- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Cryptocurrency: Fixes Fiat That Was Broken By BankGovPol Since At Least 1913
by grarpamp 11 Jan '23

11 Jan '23

https://mises.org/wire/present-fiat-monetary-system-breaking-down https://mises.org/library/man-economy-and-state-power-and-market https://mises.org/library/capital-and-production-0 https://mises.org/library/austrian-taxonomy-deflation-applications-us The Present Fiat Monetary System Is Breaking Down Authored by Frank Shostak via The Mises Institute, The heart of economic growth is an expanding subsistence fund, or the pool of real savings. This pool, which is composed of final consumer goods, sustains individuals in the various stages of the production process. The increase in the pool of real savings permits the expansion and the enhancement of the infrastructure, and this strengthens economic growth. An increase in economic growth for a given stock of money implies more goods per unit of money. This means that economic growth, all other things being equal increases the purchasing power of money. Note that most individuals are likely to strive to improve their living standards. This means that individuals are likely to aim at expanding the pool of real savings, which will in turn strengthen economic growth and the purchasing power of money. In the framework of market-selected money such as gold, the purchasing power of money is likely to strengthen over time. According to Joseph Salerno, Historically, the natural tendency in the industrial market economy under a commodity money such as gold has been for general prices to persistently decline as ongoing capital accumulation and advances in industrial techniques led to a continual expansion in the supplies of goods. Hence, in the framework of a gold standard, the purchasing power of financial assets such as stocks and bonds is likely to strengthen alongside economic growth. Note that stronger economic growth, all other things being equal, implies a strengthening in the pool of real savings; i.e., the pool of final consumer goods. Under the present monetary standard—i.e., the paper standard—an increase in the quantity of money, because of the loose policy of the central bank, undermines the pool of real savings and in turn undermines economic growth. (Observe that loose monetary policy sets in motion an exchange of nothing for something.) As long as the pool of real savings is expanding, the increase in the money supply creates the illusion that the central bank can generate real economic growth and strengthen assets’ purchasing power. However, once the pool of real savings comes under pressure because of the monetary pumping, the growth in assets’ purchasing power starts to slow. According to Richard von Strigl, Let us assume that in some country production must be completely rebuilt. The only factors of production available to the population besides labourers are those factors of production provided by nature. Now, if production is to be carried out by a roundabout method, let us assume of one year’s duration, then it is self-evident that production can only begin if, in addition to these originary factors of production, a subsistence fund is available to the population which will secure their nourishment and any other needs for a period of one year. . . . The greater this fund, the longer is the roundabout factor of production that can be undertaken, and the greater the output will be. The Subsistence Fund and Money When producers exchange their produce for money, they can then exchange their money for various consumer goods; i.e., they can access the subsistence fund whenever they deem this necessary. When an individuals exchanges their money for goods, this is an act of exchange and not an act of payment—money is just the medium of exchange. Payment is made by means of various goods. For instance, a baker pays for shoes by means of the bread he produced, while the shoemaker pays for the bread by means of the shoes he made. (Both shoes and bread are part of the subsistence fund, as they are final consumer goods.) When the baker exchanges his money for shoes, he has already paid for the shoes with the bread that he produced prior to this exchange. Trouble erupts when, on account of loose monetary policies, a structure of production emerges that ties up much more consumer goods than it creates. This excessive consumption relative to the production of consumer goods leads to a decline in the subsistence fund, meaning that there is less economic support for the individuals that are employed in the various stages of the production structure. This results in an economic slump. Intermediate Goods What about a producer of intermediate goods, like a producer of a special tool—what is his contribution to the subsistence fund? An individual who exchanges his money for the tool will employ the tool in the production of final consumer goods or in the production of other tools and machinery that, in turn, will contribute to the production of final consumer goods sometime in the future. The producer of the special tool does not directly supply final consumer goods. However, he does offer means to secure these goods. He also offers time. According to Murray Rothbard: Crusoe without the axe is two hundred fifty hours away from his desired house; Crusoe with the axe is only two hundred hours away. If the logs of wood had been piled up ready-made on his arrival, he would be that much closer to his objective; and if the house were there to begin with, he would achieve his desire immediately. He would be further advanced toward his goal without the necessity of further restriction of consumption. Now, what about education and the arts? Should we include them in the subsistence fund? Without the availability of consumer goods that sustain individuals, education and the arts are likely to be lower on individuals’ priority lists. Once the individuals’ living standard increases, all these things become affordable to them. Hence, anything that undermines the subsistence fund undermines the ability to live like human beings, as opposed to existing like other animals. The Purchasing Power of Financial Assets and Monetary Liquidity An important factor that causes fluctuations in financial asset prices is monetary liquidity. Monetary liquidity depicts the interaction between the supply and the demand for money. Now, the increase in liquidity—an increase in the supply of money relative to the demand for money—does not enter all asset markets instantaneously. It enters various markets sequentially. Note that the price of an asset is the amount of money paid for the asset. When money enters a particular asset market, there is now more money per unit of the asset. This means that the price of the asset in this market has gone up. After a time lapse, once investors have adopted the view that the asset is overvalued, they move the monetary liquidity to other asset markets. This shows that there is a time lag between changes in liquidity and changes in the average price of assets. Observe that the increase in the momentum of asset prices is driven by the increase in the lagged liquidity momentum. Conversely, a decline in the liquidity momentum after a time lag results in a decline in the momentum of asset prices. It would appear that the monetary liquidity is the key driver of asset prices. This is not the case. The pool of real savings, which gives rise to economic growth, determines the purchasing power of assets in money terms. Notwithstanding the popular view that increases in the money supply can help grow the economy, money cannot do such things. More money cannot replace real savings that sustain individuals in the various stages of production. According to Rothbard, this is revealed once the pool of real savings starts to decline and the central bank’s monetary pumping becomes ineffective in reviving the pace of economic activity. In the framework of market-selected money such as gold and in the absence of a central bank, an increase in assets’ purchasing power is going to reflect an increase in the pool of real savings and thus economic growth. Central bank policies, however, curtail investors’ ability to distinguish wealth-generating activities from non-wealth-generating ones; i.e., bubble activities. An increase in money supply masquerades as an increase in real wealth. This results in erroneous investment decisions. Hence, all other things being equal, the exchange value of assets is set by the pool of real savings. Changes in monetary liquidity because of central bank policies cause disruptions known as bull-bear markets. Summary and Conclusions An important factor that appears to drive financial asset prices is monetary liquidity, defined as the growth rate in money supply minus the growth rate in the demand for money. This is not the case. The pool of real savings gives rise to economic growth, which for a given stock of money determines the purchasing power of assets.

