A reminder that the Federal Reserve is the cause of all your problems

>>60517492 (OP)
It's the solution to a lot of financial problems on state level, that affected the citizens negatively, mass poverty, long times of economic hardship and much more.
Muttification, general IQ drop, fried dopamine, blind greed made crypto bros parrot the propaganda that it's better to have a fixed supply.

>>60517492 (OP)
I just don't like the jooz!

>>60517492 (OP)
End the Fed

>>60517492 (OP)
No. I'm just mentally ill and have trouble copeing in healthy ways.

>>60517783
Based and mentally unstable pilled

>>60517492 (OP)

>>60517503
Well guess what sort of people have been in charge of the fed for almost its entire existence
Keep mocking people for noticing those goblins though

>>60517492 (OP)
The Federal Reserve made spaghetti fall out of my pockets with the girl I like?

>>60517492 (OP)
Based
>>60517501
Picrel
>>60518325
Do not Google "who owns the Federal Reserve" at 3am

Can someone explain why I'm supposed to hate inflation so much? Moderate or heavy inflation is obviously bad but why should I care if 2% annual inflation erodes the value of money by x% over a century? I'm not holding cash for a century and the returns on non-cash-equivalents are based on real productive increases, not the nominal value of a unit of currency. ie. if annualized inflation were 0% instead of 2%, ceteris parabus we'd expect an annualized return of ~(x-2)% instead of x% and the market rate salary for skilled labor would increase by ~(y-2)% instead of y%. Is it just bad because they COULD be retarded and cause hyperinflation? I'm willing to entertain that argument, but it seems most of the people arguing against the fed aren't making that argument. They'll just talk about how cars used to be $500 while totally ignoring that a six-figure income was turbo-rich and now you can make that right out of college with a useful degree (well maybe not NOW or in 2009, etc., but a couple years ago. Regardless, you make a lot more in nominal terms now than a century ago).

Correct.

Social spending acts as a supply-side subsidy for labor, a worker CAN'T sell their labor for less than subsistence, but what happens if we give them food stamps, subsided housing, Medicaid? Well now they can sell their labor for less than it costs to produce!

But wait! How were those social programs paid for? Deficit spending? Exactly. Deficit spending is an expansion of the money supply (simple dilution), it robs ALL income earners and gives to asset holders (as an increase in money supply will naturally inflate assets), a HUGE and on going parasitic transfer of resources from income earners to oligarchs, THIS is the driving force of the wage/productivity divergence seen since the 60s.

Notice that the fiat grift also suppress incomes of white collar workers by tricking them into believing the nominal gains on house value is wealth instead of inflation, why mechanical engineers get paid so poorly, $60k seems like a lot if you bought 30 or 40 years ago, but you haven't gotten wealthy, your real terms income has just drilled through the floor.

Even immigration, seen as a driver of wage stagnation, is merely a justification for further debasement, or do you think the goblins come here for our magic clay and not our social welfare spending?

There are no political solutions, and not in the poltard "violence is the answer" as violence is of course wholly political, there are no political solutions because politics is a memetic parasite that never fixes anything. There are only technical and economic solutions, and BTC is just that, a technical fix for the political corruption of Money.

>>60518752
Not reading all that shit, noseberg. Nice try, though

>>60518752
>the returns on non-cash-equivalents are based on real productive increases, not the nominal value of a unit of currency.
False. Bonds have returned 50% of monetary expansion since ‘71, deeply negative real yields, it should be obvious that bonds always carry negative yield under debt based fiat as more dollars are owed than dollars in existence.

Equities have returned real yields, but there returns have still been ~95% monetary expansion, which distorts the price signal of money causing huge systemic inefficiencies.

>>60518876
>bonds
Fair enough, I don't know enough about bonds to dispute. Perhaps instead of non-cash-equivalents I should have said investments which are based on real production.
>equities
It only distorts the price signal if people are incapable of understanding that inflation exists, and the people who control most capital aren't that dumb.

>>60517492 (OP)

>>60517492 (OP)
The Jews are unironically the problem for the past 3000 years. If jews didn’t exist white population would be 100 billion and we’d colonize the entire solar system by now and the average white would be 7ft tall and muscular and live 500 years long.

>>60518879
>equities
>based on real production
Like I said, the overwhelming supermajority of equity returns since ‘71 has been nothing but monetary expansion, with essentially the entire remainder being driven by economic unit demand, not by “real production”.
>it only distorts if
False. Monetary expansion is in-and-of-itself distortion. The wage/productivity divergence seen since ‘71 is a perfect example of the distortion caused by monetary expansion.

Voluntary exchange is naturally positive-sum, but monetary expansion allows the manipulation of Economy to favor zero and even negative sum economic transactions, while also allowing the State to bogart an obscene fraction of total economic activity, monetary expansion is inherently negative sum.