If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Legal Tender Act passed
On Feb 25, 2:49*pm, "Bremick" wrote:
"oly" wrote in message ... On Feb 25, 11:56 am, "Bremick" wrote: "Frank Galikanokus" "Frank wrote in ... Feb 25, 1862: Legal Tender Act passed The U.S. Congress passes the Legal Tender Act, authorizing the use of paper notes to pay the government's bills. http://www.history.com/this-day-in-h...der-act-passed JAM Almost 150 years now and we're still waiting for that certain economic doom that the bankers and financial experts predicted. I know. I know. It's coming. Just listen to the experts. You know, U.S. 90% silver coins, dimes, quarters and halves, the ones you were spending in daily commerce back in 1960, are now trading for greenies at TWENTY-FOUR times (or more) original face value. How do you come up with "same-o, same-o"??? Do you have a "debt-wish"??? ----------------- Do you call that economic Doom? *Has our currency collapsed? * Is your 2001 salary the same as it was, or would have been, in 1964?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - My salary isn't 24 times what a bank examiner (with some seniority) got back in 1964. It's probably closer to ten times. I'm figuring week in and week out, the seasoned examiners got paid $175 per week (and some of the juniors as low as $100 per week), but that might be a little on the high side. One of my fellow examiners who was in the Army in 1971-73 looked up his old payscale and it was $161 mos to start and $363 mos at the end. He lived and ate on the base, not yet married. He started out very very low in rank. And it is a form of economic doom; for the four currencies which have survived since pre-1913, it's simply the death of ten-thousand cuts as opposed to a guillotine. oly |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Legal Tender Act passed
"Bremick" wrote in message ... So, yes, we're one of the three or four whose "fiat" currency hasn't collapsed. That's my point. It involves those ca1862 "financial expert" doomsayers who predicted the collapse of everything we hold dear because of this new paper currency. 150 years and still waiting. I suspect those "experts" and their heirs still managed to prosper throughout the years following their statements. If one's definition of money includes that it be a store of value, then FRNs certainly are not doing the job. They are currently worth about 5% of their value when FDR took us off the gold standard in 1933. If there is historical precendent for a stable fiat currency, I never saw it. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Legal Tender Act passed
On Feb 25, 4:16*pm, "Beanie" wrote:
If there is historical precendent for a stable fiat currency, I never saw it. Actually, there is. There may be others and the applicability of the example I know is somewhat limited. The most famous example (that I know) is this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_Swiss_dinar Unfortunately Wikipedia does not capture the whole picture of how remarkable the case was, but you get a lot of the idea from the link. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Legal Tender Act passed
Bremick wrote:
"Frank Galikanokus" "Frank wrote in message ... Bremick wrote: "Frank Galikanokus" "Frank wrote in message ... Feb 25, 1862: Legal Tender Act passed The U.S. Congress passes the Legal Tender Act, authorizing the use of paper notes to pay the government's bills. http://www.history.com/this-day-in-h...der-act-passed JAM Almost 150 years now and we're still waiting for that certain economic doom that the bankers and financial experts predicted. I know. I know. It's coming. Just listen to the experts. We've had some economic disasters since then 1907, 1929, 2008 but these were not caused by paper currency. JAM I'm hearing you. I'm still talking "doom" like those financial experts prophesized because of that new paper currency. Maybe their interpretation of "doom" is different from mine. O JAM |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Legal Tender Act passed
"Beanie" wrote in message ... "Bremick" wrote in message ... So, yes, we're one of the three or four whose "fiat" currency hasn't collapsed. That's my point. It involves those ca1862 "financial expert" doomsayers who predicted the collapse of everything we hold dear because of this new paper currency. 150 years and still waiting. I suspect those "experts" and their heirs still managed to prosper throughout the years following their statements. If one's definition of money includes that it be a store of value, then FRNs certainly are not doing the job. They are currently worth about 5% of their value when FDR took us off the gold standard in 1933. If there is historical precendent for a stable fiat currency, I never saw it. The hour's wage worth of today's FRN's still buys about the same as the hour's wage in FDR's time. If a stable currency is so important, why then do all countries choose fiat currencies? |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Legal Tender Act passed
On Feb 25, 7:53*pm, "Bremick" wrote:
