Clarivate Repeats Nobel Laureate Prediction Success: Five ...

Meet Brock Pierce, the Presidential Candidate With Ties to Pedophiles Who Wants to End Human Trafficking

thedailybeast.com | Sep. 20, 2020.
The “Mighty Ducks” actor is running for president. He clears the air (sort of) to Tarpley Hitt about his ties to Jeffrey Epstein and more.
In the trailer for First Kid, the forgettable 1996 comedy about a Secret Service agent assigned to protect the president’s son, the title character, played by a teenage Brock Pierce, describes himself as “definitely the most powerful kid in the universe.” Now, the former child star is running to be the most powerful man in the world, as an Independent candidate for President of the United States.
Before First Kid, the Minnesota-born actor secured roles in a series of PG-rated comedies, playing a young Emilio Estevez in The Mighty Ducks, before graduating to smaller parts in movies like Problem Child 3: Junior in Love. When his screen time shrunk, Pierce retired from acting for a real executive role: co-founding the video production start-up Digital Entertainment Network (DEN) alongside businessman Marc Collins-Rector. At age 17, Pierce served as its vice president, taking in a base salary of $250,000.
DEN became “the poster child for dot-com excesses,” raising more than $60 million in seed investments and plotting a $75 million IPO. But it turned into a shorthand for something else when, in October of 1999, the three co-founders suddenly resigned. That month, a New Jersey man filed a lawsuit alleging Collins-Rector had molested him for three years beginning when he was 13 years old. The following summer, three teens filed a sexual-abuse lawsuit against Pierce, Collins-Rector, and their third co-founder, Chad Shackley. The plaintiffs later dropped their case against Pierce (he made a payment of $21,600 to one of their lawyers) and Shackley. But after a federal grand jury indicted Collins-Rector on criminal charges in 2000, the DEN founders left the country. When Interpol arrested them in 2002, they said they had confiscated “guns, machetes, and child pornography” from the trio’s beach villa in Spain.
While abroad, Pierce had pivoted to a new venture: Internet Gaming Entertainment, which sold virtual accessories in multiplayer online role-playing games to those desperate to pay, as one Wired reporter put it, “as much as $1,800 for an eight-piece suit of Skyshatter chain mail” rather than earn it in the games themselves. In 2005, a 25-year-old Pierce hired then-Goldman Sachs banker Steve Bannon—just before he would co-found Breitbart News. Two years later, after a World of Warcraft player sued the company for “diminishing” the fun of the game, Steve Bannon replaced Pierce as CEO.
Collins-Rector eventually pleaded guilty to eight charges of child enticement and registered as a sex offender. In the years that followed, Pierce waded into the gonzo economy of cryptocurrencies, where he overlapped more than once with Jeffrey Epstein, and counseled him on crypto. In that world, he founded Tether, a cryptocurrency that bills itself as a “stablecoin,” because its value is allegedly tied to the U.S. dollar, and the blockchain software company Block.one. Like his earlier businesses, Pierce’s crypto projects see-sawed between massive investments and curious deals. When Block.one announced a smart contract software called EOS.IO, the company raised $4 billion almost overnight, setting an all-time record before the product even launched. The Securities and Exchange Commission later fined the company $24 million for violating federal securities law. After John Oliver mocked the ordeal, calling Pierce a “sleepy, creepy cowboy,” Block.one fired him. Tether, meanwhile, is currently under investigation by the New York Attorney General for possible fraud.
On July 4, Pierce announced his candidacy for president. His campaign surrogates include a former Cambridge Analytica director and the singer Akon, who recently doubled down on developing an anonymously funded, $6 billion “Wakanda-like” metropolis in Senegal called Akon City. Pierce claims to be bipartisan, and from the 11 paragraphs on the “Policy” section of his website it can be hard to determine where he falls on the political spectrum. He supports legalizing marijuana and abolishing private prisons, but avoids the phrase “climate change.” He wants to end “human trafficking.” His proposal to end police brutality: body cams.
His political contributions tell a more one-sided story. Pierce’s sole Democratic contribution went to the short-lived congressional run of crypto candidate Brian Forde. The rest went to Republican campaigns like Marco Rubio, Rick Perry, John McCain, and the National Right to Life Political Action Committee. Last year alone, Pierce gave over $44,000 to the Republican National Committee and more than $55,000 to Trump’s re-election fund.
Pierce spoke to The Daily Beast from his tour bus and again over email. Those conversations have been combined and edited for clarity.
You’re announcing your presidential candidacy somewhat late, and historically, third-party candidates haven’t had the best luck with the executive office. If you don’t have a strong path to the White House, what do you want out of the race?
I announced on July 4, which I think is quite an auspicious date for an Independent candidate, hoping to bring independence to this country. There’s a lot of things that I can do. One is: I’m 39 years old. I turn 40 in November. So I’ve got time on my side. Whatever happens in this election cycle, I’m laying the groundwork for the future. The overall mission is to create a third major party—not another third party—a third major party in this country. I think that is what America needs most. George Washington in his closing address warned us about the threat of political parties. John Adams and the other founding fathers—their fear for our future was two political parties becoming dominant. And look at where we are. We were warned.
I believe, having studied systems, any time you have a system of two, what happens is those two things come together, like magnets. They come into collision, or they become polarized and become completely divided. I think we need to rise above partisan politics and find a path forward together. As Albert Einstein is quoted—I’m not sure the line came from him, but he’s quoted in many places—he said that the definition of insanity is making the same mistake or doing the same thing over and over and over again, expecting a different result. [Ed. note: Einstein never said this.] It feels like that’s what our election cycle is like. Half the country feels like they won, half the country feels like they lost, at least if they voted or participated.
Obviously, there’s another late-comer to the presidential race, and that’s Kanye West. He’s received a lot of flak for his candidacy, as he’s openly admitted to trying to siphon votes away from Joe Biden to ensure a Trump victory. Is that something you’re hoping to avoid or is that what you’re going for as well?
Oh no. This is a very serious campaign. Our campaign is very serious. You’ll notice I don’t say anything negative about either of the two major political candidates, because I think that’s one of the problems with our political system, instead of people getting on stage, talking about their visionary ideas, inspiring people, informing and educating, talking about problems, mentioning problems, talking about solutions, constructive criticism. That’s why I refuse to run a negative campaign. I am definitely not a spoiler. I’m into data, right? I’m a technologist. I’ve got digital DNA. So does most of our campaign team. We’ve got our finger on the pulse.
Most of my major Democratic contacts are really happy to see that we’re running in a red state like Wyoming. Kanye West’s home state is Wyoming. He’s not on the ballot in Wyoming I could say, in part, because he didn’t have Akon on his team. But I could also say that he probably didn’t want to be on the ballot in Wyoming because it’s a red state. He doesn’t want to take additional points in a state where he’s only running against Trump. But we’re on the ballot in Wyoming, and since we’re on the ballot in Wyoming I think it’s safe—more than safe, I think it’s evident—that we are not here to run as a spoiler for the benefit of Donald Trump.
In running for president, you’ve opened yourself up to be scrutinized from every angle going back to the beginning of your career. I wanted to ask you about your time at the Digital Entertainment Network. Can you tell me a little bit about how you started there? You became a vice president as a teenager. What were your qualifications and what was your job exactly?
Well, I was the co-founder. A lot of it was my idea. I had an idea that people would use the internet to watch videos, and we create content for the internet. The idea was basically YouTube and Hulu and Netflix. Anyone that was around in the ‘90s and has been around digital media since then, they all credit us as the creators of basically those ideas. I was just getting a message from the creator of The Vandals, the punk rock band, right before you called. He’s like, “Brock, looks like we’re going to get the Guinness Book of World Records for having created the first streaming television show.”
We did a lot of that stuff. We had 30 television shows. We had the top most prestigious institutions in the world as investors. The biggest names. High-net-worth investors like Terry Semel, who’s chairman and CEO of Warner Brothers, and became the CEO of Yahoo. I did all sorts of things. I helped sell $150,000 worth of advertising contracts to the CEOs of Pepsi and everything else. I was the face of the company, meeting all the major banks and everything else, selling the vision of what the future was.
You moved in with Marc Collins-Rector and Chad Shackley at a mansion in Encino. Was that the headquarters of the business?
All start-ups, they normally start out in your home. Because it’s just you. The company was first started out of Marc’s house, and it was probably there for the first two or three months, before the company got an office. That’s, like, how it is for all start-ups.
were later a co-defendant in the L.A. County case filed against Marc Collins-Rector for plying minors with alcohol and drugs, in order to facilitate sexual abuse. You were dropped from the case, but you settled with one of the men for $21,600. Can you explain that?
Okay, well, first of all, that’s not accurate. Two of the plaintiffs in that case asked me if I would be a plaintiff. Because I refused to be a part of the lawsuit, they chose to include me to discredit me, to make their case stronger. They also went and offered 50 percent of what they got to the house management—they went around and offered money to anyone to participate in this. They needed people to corroborate their story. Eventually, because I refused to participate in the lawsuit, they named me. Subsequently, all three of the plaintiffs apologized to me, in front of audiences, in front of many people, saying Brock never did anything. They dismissed their cases.
Remember, this is a civil thing. I’ve never been charged with a crime in my life. And the last plaintiff to have his case dismissed, he contacted his lawyer and said, “Dismiss this case against Brock. Brock never did anything. I just apologized. Dismiss his case.” And the lawyer said, “No. I won’t dismiss this case, I have all these out-of-pocket expenses, I refuse to file the paperwork unless you give me my out-of-pocket expenses.” And so the lawyer, I guess, had $21,000 in bills. So I paid his lawyer $21,000—not him, it was not a settlement. That was a payment to his lawyer for his out-of-pocket expenses. Out-of-pocket expenses so that he would file the paperwork to dismiss the case.
You’ve said the cases were unfounded, and the plaintiffs eventually apologized. But your boss, Marc Collins-Rector later pleaded guilty to eight charges of child enticement and registered as a sex offender. Were you aware of his behavior? How do you square the fact that later allegations proved to be true, but these ones were not?
Well, remember: I was 16 and 17 years old at the time? So, no. I don’t think Marc is the man they made him out to be. But Marc is not a person I would associate with today, and someone I haven’t associated with in a very long time. I was 16 and 17. I chose the wrong business partner. You live and you learn.
You’ve pointed out that you were underage when most of these allegations were said to take place. Did you ever feel like you were coerced or in over your head while working at DEN?
I mean, I was working 18 hours a day, doing things I’d never done before. It was business school. But I definitely learned a lot in building that company. We raised $88 million. We filed our [form] S-1 to go public. We were the hottest start-up in Los Angeles.
In 2000, you left the country with Marc Collins-Rector. Why did you leave? How did you spend those two years abroad?
I moved to Spain in 1999 for personal reasons. I spent those two years in Europe working on developing my businesses.
Interpol found you in 2002. The house where you were staying reportedly contained guns, machetes, and child pornography. Whose guns and child porn were those? Were you aware they were in the house, and how did those get there?
My lawyers have addressed this in 32 pages of documentation showing a complete absence of wrongdoing. Please refer to my webpage for more information.
[Ed. Note: The webpage does not mention guns, machetes, or child pornography. It does state:“It is true that when the local police arrested Collins-Rector in Spain in 2002 on an international warrant, Mr. Pierce was also taken into custody, but so was everyone at Collins-Rector’s house in Spain; and it is equally clear that Brock was promptly released, and no charges of any kind were ever filed against Brock concerning this matter.”]
What do you make of the allegations against Bryan Singer? [Ed. Note: Bryan Singer, a close friend of Collins-Rector, invested at least $50,000 in DEN. In an Atlantic article outlining Singer’s history of alleged sexual assault and statutory rape, one source claimed that at age 15, Collins-Rector abused him and introduced him to Singer, who then assaulted him in the DEN headquarters.]
I am aware of them and I support of all victims of sexual assault. I will let America’s justice system decide on Singer’s outcome.
In 2011, you spoke at the Mindshift conference supported by Jeffrey Epstein. At that point, he had already been convicted of soliciting prostitution from a minor. Why did you agree to speak?
I had never heard of Jeffrey Epstein. His name was not on the website. I was asked to speak at a conference alongside Nobel Prize winners. It was not a cryptocurrency conference, it was filled with Nobel Prize winners. I was asked to speak alongside Nobel Prize winners on the future of money. I speak at conferences historically, two to three times a week. I was like, “Nobel Prize winners? Sounds great. I’ll happily talk about the future of money with them.” I had no idea who Jeffrey Epstein was. His name was not listed anywhere on the website. Had I known what I know now? I clearly would have never spoken there. But I spoke at a conference that he cosponsored.
What’s your connection to the Clinton Global Initiative? Did you hear about it through Jeffrey Epstein?
I joined the Clinton Global Initiative as a philanthropist in 2006 and was a member for one year. My involvement with the Initiative had no connection to Jeffrey Epstein whatsoever.
You’ve launched your campaign in Minnesota, where George Floyd was killed by a police officer. How do you feel about the civil uprising against police brutality?
I’m from Minnesota. Born and raised. We just had a press conference there, announcing that we’re on the ballot. Former U.S. Senator Dean Barkley was there. So that tells you, when former U.S. Senators are endorsing the candidate, right?
[Ed. note: Barkley was never elected to the United States Senate. In November of 2002, he was appointed by then Minnesota Governor Jesse Venture to fill the seat after Sen. Paul Wellstone died in a plane crash. Barkley’s term ended on Jan. 3, 2003—two months later.]
Yes, George Floyd was murdered in Minneapolis. My vice-presidential running mate Karla Ballard and I, on our last trip to Minnesota together, went to visit the George Floyd Memorial. I believe in law and order. I believe that law and order is foundational to any functioning society. But there is no doubt in my mind that we need reform. These types of events—this is not an isolated incident. This has happened many times before. It’s time for change. We have a lot of detail around policy on this issue that we will be publishing next week. Not just high-level what we think, not just a summary, but detailed policy.
You said that you support “law and order.” What does that mean?
“Law and order” means creating a fair and just legal system where our number one priority is protecting the inalienable rights of “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” for all people. This means reforming how our police intervene in emergency situations, abolishing private prisons that incentivize mass incarceration, and creating new educational and economic opportunities for our most vulnerable communities. I am dedicated to preventing crime by eliminating the socioeconomic conditions that encourage it.
I support accountability and transparency in government and law enforcement. Some of the key policies I support are requiring body-cams on all law enforcement officers who engage with the public, curtailing the 1033 program that provides local law enforcement agencies with access to military equipment, and abolishing private prisons. Rather than simply defund the police, my administration will take a holistic approach to heal and unite America by ending mass incarceration, police brutality, and racial injustice.
Did you attend any Black Lives Matter protests?
I support all movements aimed at ending racial injustice and inequality. I​ have not attended any Black Lives Matter protests.​ My running-mate, Karla Ballard, attended the March on Washington in support of racial justice and equality.
Your platform doesn’t mention the words “climate change.” Is there a reason for that?
I’m not sure what you mean. Our policy platform specifically references human-caused climate change and we have a plan to restabilize the climate, address environmental degradation, and ensure environmental sustainability.
[Ed. Note: As of writing the Pierce campaign’s policy platform does not specifically reference human-caused climate change.]
You’ve recently brought on Akon as a campaign surrogate. How did that happen? Tell me about that.
Akon and I have been friends for quite some time. I was one of the guys that taught him about Bitcoin. I helped make some videogames for him, I think in 2012. We were talking about Bitcoin, teaching him the ropes, back in 2013. And in 2014, we were both speaking at the Milken Global Conference, and I encouraged him to talk about how Bitcoin, Africa, changed the world. He became the biggest celebrity in the world, talking about Bitcoin at the time. I’m an adviser to his Akoin project, very interested in the work that he’s doing to build a city in Africa.
I think we need a government that’s of, for, and by the people. Akon has huge political aspirations. He obviously was a hugely successful artist. But he also discovered artists like Lady Gaga. So not only is he, himself, a great artist, but he’s also a great identifier and builder of other artists. And he’s been a great businessman, philanthropist. He’s pushing the limits of what can be done. We’re like-minded individuals in that regard. I think he’ll be running for political office one day, because he sees what I see: that we need real change, and we need a government that is of, for, and by the people.
You mentioned that you’re an adviser on Akoin. Do you have any financial investments in Akoin or Akon City?
I don’t believe so. I’d have to check. I have so much stuff. But I don’t believe that I have any economic interests in his stuff. I’d have to verify that. We’ll get back to you. I don’t believe that I have any economic interests. My interest is in helping him. He’s a visionary with big ideas that wants to help things in the world. If I can be of assistance in helping him make the world a better place, I’m all for it. I’m not motivated by money. I’m not running for office because I’m motivated by power. I’m running for office because I’m deeply, deeply concerned about our collective future.
You’ve said you’re running on a pro-technology platform. One week into your campaign last month, a New York appeals court approved the state Attorney General’s attempt to investigate the stablecoin Tether for potentially fraudulent activity. Do you think this will impact your ability to sell people on your tech entrepreneurship?
No, I think my role in Tether is as awesome as it gets. It was my idea. I put it together. But I’ve had no involvement in the company since 2015. I gave all of my equity to the other shareholders. I’ve had zero involvement in the company for almost six years. It was just my idea. I put the initial team together. But I think Tether is one of the most important innovations in the world, certainly. The idea is, I digitized the U.S. dollar. I used technology to digitize currency—existing currency. The U.S. dollar in particular. It’s doing $10 trillion a year. Ten trillion dollars a year of transactional volume. It’s probably the most important innovation in currency since the advent of fiat money. The people that took on the business and ran the business in years to come, they’ve done things I’m not proud of. I’m not sure they’ve done anything criminal. But they certainly did things differently than I would do. But it’s like, you have kids, they turn 18, they go out into the world, and sometimes you’re proud of the things they do, and sometimes you shake your head and go, “Ugh, why did you do that?” I have zero concerns as it relates to me personally. I wish they made better decisions.
What do you think the investigation will find?
I have no idea. The problem that was raised is that there was a $5 million loan between two entities and whether or not they had the right to do that, did they disclose it correctly. There’s been no accusations of, like, embezzlement or anything that bad.
[Ed. Note: The Attorney General’s press release on the investigation reads: “Our investigation has determined that the operators of the ‘Bitfinex’ trading platform, who also control the ‘tether’ virtual currency, have engaged in a cover-up to hide the apparent loss of $850 million dollars of co-mingled client and corporate funds.”]
But there’s been some disclosure things, that is the issue. No one is making any outrageous claims that these are people that have done a bunch of bad—well, on the internet, the media has said that the people behind the business may have been manipulating the price of Bitcoin, but I don’t think that has anything to do with the New York investigation. Again, I’m so not involved, and so not at risk, that I’m not even up to speed on the details.
[Ed note: A representative of the New York State Attorney General told Forbes that he “cannot confirm or deny that the investigation” includes Pierce.]
We’ve recently witnessed the rise of QAnon, the conspiracy theory that Hollywood is an evil cabal of Satanic pedophiles and Trump is the person waging war on them. You mentioned human trafficking, which has become a cause for them. What are your thoughts on that?
I’ve watched some of the content. I think it’s an interesting phenomenon. I’m an internet person, so Anonymous is obviously an organization that has been doing interesting stuff. It’s interesting. I don’t have a big—conspiracy theory stuff is—I guess I have a question for you: What do you think of all of it, since you’re the expert?
You know, I think it’s not true, but I’m not running for president. I do wonder what this politician [Georgia congressional candidate Marjorie Taylor Greene], who’s just won her primary, is going to do on day one, once she finds out there’s no satanic cabal room.
Wait, someone was running for office and won on a QAnon platform, saying that Hollywood did—say what? You’re the expert here.
She won a primary. But I want to push on if we only have a few minutes. In 2006, your gaming company IGE brought on Steve Bannon as an investor. Goldman later bought out most of your stock. Bannon eventually replaced you as CEO of Affinity. You’ve described him as your “right-hand man for, like, seven years.” How well did you know Bannon during that time?
Yes, so this is in my mid-twenties. He wasn’t an investor. He worked for me. He was my banker. He worked for me for three years as my yield guide. And then he was my CEO running the company for another four years. So I haven’t worked with Steve for a decade or so. We worked in videogame stuff and banking. He was at Goldman Sachs. He was not in the political area at the time. But he was a pretty successful banker. He set up Goldman Sachs Los Angeles. So for me, I’d say he did a pretty good job.
During your business relationship, Steve Bannon founded Breitbart News, which has pretty consistently published racist material. How do you feel about Breitbart?
I had no involvement with Breitbart News. As for how I feel about such material, I’m not pleased by any form of hate-mongering. I strongly support the equality of all Americans.
Did you have qualms about Bannon’s role in the 2016 election?
Bannon’s role in the Trump campaign got me to pay closer attention to what he was doing but that’s about it. Whenever you find out that one of your former employees has taken on a role like that, you pay attention.
Bannon served on the board of Cambridge Analytica. A staffer on your campaign, Brittany Kaiser, also served as a business director for them. What are your thoughts on their use of illicitly-obtained Facebook data for campaign promotional material?
Yes, so this will be the last question I can answer because I’ve got to be off for this 5:00 pm. But Brittany Kaiser is a friend of mine. She was the whistleblower of Cambridge Analytica. She came to me and said, “What do I do?” And I said, “Tell the truth. The truth will set you free.”
[Ed. Note: Investigations in Cambridge Analytica took place as early as Nov. 2017, when a U.K. reporter at Channel 4 News recorded their CEO boasting about using “beautiful Ukranian girls” and offers of bribes to discredit political officials. The first whistleblower was Christopher Wylie, who disclosed a cache of documents to The Guardian, published on Mar. 17, 2018. Kaiser’s confession ran five days later, after the scandal made national news. Her association with Cambridge Analytica is not mentioned anywhere on Pierce’s campaign website.]
So I’m glad that people—I’m a supporter of whistleblowers, people that see injustice in the world and something not right happening, and who put themselves in harm’s way to stand up for what they believe in. So I stand up for Brittany Kaiser.
Who do you think [anonymous inventor of Bitcoin] Satoshi Nakamoto is?
We all are Satoshi Nakamoto.
You got married at Burning Man. Have you been attending virtual Burning Man?
I’m running a presidential campaign. So, while I was there in spirit, unfortunately my schedule did not permit me to attend.
OP note: please refer to the original article for reference links within text (as I've not added them here!)
submitted by Leather_Term to Epstein [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Falls Below $8,000; The Entire Crypto Sector Plunges

