# This One's for The Obama Loyalists, Pay Attention. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 19, 2010, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784 "2010-08-19T20:08:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 34
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/661 "2010-09-06T00:12:53Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > [QUOTE=Jackmannii] > > Your beloved Austrian school economists these days reportedly don’t like making “quantitative” forecasts/predictions, because of distaste for statistical analysis and other sciency stuff. It’s probably safer that way. I’ll take this one on. The Austrians didn’t avoid math because of a distaste for math or for science; they avoided it because they felt that the assumptions and simplifications made to reduce economic information down to aggregate values that can be statistically examined and modeled were not acceptable. And they have a point. Why do you think it’s valid to reduce the incredible complexity of the structure of production down to a single variable? The relationships between relative prices are complex, and contain vast amounts of information. Demand and labor cannot be reasonable reduced to individual numbers without losing details key to understanding them. An economy is an example of a complex adaptive system with emergent properties. Its response to inputs changes unpredictably. It exhibits chaotic responses within an overall framework of spontaneous, optimized emergent order. We are still in our infancy when it omes to understanding and predicting such systems. The Austrians understood this, and so they resisted the simplistic general equilibrium models which abstracted away the very things they felt were most important. Their argument was that arbitrarily reducing and simplifying the economy so that it was more amenable to mathematical manipulation was actually a perversion of science, and somewhat akin to looking for your keys under a streetlamp 500 ft from anywhere you walked, simply because there was more light there. While true, it ignores the critical factors. [/QUOTE] Thanks for the input here, Sam. You are absolutely correct in what you say. Mises titled his Magnum Opus _ **Human Action** _ because he argued that the variety of human behavior, wants and desires is so complex that it cannot be centrally planned and predicted. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/662 "2010-09-06T00:14:27Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > As it stands, you are simply an ignorant jack off running your mouth about matters you know nothing about. > > Do some work and learn a thing or two about the man before you criticize him. I’d watch out with the insults. They don’t bother me, but you will get banned eventually. I know more about economics than you do. This is a fact. You know more about _pretend-fantasy economics_. Your knowledge of _pretend-fantasy economics_ is vast and commendable. But ultimately as useless as Skald the Rhymer’s knowledge of the Lord of the Rings. You are a fan of a fiction that makes you happy, in that I am glad you have it. But the things you are arguing are as fanciful and imaginary as hobbits and giant eagles. I’m sorry to play Gollum to your ring finger, but it had to be said. You’ve been shown dozens of times in this very thread that the things you are arguing for are not true. Why don’t you address those things instead of offering out reading assignments. If you actually understand what you read, you should be able to paraphrase it. Make your own arguments. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/663 "2010-09-06T00:19:06Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > ALL of them? Are you kidding me? On this thread and in others I have quoted dozens of the Founding Fathers to prove my point. If one or two were mis attributed, then I am more than happy to admit the error. > > > > But if you don’t think that the majority of founders believed in small government and considered the growth of government and the creation of a central bank to be the utmost threat to liberty, then you really don’t know your history very well. > > > > I have linked to so many pages backing this up, but apparently you haven’t read them yet. I have and know that the founders were libertarians. > > I do not care what the “Founding Fathers” wanted. The United States back then was a small country with about two and a half million people. What is more, the “Founding Fathers” were rich white men who had different economic interests from most Americans. Well, at least you admit it. As long as you acknowledge that the government and policies you pursue are totally contrary to the beliefs and desires of the founding fathers, you will have some credibility. Would you support amending the Constitution to allow the federal government to do the things it currently does, keeping the restrictions that the founders desired? Or would you rather we disposed of the Constitution entirely? If you answered the latter then you would be far more honest than most politicians who feed us this bullshit about how they are following the Constitution and respect the founders. At least be honest about it. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/664 "2010-09-06T00:30:17Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > Well, at least you admit it. As long as you acknowledge that the government and policies you pursue are totally contrary to the beliefs and desires of the founding fathers, you will have some credibility. > > Would you support amending the Constitution to allow the federal government to do the things it currently does, keeping the restrictions that the founders desired? > > Or would you rather we disposed of the Constitution entirely? > > If you answered the latter then you would be far more honest than most politicians who feed us this bullshit about how they are following the Constitution and respect the founders. > > At least be honest about it. We are living in accordance with the constitution now. At least that’s what the SCOTUS thinks. And I suspect they understand the issue better than you. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/665 "2010-09-06T00:30:58Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > Why do you think it is even necessary to artificially prevent ALL disease through vaccination? Why should I be afraid of the Flu, Chicken Pox, or any other number of fairly harmless illness that people have gotten for centuries with no lingering ill effects? Oh, you mean like Pertussis, which just killed some kids - no biggie, right? Not like you knew 'em or anything, or the thousands who have suffered with whooping cough. > [@](#): > > Don’t you understand that people’s immune systems become stronger through fighting illness and disease? OK, that does it. TELL ME HOW GETTING POLIO MAKES OUR IMMUNE SYSTEMS STRONGER. GO ON, TELL ME! Tell me how getting smallpox makes us stronger? Tell us how becoming deaf from having the mumps makes us stronger, the possible development of encephalitis or meningitis makes us stronger? Tell us how dying of the flu makes us stronger. Tell us how coughing for 24 hours straight (and sometimes dying) from whooping cough makes us ‘stronger’ Go on, tell us! > [@](#): > > We can build up our defenses through supplementation and healthy living better than through vaccinations. Bullshit. Your defenses are always vulnerable to diseases and virii unless you had exposure. The graveyards have been filled with perfectly healthy babies whose immune systems were fine - the disease didn’t give a damn. Your body isn’t a fucking WoW character, it won’t ‘level up’ from doing exercises. > [@](#): > > Did you know that a fairly high number of vaccinations actually CAUSE the disease they are meant to prevent? Bullshit - total excrement and deception taken from the lowest depths of the anti-vax liars bin. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/666 "2010-09-06T00:33:54Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > ALL of them? Are you kidding me? On this thread and in others I have quoted dozens of the Founding Fathers to prove my point. > > Well, you’ve quoted two in this thread and they both turned out to be bogus. > > And you’ve been bombarding us with links in this thread. It seems a bit evasive to fall back on “oh, I already posted dozens of quotes to back me up, trust me.” Okay then, here you go: \*\*“[America’s] glory is not dominion, but liberty. Her march is in the march of the mind. She has a spear and a shield: but the motto upon her shield is, FREEDOM, INDEPENDENCE, PEACE. This has been her Declaration: this has been, as far as her necessary intercourse with the rest of mankind would permit, her practice.” "[America] has . . . respected the independence of other nations while asserting and maintaining her own. She has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings . . . Whenever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own . . . She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change form liberty to force . . . She might become the dictatress of the world . . . "\*\* - John Adams \*\*“Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: first, a right to life; second, to liberty; third, to property; together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can. These are evident branches of … the duty of self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature. All men have a right to remain in a state of nature as long as they please; and in case of intolerable oppression, civil or religious, to leave the society they belong to, and ernter into another… Now what liberty can there be where property is taken away without consent?” “The said constitution shall never be construed to authorize congress to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”\*\* - Samuel Adams \*\*“They that would give up essential liberty for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” “Freedom is not a gift bestowed upon us by other men, but a right that belongs to us by the laws of God and nature.”