|
 Cannabischarlie
Yarry's Apprentice
Registered: 11/28/05
Posts: 12,386
Last seen: 21 days, 17 hours
|
 bill clinton fucking sucked
#11122297 - 09/24/09 09:02 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
my father is admittedly a yellow dog democrat.
my only problem is he cant be the least bit critical of anything a democrat does, he instead changes the subject and more or less turns it back to what the republicans are doing wrong, blah blah blah fucking conservatives.
its like hes a total fucking idiot about the matter. i even told him most people will find a politician, particularly a president, whom they really dislike even if they consider themselves one way or the other.
i think clinton was a truly shitty president. nothing about the economy doing better really had anything to do with what he did and there are a lot of reasons i think hes a worthless piece of shit.
I truly hate his policies and i think he is a fucking socialist. I also think both bushes where socialists and a lot of republicans too. I actually really like Obama because I think he is the first president in my lifetime (i am 26) with any fucking brains and concept of doing things properly, having conviction and having a fucking nutsack. I am not a democrat and I still really hate fucking conservatives. I also hate how they have hijacked the republican party and i think "democrat" and "republican" mean different things every quarter century, and even in nixons time and prior there seemed to be fewer and fewer republicans who werent conservatives. There is nothing good about conservatives whatsoever. 
Bill Clinton is a farce of a president as a whole.
--------------------
This section of the signature line has been intentionally left blank.
 we could all use a little more sunshine.
 yeah, she's funny and somewhat interesting. not a beauty queen, but not bad lookin. i'd feel quite honored to fuck janine garofalo. -tiny_rabid_birds
If you're actaully racist in real life though, you're literally a homosexual faggot.-StevenMichael
|
Doc_T
Random Dude
Registered: 03/06/09
Posts: 36,990
Loc: Colorado 
Last seen: 30 minutes, 11 seconds
|
|
Meh. Not the worst president ever. I kinda liked him for a while.
But to call him and both Bushes 'socialists' suggests you may not be using the standard meaning of the term. It doesn't apply to all three.
--------------------
.
|
Cannabischarlie
Yarry's Apprentice
Registered: 11/28/05
Posts: 12,386
Last seen: 21 days, 17 hours
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Doc_T]
#11122457 - 09/24/09 09:20 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Doc_T said:
Meh. Not the worst president ever. I kinda liked him for a while.
But to call him and both Bushes 'socialists' suggests you may not be using the standard meaning of the term. It doesn't apply to all three.
whereabouts in Colorado do you live? I live here also.
While National Socialists hate communism, And Communists hated National Socialists, it is the same as Conservatives hating "liberal socialists" and well you get the gist.
Conservatives point to Ayn Rand as "one of them" even know that is not even remotely true. Ayn Rand believed that man’s own happiness is the moral purpose of his life. Conservatives believe in sacrifice to “the country” (much like socialists believe in sacrifice to “the people” – see, they aren’t so different after all), and servitude to God.
--------------------
This section of the signature line has been intentionally left blank.
we could all use a little more sunshine.
yeah, she's funny and somewhat interesting. not a beauty queen, but not bad lookin. i'd feel quite honored to fuck janine garofalo. -tiny_rabid_birds
If you're actaully racist in real life though, you're literally a homosexual faggot.-StevenMichael
|
Yrat
Hello
Registered: 11/08/07
Posts: 1,986
Last seen: 10 hours, 52 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Cannabischarlie said:
i think clinton was a truly shitty president. I truly hate his policies and i think he is a fucking socialist.
Quote:
I actually really like Obama
--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root
|
Doc_T
Random Dude
Registered: 03/06/09
Posts: 36,990
Loc: Colorado
Last seen: 30 minutes, 11 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Yrat]
#11123984 - 09/25/09 05:42 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I'm in Co Springs.
--------------------
.
|
 KillerPicklez
Snitch Hunting
Registered: 12/13/07
Posts: 13,874
Loc:
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Doc_T]
#11123997 - 09/25/09 05:54 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Doc_T said:
Meh. Not the worst president ever. I kinda liked him for a while.
But to call him and both Bushes 'socialists' suggests you may not be using the standard meaning of the term. It doesn't apply to all three.
I think he is one of the better ones we have had
|
Doc_T
Random Dude
Registered: 03/06/09
Posts: 36,990
Loc: Colorado
Last seen: 30 minutes, 11 seconds
|
|
I think so aside from the part about sticking his finger in the camera and lying to me.
"I did not..." we all know it by heart.
He should have stuck his finger in the camera and said "It's none of your business, get stuffed".
I think history will soften the harshness, and we'll remember him more fondly as time goes on. Like Nixon.
--------------------
.
|
The False Diviner
proselytizing fool
Registered: 09/22/09
Posts: 45
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Doc_T]
#11124495 - 09/25/09 08:50 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Bill Clinton had his selling points.
The economy was strong during his terms. Which was a result of not doing anything to fuck it up during his term, but his economic policies did very little to insure future economic strength. He seemed to have a good grasp of foreign affairs.
Bill Clinton should have lost his job.
The Lewinsky scandal was about more than lying under oath. The none of your business argument really doesn't fly. The President of the United States of America having sexual relations of any kind with an intern is sleazy at best. I would assert that the the top dog in our government having an affair with an intern is more a misuse of his position and even predatory abuse of power. Certainly not in the best interest of the public, and combined with the lied under oath condition should have resulted in a different outcome.
Have a nice day,
The False Diviner
|
Doc_T
Random Dude
Registered: 03/06/09
Posts: 36,990
Loc: Colorado
Last seen: 30 minutes, 11 seconds
|
|
Sleazy yes. Impeachable, no. IMO.
If she'd been underage, or she got something out of it, or if she'd been working for another power... but it was just sleazy.
--------------------
.
|
MistaUNGA
green crack GREEN CRACK!!
Registered: 10/01/06
Posts: 1,519
Loc: Kalifornien, im Süden...
|
|
Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: 7.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.64
just so you know where I stand...
if it weren't for conservatives, the libs would just run amok and pass every bone-headed piece of shit legislation they come up with and run the country's economy even quicker into the shitter, with green legislation that harms business and all that al gore bullshit. (like not watering farms in california because its killing fish because of water supply levels being too low  )
if it weren't for liberals, the conservatives wouldn't get anything done (if they were truly conservative). nowadays the republicans basically just pursue a fascist platform, and its the libs who keep that from happening (except for democrats being complicit on the Patriot Act, FISA Amendments, Military Commissions Act, TARP, Bailout, etc)
so you see both sides are complicit in ruining our country. thats what that balance is for, to kind of slow down the inevitable.
as for bill clinton, he sucked dick, not monica
--------------------
Madtowntripper said:Or just give her a cloroform soaked rag and tell her it's ether!
|
The False Diviner
proselytizing fool
Registered: 09/22/09
Posts: 45
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: MistaUNGA]
#11124665 - 09/25/09 09:44 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Doc_T, she did get something out of it.
She was an unpaid intern from July 1995 to December 1995. The affair began in November of 1995 and ended in March 1997. From December 1995 to December 1997 she was a payed government employee, first at the White house, and then was move to the Pentagon in April 1996, as Lewinsky's superiors felt she was spending too much time around Clinton. So the time line is she was an unpaid intern in October 95, sucked Bill's dick in November, got a paying job at the White house in December.
The False Diviner
|
Doc_T
Random Dude
Registered: 03/06/09
Posts: 36,990
Loc: Colorado
Last seen: 30 minutes, 11 seconds
|
|
She probably could have gotten the job anyway. But you're right.
--------------------
.
|
The False Diviner
proselytizing fool
Registered: 09/22/09
Posts: 45
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Doc_T]
#11124809 - 09/25/09 10:19 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I agree, she probably could have gotten the job anyway.
The False Diviner
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
|
Quote:
Cannabischarlie said:
i think clinton was a truly shitty president. nothing about the economy doing better really had anything to do with what he did and there are a lot of reasons i think hes a worthless piece of shit.
I suppose this means you've been reading... good to know, the economy
during clintons administration was artificially 'improved' just as
clintons budget surplus was fabrication.
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11125030 - 09/25/09 11:05 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
Cannabischarlie said:
i think clinton was a truly shitty president. nothing about the economy doing better really had anything to do with what he did and there are a lot of reasons i think hes a worthless piece of shit.
I suppose this means you've been reading... good to know, the economy
during clintons administration was artificially 'improved' just as
clintons budget surplus was fabrication.
Indeed, the overall economic strategy in America has been for decades: mortgaging the future for a present false prosperity.
|
Doc_T
Random Dude
Registered: 03/06/09
Posts: 36,990
Loc: Colorado
Last seen: 30 minutes, 11 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: MistaUNGA]
#11125034 - 09/25/09 11:05 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
MistaUNGA said:
nowadays the republicans basically just pursue a fascist platform,
Agreed. Fascist, not socialist. Clinton wasn't really a socialist either, not like Obama or Roosevelt.
--------------------
.
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Doc_T]
#11125046 - 09/25/09 11:07 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Doc_T said:
Quote:
MistaUNGA said:
nowadays the republicans basically just pursue a fascist platform,
Agreed. Fascist, not socialist. Clinton wasn't really a socialist either, not like Obama or Roosevelt.
Given that fascism is by definition an economy in which government is taking over formerly private industries is not our present situation in America developing into fascism?
|
Yrat
Hello
Registered: 11/08/07
Posts: 1,986
Last seen: 10 hours, 52 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11125539 - 09/25/09 12:33 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The most popular storyline offered by these Monday morning quarterbacks is that the mistaken decision to allow Lehman to fail resulted from the Bush Administration's misplaced faith in the free markets. In this telling, the real crises began in the days following the Lehman bankruptcy, which unleashed a financial panic that would have caused complete economic collapse -- if not for the subsequent federal intervention.
In reality, Lehman's demise was simply the result of an unfolding crisis that began years before. Popular belief aside, allowing the institution to succumb to the overwhelming debts on its balance sheet was perhaps the only correct decision made by government since this crisis began. The propagandists' complete reversal of cause and effect now threatens to spur the government to compound prior mistakes and bring on the next phase of the financial crisis. Unfortunately, this chapter will likely be much more dangerous than what we saw last fall.
However, politics quickly trumped economics, and the Lehman trial balloon soon turned into the Hindenburg. Washington had no stomach for the ensuing financial carnage, and when other institutions began to topple, Bush, Paulson and Bernanke abandoned their prior convictions and threw all they had into the ensuing bailout bonanza. As a result, the moral hazard that they had sought to avoid now exists on a scale unprecedented in our history. Capitalism has been extinguished on Wall Street, and our financial institutions now exist as public utilities. The presidents of our biggest banks are now the highest paid civil servants in the world!
Since market forces are no longer allowed to allocate capital and control risk, these decisions are now made by government regulators and are then passed through to their subordinates on Wall Street. This perverse organizational structure constitutes a new form of American fascism.
~Peter Schiff
control over financial sector, auto sector, housing sector, have i forgotten any? if it's not fascism now, when does it start to be?
--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root
|
numonkei
Back! From thedigestive tractof dave theiguana!
Registered: 04/12/06
Posts: 2,451
Loc: A Tree
Last seen: 2 months, 17 days
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Yrat]
#11126316 - 09/25/09 02:42 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I fucking love the Politics forum on the Shroomery.
I swear, this is not sarcastic, I am surprised almost every time I actually look up this shit.
~Monk
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: numonkei]
#11126557 - 09/25/09 03:22 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
numonkei said:
I fucking love the Politics forum on the Shroomery.
I swear, this is not sarcastic, I am surprised almost every time I actually look up this shit.
~Monk
The Germans have been talking about how the last person to nationalize their auto industry also had a funny mustache.
I recall Putin praising the effectiveness of the American propaganda machine. That was months ago though...
When Germans and Russians are legitimately making fun of American politics you know something has gone horribly wrong.
Edited by Mr.Al (09/25/09 03:31 PM)
|
sandman3698
Stranger
Registered: 07/02/09
Posts: 103
Last seen: 1 month, 30 days
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11127415 - 09/25/09 05:52 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I think you guys are getting fascism and communism mixed up.
--------------------
Insanity in individuals is something rare -- but in groups, parties, nations, and epochs it is the rule. -Nietzche
What luck for the rulers that men do not think. -Adolf Hitler
|
robcypher
I suck cocks for socks
Registered: 04/22/09
Posts: 108
Loc: pittsburgh, pa
Last seen: 2 years, 7 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11128883 - 09/25/09 10:18 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
whew, most of you guys are fucking loony. Clinton was a okay president. He gets a B from me. A lot of you need to read a lot more before you start labeling people as "socialist" or "libertarian", btw, because it's clear that not too many people in this thread know exactly what these words mean.
|
zorbman
Be Prepared
Registered: 06/04/04
Posts: 5,475
|
|
Bill Clinton was actually a pretty good president. Especially compared against his replacements.
Sounds like you have some issues with your father which are clouding your judgement towards Clinton.
You don't give many specifics to back your opinion which suggests you are a political novice.
If you haven't gotten into politics I would suggest you stay out of national politics as there is almost no logic to it whatsoever- just a bunch of old people being rude and trying to get on tv. Just look at the regulars here on this forum- would you really want these people as your neighbors? 
--------------------
Men occasionally stumble over the truth but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened. - Winston Churchill
Edited by zorbman (09/26/09 12:59 AM)
|
Yrat
Hello
Registered: 11/08/07
Posts: 1,986
Last seen: 10 hours, 52 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zorbman]
#11129910 - 09/26/09 04:09 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
he actually balanced and reversed the trend of the federal budget. he definitely gets points from me for doing that.
--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root
|
Yrat
Hello
Registered: 11/08/07
Posts: 1,986
Last seen: 10 hours, 52 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Yrat]
#11129935 - 09/26/09 04:25 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Yrat said:
Quote:
The most popular storyline offered by these Monday morning quarterbacks is that the mistaken decision to allow Lehman to fail resulted from the Bush Administration's misplaced faith in the free markets. In this telling, the real crises began in the days following the Lehman bankruptcy, which unleashed a financial panic that would have caused complete economic collapse -- if not for the subsequent federal intervention.