Bitcoin Falls Below $8,000; The Entire Crypto Sector Plunges

The #1 Cryptocurrency Has Now A Geopolitical Influence
The coronavirus outbreak and the war forming in the crude oil sector managed to impact cryptocurrencies. The recent oil war may have caused the wipe-off of 15% of the total market capitalization in the crypto sector.
Bitcoin, the world’s leading cryptocurrency, seems to have taken the impact severely, after a week of price consolidation. The world’s #1 crypto plunged down, losing over $1,000 over the course of the past 24 hours alone. Weekly, the top crypto collapsed from $9,167.70 to trade at $7,866.49 as of press time.
Bitcoin initially started falling on Friday, March 6, but the weekend rally mitigated the consequences of the downward push. Despite the $9,192 high on Saturday, the bulls bent under the resistance, and Bitcoin started its rollercoaster start of the week.
Bitcoin’s fall to serve as a safe-haven for investors took the entire crypto sector down, with some of the top-10 cryptocurrencies recording double-digit losses. Ethereum (ETH), for example, is down 10,43% to trade at $203,29 as of press time. Ripple (XRP) recorded an 8% price decrease, touching the psychological barrier of $0,20, selling at $0,208826.
Bitcoin Cash (BCH) lost 13 percent of its price, to currently trade at $273.3, while the only gainer in the top-20 is LEO with a mere two-percent price increase. Trading volumes, however, are increasing, indicating stability and possible price increase in the following days.
The primary cause for the crypto market plunge remains unclear. However, some crypto experts believe the price drop has some kind of correlation to the more significant stock market turmoil, which caused market havoc.
The primary catalyst, according to the experts, is the tension between Saudi Arabia and Russia, after both parties failed to come to a consensus about reducing crude oil productions. Тhis is happening to act against weaker oil demand as a result of the nCoV-19 outbreak. Shortly after Saudi Arabia’s decision to keep the current levels of oil production, major U.S. indexes like Dow and S&P 500 took a 5% hit.
The recent price Bitcoin price fluctuations broke the arguments of crypto enthusiasts for Bitcoin becoming a safe-haven asset, like physical gold. Nouriel Roubini, who is a Nobel prize laureate in the field of economics, commented on the latest crypto price downfalls.
submitted by Crypto_Browser to CryptoBrowser_EN [link] [comments]

Pitfalls of Granger Causality

Original post from blog.projectpiglet.com. However, because there is promotional activity, a text post was more appropriate, thank you Mod's for working with me.

Pitfalls of Granger Causality

One of the most common forms of analysis on the stock market is Granger Causality, which is a method for indicating one signal possibly causes another signal. This type of causality is often called “predictive causality”, as it does not for certain determine causality – it simply determines correlations at various time intervals.
Why Granger Causality? If you search “causality in the stock market“, you’ll be greeted with a list of links all mentioning “granger causality”:
Search on DuckDuckGo
In other words, it’s popular and Clive Granger won a Nobel on the matter[1]. That being said, there are quite a few limitations. In this article, we’ll be covering a brief example of Granger Causality, as well as some of the common pitfalls and how brittle it can be.

What is Granger Causality?

Granger Causality (from Wikipedia) is defined as:
A time series X is said to Granger-cause Y if it can be shown, usually through a series of t-tests and F-tests on lagged values of X (and with lagged values of Y also included), that those X values provide statistically significant information about future values of Y.
In other words, Granger Causality is the analysis of trying to find out if one signal impacts another signal (such that it’s statistically significant). Pretty straightforward, and is even clearer with an image:
From Wikipedia
n a sense, it’s just one spike in a graph causing another spike at a later time. The real challenge with this is that this needs to be consistent. It has to repeatedly do this over the source of the entire dataset. This brings us to the next part: one of the fragile aspects of this method is that it often doesn’t account for seasonality.

Granger Causality and Seasonality

One common aspect of markets is that they are seasonal. Commodities (as it relates to the futures market) related to food are extremely impacted by seasonality[2]. For instance, if there is a drought across Illinois and Indiana during the summer (killing the corn crop), then corn prices from Iowa would likely rise (i.e. the corn from Iowa would be worth more).
From Wikipedia
In the example, there may be decades where some pattern in the market holds and Granger Causality is relevant. For instance, during summer heat waves in Illinois, corn prices in Iowa increase. On the other hand, with the advent of irrigation methods that deliver water underground, heat waves may no longer impact crops[3]. Thus, the causality of heat waves in Illinois may no longer impact the corn prices in Iowa.
If we then attempt to search for Granger Causality on the entire time range (a) pre-irrigation and (b) post irrigation, we will find there is no causality!
However, during the pre-irrigation time range we will find probable causality, and for post-irrigation time range we likely won’t find probable causality. Any time you combine two timeframes like this, the default is no Granger Causality (unless it’s a very small portion of the dataset). Bringing us to the conclusion, that:
Granger Causality is very sensitive to timeframe(s)
Just a few data points in either direction can break the analysis. This makes sense, as it is a way to evaluate if two time series are related. However, it does lead one to note how brittle this method can be.

Granger Causality and Sparse Datasets

Yet another potential issue with Granger Causality is sparse datasets. Let’s say we have dataset X and dataset Y: if dataset X has 200 data points and data set Y as 150 data points, how do you merge them? Assuming they are in (datetime, value) format, if we do an inner join on “datetime”, we get something that looks like the following:
From W3School
Then we will have 150 data points in a combined X and Y dataset, i.e.: (datetime, x, y). Unforunately, this also means if the data is continuous (as most timeseries data is), then we have completely broke our Granger Causality analysis. In other words, we are just skipping over days, which would break any causality analysis.
In contrast, we could do an outer join:
From W3School
We will have 200 data points in a combined X and Y dataset. Again, there’s an issue – it means we probably have empty values (Null, NULL, None, NaN, etc. ) where the Y data set didn’t have data (recall Y only had 150 data points). The dataset would then have various entries that look as such: (datetime, x, NULL).
To fix the empty values, we can attempt to use a forward or back fill technique. A forward/back fill technique is where you fill all the empty values with the previous or following location(s) real value.
This code could look like the following:
From blog.projectpiglet.com
From the sound of it, this method sounds promising! You’ll end up with something that’s continuous with all real values. You’ll actually get a graph like this:
Change in BCH price vs Random Walk (with NaNs)
As you can see, there are large sections of time where the data is flat. Recall the seasonality issue with Granger Causality? This method of outer joins + forward / back filling will definitely cause issues, and lead to minimal to no meaningful correlations.
Sparse datasets make it very difficult (or impossible) to identify probable causality.

