Comments by "Kristopher Driver" (@paxdriver) on "Peter Schiff" channel.

  1. rob sol Deflation isn't a scary monster, and like you said, it's necessary for us to get our house in order. If government ran the currency, deflation would essentially be a tax rebate for savers and a hedge for investors. It would balance. Right now because the government is paying to borrow its own money, deflation is supposedly scary, inflation is a target (to service debts more effectively) and the public is on the hook to pay a private organization whatever interest rate they decide to charge. It makes no sense and needlessly complicates an otherwise simple marketplace. it's changing the banking system that would make our economy more productive. Like having a flat tax instead of a swollen glut of an industry of accountants to find exemptions, loop holes, deferrals, rebates, credits and tiered types of income. There's enough money being wasted in the tax system alone to pay off the national debt within a decade, and accountants not messing around with taxes would then get jobs that would then be productive, which would dramatically boost GDP in the service sector as well. luvcheney1 little over the top on the commentary, in my opinion. No need to get abusive - in response to your comment, $200 bln is a big deal when a significant portion of the population lives in third world conditions, consistently has their rights violated, has almost no access to essential health services and an education system that leaves adults to fend for themselves if they even graduate with a 6th grade reading/writing level on average. Just saying, if it's such a small deal there shouldn't be anyone in the richest country in the world that struggles to put food on a table, never mind electricity bills, clothes, transportation and rent. It is a big deal to a huge segment of the population. if you've never experienced poverty i suggest you try a social experiment and limit yourself diligently for a year, then try to imagine a lifetime of it and then try to imagine raising children to hopefully break the cycle when their environment provides them an even greater disservice by creating disenfranchised youth out of them, assuming they're not murdered or jailed first.
    1
  2. rob sol separate arguments, flat tax was an example of what i was speaking of in that sentence, i'm advocating for removing the privatization of central banks and make it a public good, like common sense would dictate. we've just been in this system so long we see it as normal, but if you were to design a country from scratch, how would you set up the currency? everything else from treasuries, bond markets, accrued valuations, real estate and tech bubbles all stem from this very stupid mistake of making the FED private and for profit with zero liability and exclusive private share structures so noone can really know who is making any decision. it's shady by design, was voted in by shady holiday politics, and has lasted because of media overlooking it and near-sightedness by an entire generation.
    1
  3. luvcheney1 wish they did. funny how we don't know the stock dividends to the holders, or who they are, or where they are, or what they paid for their shares, or how many they own, etc...... who audits them every year? i can't remember who hires and does the audits, tell me. Bernanke admitted he lied about his belief in QE because he had to tow the line, but couldn't say who that line was. you really believe they're running currency supply for purely altruistic reason? lol
    1
  4. luvcheney1 if they're a corporation then they have shares, and major banks and accredited investors own those shares and get to keep it all secret. people don't own shares to not get an ROI... what's left after the expense of paying their stakeholders is considered profit. profit is after expenses, and paying out dividends is an expense.
    1
  5. rob sol wouldn't it be easier for the product manufacturer to go through the deduction process before wholesaling their goods, and then just not taxing those items when they're bought on the shelves so that each individual person doesn't need to document and file the deduction? just do it ahead of time and mark the price with the deduction included. the system is needlessly complicated when everyone's filing their own deductions.
    1
  6. Bill was a pretty seruous gangsta though lol
    1
  7. Ever hear what his family says about him?
    1
  8. What would be so bad about printing money to pay all government expenses and have the cost of inflation = exactly what would have otherwise been collected in taxes? No fed, not target numbers and no complicated tax structure or rebates incentives etc. Cut all that admin overhead and the "growth" from government spending if there is any would be obvious just by the exchange rate. The government is so focused on targets and perpetuating debt then wondering why it keeps collapsing every decade. It's so insanely over complicated but we're forcing the same practices on emerging markets who have no choice in the near term if they want to participate. Am I missing something?
    1
  9. How are people not completely pissed off that civil servants are outright lying through their teeth!? All of you can pay me a dollar each to not do anything productive and just lie to you day in day out. I'll do the best job at cheating you, believe me. Trust me, nobody will rob you better, just as long as you send me a dollar.