In reality, Lehman's demise was simply the result of an unfolding crisis that began years before. Popular belief aside, allowing the institution to succumb to the overwhelming debts on its balance sheet was perhaps the only correct decision made by government since this crisis began. The propagandists' complete reversal of cause and effect now threatens to spur the government to compound prior mistakes and bring on the next phase of the financial crisis. Unfortunately, this chapter will likely be much more dangerous than what we saw last fall.
However, politics quickly trumped economics, and the Lehman trial balloon soon turned into the Hindenburg. Washington had no stomach for the ensuing financial carnage, and when other institutions began to topple, Bush, Paulson and Bernanke abandoned their prior convictions and threw all they had into the ensuing bailout bonanza. As a result, the moral hazard that they had sought to avoid now exists on a scale unprecedented in our history. Capitalism has been extinguished on Wall Street, and our financial institutions now exist as public utilities. The presidents of our biggest banks are now the highest paid civil servants in the world!
Since market forces are no longer allowed to allocate capital and control risk, these decisions are now made by government regulators and are then passed through to their subordinates on Wall Street. This perverse organizational structure constitutes a new form of American fascism.
~Peter Schiff
control over financial sector, auto sector, housing sector, have i forgotten any? if it's not fascism now, when does it start to be?
i forgot the attempts at the health care sector!
--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: robcypher]
#11130029 - 09/26/09 05:32 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
robcypher said:
whew, most of you guys are fucking loony. Clinton was a okay president. He gets a B from me. A lot of you need to read a lot more before you start labeling people as "socialist" or "libertarian", btw, because it's clear that not too many people in this thread know exactly what these words mean.
Some people would do well to study economics, looking at business cycle theory in particular, and they might discover that Clinton was one of the individuals responsible for the housing market bubble. Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, and of course the fed chairman at the time Alan Greenspan are all also to varying degrees at fault for that massive market distortion. The economic mess we are in could be called the partial effects of the necessary market correction to fix the malinvestment caused by artificially low interest rates and bogus legislation like the Community Reinvestment Act. Austrian Business Cycle Theory is key to understanding why the economy is presently F.U.B.A.R. and not merely S.N.A.F.U.
It needs to be remembered that you can't truly ascertain a leader until you see the effects of their decisions many years later...
|
robcypher
I suck cocks for socks
Registered: 04/22/09
Posts: 108
Loc: pittsburgh, pa
Last seen: 2 years, 7 months
|
 Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11130144 - 09/26/09 06:46 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Clinton merely modified policies extended forth by Bush I and Reagan. The Reagan/Bush people are who you need to look at (remember the S&L scandals, Iran-Contra, etc)
|
mushateman
tripper
Registered: 09/26/09
Posts: 7
Last seen: 2 years, 4 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: robcypher]
#11130206 - 09/26/09 07:10 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
right
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Yrat]
#11130865 - 09/26/09 10:40 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: mushateman]
#11130882 - 09/26/09 10:45 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
mushateman said:
right
he's right, clinton was tied into iran/contra as well as heavily tied to
the S&L scandals, let's not forget whitewater, the clintons disappearing
and reappearing records and the way the clinton know anything about
anything that they had any dealings with
with the S&L scandals tax payers footed the bill for $125bn and they
still went under with none of that money being recovered
--------------------
|
Cannabischarlie
Yarry's Apprentice
Registered: 11/28/05
Posts: 12,386
Last seen: 21 days, 17 hours
|
|
Quote:
The False Diviner said:
Bill Clinton had his selling points.
The economy was strong during his terms. Which was a result of not doing anything to fuck it up during his term, but his economic policies did very little to insure future economic strength. He seemed to have a good grasp of foreign affairs.
Bill Clinton should have lost his job.
The Lewinsky scandal was about more than lying under oath. The none of your business argument really doesn't fly. The President of the United States of America having sexual relations of any kind with an intern is sleazy at best. I would assert that the the top dog in our government having an affair with an intern is more a misuse of his position and even predatory abuse of power. Certainly not in the best interest of the public, and combined with the lied under oath condition should have resulted in a different outcome.
Have a nice day,
The False Diviner
everyone makes some good points in this thread, but the fact of the matter is that besides not doing anything to truly "fuck up" the budget and that if anything its like someone else said, he didnt do anything that is sustainable in the long run, more or less a house of cards, and part of that is the fact that taxation was so high that in the end it contributed to whats going on now by more or less giving a false sense that everything is going okay and only living in the "now" without looking ahead to see the consequences of said policies is a fallacy. it is also a fallacy to give him so much credit for everything that happened when it seems like the the budget was the way it was in spite of what he did not because of it.
nothing long term was looked into and i feel he was not progressive like he makes himself out to be but moreso just trying to keep the status quo.
--------------------
This section of the signature line has been intentionally left blank.
we could all use a little more sunshine.
yeah, she's funny and somewhat interesting. not a beauty queen, but not bad lookin. i'd feel quite honored to fuck janine garofalo. -tiny_rabid_birds
If you're actaully racist in real life though, you're literally a homosexual faggot.-StevenMichael
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
|
Quote:
Cannabischarlie said:
everyone makes some good points in this thread, but the fact of the matter is that besides not doing anything to truly "fuck up" the budget
he gave 5% of the budget to his friends in banking so they could close up shop and retire early
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: robcypher]
#11132909 - 09/26/09 04:47 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
It is as if the presidency is a political hot potato...
You attempt to prop everything up (see: bubble economics a.k.a. keynesian economics). Prevent the liquid shit from hitting the fan. Pass the job to the next useless schlep....
Economic distortions need to be corrected in order for the economy to move forward in a meaningful way (efficient allocation of available resources).
The problem we run into is that market corrections for systemic malinvesment are inherently painful throughout the economy.
Thus, actually fixing economic problems is politically unpopular because people don't want to be told the truth that the solution is painful.
Economic corrections that are allowed to take their course (Id est: America circa 1920-1921) are somewhat severe, but short lived.
Government intervention (such as the nonsense during the Great Depression) leads to protracted economic agony, an increase in the size and scope of government, and an economy that is less responsive due to government regulation.
|
C.M. Mann
subconscious explorer
Registered: 05/01/08
Posts: 899
Loc: Florida
Last seen: 1 year, 1 month
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11134837 - 09/26/09 11:12 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
What do you mean when you say, "efficient allocation of available resources"?
|
Yrat
Hello
Registered: 11/08/07
Posts: 1,986
Last seen: 10 hours, 52 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: C.M. Mann]
#11135926 - 09/27/09 06:22 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
i think he means the liquidation of assets of insolvent institutions. when capitalism is in place, companies that go bankrupt sell off their assets to pay off debts. these assets are bought by those who operate in an efficient matter and are actually able to produce a profit. this way, resources are transferred from failing institutions and sectors to those succeeding and growing, generating positive growth.
propping up these insolvent institutions with taxpayer money prevents this natural process from occurring and only delays the inevitable.
--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: C.M. Mann]
#11144291 - 09/28/09 01:49 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
That is exactly what I mean. Rewarding failure is detrimental to society. We have stagnant unresponsive markets in America due to the "too big to fail" central economic planning approach. Our auto industry has been "bailed out a couple times. Unions from the American auto makers have an unhealthy amount of influence in politics. The American car companies have become a welfare state unto themselves!
The fallacies inherent in central economic planning are what destroyed the U.S.S.R. Politicians are generally corrupt individuals with dubious "understanding" of economics. It makes no sense whatsoever to allow them to meddle with the market.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11144688 - 09/28/09 02:47 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
The only economy most politicians understand is the economy of votes.
--------------------
|
Smackshadow
It's Time for Wild Speculation
Registered: 09/27/05
Posts: 575
Last seen: 3 months, 14 days
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11145739 - 09/28/09 06:03 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The fallacies inherent in central economic planning are what destroyed the U.S.S.R.
This might be true, but it is the fallacies of the free market will be what destroys the U.S.
I love listening libertarians talk about the free market. They talk about the grand ideas of competition reducing costs, an efficient allocation of resources, and proper valuation of good and services all the time. But if I had a dollar for every time a libertarian talked about the assumptions that the free market theory was based on like, free entry and exit from markets, absolute consumer knowledge, efficient labor markets, uniformity of goods, and zero externalizes I would be FLAT BROKE.
And don't even get me started on unions. Under a free market unions have the same right to exist as corporations do.
But of course, all of this is theory. And I find it interesting that if we look at reality, we can see many countries which are vastly more "socialist" than the U.S. that have much better standards of living than the united states, but still have lower unemployment, higher production per unit, and extend virtually the exact same freedoms to the people that the U.S. extends to me.
I of course put socialist in quotes because reasonable and rational government intervention in the market has never been socialist. And if it is, then the U.S. has been a Socialist country from day one.
And getting back to the point, Clinton was a fine moderate president. I didn't like what he signed regarding gay rights, some of his banking deregulation, and handling of Wacco. But Over all I would give him a solid B as President.
--------------------
The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.
~H. L. Mencken~
|
zorbman
Be Prepared
Registered: 06/04/04
Posts: 5,475
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11146941 - 09/28/09 08:40 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Rewarding failure is detrimental to society. We have stagnant unresponsive markets in America due to the "too big to fail" central economic planning approach.
"Then you will see the rise of the men of the double standard--the men who live by force, yet count on those who live by trade to create the value of their looted money--the men who are the hitchhikers of virtue. In a moral society, these are the criminals, and the statutes are written to protect you against them. But when a society establishes criminals-by-right and looters-by-law--men who use force to seize the wealth of disarmed victims--then money becomes its creators' avenger. Such looters believe it safe to rob defenseless men, once they've passed a law to disarm them. But their loot becomes the magnet for other looters, who get it from them as they got it. Then the race goes, not to the ablest at production, but to those most ruthless at brutality. When force is the standard, the murderer wins over the pickpocket. And then that society vanishes, in a spread of ruins and slaughter.
"Do you wish to know whether that day is coming? Watch money. Money is the barometer of a society's virtue. When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion--when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing--when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors--when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you--when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice--you may know that your society is doomed."
-Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand
--------------------
Men occasionally stumble over the truth but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened. - Winston Churchill
|
djmako7
Antitransubstantiationalist
Registered: 06/13/06
Posts: 1,397
Loc: A shady spot under a tree
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zorbman]
#11147424 - 09/28/09 10:02 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Good thing I have some gold. Wont have to worry about a thing when this country falls. I'll by a boat with the gold and sail my way to some uninhabited island.
As for clinton not fucking anything up? Wow have people really forgotten who put us in a recession? I admit the quality of life for Americans was a lot better than his successor but we still had money that was borrowed during bush sr. term for the gulf war.
Why does bill clintons opinion matter? He cant do anything but talk. His lesbian wife hates him so he is useless to this country now.
Now in 96 if I was old enough to vote, I would have voted for ross perot. That guy was a number cruncher. I believe if he was president NOW he could fix this economy and the medicare system.
--------------------
☺For Sale☺
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Important Links
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
|
Doc_T
Random Dude
Registered: 03/06/09
Posts: 36,990
Loc: Colorado
Last seen: 30 minutes, 11 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: djmako7]
#11149019 - 09/29/09 07:01 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
djmako7 said:
I'll by a boat with the gold and sail my way to some uninhabited island.
Which island? I doubt there's a habitable island that is uninhabited within a thousand miles of anywhere.
And what good is gold if the island has no people? Take toilet paper.
--------------------
.
|
djmako7
Antitransubstantiationalist
Registered: 06/13/06
Posts: 1,397
Loc: A shady spot under a tree
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Doc_T]
#11149739 - 09/29/09 10:08 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Doc_T said:
Quote:
djmako7 said:
I'll by a boat with the gold and sail my way to some uninhabited island.
Which island? I doubt there's a habitable island that is uninhabited within a thousand miles of anywhere.
And what good is gold if the island has no people? Take toilet paper.
Well the gold is to buy a boat I wouldnt need to buy anything after the fact and there are several thousand islands near indonesia that doesn't have a human soul on it. If you don't know how to catch your own food or build a fire you'd be fucked but luckily those skills come naturally.
--------------------
☺For Sale☺
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Important Links
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: djmako7]
#11149918 - 09/29/09 10:36 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
what's to stop the seller from shooting you and taking the gold, if the
country falls I'm sure there will be some measure of lawlessness
--------------------
|
 Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11150494 - 09/29/09 12:27 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
Yrat said:
he actually balanced and reversed the trend of the federal budget. he definitely gets points from me for doing that.
smoke and mirrors
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n4_v46/ai_14885290/
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1385&dat=19970211&id=_GgWAAAAIBAJ&sjid=TRUEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6843,3732568
http://www.theneweditor.com/index.php?/archives/3063-The-5-Trillion-Surplus-The-Myth-that-Refuses-to-Die.html
there's plenty of articles still being written about the myths of the clinton budget
Ummm - did you read any of the articles you posted??? Not a single one of them disproves the Clinton surplus.
1. The first article was printed in 1994, LONG before there was ever a budget surplus. The author claims a balanced budget isn't possible because of proposed spending increases. He fails to understand that a balanced budget can also come from increased tax revenue.
2. The second article, printed in 1997, makes exactly the same mistake.
3. The 3rd article simply claims the Clinton surplus is a myth, but doesn't provide any support to that claim.
Please try again.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
 
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11150514 - 09/29/09 12:30 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
Yrat said:
he actually balanced and reversed the trend of the federal budget. he definitely gets points from me for doing that.
smoke and mirrors
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n4_v46/ai_14885290/
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1385&dat=19970211&id=_GgWAAAAIBAJ&sjid=TRUEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6843,3732568
http://www.theneweditor.com/index.php?/archives/3063-The-5-Trillion-Surplus-The-Myth-that-Refuses-to-Die.html
there's plenty of articles still being written about the myths of the clinton budget
Ummm - did you read any of the articles you posted??? Not a single one of them disproves the Clinton surplus.
1. The first article was printed in 1994, LONG before there was ever a budget surplus. The author claims a balanced budget isn't possible because of proposed spending increases. He fails to understand that a balanced budget can also come from increased tax revenue.