\*\* - Ben Franklin **“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”** - Patrick Henry \*\*“And I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.” “I think our governments will remain virtuous for many centuries; as long as they are chiefly agricultural; and this will be as long as there shall be vacant lands in any part of America. When they get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, they will become corrupt as in Europe.” “It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world.” “I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.” “To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.” “No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” “In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”\*\* - Thomas Jefferson \*\*“History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling the money and its issuance.” “There are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the of the people by the gradual and silent encroachment of those in power, than by violent an sudden usurpation.”\*\* - James Madison \*\*“THESE are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated. Britain, with an army to enforce her tyranny, has declared that she has a right (not only to TAX) but “to BIND us in ALL CASES WHATSOEVER” and if being bound in that manner, is not slavery, then is there not such a thing as slavery upon earth. Even the expression is impious; for so unlimited a power can belong only to God.” “Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.” “Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.”\*\* - Thomas Paine \*\*“Government is not reason; it is not eloqence; it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” “The thing that separates the American Christian from every other person on earth is the fact that he would rather die on his feet, than live on his knees!” “The time is now near at hand which must probably determine whether Americans are to be freemen or slaves; whether they are to have any property they can call their own; whether their houses and farms are to be pillaged and destroyed, and themselves consigned to a state of wretchedness from which no human efforts will deliver them.”\*\* - George Washington Really, is there any doubt that the founders were libertarians? They were also against bankers and made counterfeiting a crime punishable by death! A previous poster claimed that because a quote or two was improperly attributed to the founders, it invalidates my point. Hardly. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/667 "2010-09-06T00:37:37Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > You are too busy feeling superior to everyone else, sufficiently happy to dismiss out of hand all contrary information and disputes. I need a new irony meter. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/668 "2010-09-06T00:40:27Z")
> [@Mr.Miskatonic](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > [ > > As for Homeopathy, it DOES work if you get a good Homeopath. > > There is no such thing. Homeopathy is bogus. There is no physical mechanism for how it can work. > > Wheras you seem to think that being aggressive with your ignorance makes you correct. > > Bull. Fucking. Shit. > > Wheras your ignorance is based on a few quotes and ad statements some newage health scammers told you. > > I’m just going to work with this one, because it is classic given how much jrod accuses others of not critically thinking. In this ‘article’ (which lists only the year and the Journal of the article they are trying to spin - no real citations) you find this quote > > > [@](#): > > > > Another landmark study was published in The Lancet in 1997. Researchers conducted a meta-analysis (a study of existing studies) to determine if the clinical effects of homeopathy were, in fact, placebo effects. They reviewed 185 studies, found that 119 met their inclusion criteria and used 89 with adequate data for meta-analysis. > [@](#): > > That’s right bucko. Ignore the fact that Linde (who ran this ‘study’) admitted that is was very flawed, [and it certainly was](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1874503/) > > Even without this, the article is amazingly sparse - I didn’t check into all the sources but it lists only 4 with positive outcome, the most recent of which was in 1999 (for an article written in 2009. It does not inspire confidence from those who know what positive results require. > > I note that all of jrod’s links come from naturopath groups with vested interests in promoting and selling quackery. Not exactly a stirling source. I can’t convince you so I am going to stop talking about why I personally have found more success in healthy living and a reliance on Eastern Medicine. It is hardly relevant to the topic at hand. If you want to believe in everything from Western Medicine, be my guest. Knock yourself out. By the way, I am the healthiest person I know. I have found great personal success for my own health. My mom is an ayurvedic medical practitioner and does massage. She is vibrantly healthy in her early fifties. Everyone I know who follows these principles is extremely healthy. Those who only see conventional doctors are sick and dealing with multiple chronic illnesses from my experience. Lets deal with the larger issues at hand. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/669 "2010-09-06T00:54:03Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > I can’t convince you so I am going to stop talking about why I personally have found more success in healthy living and a reliance on Eastern Medicine. You cannot convince me because you have nothing to convince me with. You are trying to imply that I am closed minded to cover for a complete lack of evidence. If you had anything worthwhile I’d be listening, but after decades, if not centuries there is nothing to alternative meds besides anecdotes. > [@](#): > > It is hardly relevant to the topic at hand. If you want to believe in everything from Western Medicine, be my guest. Knock yourself out. Western medicine is far from perfect, it has large gaps and needs lots of work to make decisions. But it is far better than the ‘make shit up’ schools that alternative medicines work with. You have only yourself as an example, that doesn’t come up to the reality of alt meds failing on all levels. > **[What's The Harm?](http://whatstheharm.net/)** > > This is a list of topics in which we have found stories where a lack of critical thinking has caused unnecessary harm, death, injury, hospitalizations, major financial loss or other damages. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/670 "2010-09-06T00:54:24Z")
> [@Hellestal](#): > > **jrodefeld** has become my favorite libertarian on the boards. By far. No one else comes close. > > If I took it upon myself to, er… let me say, _advocate for his positions in the method they best deserve_, I am confident that I could never do a _better_ job than he is doing. He is, as far as I am concerned, the utterly perfect spokesman for libertarianism. If I could give a copy of this thread to every economically undecided person in the country, I would do so in a heartbeat. I’m not lying about that. He is truly that perfect. > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > Jesus Christ you are ignorant. It is just astounding. > > Seriously. I could never top this, no matter how hard I tried. > > This is why I’ve stayed out of this. **jrodefeld** is the best spokesman that I could possibly ask for. His every post is like Christmas morning. But he’s finally repeated a mistake that I dealt with back [in March](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=557309). When I squash an error, I want it to stay squashed. Just how I am. Let’s take a quick look-see. > > He claims [in post 24 of that thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=12272864&postcount=24) that it is ILLEGAL for people to use different currencies. Ah, hell, let’s just let him speak, right? After all, he’s an expert. We know this, because he told us so.Emphasis added. Strong words. Strong enough to yell. > > Ah, but I actually responded to him back in the day. Let’s see [what I said](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=12273168&postcount=29):Emphasis added. Ah. So our expert was wrong. He’s been corrected on the Liberty Dollar case before. > > That was in March. He claims to be a reader. He readers things. Things like “books”. Maybe he readers YouTube. I dunno. Apparently, though, his eyes glaze over when they hit things like “facts”, because my response to him didn’t sink in. In the current thread, he brings up the very same example he used before. Same one. The whole being-entirely-in-error thing somehow slipped past our _expert_. The expert still hasn’t got this currency law thing quite figured out, does he? > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > Did you hear about the Liberty Dollar? The Liberty Dollar was a private currency backed by gold and silver. However, in November 2007 they were raided by the FBI and Secret Service. He was charge with criminal activity, specifically… > > > > Don’t ever tell me people are free to circulate private currencies in this country. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. > > Emphasis added. He still can’t comprehend the words that are printed in his own damn cites. And then he tops it off by saying that **begbert** has no idea what he’s talking about. > > This is just… _beautiful_. > > I told him half a year ago that he can go to a site like e-gold and do his transactions with electronic currency backed by genuine gold metal, and he _still_ hasn’t figured that out. He still doesn’t know about it. That e-gold website’s customers are doing their transaction with their private gold-backed currency every single day–still operating completely within the law–and he’s not even aware of it. He wasn’t even aware that _his own cite_ explains that the crime was making a coin that looks like a dollar, and not making a new non-dollar currency. > > So yeah. He’s pretty awesome, is what I’m saying. My favorite libertarian here, no contest. Beyond the incredibly condescending tone and undeserved attitude of superiority, you completely missed the point. The Liberty Dollar does not look like the US Dollar. At ALL. Nobody would be confused, nor would anybody mistake it for counterfeiting. But leaving that aside, I am advocating for the private money system that Hayek argued for. Was Hayek also too stupid to know that he was advocating for something that we already had (according to you)? The intricacies of monetary policy and banking elude you. Here, read this. THIS is what I am advocating for: > [@](#): > > Hayek’s view about these developments becomes clear from, for example, an excerpt of his Nobel Lecture, delivered in December 1974: “Economists are, at this moment, called upon to say how to extricate the free world from the serious threat of accelerating inflation which, it must be admitted, have been brought about by policies