    1
  10. Peter you're taking "fair share" way out of context. If your neighbors are starving it's in your best interest to make sure they can live to a first world standard or you risk getting robbed. It's not complicated. Wealthy people don't understand how far their spare change goes to raising and educating the next generation that will eventually be your leaders and professionals looking after you. Wealthy people shouldn't be surprised that an overwhelming majority of poorer people who are struggling would vote to take your wealth. You're making them want to rob you. It's not right but if you want to keep your wealth you should make them like you by donating like wealthy people used to do by paying for public facilities. Wealthy people would be loved if they didn't cling to their excesses without batting an eye at the paycheck to paycheck majority.
    1
  11. Schiff called it, I'd just like to point out to all the haters out there. He took a stand, put his reputation on the line for something not even business related but still has the courage to point out the wrongs in our society. Not specifically a person's wrongs, but the sociological implications of markets AND media when they commit or encourage wrongdoings. Look past the particular case and see this is the same one sided misdirection that's crippling the economy and political systems
    1
  12. Schiff would be more convincing if he ever faced the reality of how small a portion of the big bad governments social services are as diminutive as NASA. You're not broke because of social care, you know that, but still sensationalize a fiction that needn't be dramaticized.
    1
  13. I love how Peter keeps himself more honest in his forecasts of himself than any others do of each other, even networks aren't as specific about Re affirming forecasts and then constantly summarizing past forecasts. Kudos
    1
  14. I cringe every time I hear "factually incorrect"... Just saying, it's annoyingly irritating
    1
  15. Single payer... Problem solved. If you believe everyone should have a right to health-care being the richest in the world, why pretend insurance is even fulfilling the social need it's being depended upon? Insurance benefits the public when everyone can get it. If you suck at driving, yeah, accidents make premiums go up. If you get sick it's not because you're not existing properly. Wtf is it with Americans and defending ignorance?
    1
  16. You know I saw the daily show before coming across this video, and I've watched all of your longest talks. I knew this was really off your style so I'm really glad you actually made this video to set the record straight. Good on you for doing the interview, that's important to further open and cognizant social discourse. It's expected there would be a little humorous bias, but it should've been respectfully and tastefully done, which it wasn't.
    1
  17. Mak Muk because money is printed and paid for it fiat with a fee attached to it. That's money from money out of thin air
    1
  18. Mak Muk fed prints money that didn't previously exist when the government issues bonds and uses tax base to cover the unborn money in interest that they're promising for it plus transaction and operating costs. No they don't print them, but government doesn't print money either technically but it's the same thing man. Fractional reserve lending blurs that distinction from being important to not at all
    1
  19. so where does money come from when the government doesn't have it on the balance sheet and needs more? Fed is leveraged 77:1 or something like that. Where do they earn their income if not by creating currency in exchange for a bond / promissory note to repay with interest and fees with the tax base as collateral?
    1
  20. What you're not understanding is that the expansion of debt is the creation of money. That is generation from nothing. You're labelling uncollateralized debt as an asset to balance doesn't make an argument because it's just a rose by another name. Leveraged lending, as a currency trader myself, only benefits the first people to spend it. The pool depreciates for everyone once it's in circulation. By the government paying interest to a private corporation and transact fees it's feeding the least productive market sector in real terms. The leverage calculation is based on a little more than a news statement: lend up to 99,000 and charge interest from a 1200 deposit into a closed banking system could easily set that ration well above 77:1, that was a conservative estimate by not just me but many economists because of the systems structure. If you think it's not true why does the government keep redefining terms for their statistics? It makes the numbers less relevant to prior years every time they do and it hides the reality of leverage. Last comment on this, but thanks for the discussion, I will read your response :)
    1
  21. Ahhh yes, American news has NOTHING on Bnn. Must be so frustrating for you to explain the same thing over and over again eh Mr schiff?
    1
  22. You should do philosophical commentary on a regular basis with a new channel X-D This case is seriously disturbing and raises worthwhile discussion too, for both sides.
    1
  23. Telling quote says it all at 21 mins: reporter-"what should people be thinking"
    1
  24. Great show man, well done
    1
  25. Lol this must be frustrating but are you really surprised the information on the Internet is manipulated the same way text books and magazines? That was nice about the hard copy encyclopedias, you inherited them a century later and could see how history WAS written. Information today expires faster than software deprecation unfortunately
    1
  26. Ben Baker o_o ..... how would you define slavery if not foreign countries owning 95% of American assets? The places you live and work, food you eat and air you breath and water you drink would be owned by another country forcing you to work for them because they own your properties would be the worst thing to happen to the country. 
