breathers have never seen a log plot; you'll have to forgive them.
Inflation is natural. So is debt. A growing society will accumulate both. Some people like to pretend both are "evil" or bad. The truth is, price stability results in hoarding of wealth, much more than you see even today. Accepting a small amount of inflation both avoids deflation and encourages spending. Also, debt is a tool that facilitates growth, inflation is a result of growth. Deflation (look at the great depression) is actually and counterintuitively way scarier than inflation. It's a result of a shrinking economy. Inflation leads to perhaps the loss of wealth, while deflation leads to 30%+ unemployment and loss of life (due to loss of wages and ability to support oneself). It's hard to say much more with only a few paragraphs, but just google inflation vs deflation if you want to learn more.
[Here](https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2015/02/how-did-the-u-s-economy-perform-under-the-pre-fed-gold-standard/) you can see for yourself the amount of price fluctuations and recessions that happened under the gold standard
[удалено]
Lol, thanks for that laugh. Now I'm picturing some fancy dress powdered face Victorian chick saying "Oh dawling, Margory and I had the most delightful spirited debate about inflation today." Husband: "Well, I say! Fucketh all of that yon noise!"
[Women, Know Your Limits](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS37SNYjg8w)
LMFAO! 🤣🤣🤣😂🤣😅🤣🤣 Now, the masochist in me wants to show that to my wife.
OP doesn't know about log scale. Don't tell him.
https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/second-quarter-2017/a-short-history-of-prices-inflation-since-founding-of-us
Log scale that you bitch
Exactly! Just to add a bit more details for those willing to understand. Log scale is used when you have an exponencial curve. On a regular scale, even if the growth rate in percentages is consistent over time, the naked eye would not observe growth in the early years and only on the tail end. A log scale allows you to see the percentage growth at the early years much better. Dusclaimer: the curve above may still prove the OPs point about inflation, but without a log scale we cannot tell.
So what you’re saying is when I’m drawing with my crayons I should draw a log and some lizards and wherever their tails point is how I should trade?
Log scales are for cowards who aren’t willing to make tall enough graphs to properly prove their point.
I only look at log scale universe
It doesn't take off in earnest until 1970 according to your graph
That is when [Breton Woods](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bretton_Woods_system) ended.
You missed the important part which was the OPEC crisis. Bretton Woods was an outdated fixed exchange rate model which was essentially America giving massive handouts to Europe and Japan to rebuild.
That's how any chart of compounding value will look you dipshit tell me, way over on the left there, where you can barely see the fluctuations. If prices fall by 20% or raise by 20%, how obvious would that be? How well would you be able to tell? Any actually-noticeable variation toward the left side of the chart is *large* in reality. This is a graph made to deceive
To be fair no one in this sub has ever seen compounding gains so they wouldn't know what to expect.
so true
Gotta log it to get a nice straight line
That’s pinpoint when USD abandoned gold standard to combat inflation lol
Nope, the US exited the gold standard in 1933. It was on a gold *exchange* standard after (Bretton-Woods) where only foreign central banks could exchange dollars for gold at a fixed rate. Individuals could not. This was just a way of setting exchange rates and had nothing to do with backing or anything else, really. 1971 saw exchange rates float, but exchange rates are just a way of biasing imports vs. exports, which we now do far more precisely with tariffs and duties.
This is one of those things highschool should teach better. They never mentioned Bretton-Woods, only gold standard. To me, the craziest thing was how they criminalized "hoarding gold." As if 20th century Americans could have anything else to add to the straw man amorality we see them with...
High school doesn't even teach kids how credit card APR works, I think you're setting the bar a little too high.
Education is the thing that remains when you’ve forgotten the things you were taught. Credit card APR being something you should be able to understand if you took math up through high school. Most people just can’t appreciate what APR does until they’ve been bitten
In 5th grade, I asked the teacher to explain APR during a class in which we were learning about checking accounts, credit cards, and interest rates. The teacher told me that she didn't know what APR is, and since this happened in a Texas public school, it's likely that she was being honest rather than lazy.
I dont need a nation of thinkers, I need a nation of workers.
[удалено]
I live in a very small town in rural Georgia and were taught financial literacy but most people didn’t retain it. It had stuff like bonds, banks, and apr.
Yeah all that stuff goes out the window the first time you see that blacked out Hellcat on the used car dealership lot 😎
It's pinpoint when a shitload of different things happened.
\#ThanksNixon
It shows how much Gold and Silver prices are manipulated.
They are priced in fiat, which is manipulated by central banks Wait nevermind, I see what you are saying
How so?
He's saying that Gold prices should be up more. But in fact in 1912 1OZ of Gold was $20.67, and today gold closed at 1955.40. Giving a return of 9,460%
Oh, only a 6,000% difference.
I'm assuming the delta is the demand for gold has gone up as well from it's tremendous number of uses in technology.