2. The second article, printed in 1997, makes exactly the same mistake.
3. The 3rd article simply claims the Clinton surplus is a myth, but doesn't provide any support to that claim.
Please try again.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
djmako7
Antitransubstantiationalist
Registered: 06/13/06
Posts: 1,397
Loc: A shady spot under a tree
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11150556 - 09/29/09 12:37 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
what's to stop the seller from shooting you and taking the gold, if the
country falls I'm sure there will be some measure of lawlessness
What's to stop them? I dunno my 2 years in the Marines, my kevlar helm and vest my ar15 or my M44.
It will be like the wild wild west the only difference is I can pull a headshot from about 800 yards away with the AR and about 2 miles with the M44 .
Back to topic in 1999 Fannie Mae, the nation’s biggest underwriter of home mortgages, had been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.
For personal future self aggrandizement clinton started making the lowered capital it was simply ponzi scheme.
The subprime mortgages are backed by real money in his last few weeks as president it was republican bill through and dismantling of campaign donations from lehman bros to buy and through and wendy gramm collusion for that allowed the real estate market look towards the real commodity the real money in his life after that.
The real property or capital to blame look towards the ceo of lehman bros to enrons debacle and alan greenspans continuing to expand.
The first real money in this arena also bill through and 2006 fannie and risk ratios that blamewasnt there would be no worldwide banking crisis mortgages there would be.
The phil and to the real property or capital to risk ratios that fire the financial institutions.
During the end of clintons admin the deficit of the country was near 1 trillion already. Back then the media did not report on the economy that much. People get their news from tv and radio and believe pretty much all of it. People were not worried becaus ethey were not fully aware of the economic problem.
Don't forget that bush jr. inherited a recession too.
--------------------
☺For Sale☺
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Important Links
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Edited by djmako7 (09/29/09 12:54 PM)
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: djmako7]
#11151182 - 09/29/09 02:22 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
djmako7 said:
I can pull a headshot from about 800 yards away with the AR and about 2 miles with the M44
I'ma call bullshit on both those claims, we can save it for one of the other forums though
.
Quote:
Back to topic in 1999 Fannie Mae, the nation�s biggest underwriter of home mortgages, had been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.
he also signed Graham/Leach/Bliley which allowed for the deregulation of
banks allowing them into investments, insurance, and other games. in 94
he signed a bill loosening lending regulations and guaranteeing the bad
loans that many banks were making and others were buying up
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
Yrat said:
he actually balanced and reversed the trend of the federal budget. he definitely gets points from me for doing that.
smoke and mirrors
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n4_v46/ai_14885290/
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1385&dat=19970211&id=_GgWAAAAIBAJ&sjid=TRUEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6843,3732568
http://www.theneweditor.com/index.php?/archives/3063-The-5-Trillion-Surplus-The-Myth-that-Refuses-to-Die.html
there's plenty of articles still being written about the myths of the clinton budget
Ummm - did you read any of the articles you posted??? Not a single one of them disproves the Clinton surplus.
1. The first article was printed in 1994, LONG before there was ever a budget surplus. The author claims a balanced budget isn't possible because of proposed spending increases. He fails to understand that a balanced budget can also come from increased tax revenue.
2. The second article, printed in 1997, makes exactly the same mistake.
3. The 3rd article simply claims the Clinton surplus is a myth, but doesn't provide any support to that claim.
Please try again.
first explains why there should have been a windfall
the second was a misposted link, it should have been this
http://www.craigsteiner.us/articles/16
the 3rd shows that the dems are still trying to claim the surplus, as I
had stated, it's still being talked about
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
 Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Smackshadow]
#11151302 - 09/29/09 02:39 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Horseshit. We don't have a free market in America, we haven't for quite some time. I realize most folk don't even bother to research the economics that libertarians study. Mises.org has books in pdf. form for you to read and commentary on current economic events from an Austrian perspective. You would do well to check that out. If you disagree with free market economics then we can certainly debate it honestly and figure out what's true.
Frederic Bastiat (circa 1801-1850) is a good fellow to read up on. His "That Which is Seen and that Which is not Seen" is an excellent place to start in beginning to understand the costs of big government spending.
Edited by Mr.Al (09/29/09 02:40 PM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11151549 - 09/29/09 03:15 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
first explains why there should have been a windfall
the second was a misposted link, it should have been this
http://www.craigsteiner.us/articles/16
the 3rd shows that the dems are still trying to claim the surplus, as I
had stated, it's still being talked about
The first and last points still don't show that Clinton failed to have a balanced budget, but the new link you posted makes an interesting argument.
It says that under Clinton, social security took in more money than it needed, and the Government used that excess to pay down the public debt (as it always had before). But it argues that this excess shouldn't have been credited to Clinton; instead, it should have remained in Social Security so that future presidents who have a social security shortage can use the Clinton surplus without being penalized themselves. I'm not a Government accountant, so I can't say whose accounting methodology is correct. However, it seems a bit unfair to say that Clinton shouldn't get credit for his social security surplus.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
djmako7
Antitransubstantiationalist
Registered: 06/13/06
Posts: 1,397
Loc: A shady spot under a tree
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11151715 - 09/29/09 03:44 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
I'ma call bullshit on both those claims, we can save it for one of the other forums though
The Marines train us that way. They teach you in bootcamp one shot one kill from 1,000 yards. It may not be a headshot but most likely a lethal shot from 1000 yards. <--- This is a requirement to graduate from bootcamp.
The M44 range is 2 and a half miles. It is a sniper rifle.
Ok so looks like the Marine corps is going soft because it is now 500 yards to graduate, before it was a half mile.
--------------------
☺For Sale☺
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Important Links
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Edited by djmako7 (09/29/09 03:53 PM)
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,193
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 hours, 42 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: djmako7]
#11151977 - 09/29/09 04:26 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
> The M44 range is 2 and a half miles. It is a sniper rifle.
It fires a .308 round (7.62x54mmR actually) and has an effective range of around 800 meters with optical scope and around two thirds of that with iron sights. Last time I checked, 2.5 miles was a bit over 4000 meters. Just because a bullet can travel that far does not mean that you can fire it accurately that far.
--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
The first and last points still don't show that Clinton failed to have a balanced budget, but the new link you posted makes an interesting argument.
I've explained the first and last, the intent wasnt to prove anything
but to further explain the numerous sources of money, budget cuts, etc,
unfortunately clinton decided to take extra $70bn, double it, toss in a
little more gravy and give it to his friends in banking
Quote:
However, it seems a bit unfair to say that Clinton shouldn't get credit for his social security surplus.
it's not clintons surplus, it belonged to the people that earned the
money and their methodology of paying down debt is flawed, one of the
reasons SSI is struggling, not to mention that an SSI surplus isnt a
budget surplus and it certainly didnt reach the trillions that dems are
claiming existed pre-bush
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: djmako7]
#11152216 - 09/29/09 05:11 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
djmako7 said:
The Marines train us that way. They teach you in bootcamp one shot one kill from 1,000 yards. It may not be a headshot but most likely a lethal shot from 1000 yards. <--- This is a requirement to graduate from bootcamp.
no... I spent 8 years in the army, 6 of those was with the 5th special
forces, 101st airborne, I've served in 4 theaters of combat, I qualified
as expert in bootcamp, in which you have to hit 36 of 40 targets with
open sights to qualify, 4 of those targets are at the 300m mark which is
as far as the military expects any proficient shooter to shoot. the
qualifications for the army and marines is the same
qualifications for a sniper is much different and I'll let you know now
that the effective range of the 5.56 NATO is a maximum of 600 meters,
after that the bullet will bounce off a jacket, at 800 meters that
bullet will experience more than 30 feet of drop, at 800 meters you have
to be able to judge windage which can change several times prior to
hitting that target in addition to elevation to compensate for gravity
Quote:
The M44 range is 2 and a half miles. It is a sniper rifle.
Ok so looks like the Marine corps is going soft because it is now 500 yards to graduate, before it was a half mile.
the range of the .50BMG 7000m, the effective range is 2400m when fired
from the M107, well under that 'range' you claim for a long .30cal, for
the record, the longest recorded sniper kill was at 2300m with the TAC-50 bolt action by a canadian
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11152381 - 09/29/09 05:33 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I'm curious. How big is the target you are expected to hit with open sights at 300M? Because at 300M without a scope a cat is a rumor, a goat is a guess and a man is a prayer.
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11152553 - 09/29/09 05:56 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
you act like it's something special... a bunch of silly arabs hit a couple of skinny buildings from more than 100 miles away
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11152631 - 09/29/09 06:13 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Are you riding them bullets?
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11152761 - 09/29/09 06:39 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
many can hit a man sized target at 300 meters, most shoot the distance for qualifying at 200-250m
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11152774 - 09/29/09 06:42 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I was wondering. I don't think I can see a cat at 300M.
--------------------
|
crookedjunk
Ben of A&E's "Intervention"
Registered: 09/28/09
Posts: 340
Loc: pittsburgh, pa
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11155403 - 09/30/09 04:27 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
how did a thread about bill clinton become a thread about shooting cats?
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
 Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11158022 - 09/30/09 02:37 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
I was wondering. I don't think I can see a cat at 300M.
Cats are sneaky. A target silhouette is easily recognizable but blurry at 300 meters if you're near sighted. If you have good eyesight it is clear. You can hit something at 300 meters if you have a good steady position, a nice sight picture, practice breath control, and a good trigger squeeze (not pull). The shot should kind of surprise you and it is a good idea to be deliberate with the trigger squeeze.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11158154 - 09/30/09 03:05 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Oh I know how to shoot and my distance vision is still excellent. I just wondered what size target was being discussed at 300M. That's a good distance and something the size of a cat would be entirely obliterated by any iron sight.
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11158221 - 09/30/09 03:17 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I put the very top of the front sight post center mass.
What exactly do you have against cats?
|
zorbman
Be Prepared
Registered: 06/04/04
Posts: 5,475
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11158258 - 09/30/09 03:23 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Any opinions on what is the best cat food?
--------------------
Men occasionally stumble over the truth but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened. - Winston Churchill
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11158327 - 09/30/09 03:37 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
I put the very top of the front sight post center mass.
What exactly do you have against cats?
Usually too lean for a good 'cue.
--------------------
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 20,721
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zorbman]
#11158598 - 09/30/09 04:20 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zorbman said:
Any opinions on what is the best cat food?
Other cats.
--------------------
“In politics, few talents are as richly rewarded as the ability to convince parasites that they are victims. Welfare states on both sides of the Atlantic have discovered that largesse to losers does not reduce their hostility to society, but only increases it. Far from producing gratitude, generosity is seen as an admission of guilt, and the reparations as inadequate compensation for injustices – leading to worsening behavior by the recipients.
Thomas Sowell
-----------------------------------
A thin-skinned Mod that deletes rates of himself that he doesn't like.
-----------------------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11159315 - 09/30/09 06:05 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
I was wondering. I don't think I can see a cat at 300M.
Cats are sneaky.
much like bill clinton
see, back on topic
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zorbman]
#11165343 - 10/01/09 04:57 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zorbman said:
Any opinions on what is the best cat food?
The stuff they like most probably has the highest profit margin. I would like to see if there were some homemade recipes that were more cost effective.
|
Heffy
BrauMeister
Registered: 08/30/04
Posts: 2,399
Loc: International Traveller
Last seen: 5 hours, 22 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11165421 - 10/01/09 05:06 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Anything made of primarily meat is a sure bet. Grain based pet foods are bullshit.
In future I will probably feed my (meat eating)animals mostly unseasoned meat scraps. I think it will be healthier for them than eating mass produced, grain based, pet foods.
--------------------
I am the king of Rome, and above grammar! - Emperor Sigismund
|
crookedjunk
Ben of A&E's "Intervention"
Registered: 09/28/09
Posts: 340
Loc: pittsburgh, pa
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Heffy]
#11167791 - 10/02/09 12:15 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
the grain keeps their poop regular
|
crookedjunk
Ben of A&E's "Intervention"
Registered: 09/28/09
Posts: 340
Loc: pittsburgh, pa
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: crookedjunk]
#11167802 - 10/02/09 12:17 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
plus if you feed them nothing but meat scraps you'll spoil them and they won't eat cat food. you won't always have enough spare meat around.
Feeding meat scraps is an option only for rich people. The common man must feed his cats some grain-based cat food.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11169299 - 10/02/09 10:18 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
it's not clintons surplus, it belonged to the people that earned the money and their methodology of paying down debt is flawed, one of the reasons SSI is struggling, not to mention that an SSI surplus isnt a budget surplus and it certainly didnt reach the trillions that dems are claiming existed pre-bush
Again, whether or not Clinton should claim the SSI surplus is an accounting question, but a surplus was achieved under Clinton's watch. The reason SSI is struggling is because Bush intentionally tried to kill it by cutting taxes on the rich. It can be fixed again simply by eliminating the SSI wage cap which gives the wealthy a huge break on SSI payments:
The Future Social Security Crisis: How Can It Be Avoided?
Pretty easy, huh? This solution doesn't even require the rich to pay a larger percentage of SSI, only the same percentage as everyone else.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
C.M. Mann
subconscious explorer
Registered: 05/01/08
Posts: 899
Loc: Florida
Last seen: 1 year, 1 month
|
|
There was a surplus under Clinton, because of the Reagan policies.
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
Really....
"Taxpayers on the hook for $59 trillion"....
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-05-28-federal-budget_N.htm
What people often don't see is that social welfare (socialist programs)is bankrupting America. It is not capitalism that is failing. Government welfare, central economic planning, and the central bank ("federal reserve") is screwing up the economy.
What we see is that the poorer people become, the more handouts they ask for from the government. The handouts make the situation worse...
Our present economic system is not sustainable.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11171498 - 10/02/09 06:05 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Taxpayers on the hook for a googley googleplex
Since there is no end in sight for social security and expected life span continues to go up with no change in the age of eligibility there is no doubt that the taxpayers are on the hook for more dollars than there are particles in the universe, which is, unlike entitlement programs, finite.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11172436 - 10/02/09 10:05 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Well, I threw out a workable solution.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
Horse crap. You can't find the TRILLIONS of dollars to fund the socialist welfare programs because the money does not exist yet.
The "solution" you propose is a drop in the bucket compared to the unfunded social welfare obligation, dude.
It could be that there are plans to just end Social Security and Medicare (perhaps others...). The government states that they don't count the unfunded welfare obligations because they can cut the funding whenever they see feel the need to.