    1
  27. Ben Baker putting it for sale is dangerous precisely because you can't determine the buyers. at least if it's US owned the problem can be corrected down the road. a sell off would be un-fixable,
    1
  28. Ben Baker if they own your environment you wouldn't be able to avoid it. most people are limited by physics in their ability to commute. let's say you live in Dallas, and every job in Dallas is foreign owned, you going to commute to an American owned job in New York somehow?
    1
  29. Ben Baker it hasn't happened, obviously. you said it wouldn't be a problem if 95% of assets were sold off so that's what I was responding to.
    1
  30. Lol great show today
    1
  31. Holy shit Peter, why do you care what some idiot on the Internet says? You're such a loser when you whine like this. Fuck
    1
  32. I think your dumping metaphor is a really poor choice of words. It's not really like that at all. All that talk about how our economy needs to face our issues instead of inflating the bubble, why do you assume the Greek people aren't listening to your advice? You just assume that the Greeks are voting no to austerity, maybe it's as Tsipras says, they didn't want to get a bail out that would just keep inflating the bubble. Maybe I'm an optimist but your tone should be a celebratory or congratulatory one.
    1
  33. What 2 part videos is schiff talking about? Are they on YouTube?
    1
  34. Ool bory sto
    1
  35. Thank you for showing people how to have opinion. Well done
    1
  36. "there are loud ignorant and angry people..." Umm, you keep saying all liberals are dumb snotty kids, and mentioned true American as "having similar race color and creed" like Wtf lol
    1
  37. Stéphanie ruhle IS EXACTLY Fox news. I fucking hate her on bloomberg
    1
  38. Amen
    1
  39. Bill Janksy thaaaank you for correcting the analogy!
    1
  40. This is so frustrating... Crypto only works if they can be bought. To buy them you must earn money. If you earn money in non-legal tender you can't use it to pay taxes - ergo, never will overtake actual currency. Government won't adopt it because then you have no control over monetary policy, and you end up like Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, France, et al. Bitcoin will always have a use, even if only to keep the block chain going to be used as escrow, patents or voting polls, or whatever. There are many other perfectly suitable applications for block chain technology, but currency isn't a pivotal one.
    1
  41. Another good one, thanks man. Appreciate you dropping the cheesy ad lol
    1
  42. Lol wiki "block chain" Peter, hyperbole is a suit that never really fits
    1
  43. GM layoffs isn't "proof" of slowing demand. Robots replacing workers has the same effect. Although you're right in this case, your reasoning is flawed. ... So "three wrongs don't make a right" lol
    1
  44. Peter this is why although anyone can trade stocks, most people don't. It's because they aren't rational that their capital is exploited by the financial industry. It's such a waste.
    1
  45. MrGiggity890 agreed. It only bothers me because he has a huge following and he tells them he's an expert the same way Fox does, but he'll criticize his competition constantly in the same breath
    1
  46. "if a worker has a kid they get 12 weeks to hang out with their kid..." I bet you're a terrible parent if that's how you think 12 weeks are spent learning to raised a socialized and healthy human being. "They get all this time off to take vacation!" Remember how for thousands of years of human history we cared about raising our own kids? Before the borrowing economy forced double work hours only to leave households more indebted for their efforts, families were bigger too. Just a reminder, the next generation are necessarily going to pay for the elder care of the former - but I guess rich people don't worry about details affecting material reality. All that matters is your personal opportunity to have more for yourself over all else. 🤔
    1
  47. "podcast" x 61 times in first 90 secs precursor to a recursor spiel on our current market cycle lol. It's like subliminal poetry or something 😜
    1
  48. Once again, fatal conflation. Most of the world's wealth was not earned, it was extorted by credit markets fiat and housing bubbles. Cenk says tax the people who aren't earning their money THE SAME as everyone else at least.
    1
  49. The fed being political is not a valid argument because other people are saying it lol its true because whether people want to believe it or not, the reason the fed even speaks (they didn't always) is because of politics
    1