The Mises Community
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

The Great Depression, economics professor debunks libertarian myths. I'm in a bad mood.

rated by 0 users
Answered (Verified) This post has 2 verified answers | 67 Replies | 11 Followers

Top 150 Contributor
Male
263 Posts
Points 8,720
Democracy for Breakfast posted on Mon, Sep 28 2009 9:17 PM

I haven't taken an economics class, but I'm not sure how to refute the popular theory that nobody trusted Banks because of the lack of regulation and fractional reserve banking.

 

So I was debating with my egotistical friend, who came to me about it because his economics professor tore apart Ron Paul's book in class, and debunked all the libertarian myths about the Depression. FUCK I am pissed.

 

What, in detail was it that caused it?

 

Him: you're only against the fed bank rev because Rob Paul is
Me: you really need to get overyourself
Me): -_-
Him: is that man said sex & reproducing is bad you'd be promoting cloning as an alternative
Him (9:33:24 PM): if*
Him (9:33:36 PM): try thinking for yourself
terrabahamut101 (9:33:50 PM): I've done my own research, on the federal bank
Him his book is a load of crap my economic professors tore it apart in lecture
Him: the federal bank needs better leadership & oversight
terrabahamut101 (9:34:06 PM): lol @ economic professors

 

Him: but it's an integeral part of the capitalist system
terrabahamut101 (9:34:25 PM): and biased
Him(9:34:26 PM): not really
terrabahamut101 (9:34:38 PM): Ron Paul was the first to introduce me to the idea
Him: see there's your ingorance & racism again
Him: you want ron paul
terrabahamut101 (9:34:48 PM): But I did my own research on it
Him: so that's what you want
Him): but you've never even taken an economics class
Him: explain to me how the federal reserve works
terrabahamut101 (9:35:18 PM): Its too complex
terrabahamut101 (9:35:19 PM): But
Him: no it's not
Him: it's quite simple
terrabahamut101 (9:35:47 PM): If you let a privately owned investor own the entire economy, they easily become corrupt
terrabahamut101 (9:36:05 PM): The Federal Reserve prints money respond to commercial demand
Him: & the fed bank got congress's permission to rescue those companies
terrabahamut101 (9:36:17 PM): since fiat currency expands with the economy
Him: so if you're against them blame congress
terrabahamut101 (9:36:25 PM): OF course, but it doesn't mean it was a good decision
Him: it wasn't
Him but it wasn't the fed's fault
terrabahamut101 (9:36:41 PM): A transfer of wealth through bailouts to incompetent companie
terrabahamut101 (9:36:44 PM): companies*
Him): congress shoulda blew a whistle
Him: i agree it's a free system so they should have been free to fail
Him): that's congress's fuck up
terrabahamut101 (9:37:06 PM): Dude, congress doesn't have to, The Federal Reserve was made private so taht it isn't involved in politics
Him: the reserve did what any bank does
Him: it loans money
terrabahamut101 (9:37:19 PM): so taht politics don't interfere with it
Him: when you were actually working
Him: did you have a savings account
Him: or a checking account
terrabahamut101 (9:37:45 PM): Lends money to what? theres shitloads of private banks
terrabahamut101 (9:37:46 PM): yeah
Him: you realize
Him: they don't keep your money
terrabahamut101 (9:37:59 PM): The fed also lends money to the Government.
Him: the banks invest & spend it
Him: no it doesn't our government prints & borrows money
Him: without the fed
Him: the fed requires banks to keep X amount of dollars are all times
Him: to make sure if you want your money back
terrabahamut101 (9:38:38 PM): Yeah fractional reserve banking
Him: you can go get it
Him: and the fed INSURES your money
Him: so when fucking dumb banks lose all that money they invested
Him: it comes out of their profits
Him: & you are still GARUNTEED
Him: to get the money back
Him: that you gave them for a saving/checking account
Him: i can give you 100% assurance
Him: if you get rid of the FED
Him: we'll be worse off than in the 1940's
no one will trust banks & we'll be in one hell of a depression
terrabahamut101 (9:40:12 PM): God
terrabahamut101 (9:40:17 PM): We had the fed in the 1940
terrabahamut101 (9:40:33 PM): The fed was the fucking reason the depression happened, as well as Hoover's intervention policies
Him: yeah i know
Him: no it wasn't lol
terrabahamut101 (9:40:44 PM): Hoover raised tariffs on imports
Him: the fed didn't regulate banks then
terrabahamut101 (9:40:54 PM): cut the interest rates too low
terrabahamut101 (9:41:14 PM): That has nothing to do with it, the theory is that becuase of the gold standard
Him: would you put money in savings account or buy CD investments
Him: if there was a good chance you'll never see that money again
terrabahamut101 (9:41:27 PM): the fed wouldn't expand the credit to fight deflation
terrabahamut101 (9:41:37 PM): But in truth, they had access to an excess of gold to do it
terrabahamut101 (9:41:43 PM): they just simply didn
terrabahamut101 (9:41:44 PM): t
terrabahamut101 (9:41:55 PM): Which is what caused the depression
Him: right because it had nothing to do with the stock market collapse
: you're fucking amazing
): you're so ignorant & endoctrinated it's unbelievable
terrabahamut101 (9:42:35 PM): the stock market collapsed because the interest rates were too low

