Ok guys, little introduction first because I want you all to know just how batshit crazy I really am. I know you think people like me are crazy, but Steve Jobs said you guys should listen to people like me (and he made the fucking iPod), so shut up and listen (I promise you can string me up like Socrates afterwards). I'm an Ancap because it seems self-evident to me that collectivism is rooted in fear, and fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, and hate leads to suffering.
Also, my first introduction to economics was the work of
Martin Armstrong. This man's work will likely go down in history as the evidence which turned economics from a "soft science" into a hard empirical science in the public mind, so study it now if you want to be ahead of the curve.
So here's my badeconomics (or from your perspective bad goodeconomics? But alas, your perspective is warped by a twisted sense of morality called collectivism that was pounded into your spongy brains as children in state indoctrination centers)
R1 of the entire field of economics:
Armstrong has discovered that the global economic cycle is able to be precisely measured and forecasted decades ahead of time. How? Easy. Because humans are as much a part of this universe as anything else, we are beholden to the same metaphysical patterns that this universe is constructed out of. Thanks to Armstrong's discoveries, we now know what global collective human behaviour manifests as a precise waveform pattern that can be seen and measured in the global markets. The global economic cycle is roughly 8.6 years [(365.25 days x 8.6 = 3141.15 days) = Pi] (See “The Secret Cycle” by Nick Paumgarten; The New Yorker Magazine Oct 2009 10 Page Article on Armstrong’s discovery). Sounds like a bad hollywood script? Too bad, fuck you, it's real, reality is stranger than fiction. How exactly this global cycle manifests in individual markets is entirely dependent on the
superposition principle, meaning that when other markets in certain countries or sectors line up together it can create a
rogue economic wave
like we saw during the great depression in the 1930s and the great recession in 2007.
Politicians and central bankers have absolutely no control over the economy what-so-ever, the only thing their manipulations do is increase the volatility in each swing of the cycle. They are literally just delusional people trying to play god, and society is in full support of them, and in reality they are just making a mess of things. The invisible hand is real, it's actually a
lorenz attractor.
Please for the love of humanity, can we just start letting it do it's thing.
Government never solved a problem it didn't create in the first place, end of story. There is no such thing as a natural monopoly (if we are to define natural monopoly as a dominant market position maintained without the help of state regulatory barriers). The government didn't invent the internet. The government didn't invent GPS technology. The government isn't the reason we have vaccines or advanced medicine. The government didn't invent anything ever. All the government (the violent parasite class) ever did was hold back humanity from doing these things for ages and ages, and it was only the last few hundred years that the intelligent and productive minority of human beings have finally begun to break the chains of collectivism.
R1 of Ancaps (who are otherwise very intelligent people) believing FRB is a scam:
Ok so I think the reasons Ancaps and Libertarians seem to hate FRB and love gold standard are not based on rational thought processes. I think it's all rooted in a complete distrust of anything the government does, including the creation of paper money. They don't hate paper money because they hate paper money, they hate paper money because the only paper money they've ever known was fiat paper money (fiat meaning by decree).
I believe all their pseudo-rational arguments against paper money and FRB were made ex post facto. They decided they paper money and FRB banking because they've only ever known it as something that was so intertwined with the state itself that they never stopped to realize how it might work in a voluntaryist society with free currency and banking markets.
Anyways, I'm just going to link to my conversation because I'm lazy. But the final comment I made I wanted to really focus on because I think it perfectly explains why the money supply MUST expand as the economy does, and perfectly reveals the biggest flaw of the gold standard (inflexible money supply, creating potential liquidity crises).
Ok, let's say we start a brand new market closed off from the rest of the world. In this market we print $1000, that's the money supply. Since dollars are divisible down to pennies, we thus have a maximum of 100,000 monetary units (100,000 pennies). What happens when this market grows past the limit of 100,000 monetary units? What happens when the price of goods begin to drop below 1 cent?
At some point you either need to increase the divisibility of the monetary unit, or you need to expand the money supply. It doesn't really matter which way it's done, as at the end of the day the effect is the same. Money will technically lose it's value, but that's because it's supposed to. Everything in this universe decays over time, that's just how it works. I would argue it's a lot cleaner and makes way more sense to just increase the money supply, because pricing goods in decimal places is quite awkward as we can see in the bitcoin market.