Don't have the text on me, but Peter Temin talks about it in The Jacksonian Economy. He compared 1929-1933 period to 1839-1843. In the former example, prices fell, unemployment, and consumption fell. In the latter example, prices fell, investment fell, but real consumption increased.

There are some strong examples in the late 1800s (1880s and 1890s), as well. We were on a pure gold standard, and the U.S. had some of the highest productivity in history during that period.

[Edited on February 17, 2012 at 5:02 PM. Reason : ]

2/17/2012 4:51:26 PM

Quote :

"Does someone have to hold a gun to aaronburro's head to make him open up google.com just once in his life? There are ways to actually get information without consulting your intuition or some factoid you read on a popsicle stick."

do you deny that a dollar today buys less than a dollar did 25 years ago? just wanting to make sure we are in the same universe

2/17/2012 5:43:55 PM

Quote :

"We were on a pure gold standard,"

The US engaged in bimetalism until the gold standard act was passed, somewhere around the turn of the century

Sometimes I wonder if you know what you mean when you say "gold standard", but it's a huge fucking stretch to call what we had in the 19th century a "pure gold standard".

[Edited on February 19, 2012 at 9:25 AM. Reason : .]

2/19/2012 9:24:11 AM

Quote :

"Does someone have to hold a gun to aaronburro's head to make him open up google.com just once in his life? There are ways to actually get information without consulting your intuition or some factoid you read on a popsicle stick."

I don't get it. burron says we've been having inflation. You post charts verifying his claim. You then scold him for not using the internets. Am I missing something here?

2/19/2012 10:57:15 AM

no, what you're missing is why [user]McDouche[user] feels the need to use two usernames on here to post his mindless drivel.

2/19/2012 1:46:08 PM

nah I think its two different people. McDanger might have had the name for awhile why he was suspenders, but it seems as if he gave it to some kid he knows where he works or whatever. Their styles are different. McDanger readily blows up into a fit of internet rage and leaves threads without replying when he is losing arguments or fails to make points. Foolish hangs around for awhile rarely actually turning into the bitchmade rant factory that McDumbger does.

2/19/2012 2:17:29 PM

What can I say? It's easy to be an idiot. You're living proof.

When I lose my patience it's because nobody here is willing to meet me halfway and do their own homework. Destroyer thinks we were on a "pure gold standard" in the 19th century. He posts about like 2 things, 1 of which is finance.

[Edited on February 19, 2012 at 5:24 PM. Reason : .]

2/19/2012 5:22:43 PM

I'm sorry, but calling everyone who disagrees with you a racist doesn't count as "meeting halfway" to me.

2/19/2012 5:23:35 PM

I call a spade a spade. Isn't that supposed to garner the respect of conservatives?

2/19/2012 5:25:39 PM

Quote :

"willing to meet me halfway and do their own homework. Destroyer thinks we were on a "pure gold standard" in the 19th century."

It doesn't seemed to have helped you be any more enlightened than anyone else that ever posts here. Right? You've yet to articulate how the transition from crony capitalism to utopian socialism will work. You've made references to people becoming educated, but that is about it. When challenged you didn't offer even a basic framework of how it will work. Why should we get educated when you don't seem to actually be invested in the discussions that happen here?

2/19/2012 5:27:30 PM

Quote :

"You've yet to articulate how the transition from crony capitalism to utopian socialism will work. You've made references to people becoming educated, but that is about it. When challenged you didn't offer even a basic framework of how it will work. Why should we get educated when you don't seem to actually be invested in the discussions that happen here?"

You're demanding like a 300 page treatise out of me with this request. Furthermore, you've failed to explain why, because I haven't given my worldview in Mandala-format, I'm not allowed to speak on anything

Often what I say has nothing to do with socialism and is not drawing upon my personal socialist beliefs. The majority of bones I pick on here come down to capitalism enthusiasts knowing nothing about capitalism

2/19/2012 5:31:44 PM

^^^no, they only respect you if you call a spade a nigger

2/19/2012 5:43:17 PM

2/20/2012 1:41:23 AM

Guess who's back? Back again.

2/20/2012 2:11:31 AM

Quote :

"What can I say? It's easy to be an idiot. You're living proof. When I lose my patience it's because nobody here is willing to meet me halfway and do their own homework."