You need to look at the details to discern how broke this country is.......
How are we dealing with massive debt by record levels of deficit spending.
Why are some people in denial about the OBVIOUS incompetency of the current president?
Edited by Mr.Al (10/03/09 08:43 PM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11178446 - 10/03/09 11:49 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Horse crap. You can't find the TRILLIONS of dollars to fund the socialist welfare programs because the money does not exist yet.
If we eliminate the SSI wage cap, that would bring in an extra $4.646 trillion. Enough to cover the shortfall (see the chart in the link I posted above).
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
We would need a lot more than 4.5 trillion to cover social welfare obligations. People have estimated it anywhere from 50 to 100 trillion to cover us through the boomer generation. Can you see how the money is not there no matter what we cut in the budget? Also, deficit spending is now at record levels so I don't see any budget cuts in federal spending anytime soon.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=88851
Edited by Mr.Al (10/04/09 02:29 AM)
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Horse crap. You can't find the TRILLIONS of dollars to fund the socialist welfare programs because the money does not exist yet.
If we eliminate the SSI wage cap, that would bring in an extra $4.646 trillion. Enough to cover the shortfall (see the chart in the link I posted above).
Only if you don't increase benefits for those who make increased contributions. You do know that the benefits you get are directly related to what you pay in, right? You are just raising taxes on the wealthy to pay for the losers. Again.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11180295 - 10/04/09 11:57 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
We would need a lot more than 4.5 trillion to cover social welfare obligations. People have estimated it anywhere from 50 to 100 trillion to cover us through the boomer generation.
The rest of the money will come from normal SSI contributions. I addressed how we could cover the predicted SSI shortage.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11180301 - 10/04/09 11:58 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Only if you don't increase benefits for those who make increased contributions.
Correct.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
zorbman
Be Prepared
Registered: 06/04/04
Posts: 5,475
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: C.M. Mann]
#11180410 - 10/04/09 12:20 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
C.M. Mann said:
There was a surplus under Clinton, because of the Reagan policies.
That's the first time I've heard that one.
--------------------
Men occasionally stumble over the truth but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened. - Winston Churchill
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11182212 - 10/04/09 05:27 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Horse crap. You can't find the TRILLIONS of dollars to fund the socialist welfare programs because the money does not exist yet.
If we eliminate the SSI wage cap, that would bring in an extra $4.646 trillion. Enough to cover the shortfall (see the chart in the link I posted above).
Only if you don't increase benefits for those who make increased contributions. You do know that the benefits you get are directly related to what you pay in, right? You are just raising taxes on the wealthy to pay for the losers. Again.
Right. So it is just another hand in the pocket of the rich who already pay almost all of the taxes. Tell me again how soc sec was supposed to be money invested for retirement. Remember Al Gore's "lock box"?
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11182403 - 10/04/09 05:53 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
So it is just another hand in the pocket of the rich who already pay almost all of the taxes.
I offered a a solution to the Social Security problem. If you're so worried that the rich will have to pay the same percentage as the poor, then nothing will be fixed. If we agree that everyone should pay the same percentage, then the problem is solved.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,162
Loc: [life]now[/life]
Last seen: 6 months, 12 days
|
|
If everyone pays the same percentage, should they also be able to collect the same benefits?
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Redstorm]
#11182507 - 10/04/09 06:04 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Not if you want to save Social Security.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
THC Titan
Spoonman
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 590
Loc: FL, USA
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Redstorm]
#11182516 - 10/04/09 06:06 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Oh no, won't someone think of the tax-burdened upper 1% and their ever-dwindling share of the nation's income..
??
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: THC Titan]
#11183536 - 10/04/09 08:12 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
THC Titan said:
Oh no, won't someone think of the tax-burdened upper 1% and their ever-dwindling share of the nation's income..
??
That looks fine until the pick up shop and move all their businesses to countries that don't tax the fuck out of them. There go all the jobs their businesses provided.
|
MisterMuscaria
Registered: 05/13/08
Posts: 25,917
Loc:
|
|
Bill Clinton privatized water. Anyone who privatized water is not a friend of mine.
--------------------
 
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
We would need a lot more than 4.5 trillion to cover social welfare obligations. People have estimated it anywhere from 50 to 100 trillion to cover us through the boomer generation.
The rest of the money will come from normal SSI contributions. I addressed how we could cover the predicted SSI shortage.
I see..... So that 4.5 trillion wouldn't cover us through the boomer generation. It kind of doesn't matter because if M1 increases dramatically the money paid out for social welfare would be worthless anyway.
http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/money-supply
In spite of the fact that banks were using bailout money to buy out competitors, M1 has spiked recently. We have to keep an eye on that.
It's unfortunate but the federal government is doing exactly what it shouldn't do to fix anything. Central economic planning "at work"...
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11184146 - 10/04/09 10:05 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
I see..... So that 4.5 trillion wouldn't cover us through the boomer generation. It kind of doesn't matter because if M1 increases dramatically the money paid out for social welfare would be worthless anyway.
I don't understand the relationship between your graph and Social Security shortages. SSI revenue is collected by a tax on individual income up to $100k. As I pointed out, the projected shortage could be made up by charging SSI tax on income over $100k. Help me understand how the graph you posted factors into this. Thanks.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,193
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 hours, 42 minutes
|
|
> I don't understand the relationship between your graph and Social Security shortages.
Saved money loses value over time due to inflation. Social security is "saved money". Unless you account for the loss in value of tax money collected today that is paid out tomorrow, you will have a shortfall when the bill comes due.
--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Seuss]
#11186372 - 10/05/09 10:37 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Thanks. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the social security trust fund is ficticious. The Government doesn't actually save any money for the future. It takes what it needs from FICA each year, and any leftover is used to cover the deficit. So long as the Government collects enough FICA to cover its current obligations, then things are good. If there is a projected shortage, then eliminating the wage cap on FICA would bring in enough extra money to cover that shortage.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Thanks. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the social security trust fund is ficticious. The Government doesn't actually save any money for the future. It takes what it needs from FICA each year, and any leftover is used to cover the deficit. So long as the Government collects enough FICA to cover its current obligations, then things are good. If there is a projected shortage, then eliminating the wage cap on FICA would bring in enough extra money to cover that shortage.
It is correct that it is a Ponzi scheme. Apparently your answer to the Ponzi scheme is to make it even bigger. What sheer genius. The government has essentially embezzled vast sums of money by failing to fund soc sec and you want to give them more. Here's a better idea. Raise the retirement age. When it was originally enacted life expectancy was just slightly older than the retirement age. And then start to wind it down by allowing people to opt out. No sane person will stay in. Why do you think the government should legislate that people be forced to act insanely?
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: THC Titan]
#11186515 - 10/05/09 10:59 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
THC Titan said:
Oh no, won't someone think of the tax-burdened upper 1% and their ever-dwindling share of the nation's income..
??
It isn't the nation's income, Karl. It is the income of the people in the nation.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11186789 - 10/05/09 11:43 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
It is correct that it is a Ponzi scheme. Apparently your answer to the Ponzi scheme is to make it even bigger. What sheer genius. The government has essentially embezzled vast sums of money by failing to fund soc sec and you want to give them more. Here's a better idea. Raise the retirement age. When it was originally enacted life expectancy was just slightly older than the retirement age. And then start to wind it down by allowing people to opt out. No sane person will stay in. Why do you think the government should legislate that people be forced to act insanely?
All that needs to be done is to eliminate the wage cap, and it's no longer something that is in danger of going broke. Raising retirement age isn't a bad idea, and should also be considered as a cost saving measure.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
It is correct that it is a Ponzi scheme. Apparently your answer to the Ponzi scheme is to make it even bigger. What sheer genius. The government has essentially embezzled vast sums of money by failing to fund soc sec and you want to give them more. Here's a better idea. Raise the retirement age. When it was originally enacted life expectancy was just slightly older than the retirement age. And then start to wind it down by allowing people to opt out. No sane person will stay in. Why do you think the government should legislate that people be forced to act insanely?
All that needs to be done is to eliminate the wage cap, and it's no longer something that is in danger of going broke. Raising retirement age isn't a bad idea, and should also be considered as a cost saving measure.
Which is nothing more nor less than a tax increase which will take more money out of private hands and put it in government control. But that is nothing for you.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11187394 - 10/05/09 01:32 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Which is nothing more nor less than a tax increase which will take more money out of private hands and put it in government control. But that is nothing for you.
It'd be about a $3,000/year tax increase for me. Again, I think it's dumb that everyone making under $100k pays 6% FICA, while those making more pay a smaller percentage. But we can argue back and forth about what we believe until we're blue in the face. All that really matters is what our elected officials believe.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,162
Loc: [life]now[/life]
Last seen: 6 months, 12 days
|
|
Wouldn't a removal of the FICA cap also increase the tax burden of businesses?
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Which is nothing more nor less than a tax increase which will take more money out of private hands and put it in government control. But that is nothing for you.
It'd be about a $3,000/year tax increase for me. Again, I think it's dumb that everyone making under $100k pays 6% FICA, while those making more pay a smaller percentage. But we can argue back and forth about what we believe until we're blue in the face. All that really matters is what our elected officials believe.
Well, first of all, they don't pay 6%. They pay 12.4%, half of which is hidden if you work for a paycheck. But when your benefits are calculated you get back based on what you paid in during your lifetime. You want to eliminate that and cap benefits. You also want to increase taxes on everyone who makes more than 106,000 a year by 12.4% on their last dollar. With no chance of ever getting that money in increased bennies. That isn't just a tax increase. That is a complete Columbian police station backroom beating. Those people already pay almost all the taxes and just because you can't stop spending you want to fuck them like no one has ever fucked them before.
Please, just go live in Cuba. Nobody has any money there, you'll be happy and over your sense of resentment.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11187808 - 10/05/09 02:41 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Please, just go live in Cuba. Nobody has any money there, you'll be happy and over your sense of resentment.
Show me a country with lower tax rates than the US that is successful. Plenty of countries do just fine with higher tax rates (Western Europe).
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Please, just go live in Cuba. Nobody has any money there, you'll be happy and over your sense of resentment.
Show me a country with lower tax rates than the US that is successful. Plenty of countries do just fine with higher tax rates (Western Europe).
The welfare state is sure working swell over in Europe. America became great by doing things differently. Fuck imitating euro-trash.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11187951 - 10/05/09 03:00 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
The welfare state is sure working swell over in Europe. America became great by doing things differently. Fuck imitating euro-trash.
If they weren't doing so well, I'd say fuck them too. Norwegians now make more than Americans. And get better benefits.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
The welfare state is sure working swell over in Europe. America became great by doing things differently. Fuck imitating euro-trash.
If they weren't doing so well, I'd say fuck them too. Norwegians now make more than Americans. And get better benefits.
Upon looking at Norway it does appear that they are heavy into the welfare state way of life. Their economy isn't fucked yet.
It takes time for socialist welfare to inflict serious damage to the economy.
Can you explain how welfare helps strengthen the economy?
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11188221 - 10/05/09 03:41 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Can you explain how welfare helps strengthen the economy?
I'm actually not claiming it strengthens the economy. I'm saying civilized nations should (and do) have some forms of welfare, and that they manage to get by with it just fine.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Can you explain how welfare helps strengthen the economy?
I'm actually not claiming it strengthens the economy. I'm saying civilized nations should (and do) have some forms of welfare, and that they manage to get by with it just fine.
If it does not strengthen the economy then I would surmise that it weakens it. The problem with welfare from the government is that politicians like to bribe people with more of it over time. It places a financial drain on the producers of wealth in the economy and gives free shit to those who are not productive. Punishing productivity and rewarding sloth is not a recipe for prosperity or freedom.
|
crookedjunk
Ben of A&E's "Intervention"
Registered: 09/28/09
Posts: 340
Loc: pittsburgh, pa
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11188636 - 10/05/09 04:23 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I suppose you would rather go back to the sharecropper system then.
Disgusting.
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: crookedjunk]
#11188705 - 10/05/09 04:32 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
crookedjunk said:
I suppose you would rather go back to the sharecropper system then.
Disgusting.
What are you talking about?
I also don't like welfare because the government uses it as bribery. It's like "Don't fucking complain when we take away your freedom and anything else we do that you don't like because we're giving you free money."
Edited by Mr.Al (10/05/09 04:32 PM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11191244 - 10/05/09 11:22 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
What are you talking about?
I also don't like welfare because the government uses it as bribery. It's like "Don't fucking complain when we take away your freedom and anything else we do that you don't like because we're giving you free money."
What are YOU talking about?
I hear this all the time about "taking away freedom". I'm as much for personal freedom as anyone. Taxes always have and always will be around, so if you're talking about tax freedom, you're living in a fantasy land.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
|
And here we have yet again someone arguing that because there is any of something that means more is completely justified. In this case taxation. No, that is crap reasoning.
All taxation involves a restriction of freedom. Every fucking penny. When that penny is taken away you are no longer free to spend it as you see fit. The more pennies you lose, the more freedom you lose. The IRS is the single greatest agent of oppression in the US.
Norway is a socialist beacon of success, right? Guess why. Hint, it isn't because of socialism:
Quote:
Norway is the world's fifth-largest oil exporter and third largest gas exporter, providing much of western Europe's crude oil and gas requirements. In 2006, Norwegian oil and gas exports accounted for over 50% of total merchandise exports.
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3421.htm
5 million people and a workforce of 2.5M, almost all of the same religious and ethnic group, with very little immigration.
Quote:
"The export value for natural gas reached 21.2 billion Norwegian crowns ($3.08 billion), which is the highest ever recorded," Statistics Norway said in a statement. The value of Norway's crude oil exports was 18 billion crowns in January.
Excluding oil and gas exports, the trade deficit slimmed to 9.9 billion crowns in January from 11.7 billion in December, but was up from 9.1 billion in January a year earlier. Norway's petroleum sector accounts for about a quarter of GDP and about half of total exports.
http://in.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idINLG14118920090216
Every man, woman and child there is spotted $1,000 in oil exports, which account for 25% of their GDP. That will cover up a lot of Marxist sins.
