How 'Mainstream' Economics Miseducates About Money and the Fed | Thomas DiLorenzo

Presented by Thomas DiLorenzo at the Mises Circle at Furman University: "The Coming Currency Crisis and the Downfall of the Dollar," 13 November 2010.

[@ScarletWitchJakarta]

I wish I could have a book signed by Thomas DiLorenzo. He's the Thomas Jefferson of our time.

[@lukelee8934]

This guy sounds like he knows the ropes when it comes to govt and economics. DiLorenzo for President

[@jdagilliland]

Alexander Hamilton was such a tool.

[@ghostKurt]

When is DiLorenzo gonna hold more conferences for Mises?! Seems like he hasn't been there in ages.

[@marshalldaviesofficial]

12:55 hold your laughter please lol

[@Xasew]

Yes. He thinks the state shouldn't meddle in monetary affairs at all.

[@ScarletWitchJakarta]

If we were only a loose union of sovereign states, not a single "country," no one would fall for the con of "our country" has this or that problem that must be solved by a centralized authority. We need to abolish the federal government and system. It is the cause of all the problems.

[@mightynathaniel5355]

Great talk.

[@NicosMind]

40:25 onwards 41:31 Makes great points about WW1 and a great Mises point. 42.44, 42.46, 43.08 is awesome,

[@jnbfrancisco]

This video reminded me of a line from Will Rogers. There should be a law that says no one should be allowed to start a war until they have paid for the last one.

[@flynn2008]

Wish i have an internship with the Mises Institute.

[@sfiorare]

@Virgil0211 - presidents influenced the fed from day one, through appointments and other means "Several administrations used appointments to influence Federal Reserve decisions" source: ‪History Of The Federal Reserve‬ By Allan H. Meltzer p 21 "monetary policy is quite responsive to political climate, especially as represented by the preferences of the President" source: 'Congress, the President and the Federal Reserve' by Irwin L Morris p 9

[@kainebishop3970]

I paused this video for a while to eat and when I came back the first thing he said was poo-poo.

[@Conan_the_Based]

I'm always torn between Tarpley/Still and the Von Mises economic systems. But then, the debate itself is healthy.

[@maciej.ratajczak]

May I ask how do Tarpley/Still's ideas differ from Austrian economics?

[@sfiorare]

@FletchforFreedom - you're dreaming Hoover supported volunteerism. He feared government intervention might destroy self-reliance. Hoover did little while the economy eroded. & declined to pursue legislative relief, believing that it would make people dependent on the federal government. Instead, he organized a number of voluntary measures with businesses, encouraged state and local government responses, and accelerated federal building projects. Only later did he support legislative solutions.

[@FletchforFreedom]

Look aroud you right now because the exact same thing is happening. Whether the Fed undertakes treasury purchase - open market activities - or interest rate manipulation, such activities are marginal and require activity in the lending markets to carry its actions to economic fruition. The breaking of the banking system (again, like today) so undermined that activity that such attempts at expansion were ineffective (again, see contemporary rates of 0% - 0.25% and a "liquidity crunch").

[@TheORBOTRON]

I think that's pretty inconsequential when compared to his ownership of slaves. Regardless, being internally inconsistent does not negate the contributions Jefferson made. It will take more than an ad hominem attack on the author to discredit works like the Declaration Of Independence.

[@porcudracului]

you also forgot to mention the slave fugitive act was in place and there were lots of catchers that caught even free blacks and sold them into slavery in different states. so it wasn't that easy to free slaves, also not sure if all of them wanted to be freed in that climate. it had to be done by the government in a similar manner the English did it. so no, the ' he had slaves' argument doesn't work/matter if you're serious and intellectually honest

[@FletchforFreedom]

No, monet supply is not shrinking. The difference was that, due to unit banking laws, so many individual banks failed. This, coupled with the Fed's INITIAL tightening, so radically reduced the number of avenues available to inflate the money supply via fractional reserves and so devastated the trust in the banking system as a whole that, once the Fed tried loosening again, the damage was done. The current crisis, while similarly caused and with similar symptoms is not as severe. cont

[@BachGuitar3]

groceries stores :D great video

[@sfiorare]

@FletchforFreedom - pro-union legislation didn't directly inject liquidity into the economy; the fact remains that hoover didn't allow the fed to act @fringeelements - what particular interventions are you referring to?

[@grraadd]

What about: "This video is unlisted. Only those with the link can see it."? YT displays random messages again?

[@sfiorare]

@Arjozof - hoover was essentially the fed chairman's boss Hoover's stance on the economy was based largely on volunteerism. He feared intervention by the government would harm self-reliance, which he considered to be important American values. the bank of amsterdam went out of business because it couldn't compete with more profitable banks that didn't require a nonviable full-reserve you don't have a clear understanding constitutional law if you think the federal reserve act is fraudulent

[@Virgil0211]

@sfiorare You've made no comments addressing the discussion itself about the federal reserve system and the federal reserve bank of New York before the great depression.