Him:try reading a textbook

terrabahamut101 (9:43:27 PM): A lot of textbooks are biased
  • | Post Points: 125

Answered (Verified) Verified Answer

Top 200 Contributor
176 Posts
Points 3,895

So let me get this straight.... Your "friend" takes a class, where the professor spews one-sided vitriol that arouses an emotional response from him, and he suddenly thinks that he's the unfalsifiable master of economics and the universe?

I'm guessing he does this every time he looks at a Wikipedia page.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Male
570 Posts
Points 8,990

When dealing with people like this, you can't rely on blanket statements like "in truth [blah blah blah]".  Establish a set of factual records by which you can both verify or deny the veracity of each others' statements.

Statements like "no one trusted the banks without regulation" are incredibly stupid.  First off, American banks have always been both regulated AND protected, if not at the national level, then the state level.  American banking history is rife with laws allowing banks to suspend redemption of notes, as well as creating central banks and national banking cartels.  Secondly, there has never been a period in history when the banks were blatantly not trusted and subject to constant bank runs.

Larry White and George Selgin have posted some very powerful information about why thousands of American banks failed in 1930-33 vs. 0 in Canada.  For one, states were granting banking holidays, which basically froze the banks.  Depositors could not withdraw their money, nor could they claim a share of the bank's assets through bankruptcy proceedings.  There was rumors FDR would do this nationally.  Also, there were rumors that FDR would debase the dollar.  This prompted depositors to run on the banks.   The rumors proved true, and FDR debased the dollar 44%, a quite substantial amount.  And finally, branch banking was outlawed in America.  Canada did not make these mistakes and no banks failed, despite a massive deflation of their money supply, a greater drop than in America.

Here's a better explanation:

http://www.richmondfed.org/publications/research/region_focus/2009/winter/full_interview.cfm

So to suggest that a lack of regulation caused the bank runs is false.  If anything the opposite is true.  The federal reserve DID have regulatory authority over its member banks at the time.  It regulated them (and itself) poorly.

And to suggest deposit insurance is both limited to bank profit and effective in creating bank stability is not backed by any evidence.  The S&L crisis is the primary example.  Depositors put their money in whatever S&L offered the highest rate, independent of risk.  At the same time, they were regulated to only hold 30 year mortgages as assets.  So when interest rates spiked, they had to pay more to depositors to receive deposits that regulations forced them to hold than their borrowers owed them on outstanding loans.

So just call him a cheerleader for a lie that the government and public schools want him to believe.  If he wants to discover the truth, tell him he better look at facts.

Check my blog, if you're a loser

  • | Post Points: 30

All Replies

Top 10 Contributor
4,109 Posts
Points 66,090
Moderator

Democracy for Breakfast:
Saggittarius and Pisces don't really get along.

gimme a break.

Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid

Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
2,802 Posts
Points 49,845
Moderator

Democracy for Breakfast:
He just seems to try to discourage me, crush my beliefs, imagination, ect whatsoever

Perhaps you have already been asked this but...

Why is he your friend and why do you talk to him?

Democracy for Breakfast:
It seems a lot of adults would agree that I am ignorant and immature person. *sigh*

Get educated and shut them up. I gave you a list of material that once read will allow you to easily refute this 'friend' of yours. If you haven't read it then it is only your fault. Stop sighing and start reading if that is how you feel.

'It is difficult to imagine any normal person wishing to meet Marx for a third time.' - Alexander Gray, The Socialist Tradition

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Male
263 Posts
Points 8,720

Laughing Man:

Democracy for Breakfast:
He just seems to try to discourage me, crush my beliefs, imagination, ect whatsoever

Perhaps you have already been asked this but...

Why is he your friend and why do you talk to him?

Democracy for Breakfast:
It seems a lot of adults would agree that I am ignorant and immature person. *sigh*

Get educated and shut them up. I gave you a list of material that once read will allow you to easily refute this 'friend' of yours. If you haven't read it then it is only your fault. Stop sighing and start reading if that is how you feel.

