Quote from: TPTB_need_war on April 21, 2016, 08:15:18 PM

Quote from: freshman777 on April 21, 2016, 08:09:21 PM

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on April 21, 2016, 07:52:53 PM

There is no way to raise money other than print it or tax for it.

Checkmate.

The bolded is the path of least resistance, always taken by governments. Gold fares very well in hyper inflationary environment, what paper promises are worth is irrelevant.

That is a very oversimplistic understanding. And I don't have time to unravel your simpleton thoughts for you at this time.

I suggest reading Armstrong's blog from start to finish.

Maybe we could do this on video sometimes interactively so it would be more efficient to educate. I don't have time for writing it. Far too slow.

I know all you could write on this subject and wrote a simplistic summary on purpose. There are many factors at play midway, in the end historically it always ends in hyper inflation and gold going through the roof. In fact, gold has been in a bull market for the past few years in many currencies, with USD joining the bull market in Q1 2016. I don't buy your people don't want physical going all digital in the future hypothesis. People are awakening to the fact that their digital currency is losing purchasing power, this is more so in the future. People will barter and trade in gold and other tangible items with no regard to rules imposed on them. What can be taxed will be taxed. Free market economy settled in tangible items (cryptocurrencies can be put in this category with a few caveats) cannot be taxed cost-effectively, governments will not bother with it and will print, it's what they do best. It's all we need to know really. Paper promises will be defaulted on, they are not relevant, they are not gold. Whoever thinks paper promises are gold will wise up in time after losing money. It's a cost of education. The same could be said about people losing money in the Mt.Gox fiasco. Germans call it Lehrgeld. If you don't hold it, you don't own it.

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on April 21, 2016, 08:15:18 PM

Edit: you are entirely wrong on hyperinflation. The history is that only revolutionary and totally broken regimes hyperinflate. The world is composed of very strong regimes and they will not lay down their power by hyperinflating. Armstrong covers this in great detail in his blogs. Required reading material for you.

Your saying collapsing governments and exploding fiscal budgets are not exactly a recipe for continually strong regimes. What makes you think some modern regimes you refer to today as strong are stronger than those hyper inflating in the past?