Smashing Myths and Restoring Sound Money | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

[@88spammer]

I just can't understand how people just don't understand this, i mean it's so straight forward

[@dks13827]

How goes it ?

[@Foebasher]

I think that most people don't question to any great degree the way the systems that govern their lives are structured. Bread and circuses.

[@operationawesome8662]

Because they are evil

[@niklas4649]

On the 9th of January 2009, Satoshi Nakamoto restored sound money.

[@ouss]

i didn't know how bitcoin sounded, thanks for ringing that to me

[@sofianikiforova7790]

Satoshi started the process. Bitcoin isn’t private, look into Monero instead.

[@bradvincent2586]

I can really feel how old these KZbin comments are. I would enjoy a little more wit and competency people of 2011

[@macioluko9484]

@ 23:50 Or put another way: "The government and banks are far less relevant in this case and that's how it ought to be." Under a sound money system, the power naturally increases within the individual as opposed to the banks and governments that have gotten used to sharing the power and having the interest of the individual so far up their behinds... @25:50 No. It is impossible. The banks and Fed chairmen know this. They don't want for anyone to have a future. The politicians also know this so they want you to put your future in their hands. @27:18 Yup! All assembly line, sweat off the brow workers... @28:25 which none of us watching are...

[@SomebodyPickaName]

I don't blame you for misinterpreting his message. You don't have a clear understanding of Bill's message and that's OK. His message is not to suggest no competing currencies. He's all for competing currencies. He just doesn't want the govt to borrow it into existence with interest attached to it, because then you have to borrow more money to pay off the interest. Gold standard or not. The tally stick worked great. When the debt was repaid, the stick was removed from circulation. Simple.

[@RevoltingPeasant123]

41:38 Mises was unbelievably prescient in this writing when you read it through a Covid tinted lens.

[@cassiuslives4807]

two notes: 1- paper money can work in a free banking system (competing banks, no fed), with the backing of capital and the reclamation of debt. 2- the reason that most people call "crank" for speccie is that Keynesian fear of deflationary effects, or the hypothetical "gold asteroid"

[@tinyfanny]

Cassius Lives aaaa

[@Panax07]

a 5 Woods is worth more than 5 Dollars. Maybe we should all get our paychecks in Woods' It's All About the Woods Baby!

[@Leofus1986]

@sfiorare me: to what do you attribute the progress in our standard of living? you: progress me: that doesn't answer my question

[@TreachMarkets]

Thomas Woods, you're so money and you don't even know it!

[@s0beit]

@sfiorare I did check it out and he talks about all of those panics in other videos. It wasn't so much volatility of the currency so much as volatility of the state steering the money supply and so on. If you want to refute the gold standard you can't substitute knowing your opponent's positions with covering your ears and spouting what you 'know' to be right. View the tom woods videos in the related, mises articles on the subject and then talk about volatility.

[@magnus4g63]

1/1-2020 my bank goes negative interests, 0.75% ... insanity.

[@CurtHowland]

Tom's talk in "Economics for Highschool Students" received a standing ovation. How many economics lecturers can say that?

[@SomebodyPickaName]

Of course, those who possess gold and like their money to make more money will be against this, because it takes away their ability to get richer when they have not produced any goods/services other than to create more money from money. Money should be a denomination of what you produce. Money should be for the benefit of we the people, not we the bankers. Get rid of fractional reserve banking, interest, borrowing money into existence, and we the people win. Not the plutocrats.

[@SomebodyPickaName]

Bill Still >> Tom Woods Fiat currency only appears bad because of how it's currently used. It's not what backs a nation's money; it's who controls it's quantity. If I create a coupon for a free back rub, I give you the back rub and then tear the coupon up because the debt has been paid. Do this same thing with fiat money, and then remove it from circulation once debts have been repaid to avoid hyperinflation and everybody wins except Wall St investors in that casino called the stock market.

[@kessass83]

It will always be THE only currencies. Digital currency will be equal to current federal reserve system, where Ben can write any amount of credit without limitation in his computer. I know i know, in the beginning they will say it will be utopia, but it was the same with paper money which today became quasi digital currency. The problem with digital currency, if you will be able to buy real assets, land, companies, buildings, oil, gold with it, then inflation will be a problem again.

