Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Wandering_Dog

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I think that is the point of contention: the basic law states a basic minimum existence is a legal right, and therefore it is illegal to impose constraints. For example, if an individual voluntarily fails to search for work, payment cannot be withheld, as that would violate their human right to a minimum subsistence existence within German legal jurisdictions as stipulated by the basic law. As such, the law provides for a truly unconditional universal basic income, as it is written. EDIT: And that's the fight being fought now, essentially--at least that was my understanding of it.
  2. Germany's constitution has basic income written into it. It was a provision, afaik, mandated by the US following the war, in order to prevent such outcomes (liberal economic system failure) in the future. Germany must provide a basic income to its citizens (subsistence existence as a minimum human right), by law. If you're against it, you're assuming liberal economic systems are stable--which as a German, you should be familiar with the empirical evidence against this. https://www.dw.com/en/germany-court-rules-welfare-sanctions-unconstitutional/a-51115790 https://www.researchg
  3. Different use of the term. I'm talking about assassinations of political figures, burning down parliament/central banks/treasuries, and domestic involvement of the military in their primary role (killing people).
  4. The inflation hedge thesis. The trouble is, we won't see consumer goods and services inflation. We'll see asset price inflation. So it's not a hedge against degrading purchasing power unless you are rich, some irony there, for what it's worth. Political unrest is sure to follow if they let this continue.
  5. At the time I'm sure they were not predictable at all! Looking at a log chart now, one would swear a 5th grader could make money on it. Every 2-3 years, you have a major run of prices, like what we're seeing now. It's absurdly regular now, such that, one could argue, it shouldn't exist. But here we are.
  6. Why is it then timed somewhat sequentially with other historical crypto runs?
  7. I don't think crypto is a hedge, although I thought previously it certainly was possible. The behaviour it exhibits is a risk-asset. It tanks in downturns. Risk assets are on the run, crypto is on the run as well. If we're arguing that CB money is pumping asset prices (we know this), then a hedge thesis, I would would argue, will get you burned. Do the exchanges report their fiat inflows in a reachable place? Is this another tether print prump?
  8. Nothing happened? Globally central banks and gov treasuries converted assets to cash or added fresh money to the economy at a rate of $3 trillion per month, just to get from March to May. There is a global moratorium on all mortgages and rental payments, and billions of household members have been given money outright as basic income. All to save asset prices. And now we see late cycle ramping behaviour... I'm all for acknowledging a tremendous amount of debt that has been wiped out households and some firms balance sheets leading contributing to this. However, there has been a monumental incr
  9. JFC, that presentation could have been summarized in 5 slides and taken 3 minutes. Who took over Tar's account and is now posting TA and conspiracy theories?
  10. I took a quick read through what I could find on 'FXRP', and after a few misplaced links I think I read what you are talking about, but I didn't really get much useful info from it. If you have a link that might help.
  11. US municipalities are facing tax revenue shortfalls, as spending has fallen, incomes drop, forcing local gov to cut employment and services. The risk is micro deflationary spirals in small local economies that may increase political instability on the local level (violence). This effect is largely politically motivated at the Federal level, and may have lasting impact on US cities, which are often surplus generators for inter-state redistribution and largely represented by the democratic party. Ignoring the political dynamics and focusing purely on short term economic effects of unemploy
  12. Its a paraphrased quotation of Werner, which can be viewed on YouTube in several of his interviews. The legal operations of deposit creation have multiple sources that we can draw from, and endogenous money theory is hundreds of years old. However Werner is particularly quotable despite being a non-native English speaker.
  13. A ledger is not a legal instrument. It's just a method for tracking something. If someone writes into a ledger that they own or owe something, or have X of some currency, this is not a legal right or obligation, its just an arbitrary number in a ledger. Swap line contracts dictate how much a foreign CB can borrow and what the fx rate will be. The ledgers are just tracking how each entity has used the contract. Say the ECB and Fed enter a swap line contract for $10, and when the ECB requests $10 the Fed inadvertently types in $100, this entry has no impact on the contract. The contract prohibit
  14. It's fun to think about. The swaps have been unwound, you can check out the Fed's balance sheet here and the track swap line changes here. I was talking about on a CB's ledger. The CB USD swaps are settled on the Fed ledger with USD. If the US CB enters into a contract to borrow Baht from the Thai CB, the position is recorded on the Thai CB ledger. It is settled there when another account holder at the Thai CB transfers Baht to the Thai CB (which is recorded as deletion of that money). The US CB will record something on their own ledger accordingly, but that US ledger entr
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.