1 0

SpyVeillance:
by grarpamp 11 Jan '23

11 Jan '23

https://headlineusa.com/privacy-watchdog-atf-uses-stingrays-to-track-americ… https://www.protectprivacynow.org/news/is-the-bureau-of-alcohol-tobacco-fir… https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-402_h315.pdf Privacy Watchdog: ATF Uses Stingrays To Track Americans Authored by Ken Silva via Headline USA The Project for Privacy & Surveillance Accountability announced this week that it has obtained records about the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ use of stingrays to track Americans. An ATF agent lifts crime scene tape. / PHOTO: AP Stingrays are a relatively new technology that simulate cell towers and collect signals from devices nearby. PPSA filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the ATF in February 2021, and announced on Wednesday that it had received a batch of documents. According to PPSA, those documents show that the agency uses stingrays. “The information released by the ATF confirms the agency is indeed utilizing stingray technology,” PPSA said. “Although the agency attempted to minimize the usage of stingrays, it is clear they are being widely used against Americans.” PPSA has not published the documents it received, but described some of their contents. “The ATF stressed that stingrays are not precise location trackers like GPS, despite the plethora of information stingrays can still provide,” the organization said. “Answers to questions from the Senate Appropriations Committee about the ATF’s usage of stingrays and license plate reader technology are entirely blacked out in the ATF documents we received.” PPSA added that ATF policy conceals the use of these devices from their targets, even when relevant to their legal defense. PPSA said there’s an example of this in the documents it received. “When an ATF agent interviewed by a defense attorney revealed the use of the equipment, a large group email was sent out saying: ‘This was obviously a mistake and is being handled,’” the privacy watchdog said. PPSA said it will continue to track stingray usage and report the responses it receives to its FOIA requests with various federal agencies. Civil liberties activists have noted that the use of stingrays by law enforcement dramatically increased after the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Carpenter v. U.S., which found that law enforcement’s warrantless collection of cell phone geolocation data violated the Fourth Amendment. Instead of obtaining warrants, police agencies have used stingrays as a workaround. Ken Silva is a staff writer at Headline USA. Follow him at twitter.com/jd_cashless.