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: crookedjunk]
#11192307 - 10/06/09 07:44 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
crookedjunk said:
I suppose you would rather go back to the sharecropper system then.
it had many benefits including encouraging the lessee to work harder for
a larger harvest while having very few drawbacks, a sharecropper gets
use of the land and equipment of the land owner in exchange for his work
and a portion of his crop, the risks are the same for both parties, the
other option is the rental of land and equipment in which the lessee
keeps the whole crop but has to pay out of pocket for everything or they
are simply employees of the land owner and get none of the crop but a
meager wage instead.. ag wages are typically the lowest in the nation
if we turned welfare into workfare it would benefit the taxpayer, the
government and the recipient, the recipient wouldnt be getting a free
paycheck for watching oprah but would instead learn the value of that
paycheck while the tax payers would reap the benefits of that recipients
labor
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11192890 - 10/06/09 09:55 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
And here we have yet again someone arguing that because there is any of something that means more is completely justified. In this case taxation. No, that is crap reasoning.
The proposals are to increase taxes on the wealthy closer to where they were before we started having these massive deficits which all started under Reagan. If you're making under $100k, don't worry about it, you won't be affected. If you're making over $100k, then an extra few percent tax isn't going to break you, and I don't feel sorry for you, no matter how much whining you do.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Norway is a socialist beacon of success, right? Guess why. Hint, it isn't because of socialism:
.
.
.
Every man, woman and child there is spotted $1,000 in oil exports, which account for 25% of their GDP. That will cover up a lot of Marxist sins.
The United States produces over three times as much oil as Norway. How much are Americans spotted? Nothing? Too bad, since you clearly think it would help.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
|
We produce 3 times as much and have 60 times the population. Are you a comedian?
And of course you don't care that the wealthy pay almost all of the taxes and what's a little bit more. Because you aren't one. I think we should have a 100% tax on whatever income range you're in. We can narrow it down so it's only you. Who cares? It's only one schmuck being screwed.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11193576 - 10/06/09 11:53 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
We produce 3 times as much and have 60 times the population. Are you a comedian?
We don't even get $50.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
And of course you don't care that the wealthy pay almost all of the taxes and what's a little bit more. Because you aren't one.
I just said I'd be willing to give an extra $3k per year in order to save social security. But my $3k alone won't save it; it will take everyone else who earns $100k+.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
I think we should have a 100% tax on whatever income range you're in. We can narrow it down so it's only you. Who cares? It's only one schmuck being screwed.
I believe the more you earn, the more you should keep. But if the poor pay 6% FICA, then so should the rich. Tax breaks on the rich are bankrupting the country. You're the comedian here.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,162
Loc: [life]now[/life]
Last seen: 6 months, 12 days
|
|
Quote:
But if the poor pay 6% FICA, then so should the rich.
And if the poor receive benefits in exchange for all taxed income, so should the rich, right?
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Redstorm]
#11193781 - 10/06/09 12:25 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Redstorm said:
Quote:
But if the poor pay 6% FICA, then so should the rich.
And if the poor receive benefits in exchange for all taxed income, so should the rich, right?
Social Security is for those that need it. If the rich have no money when they are old, then yes, they'll get it too.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
We produce 3 times as much and have 60 times the population. Are you a comedian?
We don't even get $50.
Of course not. We are a net importer of oil. Duh.Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
And of course you don't care that the wealthy pay almost all of the taxes and what's a little bit more. Because you aren't one.
I just said I'd be willing to give an extra $3k per year in order to save social security. But my $3k alone won't save it; it will take everyone else who earns $100k+.
Wow, what a guy. Here's what your proposed tax increases are
200K........$12,000
300K........$24,000
400K........$36,000
$3,000 you want to pay. What a fucking prince.Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
I think we should have a 100% tax on whatever income range you're in. We can narrow it down so it's only you. Who cares? It's only one schmuck being screwed.
I believe the more you earn, the more you should keep. But if the poor pay 6% FICA, then so should the rich. Tax breaks on the rich are bankrupting the country. You're the comedian here.
Tax breaks on the rich? What tax breaks would those be, oh great unicorn hunter? The rich pay far more in taxes proportionately to their income than the poor. And it has only gone up since these fallacious tax "cuts" were enacted under Bush. The rich aren't bankrupting the country. The bums are.
As far as Soc Sec:
The poor pay 12.4%. Everybody up to $106,000 pays that. Your benefits at retirement are tied to your lifetime payments. You want to increase the payment ceiling without a benefit increase. You want to increase taxes on the wealthy by, holy fucking shit, 12.4%!!!!!! That's draconian. Just to perpetuate a Ponzi scheme that has grown way beyond anyone's original intent.
As a nod to saving this fiasco I will agree to forego any benefits if I never have to pay another dime into it. I'm 52. They can keep the fucking money they already hosed me out of and shove it up their commie asses but stop asking for more. How's that?
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Redstorm said:
Quote:
But if the poor pay 6% FICA, then so should the rich.
And if the poor receive benefits in exchange for all taxed income, so should the rich, right?
Social Security is for those that need it. If the rich have no money when they are old, then yes, they'll get it too.
Bullshit, Karl. Everybody gets retirement benefits from Soc Sec regardless of need and based solely on what they paid in. And it isn't 6%. It's 12%.
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11194270 - 10/06/09 01:44 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
More analysis of the complete and utter cornhole Falcon would like to inflict on those making more money than him:
Small business
Owner makes 1,000,000
10 employees make 200,000 each
40 employees make 50,000 each
If we eliminate the ceiling on income for soc sec one of two things will happen. Either the employees in the 200,000 range pay an additional 12% on their last 100,000 or they pay 6% and the employer pays the 6%. First scenario:
Owner pays the 6% contribution:
His tax goes up $108,000 plus 10 times 6% of $100,000 or $60,000 for a total of $168,000 (in addition to the $300,000+ he already pays). (Call an ambulance!!!!!!!)
Each 200K guy's taxes go up $6,000 for $60,000.
But no owner will ever do that
Or he cuts the employee pay by the employer contribution:
Owner tax goes up $108,000 (in addition to the $300,000+ he already pays) (Whoa!!!!!!)
Each 200K employee's tax goes up $6,000 (times 10 is $60,000) and his income goes down $6,000.
But the employees don't pay federal, state or local tax on that lost $60,000. Lost tax revenue on guys in that tax bracket varies by state but it is $20,000 to $25,000. Ponzi tax up, other tax down, income down, loss of self esteem, increased suicide, cats and dogs sleeping together.
This is no small tax, it is a complete and total rape. Raperape to Whoopie.
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
 Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11195817 - 10/06/09 05:35 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
It would work out fine. If the employer is taxed more then he will be forced to cut his workforce and/or cut wages.
Either way there is more welfare to go around and increased unemployment/drop in wages is blamed on "greedy capitalist business owners" instead of government!
http://mises.org/story/3752
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11196088 - 10/06/09 06:19 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah. That's the ticket.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11197782 - 10/06/09 10:27 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Wow, what a guy. Here's what your proposed tax increases are
200K........$12,000
300K........$24,000
400K........$36,000
$3,000 you want to pay. What a fucking prince.
Trust me, I'd MUCH rather pay $36k or even $100k, because that means I'd be taking home a shitload more money.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
The rich pay far more in taxes proportionately to their income than the poor.
Waaaa!  It's one hell of a lot easier for someone making $1M per year to pay 5% than it is for someone making $20k. Duh.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
And it has only gone up since these fallacious tax "cuts" were enacted under Bush. The rich aren't bankrupting the country. The bums are.
Do you know how much Wall Street is getting from the taxpayer??? It's one hell of a lot more than the "bums".
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
You want to increase taxes on the wealthy by, holy fucking shit, 12.4%!!!!!! That's draconian.
Oh my god you're a whiner.
You say it's "draconian" for the rich to pay 12%, but that's exactly what the poor are paying. What planet are you from to expect sympathy for asking the rich to pay as much as the poor??? Unbelievable.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
As a nod to saving this fiasco I will agree to forego any benefits if I never have to pay another dime into it. I'm 52. They can keep the fucking money they already hosed me out of and shove it up their commie asses but stop asking for more. How's that?
Your proposal doesn't save social security. Mine does.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11197804 - 10/06/09 10:29 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Everybody gets retirement benefits from Soc Sec regardless of need and based solely on what they paid in.
You wished. Although that may have been the original intent, everyone knows Social Security never worked that way.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11198028 - 10/06/09 11:03 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
It would work out fine. If the employer is taxed more then he will be forced to cut his workforce and/or cut wages.
Either way there is more welfare to go around and increased unemployment/drop in wages is blamed on "greedy capitalist business owners" instead of government!
Of course that would be the case. The employee pays more taxes, and he either accepts it, or goes to work for someone else... where he still pays more taxes, so I guess he'd just have to accept it. Social Security is saved, as the employee is now paying as much FICA as his lower income coworkers. Sucks being treated like the lower income guys have always been treated (6% FICA), doesn't it?
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11198064 - 10/06/09 11:08 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
But the employees don't pay federal, state or local tax on that lost $60,000. Lost tax revenue on guys in that tax bracket varies by state but it is $20,000 to $25,000.
That is a good point, and it's your only good point.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
Yes let's save all the socialist welfare programs.
Let's have socialist healthcare.
Socialist everything!
Viva Socialism!
We'll pay everyone welfare with money that is worth less than the paper it's printed on!
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11199242 - 10/07/09 07:55 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
hopefully it becomes a welfare state, we can all quit our jobs, collect
welfare and live a better life than the working man... oh wait, there wont
be a working man...
--------------------
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,193
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 hours, 42 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11199641 - 10/07/09 09:25 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
> oh wait, there wont be a working man...
That is phase two. The part they don't talk about where the government puts the people to work so that those running the government can continue to live in style.
--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Everybody gets retirement benefits from Soc Sec regardless of need and based solely on what they paid in.
You wished. Although that may have been the original intent, everyone knows Social Security never worked that way.
What are you talking about? Except for disability benefits that is exactly how it is done. You don't get back enough but what you do get is entirely determined by what you contributed.
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Wow, what a guy. Here's what your proposed tax increases are
200K........$12,000
300K........$24,000
400K........$36,000
$3,000 you want to pay. What a fucking prince.
Trust me, I'd MUCH rather pay $36k or even $100k, because that means I'd be taking home a shitload more money.
Why don't you just pay it anyway?Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
The rich pay far more in taxes proportionately to their income than the poor.
Waaaa! It's one hell of a lot easier for someone making $1M per year to pay 5% than it is for someone making $20k. Duh.
Yeah so? And your example is a joke. Someone making 20K pays virtually nothing in federal and state tax. And by that I mean 0%. Someone making a million pays over 40%. You also keep floating this bogus 5% or 6%. It is actually DOUBLE or TRIPLE that. 12.4% Soc sec and 2.9% M/M. Anything else you think they should pay just because they can?Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
And it has only gone up since these fallacious tax "cuts" were enacted under Bush. The rich aren't bankrupting the country. The bums are.
Do you know how much Wall Street is getting from the taxpayer??? It's one hell of a lot more than the "bums".
It is? I doubt it. Of further note, do you know how much in taxes Wall Street pays? Or how much in taxes the bums pay? Do you also know that the banks are rapidly repaying much of the loans back? At a tidy profit to the taxpayer, I might add. This will not be the case with auto companies. Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
You want to increase taxes on the wealthy by, holy fucking shit, 12.4%!!!!!! That's draconian.
Oh my god you're a whiner.
And you are crook. If I go to your house and take 12% of your possessions will you call the police? Of course you will, because you are a crybaby. Boohoo.Quote:
You say it's "draconian" for the rich to pay 12%, but that's exactly what the poor are paying. What planet are you from to expect sympathy for asking the rich to pay as much as the poor??? Unbelievable.
No, it's 12% MORE, on top of the already grotesque taxes they pay. THAT is draconian. Over 50% on their last dollar. They pay way more than the poor. The poor don't pay anything but Soc sec and M/M. Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
As a nod to saving this fiasco I will agree to forego any benefits if I never have to pay another dime into it. I'm 52. They can keep the fucking money they already hosed me out of and shove it up their commie asses but stop asking for more. How's that?
Your proposal doesn't save social security. Mine does.
And again I ask why should we keep this Ponzi scheme afloat? The government steals the money and puts it into the general fund. Maybe if they stopped doing that it could be saved. Maybe if they stopped doing that it would be worth saving. As it is right now it is a complete sham. Raise the retirement age, cut bennies, stop putting receipts in the general fund. Your answer is and always will be take more from those who succeed. Punish and punish and punish success until it can't be punished no more. Some behavior model you got there. Work hard, get fucked.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11200316 - 10/07/09 11:30 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Yes let's save all the socialist welfare programs.
Let's have socialist healthcare.
Socialist everything!
Viva Socialism!
We'll pay everyone welfare with money that is worth less than the paper it's printed on!
The decline of the dollar has nothing to do with socialism. Do you even know what socialism is? Please look it up. America is not a socialist country by a long shot.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11200330 - 10/07/09 11:33 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
hopefully it becomes a welfare state, we can all quit our jobs, collect welfare and live a better life than the working man... oh wait, there wont be a working man...
I'm not calling for a welfare state. I'm proposing fixing social security so grandma isn't out on the street. I'm all for welfare reform.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11200692 - 10/07/09 12:30 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
It's one hell of a lot easier for someone making $1M per year to pay 5% than it is for someone making $20k. Duh.
Yeah so? And your example is a joke. Someone making 20K pays virtually nothing in federal and state tax. And by that I mean 0%. Someone making a million pays over 40%. You also keep floating this bogus 5% or 6%. It is actually DOUBLE or TRIPLE that. 12.4% Soc sec and 2.9% M/M.
It doesn't matter if it's 6% or 12%. It's easier for a millionaire to pay 12% than it is for someone making $20k. That's why we have a progressive tax system for income tax. Social Security is another matter. The solution being proposed isn't even progressive, it's FLAT.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Do you know how much Wall Street is getting from the taxpayer??? It's one hell of a lot more than the "bums".
It is? I doubt it.
Yes, Wall St got more: 2008 United States federal budget
Unemployment/Welfare/Other mandatory spending was $324 billion; much less than the Wall St bailouts.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Of further note, do you know how much in taxes Wall Street pays? Or how much in taxes the bums pay? Do you also know that the banks are rapidly repaying much of the loans back? At a tidy profit to the taxpayer, I might add.