that the majority of economists recommended or even urged governments to pursue. We have indeed at the moment little cause for pride: as a profession we made a mess of things.” He expanded upon this in 1976: [5] “practically all governments of history have used their exclusive power to issue money in order to defraud and plunder the people.” > > It was against this background that Hayek proposed his radical solution. It called for no less than the complete abolition of the government’s monopoly over the issue of fiat money, leaving the way open for comprehensive competition in its supply by the private sector. In his Hobart Paper Special No. 70, he spelt out his philosophy with respect to free competition in the supply of money: “The purpose of this scheme is to impose upon existing monetary and financial agencies a very much needed discipline by making it impossible for any of them, or for any length of time, to issue a kind of money substantially less reliable and useful than the money of any other. As soon as the public became familiar with the new possibilities, any deviations from the straight path of providing an honest money would at once lead to the rapid displacement of the offending currency by others. And the individual countries, being deprived of the various dodges by which they are now able temporarily to conceal the effects of their actions by ‘protecting’ their currency, would be constrained to keep the value of their currencies tolerably stable” (p. 125). > > Although his proposal was not implemented, his contribution kindled a lively and far-reaching debate on the role of government in the monetary system, a debate that addressed the choice between a free-market monetary regime and government management of the monetary system via a central bank. The proposal was so profound and radical in its conception that some leading advocates of a laissez-faire approach to most aspects of economic life (Milton Friedman, for example) were put on the defensive. > > … > **2. Summary presentation and assessment of Hayek’s proposal for competing currencies** > > The proposal put forward by Hayek, that is, full competition between private issuers of currency, is an extremely interesting concept. It relates to the debate on the viability of unregulated banking and to the literature on the historical experience with free banking. [6] > > The basic idea seems to be as follows: creating the possibility of banks issuing currency would open the way to competition. Banks could issue non-interest bearing certificates and open cheque accounts on the basis of their own distinct registered trade mark. Different banks would issue different certificates, that is currencies. The currencies of different banks would trade at variable exchange rates. Competition and profit maximisation would lead to an equilibrium in which only banks paying a competitive return on liabilities could survive. Since currency corresponds here to non-interest-bearing certificates, the crucial requirement is the maintenance of the value of the currency. So, in equilibrium, only currencies guaranteeing a stable purchasing power would exist. Banks that failed to build up such a reputation for their currency would lose customers and be driven out of business. > > Hayek was of the opinion that his proposal would, if implemented, contribute to the overall stability of the economy. In his monograph he wrote: “The past instability of the market economy is the consequence of the exclusion of the most important regulator of the market mechanism, money, from itself being regulated by the market process” (Denationalisation of Money - the Argument Refined, p. 192; Hobart Paper Special, No. 70, 2 nd (Extended) Edition, IEA (1978); italics in the original). > > Let me now examine the characteristics of the equilibrium envisaged in Hayek’s proposal. [7] The marginal costs of producing and issuing a currency (in the form of notes and coin) are rather low (close to zero). [8] In the context of the type of competition envisaged by Hayek, the nominal rate of interest would be driven (close) to zero. If the real rate of interest required by lenders to lend funds to borrowers were positive (say 3%), equilibrium in the loan market would require that lenders would have to be rewarded by a rate of deflation equal to this real rate. This would produce an outcome that has been advocated as a normative rule for inflation by Friedman in the past, that is, in a situation in which money is non-interest bearing, the optimal rate of inflation should be set equal to the negative of the real rate of interest. This is analogous, in this context, to the well-known correlation between free competition and efficiency (Pareto optimality). > > Hayek’s privatisation proposal would, initially at least, involve a multiplicity of privately issued moneys. If these failed to trade at par, which is not unlikely given that the financial health of the different issuers is likely to be different, then it is also likely that a multiplicity of exchange rates will also emerge between these privately issued currencies. So long as there is no restriction imposed on the holding of the different currencies, those that are likely to depreciate in value would, according to Hayek’s logic, be driven out of