1 0

Cryptocurrency: Coin Privacy (re: US Homeland Security Can Now Track Privacy Crypto Monero)
by grarpamp 11 Jan '23

11 Jan '23

Subject typo, in re, and leeclagett.com

1 0

Cryptocurrency: Fixes Theft Extortion Privacy and Efficiency
by grarpamp 11 Jan '23

11 Jan '23

Trump's Tax Returns Show Evil Of The Income Tax by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2023/january/09/trum… The final act of the Democrat majority on the House Ways and Means Committee was to make public several years of Donald Trump’s tax returns, which the Committee obtained after a prolonged legal battle. The tax returns confirmed that, despite being one of the richest people in America, Donald Trump paid very little in federal income tax. In fact, in at least one year he paid under a thousand dollars. Trump’s success in minimizing his tax liability without ever being audited is surprising only to those who think IRS audits are mainly used to catch rich “tax cheats.” According to data released by the Syracuse University Transactional Records Clearinghouse, in 2022 lower-income taxpayers were five and half times more likely than millionaires and billionaires to be audited! This is because low-income taxpayers cannot afford to hire top-notch tax attorneys and accountants to help fight the IRS, so they are more likely to give in to the agency’s demands. Despite claims of the Biden Administration and its Congressional allies, the $80 million in additional funds provided to the agency as a part of the misnamed “Inflation Reduction Act” will likely increase the tax agency’s targeting of low- and middle-income Americans. Proponents of a flat tax or national sales tax argue that such a system would ensure millionaires and billionaires paid their “fair share” of taxes. Saying we must all pay our “fair share” of taxes assumes we have a moral obligation to the government that can only be fulfilled by turning over as much of our income as our so-called “public servants” demand. This is not the case. Individuals have a moral duty to support their families, and to support private charities if they wish. They do not have a moral duty to support the government. Tax reform proponents also complain that the current tax code contains too many loopholes that cause economic distortions and inefficiencies. It is true that the current tax system promotes inefficiency, but this is caused by the income tax itself, not the loopholes. Conversely, loopholes actually promote economic efficiency by giving taxpayers the ability to spend more of their money the way they prefer, rather than allowing politicians to spend it. As economist Thomas DiLorenzo put it, “private individuals always spend their own money more efficiently than government bureaucrats do.” Some have expressed concerns that the use of President Trump’s tax records as part of the Democrat and Deep State effort to discredit him sets a dangerous precedent that will lead to increased use of tax information as a political weapon. The sad fact is that ever since its creation, politicians have used the IRS as a tool for punishing political opponents. As an IRS agent told the head of conservative organization who was being audited after calling for the impeachment of then-President Bill Clinton, “What do you expect when you target the President?” The major problem with the income tax, and the reason it must be eliminated, not merely “reformed,” is that it is rooted in the idea that the government has first claim on our income. This idea is incompatible with a free society. Furthermore, the income tax must also be repealed because the force of the IRS, along with the fraud of the Federal Reserve, is one of the two foundations of the welfare-warfare state that erodes our liberty and prosperity. The only way to avoid 1984 is to repeal 1913.

1 0

[ot] Stronger-After.org Is a Beautiful Glimpse of Freedom
by Karl Semich 11 Jan '23

11 Jan '23

https://www.stronger-after.org/ Thousands of people experience intimidation and abuse in groups and relationships because someone in power is using fear, isolation or ideology to manipulate them. We've been there; we believe you. That's why Stronger After offers free online tools for those breaking away from coercion. [About Coercion] [About Stronger After] Do you experience repetitive and all-or-nothing thinking? Are you afraid of making mistakes? Do you have difficulties connecting with others, identifying your feelings, communicating your needs, or saying "no?" Many experience involuntary thoughts, feelings, or behaviors as a result of coercive control. It's a normal reaction to an abnormal situation. [Common issues after coercion] [What is a toxic group / relationship?] IS IT STILL AFFECTING YOU TODAY? Wouldn't it be wonderful if we could escape an abusive situation and just leave all the hurt behind? However, coercion makes you internalize negative messages about yourself. In order to fully step away, you have to address the impact of your experience. Informed support is essential. [Setting healthy boundaries] Read some of our articles, join an online class or consider the 5-unit one-on-one course with one of our coaches. Learn more about healthy boundaries and relationships, coercion, manipulation, how to protect yourself, and how to live an independent life. [Coaching] [Online Classes] Subscribe to the newsletter to receive free worksheets, class offerings, and event info: [Email] contact(a)stronger-after.org [Donate]

1 3

Cryptoanarchy needs more than just global economic control
by professor rat 10 Jan '23

10 Jan '23

Crypto link to Wagner Group a sharp reminder of the need for full-spectrum APster dominance. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-01-11/wagner-group-mercenaries-in-central-… Reposts not just bad news bears but bullish opportunities

1 0

Cypherpunk Pope, Juan Garofalo is financed by the child-molester Catholic Church
by professor rat 10 Jan '23

10 Jan '23

And in related news… Mussolini was Catholic. Franco was Catholic. Dolfuss was Catholic. Himmler, head of the SS, was a Catholic. The SS was set up on the Jesuit model. Goebbels was Catholic. Hoss, the camp commandant of Auschwitz, was a Catholic. Frank,‘ the butcher of Poland ’, was Catholic. Ante Pavelic was a Catholic. Pinochet was Catholic. Evita Peron introduced compulsory religious education into all Argentine schools. Dirtbag Hitler Francis heads up the Vatican. Juan Garofalo carries on in all these brownshirt traditions. Fuck him and all who sail in him.