How does it feel having many lifetimes worth of political knowledge crammed into your 25-year-old brain? How frustrating is it to know that such glorious knowledge and pointed snark is wasted on these fools? Is it painful? It must be.

Egad! One can only imagine the pain of being such a brilliant young intellectual in an insipid place like this. McDanger deserves a medal for putting up with so much stupidity, and enlightening us all with his superior acumen.


[Edited on February 20, 2012 at 4:02 AM. Reason : 2]

2/20/2012 3:54:38 AM

Quote :

"How does it feel having many lifetimes worth of political knowledge crammed into your 25-year-old brain? How frustrating is it to know that such glorious knowledge and pointed snark is wasted on these fools? Is it painful? It must be. Egad! One can only imagine the pain of being such a brilliant young intellectual in an insipid place like this. McDanger deserves a medal for putting up with so much stupidity, and enlightening us all with his superior acumen."

lol you fucking dopes keep making the same errors over and over

Clearly it's me who's arrogant, thinking he knows many lifetimes of knowledge

And not you who has 1/5 a 25-year old lifetime's knowledge

I'm simply not kind or understanding when people on here post factual inaccuracies, and mostly that's what I pick fights over. Simple factual inaccuracies, or inability to rephrase the opposition's argument. You might think I'm a cruel taskmaster, but honestly the bar is set low here

It's funny because some of you treat me like I showed up in the soap box yesterday. People here are cruel, lack understanding (in every sense of the word; compassion or otherwise), so on and so forth. I simply demand that people know what they're talking about, and *I'm* the asshole. Okay.

[Edited on February 20, 2012 at 8:55 AM. Reason : .]

2/20/2012 8:52:17 AM

Quote :

"You're demanding like a 300 page treatise out of me with this request."

I don't think you've even given hints at what it would be. I remember asking a few times how we are supposed to get "educated on socialism" which seems to be a hallmark of your plan for revolution and you didn't have an answer to even this most basic question. How is a nation of idiots going to become enlightened to the glories of socialism? Do you have anything to offer on this point? Or is the idea that, if through some miracle we as a nation do get smarter we'll naturally choose socialism?

Quote :

"Furthermore, you've failed to explain why, because I haven't given my worldview in Mandala-format, I'm not allowed to speak on anything"

What is this? I never said such a thing.

Quote :

"The majority of bones I pick on here come down to capitalism enthusiasts knowing nothing about capitalism"

No, people here know plenty about capitalism. They just disagree with you on its effects on our lives.

Quote :

"I'm simply not kind or understanding when people on here post factual inaccuracies, and mostly that's what I pick fights over."

If Soap Box material doesn't meet the standards you are used to from academia then kindly get the fuck out.

Quote :

" I simply demand that people know what they're talking about, and *I'm* the asshole. "

No, we're all assholes here. You aren't a special kind of one.

2/20/2012 9:51:03 AM

Quote :

" There are ways to actually get information without consulting your intuition or some factoid you read on a popsicle stick."

We use Snapple bottle tops these days.

2/20/2012 3:54:59 PM

Quote :

"Destroyer thinks we were on a "pure gold standard" in the 19th century. "

In some parts (like the late 1870s until 1890 or so), we were. No, people weren't literally buying goods with gold for the most part...but that's not what I mean by a pure gold standard. We went between bimetallism and monometallism, but that was mainly determined by what was available. In basically all cases where money was tied to metal and the money was getting devalued by inflation, the respective metal flowed out of the country.

You talk about the 19th century as if we had one monetary system throughout. It actually changed a lot, and I'm convinced that you don't actually know what you're talking about.

[Edited on February 20, 2012 at 7:40 PM. Reason : ]

2/20/2012 7:39:31 PM

Quote :

"You talk about the 19th century as if we had one monetary system throughout. It actually changed a lot, and I'm convinced that you don't actually know what you're talking about."

Of course it didn't have one monetary system throughout. It's just hard to describe anything in there as a "pure gold standard" except for the gold exchange standard adopted by the British, and gradually throughout Europe (and eventually in India) up through the end of the 19th century. At any rate cheques were the main form of currency in Britain (at least after the Bank Act, at least one moment of major change in the 19th).

