Joe

Easier to achieve might be to allow all investments to be tax deductible. You're taxed when you sell if not reinvested. If you want to pay taxes now, buy a bond.

@phl43 "It wouldn't have happened if the US and Israel hadn't attacked" This means it wouldn't have happened ever, right? Obviously if it was going to happen next year and Trump expected this, there's no circularity so you must be making the stronger claim. Right?

The problem with the argument that Iran's closure of Hormuz retroactively justifies Trump's decision to attack, even though it wouldn't have happened if the US and Israel hadn't attacked Iran in the first place, is not just that it's obviously circular but also that it may

@ZIMGODO @MsMelChen Pretty good wall if it made Singapore so rich and principled

@MsMelChen lol all that wall of text when the actual reason was actually this simple

Singapore is the first and only Asian country so far to publicly refuse negotiating passage with Iran. Many others have made deals with Tehran to allow their shipments through. Some vessels are reportedly paying as much as $2m in fees to Iran to cross the waterway without

@LesserMidas @anthonyost3 @Gianpattention @saifedean Thanks for confirming my point

@c64f7e94 @anthonyost3 @Gianpattention @saifedean Nah im good, im up 2000% since 2018

As @saifedean brilliantly explains in The Bitcoin Standard: when your currency loses 3-4% yearly, saving becomes mathematically irrational. Prudence (the cardinal virtue that orders all the others) requires a future worth saving for. Fiat severs that link. The result? You get a

@Gianpattention @anthonyost3 @saifedean That's true

@c64f7e94 @anthonyost3 @saifedean you aren't mandated to lend it to gvmnt (people do in some places because of better fiscal treatment or whatever, that's a different topic). You can buy high rated short term paper from corporate issuers and it's identical (you get a few more bps as well).

@LesserMidas @anthonyost3 @Gianpattention @saifedean Think a bit harder and upgrade your common sense

@c64f7e94 @anthonyost3 @Gianpattention @saifedean It’s only ridiculous if you try to be smart It makes common sense

@anthonyost3 @Gianpattention @saifedean They sometimes outpace it and sometimes fall behind. But on average, it's equal (ex ante, at least). You lend to the government, but economically, it's not really lending. Think of it like exchanging money for a higher quantity of less valuable money in the future.

@c64f7e94 @Gianpattention @saifedean Not only do money market funds not outpace true inflation, but you are also saying in order to keep the money you’ve earned have to then lend it back to the government.

@cafreiman How many people have you killed today by not liquidating your savings?

Shutting down USAID “resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths.”

@anthonyost3 @Gianpattention @saifedean Putting your money in a money market fund which beats inflation is very far from speculation. Inflation encourages you to hold less cash, which is bad, but Saifedean's theory is badly argued and mostly ridiculous.

@Gianpattention @saifedean If your currency is being debased you are forced to speculate on investments in order to save. It’s become so normalized that people don’t even think about it but not only do you have to earn money from your work but you have to then speculate just to keep it.

@deadalnix Both of our conversations now have you squirming out of answering me. You responded to a tweet about European bases. Trump and Rubio have been discussing NATO in that context. You mention American military bases, I assume you include European ones, which are there bc of NATO.

@c64f7e94 If you want to know what my claim is, I suggest you read the post you are reacting to instead of repeatedly pulling a Cathy Newman.

Europeans want to convince us that the world invests in the US as a favor to us because of NATO.

@deadalnix But this was your misunderstanding. Any sense of "strength" (high market cap/expected returns/whatever) has nothing to do with what I was saying, and now you're obscuring. I want to laugh more, tell me why I can't talk about %s of GDP because GDP is measured in dollars 😆

@c64f7e94 When you don't know what word means, I suggest you educate yourself and/or ask questions. That's a good tell you aren't up to speed and shouldn't be lecturing others.

Let me go over why this is either a bluff, or something that'll backfire spectacularly for the US. The US has an informal deal with the world: The world uses the dollar for international commerce, and in exchange, the US ensure security of supply lines, notably in the middle

@deadalnix Which NATO has nothing to do with? Is that your claim?

@c64f7e94 The US military bases in Europe.