Granger Causality and Resampling

There is another option for us, and that is “resampling”. Where instead of just filling the empty values (Nulls / NaNs) with the previous or following real values, we actually resample the whole series). Resampling is a technique where we fill the holes in the data with what amounts to a guess of what we think the data could be.
Although there are quite a few techniques, in this example we’ll use the python package Scipy, with the Signal module.
From blog.projectpiglet.com
At first glance, this appears to have solved some of the issues:
Change in Bitcoin Price vs Random Walk
However, in reality it does not work; especially if the dataset starts or ends with NaN’s (at least when using the Scipy package):
Change in BCH price vs Random Walk (with NaNs)
If you notice, prior to the ~110 data point, the values are just oscillating up and down. The resampling method Scipy is using does not appear to be functional / practical with so few data points. This is because I selected data set for Bitcoin Cash (BCH) and the date range is prior to Bitcoin Cash (BCH) becoming a currency (i.e. there is no price information).
In a sense, this indicates it’s not possible (at least given the data provided) to attempt Granger Causality on the given date ranges. Small gaps in time can have dramatic impacts on whether or not “probable causality” exists.
When determining Granger Causaily it is extremely important to have two complete overlapping datasets.
Without two complete datasets, it’s impossible to identify whether or not there are correlations over various time ranges.
Resampling can cause artifacts that impact the Granger Causality method(s).
In fact, the most recent example was actually positive for Granger Causality (p-value < 0.05)… That is the worst scenario, as it is a false positive. In the example, the false positive occurs because when both datasets are resampled they had a matching oscillation… it wouldn’t have even been noticed if the raw data sets weren’t being reviewed.
This is probably the largest issue with Granger Causality: every dataset needs to be reviewed to see if it makes sense. Sometimes what at first appears to make sense, in reality the underlying data has been altered in some way (such as resampling).

Granger Causality and Non-Linear Regression

Changing gears a bit (before we get to a real-world ProjectPiglet.com example), it’s important to note that most Granger Causality uses linear regression. In other words, the method is searching for linear correlations between datasets:
From austingwalters.com
However, in many cases – especially in the case of markets – correlations are highly likely to be non-linear. This is because markets are anti-inductive[5]. In other words, every pattern discovered in a market creates a new pattern as people exploit that inefficiency. This is called the Efficient Market Hypothesis.
Ultimately, this means most implementations of Granger Causality are overly simplistic; as most correlations are certainly non-linear in nature. There are a large number of non-linear regression models, below is an example of Gaussian Process Regression:
From Wikipedia
Similar, non-linear regression techniques do appear to improve Granger Causality[6]. This is probably due to most linear correlations already being priced into the market and the non-linear correlations will be where the potential profits are. It remains to be seen how effective this can be, as most research in this area is kept private (increasing profits of trading firms). What we can say is that non-linear methods do improve predictions on ProjectPiglet.com. They also require a larger dataset than their linear regression counterparts.

Conclusion

Overall, Granger Causality has quite a few potential pitfalls. It is useful for indicating a potential correlation, but is only a probable correlation. It can help to identify market inefficiencies and open the opportunity to make money, but will probably require more finesse than simple linear regression.
All that being said, hope you’ve found some of the insights useful!
submitted by austingwalters to algotrading [link] [comments]

Bitcoin. An Internet Protocol For Sound Money.

For many Gold is the soundest money known to man. It is the high stock to flow ratio of gold which ensures that gold holds it’s value over time. When a gold standard has been applied by a country or nation, peace and prosperity follow. Gold or gold backed money aligns human action, innovation, and labour with time. Allowing humans to store their productive output & mitigates malinvestment. A Gold Standard monetary policy whilst historically supreme, has suffered in it’s practices, as it’s implementation requires trust in a central planning entity to not debase the money.
Money is, in its essence a technology to optimize human coordination. The design flaw in our current money system is trust. We cannot have trust as a foundational design element in the system when self interest is an innate part of the human experience.
We must, without force, or violence move towards a monetary system that upholds the highest degree of trust minimization.
In 1999, American economist and Nobel Prize winner in Economic Sciences Milton Friedman said, when discussing the implications of the internet:
“The one thing that’s missing, but that will soon be developed, is a reliable e-cash, a method whereby on the Internet you can transfer funds from A to B, without A knowing B or B knowing A.”
On January 9, 2009 a form of electronic cash called Bitcoin was released onto the internet. Bitcoin is a digital decentrazlied currency. There is no central planning entity behind Bitcoin or it’s issuance. Bitcoin transactions are verified by a network of nodes and recorded to a public ledger called a Blockchain.
Bitcoin is sound money as an internet protocol. As more and more global citizens connect to the internet in the era of Bitcoin, it is plausible that unprecedented amounts of human capital & innovation shall flourish through cryptographic monetary sovereignty.
Thanks for reading! Please feel free to comment or leave feedback
submitted by kalapa108 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin - An Internet Protocol For Sound Money.

 For many Gold is the soundest money known to man. It is the high stock to flow ratio of gold which ensures that gold holds it’s value over time. When a gold standard has been applied by a country or nation, peace and prosperity follow. Gold or gold backed money aligns human action, innovation, and labour with time. Allowing humans to store their productive output & mitigates malinvestment. A Gold Standard monetary policy whilst historically supreme, has suffered in it’s practices, as it’s implementation requires trust in a central planning entity to not debase the money. Money is, in its essence a technology to optimize human coordination. The design flaw in our current money system is trust. We cannot have trust as a foundational design element in the system when self interest is an innate part of the human experience. We must, without force, or violence move towards a monetary system that upholds the highest degree of trust minimization. In 1999, American economist and Nobel Prize winner in Economic Sciences Milton Friedman said, when discussing the implications of the internet: “The one thing that’s missing, but that will soon be developed, is a reliable e-cash, a method whereby on the Internet you can transfer funds from A to B, without A knowing B or B knowing A.” On January 9, 2009 a form of electronic cash called Bitcoin was released onto the internet. Bitcoin is a digital decentrazlied currency. There is no central planning entity behind Bitcoin or it’s issuance. Bitcoin transactions are verified by a network of nodes and recorded to a public ledger called a Blockchain. 
Bitcoin is sound money as an internet protocol. As more and more global citizens connect to the internet in the era of Bitcoin, it is plausible that unprecedented amounts of human capital & innovation shall flourish through cryptographic monetary sovereignty.
Thanks for reading! Please feel free to comment or leave feedback
submitted by kalapa108 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Gregory Maxwell /u/nullc has evidently never heard of terms like "the 1%", "TPTB", "oligarchy", or "plutocracy", revealing a childlike naïveté when he says: "‘Majority sets the rules regardless of what some minority thinks’ is the governing principle behind the fiats of major democracies."

UPDATE: This post was inspired by a similar previous post which also has lots of great points, but the current post has a slightly different focus because:
(1) This post assumes ignorance (not dishonesty) on the part of nullc.
(2) This post basically gives a list of a bunch of sources on Wikipedia talking about oligarchy and plutocracy, as a starting point for anyone interested in this stuff.
Gregory Maxwell nullc has repeatedly shown that he has a very weak grasp of the political and economic realities shaping our world today.
He should not be (actually nobody should be) in charge of setting major economic policies and parameters (eg money velocity aka "max blocksize") for the most important non-state-based currency in the history of humanity (Bitcoin).
Are serious investors and businesspeople going to believe in a new currency whose economic parameters (eg money velocity aka "max blocksize") are centrally planned by a private for-profit corporation Blockstream whose CTO and CEO (Gregory Maxwell nullc and Adam Back adam3us) have repeatedly shown that they are totally clueless when it comes to markets and economics?
I don't even know where to begin to school this guy on the reality of politics and economics in the world today. It would take literally years of reading up on events in the mainstream media and online in order for him to get familiar enough with this stuff to stop blurting out ridiculously ignorant statements like:
"Majority sets the rules regardless of what some minority thinks" is the governing principle behind the fiats of major democracies.
https://np.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/44meru/why_would_miners_go_against_their_own_interests/czrgb0d
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/44p5tk/does_the_community_believe_that_gmaxwell_is_being/
Maybe the Wikipedia articles on "Oligarchy" or "Plutocracy" would be a good place for him to start reading up, so he can avoid making such ignorant public pronouncements in the future.
Meanwhile, it is obvious that this guy should not be in charge of centralized planning for Bitcoin's economic aspects such as "max blocksize".
Actually, blocksize is probably not a even a "parameter" which can be "pre-determined" by a C/C++ programmer.
Blocksize is more likely an "emergent phenomenon" which should probably be determined by the market itself.
Below are many, many links talking about how "oligarchy" and "plutocracy" have replaced democracy in politics and economics today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy#United_States
Some contemporary authors have characterized current conditions in the United States as oligarchic in nature.[8][9]
Simon Johnson wrote that "the reemergence of an American financial oligarchy is quite recent," a structure which he delineated as being the "most advanced" in the world.[10]
Jeffrey A. Winters wrote that "oligarchy and democracy operate within a single system, and American politics is a daily display of their interplay."[11]
Bernie Sanders,opined in a 2010 The Nation article that an "upper-crust of extremely wealthy families are hell-bent on destroying the democratic vision of a strong middle-class … In its place they are determined to create an oligarchy in which a small number of families control the economic and political life of our country."[12]
The top 1% in 2007 had a larger share of total income than at any time since 1928.[13] In 2011, according to PolitiFact and others, the top 400 wealthiest Americans "have more wealth than half of all Americans combined."[14][15][16][17]
French economist Thomas Piketty states in his 2013 book, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, that "the risk of a drift towards oligarchy is real and gives little reason for optimism about where the United States is headed."[18]
A study conducted by political scientists Martin Gilens of Princeton University, and Benjamin Page of Northwestern University, was released in April 2014,[19] which stated that their "analyses suggest that majorities of the American public actually have little influence over the policies our government adopts."
It also suggested that "Americans do enjoy many features central to democratic governance, such as regular elections, freedom of speech and association, and a widespread (if still contested) franchise."
Gilens and Page do not characterize the US as an "oligarchy" per se; however, they do apply the concept of "civil oligarchy" as used by Jeffrey Winters with respect to the US. Winters has posited a comparative theory of "oligarchy" in which the wealthiest citizens – even in a "civil oligarchy" like the United States – dominate policy concerning crucial issues of wealth- and income-protection.[20]
Gilens says that average citizens only get what they want if economic elites or interest groups also want it; that is, economic elites and interest groups are influential.[21] ...
In a 2015 interview, former President Jimmy Carter stated that the United States is now "an oligarchy with unlimited political bribery," due to the Citizens United ruling, which effectively removed limits on donations to political candidates.[25]
Links for the above references (footnotes) in the Wikipedia article on "Oligarchy":
[8] Kroll, Andy (2 December 2010). "The New American Oligarchy". TomDispatch (Truthout). Retrieved 17 August 2012.
http://www.truth-out.org/archive/component/k2/item/93150:andy-kroll--the-new-american-oligarchy
It used to be that citizens in large numbers, mobilized by labor unions or political parties or a single uniting cause, determined the course of American politics. After World War II, a swelling middle class was the most powerful voting bloc, while, in those same decades, the working and middle classes enjoyed comparatively greater economic prosperity than their wealthy counterparts. Kiss all that goodbye. We're now a country run by rich people.
[9] America on the Brink of Oligarchy 24 August 2012 The New Republic
http://www.tnr.com/article/magazine/books-and-arts/106430/money-politics-inequality-power-one-percent-move-on-effect
Winters conceives of oligarchy not as rule by the few, but as a kind of minority power created by great concentrations of material wealth. Compatible with a wide range of regimes, oligarchy can co-exist and even be “fused” with democracy as it is today in the United States.
[10] Johnson, Simon (May 2009). "The Quiet Coup". The Atlantic. Retrieved 17 August 2012.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/05/the-quiet-coup/307364/?single_page=true
The crash has laid bare many unpleasant truths about the United States. One of the most alarming, says a former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, is that the finance industry has effectively captured our government—a state of affairs that more typically describes emerging markets, and is at the center of many emerging-market crises. If the IMF’s staff could speak freely about the U.S., it would tell us what it tells all countries in this situation: recovery will fail unless we break the financial oligarchy that is blocking essential reform. And if we are to prevent a true depression, we’re running out of time.
[11] Winters, Jeffrey A. (November–December 2011) [28 September 2011]. "Oligarchy and Democracy". The American Interest 7 (2). Retrieved 17 August 2012.
http://www.the-american-interest.com/2011/09/28/oligarchy-and-democracy/
Democratic institutions aren't sufficient in themselves to keep the wealthy few from concentrating political power.
[12] Sanders, Bernie (22 July 2010). "No To Oligarchy". The Nation. Retrieved 18 August 2012.
http://www.thenation.com/article/no-oligarchy/
While the middle class disappears and more Americans fall into poverty, the wealthiest people in our country are using their wealth and political power to protect their privileged status at everyone else's expense.
[13] "Tax Data Show Richest 1 Percent Took a Hit in 2008, But Income Remained Highly Concentrated at the Top. Recent Gains of Bottom 90 Percent Wiped Out". Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. 25 May 2011. Retrieved 30 May 2014.
http://www.cbpp.org/research/tax-data-show-richest-1-percent-took-a-hit-in-2008-but-income-remained-highly-concentrated?fa=view&id=3309
[14] Kertscher, Tom; Borowski, Greg (10 March 2011). "The Truth-O-Meter Says: True - Michael Moore says 400 Americans have more wealth than half of all Americans combined". PolitiFact. Retrieved 11 August 2013.
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/ma10/michael-moore/michael-moore-says-400-americans-have-more-wealth-/
"Right now, this afternoon, just 400 Americans -- 400 -- have more wealth than half of all Americans combined," Moore avowed to tens of thousands of protesters.
"Let me say that again. And please, someone in the mainstream media, just repeat this fact once; we’re not greedy, we’ll be happy to hear it just once.
"Four hundred obscenely wealthy individuals ... -- most of whom benefited in some way from the multi-trillion-dollar taxpayer bailout of 2008 -- now have more cash, stock and property than the assets of 155 million Americans combined."
[15] Moore, Michael (6 March 2011). "America Is Not Broke". Huffington Post. Retrieved 11 August 2013.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-moore/america-is-not-broke_b_832006.html
America is not broke.
Contrary to what those in power would like you to believe so that you'll give up your pension, cut your wages, and settle for the life your great-grandparents had, America is not broke. Not by a long shot. The country is awash in wealth and cash. It's just that it's not in your hands. It has been transferred, in the greatest heist in history, from the workers and consumers to the banks and the portfolios of the uber-rich.
Today just 400 Americans have more wealth than half of all Americans combined.
Let me say that again. 400 obscenely rich people, most of whom benefited in some way from the multi-trillion dollar taxpayer "bailout" of 2008, now have more loot, stock and property than the assets of 155 million Americans combined. If you can't bring yourself to call that a financial coup d'état, then you are simply not being honest about what you know in your heart to be true.
[16] Moore, Michael (7 March 2011). "The Forbes 400 vs. Everybody Else". michaelmoore.com. Archived from the original on 2011-03-09. Retrieved 2014-08-28.
https://web.archive.org/web/20110309211959/http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/must-read/forbes-400-vs-everybody-else
According to the most recent information, the Forbes 400 now have a greater net worth than the bottom 50% of U.S. households combined.
[17] Pepitone, Julianne (22 September 2010). "Forbes 400: The super-rich get richer". CNN. Retrieved 11 August 2013.
http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/22/news/companies/forbes_400/index.htm
Forbes magazine released its annual list of the 400 richest Americans on Wednesday, and their combined net worth climbed 8% this year, to $1.37 trillion.
[18] Piketty, Thomas (2014). Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Belknap Press. ISBN 067443000X p. 514
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_in_the_Twenty-First_Century
Capital in the Twenty-First Century is a 2013 book by French economist Thomas Piketty. It focuses on wealth and income inequality in Europe and the United States since the 18th century. It was initially published in French (as Le Capital au XXIe siècle) in August 2013; an English translation by Arthur Goldhammer followed in April 2014.
The book's central thesis is that when the rate of return on capital (r) is greater than the rate of economic growth (g) over the long term, the result is concentration of wealth, and this unequal distribution of wealth causes social and economic instability.
[19] Gilens, Martin; Page, Benjamin (9 April 2016). "Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens" (PDF): 6.
[20] Gilens & Page (2014) p. 6
https://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=9354310
Each of four theoretical traditions in the study of American politics—which can be characterized as theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy, Economic-Elite Domination, and two types of interest-group pluralism, Majoritarian Pluralism and Biased Pluralism—offers different predictions about which sets of actors have how much influence over public policy: average citizens; economic elites; and organized interest groups, mass-based or business-oriented.
Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. The results provide substantial support for theories of Economic-Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism.
[21] Prokop, A. (18 April 2014) "The new study about oligarchy that's blowing up the Internet, explained" Vox
http://www.vox.com/2014/4/18/5624310/martin-gilens-testing-theories-of-american-politics-explained
Study: Politicians listen to rich people, not you
Who really matters in our democracy — the general public, or wealthy elites?
[25] http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/videos/jimmy-carter-u-s-is-an-oligarchy-with-unlimited-political-bribery-20150731
Former President Jimmy Carter had some harsh words to say about the current state of America's electoral process, calling the country "an oligarchy with unlimited political bribery" resulting in "nominations for president or to elect the president." When asked this week by The Thom Hartmann Program (via The Intercept) about the Supreme Court's April 2014 decision to eliminate limits on campaign donations, Carter said the ruling "violates the essence of what made America a great country in its political system."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy#Post_World_War_II
When the Nobel-Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz wrote the 2011 Vanity Fair magazine article entitled "Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%", the title and content supported Stiglitz's claim that the United States is increasingly ruled by the wealthiest 1%.[34]
Some researchers have said the US may be drifting towards a form of oligarchy, as individual citizens have less impact than economic elites and organized interest groups upon public policy.[35]
A study conducted by political scientists Martin Gilens (Princeton University) and Benjamin Page (Northwestern University), which was released in April 2014,[36] stated that their "analyses suggest that majorities of the American public actually have little influence over the policies our government adopts."
Links for the above references (footnotes) in the Wikipedia article on "Plutocracy":
[34] Stiglitz Joseph E. "Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%" Vanity Fair, May 2011; see also the Democracy Now! interview with Joseph Stiglitz: Assault on Social Spending, Pro-Rich Tax Cuts Turning U.S. into Nation "Of the 1 Percent, by the 1 Percent, for the 1 Percent", Democracy Now! Archive, Thursday, April 7, 2011
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2011/05/top-one-percent-201105
It’s no use pretending that what has obviously happened has not in fact happened. The upper 1 percent of Americans are now taking in nearly a quarter of the nation’s income every year. In terms of wealth rather than income, the top 1 percent control 40 percent.
...
America’s inequality distorts our society in every conceivable way. There is, for one thing, a well-documented lifestyle effect—people outside the top 1 percent increasingly live beyond their means. Trickle-down economics may be a chimera, but trickle-down behaviorism is very real. Inequality massively distorts our foreign policy. The top 1 percent rarely serve in the military—the reality is that the “all-volunteer” army does not pay enough to attract their sons and daughters, and patriotism goes only so far. Plus, the wealthiest class feels no pinch from higher taxes when the nation goes to war: borrowed money will pay for all that. Foreign policy, by definition, is about the balancing of national interests and national resources. With the top 1 percent in charge, and paying no price, the notion of balance and restraint goes out the window. There is no limit to the adventures we can undertake; corporations and contractors stand only to gain. The rules of economic globalization are likewise designed to benefit the rich: they encourage competition among countries for business, which drives down taxes on corporations, weakens health and environmental protections, and undermines what used to be viewed as the “core” labor rights, which include the right to collective bargaining. Imagine what the world might look like if the rules were designed instead to encourage competition among countries for workers. Governments would compete in providing economic security, low taxes on ordinary wage earners, good education, and a clean environment—things workers care about. But the top 1 percent don’t need to care.
[35] Piketty, Thomas (2014). Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Belknap Press. ISBN 067443000X p. 514: "the risk of a drift towards oligarchy is real and gives little reason for optimism about where the United States is headed."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_in_the_Twenty-First_Century
[36] Gilens & Page (2014) Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens, Perspectives on Politics, Princeton University. Retrieved 18 April 2014.
PDF! www.princeton.edu/~mgilens/Gilens%20homepage%20materials/Gilens%20and%20Page/Gilens%20and%20Page%202014-Testing%20Theories%203-7-14.pdf
Finally, it is worth mentioning the notorious "Plutonomy" memo prepared by analysts at Citigroup:
https://pissedoffwoman.wordpress.com/2012/04/12/the-plutonomy-reports-download/
Citigroup wrote memos in 2005 and 2006 addressed to investors, basically saying that the world is dividing up more and more into a small group of rich people who drive the economy, surrounded by a large number of poor people whose economic interests can be safely ignored.
As the above links show, it is shockingly naïve for Gregory Maxwell u/nullc to claim that policies for fiat currencies are determined by "democracies".
If he is this ignorant about the reality of so-called democracies and fiat currencies, one can only wonder how much other stuff he is ignorant about, in his ongoing misguided attempts to impose his own centralized economic planning on Bitcoin.
submitted by ydtm to btc [link] [comments]