There's constantly switching rhetoric on the part of the Gold-Bug, here. On the one hand, "gold was money" for 5000-years (or some huge claim like that). Then, you get recognition of all sorts of different systems being tried in the modern era (paper, silver, bimetal, gold; many of course settle on local currencies of silver and gold for international currency, although many places like India end up pegging their silver currencies to gold at a managed exchange rate rather than the natural price of silver in gold). So which is it?

Quote :

"I remember asking a few times how we are supposed to get "educated on socialism" which seems to be a hallmark of your plan for revolution and you didn't have an answer to even this most basic question. How is a nation of idiots going to become enlightened to the glories of socialism? Do you have anything to offer on this point? Or is the idea that, if through some miracle we as a nation do get smarter we'll naturally choose socialism?"

It's not education on socialism that's supposed to save people, it's simply education. A highly educated population could not be lorded over by any class, be it feudal or capitalist.

"Salvation" here could be a fixed form of capitalism (does anybody think this form of capitalism is agreeable?), or socialism, or whatever. Highly equitable, regulated, competitive, meritocratic capitalism might be perfectly acceptable (assuming it doesn't automatically slide back into this position over and over again).

Don't project your dogmatism or extremism onto me; I'm not your mirror image. Just because I prefer one ideal system over another doesn't mean I think that's the only acceptable end-state, or the only practical solution, or only definition of "salvation", or whatever.

[Edited on February 20, 2012 at 8:13 PM. Reason : .]

2/20/2012 8:06:37 PM

Please explain your ideal form of a fixed capitalist system. I'm honestly interested.

2/20/2012 10:54:18 PM

I honestly think that in order to produce markets with desirable properties, one must regulate (especially if the actors in those markets are private). Certain assumptions (in many cases, information symmetries) are required in order to gain socially desirable consequences. (I suggest looking up the work of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Arrow and Debreu for more info on the assumptions required to gain various beneficial properties we habitually unconditionally associate with markets.)

Regardless of what conservative economic theory proclaims, real world economies have increasingly been characterize by a flight from the market (think of all the "collectives" that have popped up: corporations, trade unions, lobbies, political organizations, etc., all designed with the purpose of controlling outcomes by circumventing the market). Think about many raw inputs markets, and how many of them are cartel-controlled. Given that private organizations will always organize and gain power where private property is a thing (or simply that they currently exist), there should be other collectives in place to hold them in check, be they politically controlled or otherwise. Political control is subject to all of the less-than-ideal bullshit that comes with real-world politics, but the public needs a way to organize and express/fight for its interests (even those who don't own anything). The alternative is a world where, say, false advertising is perfectly legal, and a corporation with a shitload of money can get away with practically anything (sound vaguely familiar?).

2/21/2012 12:57:44 AM

tl;dr version: Swedish welfare state shit that'd make you guys puke

2/21/2012 12:59:17 AM

Took the words right out of my mouth

2/21/2012 1:29:03 AM

Quote :

"I don't get it. burron says we've been having inflation. You post charts verifying his claim. You then scold him for not using the internets. Am I missing something here?"

Inflation's been historically *stable* right now and has been for almost 3 decades. Prior to that, the further you go back in US history the more unstable and erratic it becomes. Bitching about inflation, right now, belies not only ignorance of current (low) levels, but also an ignorance of historical perspective.

I'm not sure if aaronburro meant to say just state "there is inflation" as one would state "the sky is blue", maybe so and I guess then I did "verify his claim" by showing that indeed the sky has been blue for hundreds of years, and is a relatively pale shade right now. But if he was trying to imply that recent inflation has been remotely significant or unusual (Except being unusually low and stable, historically speaking) then yeah he could have spent 5 seconds on google and avoided the embarrassment.

edit: Reading the thread back again, I was pointing out that there are *actual measures of inflation* beyond "A quarter don't buy ya what it used to." and if you consult those actual measures you'll see inflation nowadays is the some of the mildest we've ever had in this country.



[Edited on February 21, 2012 at 9:43 AM. Reason : .]

2/21/2012 9:32:33 AM

Quote :

"There's constantly switching rhetoric on the part of the Gold-Bug, here. On the one hand, "gold was money" for 5000-years (or some huge claim like that). Then, you get recognition of all sorts of different systems being tried in the modern era (paper, silver, bimetal, gold; many of course settle on local currencies of silver and gold for international currency, although many places like India end up pegging their silver currencies to gold at a managed exchange rate rather than the natural price of silver in gold). So which is it?"

