The World Need A New International Income Wage Index Based On Price Of Silver, Gold

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

There is no such thing as a 'Market Maker'

You are unbelievable! Get your friends to put your above quote in their signatures.

Go look up the company Citadel. They provide market making services.

Check out this interview with a market maker https://youtu.be/KRz259u6A6w and see if you can learn the distinction between a market maker and a broker.

You double down on your lies even when they become obvious.

These are people who buy and sell or commodities. They are brokers. They do not set the price.

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Everyone can cover all of their expenses without going into debt, if they choose to.

Really? How so?

Simple. Don't go into debt.

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Cash is not debt. There is no such thing as a 'net' between apples and oranges.

Cash is positive, Debt is negative, and the net is the sum of them both. Got it?

Debt is not cash. There is no 'net'.

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

There is no such thing as a 'Market Maker'

You are unbelievable! Get your friends to put your above quote in their signatures.

Go look up the company Citadel. They provide market making services.

Check out this interview with a market maker https://youtu.be/KRz259u6A6w and see if you can learn the distinction between a market maker and a broker.

You double down on your lies even when they become obvious.

These are people who buy and sell or commodities. They are brokers. They do not set the price.

Here is an article clearly spelling out the differences between market makers and brokers.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/06/brokerandmarketmaker.asp

"Market makers essentially act as wholesalers by buying and selling securities to satisfy the market—the prices they set reflect market supply and demand."

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

You are attempting to use 'economy' as money. Redefinition fallacy.

No I'm not.

The economy is all the goods and services being supplied and demanded.

Paradox. Irrational. You are still locked in paradox. You must clear your paradox. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox.

Spongy Iris wrote:
Money is created when banks loan it to businesses so they can supply goods and services demanded.

No. Money is created when a government 'prints' it by expanding M1.

Spongy Iris wrote:
The histories of money transactions can give an indication of supply and demand.

No. Money is a trade medium, not an indicator of supply and demand.

Spongy Iris wrote:
It may be hard to figure out supply and demand without the information extrapolated from money transactions. But these days with cool spreadsheet and supply chain programs such information may be easier to extrapolate.

Magick Spreadsheets are not crystal balls. They cannot foretell the future.

The spread of a stock or commodity is determined by the broker, not anything like a 'market maker'. It is the price you pay for using the broker. It doesn't matter if it's a stock (popular or not), or a commodity like corn or gold.

Think of it as a markup price implemented by a broker. He is a merchant, like any other.

HarveyH55 wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

There is no such thing as a 'Market Maker'

You are unbelievable! Get your friends to put your above quote in their signatures.

Go look up the company Citadel. They provide market making services.

Check out this interview with a market maker https://youtu.be/KRz259u6A6w and see if you can learn the distinction between a market maker and a broker.

You double down on your lies even when they become obvious.

These are people who buy and sell or commodities. They are brokers. They do not set the price.

Here is an article clearly spelling out the differences between market makers and brokers.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/06/brokerandmarketmaker.asp

"Market makers essentially act as wholesalers by buying and selling securities to satisfy the market—the prices they set reflect market supply and demand."

So 'market maker'. is a buzzword for market manipulator? They buy up securities, to give a false sense of an upward trend. Or they dump them cheap, to imply that they are losing value, get out quick.

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:

SI: You are the one trying to confuse me into conflating wealth with money when no confusion is present. I have barely talked about wealth, except to imagine a world where you don't need money to create wealth: If there becomes no money, a baker would not need to directly give a car dealer 10,000 loafs of bread to buy a car. That is a straw man argument. They are both part of a larger economy. They don't directly deal with each other, but they both give their goods into the economy. There is no need for them to trade with each other directly.

How does the economy work then? The baker needs a car, has to go where someone is selling cars, to pick one out, and negotiate the deal. The baker, would of course have other stuff to trade, besides bread, from his bread baking business. The car dealer would need to look through a long list, maybe visit where the baker keeps his trade goods, to see what would be acceptable. Money just makes the exchange so much simpler, since it's less likely to spoil, or be damaged, while waiting to be exchanged for other goods and services, a person might want or need. Your model also depends on the baker even having the trade goods, a car dealer might want or need. The value of a dollar, is how much work you had to put into earning it, and how badly a seller needs to part with his product or service.