SWISSBORG´S DAILY INSIDER - WEEK 21


DON'T MISS OUT ON THE NEWS!

Want to stay updated on the most current news, market trends, and analysis? Subscribe to our daily SwissBorg Insider!

Friday, 25th May 2018

DOJ’s Bitcoin Price Manipulation Probe a ‘Good Thing’: Mike Novogratz Billionaire investor Mike Novogratz is optimistic that the US DOJ's recently-launched probe into allegations of bitcoin price manipulation will contribute to the LT health of the crypto market.
Revolut App Adds XRP, Bitcoin Cash to Crypto Options - CoinDeskMobile banking app Revolut now lets users buy, sell and hold Ripple's XRP and bitcoin cash, in addition to bitcoin, litecoin and ether.
Singapore Warns 8 Exchanges Over Unregistered Securities Trading - CoinDeskSingapore's central bank has warned eight digital token exchanges and an ICO issuer to stop trading tokens deemed unauthorized securities.
Ontology And NEO Announce New Huge Partnership Yesterday afternoon, we saw reports of a huge partnership between Ontology and NEO hit the headlines.
Daily Performance
https://preview.redd.it/u52izib4f0011.png?width=1024&format=png&auto=webp&s=90e65d617691193aef057ac2e1b13ae9531a79c7
Market 25-05-2018
Over the past several days the market has softened up significantly, losing about USD50 billion from the beginning of the week, stabilising today at USD340 billion. However, the down move has been an orderly one, and there has been no clear catalyst for the sell-off, other than the typical uncertainties and noise surrounding regulation. There has been no noticeable pick up in volumes, which remain light at around USD20 billion. Option volatility have not budged from the high 70%s despite the sharp down move, and high correlation across cryptos still indicates that the entire market is moving up and down in tandem with BTC. There simply seems to be a clear lack of conviction in terms of market direction. The above parameters continues to show a consolidative range trade for the near term.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thursday, 24th May 2018

CFTC Opens the Door to More Cryptocurrency Derivatives with New Advisory The U.S. CFTC has issued a new advisory according to a May 21 announcement, which exchanges and clearinghouses planning to list cryptocurrencies derivatives must adhere.
Singapore Proposes Regulatory Boost for Decentralized ExchangesThe Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS), is proposing changes to existing regulations that would ease market entry for blockchain-based decentralised exchanges.
Bitcoin Gold Hit by Double Spend Attack, Exchanges Lose MillionsA malicious miner successfully executed a double spend attack on the Bitcoin Gold network last week, making BTG at least the third altcoin to succumb to a network attack during that timespan.
Daily Performance
https://preview.redd.it/3d3ie1cha0011.png?width=908&format=png&auto=webp&s=23070ca6793ed9607772740b6e26ee46df6d092b
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
BTC
https://preview.redd.it/y7e5sc1oa0011.png?width=1076&format=png&auto=webp&s=05086f8ffd56754038458d9a2046b6b38a38e46d
ETH
https://preview.redd.it/igzo4jksa0011.png?width=1076&format=png&auto=webp&s=8301f05a973e878324abf5f15b10ed7fddcd5413
XRP
https://preview.redd.it/yxvrqfgwa0011.png?width=1076&format=png&auto=webp&s=e15005d2ab05a219f33780e5cefee5578bc379b3

Wednesday, 23rd May 2018

PAYPAL: WE’LL ‘DEFINITELY SUPPORT’ BITCOIN IF IT BECOMES ‘BETTER CURRENCY’The CFO of PayPal defended the case for fiat merchant settlements Monday, telling mainstream media the company could nonetheless “definitely support” Bitcoin in the future.
Nobel Prize Economist Says That Crypto the Latest in a Pattern of Alternative Currencies’In a May 21 article entitled “The Old Allure of New Money,” the 2013 Nobel laureate of Economics Robert Shiller calls crypto the newest iteration of alternative currency ideas.
Taiwan: Legislators Launch Parliamentary Blockchain Alliance to Promote Industry GrowthTaiwanese legislators have formed a parliamentary blockchain group to promote the development of the industry.
$363 Million Funding Round Puts Robinhood on Fast-Track to Build ‘Largest Crypto Platform’Though best known for its commission-free stock brokerage platform, Robinhood has also begun rolling out bitcoin and Ethereum trading, with more coins expected to be added in the future.
ICO of the Week: TV-TWO
Source: https://icoholder.com/
Daily Performance
https://preview.redd.it/opimwm8080011.png?width=1344&format=png&auto=webp&s=3c94e5015ba1c51d291a1b2d6a6c43f4369a85af
Market 23-05-2018
Over the past 24 hours, the valuation of the cryptocurrency market has dropped from $390 to $353 billion, by more than $37 billion. The bitcoin price dipped below $7'940 and the value of Ether, dropped to $643. However, the current price still shows a 30 percent premium over bitcoin's lowest point this year at $5,947 seen on 5th Feb.Indeed, almost all of the top 100 assets by market cap are showing 10 to 20 percent declines at press time. According to CoinMarketCap, among the world's largest five cryptocurrencies, both Ripple and Bitcoin Cash are trading at a one-month low at $0.63 and $1,120 respectively.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Tuesday, 22nd of May 2018

No Investors Affected, Hard to Charge Cryptocurrency Exchange UPbit Experts in the cryptocurrencies of South Korea have stated that it will be difficult for the government and local financial authorities to file charges against UPbit, given that no investors were affected.
Bank of England Issues Working Paper on Central Bank Digital CurrenciesThe Bank of England released a staff working paper, laying out various scenarios of possible risks and financial stability issues of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs).
Daily Performance

Market 22-05-2018
The cryptocurrencies' market continued to consolidate at current levels, with today seeing a small pull back across the board. Volumes continue to be on the low side with only 16B USD changing hands over the last 24 hours. ETH/BTC spread seems to stabilise at around the 0.083 level for the past week, which shows there are no strong forces in play. High correlation across large cap names all moving up in tandem also indicate a lack of news and conviction in terms of market direction.Also, realised volatility on BTC has dropped further, with implied vols softening up further (ATM< 80%). Both correlation and volatility indicate that for the short term, the overall market is subdued but is likely to drift towards the path of last resistance, which is higher. Having said that, quiet low volume environments are vulnerable to sudden external shocks - be wary of sudden large gaps in market movement!
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
BTC
https://preview.redd.it/29o1635gvzz01.png?width=1344&format=png&auto=webp&s=edb54d4fb4fcfeb03fb4ad8cd97ddd0a78022fb7
ETH
https://preview.redd.it/e6yn8uonvzz01.png?width=1344&format=png&auto=webp&s=4e934f3d9366e70267b51cc8d8fd1f7e675abbcb
XRP
https://preview.redd.it/rjb1pb7rvzz01.png?width=1344&format=png&auto=webp&s=6ba2d228a703ee976184b813efe35f882a96d227

---------------------------------------------------

Monday, 21st May 2018

Switzerland is the Number 1 blockchain-friendly country in Europe Switzerland has been named the most blockchain-friendly country in Europe by the Blockchain Conference Europe 2018.
Why Gibraltar’s crypto gambling regulation is important and what to expect from it?At the beginning of 2018 when many countries were tightening regulations around ICOs and cryptocurrency, Gibraltar was taking a different route.
Save the date: AIRPOD's pre-sale prepares for launchThe long-awaited AirPod ICO is finally taking off! The team has announced that its pre-sale is going to start on May 29, 2018.
Daily Performance
https://preview.redd.it/kdj1ayag8zz01.png?width=1804&format=png&auto=webp&s=3c12299866329c7dc4eba73c6784a3f2ea71217c
Daily Gainer vs. Looser
https://preview.redd.it/ifunb7lo8zz01.png?width=844&format=png&auto=webp&s=5fb37450d977ec90fed029a909c505d9b3e370fa
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
BTC
https://preview.redd.it/clivbowt8zz01.png?width=1344&format=png&auto=webp&s=d52c74f3e2f3af1c1ae97c435ef0fa7bc3aa29e1
ETH
https://preview.redd.it/snafd9129zz01.png?width=1344&format=png&auto=webp&s=7b6fd52e64ac3cdf1d1452178ee67af2516b6f67
XRP
https://preview.redd.it/v6zypz879zz01.png?width=1344&format=png&auto=webp&s=11c15aad63e548fec117f4b3ff65a8a253d12846
Disclaimer: Insider aims to provide our community with updates and information regarding financial markets and the blockchain world.This is our way of communicating with our community. It is meant to be used for informational purposes not to be mistaken for financial advice.Our opinion, when shared, is just that, it may not apply directly to your individual situation. Any information gleaned here is to be used at the readers' own risk, SwissBorg does not accept any responsibility for individual decisions made based on reading our daily blog. Any information we provide on our daily blog is accurate and true to the best of our knowledge, there may be omissions, errors or mistakes.
Copyright © 2018 SwissBorg, All rights reserved.
submitted by lioness444 to swissborg [link] [comments]

