The asteroids have plenty more gold than is available on the Earth's surface, gravity and the pressures that build quickly with depth greatly limits our ability to dig deeply into the Earth, on a weightless asteroid, that is a different story.
What Is Wrong with "Trickle Down Economics"?
- Thread starter Knight Templar
- Start date
- Status
The asteroids have plenty more gold than is available on the Earth's surface, gravity and the pressures that build quickly with depth greatly limits our ability to dig deeply into the Earth, on a weightless asteroid, that is a different story.
The asteroids have plenty more gold than is available on the Earth's surface, gravity and the pressures that build quickly with depth greatly limits our ability to dig deeply into the Earth, on a weightless asteroid, that is a different story.
That is not cost effective. At all.
I notice going out into space is your go-to solution for everything. If only everything could be so simple.
We were a nation that used slave labor prior to end of the Civil War in 1865.
Are you an economist?
Besides, this is 2012...not 2072. And anyways with the current trend towards economies less reliant on if not completely rid of paper currency I don't think the good ol' $1 bill is going to be the relative monster it is now half a century or more down the road.
By the time we as a species get around to actively mining the Moon or the solar system's asteroids for resources paper currency might have gone the way of the Daguerrotype or eight-track player. All I know is that right now? As we sit here and read these posts? Not happening. All the gold we're going to have access to in the near future is right here on earth...and there's not enough of it by a light year.
By the time we as a species get around to actively mining the Moon or the solar system's asteroids for resources paper currency might have gone the way of the Daguerrotype or eight-track player. All I know is that right now? As we sit here and read these posts? Not happening. All the gold we're going to have access to in the near future is right here on earth...and there's not enough of it by a light year.
If we were to transition to any other kind of economy, one based on something physical, then I would recommend a technate. None of this nonsense of using gold and/or silver or some other metal, the supply of which has zero relation to the actual size and productivity of the economy.
If you devalue currency by one hundred percent, then that two cents your paying is still equivalent to two dollars.
I hope that was a joke...
If you devalue currency by one hundred percent, then that two cents your paying is still equivalent to two dollars.
I hope that was a joke...
I don't think so.
2 cents for a bottle of soda? Won't happen. Ever. None of his ideas for a new currency system and standard of valuation are tenable or make any practical sense.
A brand new, from-scratch paper currency backed by gold isn't going to happen in the United States of America. As we've said repeatedly...gold is a terrible standard to tie a national as well as globally accepted and used currency to. Finite resources and expanding populations and labor forces don't mix.
A brand new, from-scratch paper currency backed by gold isn't going to happen in the United States of America. As we've said repeatedly...gold is a terrible standard to tie a national as well as globally accepted and used currency to. Finite resources and expanding populations and labor forces don't mix.
Currency devaluations aren't uncommon. Some countries just lop digits off the end. The only benefit is that it saves printing lots of zeroes in ads.
If America wants to regain its leadership just through currency innovations, we should switch to hexadecimal instead, unless too much of our population would have difficulty, in which case octal would be a good fall back option.
If America wants to regain its leadership just through currency innovations, we should switch to hexadecimal instead, unless too much of our population would have difficulty, in which case octal would be a good fall back option.
Sexatrigecimal numbering systems or bust!
It retains its value better than paper, which is the purpose of money. Do you want the government stealing the value of your money by printing more of it? I've noticed my income has not kept up with inflation, therefore inflation is making me poorer, and I don't like it, I don't see any advantage in having an inflatable currency, its just a vehicle that allows government to rob you without officially taxing you!
Slavery was on its way out in the North, yet we won the war with the slave owning south, thus we out competed their slave labor. If slavery was more efficient, they would have won.
This is the Star Trek Forum after all, what do you expect? There are two ways to deal with space travel, one as a fantasy land with warp drives and vulcans and the other is as a real place where we may spend our future. I think too many people treat space travel as just another fantasy world as in Middle Earth. Middle Earth won't happen, but space travel might, that is the difference between science fiction and fantasy literature, no one will ever cast a spell, but travel into space is certainly possible.
The asteroids have plenty more gold than is available on the Earth's surface, gravity and the pressures that build quickly with depth greatly limits our ability to dig deeply into the Earth, on a weightless asteroid, that is a different story.
That is not cost effective. At all.
I notice going out into space is your go-to solution for everything. If only everything could be so simple.
getting gold out of asteroids requires bringing what's in space down to Earth, that is a lot easier than getting into space, because its "downhill" going in the other direction.
If gold is suddenly used almost exclusively to back currency, what do ya think is going to happen to the price of electronics which currently utilize gold for its excellent conductive properties? Are you willing to pay ten or twenty times as much as you currently do for home electronics that still utilize gold? Or will you instead be content with a future where new electronic devices don't perform nearly as well as our current tech, because they no longer utilize gold, but are limited to using lesser conductors?
Actually we don't use very much gold in electronics because it's expensive and not a very good conductor compared to copper (silver is the best conductor, then copper). A very thin gold coating is found in some high end connectors because it doesn't corrode over time.
But the question is, why does money (or electronic bits) have value? It's not because it's backed by something like silver or gold, because that's just pushing the question back a level. Why would they have value?
And it turns out that the only things that make money work are trust and confidence. You trust that it's not fake, and you accept it as payment because you're confident that anyone else you need to transact with will accept it as well, assigning it the same value you did. That means our money doesn't need its value tied to one particular thing, because it's tied to the vaue of everything.
The job of the Fed and other bodies is to try to keep the money supply (T1, T2, etc) pretty closely matched up with the "everything" that it represents, so that the ratio of "everything" to dollars doesn't get wonky.
Are you implying a liberal plot to feminize the male population in order to make them more docile?
Devious.
An appreciation for logic?
- Status
