Mar 232013
 
Uploaded by EconMilitia on Jul 28, 2009 httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzkdK1wxYSU From Rush Limbaugh to Timothy Geithner to Glenn Beck to Barack Obama, everyone has something to say about the gold standard. To hear some of them tell it, the day we stopped using gold backed currency was the day our country began to die. If you think you know what gold backed currency is, you’re probably missing some details about the benefits and drawbacks of this economic policy. The gold standard is what we call representative money in economic circles. When Lyndon Johnson decided to bankrupt the country with his Great Society idea, he forced us to abandon the gold standard. Why? Because the amount of money he and his successors needed to fund the social programs far exceeded the gold we had on hand. So we moved to fiat currency, which is essentially an unsecured loan. It’s worth only as much as you believe it should be worth — it has no intrinsic value. When we moved off the gold standard, pretty much everyone else did, too. That makes Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society one of the biggest disasters in progressive policymaking. But have no fear, President Obama is trying to blow the doors of Johnson’s record! Tell truth to power. Join the conversation at econmilitia.com.   Share this:FacebookLinkedInTwitterGoogleTumblrPinterestReddit (more…)
Jun 092011
 
http://english.alrroya.com/content/economic-statistic-us-elites-keep-%E2%80%98hush-hush%E2%80%99 Monday, 6 June 2011  at  12:40, By Ron Robins, Founder & Analyst – Investing for the Soul It is a simple statistic that continues to warn of huge economic problems ahead for the US. Some economists call it the ‘marginal productivity of debt (MPD).’ It relates the change in the level of all debt (consumer, corporate, government etc.) in a country to the change in its gross domestic product (GDP). However, due to the message it is delivering, most US economists employed in financial institutions, governments and private industry, as well as financiers and politicians, want to ignore it. And for the US economy and government finances, the MPD (and related variants of it) is continuing to indicate extremely difficult economic times ahead. I have vague recollections of the MPD concept from my economics classes long ago. But I was re-introduced to it around 2001 by a renowned economist who, during the following few years prior to his passing, became alarmed as to the MPD path of the US. His name was Dr. Kurt Richebächer, formerly chief economist and managing director of Germany’s Dresdner Bank. Dr. Richebächer, was so respected that former US Federal Reserve Chairman, Paul Volcker once said of him that, “sometimes I think that the job of central bankers is to prove Kurt Richebächer wrong,” reported the online financial journal, The Daily Reckoning on May 15, 2004. Investigating Dr. Richebächer’s concern further, I wrote an article on my Enlightened Economics blog on January 23, 2008, titled, Is the Amazing US Debt Productivity Decline Coming to a Bad End? I found that, “for decades, each dollar of new debt has created increasingly less and less national income and economic activity. With this ‘debt productivity decline,’ new evidence suggests we could be near the end-game… ” Another way of viewing the debt productivity problem is to look at it in terms of how many dollars of debt it took to help create total national income, which is the wages, salaries, profits, rents and interest income of everyone. Again, from my above mentioned article, which quotes Michael Hodges in his Total America Debt Report, that, “in 1957 there was $1.86 in debt for each dollar of net national income, but [by] 2006 there was $4.60 of debt for each dollar of national income – up 147 per cent. It also means this extra $2.74 of debt per dollar of national income (more…)