Krugman and Bitcoin and Me: Radical Thoughts on Fixed Supply Currency

My dad asked me how I reconciled Bitcoin's fixed supply with the Keynesian model of supply. I understand that most people around here don't hold much stock in what Paul Krugman has to say. But much of the real world actually does, what with his Nobel prize and all. So I put some serious consideration into what he had to say about deflation, how it relates to Bitcoin, and other vague currency questions. What follows is my email back to my pa. Many of these ideas have come from my time spent in this forum, so feel free to chop it up, edit, and distribute away if you find any of it worthwhile.
Thoughts from a liberal after reading Paul Krugman's 2010 NYT piece: Why is Deflation Bad?
Krugman and Bitcoin and Me
Krugman's argument against deflation is built with a dependency: that there is a central authority which controls the money supply. So in a sense he has two core points.
(1) Krugman prefers that a centralized authority control the currency supply in order to manipulate the economy.
I'll allow that this tool can be a good, stabilizing force. But if that's the case, I want to be able to vet that institution from the bottom up before handing them the keys to the kingdom. And I want that institution to unequivocally work for society, not for Goldman Sachs. If I thought the current system worked well, I wouldn't be exploring other options in the first place.
(2) Krugman prefers that that centralized authority manipulate the economy such that it encourages spending and lending. In other words, manipulate toward small inflation.
This could be a good thing. And maybe the economy it creates is more fluid than a deflationary one. But when you bake into the system incentives to spend now and borrow from the future now, you get exactly the problems that you'd expect: over-consumption and a society largely ridden in debt.
Control of the supply of the currency carries tremendous power. It can be used to smooth natural economic cycles and encourage specific consumer and producer behavior. This supply-manipulative ability is not in and of itself a bad thing. The question is whether it is necessary- because with Bitcoin (as it stands) it is impossible. Within the theoretical bounds of crypto-currency, the abilities for algorithmic, "smart" money-supply, one that rests on mathematics rather than the banking elite, are endless. There are truly exciting developments to come in this space.
A First Consideration on Currency
Think, for a moment, of the unit of currency as sort of a creditor's note. It is an IOU from society; a placeholder for some unit of production. It says, "I produced something valuable (for someone else who takes part in this system). In return I got this note. I have reasonable assurance that one day I can cash this IOU in for something that I'll need in the future."
The unit of currency acts as a placeholder for its owner. Under this system, people trade their current productivity for the placeholder, and later (given the system still has integrity) they can trade that placeholder for something that raises their standard of living. It allows us to "time-shift" our production with respect to our consumption.
But don't forget!: A unit of currency as "just a thing". It only carries value if it is actually valued by somebody else you want to do business with. The dollar, the gold bar, the Bitcoin. the Euro, all work the same way: they are nothing but numbers or paper or metal. They are just atoms arranged in a way that make them valuable to a group of people only because they trust in the future of their common system.
Currencies are a subset of commodities. Commodities are things (oil, clothing, food, televisions) that are valuable to humans because they have useful properties. Like we said above, a currency's use is to "time-shift" production and consumption. The properties of the object that afford this advantage are usually a combination of irreproducibility, fungibility, scarcity, ease of transport, and securability.
Why is Deflation Bad?
In his 2010 NYT piece, Krugman argues that deflation hurts the economy due to three factors:
(1) People become less willing to spend, because sitting on money becomes an investment. Your dollar tomorrow will buy you more than what it can today, so why spend today? Therefore, spending goes down.
(2) Those in debt get into serious trouble awfully quickly, because the nominal amount-owed appreciates in value. As a result, they spend significantly less. At the same time, creditors have been shown to not spend enough such that it make up for this difference. Therefore, borrowing (and spending) goes down.
(3) Psychologically, people hate nominal wage decreases. With a fixed supply currency, year over year, wages will have to decrease in name. Even if the value of your wage rises, the amount written on the paycheck is lower. Therefore, people freak out.
These are troubling scenarios, though I think the first two are more substantial than the third. I don't mean to underestimate the psychological factor- in economics psychology is everything- but we'll talk about this later.
Krugman presents the first two points as bugs in a deflationary system. I see them as features.
"Your dollar will buy you more tomorrow than what it can today."
I think this is natural. We are a rapidly advancing species; through technology we are becoming more efficient, automating crappy tasks, raising the standard of living for less work, of course a dollar (that placeholder for your unit of production) is going to go further tomorrow than it does today.
Personally, I find this appealing. It provides every incentive to work now and spend later. That falls very much in line with good ol' American hard-working values and non-consumptive ethics.
Krugman finds this worrying though. If people have less incentive to spend, their is a crisis in demand. Hello liberals?! When was the last time we complained about lower consumption? In a country wracked with hyper-consumption that has put an unprecedented load on Earth's environment and ignited a climate crisis, I see a drop in demand as a breath of fresh air! Furthermore, you don't have to worry about people never spending. People will always spend now- but only on the want/need products, rather than the maybe-want-need-this-now-really-might-as-well-because-my-currency-is-losing-value-and-all-these-things-meet-my-zillion-useless-ephemeral-wants products.
I do believe there are much higher economic principles at work here. The United States is the world's default consumer. The global economy needs us to consume as much as it needs the million child laborers to produce. The economy would come crashing down if we stopped consuming immediately. But if we're trying to aim for a more sustainable economy, one that is compatible with the Earth's environment, let's move slowly and use a deflating currency as an incentive!
"Deflation rewards creditors and hurts debtors. Debtors spend less and creditors don't spend more enough to offset."
The impassive Krugman is beating around the bush. There is a problem when debtors suffer at the expense of creditors, and it's more than just a net loss in consumer spending. If you're concerned about a reduction in spending, see my previous point. But the remaining ethical problem is glaring- a power imbalance already exists in a creditor-debtor relationship, and it seems that deflation only widens this gap, crucifying the debt class on a cross of deflationary coin.
There's no doubt that this is a problem. And wealth redistribution may ultimately be easier with an inflationary currency- again, a word on that later. But there is also an incentive here: borrow less. Credit card debt is at an all-time high, up 1200% in the US since 1980, all while student loans have ballooned out of control. But neither of these problems even compares to the $7.8 trillion of mortgage debt our country has dug itself into.
Now debt is not a bad thing. The right combination of debt and saving, that is- using both capital previously earned with capital borrowed from future earnings- indicates a healthy economy. I don't want to have to work my entire life only to afford a house at the very end. I want to be able to borrow from my future economic output, buy the house now, and live in it while I work to pay it off. The same goes for student debt, corporate debt-financing, etc. Access to credit is crucial to a healthy middle class.
But ever-increasing debt is not sustainable. Nobody lives- and produces- forever, so you cannot always borrow from your future economic output. In the end, regardless of the money tricks you play, you have to produce enough value to cover your consumption. The world recently found out, in a mild manor, what happens when a currency's incentive and a nation's culture favors borrowing. When given the opportunity to build houses they never could have dreamed of paying off in their lifetime, millions of people took the offer and the biggest lenders took the risk. The echoes of their mass default still burden the global economy 6+ years later.
The point is, if Krugman says "inflation promotes borrowing", I say, "is this debt-ridden wreck what we really want our economy to look like?"
"People would freak out when their paycheck goes down."
I say get over it. Other possible proclamations in a deflationary world:
Better yet, this reflects reality! Technology makes everything cheaper every day. You should be paying lower phone bills tomorrow. Has the infrastructure gotten less efficient?
Here it feels like Krugman's grasping for straws. He pounces on people's reaction to their one source of income rather than their many expenses. This point also invokes that ugly liberal side: "The people don't know what's best for them."
The Central Authority as a Tool for Wealth Redistribution
Now we're talking. As a Liberal, I consider this to be a most important necessary evil. But let's call it what it is: stealing from the rich to give to the poor. (Unless we reject the modern notion of property- stay tuned...)
In an inflationary economy, value is constantly leaching out of everyone's savings. Those who control the monetary supply have a means of reaching into every dollar, and skimming off a little bit of value. We can choose to do a lot of good with this. Right now the skimmed dollars are "lent" to banks- the theory is that they then have more to lend to the general public and everyone benefits. Lending is good right? It introduces liquidity. But continue this cycle ad infinitum and all the spending in the economy starts in the form of bank debt! It is no coincidence that Americans households are more in debt than ever before.
If wealth redistribution is the only benefit of a central supply authority (which can fall out of trust at any time), this is a weak foundation. We already have a mechanism for wealth redistribution: taxation. Let's be proud of it, call a duck a duck, raise taxes on the wealthy, and introduce that liquidity with massive infrastructural programs, education spending, science spending, etc, rather than in the form of bank loans.
One last point- inflation appears to be a flat tax. That's already bad. It affects every dollar proportionally, rich or poor. Worse, the middle class and poor have a higher percentage of their net worth in USD- so inflation then becomes a regressive tax... given to banks... to be lent out to again to the middle class. All in the name of wealth redistribution?! In the name of kick-starting the economy?! Something's fishy here, and "you wouldn't understand, it's more complicated" doesn't cut it as an answer for these practices.
Bitcoin
So. What are we even doing here?
In 2009 a great mind developed a tool, the first in the history of human civilization, for "minting" a currency according to a fixed and open sourced algorithm. Without the involvement of any third party, you can now send an irreproducible digital object of fixed supply to anyone with an internet connection. The implications are mind-boggling. But the first such currency, Bitcoin, happened to be fixed-supply and ultimately deflationary, which has re-sparked the deflation vs. inflation debate.
This is happenstance. The protocol that gives rise to these digital currencies- the bitcoin protocol (small b)- could easily implement a different supply model. Paul Krugman can start a currency, KrugCoin, with any supply model that he likes! Which begs one last question.
Let's say I'm presented with an option: I may collect my paycheck in a currency that deflates- that is, my paycheck will gain value over time. Or I may collect my paycheck in a currency that inflates- it loses value over time. Why would anyone choose the latter? Must a population be forced into using an inflationary currency? Are we?
submitted by dpxxdp to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

The Next Breakthrough Will Be Led by Decentralized Storage Networks

Mr. Zhuo'er Jiang, Founder & C.E.O of BTC.TOP. A true supporter of Bitcoin Cash.
At one forum, Mr. Jiang talked about the three breakthroughs in blockchain area. Let's see how the leader of crypto currency view the future of blockchain.
The first breakthrough of blockchain: crypto currencies.
In 1974, the Nobel Economics Prize Winner Friedrich August von Hayek wrote a book "Denationalization of Money" in which he claimed that it is wrong for governments to monopolize currencies. Monopoly lowers the efficiency of society. It enables the governments to take seigniorage from the people through inflation. Hayek believed that currencies should be denationalized and issued by private organizations. With competitions among these organizations, the value of the currencies would be stabilized.
The second breakthrough of blockchain: ICO
Most governments have banned unmonitored stocks. ICO ignored this regulation which led to the large scale of projects that are worth tens of billions. It is not uncommon that with a new type of "freedom" comes con men. With the blooming of internet and e-commerce, there came people who took advantage of that and conned many others. With ICO, there are also con men who tricked people of their investment. However, we can't shut down the great inventions/projects just because of this. It takes a while for the society to reach a new balance.
After the first two breakthroughs of blockchain, what will be the next? It is a very interesting and important question. If we make the right assessment, we might be able to catch the next big opportunity.
The third breakthrough of blockchain: decentralized storage network.
It could be a decentralized, tamper-proof file storage system that is based on blockchain.
For the past 20 years or so, people relied on the internet for a lot of things. To work together, play together, communicate with their loved ones and so on. There's been an exponential growth of the data generated over the internet. The means to store and safeguard all the data becomes crucial.
The way the internet has evolved, single points of failure are everywhere. It is important to improve the properties of internet with the idea of decentralization.
submitted by IPFSChina to ipfs [link] [comments]

Subreddit Stats: Economics top posts from 2016-12-11 to 2017-12-10 14:09 PDT

Period: 363.96 days
Submissions Comments
Total 998 124701
Rate (per day) 2.74 341.28
Unique Redditors 447 16507
Combined Score 499738 904919