 

Because I've known him for a long time. He might just be correct, about the things he says... not sure if he means harm

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
15 Posts
Points 465

I've had somewhat similar conversations, and I figure that if people don't have any better arguments, they aren't worth debating with. Tell them to do their own research if they are interested, refer them to Hazlitt's Econ in 1 Lesson, or something like that. I mean, it isn't like the person is going to say, "okay, I see, it makes sense, you're right, I am wrong...", just point out common sense, and leave them to chew it over. I suspect that people like that don't really want to know the truth, they just want to just argue with someone and feel so much "smarter" and more "intelligent" by ripping you apart. 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
2,802 Posts
Points 49,845
Moderator

Democracy for Breakfast:
He might just be correct, about the things he says...

If you think he might be correct then why are you giving this prima facie defense of anti-Fed sentiments?

Democracy for Breakfast:
not sure if he means harm

When is intellectual suffocation not harmless? You said the guy is trying to crush your beliefs and dreams yet you don't know if he means harm? It seems to me that you need to discover yourself before you even begin to debate politics with others. That is probably why people treat you like a silly teenager.

'It is difficult to imagine any normal person wishing to meet Marx for a third time.' - Alexander Gray, The Socialist Tradition

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Male
263 Posts
Points 8,720

Laughing Man:

Democracy for Breakfast:
He might just be correct, about the things he says...

If you think he might be correct then why are you giving this prima facie defense of anti-Fed sentiments?

Democracy for Breakfast:
not sure if he means harm

When is intellectual suffocation not harmless? You said the guy is trying to crush your beliefs and dreams yet you don't know if he means harm? It seems to me that you need to discover yourself before you even begin to debate politics with others. That is probably why people treat you like a silly teenager.

He's really the only one who seems to treat me like that. Do you mean find myself politically? I think Libertarian is what suits me best, since libertarian politics are all about you.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Male
263 Posts
Points 8,720

There are a lot of things he is wrong about, but I don't see how he could not change his opinion about me after 6-7 years. He doesn't see that I've changed at all, and he sprobably right that I didn't, I'm still some immature kid who has no place among intellectuals.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 100 Contributor
384 Posts
Points 4,575

It seems that both of you are goofs.  However, you have succeeded at one thing he failed: realizing the the overarching truth about the Federal Reserve.  He is a lip flapper, not a listener.  He will never learn.  You have nothing to gain form listening to his flapping.  Pretend he doesn't exist.  Case closed.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
2,802 Posts
Points 49,845
Moderator
Suggested by Libertyandlife

Democracy for Breakfast:
He's really the only one who seems to treat me like that.

Then cut off discussion with him. No point in trying to change someone who is so overzealous in their beliefs.

Democracy for Breakfast:
Do you mean find myself politically? I think Libertarian is what suits me best, since libertarian politics are all about you.

Libertarianism is not simply limited to what 'works' for you. In some sense it is and in some sense it isn't. Sure there is this axiom called the non-aggression and that's really cool. I don't like to fight people, I find it barbaric. However, the implications of such an tenet go beyond just me thinking its really cool. It is a code of how to act and how not to act. What is rational and allowable in a society. What is afforded to myself and what is afforded to others around me. You could like libertarianism because you don't like getting punched in the face, but I would say you are missing out on the best part of libertarianism which is the rich history, the rigorous logical deduction and the aesthetic beauty of the system itself.

'It is difficult to imagine any normal person wishing to meet Marx for a third time.' - Alexander Gray, The Socialist Tradition

  • | Post Points: 45
Top 200 Contributor
176 Posts
Points 3,895

You're the target kid in my analysis who turns the other cheek to his aggressors. Swimming in a pool of negativity has left you thirsty for a network of negatively charged nodes, which further demoralize you. What you think is Pascal's Wager in reality is Stockholm Syndrome.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 200 Contributor
156 Posts
Points 2,710

Democracy for Breakfast:

auctionguy10:

Your friend is just way too immature to have any breakthroughs with. He needs to deal with his own issues and insecurities- its obvious he has a whole lot of them, he projects it right away.

Sorry, but he isn't like that at all. Hes 27, almost 10 years older then I am. He's known me for 4-5 years. He just seems to try to discourage me, crush my beliefs, imagination, ect whatsoever. He talks to me about how immature,ignorant and racist I am. He refuses to believe I'm good at anything, and sees me as a defunct being with no intellectual value, who's inept at life. Also, I'm the only one he doesn't really get along with, so maybe its true.

 

It seems a lot of adults would agree that I am ignorant and immature person. *sigh*

 

I don't see how he doesn't have a right to get frustrated at me so easily, its mostly just because hes honest but he swears a lot. Saggittarius and Pisces don't really get along.

