What do you think caused the Panic of 1837?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,645
0
76
www.facebook.com
The Jacksonians banned fiduciary media... see Old Bullion's comments on money. Old Bullion was Andrew Jackson's genius speech writer because Andrew Jackson couldn't help himself and I feel like an idiot for ever supported Old Bullion on money. John Tyler and Jefferson were much better, but John Tyler really hit a home run when he decentralized the free market money system supported by Jefferson.

The govt was borrowing all the gold to fight the Civilized people. Look at the national debt from 1837-1841 and look at how much the govt paid the troops... it should then be obvious that you can't attempt genocide and have prosperity for the citizens at the same time.

Those two things made the depression from ending SBUS much sharper.

Dr. Paul's proposal to repeal legal tender was the best chance America ever had since it would've been a smooth transition compared to abolishing the Fed overnight and establishing a modern day Specie Circular.

A gold standard is nothing more than a govt standard, so I see no reason to desire the gold standard anymore. The gold standard under the Fed will either centralize most of the gold in the banking system, the hard money Jacksonian standard will centralize most of the gold in the hands of the govt.

Your thoughts on this?

I'd also like to make a thread on why Shay's rebellion was a revolt against State debt and not against private debt. (see pg 387 and beyond). In other words, Shay's Rebellion was in the Jeffersonian spirit of being against State debt.

Anyway, isn't it a shame that both the forced Hard money elite (those who supported crushing Shay's Rebellion) and the forced soft money elite (Hamilton) succeeded at overthrowing the legitimate and free market money Articles of Confederation?
 

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,645
0
76
www.facebook.com
I think he's trying to achieve greater understanding, something he obviously won't get from reading Gary North...
No, I'm trying to start a debate or to get a polite response on the topic. I understand that Krugman and stathiests are always wrong and that he lacks original ideas... North isn't proven wrong in any way and he's pretty fucking reasonable (he contains a massive amount of original thought and he is a massively good debunker). Anyone who believes govt intervention can help the poor globally and who thinks raising the top marginal income tax rate is a solution to inequalities in wealth is automatically discredited. Maybe if he could frequently acknowledge that his anti-militarism is in conflict with his Keynesian theories, then I could give him more credit. Even if he did that, I still won't ever fully agree with him because I don't ever want even more people dependent on the damn U.S. Govt which is where society (not just Americans, but Koreans too with the managed trade agreement) is headed, unfortunately. Being dependent on the U.S. govt is mediocre and/or crappy for the world.

Never forget that Original thought is more powerful than recycled waste and all Keynesian policy is is popular recycled waste straight out of Alexander Hamilton's anus.
 
Last edited:

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
No, I'm trying to start a debate or to get a polite response on the topic. I understand that Krugman is always wrong and that he lacks original ideas. Anyone who believes govt intervention can help the poor globally and who thinks raising the top marginal income tax rate is a solution to inequalities in wealth is automatically discredited. Maybe if he could frequently acknowledge that his anti-militarism is in conflict with his Keynesian theories, then I could give him more credit. Even if he did that, I still won't ever fully agree with him because I don't ever want even more people dependent on the damn U.S. Govt which is where society (not just Americans, but Koreans too with the managed trade agreement) is headed, unfortunately. Being dependent on the U.S. govt is mediocre and/or crappy for the world.

Never forget that Original thought is more powerful than recycled waste and all Keynesian policy is is popular recycled waste straight out of Alexander Hamilton's anus.

Heh. Maybe I was wrong.

When you say that you understand that Krugman is always wrong, you reject reality in a truly fundamental way.

Original thought? 2+2=4. Perhaps you can apply some original thought to that to come up with a different answer, huh?

Recommended reading for all Righties-

http://www.amazon.com/The-Republican...s=chris+mooney

http://www.amazon.com/The-Reactionar...ref=pd_sim_b_9

If you want to understand the world around you, a good place to start is in truly understanding yourself, a realm where Righties fail miserably.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,897
55,173
136
I like how he says he's trying to start a debate but that the opposition is always wrong.

Sounds like a great debate.
 

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,645
0
76
www.facebook.com
Nobody gives a sh*t about Ron Paul.
Why would anyone want to give a shit about a person, place, or thing? Is that even possible?

Hey, we agree on something.
Aren't you one of the ones who thought Dr. Paul wasn't the best for America's future? Didn't you fall for neoconservative propaganda thinking that me and my matrilineage would leave you alone if the power of the State were increased?

I wouldn't even be alive if the Articles of Confederation had remained in effect which is why I like it so much, smart guy... I wish nature would eat me alive.

At least you didn't know that I'm stupid. Now you know though.:)
 

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,306
3
0
Why would anyone want to give a shit about a person, place, or thing? Is that even possible?
Now you're feigning being totally ignorant of an idiom that even total morons understand?

Will your New Year's resolution being admitting that you're trolling here or...?
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,986
3,321
126
The Jacksonians banned fiduciary media... see Old Bullion's comments on money. Old Bullion was Andrew Jackson's genius speech writer because Andrew Jackson couldn't help himself and I feel like an idiot for ever supported Old Bullion on money. John Tyler and Jefferson were much better, but John Tyler really hit a home run when he decentralized the free market money system supported by Jefferson.

The govt was borrowing all the gold to fight the Civilized people. Look at the national debt from 1837-1841 and look at how much the govt paid the troops... it should then be obvious that you can't attempt genocide and have prosperity for the citizens at the same time.

Those two things made the depression from ending SBUS much sharper.

Dr. Paul's proposal to repeal legal tender was the best chance America ever had since it would've been a smooth transition compared to abolishing the Fed overnight and establishing a modern day Specie Circular.

A gold standard is nothing more than a govt standard, so I see no reason to desire the gold standard anymore. The gold standard under the Fed will either centralize most of the gold in the banking system, the hard money Jacksonian standard will centralize most of the gold in the hands of the govt.

Your thoughts on this?

I'd also like to make a thread on why Shay's rebellion was a revolt against State debt and not against private debt. (see pg 387 and beyond). In other words, Shay's Rebellion was in the Jeffersonian spirit of being against State debt.

Anyway, isn't it a shame that both the forced Hard money elite (those who supported crushing Shay's Rebellion) and the forced soft money elite (Hamilton) succeeded at overthrowing the legitimate and free market money Articles of Confederation?

I think illegal Hostess Twinkies caused the Panic of 1837.....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.