1 0

how is the U.S. mailbomber jewnazi grarpamp @ gmail.com 'financed'?
by punk 10 Jan '23

10 Jan '23

where does the stolen money that pays for all the list's propaganda come from? "In all, at least a mind-boggling $21 trillion of Pentagon financial transactions between 1998 and 2015 could not be traced, documented, or explained" http://web.archive.org/web/20200116111930/https://www.thenation.com/article… So that's the answer eh. 21 Trillions of 'black budgets' in less than twenty years. I bet the current figure is some 40 trillions. But hey, the only jewnazi global empire and biggest threat to humanity...in human history...the jewnazi U.S., is no different than any other 'bad actor', like, I don't know, the governmnet of paraguay!

1 0

Are The New York Giants, The New York Jets, And MetLife Stadium Misleading Consumers About Their Connection To New York?
by Gunnar Larson 10 Jan '23

10 Jan '23

Binance Holdings Ltd., the biggest cryptocurrency exchange, acknowledged past flaws in the management of its stablecoin’s reserves which at times led to more than $1 billion in missing collateral, according to one analysis. The token, Binance-peg BUSD, is meant have a constant $1 value backed by reserves of BUSD, another stablecoin that is branded by Binance but issued and managed by a separate company, Paxos Trust. Binance signaled that the “peg,” referring to the amount of BUSD locked as collateral to support its own token, had frayed in the past but is now intact. -------- https://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/advertising-marketing--branding/1267766… This time of year, I spend a lot of my time working on Super Bowl-related advertising. So, it seems like a perfect time to blog about football. Is it misleading for the New York Giants and the New York Jets to have "New York" in their team names when they actually play in MetLife Stadium, which is located in East Rutherford, New Jersey? And is it misleading for MetLife Stadium to use a New York City skyline image in its logo? Those were some of the key issues in a recent false advertising lawsuit in federal court in New York (yes, actually in New York). The Giants have played in New Jersey since 1976 and the Jets have played there since 1984. Notwithstanding this, two consumers -- both New York City residents, by the way -- sued the NFL, the Giants and the Jets, and MetLife Stadium, alleging false advertising and other claims, on the grounds that that they didn't realize that the teams played across the river in New Jersey and that MetLife Stadium was, in fact, located in New Jersey. The plaintiffs also asserted additional false advertising claims related to statements that appeared on the stadium's website, including that it is "the number one stadium in the world," that it "hosts the World's Biggest Events, on the World's Biggest Stage," that it "sets the standard for venue excellence," that the stadium is under 20 minutes from New York City, and that the stadium is accessible to Penn Station. In order to state a claim for false advertising under New York law, a plaintiff must prove that the defendant engaged in deceptive or materially misleading acts or practices. It's not enough to allege that a statement "might conceivably be misunderstood by some few consumers." Rather, a plaintiff must allege that the acts or practices were "likely to mislead a reasonable consumer acting reasonably under the circumstances." The defendants here moved to dismiss the false advertising claims, arguing (among other things) that the alleged misrepresentations were not misleading to reasonable consumers. And the magistrate judge, in a report and recommendation to the District Court, agreed. Here's why. First, the court held that "no reasonable football fan, 'acting reasonably under the circumstances,' would conclude from the names and logos of the Jets and the Giants that their stadium is within the five boroughs of New York City." The court explained that it is common for professional sports teams to name themselves after the city they call home, even while playing in the suburbs of that city (or even further away). The court gave, as examples, the Washington Redskins (who played in Maryland), the San Francisco 49ers (who played in Santa Clara), and the New York Giants themselves (who played in New Haven, Connecticut for two years). The court concluded, "As these and similar examples demonstrate, there is nothing misleading -- in the context of professional football -- about the long-standing names and logos of the Giants and the Jets." Second, the court also didn't think that the MetLife Stadium's logo -- which features a version of the New York City skyline -- was confusing. The court pointed to a number of examples on the stadium's website which indicated that the stadium was located in New Jersey. For example, the site indicated that there was "NJ Transit rail station" located in front of the stadium and there was a map link on the site which showed that the stadium was located just off the New Jersey turnpike. The court explained, "A reasonable consumer (even if she did not click through to Google Maps) would understand that New Jersey Transit goes to New Jersey, and that the New Jersey Turnpike is in New Jersey." Third, the court determined that statements that MetLife Stadium is "the number one stadium in the world" and