[@fringeelements]

I believe Hoover pioneered some interventions prior to the period of the stock market crash, and I know Roosevelt ran against Hoover's big government policies. Volunteerism failed of course because Hoover's economic theories were faulty and so required legislation to force them to artificially keep up wages and prices.

[@sfiorare]

@FletchforFreedom - other than hoover's influence, what prevented the fed from expanding the money supply?

[@sfiorare]

@FletchforFreedom - during the depression the money supply shrank do you think the exact same thing is happening, now?

[@sfiorare]

@Arjozof - what grade are you in?

[@93msinclair]

I thinlk you mean "diseducates" rather than "miseducates"

[@sfiorare]

@synestheticmonotony - you wrote: "they can stop the offenses of government at the source" how would this happen?

[@sfiorare]

@betodesign101 - what grade are you in?

[@FletchforFreedom]

The issue is not whether or not govt can influence the Fed (of course they can, it's one of the reasons it's appropriate to blame Fed failure on govt. Hoover's ability to influence the relatively young Fed is another issue entirely and consistent with what I have said (as are Hoover's memoirs which are frequently misinterpreted as what he did rather than what he WANTED to do. Your interpretation is inconsistent with what was actually said (including by Hoover) AT THE TIME, rather than later.

[@sfiorare]

@Arjozof - i see that haven't answered my simple question to you "what bank, in operation today, uses full-reserve banking?"

[@Individual_Lives_Matter]

What are the banks required to have in reserve now? Your central planners cannot stop putting their hands in the till nor can they keep their thumbs off of the scales. No matter how smart they are, they are not smart enough and they’re corrupt to boot. It’s your metaphysics that you need to examine. Is “god” a process we all participate in or is “god” a dictator?

[@93msinclair]

@synestheticmonotony Ya you're right, I was just making the point that it's intentionaly misleading.

[@anon10077]

DiLorenzo's definitely one of my favorite Austrians

[@tomass8425]

we've been fighting socialist theory, since before it was socialist theory.

[@FletchforFreedom]

here are the facts: 1) Hoover opposed expanding the money supply 2) the Fed tried DESPERATELY to expand the money supply 3) the money supply shrank (Austrians point out that this was due to the intervention and uncertainty, Keynesians called this failure to succeed in expansion the "liquidity trap") 4) Hoover had no influence over the Federal Reserve (and your reasoning collapses with point 2) Hoover's path was NOT taken, the damage had simply already been done. Nice try.

[@FletchforFreedom]

What's happening now is that what in an ordinary economy would result in massive hyperinflation is merely inflating at a far lower level. The inflation is bad in its own right. The risk that, as again in the 1930s, since neither FDR nor Bush nor Obama could ever completely kill entrepreneurship, that, when the economy really begins to turn, the policies in place will rapidly create another bubble and begin the cycle anew.

[@immaculatesquid]

Boom and Bust infinity. It's fine if you have a secure job and can afford rental properties and stock etfs that remain relatively stable through every boom/bust cycle, but if you're poor or low middle class, you get washed out when the economy implodes and wipes out 30 million jobs which takes years to recover from.

[@sfiorare]

@betodesign101 - that just goes to show how little you know @Moragauth - my comments against dilorenzo's assertions are based on economic principles, documented history and hoover's memoirs

[@sfiorare]

@synestheticmonotony - bias is appropriate in this case the gold standard didn't work and was dropped for that reason rothbard's bias towards a gold standard is the example

[@sfiorare]

@synestheticmonotony - show me the information source you relied on for this: "government actions are the leading cause of death"

[@91Eschaton]

see what your doing is accusing Jefferson of being a hypocrite with a baseless assertion about equivalence of a government provided option with a refute of destructive government control. Like do you even know how Jefferson wanted to implement public education? Because this was a century before the prussian education model was made and the latter is what american public education was based on when it was started in the 1890s.

[@Virgil0211]

@sfiorare you still haven't addressed the argument.

[@sfiorare]

@Arjozof - it's pretty simple; this time the fed was allowed to expand the money supply and prevent a domino effect if hoover had allowed expansion of the money supply, the depression of the 1930's would not have occurred the mises institute helps economists, historians and etc to make money if they espouse their views and propaganda; it's an extremely politically biased organization

[@immaculatesquid]

Hoover had been in office for 9 months when the stock market crashed, so I'm not really sure how the money supply is his issue when the Federal Reserve had been around for 16 years at that point. Also Unemployment was at 6% in June 1930, 8 months after the Late October 1929 Stock Market Crash, before the Smoot Hawley Tariffs were passed. After the largest tariff package in US History was passed, unemployment did not return to a single digit number for the remainder of the 1930s.