@deadalnix I'm not talking about the "strength" (whatever that means) of the USD with that "1%" claim. I'm saying that the US is richer by around 1% via it's ability to inflate foreigners' dollars. You can attempt to counter that claim, but hyperinflation has nothing to do with this, idiot.

@c64f7e94 GDP is irrelevent to measure the strength of the USD because it is measured in USD. If you though about this, you'd have realized that, for instance, in the case of hyperinflation, the strength of the USD would collapse while the GDP would go through the roof.

@esaagar Why is this framed as Trump backing down and not the Iranian government? I know the answer.

A few friends told me that saying TACO implies ridicule or chiding. To me is just a generic term at this point for a pretty clear Trump pattern of backing down but I see their point considering the literal meaning of the acronym so let me just say I’m very glad this happened!

@deadalnix What do you think Marco Rubio was talking about in regard to Europe's defense in the tweet you retweeted?

@c64f7e94 The post doesn't mention NATO at all. Not the brightest, are you?

@deadalnix It's the reserve currency because the US is a huge economy and has not been terrible to bondholders. Lots of people want to diversify into US debt and assets. Talking about percents of GDP is bad, why? Because both are measured in dollars (and the units cancel)? Lmao say more...

@c64f7e94 Ho it's better than the alternative? Why is that? Could that be because it's the world reserve currency? As to the benefit, measuring it in term of GDP is retarded. The GDP is measured in USD, and $1 is always equal to $1 . It kind of make sens you'd want to do that then.

Señor presidente @petrogustavo, Hace algún tiempo planteé una propuesta similar a Hillary Clinton, tras sus críticas sobre el sistema penitenciario en mi país. Hasta hoy, sigo a la espera de una respuesta. Permítame entonces extenderle la misma invitación, con el mayor respeto. Si, como usted sostiene, en nuestro país existen “campos de concentración”, estaríamos frente a una situación que no admite términos medios, sino decisiones firmes en favor de la dignidad humana. En ese espíritu, El Salvador está dispuesto a facilitar el traslado del 100% de su población carcelaria, todos, incluyendo los llamados presos políticos y cualquier otro caso que considere viole su política del “amor y la vida”. Únicamente bajo una condición que entiendo será compartida por usted: deben ser todos. Porque si se trata de “campos de concentración”, incluso un solo detenido que permanezca allí sería inaceptable. Esta es una oportunidad histórica para consolidar su legado como el libertador que extendió la cuerda firme de la justicia, para sacar a miles del abismo de la exclusión.

@oren_cass @marlo_safi Obvious theory is that Trump and the Iranian negotiators already had an agreement. If so, Trump's crazy tweets give the Iranian leadership a political win and a way to back down without looking weak to hardliners. Surely I'm not the only person who can speculate rationally?

I mostly avoid commenting on what President Trump says from day to day, while pulling no punches in my assessments, whether positive or negative, of his policy. His Iran ultimatums feel different. Making such threats is a policy. If he were to follow through on them, the

@cezarybaginski @AlexNowrasteh Stuck at the beginning: > If you equate every possible action to being an act of economizing, random action is them also economizing. I am not "equating" anything here, and I am not asserting something about "every possible action". And what is "universally objective"?

> Even if the guy owns slaves, he still has preferences and faces constraints. If you equate every possible action to being an act of economizing, random action is them also economizing. How you have 2 terms that are identical "I'm economizing" and "I'm doing random stuff". So obviously, "economizing" would imply a demonstrable improvement. An autistic economy aside (Crusoe on an island), economizing is no different from destruction unless it's objective. If individual value rankings are subjective, how can outputs be demonstrated to be universally objective? You need the idea of voluntary exchange. That prevents a random allocation, because a random allocation between 2 people would be a constant back and forth exchange. The fact that that does happen between humans (who can exchange freely) proves all people involved prefer the new allocation of goods than before the last transaction. > If he randomly chooses whom to throw the first spear (or further, chooses a random direction to throw in) he will not eat and die. A person doing random things also faces the same constraints. Those constraints do not change as a result of economizing or not. That's why they're external constraints. Constraints do not imply economizing. Does that make it clearer?

The number of economists on staff remains unchanged.