that it "sets the standard for venue excellence" are non-actionable puffery, since they are each a "general claim of superiority over comparable products that is so vague that it can be understood as nothing more than a mere expression of opinion." The court also held -- without much explanation -- that the statements, "hosts the World's Biggest Events," "has the World's Biggest Stage," and "has topped the industry charts annually since opening," were also puffery (though I could imagine another court struggling over these specific claims a bit more). And, finally, the court also found that the claims that the stadium is "under 20 minutes from New York City" and that it is "accessible to Penn Station" were also not misleading. The court said that the website didn't promise a 20 minute travel time, but instead just estimated that travel would take under 20 minutes (which the court felt was apparently pretty close to the actual 30 minute travel time that the plaintiffs experienced). The court also wasn't troubled by the claim that the stadium is accessible to Penn Station, since all consumers needed to do was to change trains in Secaucus. Are there any important take-aways here -- or is this just an entertaining case? It's probably mostly just an entertaining case, but here are a few things to think about. One of the things that strikes me about how federal courts often approach false advertising class actions is that it seems that they often bring a fair degree of skepticism to them. Without saying so explicitly, they often seem to be asking the question whether the case deserves to be heard (or whether it's just a stupid case), regardless of the potential legal arguments that could be made about whether particular claims are misleading. Here, it seemed pretty clear that the court didn't really see much merit in the claims, and without a lot of reasoning, was pretty comfortable disposing of the plaintiffs' claims. For example, the court seems to say that the MetLife Stadium's logo isn't misleading because someone can review the stadium's website and figure out by clues on the site (such as that it's near a New Jersey Transit station) that the stadium is in New Jersey. Putting aside the question whether the logo is actually misleading -- or communicating any specific claims at all -- if it were actually communicating claims, there's really no basis in advertising law for suggesting that a false claim can be cured by hunting for clues about the meaning of the claim on the advertiser's website. As another example, the court dismisses out of hand the plaintiffs' claim that it is misleading for the stadium to advertise that it "hosts the World's Biggest Events," holding, without any real explanation, that the claim is puffery. Regardless of how I might come out on this question, having recently been at The Big House, I would at least have struggled a bit with the fact that MetLife Stadium isn't the world's biggest football stadium or even the biggest football stadium in the United States. Another thing that struck me about the decision was that it was focused more on whether the claims were misleading to reasonable consumers, rather than on whether the claims were materially misleading. This isn't unique to this decision. Often, it seems to me, when considering potentially problematic claims, regulators and others often fail to sufficiently consider whether a claim, even if misleading, simply isn't material to a consumer's purchasing decision. Looking again at the statement, "hosts the World's Biggest Events," for example, regardless of whether this may be a false claim, could it possibly be material to a consumer's choice to attend a Giants game whether the stadium holds 80,000 or 100,000 fans? Finally, one important take-away from the decision is that the court -- when evaluating whether the team names were misleading -- considered the claims in context. In other words, advertising claims shouldn't be judged in isolation, without regard to who the intended audience is and what that audience will understand the claims to communicate. Here, the court was persuaded that sports fans in the United States understand -- based on their own experience as sports fans here -- that the team's name doesn't necessarily tell you where the team actually plays its games. Ever since I was a little kid, I remember driving over the George Washington Bridge to get to Giants games -- and the court's decision here supports the idea that advertising claims must be interpreted in light of consumers' actual experiences and their real world understanding of those claims. Suero v. NFL, 2022 WL 17985657 (S.D.N.Y. 2022).

1 0

Adrienne Harris Is Crypto’s Most Powerful Regulator
by Gunnar Larson 10 Jan '23

10 Jan '23

Pam: Another great story from Wall Street on Parade today. Wondering if you saw the New York Magazine mention of Sullivan and Cromwell? Seems your story would have been 360 on the essence of conflicts? Gunnar https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/03/adrienne-harris-is-cryptos-most-pow… 'In 2008, Harris joined Sullivan & Cromwell, a law firm so close with Goldman Sachs that it has long sent its lawyers to work in-house at the investment bank. It was there that she worked for H. Rodgin “Rodge” Cohen, then the law firm’s chairman and the so-called trauma surgeon of Wall Street.'

1 0