existence leading to a situation in which only currencies with stable values would remain in existence. > > Hayek believed that such competition between currencies was a discovery process, which would lead to a stable non-inflationary outcome. In this respect, it may be best to let Hayek speak for himself which I do by quoting from his Denationalisation of Money: “Indeed, if, as I am convinced, the main advantage of the market order is that prices will convey to the acting individuals the relevant information, only the constant observation of the course of current prices of particular commodities can provide information on the direction in which more or less money ought to be spent. Money is not a tool of policy that can achieve particular foreseeable results by control of its quantity. But it should be part of the self- steering mechanism by which individuals are constantly induced to adjust their activities to circumstances on which they have information only through the abstract signals of prices. It should be a serviceable link in the process that communicates the effects of events never wholly known to anybody and that is required to maintain an order in which the plans of participating persons match” (p. 192/193). What is wrong with this? Nobel Laurette Hayek advocated for the same thing I do. I think it is you who fails to understand the currency laws. What is wrong with what I, Ron Paul and FA Hayek are proposing? Since I am your favorite libertarian apparently, you wouldn’t mind engaging in this discussion. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/671 "2010-09-06T00:58:13Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > As it stands, you are simply an ignorant jack off running your mouth about matters you know nothing about. I have been cutting you some slack, but this is over the line and too blatant to ignore. This is a(nother) Warning that your behavior is going to jeopardize your posting privileges. = = = EVERYONE else, you need to ratchet back on the language, as well. [/Moderating] ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/672 "2010-09-06T00:59:55Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > Find one place I or any libertarian claimed that there should be no public schools. > > Find one place I claimed they said that. > > You have run out of reason, and are reduced to fabricating straw men as a desperate defense. That is what happens when you allow yourself to be deluded by the mythology concocted by charlatans like your libertarian heroes. It withers when exposed to scrutiny, and you are left naked and exposed to the laughter and derision of your audience, with nothing but falsehoods woven from whole cloth to conceal your shortcomings. Pitiful. Wow, I have never seen anyone with a greater unjustified sense of superiority. You think you are winning this debate? Are you kidding me? You are the one who is failing repeatedly to acknowledge the real issues that I am bringing up. You were saying that it is inconsistent for a libertarian to oppose vaccinations in schools because people are “free” to home school their kids. I said most people don’t have that choice, and you claim that is inconsistent with libertarianism, implying that libertarians don’t believe in public schools. I am saying we SHOULD have public schools but the federal government should stay out of the matter. Only the parents should say whether or not their children need psychotropic drugs or vaccinations. It shouldn’t be a requirement to simple get an education. Tell me how any of this is inconsistent with libertarianism? ---
**Author:** ![Who\_me\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/958977/32.png) [@Who\_me\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Who_me_1)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/673 "2010-09-06T01:03:18Z")
“The thing that separates the American Christian from every other person on earth is the fact that he would rather die on his feet, than live on his knees!” Is incorrect, it’s “It’s better to die upon your feet than to live upon your knees” By Zapata… the only sites saying George said it are a number of political ones. Do you ever actually fact check anything? ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/674 "2010-09-06T01:03:25Z")
> [@Hellestal](#): > > > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > > > Wouldn’t Paypal be considered a form of private currency? How about casino chips? > > Paypal and casino chips are denominated in the relevant national currencies. You could consider them private currencies–people can and do exchange credits on PayPal computers and casino chips for private transactions–but they don’t go quite as far as it’s possible to go. Those credits are always transferable, one-for-one, with the national currency. It would constitute fraud if that transfer could not be made. > > A business like e-gold, in contrast, denominates its private currency in real weights of the metal, independent of any national currency. You’re not actually trading the metal–that stays in the vault–you’re trading electronic representations of that gold. That’s a fully-fledged currency, a private gold standard. What’s more astounding is that even in private markets, the commodity backing isn’t necessary. You can have a