 

Being 10 years older doesn't mean he's mature. Being discouraging, crushing your beliefs, telling  you how ignorant/racist you are, refusing to believe you're good at anything, seeing you as a defunct being with no intellectual value and who's inept at life....that's exactly why he's immature and has severe insecurities. That kind of attitude is simply child-like, yeah he has a "right" to get frustrated at you easily, but if he IS getting frustrated easily he is not a mature man plain and simple and has issues he needs to get a handle on.  A mature man doesn't get frustrated easily.

Well of course you're a bit immature- you're only 18, but that's ok you'll grow up. Just advice, you can take it for what you will, but don't accept negativity people throw at you. There's no reason to, its not helpful, and it'll lock you into a mindset where you think "You know...maybe I am ignorant and immature..."- which can stay with you for YEARS if you never get a handle on it.  

From the convo you posted you had a lot more composure then this guy. He should understand that you're young and  that you're still learning things,  for him to talk the way he does smacks of insecurity. Don't give anyone excuses to talk down to you. You're young and open to learning things new, this guy's a big baby.

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
2,802 Posts
Points 49,845
Moderator

Capital Pumper:

You're the target kid in my analysis who turns the other cheek to his aggressors. Swimming in a pool of negativity has left you thirsty for a network of negatively charged nodes, which further demoralize you. What you think is Pascal's Wager, in reality is Stockholm Syndrome.

Always with the negative waves!

'It is difficult to imagine any normal person wishing to meet Marx for a third time.' - Alexander Gray, The Socialist Tradition

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
197 Posts
Points 2,990

There is a great book with a weird name called Compassion and Self Hate by T. I. Rubin. Don't wanna sound heretical, but it is more important to understand the contents of that book than all of this website, which is saying a lot.

It will open your eyes to what your "friend" is doing, what you are doing chatting with him, what the good willed people here are trying to tell you. Oh to have  read that book at 18!

 

 

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Male
263 Posts
Points 8,720

Laughing Man:

Democracy for Breakfast:
He's really the only one who seems to treat me like that.

Then cut off discussion with him. No point in trying to change someone who is so overzealous in their beliefs.

Democracy for Breakfast:
Do you mean find myself politically? I think Libertarian is what suits me best, since libertarian politics are all about you.

but I would say you are missing out on the best part of libertarianism which is the rich history, the rigorous logical deduction and the aesthetic beauty of the system itself.

What do you mean? And I would like to look at the history of it all. I was already pretty turned on by Andrew Jackson. I'd like to read more by philosophers like Locke though.

Ron Paul was the one who got me into Libertarianism. I'm a Libertarian because I value individualism.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Male
263 Posts
Points 8,720

auctionguy10:

Democracy for Breakfast:

auctionguy10:

Your friend is just way too immature to have any breakthroughs with. He needs to deal with his own issues and insecurities- its obvious he has a whole lot of them, he projects it right away.

Sorry, but he isn't like that at all. Hes 27, almost 10 years older then I am. He's known me for 4-5 years. He just seems to try to discourage me, crush my beliefs, imagination, ect whatsoever. He talks to me about how immature,ignorant and racist I am. He refuses to believe I'm good at anything, and sees me as a defunct being with no intellectual value, who's inept at life. Also, I'm the only one he doesn't really get along with, so maybe its true.

 

It seems a lot of adults would agree that I am ignorant and immature person. *sigh*

 

I don't see how he doesn't have a right to get frustrated at me so easily, its mostly just because hes honest but he swears a lot. Saggittarius and Pisces don't really get along.

 

Being 10 years older doesn't mean he's mature. Being discouraging, crushing your beliefs, telling  you how ignorant/racist you are, refusing to believe you're good at anything, seeing you as a defunct being with no intellectual value and who's inept at life....that's exactly why he's immature and has severe insecurities. That kind of attitude is simply child-like, yeah he has a "right" to get frustrated at you easily, but if he IS getting frustrated easily he is not a mature man plain and simple and has issues he needs to get a handle on.  A mature man doesn't get frustrated easily.

Well of course you're a bit immature- you're only 18, but that's ok you'll grow up. Just advice, you can take it for what you will, but don't accept negativity people throw at you. There's no reason to, its not helpful, and it'll lock you into a mindset where you think "You know...maybe I am ignorant and immature..."- which can stay with you for YEARS if you never get a handle on it.  

From the convo you posted you had a lot more composure then this guy. He should understand that you're young and  that you're still learning things,  for him to talk the way he does smacks of insecurity. Don't give anyone excuses to talk down to you. You're young and open to learning things new, this guy's a big baby.

 

He isn't self conscious of anything, he's just a Narcissist.

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 4 of 5 (68 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next > | RSS

Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528

Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119

contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises

Mises.org sitemap