Top Submitters' Top Submissions

  1. 24425 points, 17 submissions: speckz
    1. At $75,560, housing a prisoner in California now costs more than a year at Harvard (5125 points, 597 comments)
    2. America’s Lost Einsteins - Millions of children from poor families who excel in math and science rarely live up to their potential—and that hurts everyone. (3231 points, 440 comments)
    3. One in five American households have ‘zero or negative’ wealth (2951 points, 619 comments)
    4. Escaping Poverty Requires Almost 20 Years With Nearly Nothing Going Wrong. The MIT economist Peter Temin argues that economic inequality results in two distinct classes. And only one of them has any power. (2717 points, 631 comments)
    5. After decades of pushing bachelor’s degrees, U.S. needs more tradespeople (2386 points, 587 comments)
    6. The world’s most valuable resource is no longer oil, but data (2200 points, 198 comments)
    7. Employees Who Stay In Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less (1873 points, 260 comments)
    8. Student Loan Debt Is Now As Big as the U.S. Junk Market (1392 points, 380 comments)
    9. The tech sector is leaving the rest of the US economy in its dust (614 points, 235 comments)
    10. The Countries Most (and Least) Likely to be Affected by Automation. Japan is at the top with 55.7% while the US is at 45.8%. (532 points, 138 comments)
  2. 19191 points, 26 submissions: jimrosenz
    1. Warren Buffett wins $1M bet made a decade ago that the S&P 500 stock index would outperform hedge funds (7205 points, 402 comments)
    2. The Gender Pay Gap Is Largely Because of Motherhood (3325 points, 661 comments)
    3. 'Negligible' link between executive pay and firm's performance, says study (1561 points, 165 comments)
    4. We need to challenge the myth that the rich are specially-talented wealth creators (1231 points, 552 comments)
    5. Will MySpace ever lose its monopoly? (2007) (1219 points, 193 comments)
    6. Should the Government Bring Back Trust-Busting? (1093 points, 201 comments)
    7. Economics isn't a bogus science — we just don't use it correctly (625 points, 176 comments)
    8. ‘Exclusionary zoning’ is opportunity hoarding by upper middle class (559 points, 240 comments)
    9. Index Funds Are Great for Investors, Risky for Corporate Governance (358 points, 75 comments)
    10. Milton Friedman's Cherished Theory Is Laid to Rest (324 points, 156 comments)
  3. 15893 points, 26 submissions: ghostofpennwast
    1. Student Debt Is a Major Reason Millennials Aren't Buying Homes (2228 points, 487 comments)
    2. Americans Are Paying $38 to Collect $1 of Student Debt (1598 points, 150 comments)
    3. Report: America’s marijuana industry headed for $24 billion by 2025 (1350 points, 74 comments)
    4. Solar Power Will Kill Coal Faster Than You Think (1336 points, 243 comments)
    5. Saudi Arabia signals end of tax-free living as oil revenues slump (1013 points, 264 comments)
    6. One-third of Americans say they’d have trouble coming up with an emergency $2,000 (979 points, 346 comments)
    7. Trump Seeks $3.6 Trillion in Spending Cuts to Reshape Government (977 points, 652 comments)
    8. Indian American community richest with median household income of $103,821 (846 points, 201 comments)
    9. Foreigners snap up record number of US homes (825 points, 363 comments)
    10. More Americans Are Falling Behind on Student Loans, and Nobody Quite Knows Why (679 points, 526 comments)
  4. 13354 points, 31 submissions: Splenda
    1. Study: The richest families in Florence in 1427 are still the richest families in Florence (5678 points, 501 comments)
    2. Handing Out Tax Breaks to Businesses Is Worse Than Useless: Study exposes the futility of the $45 billion that states spend on economic development incentives. (1410 points, 120 comments)
    3. The Never-Ending Foreclosure: How can the country survive the next economic crash if millions of families still haven't recovered from the last one? (1061 points, 331 comments)
    4. Memo To Steven Mnuchin: Trump's Tax Plan Would Add $7 Trillion To The Debt Over 10 Years (950 points, 317 comments)
    5. Rural America Is Aging and Shrinking (414 points, 364 comments)
    6. This Is What a Real Middle-Class Tax Cut Would Look Like (387 points, 252 comments)
    7. The coming battle between the Trump team and economists over the true cost of climate change (290 points, 102 comments)
    8. Here’s One Scary Way Trump’s Team Could Manipulate Government Data: It has plans to recalculate the social cost of carbon, which has been called “the most important number you’ve never heard of.” (256 points, 29 comments)
    9. Hot and Violent: Researchers have begun to understand the economic and social damage caused by climate change. (238 points, 90 comments)
    10. How Wall Street Once Killed the U.S. Solar Industry… and how it could happen again. (238 points, 53 comments)
  5. 12703 points, 31 submissions: DoremusJessup
    1. U.S. Wage Disparity Took Another Turn for the Worse Last Year: The rich-poor pay gap is getting wider (1307 points, 323 comments)
    2. European Union finance ministers agreed on Tuesday to close loopholes multinational corporations use to skip taxation on dividends, part of a drive to stop them from parking profits where they pay the least tax (1063 points, 131 comments)
    3. Trump Plan to Slash LLC Rate Is Boon for Top Earners: Cutting pass-through rate to 15% could cost $2 trillion; Top 1% would get tax cut of $76,000 - Tax Policy Center (1046 points, 216 comments)
    4. Robots Are Slashing U.S. Wages and Worsening Pay Inequality: Robots have a real impact on jobs and wages, new research shows (1014 points, 391 comments)
    5. US Adds 156K Jobs; Unemployment Rate Ticks up to 4.7 Pct. Hourly pay jumped 2.9 percent from a year earlier, the biggest increase in more than seven years (883 points, 350 comments)
    6. Norway's sovereign wealth fund, the world's largest, on Friday called for a cap on executive pay and fiscal transparency at the companies in which it invests, further buffing its reputation as an ethical investor (846 points, 78 comments)
    7. U.S. payrolls increase more than expected, wages rise (842 points, 142 comments)
    8. America’s Biggest Creditors Dump Treasuries in Warning to Trump (838 points, 309 comments)
    9. Unemployment in the U.S. Is Falling, So Why Isn’t Pay Rising? (571 points, 228 comments)
    10. Citigroup on Thursday became the first-ever bank to get hit with civil "spoofing charges," after U.S. derivatives regulators said one of its units entered U.S. Treasury futures market orders with the intent of canceling them (511 points, 46 comments)
  6. 12274 points, 1 submission: CADBP
    1. Freakonomics: You're twice as likely to go from low to high income in Canada than in the USA (12274 points, 809 comments)
  7. 11930 points, 4 submissions: trot-trot
    1. Trade school, not 4-year college, is a better bet to solve the US income gap, researchers say (11060 points, 1329 comments)
    2. Libor: Bank of England implicated in secret recording (517 points, 9 comments)
    3. 'These Boots are Made for Walking': Why Most Divorce Filers are Women (273 points, 268 comments)
    4. This Is Le Pen's Plan to Break Up the Euro (80 points, 11 comments)
  8. 11267 points, 16 submissions: unimployed
    1. Basically every problem in the US economy is because companies have too much power, new research argues (7086 points, 372 comments)
    2. The Fraternity Paradox: Lower GPA, Higher Incomes (1440 points, 319 comments)
    3. The Real Reason the U.S. Has Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance (566 points, 95 comments)
    4. US opioid crisis holds back jobs market recovery, says study (563 points, 74 comments)
    5. An important shift in the job market makes the mystery of weak wage growth less puzzling (345 points, 62 comments)
    6. The Economics and Politics Of Flooding and Insurance (266 points, 56 comments)
    7. Economic models are broken, and economists have wildly different ideas about how to fix them (198 points, 130 comments)
    8. Most Americans live paycheck to paycheck (128 points, 56 comments)
    9. Trump preparing withdrawal from South Korea trade deal (97 points, 46 comments)
    10. The Incredible Shrinking Corporate Tax Bill (93 points, 24 comments)
  9. 9635 points, 17 submissions: lingben
    1. I’m a Depression historian. The GOP tax bill is straight out of 1929 (2907 points, 577 comments)
    2. 35 of 37 economists said Trump was wrong. The other two misread the question. (2127 points, 198 comments)
    3. CEOs agree: Corporate tax cuts won't trickle down (738 points, 301 comments)
    4. Trump's Numbers Guy Isn't Great With Numbers (662 points, 111 comments)
    5. Trumponomics Gets The Thumbs Down From Nobel-Winning Economists (563 points, 268 comments)
    6. If Everyone Is So Confident, Why Aren’t They Borrowing? (466 points, 179 comments)
    7. Economists Have No Use for Republican Tax Cuts (447 points, 180 comments)
    8. Corruption Is Still a Problem Ten Months After India's Cash Ban (412 points, 39 comments)
    9. Should the rich be taxed more? (352 points, 554 comments)
    10. Trump Administration Considers Change in Calculating U.S. Trade Deficit (208 points, 19 comments)
  10. 9371 points, 1 submission: RegressToTheMean
    1. Poll: Economists Unanimous That Debt Would Balloon Under GOP Tax Plan (9371 points, 848 comments)
  11. 8887 points, 39 submissions: mberre
    1. Japan logs longest phase of growth in 16 years (846 points, 76 comments)
    2. British Employers Begin To See A Pre-Brexit Exit Of Foreign Workers (746 points, 268 comments)
    3. US unemployment falls to 10-year low (602 points, 228 comments)
    4. U.S. new home sales fall to seven-month low (546 points, 242 comments)
    5. US deficit rises to 2008 levels (538 points, 91 comments)
    6. Iceland to end capital controls from 2008 financial crisis - BBC News (463 points, 48 comments)
    7. Swiss say goodbye to banking secrecy (450 points, 122 comments)
    8. Pew Research: In a Recovering Market, Homeownership Rates Are Down Sharply for Blacks, Young Adults (439 points, 183 comments)
    9. UK wealth gap 'widening over past decade' says report - BBC News (429 points, 182 comments)
    10. Fed's Williams calls for global rethink of monetary policy (387 points, 158 comments)
  12. 7956 points, 6 submissions: johnmountain
    1. Martin Schulz to Trump: Dropping Paris agreement means no trade talks -- ‘Whoever wants to have access to our market needs to respect the European standards,’ Schulz says. (6708 points, 1020 comments)
    2. Paul Krugman in 1998: Internet’s Economic Impact No Greater Than Fax Machine (710 points, 261 comments)
    3. Without Power to Run A.T.M.s, Puerto Rico Is Cash Only (210 points, 15 comments)
    4. A basic income could boost the US economy by $2.5 trillion (150 points, 165 comments)
    5. America's housing inventory crisis is causing home prices to rise at double the rate of a 'normal' market (91 points, 15 comments)
    6. Why Do Cities Become Unaffordable? (87 points, 117 comments)
  13. 6952 points, 2 submissions: mjanes
    1. The U.S. Has Forgotten How to Do Infrastructure: The nation once built things fast and cheaply. Now experts are puzzled why costs are higher and projects take longer than in other countries. (5056 points, 575 comments)
    2. Reaganomics killed America’s middle class (1896 points, 468 comments)
  14. 6290 points, 2 submissions: Nolagamer
    1. 37 of 38 economists said the GOP tax plans would grow the debt. The 38th misread the question. (5268 points, 473 comments)
    2. Opioid crisis: Nearly half of working-age American men who are out of the labor force are using painkillers daily (1022 points, 137 comments)
  15. 5852 points, 7 submissions: PinkSlimeIsPeople
    1. Tax Cuts Don't Lead to Economic Growth, a New 65-Year Study Finds (3816 points, 352 comments)
    2. You're not imagining it: the rich really are hoarding economic growth (841 points, 546 comments)
    3. Vast Majority of Americans Would Likely Lose From Senate GOP’s $1.5 Trillion in Tax Cuts, Once They’re Paid For (347 points, 128 comments)
    4. Commentary: Signs Suggest Trump Budget Will Feature Unprecedented Cuts Plus Large Tax Cuts Favoring Wealthy (323 points, 212 comments)
    5. Eight Market-Oriented Proposals That Reduce Income Inequality (304 points, 280 comments)
    6. Republicans’ tax plan gives the top 1 percent of households a $207,000 tax cut; Bottom 20 percent get $50 (163 points, 154 comments)
    7. Eliminating Two ACA Medicare Taxes Means Huge Tax Cuts for High Earners and the Wealthy (58 points, 67 comments)
  16. 5489 points, 10 submissions: pipsdontsqueak
    1. Americans want U.S. goods, but not willing to pay more: Reuters/Ipsos poll (1219 points, 461 comments)
    2. After a Tax Crackdown, Apple Found a New Shelter for Its Profits (1216 points, 221 comments)
    3. Fed raises rates for third time since the recession (716 points, 170 comments)
    4. U.S. moves to impose tariffs of as much as 219 percent on Canadian jet maker, siding with Boeing (672 points, 120 comments)
    5. Bitcoin hits all-time high after CME Group says to launch futures (637 points, 365 comments)
    6. Trump Is Expected to Name Jerome Powell as Next Fed Chairman (451 points, 58 comments)
    7. Awaiting Trump's coal comeback, miners reject retraining (202 points, 118 comments)
    8. Republicans to propose keeping top tax rate for very wealthy, nodding to concerns (202 points, 63 comments)
    9. Experian fined $3M over 'inaccurate' credit scores (97 points, 3 comments)
    10. Paradise Papers: Apple's secret tax bolthole revealed (77 points, 8 comments)
  17. 5133 points, 2 submissions: MaxGhenis
    1. Something missing from Trump's Cabinet: Economists (4128 points, 575 comments)
    2. San Francisco Bans Salary History Questions (1005 points, 243 comments)
  18. 4744 points, 16 submissions: InvisibleTextArea
    1. New Zealand bans foreign home buyers (1744 points, 533 comments)
    2. EU Audit Admits Greek Bailouts Didn't Go as Planned (811 points, 291 comments)
    3. Renters in the UK spend average of 62 per cent of income on rent (627 points, 104 comments)
    4. Venezuela pulls most common banknote from circulation to 'beat mafia' (369 points, 80 comments)
    5. Yet again, today’s politicians are ignoring basic economics (166 points, 111 comments)
    6. The next crash risk is hiding in plain sight (159 points, 36 comments)
    7. After Universal Basic Income, The Flood (143 points, 118 comments)
    8. Slow economic growth is not the new normal, it's the old norm (124 points, 117 comments)
    9. Cryptoeconomics 101 (88 points, 9 comments)
    10. Of productivity in France and in Germany (85 points, 19 comments)
  19. 4258 points, 16 submissions: kludgeocracy
    1. How Corporations and the Wealthy Avoid Taxes (and How to Stop Them) (787 points, 296 comments)
    2. How “Shareholder Value” is Killing Innovation (637 points, 217 comments)
    3. Capitalism Can Thrive Without Cooking the Planet (547 points, 296 comments)
    4. American builders’ productivity has plunged by half since the late 1960s (519 points, 112 comments)
    5. There's a $136,400 reason so many Americans feel they haven't made economic progress (470 points, 186 comments)
    6. What Happened When 18 States Raised Their Minimum Wage? (242 points, 189 comments)
    7. Democrats just united on a $15-an-hour minimum wage (208 points, 252 comments)
    8. Avoiding Payday Loans Makes the Poor Richer (201 points, 44 comments)
    9. Maybe We’ve Been Thinking About the Productivity Slump All Wrong (167 points, 92 comments)
    10. Researchers have answered a big question about the decline of the middle class (95 points, 50 comments)

Top Commenters

  1. tcoop6231 (6607 points, 678 comments)
  2. SmokingPuffin (5048 points, 544 comments)
  3. MasterBerter (4931 points, 369 comments)
  4. louieanderson (4560 points, 710 comments)
  5. autotldr (3551 points, 333 comments)
  6. TitaniumDragon (3202 points, 693 comments)
  7. Adam_df (3193 points, 611 comments)
  8. HTownian25 (3165 points, 392 comments)
  9. slash196 (3002 points, 284 comments)
  10. thewimsey (2932 points, 534 comments)
  11. MELBOT87 (2835 points, 187 comments)
  12. HeFlipYa (2819 points, 380 comments)
  13. Ponderay (2809 points, 198 comments)
  14. Mylon (2732 points, 510 comments)
  15. ucstruct (2729 points, 241 comments)
  16. bartink (2473 points, 645 comments)
  17. throwittomebro (2360 points, 490 comments)
  18. holy_rollers (2318 points, 211 comments)
  19. Lando_Calrissian (2314 points, 14 comments)
  20. bokabo (2250 points, 487 comments)
  21. skatastic57 (2212 points, 284 comments)
  22. bobmarles3 (2179 points, 189 comments)
  23. Splenda (2159 points, 366 comments)
  24. mwatwe01 (2133 points, 34 comments)
  25. UpsideVII (2120 points, 171 comments)
  26. sunflowerfly (2032 points, 178 comments)
  27. OliverSparrow (2002 points, 362 comments)
  28. Rookwood (1965 points, 297 comments)
  29. besttrousers (1948 points, 181 comments)
  30. sethstorm (1928 points, 880 comments)
  31. roboczar (1899 points, 133 comments)
  32. HumanKapital_ (1889 points, 404 comments)
  33. itsreaditpeople (1887 points, 13 comments)
  34. cd411 (1880 points, 62 comments)
  35. brberg (1841 points, 287 comments)
  36. Brad_Wesley (1811 points, 183 comments)
  37. DrSandbags (1772 points, 164 comments)
  38. DefendedCobra29 (1727 points, 27 comments)
  39. Uptons_BJs (1660 points, 70 comments)
  40. TracyMorganFreeman (1655 points, 628 comments)
  41. whyrat (1652 points, 110 comments)
  42. FweeSpeech (1648 points, 68 comments)
  43. darwin2500 (1635 points, 229 comments)
  44. Holophonist (1612 points, 247 comments)
  45. Nolagamer (1569 points, 272 comments)
  46. Dave1mo1 (1553 points, 171 comments)
  47. WordSalad11 (1546 points, 167 comments)
  48. HeTalksToComputers (1511 points, 141 comments)
  49. number676766 (1475 points, 7 comments)
  50. matty_a (1445 points, 1 comment)