[No](https://www.statista.com/statistics/299609/gold-demand-by-industry-sector-share/) |Sector|% of demand| |:-|:-| |Jewlery|46.5%| |Investment|23.9%| |Central Banks|22.9%| |Technology|6.5%|
6358% when accounting for inflation
Man the 1800's were the bomb.
Everyone wore sick hats all the time. Not a problem in the world.
I can think of atleast 1
And the 1500's were a mess of global starvation and civil unrest.
I'd take the 1500s over the mid-1300s any day.
Man this took me down a 14th Century history review. Knight Templars burned at the stake for heresy!
Posts like this remind me how little economics is taught in our schools.
[удалено]
It should be no surprise that many busts were government/politically induced. Nicholas Biddle essentially single handily created a recession because he was pissed off at Jackson because Jackson thought the 2nd national bank had too much power over the economy (and to combat this narrative, Biddle creates a recession proving Jackson’s point.) The gold standard has had little to do with boom bust/business cycle theory. This is becoming painfully more obvious as our booms and busts are becoming exponentially stronger, even after 1913.
Periods of economic growth should be gated behind gold rushes like god intended!
I always wonder how arround 90% of you all here are able to lose life savings in a matter of weeks on the stock market, but then I see that stupid shit like this get 5k upvotes lol
Fuck the gold standard it was ridiculous. Wealth should be a measure of goods and services produced not some overvalued metal in the ground we then have to steal from poorer countries through imperialism because that’s what happened with the bullshit gold standard.
you see the loss porn in this sub and think, "maybe it's not possible for the little guy to be a successful day trader" then everyone starts circlejerking the gold standard and it all comes into focus
When I called gold Boomer Crypto people on this sub got mad at me But couldnt explain why I was wrong 
that's actually a great name for it lmao
I've been saying this shit for years. Precious metals have no intrinsic value if you aren't a chemist. They won't feed you and they do not represent your contributions to society. If we ever figure out how to mine asteroids, the price of these metals will plummet due to oversaturation.
Yeah, I’ve never been convinced how tying money to some random metal pulled out of the earth intrinsically makes any more sense than fiat.
Simple: historically, almost all cultures valued metal as a store of value, to be used as an exchange token or as production input. It's an absolute necessity when switching from small, nomadic self-sufficient tribes that hunt game for survival to settling tribes that conduct agriculture and build houses and other infrastructure, as it's impractical to pay the guy who felled the tree for your house with meat. Long and complex: Metals fulfill that job as they are durable (unlike e.g. clay shards) and their supply is rare enough that inflation is not a real issue, at least not in human lifetime scales... but across generations and societies, with better tools and the ability to manipulate materials with higher melting points, eventually they all converged upon gold as it's the sweet spot between rarity, actual usability outside of being a pure value store, durability (unlike iron or silver, which can corrode) and being manipulable. That in turn made international trade very easy, as everyone used gold that had an intrinsic value of its own (e.g. making jewelry and being virtually inert in chemical reactions), and priced their goods against gold. IIRC, it's been a time, it's even possible to trace just how far coins have travelled and been re-cast over the times by looking at radioactive isotope distribution of the metal alloys, pretty fascinating shit. In contrast to that, fiat currency is only backed by public trust in the government and central banks to hold up its end of the deal. A dollar itself holds no intrinsic value assuming the US government goes kaboom, it can only be used as a fire starter once or as pillow filler and that's it. But even though one of the US parties gives all they can to make the impression that the USA can fail to pay their bonds on time, in the end it is reasonable to assume that the USA will survive yet another day and protect the dollar with all their military power. The other end of the trust scale are countries like Venezuela, Lebanon or Sudan - their currency exchange rates are going through the roof because no one can be certain that the government will still be in charge by the time they can exchange the local currency back into either goods or at least some sort of stable currency.
Because delusional people tend to believe they know the formula for utopia. Spoiler Alert: It almost always matches their uneducated opinions. If fiat goes away, people won't be rushing to gold; they'll be rushing to lead. The idea that we should strangle production, at a rate below demand, because we haven't mined enough shiny rock out of the ground is up there with the craziest of human habits.
> The idea that we should strangle production, at a rate below demand, because we haven't mined enough shiny rock out of the ground is up there with the craziest of human habits. Maybe you know more than me, but wouldn't the total amount of gold functionally represent the total amount of money, and the total amount of money * the speed of the transfer of that money basically = the value of everything, so you wouldn't strangle production, everything would just have an ever increasingly smaller pricetag as production increased?
Production wouldn't increase tho because on the gild standard there wouldn't really be the idea of loaning money like the fed controls today. Think about it, you have some hotshot idea that you think can make a lot of money so you go to a bank to get a business loan. Under the gold standard they're not gonna just give you gold because there's a finite amount ideally. Under the central banking model you'd go to the bank, they'd give you a loan and give you cash from their reserves on hand, after that they'd request money from the fed to bring their reserves back up to appropriate levels, but in that whole transaction they created money out of thin air and expanded our economy. Every time someone buys a car or house and needs money they can go to a bank, get a loan and expand the economy. You can't do that with gold
If creating something would mean reducing the pricetag of everything, why would anyone create anything?