"Beanie" wrote in .... "Bremick" wrote in message ... So, yes, we're one of the three or four whose "fiat" currency hasn't collapsed. *That's my point. *It involves those ca1862 "financial expert" doomsayers who predicted the collapse of everything we hold dear because of this new paper currency. *150 years and still waiting. *I suspect those "experts" and their heirs still managed to prosper throughout the years following their statements. If one's definition of money includes that it be a store of value, then FRNs certainly are not doing the job. They are currently worth about 5% of their value when FDR took us off the gold standard in 1933. If there is historical precendent for a stable fiat currency, I never saw it. The hour's wage worth of today's FRN's still buys about the same as the hour's wage in FDR's time. * If a stable currency is so important, why then do all countries choose fiat currencies?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Note that those who are retired and depend on a fixed income (annuity, or conventional pension) might be less pleased than the workers. Also any progressive tax regime that seeks to "soak the rich" has a convenient way to adjust the fraction of the GDP it captures. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Legal Tender Act passed
On Feb 25, 4:51*pm, "Beanie" wrote:
bad, if not disingenuous example. You doubted the existence of an historical precedent. It is only recent history, but unless you doubt Wikipedia, it seems to be historical, even so. Admittedly, the measurement period was modest and the Swiss Dinars did better than just hold their value (they actually did better than the US dollar). How does that make it bad? Disingenuous would seem to indicate that you not only doubt the example, but also doubt my motive. I don't understand how that came to be. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Legal Tender Act passed
"oly" wrote in message ... On Feb 25, 2:49 pm, "Bremick" wrote: "oly" wrote in message ... On Feb 25, 11:56 am, "Bremick" wrote: "Frank Galikanokus" "Frank wrote in ... Feb 25, 1862: Legal Tender Act passed The U.S. Congress passes the Legal Tender Act, authorizing the use of paper notes to pay the government's bills. http://www.history.com/this-day-in-h...der-act-passed JAM Almost 150 years now and we're still waiting for that certain economic doom that the bankers and financial experts predicted. I know. I know. It's coming. Just listen to the experts. You know, U.S. 90% silver coins, dimes, quarters and halves, the ones you were spending in daily commerce back in 1960, are now trading for greenies at TWENTY-FOUR times (or more) original face value. How do you come up with "same-o, same-o"??? Do you have a "debt-wish"??? ----------------- Do you call that economic Doom? Has our currency collapsed? Is your 2001 salary the same as it was, or would have been, in 1964?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - My salary isn't 24 times what a bank examiner (with some seniority) got back in 1964. It's probably closer to ten times. I'm figuring week in and week out, the seasoned examiners got paid $175 per week (and some of the juniors as low as $100 per week), but that might be a little on the high side. One of my fellow examiners who was in the Army in 1971-73 looked up his old payscale and it was $161 mos to start and $363 mos at the end. He lived and ate on the base, not yet married. He started out very very low in rank. And it is a form of economic doom; for the four currencies which have survived since pre-1913, it's simply the death of ten-thousand cuts as opposed to a guillotine. ------------------ If you were being paid today in 1964 silver half dollars at face value, then your comparison might be more relevant. Silver is erratic, doubling in value over the past year primarily due to world events and investor emotion. A few years ago it dropped in value. A little over two years back you were probably making a similar salary while silver was trading at only TEN times face. The average annual increase in the price of silver since 1964 has been less than a dollar a year, hardly competitive to compounded bank interest over that same period. I started out in the Army under the same circumstances in 1962 at $78 a month (before taxes and "unit fund contributions"). Today it would be $1467 or about twenty times greater. To show how military pay has been adjusted, my starting fed salary was $5,500. Today it would be $27,430, only about ten times greater. And feds don't get free meals, quarters, and medical, and they can't retire at age 40. Not intending to disparage today's military, but they aren't the only "feds" who are asked put their life on the line. I guess I'll take those thousand cuts. They're hardly noticeable. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Legal Tender Act passed