Top Submissions

  1. Freakonomics: You're twice as likely to go from low to high income in Canada than in the USA by CADBP (12274 points, 809 comments)
  2. Trade school, not 4-year college, is a better bet to solve the US income gap, researchers say by trot-trot (11060 points, 1329 comments)
  3. Poll: Economists Unanimous That Debt Would Balloon Under GOP Tax Plan by RegressToTheMean (9371 points, 848 comments)
  4. Warren Buffett wins $1M bet made a decade ago that the S&P 500 stock index would outperform hedge funds by jimrosenz (7205 points, 402 comments)
  5. Basically every problem in the US economy is because companies have too much power, new research argues by unimployed (7086 points, 372 comments)
  6. Martin Schulz to Trump: Dropping Paris agreement means no trade talks -- ‘Whoever wants to have access to our market needs to respect the European standards,’ Schulz says. by johnmountain (6708 points, 1020 comments)
  7. Study: The richest families in Florence in 1427 are still the richest families in Florence by Splenda (5678 points, 501 comments)
  8. Warren Buffett declared victory Saturday in his decade-long, $1 million bet that low-cost index funds would out earn more expensive hedge funds by deleted (5318 points, 311 comments)
  9. 37 of 38 economists said the GOP tax plans would grow the debt. The 38th misread the question. by Nolagamer (5268 points, 473 comments)
  10. At $75,560, housing a prisoner in California now costs more than a year at Harvard by speckz (5125 points, 597 comments)

Top Comments

  1. 1760 points: itsreaditpeople's comment in Freakonomics: You're twice as likely to go from low to high income in Canada than in the USA
  2. 1678 points: mwatwe01's comment in Trade school, not 4-year college, is a better bet to solve the US income gap, researchers say
  3. 1445 points: matty_a's comment in Trump Administration Rolls Back Protections for People in Default on Student Loans
  4. 1411 points: electrik_wizard's comment in The U.S. Has Forgotten How to Do Infrastructure: The nation once built things fast and cheaply. Now experts are puzzled why costs are higher and projects take longer than in other countries.
  5. 1326 points: number676766's comment in Something missing from Trump's Cabinet: Economists
  6. 1314 points: Lando_Calrissian's comment in Trump names Japan a currency manipulator
  7. 1201 points: DefendedCobra29's comment in Poll: Economists Unanimous That Debt Would Balloon Under GOP Tax Plan
  8. 1004 points: kristopolous's comment in Reaganomics killed America’s middle class
  9. 1000 points: TheWhitestOrca's comment in Poll: Economists Unanimous That Debt Would Balloon Under GOP Tax Plan
  10. 983 points: BmoreIntelligent's comment in The Fraternity Paradox: Lower GPA, Higher Incomes
Generated with BBoe's Subreddit Stats (Donate)
submitted by subreddit_stats to subreddit_stats [link] [comments]

Subreddit Stats: badeconomics top posts from 2014-12-28 to 2015-12-26 14:40 PDT

Period: 363.19 days
Submissions Comments
Total 998 85609
Rate (per day) 2.75 234.43
Unique Redditors 240 2478
Combined Score 26803 402029

Top Submitters' Top Submissions

  1. 1933 pts, 76 submissions: u/urnbabyurn
    1. Guy praxes out why women should be virgins (66 pts, 184 comments)
    2. The Democratic POTUS primary debate thread (61 pts, 400 comments)
    3. In solidarity with reddit uprising, /badeconomics will not be the default sub in place of /economics. wumbotarian is Victoria and /praxacceptance has gone full Marxian. (59 pts, 101 comments)
    4. End of Memes! Central planning failure... (58 pts, 21 comments)
    5. Anyone else notice how quiet the economics subs get during Passover? (57 pts, 8 comments)
    6. "Once demand is high enough you don't need to lower your price" (49 pts, 73 comments)
    7. The BE reader - crowd sourcing chapters thread (49 pts, 141 comments)
    8. Feminism is responsible for stagnant wages (48 pts, 187 comments)
    9. Trade is worse than war! (44 pts, 72 comments)
    10. ELS series: we hate famous economists part 27 (44 pts, 85 comments)
  2. 1214 pts, 36 submissions: u/besttrousers
    1. Is a basic income badeconomics? No, not really. But there is a lot of badeconomics in the /basicincome FAQ (Part 1) (163 pts, 136 comments)
    2. "But companies still hire people because they have no choice but to. They need enough workers to meet the demands of the market and so they hire people. So if a layoff was to occur I'd occurred regardless of wage hike." (72 pts, 73 comments)
    3. "Piketty basically proved that r>g, which means capital tends to concentrate faster than the economy grows. This means our method of economics is destined to collapse." (58 pts, 25 comments)
    4. " The Chicago school seems to pretty much ignore money." (53 pts, 71 comments)
    5. [META] /badmathematics discusses Austrian economics (52 pts, 112 comments)
    6. Migrants respond to the market signal of high wages. They migrate, and some find jobs, and others do not. Those who do not find jobs end up on welfare rolls. Wages do not fall, and the market signal telling migrants to keep coming remains broadcasted to the world. (45 pts, 84 comments)
    7. I think I finally praxxed out why Austrians tend to be libertarians (43 pts, 36 comments)
    8. "The first paper [Diamond 1960] I have refuted, show me the damn data or go troll elsewhere.' (41 pts, 100 comments)
    9. "So again, I ask, what exactly would humans have a comparative advantage in?" (40 pts, 159 comments)
    10. The stock market has gone up ∴ we are in a bubble (38 pts, 118 comments)
  3. 1033 pts, 31 submissions: u/say_wot_again
    1. FUCK THE BABY BOOMERS!!! LOUD NOISES!!! (253 pts, 259 comments)
    2. Economics Is Too Important to Be Left to Economists (70 pts, 80 comments)
    3. Very Serious Economic Training vs. Free Trade (58 pts, 142 comments)
    4. TIL free movement of labor is a subsidy. (46 pts, 30 comments)
    5. The General Theory of Comments, Interest, and Stickies (42 pts, 25 comments)
    6. Apparently the simple act of being in New York now makes you too big to fail. (39 pts, 15 comments)
    7. Not Pictured: A credible model of macroeconomics (36 pts, 56 comments)
    8. Careful Sumner. Winter is coming. (35 pts, 71 comments)
    9. Low oil prices will lead to an oil shortage! People are batteries! And more gems. (32 pts, 51 comments)
    10. DAE live in a formalized fantasy world? (28 pts, 112 comments)
  4. 996 pts, 28 submissions: u/commentsrus
    1. User in /Politics unironically calls Integralds "Hitler" in a horrible thread about the Federal Reserve, Bitcoin, Anarcho-Marxism, and Basic Income. (202 pts, 17 comments)
    2. Kicked a girl out before sex after she started arguing that Keynesian/Hansen-Samuelson multipliers weren't real (104 pts, 68 comments)
    3. meconomist irl (85 pts, 79 comments)
    4. And the Lord Sanders sayeth unto /Politics: "There are only so many jobs we could extract from the jobs mines this year, and blessed is he who doesn't give them to immigrants." Amen. (53 pts, 91 comments)
    5. [Dank Meme] Wumbotarian's OPpR1ession (47 pts, 34 comments)
    6. How to replace the entire banking system with cryptocurrency in 3 years and what results it will bring (38 pts, 15 comments)
    7. "No European country benefits from Muslim immigration." Actually, Denmark's wages rose after an influx of Muslim refugees. "Ah yes, but no TRUE European country benefits." (38 pts, 86 comments)
    8. THIS JUST IN!! ECB Protester Josephine Witt has released a new statement regarding the excesses of the ECB (36 pts, 44 comments)
    9. Eastern Europeans are immigrating to the UK and are LITERALLY starting businesses! Call up the Jobs Patrol so we can start rationing NOW before the shelves go empty [go to 1:15] (36 pts, 31 comments)
    10. Today is Peter Schiff Day! Post all your dank Peter Schiff praxes to show solidarity. (35 pts, 54 comments)
  5. 894 pts, 29 submissions: u/wumbotarian
    1. PA Gov Tom Wolf thinks competition leads to higher prices. (84 pts, 78 comments)
    2. /socialism is praying that Venezuela "doesn't fuck up" centrally planning food distribution (76 pts, 132 comments)
    3. "Open borders? No, that's a Koch brothers proposal." (66 pts, 171 comments)
    4. Private Defense Agencies: AnCaps deny monopolies can exist (55 pts, 144 comments)
    5. "Inflation is the true opium of the masses." (47 pts, 37 comments)
    6. Angry neckbeards in /gaming don't understand how prices work in a a market economy. (44 pts, 160 comments)
    7. Bad monetary economics (42 pts, 106 comments)
    8. "You have to keep in mind that economics is a highly ideological field." (41 pts, 83 comments)
    9. WHO GETS THE BE NOMINATION? (34 pts, 227 comments)
    10. "Tax is price fixing which is known to break economies" so use Kickstarter to fund public goods instead! (33 pts, 110 comments)
  6. 857 pts, 33 submissions: u/HealthcareEconomist3
    1. [Meta] TrueReddit discusses /be (56 pts, 176 comments)
    2. [Low hanging fruit] /Futurology discusses basicincome (42 pts, 129 comments)
    3. "we have to accept the logic of 21st century capitalism is that it will constantly lower costs by adopting automation & a race to the bottom between the general working population & robots for less & less income is a road to nowhere." (42 pts, 122 comments)
    4. A superbly bad description of comparative advantage, complete failure to understand how currencies work, complete failure to understand a currency peg, absurd claim that China prints to buy up Treasuries and a complete misunderstand regarding how S/D works. (39 pts, 28 comments)
    5. High individual taxes encourage investment (39 pts, 59 comments)
    6. TPP quackery (37 pts, 50 comments)
    7. I bet about $3.50 this thread is going to be the worst econ thread of the year (36 pts, 149 comments)
    8. No title will do this thread appropriate justice (36 pts, 38 comments)
    9. 7 ways i made up a bunch of data about Switzerland (35 pts, 125 comments)
    10. Monetarism has special views on trade, economists oppose TPP, insanity about prices & competition etc (34 pts, 44 comments)
  7. 573 pts, 17 submissions: u/Jericho_Hill
    1. <-- # of Days Jericho_Hill replaces Wumbo as R1 Moderator (159 pts, 64 comments)
    2. Reward: Reddit Gold Task: Find the best badeconomics in the Bernie Sanders AMA live now (49 pts, 151 comments)
    3. In which HealthCare Economist is believed to be a covert agent of manipulation embedded by the intelligence community. (41 pts, 48 comments)
    4. All Economists believe in Trickle Down (39 pts, 120 comments)
    5. Physics isn't real science (38 pts, 17 comments)
    6. Technology = Return to Feudalism (30 pts, 29 comments)
    7. R1 Holiday contest comin' (29 pts, 79 comments)
    8. The BadEconomics Holiday Contest (29 pts, 1 comment)
    9. Unintended consequences (27 pts, 50 comments)
    10. In Which JH is called a retarded economist (22 pts, 44 comments)
  8. 487 pts, 24 submissions: u/lorentz65
    1. I like my labor lumpy and my employment serf-y. (38 pts, 27 comments)
    2. I'm audibly laughing and weeping while reading this thread. (33 pts, 75 comments)
    3. [Question] Why are the mods massive fascists? (31 pts, 32 comments)
    4. De immigranten! (29 pts, 68 comments)
    5. The poster child of badeverything. (26 pts, 39 comments)
    6. The internet exists therefore public goods don't real. QED. (26 pts, 58 comments)
    7. This sub-reddit should start doing more slam poetry (26 pts, 89 comments)
    8. We are not proselytizing enough praxbrothers! (25 pts, 60 comments)
    9. Causation goes from GDP=>everything bad. (25 pts, 40 comments)
    10. DAE Fed is a private bank! (21 pts, 22 comments)
  9. 441 pts, 7 submissions: u/Integralds
    1. Bernie Sanders' NYT Op-Ed on the Federal Reserve (234 pts, 445 comments)
    2. The Chart for /badeconomics (51 pts, 78 comments)
    3. Official Proposal for Two "Bad Economics Discussion Threads" per Week (proofs inside) (49 pts, 36 comments)
    4. List of Currencies by Realness [Public Service Announcement] (40 pts, 36 comments)
    5. I Just Spent Five Days Listening to Fox News (34 pts, 107 comments)
    6. Annual hours worked (17 pts, 19 comments)
    7. PSA: /dsge is now open for business (16 pts, 15 comments)
  10. 439 pts, 12 submissions: u/potato1
    1. Humanity is 10 cows. The economy is a butcher and/or a dairyman, and the dairyman only wants 7 of them. Jobs are when you avoid getting butchered and get milked instead. (58 pts, 36 comments)
    2. "[T]ariffs... are the only thing that allow workers here to continue making $10 an hour vs $.10 an hour because we tax imports from countries where they pay employees $.10 an hour" (52 pts, 41 comments)
    3. Law and Economics RI: "Every person on this subreddit should be aware of the Glass-Steagall act, because if it hadn't been repealed you'd be paying only 0.5% interest on your mortgage and student loans right now" (50 pts, 29 comments)
    4. Wealth is basically like character level in an MMORPG with player versus player combat, and like character level, wealth should have an absolute cap (46 pts, 210 comments)
    5. NAFTA was bad because it was bad for Detroit. Also, an increase in Americans' mean income is bad for the majority of Americans. (43 pts, 162 comments)
    6. "economist are like the Borg and don't care about regular people. They care about conglomerate entities like nations, corporations, etc. The smaller the conglomerate entity, the less of a shit economists give about it." (38 pts, 34 comments)
    7. "Why would greater productivity lead to higher wages and lower prices? There is little evidence to support that actually occurs in the real world." (36 pts, 62 comments)
    8. Printing more money causes deflation. Also, deflation is when prices of goods increase. Also, China caused the real estate bubble by "exporting deflation" though "flood[ing] the world with cheap products" (31 pts, 22 comments)
    9. This redditor has the solution for the Greek debt crisis, and indeed all economic problems across the globe: global jubilee (27 pts, 41 comments)
    10. Net Neutrality is communism. (25 pts, 88 comments)