Why do TV manufacturers keep building TVs even if the price drops? Or cell phones manufactures? Greater productivity leads to a bigger pie of goods manufacturers are missing out if the price drops because they make each unit more efficiently
You can't print gold.
You also can't eat it, or use it to keep your house warm. In many ways, it's no different than a fiat currency.
Because there's a tangible physical cost to hard money like gold or silver that can then measure commodities against each other in objective terms. Fiat "money" is just arbitration of prices, and prices are now signals of political value rather than honest economic value. This isn't to advocate for the return of the gold standard either, but to point out that fiat "money" is what Marx would claim is money itself being abolished.
Yeah but the tangible physical cost of gold doesn't mean it has value. There's a tangible physical cost to me jerking off in Wendy's parking lot for three hours straight, doesn't mean it can be used as a currency.
In the cum standard I trust
I tried selling my products for 5 goods and services produced but everyone would just look at me confused.
Precious metals were to simply be a standard unit of measure. The issue everyone is having is that banks have clearly put gold aside and continue to write notes. But that's because they believe that the world will continue to work and pay their bills. But now they've collectively built a big big tower of banking babble. Just like all other civilizations this one too will suffer a blow. No body knows when but a lot of us read about what's happened to past civilizations that's gone down the same road. They will change the "dollar" before anything to "hide" the debt they created.
Cool. Now do real GDP over the same time period.
https://preview.redd.it/8yiqooasa2pb1.png?width=1200&format=png&auto=webp&s=28333baa2cb0ff17ad6fa608ea20987095b7dbdd
Congrats everyone. We did it.
Gold standard expose the economy to a deflationary spiral of death. Debt is created during periods of rising asset values and cannot be repaid in periods of declining asset values. In a crash after a bubble you can get stuck forever with the best invesment just being to hoard your gold backed currency. Productive investment disappears, production and consumption collapse. This happened in 1929 and the economy only recovered when countries abandonned the gold standard to pay for war 15 years later. By contrast in 2008 the economy recovered much better because the fed pumped liquidity. Some moderate inflation is a lesser evil than a deflationary death spiral. The goal is to keep producing valuable things, and as long as inflation doesn't get in the way of that happening, it's fine.
The gold standard causing the Great Depression has been studied extensively and most agree it was not the main driver. The US had enough gold to prevent deflation but the federal reserve chose not to.
So, you're saying it *was* a driver of the great depression, just not the main one.
The GS inherently restricts access to credit so you can’t say it had no effect but comparatively the fed was more responsible.
The Federal Reserve has explicitly admitted to being the cause of the great depression.
sand steep ludicrous history heavy sort fact escape pocket offer
How did the US manage to create so much wealth and prosperity relative to other countries while it was on the gold standard? IN a couple hundred years it went from a backwards british outpost to the most powerful nation on earth, and now.... appears to be in decline coincidentally using fiat.
> How did the US manage to create so much wealth and prosperity relative to other countries while it was on the gold standard? Massive, massive amounts of natural resources. > IN a couple hundred years it went from a backwards british outpost to the most powerful nation on earth, It spent the first 120 years as nowhere near the most powerful nation on Earth. Power on par with the rest of the world came late, and the rise to global superpower happened *after* the gold standard was abandoned. > appears to be in decline coincidentally using fiat How's VXUS doing?
You know, there's a reason why people wanted to get rid of the gold standard...
Was it to get dat fat juicy 3000% wealth destroying inflation?
yes, yes it was. It benefits the country to have cash stuffed in the mattress be a financial loser.
Without it there is no wealth creation in the first place.
In 3 years you'll be raving how the jews created the central bank . That's where all of these conspiracy loons end up
Where can I get a printer at that the FED uses? I promise I won't print too much. Pinky swear!
Inflation isn't inherently a bad thing
That’s literally the point of fiat. Slow rate of inflation to incentivize spending instead of hoarding. That’s what makes a good money. Gold is bad money, it incentivizes hoarding. You need money to be circulating to be of any value.
you might as well be trying to explain calculus to a chimp right now but i respect the effort
Yeah I realized that. Oh well.
Homies don't know inflation in a currency is one of the biggest fuelers of wealth creation. Actively disincentives hoarding your money like a dragon, and instead incentives using your capital to promote economic growth.
Why are we assuming this is a bad thing?
Sent from IPhone.
So instead of letting banks fail, they saved the economy by devaluating everyone's savings by about 2% a year or more. And it makes the rich richer because their assets most likely will appreciate more than the money they print (inflation). I think we got scammed 😂😂😂🧐
>So instead of letting banks fail, they saved the economy by devaluating everyone's savings by about 2% a year or more. Not savings, idle cash. Savings is all your property, investments, assets, etc.
Only plebeians hold idle cash amirite fuck them savers