As long as all the businesses which are connected to each other in an economy have a good sense of what demand they need to supply, and they do the needed work to provide supply to demand, then nothing you described about trading loaves and baked goods for cars is necessary, is it?

What's the connection? How is one company's product or service connected to every other business, without money? Is it a credit system? All on paper? You still have a bunch of good and services available, that not everyone is going to want or need. It presumes that every business knows what each individual is entitled, at every other business. People tend to be a little greedy and dishonest as well. People move around too. Each community, has it's own economy. I'm just having trouble seeing how eliminating money is advantageous to anyone. When I go to work, I have a pretty good idea what is required, and how much compensation I'll need to make the required labor, worth the time and effort. I know the price of the goods and services in the area I live. If the job doesn't pay what I want or need, I don't have to accept working there, or I can take on additional jobs to make up the difference. When I'm buying stuff, there are often options of similar business, some willing to negotiate a little on prices. They charge too much, potential customers don't buy there. What they are selling, is only worth as much, as someone else is willing to pay. If the baker charges too much for a loaf of bread, people can always bake their own bread. The baker needs to lower his price, since his products need to move, limited shelf life. If I can bake bread myself, for a fraction of what the baker charges, I could also sell to my neighbors.

Honor system. Greater freedom.

If you give what others need and want, why can't you take what you need and want, without transacting with money?

The other may not have what you need and want. Without money, you cannot trade with him to get what you need and want. You have to find someone to trade with that has what you need and want, and needs or wants what you have to trade.

Rather inconvenient.

With money, you can trade what you have for money (if the other is using the same money). You can then use that money to trade for what you need and want with those that have it.

Much more convenient.

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:

SI: You are the one trying to confuse me into conflating wealth with money when no confusion is present. I have barely talked about wealth, except to imagine a world where you don't need money to create wealth: If there becomes no money, a baker would not need to directly give a car dealer 10,000 loafs of bread to buy a car. That is a straw man argument. They are both part of a larger economy. They don't directly deal with each other, but they both give their goods into the economy. There is no need for them to trade with each other directly.

How does the economy work then? The baker needs a car, has to go where someone is selling cars, to pick one out, and negotiate the deal. The baker, would of course have other stuff to trade, besides bread, from his bread baking business. The car dealer would need to look through a long list, maybe visit where the baker keeps his trade goods, to see what would be acceptable. Money just makes the exchange so much simpler, since it's less likely to spoil, or be damaged, while waiting to be exchanged for other goods and services, a person might want or need. Your model also depends on the baker even having the trade goods, a car dealer might want or need. The value of a dollar, is how much work you had to put into earning it, and how badly a seller needs to part with his product or service.

As long as all the businesses which are connected to each other in an economy have a good sense of what demand they need to supply, and they do the needed work to provide supply to demand, then nothing you described about trading loaves and baked goods for cars is necessary, is it?

What's the connection? How is one company's product or service connected to every other business, without money? Is it a credit system? All on paper? You still have a bunch of good and services available, that not everyone is going to want or need. It presumes that every business knows what each individual is entitled, at every other business. People tend to be a little greedy and dishonest as well. People move around too. Each community, has it's own economy. I'm just having trouble seeing how eliminating money is advantageous to anyone. When I go to work, I have a pretty good idea what is required, and how much compensation I'll need to make the required labor, worth the time and effort. I know the price of the goods and services in the area I live. If the job doesn't pay what I want or need, I don't have to accept working there, or I can take on additional jobs to make up the difference. When I'm buying stuff, there are often options of similar business, some willing to negotiate a little on prices. They charge too much, potential customers don't buy there. What they are selling, is only worth as much, as someone else is willing to pay. If the baker charges too much for a loaf of bread, people can always bake their own bread. The baker needs to lower his price, since his products need to move, limited shelf life. If I can bake bread myself, for a fraction of what the baker charges, I could also sell to my neighbors.

Honor system. Greater freedom.

If you give what others need and want, why can't you take what you need and want, without transacting with money?

The other may not have what you need and want. Without money, you cannot trade with him to get what you need and want. You have to find someone to trade with that has what you need and want, and needs or wants what you have to trade.

Rather inconvenient.

With money, you can trade what you have for money (if the other is using the same money). You can then use that money to trade for what you need and want with those that have it.

Much more convenient.