Only some of them are paying it back:
Number of Banks Not Making TARP Payments Skyrockets
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
And you are crook. If I go to your house and take 12% of your possessions will you call the police? Of course you will, because you are a crybaby. Boohoo.
That would be against the law.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
No, it's 12% MORE, on top of the already grotesque taxes they pay. THAT is draconian. Over 50% on their last dollar. They pay way more than the poor. The poor don't pay anything but Soc sec and M/M.
They got by just fine before from 1932 - 1986. Then Reagan implemented tax cuts on the wealthy, and massive deficit spending began in the US.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Your answer is and always will be take more from those who succeed. Punish and punish and punish success until it can't be punished no more. Some behavior model you got there. Work hard, get fucked.
For fuck's sake, quit playing an idiot. I've never suggested that CEOs make the same as fast food cooks. I'm saying if you make more you pay more, but of course you still keep more.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
It's one hell of a lot easier for someone making $1M per year to pay 5% than it is for someone making $20k. Duh.
Yeah so? And your example is a joke. Someone making 20K pays virtually nothing in federal and state tax. And by that I mean 0%. Someone making a million pays over 40%. You also keep floating this bogus 5% or 6%. It is actually DOUBLE or TRIPLE that. 12.4% Soc sec and 2.9% M/M.
It doesn't matter if it's 6% or 12%. It's easier for a millionaire to pay 12% than it is for someone making $20k. That's why we have a progressive tax system for income tax. Social Security is another matter. The solution being proposed isn't even progressive, it's FLAT.
I like to have my facts in order. You? Not so much.
Of course it's easier for them to pay. So what? Why stop there. Tax the rich down to the level where everybody has the same takehome. Why should they have any more at all?
We already have an egregiously unjust progressive taxation wherein the very few pay almost all of the tax bills for the many.Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Do you know how much Wall Street is getting from the taxpayer??? It's one hell of a lot more than the "bums".
It is? I doubt it.
Yes, Wall St got more: 2008 United States federal budget
Unemployment/Welfare/Other mandatory spending was $324 billion; much less than the Wall St bailouts.
LOL. That isn't all the bums got, is it? Now, how much did Wall Street get? In loans. Unlike the bums who aren't paying their mortgages they actually have been paying it back. You like Wiki? I got Wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubled_Asset_Relief_Program
Quote:
As of February 9, 2009, $388 billion had been allotted, and $296 billion spent, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. Among the money committed, includes:
For the math challenged 296 is less than 324, which was a phony number anyway.
Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Of further note, do you know how much in taxes Wall Street pays? Or how much in taxes the bums pay? Do you also know that the banks are rapidly repaying much of the loans back? At a tidy profit to the taxpayer, I might add.
Only some of them are paying it back:
Number of Banks Not Making TARP Payments Skyrockets
Well no shit. They haven't all paid it back in the less than 12 months. What a stunner. Most of the banks on that list have nothing to do with Wall Street, by the way.Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
And you are crook. If I go to your house and take 12% of your possessions will you call the police? Of course you will, because you are a crybaby. Boohoo.
That would be against the law.
So are compelling soc sec contributions beyond 12% of $106,000. What's your point? You want to change a law, I want to change a law.Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
No, it's 12% MORE, on top of the already grotesque taxes they pay. THAT is draconian. Over 50% on their last dollar. They pay way more than the poor. The poor don't pay anything but Soc sec and M/M.
They got by just fine before from 1932 - 1986. Then Reagan implemented tax cuts on the wealthy, and massive deficit spending began in the US.
Did they? One could quite well argue that those tax rates were quite damaging even then. If tax revenue goes up is it a tax cut? That's the beginning of deficit spending? Under Reagan? Now you're just being a buffoon.Quote:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Your answer is and always will be take more from those who succeed. Punish and punish and punish success until it can't be punished no more. Some behavior model you got there. Work hard, get fucked.
For fuck's sake, quit playing an idiot. I've never suggested that CEOs make the same as fast food cooks. I'm saying if you make more you pay more, but of course you still keep more.
We already pay more. Disproportionately more. Hideously, flagrantly, grotesquely, disproportionately more. So much more that I could hire a harem of welfare queens and get market rate blow jobs 5 times a day, every day for less.
I think that all the tax increases should fall on people making between 100K and 200K. There's so many more of them it would be easy. The few at the top have been fucked to death already.
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
hopefully it becomes a welfare state, we can all quit our jobs, collect welfare and live a better life than the working man... oh wait, there wont be a working man...
I'm not calling for a welfare state. I'm proposing fixing social security so grandma isn't out on the street. I'm all for welfare reform.
why not let grandma have the option of cashing out and investing on her
own, it's obvious that SSA earns no interest on the billions it takes in
each year, they supposedly spend the surplus on the national debt but
then in years like this where 30 million people are out of work they
have shortfalls and start cutting benefits for people, if grandma
decides to give it to the grandkids then hopefully they are compassionate
enough to take care of her in her golden years, if not, let poor old
grandma eat the cat food and live in her box by the dumpsters
with the current system, no one can live on the $1000/mo that SSI pays,
it's unlikely that any improvements would be made, government is
incapable of doing anything that doesnt benefit it's self or those that
dont contribute to the system
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
I've never suggested that CEOs make the same as fast food cooks. I'm saying if you make more you pay more, but of course you still keep more.
it's unfortunate that they have a maximum payout of about $1800/mo, if I
payed in $30k every year I'd still only get $20k/yr during my retirement,
I feel I should get back what I payed in plus a modest interest rate,
obviously government is incapable of handling money properly or we'd be
earning interest off of our money
wanna fix social security, then end the shit
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11203118 - 10/07/09 06:58 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:It's one hell of a lot easier for someone making $1M per year to pay 5% than it is for someone making $20k. Duh.
Yeah so? And your example is a joke. Someone making 20K pays virtually nothing in federal and state tax. And by that I mean 0%. Someone making a million pays over 40%. You also keep floating this bogus 5% or 6%. It is actually DOUBLE or TRIPLE that. 12.4% Soc sec and 2.9% M/M.
It doesn't matter if it's 6% or 12%. It's easier for a millionaire to pay 12% than it is for someone making $20k. That's why we have a progressive tax system for income tax. Social Security is another matter. The solution being proposed isn't even progressive, it's FLAT.
I like to have my facts in order. You? Not so much.
I was making a generalization there. I could have said "any" rather than 5%, but the number doesn't matter. My point is that it's easier for a wealthy person to pay X% of his income than it is for a poor person to pay X%.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Of course it's easier for them to pay. So what? Why stop there. Tax the rich down to the level where everybody has the same takehome. Why should they have any more at all?
For obvious reasons. People need to be incentivized. So long as people can still become millionaires, we'll see our brightest do their best. If your pay were to go down by 12%, would you take the paycut, or stop working? If you say you'd quit working, then you're not making nearly as much as you claim.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
We already have an egregiously unjust progressive taxation wherein the very few pay almost all of the tax bills for the many.
It's nowhere near what other civilized countries have, nor what we used to have. Stop whining.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
If tax revenue goes up is it a tax cut? That's the beginning of deficit spending? Under Reagan? Now you're just being a buffoon.
Have a look at US tax rates from 1980 to 1988 while Reagan was president: Top US Marginal Income Tax Rates, 1913--2003
And have a look at our deficit spending under Reagan:
Who's the buffoon???
Edit: Here is another link: Reagan and revenue
And let's not forget the Reagan TEFRA tax hike.
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (10/07/09 08:45 PM)
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
|
You are. You think Reagan and the Dem Congress of the eighties invented deficit spending, which is monumentally ignorant. Obama and the Dem Congress are in the process of resizing that graph so that the bottom of it will go into this post.
--------------------
|
THC Titan
Spoonman
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 590
Loc: FL, USA
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11206505 - 10/08/09 08:12 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
You are. You think Reagan and the Dem Congress of the eighties invented deficit spending, which is monumentally ignorant. Obama and the Dem Congress are in the process of resizing that graph so that the bottom of it will go into this post.
It's not an ideological belief, the deficit under Reagan was increased to historic levels and so was peacetime defense spending. Coincidentally, two of the terrible legacies of Reagan that still afflict this country's politics.
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
Welfare is socialist. Explain how welfare strengthens the economy. I don't think you can because it doesn't. We could get somewhere if we look at economics from a more scientific perspective. I would like to see a nation that maximizes prosperity and personal freedom. I think they go together nicely.
|
THC Titan
Spoonman
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 590
Loc: FL, USA
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11206742 - 10/08/09 09:08 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Welfare is socialist. Explain how welfare strengthens the economy. I don't think you can because it doesn't. We could get somewhere if we look at economics from a more scientific perspective. I would like to see a nation that maximizes prosperity and personal freedom. I think they go together nicely.
In rich developed countries, it is usually socially desirable to have some level of safety net available for the poorest and most needy among us. That doesn't necessarily include all the entitlement programs that are part of the "welfare state", and it is not socialism.
If you're saying there should be zero assistance to anyone, well, I'm sure there's an island in the Caribbean you can call your own where you don't have to get a shit about anyone but yourself, and everything can be reduced to net monetary benefit.
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: THC Titan]
#11206787 - 10/08/09 09:15 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
THC Titan said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Welfare is socialist. Explain how welfare strengthens the economy. I don't think you can because it doesn't. We could get somewhere if we look at economics from a more scientific perspective. I would like to see a nation that maximizes prosperity and personal freedom. I think they go together nicely.
In rich developed countries, it is usually socially desirable to have some level of safety net available for the poorest and most needy among us. That doesn't necessarily include all the entitlement programs that are part of the "welfare state", and it is not socialism.
If you're saying there should be zero assistance to anyone, well, I'm sure there's an island in the Caribbean you can call your own where you don't have to get a shit about anyone but yourself, and everything can be reduced to net monetary benefit.
I think communities could do a far better job than government. People think that they can't do something once government takes over that role. Government likes to look benevolent because that's the easiest way to take advantage of people.
Welfare is redistribution of wealth which is a key part of socialism.
It is always interesting how no one has a convincing argument for welfare being good for the economy...
Edited by Mr.Al (10/08/09 09:17 AM)
|
THC Titan
Spoonman
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 590
Loc: FL, USA
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11206992 - 10/08/09 09:51 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
I think communities could do a far better job than government. People think that they can't do something once government takes over that role. Government likes to look benevolent because that's the easiest way to take advantage of people.
Welfare is redistribution of wealth which is a key part of socialism.
It is always interesting how no one has a convincing argument for welfare being good for the economy...
If your idea of "maximizing prosperity" means concentrating a majority of the country's wealth in the upper 1% of the population, you're limiting your conception of both prosperity and freedom. If a significant number of people are not healthy and not educated, their ability to exercise their freedoms (and pursue happiness, blah blah) is severely limited.
|
THC Titan
Spoonman
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 590
Loc: FL, USA
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: THC Titan]
#11207007 - 10/08/09 09:54 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
As an aside, what is the Austrian school of economics perspective on Pres. Reagan?
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11207102 - 10/08/09 10:15 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
You are. You think Reagan and the Dem Congress of the eighties invented deficit spending, which is monumentally ignorant.
If I thought that, it would be monumentally ignorant. But you're making things up. I said monumental deficit spending started under Reagan. To be even more accurate I should have said "restarted".
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Obama and the Dem Congress are in the process of resizing that graph so that the bottom of it will go into this post.
That wouldn't disprove my point.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11207112 - 10/08/09 10:17 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I'm in agreement with THC Titan's respones to your posts.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
|
Of course you are. The consistency of both of your desires to spend other people's money is as certain as sunrise.
You also persist in the same false notion that the President determines the budget. He does not. Congress does.Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
You are. You think Reagan and the Dem Congress of the eighties invented deficit spending, which is monumentally ignorant.
If I thought that, it would be monumentally ignorant. But you're making things up. I said monumental deficit spending started under Reagan. To be even more accurate I should have said "restarted".
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Obama and the Dem Congress are in the process of resizing that graph so that the bottom of it will go into this post.
That wouldn't disprove my point.
You already said your point was incorrect but I will include this for reference.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt
A nice table showing government debt as a fraction of GDP from 1940 to this year
Year Gross Debt in Billions [6] as % of GDP
1910 2.6 n/a
1920 25.9 n/a
1930 16.2 n/a
1940 43.0 52.4
1950 257.4 94.1
1960 290.5 56.1
1970 380.9 37.6
1980 909.0 33.3
1990 3,206.3 55.9
2000 5,628.7 58.0
2001 5,769.9 57.4
2002 6,198.4 59.7
2003 6,760.0 62.6
2004 7,354.7 63.9
2005 7,905.3 64.6
2006 8,451.4 65.0
2007 8,950.7 65.6
2008 9,985.8 70.2
2009 (est.) 12,867.5 90.4
2010 (est.) 14,456.3 98.1
2011 (est.) 15,673.9 101.1
2012 (est.) 16,565.7 100.6
2013 (est.) 17,440.2 99.7
2014 (est.) 18,350.0 99.8
As of 2007, the debt of the United States ranked as the 23rd-largest in the world as a percentage of GDP.[7].
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11207223 - 10/08/09 10:38 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
What are you saying? That deficits aren't a big deal?
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (10/08/09 02:57 PM)
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
|
No. That the Dem Congress is an out of control lunatic spendthrift socialist organization. Also that you are falsely asserting that the lowering of the top tax rates while Reagan was Pres led to unprecedented deficit spending.
http://www.college-cram.com/study/jer/presentations/970
Quote:
Taxation Part XII – Less is more: Later Experience with Tax Rate Cuts
In 1981 President Reagan signed the Kemp-Roth Tax Cut which trimmed the top marginal tax rate from 70% to 50% over three years, being fully implemented by 1984. Inflation adjusted tax revenue declined in the four years before 1983, but grew in 1983 and the three years following. Similarly, prior to the tax cuts, our economy grew at less than 1% annually with inflation adjustment, but the following four years grew at nearly 5% while inflation, unemployment, and interest rates also decreased. This was just the first round of cuts Reagan initiated.
Tax revenues went up. Spending went up even more. Let's stop the fucking spending and not go back to mugging people with more than a few dollars in their pocket.