[@supreme84x]

In my opinion, Gold and Silver are what our currency is meant to be... UNTIL the majority of human beings on this planet's wealth has risen high enough to allow them all to be like the US was ten years ago. This will allow digital fixed currencies. We'll have a mix of both for a long while and if the gov allows the competing of different curries. This is logically how the product known as currency will evolve further if you look at 100% of all its functions/requirements..

[@Joe11Blue]

I did what was called inferring. By the mere definitions of the words you chose and their arrangement you spoke about the government in that manner. I never assumed anything, I looked at what you typed and read what it said, and what it did not say. Asking for a Free Market is the complete opposite of Utopia. Understanding that would require you to actually know what the word utopia means though. With your use of it here, it is obvious that you do not know what the word means.

[@Joe11Blue]

The Price system can not work in a situation where true prices discovery can not take place. True price discovery can not take place in a situation where the currency is losing it's value, and prices are distorted through government intervention. This is exactly what Mises was saying. What you are saying is that since governments distort reality that we must have more government to prevent this distortion of reality from causing humans to get mad about getting screwed over for their labor.

[@dmsanders2]

So what?? There is always a trade off between paying an employee for their labour and investing in technology in order to have less labour required to produce a certain good. People need to adapt. Are you saying that we should roll back technology so that it requires more labour to produce something? How expensive would your house be if it took 300 people to build it without power tools? Your analysis is too narrow and flawed.

[@tewj57]

@sfiorare Proves how clueless you are. When they ARE MONEY, they trade in every market by definition and are not volatile at all. Have you ever seen graphs of money's purchasing power in the 20th century? Quiz question: at what part of the graph do we see the greatest volatility? During the gold standard period? Quit while you're behind, buddy. You know nothing other than a few sentences about how out-of-the-mainstream gold is.

[@gergenheimer]

@worldnewsbbc1 if inflation increases output, why are we messing around with such piddly rates of inflation? Why not inflate the money supply by 5% per year, or 10%? Because it's obvious that more money does not equal more wealth, despite the best smoke and mirror tricks of Keynesians. The CPI data from 1913-1955 is largely meaningless because of the rationing, wage and price controls of WW1, the Great Depression, and WW2. Monetary inflation benefits the first receivers at the expense of others.

[@Leofus1986]

@sfiorare i accept that there is a higher standard of living but thats not what i asked. what i asked you is specifically what kind of progress you attribute it to. it seems like you can get mad about me using the word prove and call me a kid but so far you still have not answered any of my questions. if youre just going to keep avoiding my questions im simply going to stop asking them. thanks for all the views and comments on this video, boosting its search ranking :D

[@mmaier2112]

The really messed up part is that it's impossible to fully understand exactly how it all works. There are so many interactions with the monetary side (Fed, the individual banks and fractional reserves) and the consumer side (govt, taxpayers, "normal consumers") that there IS no predictive ability. Which is supposed to be the big selling point of the Fed in the first place. I say "supposed to be" because the real benefit of the Fed goes to its member banks.

[@ForTehNguyen]

currency has to have intrinsic value, otherwise it operates on 100% faith. You need faith and trust in free markets to work. If that is lost then you lose everything in a fiat system. With a commodity system if faith is lost, you can back out with whatever the currency is backed by. What would you have the most faith to represent your work and wealth, paper that can be created out of nothing or commodities that cant be created from nothing? Dont tell me paper lol

[@Feanor1169]

Several American Colonial governments (like Pennsylvania) issued fiat currency and successfully controlled inflation, functioned nearly tax free, and had zero debt. They did this out of necessity because the commodity money systems failed as gold left the country to balance their trade deficits with Britain. The lack of currency created economic hardship, but this was artificial as prosperity lies with the productivity and industry of individuals, not the intrinsic value of a currency.

[@Feanor1169]

A currency or medium of exchange does not need to have an intrinsic value itself, just the goods or services exchanged and represented by the currency. Gold can serve that purpose, but people have historically stored it with goldsmiths or banks and used paper representations for daily transactions. Great, but the banks invariably start lending out more paper than they have gold. It would be helpful if Mr. Woods pointed out where money really comes from - banks, not the government.

