Lol. Nice try. Don’t think that works around here.
Look, a right-libertarian on Lemmy! How quaint
I would be curious what the actual political distribution is on Lemmy. Though, I think It would be very tough to accurately survey that.
Look at this guy posts people. He’s just one of the many Milei shills being paid by his fucking government. Lemmy is getting pretty bad with this kind of shit, there are a lot of these single issue accounts with a few “random” posts and comments to give them legitimacy. Sometimes is very hard to know, but this account is pretty blatant. Like most of his posts and comments are pro Milei bullshit “news”. This is going to break this platform, and it’s worrying seeing this so fast in a platform this small.
You can say whatever you want, without any proof, so yeah , have a nice day man
You fail to realize how you take for granted having a working, capable government, in places were your wishes come true, the UN usually send peacekeeping and humanitarian missions.
Isn’t it banks, that generate most of the currency, especially by lending out money that comes from account holders funds?
Only the US Mint, literally prints money. No one else is legally allowed to print dollars and cents. Loans only deal with what money they have to lend and what you have to overall pay (coming from another source). They can generate profits but not money. Stocks do a lot more number generation and disappearing because value is speculative (see Tesla).
The Federal Reserve sorta sets interest rates (it gets complicated).
you USD audit is going well then i take it.
The value of stocks has no direct impact on the volume of currency that exists, and printing literal paper money is only a tiny fraction of the new currency generated by the banking system. The person you replied to is correct. Most new money is created by banks:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional-reserve_banking
As banks hold in reserve less than the amount of their deposit liabilities, and because the deposit liabilities are considered money in their own right (see commercial bank money), fractional-reserve banking permits the money supply to grow beyond the amount of the underlying base money originally created by the central bank.
For example, if banking regulators set the ‘reserve ratio’ at 1:10, and you deposit $1,000 at your bank, then your bank would be able to give out loans worth $10,000. The effect on the volume of currency that exists is the same as if the US Mint printed an additional $9,000.
One of the problems with that system is that all that money is owed back to the bank + interest. However, there’s not actually enough currency in existence to pay back all the loans + interest, so the banks inevitably get to confiscate people’s property when they default on loans. Remember that the banks invented that money from thin air via fractional reserve lending - now they’ve turned that thin air into physical, tangible wealth at no cost to them.
Another problem with that system is that big loans - i.e. new currency entering the system - take time for their full inflationary effects to be felt. The “people” who get the big loans can spend the new currency at its full value, but by doing so they put enough new currency into circulation to devalue it via inflation.
One of the consequences of the fractional reserve lending system is that increasing the ‘reserve ratio’ will decrease the rate of inflation. Less new loans are issued, so less new currency enters the system. The banking lobby does not want this to become common knowledge, for obvious reasons. Federal taxes can be eliminated entirely, and the regulatory effect those taxes would have had on inflation can be substituted by taking it out of the banker’s profits by reducing the amount of new currency the banks are adding to the economy via fractional reserve lending.
Cringe “Anarcho” capitalist bullshit
Finally, a good meme utilizing the Gadsden Flag. That’s a fair criticism of libertarianism, imo.
I think the fairest criticism of libertarianism is “If men were angels, no government would be necessary”.
Like, I’m definitely level-headed and community aware enough to be a good libertarian, it’s all the other conceited assholes that need government to keep them from drinking and driving, shooting off fireworks in a field during a drought, feeding bears…etc etc.
Yeah, as long as we have Musks, Zuckerbergs, and Shkrelis in the world, we’ll always need a public entity strong enough to act as a counterbalance. I can’t imagine an entity other than “government” to do that.
The last thing I want is a visit from the privately-owned police department to interrogate me about using an ad blocker.
Naive libertarian.
Naive libertarian.
But you repeat yourself.
I had to be redundant, as the simpleton would not have perceived my slight.
Without the government, who would protect your private property in the first place?
#propertyistheft- Property requires government
- Government requires taxes
- Taxes are theft
- Property is theft
IFF taxes are theft THEN property is theft. QED. Have fun with that everybody
- Get rid of government
- Somebody stronger than you will overpower you and take everything selfishly
- You still will have nothing and be on your own
- Regret getting rid of government
- Get rid of the government as a collective
- Organize as a community of communities
- Destroy the state, capitalism and patriarchy and all other vertical power structures once and for all
Back to nature! Nothing above you; do what you will do people. Horizontal power woohoo!