It's whatever people want it to be. We don't need a standard or a central bank; the market is capable of coming up with solutions. Banks are certain to engineer a system that benefits them. See: the federal reserve system.

Quote :

"Given that private organizations will always organize and gain power where private property is a thing (or simply that they currently exist), there should be other collectives in place to hold them in check, be they politically controlled or otherwise. Political control is subject to all of the less-than-ideal bullshit that comes with real-world politics, but the public needs a way to organize and express/fight for its interests (even those who don't own anything). The alternative is a world where, say, false advertising is perfectly legal, and a corporation with a shitload of money can get away with practically anything (sound vaguely familiar?)."

I don't think you're going to find anyone that disagrees with the statement in bold, but the widely held sentiment is that the state is the only entity that can be trusted with this power. In the real world, the state is really, without dispute, responsible for the worst atrocities. If not directly, then because they're the hired gun of private groups.

Quote :

"tl;dr version: Swedish welfare state shit that'd make you guys puke"

Nothing you said in the previous post points towards having a "Swedish welfare state". It points to have a property rights defending government.

Quote :

"Inflation's been historically *stable* right now and has been for almost 3 decades. Prior to that, the further you go back in US history the more unstable and erratic it becomes. Bitching about inflation, right now, belies not only ignorance of current (low) levels, but also an ignorance of historical perspective. "

What world are you living in? Prices might be stable with some goods and services, but in others, prices are spiraling of control. I know we've had this discussion before. Inflation (my definition, increase in the money supply) only increases prices in areas where the money is flowing. If the Fed prints up a few trillion and hands it out to banks, that does not necessarily equate to a rise in the price of bananas. If banks are passing out student loans like candy, you could expect a regular, predictable rise in tuition.

Prices will change, and they need to be allowed to change. Propping up demand with credit doesn't seem to yield desirable results.

2/21/2012 11:39:39 AM

Quote :

"I have a problem with the fact that insurance is even covering things like birth control since it ultimately serves to drive up costs, but why are we forcing people to pay for things they find morally objectionable?"

Birth control has other uses aside from stopping procreation: http://www.womenshealth.gov/publications/our-publications/fact-sheet/endometriosis.cfm

2/21/2012 1:40:25 PM

Quote :

"What world are you living in? Prices might be stable with some goods and services, but in others, prices are spiraling of control. I know we've had this discussion before. Inflation (my definition, increase in the money supply) only increases prices in areas where the money is flowing. "

Likely the world in which the population has quadrupled in 100 years. You have to allow dilution to let in the new people, otherwise the rich will use the money for harems and space vacations and let the children of the poor starve in the street. Inflation gives investment incentive that wouldn't otherwise be there, and keeps innovation alive. What's the alternative? Feudalism?

It is kind of scary that one of the fundamentals of our modern economic world does seem to be no longer working. I would argue it's the damned tech sector eliminating the need for certain jobs

2/21/2012 2:32:40 PM

Quote :

"Bitching about inflation, right now, belies not only ignorance of current (low) levels, but also an ignorance of historical perspective. "

Huh? I'm not supposed to be unhappy with pegged dollar debasement because 150 years ago the money handlers of that ear couldn't get it right either?

Quote :

"Inflation's been historically *stable* right now and has been for almost 3 decades."

Yeah, *stable*. And continued pernicious devaluing of dollars isn't the kind of *stable* I signed up for.

Quote :

"But if he was trying to imply that recent inflation has been remotely significant or unusual (Except being unusually low and stable, historically speaking) then yeah he could have spent 5 seconds on google and avoided the embarrassment."

Wait, what? You aren't sure exactly what argument he was trying to make but he embarrassed himself regardless?

Quote :

"if you consult those actual measures you'll see inflation nowadays is the some of the mildest we've ever "

Of course it's mild "these days" because yearly massive injections of money only stem to slow the deflation of DECADES of inflated money being destroyed as mal investment is slowly being liquidated and written down.

2/21/2012 5:17:16 PM

Haven't completed the wikipedia research yet to form a response on this one?

2/23/2012 5:23:54 PM