[@Leofus1986]

@mrzack888 a trillion dollar stimulus spent on infrastructure is better than a multi trillion dollar stimulus spent on failing businesses, military imperialism and a social welfare state. the fact of the matter is that china doesn't hinder business the way the us does, nor does it squander its money (except on buying us bonds)

[@sfiorare]

@tewj57 - i guess you didn't understand my previous answer, let me give you a specific example: a 20% rise for 8¢ per hour is 1.5¢ in 1895 an average worker had to work for over a month to earn enough to buy a bicycle, now it takes a day or less you throw around the term 'proof' like a little boy that has no idea what it means

[@CurtHowland]

> where money really comes from - banks, not the government. Legal Tender laws are pure government. Without those laws, commodity money would be the rule. It is only in an environment of legal tender laws that "bad money drives out good." Without those laws, good money drives out bad because bad can be REFUSED.

[@sfiorare]

@Leofus1986 - please don't throw around the term 'proves' like kid that has no idea what it means the point is that the average person has more purchasing power & a better standard of living now, than in 1895 both north korea and china have poor human rights records

[@tewj57]

@sfiorare This proves how in over your head you are. Real wages rose by 20% in the 1880s alone. That alone smashes your position, so we'll be awaiting your apology for unjustly attacking people who are much more knowledgeable than you are, and who happen to be right.

[@CurtHowland]

> Debt-free government issued fiat worked well in the American colonies and during the Civil War, and can again. Ah! You saw "The Money Masters" and didn't notice how they went horribly wrong. But now you've discovered the Mises Institute and can rectify that lack.

[@Joe11Blue]

Perhaps you should learn to look up words you do not know the meaning of before acting as if you were superior to everyone else. Maybe then you would be treated by others as an equal and have the chance to grow to the same intellectual level as them.

[@TheORBOTRON]

You're falling for one of the oldest economic fallacies in the book. Human needs and wants will never be completely satisfied, no matter how many robots there are, there will always be some newer, better product or service for a human to create.

[@kessass83]

Yes. I think when we will create all possible jobs on earth, we will then be going create even more jobs in space. There will never be the limits to possibilities. The only hurdle will be corrupt power.

[@Joe11Blue]

It's obvious you never read either, but were capable of reading the outliners of some of their material. Try again please, and this time go back and actually read the material before commenting.

[@Joe11Blue]

That is assuming that technology doesn't expand into new realms and allow for further employment. You are making an assumption based on what is now, rather than what humans are capable of.

[@Leofus1986]

@sfiorare in 1895, it took a lot more people and a higher price in energy to produce a bike. Also, 8 cents was worth $7.84 in today's dollar. Even if your facts were correct, they are irrelevant.

[@mrzack888]

@Leofus1986 yes. i follow larouche, fuller, and venus project. not this simple minded everybody for themselves selfish selfish austrian libertarian economic views.

[@Joe11Blue]

So what you are saying is that your argument now is to attack me rather than actually prove what I have said incorrect. That makes it an Ad-Hom, which is a fallacy.

[@TheORBOTRON]

What good would it do a corporation to have robots do all the work if there were no people with money to buy their products? You're looking at only one side of the coin.

[@sfiorare]

@BrettDunbar - that's funny considering what the mises institute does high-school indoctrination program google: "economics for high school students mises"

[@polevaultrockstr]

@benandreas369 even if a dollar equal . 000000001 oz of gold, that would not devalue the dollar. The beauty of gold is it is divisible, unlike most commodities....

[@sfiorare]

@Leofus1986 - progress in higher standards of living it's really funny how you pretend that i don't answer questions, but it's really you that doesn't answer

[@sfiorare]

@Leofus1986 - the relevant thing is that the average person today a much more wealthy than in 1895 what do you think of the human rights situation, in china?

[@tewj57]

@mrzack888 Quite unlike the Keynesians, who aren't at all repeating the same old things again after again, even after the 1970s stagflation disproved them.

[@Tenebrousable]

Buy bitcoin, let's do this thing and make currency truly democratic. And democracy truly profitable.

[@ForTehNguyen]

are you freaking serious? Where do you think "not worth a continental" came from? You cannot have something represent value that has no value it self.

[@TheORBOTRON]

Who is going to buy the products? If there are no employees, there are no customers, you need to take off the blinders and look at the bigger picture.

[@Leofus1986]

@sfiorare what kind of progress specifically? so far i have only asked questions, none of which you have answered so what arguments do you refer to?

