This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
“Consumers don't produce inflation. Producers don't produce inflation. Inflation is produced only by too much government spending and too much government creation of money, and nothing else.”
— Milton Friedman
— Milton Friedman
💯11👌3🔥2
DoomPosting
“Consumers don't produce inflation. Producers don't produce inflation. Inflation is produced only by too much government spending and too much government creation of money, and nothing else.” — Milton Friedman
“Inflation is produced only by too much government spending and too much government creation of money, and nothing else.”
Well, “too much” doing a lot of the work here.
Missing a huge source of money creation, the QUALITY of which, and not only the QUANTITY of which, massively determines inflation deflation
= LOANS
Loans, in excess of reserves, which is virtually always the case — are one of the biggest sources of money printing
What determines the degree to which a loan is inflation-creating or deflation-creating, and to what degree?
= the loan’s QUALITY
The quantity affects the degree to which this inflationary or deflationary effect effects the wider market, but quantity is NOT what determines if a particular loan is inflationary or deflationary, quality is.
More concretely, quality of a loan can be seen as:
Quality = degree to which the net future discounted cumulative value created by whatever the loan is used for exceeds or does not exceed the value of the dollars spent on the loan (value measured in eg utility not dollars), in combination with the currency’s ability to capture that value (e.g. by people somehow being forced or persuaded to use the currency for everything).
I.e., very roughly:
Loan quality = utility ROI * capturability
Note that we are NOT taking about financial ROI returned to the originator of the loan, but rather capturable value creation, not just money. Nothing to do with whether the loanee pays it back, and indeed in many cases they don’t even have to in order for value to be captured in other ways.
So,
+ Very low quality loan, like when corrupt governments just loan insiders billions at zero interest = massively inflationary
+ Very high-quality loan, which gets invested in value creating tech that legitimately creates big value for the whole economy in a way the currency can capture = massively deflationary (and indeed such technological advancements are a classic example of a major cause of currency deflation)
What’s the point of pointing out that loan QUALITY, not just loan QUANTITY has a massive effect on inflation?
— Because the left has continued to absolutely TANK the quality of loans over the years, while dramatically increasing their quantity.
E.g.
+ Government forcing guaranteed massive school loans for all, skyrocketing tuition, while university quality tanks and ROI of going to university as a whole tanks = super inflationary
+ Government forcing home loan approval for everyone at extremely low rates = super inflationary
Etc.
Drop in quality of loans,
= hugest unspoken cause of inflation.
Not spoken about, because the people are highly complicit, forced to take out these huge loans to not get crushed.
But ultimately, yes, hugely the fault of the governments.
No coincidence that loans & social credit scores, in combination with elimination of private investment as a substitute for loans — are a key feature of communist regimes since the start of time.
Beware governments forcing dropping of loan quality, governments forcing huge loans whose value vastly outstrips the value of the things the loans are forced to be used for
= enormous fake money printer that most don’t even realize.
He who rules the loans rules the future.
Well, “too much” doing a lot of the work here.
Missing a huge source of money creation, the QUALITY of which, and not only the QUANTITY of which, massively determines inflation deflation
= LOANS
Loans, in excess of reserves, which is virtually always the case — are one of the biggest sources of money printing
What determines the degree to which a loan is inflation-creating or deflation-creating, and to what degree?
= the loan’s QUALITY
The quantity affects the degree to which this inflationary or deflationary effect effects the wider market, but quantity is NOT what determines if a particular loan is inflationary or deflationary, quality is.
More concretely, quality of a loan can be seen as:
Quality = degree to which the net future discounted cumulative value created by whatever the loan is used for exceeds or does not exceed the value of the dollars spent on the loan (value measured in eg utility not dollars), in combination with the currency’s ability to capture that value (e.g. by people somehow being forced or persuaded to use the currency for everything).
I.e., very roughly:
Loan quality = utility ROI * capturability
Note that we are NOT taking about financial ROI returned to the originator of the loan, but rather capturable value creation, not just money. Nothing to do with whether the loanee pays it back, and indeed in many cases they don’t even have to in order for value to be captured in other ways.
So,
+ Very low quality loan, like when corrupt governments just loan insiders billions at zero interest = massively inflationary
+ Very high-quality loan, which gets invested in value creating tech that legitimately creates big value for the whole economy in a way the currency can capture = massively deflationary (and indeed such technological advancements are a classic example of a major cause of currency deflation)
What’s the point of pointing out that loan QUALITY, not just loan QUANTITY has a massive effect on inflation?
— Because the left has continued to absolutely TANK the quality of loans over the years, while dramatically increasing their quantity.
E.g.
+ Government forcing guaranteed massive school loans for all, skyrocketing tuition, while university quality tanks and ROI of going to university as a whole tanks = super inflationary
+ Government forcing home loan approval for everyone at extremely low rates = super inflationary
Etc.
Drop in quality of loans,
= hugest unspoken cause of inflation.
Not spoken about, because the people are highly complicit, forced to take out these huge loans to not get crushed.
But ultimately, yes, hugely the fault of the governments.