[@porcudracului]

as opposed to what? how many biased economists benefit from it? what's your solution? you have nothing to add, boy. you're just a coward with no argument

[@sfiorare]

@synestheticmonotony - since it's inception, the usa has been committed to the rule of law; government is not only committed to the rule of law, it makes the law would you have rather that closed, totalitarian communistic societies had dominated the earth or that the free world fought back? remember khrushchev's words: "we will bury you"

[@sfiorare]

@Virgil0211 - you can pretend presidents didn't have influence over the fed prior to the depression, but hoover changed the fed chairman in 1930 the power to appoint or not, is an influential power, whether it's convenient for you to admit it or not what would you like to know about the federal reserve bank of new york?

[@sfiorare]

@Arjozof - i studied economics for years at university & have an advanced degree what bank, in operation today, uses full-reserve banking? @FletchforFreedom - even tom woods agrees with what i said about the president's ability to influence the fed chairman 35:00 - 39:00 - if you [fed chairman] want to keep your job… you do what the boss [president] wants @betodesign101 - i'll just say, you don't know what you're talking about

[@Guti3737]

No that's not true. Milton Friedman wanted to abolish almost every government agency, the issue was when asked how to pull these agencies back he would suggest a middle ground. Something reasonable and short term not a utopia. This is government your dealing with, its naive to think you can take that power away overnight like the this guys suggest

[@NicosMind]

The article that he mentions is watch?v=2dm7ZAN4iiQ

[@sfiorare]

@synestheticmonotony - if you had your way, i suspect there would be more war rather than less

[@thundaga4005]

36:00 - Trump perfectly demonstrates this today.

[@sfiorare]

@synestheticmonotony - one of rothbard's most obvious biases is against government

[@Individual_Lives_Matter]

Being against government might not be a merely a bias but a philosophical argument against centralizing decision making. I’m no expert on Rothbard though. I’m thinking of Matt Ridley’s idea about expertise being diffuse, with regard to innovation.

[@Individual_Lives_Matter]

Also, you say you have advanced degrees in economics. I would say that the economics departments have a vested interest in toeing the MMT line. It’s not exactly like there’s anything in it for them to go against it. Like much of the university, they are grass blowing in the wind.

[@sfiorare]

@synestheticmonotony - war predates government statutory law is law and codified law is also law at its core, society and government are just abstract concepts in practice, society is made up of people and governments are people what country has a government that is ideal?

[@Rensune]

Joe Montegna? (I know it's not him, but it sounds just like him)

[@sfiorare]

@synestheticmonotony - in other words you can't back up your claim

[@cchessmaster]

Quit using their fiat dollars. Free yourself. Stop the wars. Buy silver not gold.

[@Virgil0211]

@sfiorare 1.Argument from authority, argument from common practice, straw-man. 2. He's talking about the fed chairman's position right now. It doesn't have anything to do with the banking system at the time of the great depression. Nice try, though. 3. Says the guy who's demonstrated economic and logical ignorance time and time again, on the bogosity.tv forums, shanedk's channel, Fletchforfreedom's channel, etc.

[@sfiorare]

@synestheticmonotony - empirical evidence says the gold standard doesn't work; rothbard has little credence with people that aren't politically biased

[@sfiorare]

@synestheticmonotony - you can count on dilorenzo for a biased revision of history

[@jacksonlamme]

Does this speaker believe in the issuance of private money?

[@FletchforFreedom]

The fact is you are spouting ahistorical nonsense. In fact, Hoover could not have exercised such power if he tried. Until well into FDR's term, the individual Federal Reserve Banks maintained a great deal of autonomy and the head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (not subject the the threat of presidential ouster) was more powerful than the Fed Chairman. This did not change until long after Hoover was out of office. The pro-union legislation was merely economically harmful.

[@sfiorare]

@synestheticmonotony - the usa is committed to the rule of law

[@wesbaumguardner8829]

sfiorare aka the immoral dictates of corrupt narcissists concealed behind the delusion of the public good

[@FletchforFreedom]

No, I'm educated on the subject. Yes, Hoover supported volunteerism (not that his efforts to have businesses voluntarily keep wages from falling were any less economically disastrous. The assertion that Hoover "did little while the economy eroded" is factually wrong on every level. The pro-union legislation he forwarded and passed actually pre-sated the crash and the massive increase in governmnet outlays began early, not late. Do a little actual research.

[@sfiorare]

@betodesign101 - are you afraid to show your face?

[@Virgil0211]

@successfulbuild 'He asked a QUESTION, and it was not loaded.' Argument by assertion. Any honest look at the context and sfiorare's behavior will indicate that the question was loaded. Nice try.