[@odigity]

The conspiracy is real, but I agree with Stefan Molyneux that it is also irrelevent. It doesn't change what is true, and what the solution is.

[@Joe11Blue]

Go read Rothbard. I'm not speaking about Classical Liberalism here. I'm speaking about it's modern evolution called Libertarianism.

[@TheORBOTRON]

Are you doing your part? Are you scientifically deciding how much you actually need to live on and donating all the rest to the poor?

[@Leofus1986]

@sfiorare ok, so what do you attribute the higher standard of living to? yeah, countries have poor human rights records... so what?

[@sfiorare]

@tewj57 - it figures that you'd try to deny reality and economics 101 gold is a volatile commodity due to its inelastic supply

[@Leofus1986]

@sfiorare relevant to what? what do you suppose that proves? what do you think of the human rights situation in North Korea?

[@mrzack888]

thomas woods is very simple one dimensional. all these austrian followers spout the same thing over and over. no new ideas.

[@Joe11Blue]

That's what I figured, you do not have a rational rebuttal, but you certainly have more fallacies to throw around.

[@ZeteticPlato]

Shazam! Trying to read John Hanson "He quit Alfred." What a Marv Al.... "Who are you?" That's a good song and question... Hang loose..

[@CrawlingAxle]

9 socialists watched this video.

[@sfiorare]

@s0beit - check out the economic busts and booms in the 19th century for evidence of commodity money's volatility

[@benandreas369]

You did not get my message at all. What I am telling you is that technology is the part of creative destruction going at a faster rate than entrepreneurship. I am not suggesting to go back to 300 workers. I am saying it is inevitable that machines will take over most jobs. A corp will not have to pay health insurance, salary, bonuses, ext, all because a machine can do it, and guess what? They are building machines that can fix themselves! 3d printing! It's inevitable, tech unemployment

[@benandreas369]

Infinite wants and the idea that human's are too complex or incompatible for a designed, environmentally efficient economy, is mostly propaganda and delusion. Historical reflections on human collective behavior show deep adaptability and if people were not so manipulated by advertising; living in a consumption growth economic model, your needs and wants would be very different. Our values are simply distorted. Humanity needs to base its "wants" on the scientific principles of sustainability.

[@benandreas369]

The issue I have with your claim is that you seem to think that creative destruction and entrepreneurship and in balance, when in reality, creative destruction is going at a faster rate than entrepreneurship. Look at the auto industry. Sure machines also created human jobs, but machines took over more human jobs, than created. Again, its a fallacy that economists do not understand and it is, quite honestly, inevitable, technological unemployment that is. Rise against the machines is a good read

[@benandreas369]

@lomocan I just want to mention that what if one day, corporations will decide not to use human labor, because to earn more money, they can use machines.Technology is growing so rapidly, and the U.S.'s majority of jobs are in the service sector. What happens if companies decide to have the service sector replaced with machines. It is happening in the world today. What job's are going to replace the service sector? Do you think that technological unemployment is not happening?

[@panpiper]

Learn the word; 'Fiat' money. Paper money backed by nothing except a bureaucrat, who can make what money you do have worth less, so they can give more of that fiat money to their friends and the speculators. That is literally how it is that the rich get richer while the poor get poorer. Fiat money is the culprit. Fiat money is the problem. A 100% reserve, gold currency is the answer.

[@RichardRoy2]

Wrong. The paper representations are like a receipt, and is payable to the barer on demand. The paper isn't the money; the gold is. And money doesn't come from the bank, it comes from the depositor. If the bank distributes more notes than deposits, it's called fractional reserve banking, and done so without the depositors permission is a breach of contract. Point is, money comes from the depositor, not the bank.

[@ipconfigrenew]

@KenMacMillan Uhh...care to explain? Or do you prefer to make statements with nothing to support your claim?

[@RationalDischarge]

Could we get a Ron Paul/Tom Woods ticket for POTUS in '12? Pretty please with sugar and gold coins on top?!

[@benandreas369]

Infinite wants and the idea that human's are too complex or incompatible for a designed, environmentally efficient economy, is mostly propaganda and delusion. Historical reflections on human collective behavior show deep adaptability and if people were not so manipulated by advertising; living in a consumption growth economic model, your needs and wants would be very different.