He also asks a good question. Since you blindly follow the idea that raising tax rates increases revenue, do you believe that the most revenue would be achieved with a 100% rate?
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: THC Titan]
#11207892 - 10/08/09 12:23 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
THC Titan said:
If you're saying there should be zero assistance to anyone
well shouldnt that assistance be available to everyone, it's not available
to me, I've been out of work for 2 years, I cant qualify for any sort of
government assistance, I was denied unemployment and even if I were able
to collect that would have expired 18 months ago, seems that the only one
that can get it are those have the entitlements and they seem to be based
on race, seems I'm not the flavor of the week
--------------------
|
THC Titan
Spoonman
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 590
Loc: FL, USA
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11208744 - 10/08/09 02:21 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
You also persist in the same false notion that the President determines the budget. He does not. Congress does.
You bring this up every time the discussion turns to fiscal policy, and I still don't understand how you made it to 50 years of age without having more than a fragmented understanding of the federal budgetary process.
Do you really believe the President has no direct influence in crafting the annual budget? Is it even possible to lay out a general framework for the process without including the role of the President and executive branch? I don't think you could, because it would instantly reveal how deceptive you are being. In fact, the President is one of the most important actors in the budgetary process.
This blind unawareness of government reminds me of certain people who criticized Sotomoyor for her comments about courts "making policy" when it's obvious to anyone with an education that every time the court determines the constitutionality of an issue, it changes the way those behaviors/rules/laws are practiced - thus, believe it or not, making policy.
|
THC Titan
Spoonman
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 590
Loc: FL, USA
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11208748 - 10/08/09 02:23 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
well shouldnt that assistance be available to everyone, it's not available
to me, I've been out of work for 2 years, I cant qualify for any sort of
government assistance, I was denied unemployment and even if I were able
to collect that would have expired 18 months ago, seems that the only one
that can get it are those have the entitlements and they seem to be based
on race, seems I'm not the flavor of the week
What? Prisoner#1 scapegoating black people? I've never seen this before!
Hey buddy, why don't you stop being so gosh-darned lazy and pull yourself up by the bootstraps.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11208904 - 10/08/09 02:51 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Since you blindly follow the idea that raising tax rates increases revenue, do you believe that the most revenue would be achieved with a 100% rate?
No. I'm familiar with the Laffer Curve. The most revenue will be achieved somewhere between 40% - 75% depending on many factors (the more someone makes the higher tax rate they will accept before they become less motivated to work).
The links I posted above show why revenue went up under Reagan. Inflation, population growth, and other new taxes that effectively transferred taxes from the wealthy to everyone else.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (10/08/09 03:01 PM)
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: THC Titan]
#11209598 - 10/08/09 04:45 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
THC Titan said:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
well shouldnt that assistance be available to everyone, it's not available
to me, I've been out of work for 2 years, I cant qualify for any sort of
government assistance, I was denied unemployment and even if I were able
to collect that would have expired 18 months ago, seems that the only one
that can get it are those have the entitlements and they seem to be based
on race, seems I'm not the flavor of the week
What? Prisoner#1 scapegoating black people? I've never seen this before!
Hey buddy, why don't you stop being so gosh-darned lazy and pull yourself up by the bootstraps.
so, lemme ask you, is it right that the non-contributing sector of
society can collect the government benefits I've paid for but when
in my time of need I cannot?
you should link us to that scapegoating you claim I've done
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11209717 - 10/08/09 05:00 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
well shouldnt that assistance be available to everyone, it's not available to me, I've been out of work for 2 years, I cant qualify for any sort of government assistance, I was denied unemployment and even if I were able to collect that would have expired 18 months ago, seems that the only one that can get it are those have the entitlements and they seem to be based on race, seems I'm not the flavor of the week
Are you saying a minority in the same position as you would be collecting benefits right now??? Please provide a link or explain this further. Thanks.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
|
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: THC Titan]
#11209881 - 10/08/09 05:24 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
THC Titan said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
You also persist in the same false notion that the President determines the budget. He does not. Congress does.
You bring this up every time the discussion turns to fiscal policy, and I still don't understand how you made it to 50 years of age without having more than a fragmented understanding of the federal budgetary process.
Do you really believe the President has no direct influence in crafting the annual budget? Is it even possible to lay out a general framework for the process without including the role of the President and executive branch? I don't think you could, because it would instantly reveal how deceptive you are being. In fact, the President is one of the most important actors in the budgetary process.
This blind unawareness of government reminds me of certain people who criticized Sotomoyor for her comments about courts "making policy" when it's obvious to anyone with an education that every time the court determines the constitutionality of an issue, it changes the way those behaviors/rules/laws are practiced - thus, believe it or not, making policy.
Egregiously nonsensical from top to bottom. There are vast latitudes of policy that can be determined by the legislature that have no judicial impact at all.
And I have never denied that the President can influence legislation. What I have endeavored to point out over and over again for the simple-minded is that the real dictator in terms of spending is the Congress. Hence all descriptions of what happened budgetarily at any time are far more accurately ascribed to the make up of Congress and NOT the White House.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11209932 - 10/08/09 05:31 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
provide a link to what, my non-existent bank account?
http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsp/applicant_recipients/eligibility.htm
Did I miss something in your link saying only minorities are eligible for food stamps? Isn't that your claim? That minorities in your position would get some kind of welfare that you're not getting?
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
|
maybe you should read my posts again, it's obvious you're missing something
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: THC Titan]
#11210024 - 10/08/09 05:48 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
THC Titan said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
I think communities could do a far better job than government. People think that they can't do something once government takes over that role. Government likes to look benevolent because that's the easiest way to take advantage of people.
Welfare is redistribution of wealth which is a key part of socialism.
It is always interesting how no one has a convincing argument for welfare being good for the economy...
If your idea of "maximizing prosperity" means concentrating a majority of the country's wealth in the upper 1% of the population, you're limiting your conception of both prosperity and freedom. If a significant number of people are not healthy and not educated, their ability to exercise their freedoms (and pursue happiness, blah blah) is severely limited.
We can make education cheap again if we get government out of it. Healthcare is extremely expensive also from government involvement. Notice things get expensive when government tries to "fix it."
Again, no explanation in how government welfare benefits the economy... No one wants to touch that.
Let me give you some help with economics.
Read Frederic Bastiat's: That Which is Seen and That Which is Not Seen. You will then comprehend exactly how government makes things more expensive.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/08/09 05:51 PM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11210435 - 10/08/09 06:51 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
maybe you should read my posts again, it's obvious you're missing something
Can someone help me, or is Prisoner the only one here that understands his post?
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11210520 - 10/08/09 07:02 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
We can make education cheap again if we get government out of it. Healthcare is extremely expensive also from government involvement. Notice things get expensive when government tries to "fix it."
So your proposal is that only kids with well to do parents go to school?
Also, Government hasn't taken over healthcare. This isn't a socialist country as you think.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Again, no explanation in how government welfare benefits the economy... No one wants to touch that.
So you'd rather put the eldery in the streets than allow the economy to take a minor hit? People like you are in the minority, thank goodness.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,193
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 hours, 42 minutes
|
|
Where in the world do you get:
> So your proposal is that only kids with well to do parents go to school?
From:
> We can make education cheap again if we get government out of it.
If that is indicative of your reading comprehension skills, then it is no wonder that you have difficulty understanding Prisoner's posts.
Let me help you:
1) "We can make education cheap again" does not imply that there is no education. In fact, the wording clearly states that education exists, but that it has gotten expensive.
2) The only proposal made was that "if we get government out of it," then the costs associated with education would decline.
3) Nothing was said about well to do parents. I have no idea where you pulled this from.
4) Nothing was said about parents having to pay for schooling. I have no idea where you pulled this from.
5) Nothing was said about restricting a child's access to eduction. I have no idea where you pulled this from.
> Also, Government hasn't taken over healthcare.
The government completely regulates the healthcare industry, so in essence the government has taken over healthcare. The government decides who can be a healthcare provider (doctor, nurse, etc). The government decides who can get prescription drugs. The government decides who can produce prescription drugs. The government decides what prescription drugs are allowed. The government decides how long patents apply to prescription drugs. The government decides how much leeway to give to insurance companies. The government pays for healthcare for a segment of the population. etc, etc, etc.
And yet another brilliant leap of pulling BS from thin air... how did you arrive at:
"So you'd rather put the eldery in the streets than allow the economy to take a minor hit?"
From:
"Again, no explanation in how government welfare benefits the economy... No one wants to touch that."
How does his statement indicate his belief? It doesn't. I won't bother breaking this one down, but I would highly recommend that you slow down and read what people are saying rather than jumping to some inane conclusion that supports your personal beliefs and demonizes another. Perhaps an example will help you understand:
> People like you are in the minority, thank goodness.
So you'd rather kill everybody than let a few people suffer just because their children have Autism? And you claim to be the compassionate one.
--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
Regarding welfare:
Government welfare puts a drain on the economy. When the economy is experiencing a significant downturn more welfare is doled out... Can you see how this is cyclical?
Notice that they just announced that they are extending unemployment benefits... I can't imagine why.
When government gets involved in an industry it becomes more expensive. When government takes something over and runs it the result is generally the business continues post losses.
I'm curious about what you think about the auto bailout... As far as I can see only auto unions benefited... It's throwing good money after bad!
Remember how Nixon said they were just going to run Amtrak for a few years?
Real science is based on observation first. Pseudo science (Id est: keynesian "economics") appears to put together theories and then come up with idiotic things like the "paradox of thrift" idea when reality proves them wrong.
How is it that a prominent keynesian like Bernanke is obviously a moron?
Edited by Mr.Al (10/09/09 10:31 AM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11214780 - 10/09/09 10:44 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seuss said:
Let me help you:
.
.
.
4) Nothing was said about parents having to pay for schooling. I have no idea where you pulled this from.
Ok, where do YOU think money will come from for schooling of children with poor parents?
Quote:
Seuss said:
The government completely regulates the healthcare industry, so in essence the government has taken over healthcare.
Do you think safety regulations are a bad idea? That's what most healthcare regulations are about.
Quote:
Seuss said:
And yet another brilliant leap of pulling BS from thin air... how did you arrive at:
"So you'd rather put the eldery in the streets than allow the economy to take a minor hit?"
What do YOU think will happen to the elderly with no money if we eliminate social security???
Your answers to these 3 questions will help me understand if I was "pulling BS from thin air" or not.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
|
Just imagine how much better off the elderly would be if they hadn't had their wages stolen for a Ponzi scheme for 40 years. Most of them would be millionaires living nicely off the interest and still leaving an estate for their children.
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
Here's the best idea yet...
Since government has proven itself to be the best at the task of allocating monetary resources intelligently let's all just send them all our money and tell them to do what they do best!
Reductio ad absurdum...
Government is the most wasteful allocator of resources. If you give them more funds you will see a deepening depression and a call for more welfare!
The welfare system is broken because it was a stupid idea in the first place.
How about.....
The elderly people living on a fixed income (from whatever source) would be far better off if they weren't faced with a severe inflation of the money supply that causes their fixed income to not be worth shit!
There is a school of economics that calls for endless inflation (that hurts the most those who have the least money), I think I recall that it is keynesian "economics"...
Edited by Mr.Al (10/09/09 10:58 AM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11215174 - 10/09/09 11:48 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Regarding welfare:
Government welfare puts a drain on the economy. When the economy is experiencing a significant downturn more welfare is doled out... Can you see how this is cyclical?
Notice that they just announced that they are extending unemployment benefits... I can't imagine why.
Civilized societies have welfare. I'm not disagreeing that it doesn't drain the economy a bit. I'm saying welfare won't go away, no matter how little you yourself care about the elderly, the people who are laid off work, the kids whose parents are on crack, etc. Sure, there's room for welfare reform that would require able-bodied people to at least do some type of menial work to get a paycheck, etc. But welfare won't go away; not in a civilized society.
Now, given that welfare won't go away, how do you pull a country out of a recession? The more jobs that are lost, the fewer people have money. The fewer people have money, the more jobs that are lost. Do you see the downward spiral? Putting money into the economy or lowering taxes is the only way to bring back jobs; both solutions increase the deficit, and put a drain on future generations. I've always been for a balanced budget amendment, which would stop deficit spending unless there were an economic crisis. Unfortunately, we are in an economic crisis.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
When government gets involved in an industry it becomes more expensive. When government takes something over and runs it the result is generally the business continues post losses.
I'm curious about what you think about the auto bailout... As far as I can see only auto unions benefited... It's throwing good money after bad!
I remember the Chrysler bailout in 1980. That seemed to work out fine. Time will tell if the latest auto bailouts were successful. I'm guessing GM will rise again.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Real science is based on observation first. Pseudo science (Id est: keynesian "economics") appears to put together theories and then come up with idiotic things like the "paradox of thrift" idea when reality proves them wrong.
What type of "real science" is there to back up the Austrian School? What countries can we look at to see that the theories work? You're the one advocating "real science", after all.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
How is it that a prominent keynesian like Bernanke is obviously a moron?
Um, because he's a republican?
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
What caused the "recession" in the first place?
How can you not see that having a central bank that props up the fractional reserve banking system worsens the severity of boom & bust economic cycles?
The government answer is always to create, borrow, or tax to inject more money into the economy. Yes there is a short period (sometimes a couple years) of false prosperity. This is caused by the fact that initially there is more money circulating in the economy but it takes a little while for prices to adjust to the influx of new money. Once prices adjust to the new money people find that they are worse off than before the government "stimulated the economy".
We have established that welfare puts a drain upon the economy. Is it that much of a stretch to suppose that this might conceivably precipitate more welfare?
If the 1980 Chrysler bailout was such a resounding success why are they broke again?
Maybe companies that suck at life need to go bankrupt, have better businessmen buy them out, and then perhaps produce better products more cheaply???????
Can you not see how corrupt it is for the federal government to bail out an auto industry that was made unprofitable by auto labor unions?
If a business is not solvent it makes no sense for government to give them lots of money. They have already demonstrated that the business sucks at life and has become a bottomless money pit.
The auto bailout is a welfare program for auto unions.
To answer your question regarding an economy that practiced parts of Austrian economics: civilizations throughout history used precious metals for thousands of years as money. Precious metals have shown to be much more stable than government paper. The lifespan of fiat currency is never very long.