"Peter" wrote in message ... On Feb 25, 7:53 pm, "Bremick" wrote: "Beanie" wrote in ... "Bremick" wrote in message ... So, yes, we're one of the three or four whose "fiat" currency hasn't collapsed. That's my point. It involves those ca1862 "financial expert" doomsayers who predicted the collapse of everything we hold dear because of this new paper currency. 150 years and still waiting. I suspect those "experts" and their heirs still managed to prosper throughout the years following their statements. If one's definition of money includes that it be a store of value, then FRNs certainly are not doing the job. They are currently worth about 5% of their value when FDR took us off the gold standard in 1933. If there is historical precendent for a stable fiat currency, I never saw it. The hour's wage worth of today's FRN's still buys about the same as the hour's wage in FDR's time. If a stable currency is so important, why then do all countries choose fiat currencies?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Note that those who are retired and depend on a fixed income (annuity, or conventional pension) might be less pleased than the workers. Also any progressive tax regime that seeks to "soak the rich" has a convenient way to adjust the fraction of the GDP it captures. -------------------- I'm missing your point. I'm retired and am usually more pleased than I was when I had to go to work every day. Plus, I don't have to worry about job security. I welcomey the challenge of living within the limits of my pension. I was never anywhere close to being rich, but I still believe that those who BECOME rich shouldn't be taxed at a higher percentage than the rest of us-- as long as they actually DO pay that percentage of their income. Financial success shouldn't be "soaked". |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Legal Tender Act passed
On Feb 25, 8:52*pm, "Bremick" wrote:
"Peter" wrote in message ... On Feb 25, 7:53 pm, "Bremick" wrote: "Beanie" wrote in ... "Bremick" wrote in message ... So, yes, we're one of the three or four whose "fiat" currency hasn't collapsed. That's my point. It involves those ca1862 "financial expert" doomsayers who predicted the collapse of everything we hold dear because of this new paper currency. 150 years and still waiting. I suspect those "experts" and their heirs still managed to prosper throughout the years following their statements. If one's definition of money includes that it be a store of value, then FRNs certainly are not doing the job. They are currently worth about 5% of their value when FDR took us off the gold standard in 1933. If there is historical precendent for a stable fiat currency, I never saw it. The hour's wage worth of today's FRN's still buys about the same as the hour's wage in FDR's time. If a stable currency is so important, why then do all countries choose fiat currencies?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Note that those who are retired and depend on a fixed income (annuity, or conventional pension) might be less pleased than the workers. *Also any progressive tax regime that seeks to "soak the rich" has a convenient way to adjust the fraction of the GDP it captures. -------------------- I'm missing your point. *I'm retired and am usually more pleased than I was when I had to go to work every day. *Plus, I don't have to worry about job security. *I welcomey the challenge of living within the limits of my pension. * *I was never anywhere close to being rich, but I still believe that those who BECOME rich shouldn't be taxed at a higher percentage than the rest of us-- as long as they actually DO pay that percentage of their income. *Financial success shouldn't be "soaked".- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I was trying to avoid discussing your specific case, actually. A retired federal employee (as I suspect you might be) has, under CSRS, a pension that is indexed to a cost of living index. It is a feature that is not typical of an annuity or a conventional pension. I am in the same situation that I guess you are in and have a somewhat similar view of that situation. You were discussion the plight of the currently employed. Your remark seems accurate as far as it went. If someone is currently employed in the US, in the past wages have done a reasonable job of following the cost of living. The case you omitted was those that stepped out of the system. I mentioned one example of someone who steps out by retiring on an annuity or conventional pension. Retiring on an annuity or a conventional pension means, for most, that inflation will take its toll. The other case you didn't treat was the benefiit of using a fiat currency except to wonder why they seem prevalent. They are prevalent for many reasons; I mentioned one: It is easy under a progressive tax system for governments to adjust the revenue they receive. In inflation, the government's revenue increases faster than inflation so long as it does not lower taxes (more people meet the minimum income and more reach the highest tax bracket). Please note that I am not necessarily disagreeing with your initial post; I am merely noting some of the aspects you omitted. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
February 25, 1862 Legal Tender Act passed | Bill Dukenfield | Coins | 2 | February 26th 08 09:25 PM |
Legal tender ? | Terry | Coins | 6 | February 23rd 08 03:56 AM |
Legal Reason For Legal Tender Amounts? | [email protected] | Coins | 6 | October 26th 07 06:43 PM |
Legal tender?? | Danny | Coins | 46 | November 3rd 03 01:25 AM |
"Legal Tender" | Larry Louks | Coins | 23 | August 11th 03 08:45 PM |