More specifically, reliable records of interest rates start about 3,000 years ago. We have *never* in all of this recorded human history seen interest rates as low -- indeed negative! -- as they are today.https://twitter.com/maxkeiser/status/1161000868784877570 …
-
Yup. There are regulatory limits to hoarding cash, but no one is forced to buy bonds unless that's how they set up their fund. There's always gold, cash under the mattress, barrels of oil...
"Hoarding". You know somebody wants to take your hard-earned savings when they start calling it "hoarding", as if you were trying to stuff too many fire hazard cardboard boxes in your apartment.
![Guy Swann ⚡[Pay me in Bitcoin]](https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1179969545613795330/djNzdtP__normal.jpg)
-
-
"Hoarding" can be a sign that you're a far right anti-government prepper, who meets the criteria for a red flag law confiscation order.
-
It’s a red flag law, but for money!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Yeah, we wouldn't want people to amass too much potential wealth by producing value for others & refraining from consuming for themselves
that might lead to real civilization where institutionalized theft isn't tolerated..."Oh Autie Em & Toto, what'll we do!"Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The rules are not fixed. The rules are constantly changing. There are no rules.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I don’t think there is anything wrong with saving (“hoarding”). I believe the issue which central banks ‘attempt’ to manage with -ve rates is the issue of foreign funds being parked in a local currency -> removing supply -> leading to unmanageable fx rises -> impact trade/export
-
Buying/holding a currency transfers wealth to most productive & fiscally responsible w/in said currency market. Govts oppose this bc they're least fiscally responsible as are all those they subsidize. Plus, debt & inflation keep ppl trapped, dependent, working & paying taxes
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
No. Lack of investment for whatever reason stifles the progress of humanity. With a scarce economy, investment isn’t encouraged. Dynasties are.
-
Why is it anyone else's business what I do with my own funds? This line of thinking would rationally progress to total communism.
-
No. It would prevent a dynastic rule. You'd be encouraged to save but even more encouraged to spend. Our current system is like this, it's not communist.
-
I would argue dynastic rule is superior to democracy. In a dynasty, the rulers have a vested interest in maintaining a prosperous society for generations. Under democracy, only the next 4 years matter, and the average citizen is far too incompetent to select an effective leader.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.