Not enough participation from people who have things which many others want. I will give you this obstruction for now.

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

There is no such thing as a 'Market Maker'

You are unbelievable! Get your friends to put your above quote in their signatures.

Go look up the company Citadel. They provide market making services.

Check out this interview with a market maker https://youtu.be/KRz259u6A6w and see if you can learn the distinction between a market maker and a broker.

You double down on your lies even when they become obvious.

These are people who buy and sell or commodities. They are brokers. They do not set the price.

Here is an article clearly spelling out the differences between market makers and brokers.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/06/brokerandmarketmaker.asp

"Market makers essentially act as wholesalers by buying and selling securities to satisfy the market—the prices they set reflect market supply and demand."

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Everyone can cover all of their expenses without going into debt, if they choose to.

Really? How so?

Simple. Don't go into debt.

Debt has been and is how cash is created.

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Cash is not debt. There is no such thing as a 'net' between apples and oranges.

Cash is positive, Debt is negative, and the net is the sum of them both. Got it?

Debt is not cash. There is no 'net'.

You can't have cash without debt. Net means the total cash and debt combined.

HarveyH55 wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

There is no such thing as a 'Market Maker'

You are unbelievable! Get your friends to put your above quote in their signatures.

Go look up the company Citadel. They provide market making services.

Check out this interview with a market maker https://youtu.be/KRz259u6A6w and see if you can learn the distinction between a market maker and a broker.

You double down on your lies even when they become obvious.

These are people who buy and sell or commodities. They are brokers. They do not set the price.

Here is an article clearly spelling out the differences between market makers and brokers.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/06/brokerandmarketmaker.asp

"Market makers essentially act as wholesalers by buying and selling securities to satisfy the market—the prices they set reflect market supply and demand."

So 'market maker'. is a buzzword for market manipulator? They buy up securities, to give a false sense of an upward trend. Or they dump them cheap, to imply that they are losing value, get out quick.

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

You are attempting to use 'economy' as money. Redefinition fallacy.

No I'm not.

The economy is all the goods and services being supplied and demanded.

Paradox. Irrational. You are still locked in paradox. You must clear your paradox. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox.

Spongy Iris wrote:
Money is created when banks loan it to businesses so they can supply goods and services demanded.

No. Money is created when a government 'prints' it by expanding M1.

Spongy Iris wrote:
The histories of money transactions can give an indication of supply and demand.

No. Money is a trade medium, not an indicator of supply and demand.

Spongy Iris wrote:
It may be hard to figure out supply and demand without the information extrapolated from money transactions. But these days with cool spreadsheet and supply chain programs such information may be easier to extrapolate.

Magick Spreadsheets are not crystal balls. They cannot foretell the future.

The spread of a stock or commodity is determined by the broker, not anything like a 'market maker'. It is the price you pay for using the broker. It doesn't matter if it's a stock (popular or not), or a commodity like corn or gold.

Think of it as a markup price implemented by a broker. He is a merchant, like any other.

What paradox???

Can money foretell the future???

Spongy Iris wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

There is no such thing as a 'Market Maker'

You are unbelievable! Get your friends to put your above quote in their signatures.

Go look up the company Citadel. They provide market making services.

Check out this interview with a market maker https://youtu.be/KRz259u6A6w and see if you can learn the distinction between a market maker and a broker.

You double down on your lies even when they become obvious.

These are people who buy and sell or commodities. They are brokers. They do not set the price.

Here is an article clearly spelling out the differences between market makers and brokers.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/06/brokerandmarketmaker.asp

"Market makers essentially act as wholesalers by buying and selling securities to satisfy the market—the prices they set reflect market supply and demand."

So 'market maker'. is a buzzword for market manipulator? They buy up securities, to give a false sense of an upward trend. Or they dump them cheap, to imply that they are losing value, get out quick.

How else are you going to make a market???

One of the many perks of capitalism!

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

There is no such thing as a 'Market Maker'

You are unbelievable! Get your friends to put your above quote in their signatures.

Go look up the company Citadel. They provide market making services.

Check out this interview with a market maker https://youtu.be/KRz259u6A6w and see if you can learn the distinction between a market maker and a broker.

You double down on your lies even when they become obvious.

These are people who buy and sell or commodities. They are brokers. They do not set the price.

