On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 10:28 PM, Andy Bradford <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thus said Richard Esplin on Sat, 18 Jan 2014 20:15:07 -0700:
>
>> Here is one example episode that contrasts bank issued currency (their
>> term) with counterfeits, and concludes that the only difference
>> between them is who goes to jail when the note cannot be redeemed.
>
> Can we even relate to these previous banking periods in American
> history? What does it mean to have a note that cannot be redeemed in
> today's money system? Do bank runs still exist? One will say that FDIC
> prevents bank runs, but does it? Is it an ulimited source of funding? At
> what cost does it prevent them?
Are you seriously asking these questions? Do you know the answers? Why
don't you provide them instead of continuing to ask? Do you think
anyone else cares? Why is it apparently a problem that we don't have
the proper context for this kind of reasoning, but you seem very
comfortable reasoning about economic theories that, as far as I can
tell, have never had any pure manifestation in the real world?
> These are the kinds of questions I have when I see people discussing
> historical money systems and coming to conclusions that what we have
> today is better than what existed then. Having neither experienced
> wildcat banking, nor having read any journals of those who did, how can
> anything we say about them be nothing more than mere speculation? We can
> look at the facts (as far as we know that they have been represented
> truthfully) and try to analyze them. What is the magnitude of people who
> were affected by wildcat banking? Are there statistics that compare the
> wildcat bank failures to the failure of the Federal Reserve that
> resulted in the Great Depression?
What makes you think you know anything about what I know about
historical money systems? Or are you not including me in your "we"?
You're actually correct, though, that I haven't experienced "wildcat
banking" or read any journals of people who have. Why did you feel
presumptuous enough to assume I hadn't?
But to answer your question with another question, as you are wont to
do, how can anything we say about anything be any more than mere
speculation? Ah, epistemology.
> Do we imagine that without a banking cartel that we would return to
> wildcat banking? Does anyone ever worry about being able to find
> affordable shoes? Is that because we have a shoe cartel?
There you go imagining things again. I really think you ought to
exercise your imagination in more interesting directions. Aliens and
free energy, that's where it's at!
But on a more serious note, the format of your side of the discussion
is really not conducive to getting anywhere. My suggestion is that
you pick some line of reasoning and stick with it for a while, make
some meaningful statements, and stick to one or two questions that all
lie in the same general direction. Ones that you actually want
answers to. And maybe try responding to some of my points once in a
while instead of going off in random directions with rhetorical
theatrics.
--Levi
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