No coincidence that loans & social credit scores, in combination with elimination of private investment as a substitute for loans — are a key feature of communist regimes since the start of time.
Beware governments forcing dropping of loan quality, governments forcing huge loans whose value vastly outstrips the value of the things the loans are forced to be used for
= enormous fake money printer that most don’t even realize.
He who rules the loans rules the future.
🔥5🤯2💯1
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Throwback: day Biden took power,
January 20th, 2021
January 20th, 2021
🤯4
DoomPosting
numbers time
highly-cited, tier-1 published paper that above thread came from,
for those few who thought it might just be coming from random 4chan threads or something
and excuse me we only post from the finest 4chan threads here
for those few who thought it might just be coming from random 4chan threads or something
and excuse me we only post from the finest 4chan threads here
😁9👏3
And now seeing there are thousands more papers on the many health benefits of
them big booty hoes
Ahem, I mean high “gluteofemoral fat”.
Turns out thick thighs really do save lives.
“But this is something you’re born with, isn’t that against the right’s core beliefs of hard work leading to success?”
Ok, can see the confusion.
First off, no, the right’s position is not that anyone can achieve literally anything as long they try — that nurture-over-nature position is a LEFT core belief, and in fact probably the core belief separating left from right.
But at the same time, yes, the right does deeply hold the belief that hard work is far better at making you wealthy than laziness, and that you can’t just sit around and treat life like a lottery ticket believing that all wealth just falls out of the sky onto lazy people randomly.
How do those 2 square?
Right’s belief, I’d say, is that you must work hard in BOTH of 2 different areas:
(1) In life in general
(2) In choosing a partner — selecting your children’s genes, because their potential success in (1) will be bounded by your choice of (2).
i.e. yes you can work hard to improve even genes, if only for your family and not your own.
Btw, any real right-wing women I’ve met has been quite big on (2), though sometimes they do rely on somewhat questionable surrogate ways of measuring this like competitive or business success.
Going further,
Look harder and you’ll see that the left is extremely against individual selection of relationship partners based on genes,
e.g. How dare you not date someone with highly-hereditary mental illnesses! In fact, how dare you point out that anything is hereditary!
Well generally left is against explicitly choosing partners based on genes, except for their left-centrally-controlled eugenics schemes, which they of course would control, and the like. Central planners for everything in commie world.
Short answer:
Stressed out you can’t control your own genes, and wish you had different genes?
Then redirect that stress into putting the work into finding the best genes for your children, or to helping or advising your children to so the same, or to spreading the word to all.
You can’t really improve your own genes, but you can hugely improve the future generations’… probably without bound.
This is the right’s version of making the future world a better place.
(And BTW what people find to be the best genes is highly assortative — which prevents collapse of all traits into just one single “ideal” type of human with everyone identical — but explaining this is a longer topic for another day.)
them big booty hoes
Ahem, I mean high “gluteofemoral fat”.
Turns out thick thighs really do save lives.
“But this is something you’re born with, isn’t that against the right’s core beliefs of hard work leading to success?”
Ok, can see the confusion.
First off, no, the right’s position is not that anyone can achieve literally anything as long they try — that nurture-over-nature position is a LEFT core belief, and in fact probably the core belief separating left from right.
But at the same time, yes, the right does deeply hold the belief that hard work is far better at making you wealthy than laziness, and that you can’t just sit around and treat life like a lottery ticket believing that all wealth just falls out of the sky onto lazy people randomly.
How do those 2 square?
Right’s belief, I’d say, is that you must work hard in BOTH of 2 different areas:
(1) In life in general
(2) In choosing a partner — selecting your children’s genes, because their potential success in (1) will be bounded by your choice of (2).
i.e. yes you can work hard to improve even genes, if only for your family and not your own.
Btw, any real right-wing women I’ve met has been quite big on (2), though sometimes they do rely on somewhat questionable surrogate ways of measuring this like competitive or business success.
Going further,
Look harder and you’ll see that the left is extremely against individual selection of relationship partners based on genes,
e.g. How dare you not date someone with highly-hereditary mental illnesses! In fact, how dare you point out that anything is hereditary!
Well generally left is against explicitly choosing partners based on genes, except for their left-centrally-controlled eugenics schemes, which they of course would control, and the like. Central planners for everything in commie world.
Short answer:
Stressed out you can’t control your own genes, and wish you had different genes?
Then redirect that stress into putting the work into finding the best genes for your children, or to helping or advising your children to so the same, or to spreading the word to all.
You can’t really improve your own genes, but you can hugely improve the future generations’… probably without bound.
This is the right’s version of making the future world a better place.
(And BTW what people find to be the best genes is highly assortative — which prevents collapse of all traits into just one single “ideal” type of human with everyone identical — but explaining this is a longer topic for another day.)
💯2🔥1
even wikipedia brothers can’t deny
health benefits of that itty bitty waist and a round thing in your face
baby got back-ing of reality and countless sources on left and right
health benefits of that itty bitty waist and a round thing in your face
baby got back-ing of reality and countless sources on left and right
👏5🔥1😁1