Here is an article clearly spelling out the differences between market makers and brokers.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/06/brokerandmarketmaker.asp

"Market makers essentially act as wholesalers by buying and selling securities to satisfy the market—the prices they set reflect market supply and demand."

There are no wholesalers of securities. No one controls the securities markets.

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

You are attempting to use 'economy' as money. Redefinition fallacy.

No I'm not.

The economy is all the goods and services being supplied and demanded.

Paradox. Irrational. You are still locked in paradox. You must clear your paradox. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox.

Spongy Iris wrote:
Money is created when banks loan it to businesses so they can supply goods and services demanded.

No. Money is created when a government 'prints' it by expanding M1.

Spongy Iris wrote:
The histories of money transactions can give an indication of supply and demand.

No. Money is a trade medium, not an indicator of supply and demand.

Spongy Iris wrote:
It may be hard to figure out supply and demand without the information extrapolated from money transactions. But these days with cool spreadsheet and supply chain programs such information may be easier to extrapolate.

Magick Spreadsheets are not crystal balls. They cannot foretell the future.

The spread of a stock or commodity is determined by the broker, not anything like a 'market maker'. It is the price you pay for using the broker. It doesn't matter if it's a stock (popular or not), or a commodity like corn or gold.

Think of it as a markup price implemented by a broker. He is a merchant, like any other.

What paradox???

Can money foretell the future???

RQAA.

Your current paradoxes:

1) The Arctic is warming.
2) The Arctic is cooling.

1) Money is a zero sum game.
2) Money is created along with wealth.

1) Money is created along with wealth.
2) Money is not created along with wealth.

1) Brokers set prices.
2) Brokers do not set prices.

1) Money is wealth.
2) Money is not wealth.

1) Economy is money.
2) Economy is not money.

Feel like clearing any?

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Cash is not debt. There is no such thing as a 'net' between apples and oranges.

Cash is positive, Debt is negative, and the net is the sum of them both. Got it?

Debt is not cash. There is no 'net'.

You can't have cash without debt. Net means the total cash and debt combined.

Debt is not cash. Debt does not create cash.

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Cash is not debt. There is no such thing as a 'net' between apples and oranges.

Cash is positive, Debt is negative, and the net is the sum of them both. Got it?

Debt is not cash. There is no 'net'.

You can't have cash without debt. Net means the total cash and debt combined.

Debt is not cash. Debt does not create cash.

How does cash created?

By getting a loan from a bank.

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Cash is not debt. There is no such thing as a 'net' between apples and oranges.

Cash is positive, Debt is negative, and the net is the sum of them both. Got it?

Debt is not cash. There is no 'net'.

You can't have cash without debt. Net means the total cash and debt combined.

Debt is not cash. Debt does not create cash.

How does cash created?

By getting a loan from a bank.

keepit wrote:
James,
That last part of your last post is really interesting.

James___ wrote:

keepit wrote:
James,
That last part of your last post is really interesting.

Thanks keepit. With 401Ks, if a person saves 10% of their gross pay, that is tax free. As a country, that would contract the GDP by the amount inflation does not account for.
And if an economy is to increase, then money removed from circulation in the form of savings needs to be accounted for. This might be where government spending makes up the difference.
If so, then when agencies like the GAO consider an economy, it would be something they need to consider.

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

There is no such thing as a 'Market Maker'

You are unbelievable! Get your friends to put your above quote in their signatures.

Go look up the company Citadel. They provide market making services.

Check out this interview with a market maker https://youtu.be/KRz259u6A6w and see if you can learn the distinction between a market maker and a broker.

You double down on your lies even when they become obvious.

These are people who buy and sell or commodities. They are brokers. They do not set the price.

Here is an article clearly spelling out the differences between market makers and brokers.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/06/brokerandmarketmaker.asp

"Market makers essentially act as wholesalers by buying and selling securities to satisfy the market—the prices they set reflect market supply and demand."

There are no wholesalers of securities. No one controls the securities markets.

Blatant denial of evidence by narrowing the definition of wholesale.

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

You are attempting to use 'economy' as money. Redefinition fallacy.

No I'm not.

The economy is all the goods and services being supplied and demanded.

Paradox. Irrational. You are still locked in paradox. You must clear your paradox. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox.

Spongy Iris wrote:
Money is created when banks loan it to businesses so they can supply goods and services demanded.

