Re: Why Its Pointless To Argue With Global Warming Believers

ZnU wrote:

In article <ybOdneoqlP0JaQTZnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
GreyCloud <mist@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


ZnU wrote:


In article <mNWdnQrlkMKDFQTZnZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
GreyCloud <mist@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



ZnU wrote:



In article <euCdndwFq8u6WgXZnZ2dnUVZ_sKdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
GreyCloud <mist@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:




ZnU wrote:




A gold-backed dollar would also float in value.


You can say this, but you have no proof of this.


I have already demonstrated that the price of gold fluctuates relative to the price of other goods. IOW, that the price floats.


The price floats because the USD is the so-called legal tender now, not gold. The price didn't vary much when there were gold certificate and silver certificate notes in circulation.


Take a look at http://minerals.usgs.gov/ds/2005/140/gold.pdf

Particularly, the 98$/t column. This column is in inflation-adjusted 1998 dollars. Inflation adjustments are made based on the consumer price index, which means that the value in this column directly represents a quantity of CPI goods and services. IOW, all of the 'float' in the USD itself has been removed, and what you're seeing what quantity of consumer goods you can buy with a ton of gold.

You may note that this number changes quite a lot, even prior to the adoption of the paper USD.


I see you have no response. Please stop making absurd statements and then ignoring me when I correct them.


Missed that one.

I'd say that the numbers, like statistics, seem to be jimmied up.


Look, you're being absurd here. This data is really basic, simple stuff, coming from objective sources. You can't just dismiss it all out of hand because it doesn't agree with your belief system.


Of course I can dismiss it out of hand. It really depends on where you live and what you do. Some areas of the country are booming and others are not. Remember the old line "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics". The Gov. is always making sure that the current admin is in good standing.


Look at the current cost of postage stamps. Back then it took over 20 years before the 2 cent stamp bumped up to a 3 cent stamp. Today the inflation pressures are far steeper than the past by a great deal. It is the little things that give it away.


Postage stamps are not a useful measure of inflation, because for a very long time the Post Office was subsidized.


Postage is a good and real indicator of inflation. It takes transportation to deliver mail and it takes labor to handle mail.
Back in the 20s thru the early 50s, postage paid its own way.
Look at the history of mail since 1847 thru to 1900. Not much at all in the line of inflation... and that is before the Federal Reserve Act.

I don't understand why you keep bringing up specific individual items to make your case, when the consumer price index represents the actual cost of living *far* more accurately than any one specific product or commodity.


The consumer price index really doesn't take actual cost of living into account. You'll feel the pinch of inflation more accutely if you are at a low income level than at a high income level. Those at the high income level won't even feel the rise of the cost of goods.


Well, I do understand. It's because the CPI doesn't back up what you're saying. But you've offered no *legitimate* reason for ignoring it.


I've already pointed out that the gov.s stats really don't match what is actually happening. Also the fact that the health of the economy is regional.



[snip]



I was thinking more along the lines of an economy where most people don't work on farms.


But you need farms. Without them what will you eat?
All modern civilizations have as a base farming.


Yes, but in modern first-world economies, one or two percent of the workforce is all that's necessary to grow the food for everyone. The rest of the population is off generating wealth in other ways, which creates a much more dynamic, fast-moving society, dominated by rapid economic and technological change.

But no country ever moved from hunter-gatherer to a modern economy.


Err... huh? Hunter-gatherers don't farm, by definition. The United States *did* in fact move from an agrarian economy to an industrial economy, and is now arguably moving to an information economy.


Still, you have to eat. Also, some states economies do rely on agriculture. Living in states like Cal. or New York, where farming is disappearing is deceptive.


The only reason that it only takes less than 2% of the population is mainly due to corporate farming and better equipment.


Yes, better farming techniques, industrialized farming, a couple hundred more years of selective breeding (and now genetic modification), neat things like weather forecasts, etc.


The weather forecasts are still out to lunch. Most farmers can't even rely on the weather forecasts... where the cherry crops were damaged in eastern washington, and the wheat crops are damaged with rust in Montana. Genetic mods are looked at with horror by many people, as they wonder what it will do to them.



In other words, the fact that things were more stable in pre-industrial societies has very little to do with the fact that they often used gold coins.


What pre-industrial society. Our society was industrial before the civil war.


It was moving in that direction. At the start of the Civil war, only about 1/3 of GDP was generated by industry, and 84% of the population was still rural.


And yes you have shown this, but only during the reign of the Federal Reserve. Before that inflation and deflation really was non existent.


Actually, I showed it prior to the establishment of the Federal Reserve as well.


Not much if you ask me... very little.


Nobody really asked you.


Just going on personal experience. Those graphs are really meaningless until you actually had to live thru those years. A whole different story.


Once again, your personal experience is not a valid benchmark for the performance of the US economy.


The economy is only made to look good... at least so says the gov and their graphs. Actually living in the economy and whereever one lives is a totally different experience.


Look, I'm really done here. I've made detailed arguments, posted lots of data... and it's becoming increasingly clear that you simply don't comprehend some of the basic issues involved here. There's no point in continuing this discussion.


I'm just pointing out that people are so deeply used to or familiar with a system that is slowly sinking that the majority can't even see the edge of the waterfall up ahead.


I have demonstrated that the system is not "slowly sinking", as wage growth outpaces inflation.