[@roymarshall_]

@michaelpshipley1 I got a chance to chat a little with him and I really regret not asking for an autograph.

[@sfiorare]

@successfulbuild - yea, he and his bogus buddies seem to like to throw out the fallacy accusation instead of making real arguments @Arjozof - you continue to avoid answering a simple question what bank, in operation today, uses full-reserve banking? just admit that it's not used because it's an archaic practice i understand quite well that you make ludicrous false accusations and refuse to face facts

[@sfiorare]

@Arjozof - you continue to avoid answering a simple question what bank, in operation today, uses full-reserve banking? just admit that it's not used because it's an archaic practice i understand quite well that you make ludicrous false accusations and refuse to face facts

[@brown55061]

@sfiorare The fact remains that the Federal Reserve's practices are not only illegal, but their policies destroy the value of YOUR money as well. It's simple math. How much did every product you bought in 1970 cost? Multiply it times 6 or 10 and you have what it costs today. That's called price inflation. I've read a years worth of your ignorant comments on this channel and NEVER have you offered one intelligent solution, just conflating arguments. You are wasting our oxygen.

[@mrgetrealpeople]

Why did they leave the Union..... These speeches and writings should clear up the reason for the slave owning states leaving the union. 1.Alexander H. Stephens Vice president of confederate states Savannah, Georgia March 21, 1861 22 days before the start of the Civil war “Corner Stone” Speech ' But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other though last, not least. "The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. ******This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution******. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the “rock upon which the old Union would split.” He was right." 2.James H. Hammond, Congressman from South Carolina: "Sir, I do firmly believe that domestic slavery, regulated as ours is, produces the highest toned, the purest, best organization of society that has ever existed on the face of the earth." Hammond again, from later in the same speech: ****"the moment this House undertakes to legislate upon this subject [slavery], it dissolves the Union**** . Should it be my fortune to have a seat upon this floor, I will abandon it the instant the first decisive step is taken looking towards legislation of this subject. I will go home to preach, and if I can, practice, disunion, and civil war, if needs be. A revolution must ensue, and this republic sink in blood." 3..Senator Robert M. T. Hunter of Virginia: "There is not a respectable system of civilization known to history whose foundations were not laid in the institution of domestic slavery." [Battle Cry of Freedom, p. 56.] Richmond Enquirer, 1856: "Democratic liberty exists solely because we have slaves . . . freedom is not possible without slavery." Atlanta Confederacy, 1860: "We regard every man in our midst an enemy to the institutions of the South, who does not boldly declare that he believes African slavery to be a social, moral, and political blessing." 4.8.Speech of E. S. Dargan, in the Convention of Alabama, Jan. 11, 1861 I wish, Mr. President, to express the feelings with which I vote for the secession of Alabama from the Government of the United States; and to state, in a few words, the reasons that impel me to this act. Alabama Civil War The Seceding Alabama Congressional Delegation, January 11, 1861 I feel impelled, Mr. President, to vote for this Ordinance by an overruling necessity. Years ago I was convinced that the Southern States would be compelled either to separate from the North, by dissolving the Federal Government, or they would be compelled to abolish the institution of African Slavery. This, in my judgment, was the only alternative; and I foresaw that the South would be compelled, at some day, to make her selection. The day is now come, and Alabama must make her selection, either to secede from the Union, and assume the position of a sovereign, independent State, or she must submit to a system of policy on the part of the Federal Government that, in a short time, will compel her to abolish African Slavery. 3.From the Confederate Constitution: Article I, Section 9, Paragraph 4: "No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed." Article IV, Section 3, Paragraph 3: "The Confederate States may acquire new territory . . . In all such territory, the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress and the territorial government." 4.From the Georgia Constitution of 1861:"The General Assembly shall have no power to pass laws for the emancipation of slaves." (This is the entire text of Article 2, Sec. VII, Paragraph 3.) 5.From the Alabama Constitution of 1861: "No slave in this State shall be emancipated by any act done to take effect in this State, or any other country." (This is the entire text of Article IV, Section 1 (on slavery).)

[@BobWidlefish]

mrgetrealpeople clearly slavery was a factor. Though the immediate precipitating event seems to have been tariffs and then secession. If there had been no confiscatory tariff, there would have been no threat of secession, and so no war. If secession would have been respected there would have been no war, either. So while slavery was a factor, that's far from the whole story. It seems entirely plausible slavery would have been phased out shortly thereafter if the south had seceded, as it had in the north and did around the rest of the world. Lincoln didn't care about slavery as much as taxation and conquering states that wished to secede.

[@porcudracului]

find the exact same number of abolitionists in the north who were agitating against the Confederates. and put them next to the quotations you carefully selected. then you'll be credible. until then, go watch your Mickey mouse economists