No. Money is created when a government 'prints' it by expanding M1.

Spongy Iris wrote:
The histories of money transactions can give an indication of supply and demand.

No. Money is a trade medium, not an indicator of supply and demand.

Spongy Iris wrote:
It may be hard to figure out supply and demand without the information extrapolated from money transactions. But these days with cool spreadsheet and supply chain programs such information may be easier to extrapolate.

Magick Spreadsheets are not crystal balls. They cannot foretell the future.

The spread of a stock or commodity is determined by the broker, not anything like a 'market maker'. It is the price you pay for using the broker. It doesn't matter if it's a stock (popular or not), or a commodity like corn or gold.

Think of it as a markup price implemented by a broker. He is a merchant, like any other.

What paradox???

Can money foretell the future???

RQAA.

Your current paradoxes:

1) The Arctic is warming.
2) The Arctic is cooling.

1) Money is a zero sum game.
2) Money is created along with wealth.

1) Money is created along with wealth.
2) Money is not created along with wealth.

1) Brokers set prices.
2) Brokers do not set prices.

1) Money is wealth.
2) Money is not wealth.

1) Economy is money.
2) Economy is not money.

Feel like clearing any?

What is RQAA?

Spongy Iris wrote:
The Arctic warms in summer and cools in winter.

Spongy Iris wrote:
Money is created by debt. Add them both up and you get zero.

Spongy Iris wrote:
I never said the economy and wealth are money.

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Cash is not debt. There is no such thing as a 'net' between apples and oranges.

Cash is positive, Debt is negative, and the net is the sum of them both. Got it?

Debt is not cash. There is no 'net'.

You can't have cash without debt. Net means the total cash and debt combined.

Debt is not cash. Debt does not create cash.

How does cash created?

By getting a loan from a bank.

Spongy Iris wrote:
[img][/img]

James___ wrote:

keepit wrote:
James,
That last part of your last post is really interesting.

Thanks keepit. With 401Ks, if a person saves 10% of their gross pay, that is tax free. As a country, that would contract the GDP by the amount inflation does not account for.
And if an economy is to increase, then money removed from circulation in the form of savings needs to be accounted for. This might be where government spending makes up the difference.
If so, then when agencies like the GAO consider an economy, it would be something they need to consider.

James I think government spending is now, and has been, making up for the economic squeeze which occurs when people save money. It's why they have $27 trillion in debt.

Spongy Iris wrote:You can't have cash without debt.

IBdaMann wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:You can't have cash without debt.

There was a point in my life when I had no debt. None. It was prior to having purchased my first home, I lived in an apartment, my car was paid off, I had paid my next month's rent, I had no other loans *AND* just to achieve Nirvana I paid off my one credit card with $150 extra dollars above what I owed in order to have a positive credit balance (i.e. the next $150 in purchases was already covered). I just wanted to relish having zero debt.

Here's the kicker. I had $120 cash in my wallet.

Zero debt. Cash on hand. How do you explain that?


Regardless, it felt good. If freedom is ever a feeling then that's what I was feeling. Once I owned multiple houses and multiple cars and family-supporting credit cards, there was no way I was going to be debt-free for a while at least. But it was amazing while it lasted.


.

Spongy Iris wrote: ITN, All future comments from you will be ignored.

IBdaMann wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote: ITN, All future comments from you will be ignored.

This is so totally unfair. How is Into the Night on your "Ignore List" and I'm not? That's total crap. Ignore lists don't even exist on Climate-Debate and somehow he managed to get on yours.

C'mon Maaan! Now Into the Night is catching up and I've got to start working again. You shouldn't be carelessly putting people who aren't me on "Ignore" just willie-nillie. You should always take a deep breath first, count to ten and then not do it.

Do you realize the bind you're putting me in? This really isn't a good time. I went to the trouble of creating an animated gif mocking someone on JPP who then did the same thing as you just did and simply put Into the Night on "Ignore" while kicking me to the curb. Sometimes I think you guys are just throwing the game.

This is why we need a moderator ... to put an end to this kind of cheating.


.

Spongy Iris wrote:Jealous much?

Spongy Iris wrote: I can ignore you too.

Spongy Iris wrote:Maybe I just won't reply to either of you anymore.

Spongy Iris wrote:
ITN, All future comments from you will be ignored.