Those figures do not show a sinking system tho. The fact that the USD floats is a cause in not knowing when the ship is starting to sink.


You have not made a coherent argument as to why the paper USD will cause the system to sink.

Because of the USDs slow devaluation over time, which affects our standard of living, along with inflation.


What? Inflation *is* "the USDs slow devaluation over time". These aren't two separate effects which both must be taken into account. This is *basic* stuff. How can you think you're qualified to argue these issues without understanding it?

Oh, I understand it painfully and am quite aware of where the USD is heading.


Could you please try to make some kind of actual argument, one of these days?


I am, but you aren't listening.



Living near big cities tends to hide this from the working class. But even the working class is feeling the pinch. That's why there are two breadwinners in a family instead of one, like it used to be.


Once again, average inflation-adjusted income is *vastly* higher than it was in 1900, or even 1950. The reason there are often two breadwinners in a family today is *not* because individual workers have less buying power, but because:

1) There's more stuff out there that one *can* buy now, and people are willing to work for it.
2) Many women choose not to stay at home now that they actually have other options.
3) The collapse of unions has reduced real wages for *certain types* of jobs.

And for those that do not have a college education and are married, it does take two bread-winners to make ends meet... like food, rent, taxes, car payments, medical insurance payments, etc.


If you lived at 1950s standards, this wouldn't be the case. Food is *cheaper* after adjusting for inflation than it was 50 years ago. 1950s-level medical care you can probably get for free (just don't get cancer or something, because you'll die). A car of the quality available in the 1950s, if you could still buy one new, would be dirt cheap. But of course you can't buy one new, because it would horribly flunk modern emissions and safety tests. There are a lot of other consumer goods where advances in quality have been just as large; there's a reason "TV repairman" was once a viable profession, but no longer is.


Electronics as a whole is either engineering at a top level or just a twidget tweaker or board replacer.
Our population was smaller back in the 50s than it is today, and I believe that the population is now our biggest concern and where the population demographics are at. But todays kids are now turning down the hamburger flipper jobs, the restaurant jobs, as these jobs no longer provide the necessary income to attend college. This is another indicator that I see as the decline of the USD. It takes too many USDs to go to college. They'd rather just take out a loan or get a grant.

And, of course, in the 1950s, nobody had iPods, computers, Internet access, flat screen TVs (or, usually, more than one TV, if any), cable service, cell phones (or, usually, more than one phone line), DVD players, and so on.


And except for the computer, none of these are really necessary.

Housing is probably more expensive in real terms, but in general, people can afford a lot more stuff than they could 50 years ago. They just don't feel like they can, because there's so much more stuff that everyone is expected to have.


Expected to have? More like a desire to have, in terms of keeping up with the jones. Pay scales were pretty stable back in the 50s due to a post war condition where the rest of the world was still rebuilding. I knew of a fellow that worked in New Jersey and didn't like what the company was doing, so at lunch break he went across the street and got a job at a competing company. Today, it is dog eat dog and hard to get the right job.


Face it, the middle class is becoming squeezed out of existence.


The middle-class has lost out to the upper-class over the last 30 years *in relative terms*. In absolute terms, people across the entire income spectrum are doing better.


I'd say that the upper class is a small class compared to what used to be the middle class. From my vantage, it just appears that the upper class seems to think it is rich, when in reality the USDs decline is just catching up to them and making the upper class in reality the new middle class. The poor class is fast growing.


Note that none of these factors has anything to do with the value of the USD.

Could have fooled me.


You're still not making an argument.



You still aren't listening.

It is only a matter of time.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Us_real_gdp_growth.gif

Yes, I see the problem. We're in big trouble of things keep up like that.


If you believe in statistics... ;-)


Sorry, I guess I'm part of that special-interest political group they're calling the "reality-based community" these days.


They'd like to think they are in reality, but it seems they are sadly out of touch with it.



--
Where are we going?
And why am I in this handbasket?
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Why Its Pointless To Argue With Global Warming Believers
    ... I have already demonstrated that the price of gold fluctuates ... The price floats because the USD is the so-called legal tender now, ... inflation pressures are far steeper than the past by a great deal. ... But no country ever moved from hunter-gatherer to a modern economy. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Greenspan concerned with weak dollar
    ... >> Except when it gets to imports. ... Triggers inflation. ... Substantial chunks of the economy are not markets. ... Saw lots of it the last time the USD was ...
    (sci.med.dentistry)
  • forget the mexicans, the terrorists, high gas prices, hillary, obama...Here are the REAL ISSUES WE A
    ... Inflation, Dow 13K and the Second Great Depression ... The problem is that college tuition costs have been rising ... booming economy providing well paying jobs upon graduation, ... American manufacturing, ...
    (soc.senior.issues)
  • Re: US Using Inflation To Reduce Its Debt.
    ... can't repay it's debt - it lets inflation take care of it. ... global economy readjusting to the US's period of trade deficits. ... There is something referred to in aviation as PIO - Pilot ... The natural reaction of the plane is to nose ...
    (soc.culture.china)
  • Re: A Majority of Americans Still Blame Bush for the Economy
    ... Ben Bernanke isn't likely to become president any time ... Republicans, of course, don't like him, because they want the economy ... it is now pretty clear that Alan Greenspan played a central ... on a course that avoided both inflation and deflation. ...
    (soc.retirement)