no, cause i have better stuff to read than a foreword on this stuff and i don't need rothbart to understand fractional reserve banking and why its the right tool, sthg thats lost on him, nor modern banking & finance concepts incl monitoring etc... and everything i've read from him has been a waste of time... but as i said elsewhere, feel free to 'follow' him... free country...
The only thing more disgusting than you trying to give intellectual cover to the blatantly criminal and fraudulent nature of central banking and fractional reserve banking, is that you probably believe it. The problem is you have exactly zero understanding of economic science, otherwise you would know that 1) Money does not originate by fiat and 2) No increase in the supply of money, once it has been established, can be a net benefit to society. But wait, since you've already read Rothbard you obviously already know this; in that case please explain how increasing the supply of pieces of paper (fiat money) increases man's standard of living. And how exactly are CBs independent? How could they maintain they're monpoly on the supply of money without legal tender laws? That makes them completely dependant on the state for their effectiveness.
hello austrian schoolboy http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=852919#post852919 let me be fair, i'll let U choose your most important ONE question, if your mind is able of such form of thought organization - v.un-austrian i know, as for all pseudo-sciences... - and then i'll respond
bullshit, end of story... fyi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_Act ... if u want to know more, google it
honestly if thats the basis for / underpins most of libertarian and austrian school's drivel, no wonder they make me laugh http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=54920&perpage=6&pagenumber=14
Think a little deeper than a simple wikipedia fact sheeet. The constitution provides for CONGRESS to coin money, not a central bank. The back-door amendment process by which the FED was created in 1913 has always been questionable and shady. A central bank is what the constitution wanted to avoid.
Don't bother, anything that does not agree with him is either a) stupid, b) conspiracy nonsense or c) stated by someone(s) who are simply incapable of understanding the complexity of today's world of finance & banking. Really, it's entertaining to read his puposely elongated responses and watch him dodge simple specific questions but it gets old. Just agree to disagree because you cannot get anywhere with him when he continues to use www.federalreserve.org as the ultimate all knowing & impreccable source of factual information. One would think that if the opposing side is attacking & critisizing a somewhat controversial institution like the Fed, you would avoid using the Fed's own website as a source. But hey, some ppl also still believe the Fed is a government institution, me thinks 2cents falls into that group.
think a little deeper too, and show us sthg instead of making empty, unsubstantiated statements... just because the libertarian & austrian school press are making similar statements doesn't make them true nor relevant... for starters who says that: "A central bank is what the constitution wanted to avoid"?
hey hydroboy one wld think a smart guy like you wld be able to demolish anything published by the Fed... and not fall into the abc categories u've aptly listed: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1174547#post1174547 http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1162749&highlight=fullreserve#post1162749 http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1169440&highlight=basel+ii#post1169440 nor the "d: untrustworthy angry folk" one, remember? http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1170402&highlight=untrustworthy#post1170402 now, simple specific question for you to dodge, what are YOUR sources again?