Peter Schiff on Joe Rogan Experience

Listened to first 30 mins. Noticed Joe didn’t say he agreed with universal education and healthcare like he did a few weeks ago.
 
Diamond Jim said:
Listened to first 30 mins. Noticed Joe didn’t say he agreed with universal education and healthcare like he did a few weeks ago.
Click to expand...

I listen to the JRE every week and can confidently say that Joe will often alter what he believes to suit each guest. Some days he's a libertarian, other days he's a progressive liberal. Which doesn't really bother me, because most folks are woefully inconsistent in their political beliefs.
 
SBJJ said:
The worst thing is that from what I’m seeing. His fund lost money but he may have actually made money from his personal investments
Click to expand...

Well, he makes money from his show and from conning rubes. What I'm saying is that his investing strategy is based around profiting from a crash and then when there was a big one, he didn't profit off it. Without exaggeration, a monkey could do better than him (assuming an untrained monkey rather than one that has learned or independently come up with Austrian "economics").

Trotsky said:
I didn't listen. Can you fill me in on what things about the economy are common sense to persons in the know like Schiff and @Scheme, but which I am not sophisticated enough to know about?
Click to expand...

The issue is that he's stuck in the (early) 19th century, or he'd say that all knowledge attained since then is misleading or something. Early economists thought in terms of gluts and shortages. So if people shift from liking coffee to tea, coffee starts going unsold, shops are going out of business, etc., tea shops start seeing long lines and/or selling out of product. It looks like coffee is now too expensive and tea is too cheap, and the market corrects that, leading to more tea being produced/less coffee being produced and then to prices stabilizing. The thinking was that every trend toward a glut is balanced by one toward a shortage. But at times, it appeared that there was a "general glut" with no balancing shortage (think of the Great Depression). Everything seems too expensive suddenly. Some people thought that was a logical impossibility, but J.S. Mill figured out how to explain it within the glut/shortage framework. The shortage was in (think about it for a second if you want a challenge) ... money itself. To us, that was not the end but the beginning of the debate (rather than money, is it actually safe assets? high-quality assets? a mix?). That leads to a natural solution (if you think it's money as Friedman did, print more money; if you think it's safe assets, issue more bonds; etc.).

Well, Schiff never got the memo. He thinks that there was a period of "malinvestment" where the economy was built around false signals and thus we're effectively *unable* to supply the needs of consumers. So to go back to the coffee example, people still want it, but it just can't be made. In addition to this being obvious rot (just think about it), you can devise any number of tests to check it and see that it's rot. It also explains why he keeps predicting hyperinflation. If he's right, putting more money/safe assets/gov't spending into the system doesn't do anything to fix the problem and so you have the same constraints on production but more money to spend on the low number of goods. Should just drive prices way up without increasing growth. For the civilized among us, the Great Depression and WWII put an end to the debate. The aftermath of the GFC (both the impact of austerity in nations that went that route and the impact of fiscal and monetary stimulus in the U.S.) should have taught people who didn't learn from history.
 
Last edited:
lol these free market capitalists are fucking retarded.
 
$uperman said:
Yeah, that's why the richest countries in the world are capitalistic countries.
Click to expand...
do they all have regulations? if so they are not "free market" so try again chuckles
 
$uperman said:
Yeah, that's why the richest countries in the world are capitalistic countries.
Click to expand...

The richest countries also have economic stabilization policies, public infrastructure, publicly funded R&D, public education, safety nets, worker/consumer/environmental protections, etc. If Schiff were to advocate emulating successful approaches, that would be a huge step up from Austrian nuttiness.
 
$uperman said:
If you don't like capitalism.

Why don't you move to Venezuela
Click to expand...
I have no issue with capitalism.... as long as there are protections in place for the consumers(ie regulations). Mixed economies are far better places to live. They provide healthcare for their citizens

Venezuela is not my only option. Name one free market capitalist nation on the planet? Just one
 
Jack V Savage said:
The richest countries also have economic stabilization policies, public infrastructure, publicly funded R&D, public education, safety nets, worker/consumer/environmental protections, etc. If Schiff were to advocate emulating successful approaches, that would be a huge step up from Austrian nuttiness.
Click to expand...

Can you imagine how much wealthier those countries would be if they had smaller government, lower taxes, and no stupid wars?
 
$uperman said:
Can you imagine how much wealthier those countries would be if they had smaller government, lower taxes, and no stupid wars?
Click to expand...
Aside from the last one, they would very likely be less wealthy.
 
$uperman said:
Capitalistic countries also have regulations and a government. They're not mutually exclusive
Click to expand...
what dont you understand about "free market capitalism" kiddo?

do you want me to hold your hand as I walk you through this?
 
MayhemMonkey said:
I have no issue with capitalism.... as long as there are protections in place for the consumers(ie regulations). Mixed economies are far better places to live. They provide healthcare for their citizens
Click to expand...

I'm personally also against 100% free market. I just want a small government and a big free market.

In my vision of a small government and a big free market. The citizens are so rich that they can afford healthcare for themselves. People that can't afford healthcare should get charity money. I think most people would prefer to give to charity than pay high taxes.

Venezuela is not my only option. Name one free market capitalist nation on the planet? Just one
Click to expand...

I think there is not a 100% free market country. It is a spectrum. The countries with more economic freedom are doing better on average than the countries with a less economic freedom.

Source: https://www.heritage.org/index/ranking
 
$uperman said:
Can you imagine how much wealthier those countries would be if they had smaller government, lower taxes, and no stupid wars?
Click to expand...

:) That's a funny approach. "Let's do what all rich countries do." "OK." "Imagine how much better things would be if we did things differently than the richest countries!" Can't argue with that.

Anyway, you can't really measure the size of the gov't. If the lower taxes came with less growth-directed spending or higher debt, they might be poorer for it.
 
Last edited:
Schiff reminds me of this guy. The world is ending in 2003, no its ending in 2007, no now its 2010...wait, wait, 2018....

13926288.jpg
 
SBJJ said:
The worst thing is that from what I’m seeing. His fund lost money but he may have actually made money from his personal investments
Click to expand...
giphy.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,936
Messages
58,329,168
Members
176,000
Latest member
Markooz86

Share this page

Back
Top