Top Commenters

  1. u/besttrousers (30182 pts, 4648 comments)
  2. u/wumbotarian (25844 pts, 5992 comments)
  3. u/say_wot_again (17728 pts, 2805 comments)
  4. u/Integralds (15045 pts, 2290 comments)
  5. u/urnbabyurn (12655 pts, 2220 comments)
  6. u/commentsrus (11917 pts, 1969 comments)
  7. u/bdubs91 (6030 pts, 1629 comments)
  8. u/irondeepbicycle (5733 pts, 794 comments)
  9. u/-Rory- (5577 pts, 1115 comments)
  10. u/Jericho_Hill (5243 pts, 1195 comments)

Top Submissions

  1. FUCK THE BABY BOOMERS!!! LOUD NOISES!!! by u/say_wot_again (253 pts, 259 comments)
  2. Bernie Sanders' NYT Op-Ed on the Federal Reserve by u/Integralds (234 pts, 445 comments)
  3. User in /Politics unironically calls Integralds "Hitler" in a horrible thread about the Federal Reserve, Bitcoin, Anarcho-Marxism, and Basic Income. by u/commentsrus (202 pts, 17 comments)
  4. Is a basic income badeconomics? No, not really. But there is a lot of badeconomics in the /basicincome FAQ (Part 1) by u/besttrousers (163 pts, 136 comments)
  5. 10 Ways that TPP would hurt Working Families. Bernie Sanders AND the TPP, what's not to love?! by u/irondeepbicycle (160 pts, 115 comments)
  6. <-- # of Days Jericho_Hill replaces Wumbo as R1 Moderator by u/Jericho_Hill (159 pts, 64 comments)
  7. "Now that the text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership has finally been released, it is even worse than I thought." Sanders declares, hours after the release of a 1,000 odd page legal document. by u/Tiako (144 pts, 266 comments)
  8. Banks serve no social purpose, if banks didn't exist everyone could build their own house, the only reason you can't create your own money is because banks have banned it, banks are "cheeky cunts" for demanding repayment of loans, you are only an employee because you have to pay taxes, and more! by u/usrname42 (121 pts, 85 comments)
  9. "Economics teacher" explains why free trade is bad. Seems to have no idea what comparative advantage is. by u/telaisarcher1 (109 pts, 313 comments)
  10. "In the U.S., the gap stands at 64%, meaning that women earn about two-thirds of what men make for similar work." by u/wqqk (108 pts, 23 comments)

Top Comments

  1. 675 pts: u/say_wot_again's comment in FUCK THE BABY BOOMERS!!! LOUD NOISES!!!
  2. 146 pts: u/Tiako's comment in Bernie Sanders' NYT Op-Ed on the Federal Reserve
  3. 138 pts: u/NORTHAMERICAN_SCUM's comment in FUCK THE BABY BOOMERS!!! LOUD NOISES!!!
  4. 136 pts: u/besttrousers's comment in "But companies still hire people because they have no choice but to. They need enough workers to meet the demands of the market and so they hire people. So if a layoff was to occur I'd occurred regardless of wage hike."
  5. 133 pts: u/praxeologist4lyfe's comment in Don’t let the Nobel prize fool you. Economics is not a science | Joris Luyendijk
  6. 118 pts: u/Timster757's comment in "Now that the text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership has finally been released, it is even worse than I thought." Sanders declares, hours after the release of a 1,000 odd page legal document.
  7. 115 pts: u/-Rory-'s comment in Economics is an art, therefore rent controls are a good idea
  8. 107 pts: u/mberre's comment in Guys: SMBC is on to us
  9. 106 pts: u/lorentz65's comment in I finally understood different schools of economic thought
  10. 105 pts: u/HealthcareEconomist3's comment in [Low hanging fruit] /Futurology discusses basicincome
Generated with BBoe's Subreddit Stats SRS Marker: 1451162423.0
submitted by amici_ursi to subreddit_stats [link] [comments]

The phase in which everyone quietly grows desperate

Closely following the economic collapse of my country and continent, I can tell where we are going now. We have arrived at that hilarious point in time where people try desperately to sell their crap to a public that simply can't afford any of it. They have to of course, because they have no viable alternative.
The one exception I would have to note is found in the banking sector. Big banks are downsizing their mortgage division, as the risk is too large to them. They won't say that, they declare instead that they can't profit enough, but that's a lie. They earn 4% a year for a period of 10 years, while borrowing themselves for 0.005%. It's not hard to earn money if given such a privilege.
So why then are they not interested in lending to the public? The answer is because they recognize what lies ahead for Eurozone economies. The answer is, contrary to what most of the public fears, deflation. Governments seek to prevent deflation, but they're powerless to do so. Christopher Sims, a Nobel prize winning monetary expert, warned that Europe faces deflation, with governments having no real option to prevent it.
The real worry should be deflation now. The worst performing countries in Europe, Greece, Portugal and Spain, all face deflation, rather than inflation.2 Most people who have figured out that governments are now lying to us in an effort to get the economy to recover get their economic perspective from libertarians. Libertarians don't warn about deflation however, because Austrian economists tend to deny that deflation is a bad thing. Governments are probably thankful to libertarians for this, as the expectation by the public of deflation in the future is an essential factor for it to happen.
We'll find out soon enough that deflation grinds the whole economy to a halt however. Banks in anticipation of deflation refuse to lend out money, because they recognize that people will be unable to pay back the mortgage, while the property they bought won't be worth enough as collateral. The issue for banks is that deflation is associated with high unemployment, as companies have to fire people when people refuse to buy their products, which people will when they can get it for a lower price in the near future.
The prices of most goods are going to go down in Europe, as more is produced than consumers can afford. Car sales in my country are down 21.5% in 2014, compared to 2009.3 I am part of an entire demographic of youth who simply gave up on car ownership altogether, as car sales to people aged 18-25 are down 44.7% in my country, in just five years. This triggers blatantly obvious attempts by car manufacturers to market cars to hipsters, young middle class white women.4 They're fearful, because if they don't capture this market today, they'll probably never buy one.
It should have been obvious to people in my nation that something was wrong when our prime minister showed up on TV and declared that everyone should buy bigger houses and new cars to save a dying economy.5 The desperation visible here doesn't align with the narrative they are pushing, of an economy that is in recovery. Nor does the recommendation to the elderly of our state secretary to supplement their pension by growing their own food indicate confidence in an ongoing recovery.6
Babyboomers responded with outrage of course, because they don't like hearing the truth. They'd rather have their government lie to them and pretend that housing prices can rise forever, young people will one day buy your overvalued homes and stocks from you and pensions will still be there by the time you're old. They argued that most people who grow their own food actually spend a lot of money, apparently not realizing that rising food prices and declining incomes means that it will be easier to break even in the future.
Our governments also take desperate measures to reduce the size of the welfare state. This is a pointless endeavor however, as people have no genuine alternative. It started by declaring that people who don't learn Dutch face cuts to their benefits. The next step we see now is where people who sell puppies on the internet after their dog gave birth suddenly have their benefits withdrawn and are forced to pay back the money they received.7
The government is scared of an underground informal economy rising up that threatens the established economy on which its tax revenue depends. This is inevitable however, as the government creates the incentive itself, as it raises VAT taxes in an effort to fix its budget. Modern technology also makes the formation of a growing informal economy inevitable. Bitcoin allows people to receive payments without any involvement of the banks. We're then able to anonymously exchange the Bitcoin for fiat currency.
Times are changing, the trend today in Europe is towards rapid deindustrialization. People who make the mistake of investing in the future by buying a house, buying stock or going to college are setting themselves up for trouble, as they will be faced with assets that lose value and debts they will not be able to pay back. If you wish to see the trend towards deindustrialization for yourself, you should go outside and look at the people gathering blackberries. I'm not the exception to the rule, rather, I'm an early adapter in a trend that is going to spread, as I was with Bitcoin.
I think a lot about what we have to do, now that we are faced with the prospect of rapid deindustrialization. Should we try to escalate it? If we want to try to hasten the process of deindustrialization, how do we accomplish this? These are difficult questions to which no clear answer exists. I consider sabotage to be an ethically justified method of prohastening deindustrialization. The problem lies in figuring out what method of sabotage is most efficient.
Sabotage that appears efficient may in reality have the opposite expected effect. After World War II developed economies grew very rapidly, as the task of reconstructing our nations created additional economic opportunities. The task of building new houses ensures that people in the construction sector have a long-term job guarantee. This makes banks willing to lend money to the workers, and so forth.
Thus counterintuitively, we find that destroying a factory doesn't destroy the factory. We might think that Africa proves the opposite of this rule. Continual civil wars and strife surely seems responsible for the fact that Africa fails to industrialize. I believe this is not true however. What happened in Africa was that Africa did not industrialize because the people did not need the factory. People who can be self-sufficient and produce their own food can not be convinced to start working for minimum wage in a factory, nor can they be convinced to consume its products or to build the infrastructure the factory needs.
We know that in Britain, the industrial revolution only happened when the rich successfully drove the poor into the cities, by stealing the commons, public land that was communally utilized. The term "tragedy of the commons" is in fact an insult to our ancestors, a white-washing by an elite. The commons were well managed and utilized, the only tragedy we find is that the commons were stolen from the people, who were then forced to migrate to the cities.
The idea that destroying a factory doesn't destroy the factory may seem to libertarians like an expression of the broken window fallacy. However, I would argue that in our current economic situation, the broken window fallacy is itself a fallacy. The broken window fallacy fallacy (no, that's not an error) argues that the man whose window was broken would have otherwise invested the money into some other product, like a slot machine, which he is now forced to spend on fixing his broken window. This explanation only makes sense in an economic climate where people have a strong incentive to spend money and invest in their future. In our current economic climate, people try to make do with the objects we already have. We don't want to buy any new ones, unless we absolutely have to, nor do we invest in the future.
The machine is in danger, not when we destroy it, but rather, when we decide that we no longer need it. I believe that we are entering this phase now. An entire generation of young people is figuring out that they do not need a car. This beast of burden that ravages the countryside and fills the landscpae with a network of asphalted paths is a relic of the past. For modern young people, to buy a car is to be old fashioned and naively optimistic about the future.
As ironic as it may seem, if we want to get rid of the car and everything it represents, it may be more effective for us to remove a broken glass bottle from the bicycle lane than to burn down a car. A car maker doesn't lie awake at night from a bomb found in his factory, a car maker lies awake at night from the young people he saw the other day with a bicycle.
Imagine for a moment that in a town somewhere in the United States, someone shoots at a bunch of transformers or power cables, causing a large grid failure. Surely this would stop the industrial machine? In reality, we might find that people flee from a town, as they have no air conditioning. People find that those without a car have difficulty leaving, as the trains no longer ride. When order is restored, people purchase cars, expecting to increase their autonomy again in the process.
Is there no point at all then, to industrial sabotage? I don't believe we should go this far either, but we have to think very hard about the effectiveness of such actions. We have to ask: Where is the machine most vulnerable? To me it would appear that the machine is most vulnerable, exactly there where we do not believe we need it. This would mean that our prime target should be biotechnology. People don't yet believe themselves to need biotechnology, whereas we do believe we depend on the electrical grid.
I also expect that the machine is vulnerable whenever it tries to seize something from the natural world. A mine that is opened in a wild forest is vulnerable to disruption, yet because it does not produce anything yet, people don't directly depend on it. In the case of shale oil in the United States or tar oil in Canada, profit margins may be so tight that a systematic sabotage campaign may render the entire industry unsustainable, which would then have the effect of accelerating the collapse of civilization.

References

1 - http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ambroseevans-pritchard/100027956/nobel-guru-fears-it-may-be-nigh-impossible-to-stop-deflation/
2 - http://daskapital.nl/images/fotos/deflasiewoohoo.png
3 - http://www.rtlnieuws.nl/economie/home/65-plussers-zijn-grootste-autokopers
4 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZXPnW358aI
5 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OV4TWO9FDnA
6 - http://www.ad.nl/ad/nl/1012/Nederland/article/detail/3676637/2014/06/21/Klijnsma-Vul-je-pensioen-aan-met-een-moestuin.dhtml
7 - http://www.rtlnieuws.nl/nieuws/binnenland/de-bijstand-en-actief-op-marktplaats-oppassen
submitted by returnofaccountt1234 to accountt1234 [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Dips to $9800  Ethereum 2.0 All You Need To Know Winner of Nobel Prize Economics about valu of bitcoin ... Robert Shiller Bitcoin is in a bubble or not THE BOTTOM LINE: Bitcoin Mania, a Nobel Prize-winning Economist Talks Trump, and Tech Stocks Nobel Prize-winning economist warns US appears doomed to disease and depression

Bitcoin Stock-to-Flow (S2F) model was published in March 2019 [1]. The model has been well received by bitcoiners and investors. Many analysts have verified the cointegrated S2F model and confirmed… The 2020 Nobel prize for Physics awarded to Roger Penrose, University of Oxford, UK for the discovery that black hole formation is a robust prediction of the general theory of relativity.; Roger ... Two professors from Harvard and MIT have been awarded the Nobel Prize in economics for contributions to contract theory -- the agreements that shape business, finance and public policy. Bitcoin inventor Satoshi Nakamoto nominated for Nobel Prize in Economics Nobel Prizes are given for making important — preferably fundamental — breakthroughs in the realm of ideas. Considering the establishment’s hatred of Bitcoin, it is quite remarkable that the inventor of bitcoin has been nominated for the 2016 Nobel Prize in Economics. The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel 2013 was awarded jointly to Eugene F. Fama, Lars Peter Hansen and Robert J. Shiller "for their empirical analysis of asset prices".

[index] [41358] [47223] [3756] [9307] [12118] [41692] [22565] [5902] [4802] [32523]

Bitcoin Dips to $9800 Ethereum 2.0 All You Need To Know

Business Insider senior editor Josh Barro sits down with Paul Krugman, a Nobel Prize-winning economist and distinguished professor of economics at the City University of New York. They start by ... Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube. Bitcoin Stock-to-Flow On Track. Bitcoin - Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel-Prize winning economist, says cryptocurrencies should be shut down. Bitcoin - Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel-Prize winning economist ... Business Insider recently caught up with Nobel Prize-winning economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman to talk taxes, Trump, and bitcoin. Krugman i... In this video we look at a theory put forward by Nobel prize economists on what could be a potential cause for a bitcoin crash. The book I discuss is called Animal Spirits.

#