[@benandreas369]

Ugh huh... keep reading that Mises... he sure was an expert in human sociology... lol. Only people like free market advocates believe in predetermination, and that, we, as humans are built into having unlimited wants, when in reality, history has shown that to be false.. If only Mises actually read a history book!

[@ytgv3fc7]

@benandreas369 we can't run out of gold. We also can't move beyond money. It takes god-powers to make all you need without trade. You require the work, materials and skills of others, so you require trade. "beyond money" = "all humans are dead". Scarcity & inequality are nature, are GOOD. Violence happens to CAUSE inequality, also, more than to stop it.

[@benandreas369]

@lomocan You are right. I did not mean to say that it is just scarcity that causes violence. There are many factors as to why humans create violence. The problem is our socioeconomic system. Thank you for not bashing me like many people on youtube! Hopefully, more people in our society can have more civil discussions.

[@benandreas369]

@lomocan but what happens when we run out of gold? I am more for gold than a money system backed up by nothing... but isn't it time to move forward beyond money? The first step is sound money, but then after that, scarcity is still taken place, which results into economic inequality, thus violence occuring... how can we stop this with a gold standard? We can't.

[@panpiper]

That's like saying you hate food, clothing and a warm and dry shelter. Money is no different, it's just a better way to gain those things, and other things. You don't hate money. You hate 'fiat' money. Fiat money is what enables speculators and leveraged buyouts, conspicuous consumption, massive debt, wars of aggression, etc., etc..

[@sfiorare]

@javerret - volatile commodities like gold and silver don't make for sound money, they make volatile money

[@benandreas369]

But the technology we are creating, isn't for new employment/ human labor, it is to reduce it, which those technologies will do. They are not going to create more human employment. Once automation, always automation. Unless we become part machine, which is another possibility, and you may be right.

[@jonathans8]

@ManBearPigWolf sounds like they have an identity crisis. this _is_ liberalism, "classical" or not.

[@Johny_Locke]

Yeah, they know everything about the system... that's a complete failure and is currently collapsing.

[@benandreas369]

I never said anything about government did I? Stop assuming that Im some sort of Communist or Socialist. Jesus the assumptions people have on this page, dickricking the "free market" utopia, is just laughable.

[@TheORBOTRON]

Right, Mises never read a history book, I see the level of intelligence I'm dealing with here.

[@clockworkOMNI]

Alright but deflation leading to mass bankruptcies would entail a major disruption as "bankruptcy courts sort it all out"

[@benandreas369]

Once one corporation goes fully automated, they will have there prices drop so much, that in order for their competitors to compete, will have to follow suite. Watch and see.

[@s0beit]

@sfiorare Yeah well it doesn't help when the people trying to inform me, like yourself, resort to ad hominem attacks instead of, you know, having a real argument.

[@sharperguy]

I might've left an intelligent comment but then he used the word "discombobulates". :D

[@kessass83]

Gold and silver is the best preservation of your fruits of labor and your savings.

[@commiekiller1989]

So.... if no humans are working who is going to buy the products that are produced?

[@-Aurumn-]

The intrinsic value in gold is that it's value isn't controlled. Hey...That rhymed.

[@taubstumm]

No, money supply doesn't have to grow with the population. If it remains constant it will simply increase in value when the population grows.

[@s0beit]

@sfiorare You'd have to first convince people that they're volatile and that they wouldn't be able to adjust for their supposed volatility.

[@zeo285]

Maybe, we should, try and get... Woods to run for president? *crosses fingers*

[@DigitalSkyline]

Isn't paper money , dollars, really backed by the U.S. military? It has value becuase "we" say it has value... any questions?

[@ManBearPigWolf]

Excellent Speech. Its the economics class liberal colleges don't teach.

[@Joe11Blue]

Hey, at least the opponents of Mises are getting easier to deal with.

[@sfiorare]

@Leofus1986 - i attribute it to progress, so your arguments are crap

[@KagarBeardtooth]

dis⋅com⋅bob⋅u⋅late verb (used with object), to confuse or disconcert

[@wesostler8463]

This guy sounds exactly like a young Steve Jobs.

[@LucidDream101]

Wow! Since when did Tom Woods videos start becoming Trollville?

[@rlkinnard]

There was a 14% unemployment rate in 1876.