money that’s backed by an arbitrarily defined _service_, and not even need a commodity like gold. The gold pieces from World of Warcraft, if the stories I’ve heard about the game are true, are just such a currency. The service is entirely electronic, subject completely to the whims of the creators. Which means that Blizzard has managed to create a private _fiat_ currency. And it works. It apparently has a relatively stable exchange rate with government currencies. It’s a genuine store of value, means of exchange, and unit of measure. It’s genuine money. > > Money can be simply amazing. Right, but why can you not acknowledge that what you are describing is very different from the Hayekian proposal for private money and the denationalization of money? If the vast majority of transactions are REQUIRED by law to be made in dollars, there can’t really be viable competing currencies, right? ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/675 "2010-09-06T01:07:01Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > Libertarianism appeals to high school seniors and college freshmen. It has an appeal in its simple logic , but it is really sophistical. It fails to relate to the real world and is often absurd . When a poster says he is a Libertarian or leans that way, I wonder how young he is. > JRODEFLD adds in nasty remarks like “listen up” or “got it” that puts off his readers. He could learn some manners. > I love how he bailed on Greenspan who was a proud Libertarian his whole life. When his policies helped destroy the economy, Libertarians had to dig out so they pretend he and the other Bush economic "experts’ who were proud Libertarians, weren’t. I would have preferred if they learned what was wrong with their policies and adjusted from there. > Greenspan was a Randian and actually was coached by her. He was a member of her entourage. Okay, I will go over this for the last time. Please pay attention. Greenspan IN HIS YOUTH was influenced by Ayn Rand and believed in the Gold Standard. He COMPLETELY abandoned these ideals when he became Fed chairman and never governed according to libertarian principles. Again, Austrians believe there shouldn’t be a central bank AT ALL. Is this clear? There are no Austrian economists or libertarians I know of who defend Greenspan and his policies. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/676 "2010-09-06T01:11:13Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > How can you claim that there is no evidence for the success of Homeopathy? I personally got fantastic results for a variety of health concerns a few years back. > > This is rich. Not only does Jrodefeld not understand basic economics, civics and vaccinations. He believes in homeopathy. > > Jro, bubbie. Do us a favor. Look at the masthead of this site. Right under the words, “The Straight Dope”, we are here to fight ignorance. You are promulgating it. If you got success from any treatment, you would become a believer. Period. You are simply displaying your close mindedness. Why do you think homeopathy and various alternative therapies have lasted so long? How are so many quacks and charlatans getting away with this stuff for so long? We can disagree on the various merits of vaccinations and homeopathy, but any learned person will not be able to dispute the teachings of Austrian economics and Constitutional Law, both of which I am extremely educated. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/677 "2010-09-06T01:14:31Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > Beyond the incredibly condescending tone and undeserved attitude of superiority, you completely missed the point. There’s a sale on irony meters at Best Buy. Better stock up on them by the gross. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/678 "2010-09-06T01:18:14Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > You were saying that it is inconsistent for a libertarian to oppose vaccinations in schools because people are “free” to home school their kids. I said most people don’t have that choice, and you claim that is inconsistent with libertarianism, implying that libertarians don’t believe in public schools. I have implied no such thing. You stated you are entitled to send your unvaccinated children to public schools, because it is too inconvenient to home school them. That is what is inconsistent with libertarianism; your sense of entitlement, and unwillingness to accept personal responsibility for the consequences of your actions. Disgraceful. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/679 "2010-09-06T01:18:18Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > Beyond the incredibly condescending tone and undeserved attitude of superiority, you completely missed the point. > > There’s a sale on irony meters at Best Buy. > > Better stock up on them by the gross. Pony up the extra dough and get the logarithmic models. They are well worth the extra cost. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/680 "2010-09-06T02:13:42Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Disgraceful. Back off. This thread has too many personal comments as it is. [/Moderating] [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784.md?page=33) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784.md?page=35)