The chief teleprompter reader re-appointed Bernanke. The blame is shared by the puppet clown that is the definition of FAIL. This has nothing to do with political parties because both have followed the keynesian model. Making this an issue of political parties is a pathetic distraction from looking at the real causes of our economic problems.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/09/09 11:21 PM)
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
I remember the Chrysler bailout in 1980. That seemed to work out fine. Time will tell if the latest auto bailouts were successful. I'm guessing GM will rise again.
so the first bailout for chrysler worked fine, why then are they in need of a bail out again
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11220805 - 10/10/09 12:18 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
I remember the Chrysler bailout in 1980. That seemed to work out fine. Time will tell if the latest auto bailouts were successful. I'm guessing GM will rise again.
so the first bailout for chrysler worked fine, why then are they in need of a bail out again
Quite right. One can certainly argue that if the unions had gotten a taste of dissolution then they wouldn't have totally fucked all three auto makers unto death for the next 25 years.
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11221461 - 10/10/09 02:31 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
the only thing that allowed chrysler to survive the first 20 years was the
contractual obligation the government had to purchase their vehicles, the
public wasnt interested in buying what they knew to be junk, anyone
remember the K-car, they leaked coolant on the showroom floor due to poor
head design and inferior gasket materials... not much has changed since
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Thanks. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the social security trust fund is ficticious. The Government doesn't actually save any money for the future. It takes what it needs from FICA each year, and any leftover is used to cover the deficit. So long as the Government collects enough FICA to cover its current obligations, then things are good. If there is a projected shortage, then eliminating the wage cap on FICA would bring in enough extra money to cover that shortage.
Haha, it seems that Michael Moore and Sean Hannity followed this thread, as they almost duplicated it here:
We debated about 4 days before they did. 
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
Do you need to be reminded that government projections of funding required for future programs are low-balled to the degree that can only be called laughable?
It is interesting that followers of Keynes don't even make an attempt at economic debate.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/12/09 06:12 AM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11237499 - 10/13/09 12:38 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
What caused the "recession" in the first place?
It was caused by a lot of things. Deregulation, greedy bankers, greedy mortgage brokers, greedy real estate agents, greedy investors, etc. You probably can't stop greed, but you can bring regulation back.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
How can you not see that having a central bank that props up the fractional reserve banking system worsens the severity of boom & bust economic cycles?
How can you see that it worsens the severity? Here are the economic cycles in the US as far back as I could find them:
http://www.oswego.edu/~edunne/200ch8_1.html
The cycles appear to have improved significantly since central banks started playing a larger role.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
The government answer is always to create, borrow, or tax to inject more money into the economy. Yes there is a short period (sometimes a couple years) of false prosperity. This is caused by the fact that initially there is more money circulating in the economy but it takes a little while for prices to adjust to the influx of new money. Once prices adjust to the new money people find that they are worse off than before the government "stimulated the economy".
How do you define "false" prosperity? If I earn more money and use it to buy more things, is it really false prosperity? Especially in light of the graph I just posted above?
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
We have established that welfare puts a drain upon the economy. Is it that much of a stretch to suppose that this might conceivably precipitate more welfare?
Empirical evidence seems to show otherwise:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School#Criticism
Economist Jeffrey Sachs states that when comparing developed free-market economies, those that have high rates of taxation and high social welfare spending perform better on most measures of economic performance compared to countries with low rates of taxation and low social outlays. He asserts that poverty rates are lower, median income is higher, the budget has larger surpluses, and the trade balance is stronger (although unemployment tends to be higher). He concludes that Friedrich Hayek was wrong when he said that high taxation would be a threat to freedom; but rather, a generous social-welfare state leads to fairness, economic equality, international competitiveness, and strong vibrant democracies.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
If the 1980 Chrysler bailout was such a resounding success why are they broke again?
Because of the financial crisis. They're not the only car company that's struggling.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Maybe companies that suck at life need to go bankrupt, have better businessmen buy them out, and then perhaps produce better products more cheaply???????
I'm ok with that. I'm also ok with saving them, because their failure was largely the result of the recession.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Can you not see how corrupt it is for the federal government to bail out an auto industry that was made unprofitable by auto labor unions?
What do labor unions have to do with this? Are you saying if they failed because of poor management, then they should have been bailed out? Seriously, why did you qualify your statement with labor unions?
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
If a business is not solvent it makes no sense for government to give them lots of money. They have already demonstrated that the business sucks at life and has become a bottomless money pit.
Fair enough.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
The auto bailout is a welfare program for auto unions.
Again, what's the relevance of auto unions to your argument?
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
To answer your question regarding an economy that practiced parts of Austrian economics: civilizations throughout history used precious metals for thousands of years as money. Precious metals have shown to be much more stable than government paper. The lifespan of fiat currency is never very long.
Never? How long has the dollar lasted as a fiat currency? 75 years and counting? And it hasn't failed.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11237505 - 10/13/09 12:41 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Do you need to be reminded that government projections of funding required for future programs are low-balled to the degree that can only be called laughable?
Yes, estimates are generally given on the low end of the estimated range. But I disagree that it's to a "laughable" degree (whatever that means).
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
It is interesting that followers of Keynes don't even make an attempt at economic debate.
Sorry, I had guests over this weekend.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Yrat
Hello
Registered: 11/08/07
Posts: 1,986
Last seen: 10 hours, 52 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Never? How long has the dollar lasted as a fiat currency? 75 years and counting? And it hasn't failed.
no, only since 1971. that's 38 years.
what is interesting to note, is that no fiat currency throughout history has lasted past 40 years. knowing this number, do you think the timing of all these collapses is just coincidence? the last bubble is the dollar bubble, and when it pops, look out below.
--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
What caused the "recession" in the first place?
It was caused by a lot of things. Deregulation, greedy bankers, greedy mortgage brokers, greedy real estate agents, greedy investors, etc. You probably can't stop greed, but you can bring regulation back.
Quote:
Again, you are not looking at the moral hazard created by artificially low interest rates. The federal reserve created the moral hazard. Central economic planning and banking caused the problem and you blame the market???
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
How can you not see that having a central bank that props up the fractional reserve banking system worsens the severity of boom & bust economic cycles?
How can you see that it worsens the severity? Here are the economic cycles in the US as far back as I could find them:
http://www.oswego.edu/~edunne/200ch8_1.html
The cycles appear to have improved significantly since central banks started playing a larger role.
[quote]How do you define improvement? Since the fed hijacked the currency the dollar has lost 96% of it's purchasing power. The situation we are in now constitutes improvement?
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
The government answer is always to create, borrow, or tax to inject more money into the economy. Yes there is a short period (sometimes a couple years) of false prosperity. This is caused by the fact that initially there is more money circulating in the economy but it takes a little while for prices to adjust to the influx of new money. Once prices adjust to the new money people find that they are worse off than before the government "stimulated the economy".
How do you define "false" prosperity? If I earn more money and use it to buy more things, is it really false prosperity? Especially in light of the graph I just posted above?
Quote:
I define false prosperity as the temporary good times that an influx of new money causes, before prices adjust to the increase in the money supply.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
We have established that welfare puts a drain upon the economy. Is it that much of a stretch to suppose that this might conceivably precipitate more welfare?
Empirical evidence seems to show otherwise:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School#Criticism
Economist Jeffrey Sachs states that when comparing developed free-market economies, those that have high rates of taxation and high social welfare spending perform better on most measures of economic performance compared to countries with low rates of taxation and low social outlays. He asserts that poverty rates are lower, median income is higher, the budget has larger surpluses, and the trade balance is stronger (although unemployment tends to be higher). He concludes that Friedrich Hayek was wrong when he said that high taxation would be a threat to freedom; but rather, a generous social-welfare state leads to fairness, economic equality, international competitiveness, and strong vibrant democracies.
Quote:
Socialism worked great for Jamestown, didn't it? http://mises.org/story/336 How is it difficult to comprehend that government spending ALWAYS COMES AT A COST. When government spends, it means that production in the private sector will be decreased in the future. Government taking wealth from people through taxation or inflation is certainly means a decrease in freedom, is that not a key part in the right to pursue happiness? Certainly that idiot Sachs hasn't been to Britain and seen how well the welfare state there fares. Jeffrey Sachs is another useless windbag who would not be able to refute A.B.C. theory, which utterly destroys the entire keynesian school, and thus his words are worth less than nothing.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
If the 1980 Chrysler bailout was such a resounding success why are they broke again?
Because of the financial crisis. They're not the only car company that's struggling. Quote:
Bullshit, it's because labor unions have jacked up production costs to the point where American cars are not competitively priced in the market.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Maybe companies that suck at life need to go bankrupt, have better businessmen buy them out, and then perhaps produce better products more cheaply???????
I'm ok with that. I'm also ok with saving them, because their failure was largely the result of the recession.Quote:
How do you not comprehend that "saving" gigantic, bankrupt, and inefficient (fucking profitless!!! W.T.F. man!) corporations occurs at the cost of the entire damn economy! Healthy businesses produce more value. Subsidizing business failure is utter nonsense! It reinforces failure! W.T.F.!?!
Mr.Al said:
Can you not see how corrupt it is for the federal government to bail out an auto industry that was made unprofitable by auto labor unions?
What do labor unions have to do with this? Are you saying if they failed because of poor management, then they should have been bailed out? Seriously, why did you qualify your statement with labor unions?
Quote:
If labor unions make a business unprofitable to the point of insolvency the only REAL cure is for the business to declare bankruptcy! The only means for the production to become efficient and economically sound is for the valuable parts of the business to be bought out!!! The solution is not for the asshole sellout politician that they contributed vast sums of campaign money to send them even greater sums of public money!
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
If a business is not solvent it makes no sense for government to give them lots of money. They have already demonstrated that the business sucks at life and has become a bottomless money pit.
Fair enough.
Mr.Al said:
The auto bailout is a welfare program for auto unions.
Again, what's the relevance of auto unions to your argument?
Quote:
The central argument is that government spending occurs with unseen costs attached to them. It is immoral for politically well connected (sometimes also organized crime connected) unions to rob from the productivity of the entire economy through theft!
Mr.Al said:
To answer your question regarding an economy that practiced parts of Austrian economics: civilizations throughout history used precious metals for thousands of years as money. Precious metals have shown to be much more stable than government paper. The lifespan of fiat currency is never very long.
Never? How long has the dollar lasted as a fiat currency? 75 years and counting? And it hasn't failed.
Yrat answered that question. Fiat has a short lifespan because government abuses the shit out of the power to create new money and back it with nothing but force. You would do well to read this http://mises.org/story/2868 Have you invested in a wheel barrow yet? You might need it in the future to buy that loaf of bread.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/13/09 08:00 AM)
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
What caused the "recession" in the first place?
It was caused by a lot of things. Deregulation, greedy bankers, greedy mortgage brokers, greedy real estate agents, greedy investors, etc. You probably can't stop greed, but you can bring regulation back.
The banking industry is the most heavily regulated industry in the entire country. You might want to consider other government interference in banking as more culpable. For instance the CRA, Fannie and Freddie. Greedy real estate agents? How can they possibly do anything to affect the price? Greedy investors? Isn't that what they are supposed to be? Otherwise why invest? Likewise banks.
Not surprisingly you leave out the one group that actually is culpable. The bums who take loans that they don't repay.Quote:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
How can you not see that having a central bank that props up the fractional reserve banking system worsens the severity of boom & bust economic cycles?
How can you see that it worsens the severity? Here are the economic cycles in the US as far back as I could find them:
http://www.oswego.edu/~edunne/200ch8_1.html
The cycles appear to have improved significantly since central banks started playing a larger role.
I can see no evidence whatsoever that ups and downs are a product of the existence of a central bank. They seem to be an inevitable feature of economies, as you point out. This boom and bust cycle is also endlessly reflected in every homeostatic system on the planet. Which somewhat destroys your entire notion that insufficient regulation in the most heavily regulated industry in the country has caused this one.Quote:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
The government answer is always to create, borrow, or tax to inject more money into the economy. Yes there is a short period (sometimes a couple years) of false prosperity. This is caused by the fact that initially there is more money circulating in the economy but it takes a little while for prices to adjust to the influx of new money. Once prices adjust to the new money people find that they are worse off than before the government "stimulated the economy".
How do you define "false" prosperity? If I earn more money and use it to buy more things, is it really false prosperity? Especially in light of the graph I just posted above?
The graph you posted above has nothing to do with that. It is possible to have a "false" prosperity if you base it strictly on poor analysis. For instance, if you earn ten times more money but everything costs 100 times more but you only measure prosperity by dollar amounts that would be a false analysis. I haven't seen anyone fall for that in my entire lifetime. Then again, I have unfortunately seen someone fall for the "the dollar has lost 96% of it's value" nonsense.Quote:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
We have established that welfare puts a drain upon the economy. Is it that much of a stretch to suppose that this might conceivably precipitate more welfare?
Empirical evidence seems to show otherwise:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School#Criticism
Economist Jeffrey Sachs states that when comparing developed free-market economies, those that have high rates of taxation and high social welfare spending perform better on most measures of economic performance compared to countries with low rates of taxation and low social outlays. He asserts that poverty rates are lower, median income is higher, the budget has larger surpluses, and the trade balance is stronger (although unemployment tends to be higher). He concludes that Friedrich Hayek was wrong when he said that high taxation would be a threat to freedom; but rather, a generous social-welfare state leads to fairness, economic equality, international competitiveness, and strong vibrant democracies.
I don't see any empirical evidence there about which direction the causality arrow points in. Welfare is a luxury only afforded to the most affluent societies. Affluence is not caused by welfare. See his own remarks regarding unemployment.Quote:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
If the 1980 Chrysler bailout was such a resounding success why are they broke again?
Because of the financial crisis. They're not the only car company that's struggling.
Quite right. The unions destroyed all three American auto maker. Maybe if the government hadn't bailed Chrysler out in the first place the unions would have been forced to cave and GM and Ford could have competed.Quote:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Maybe companies that suck at life need to go bankrupt, have better businessmen buy them out, and then perhaps produce better products more cheaply???????
I'm ok with that. I'm also ok with saving them, because their failure was largely the result of the recession.
No. They hadn't made any money to speak of for years and years long before this recession started. How is this recession different than any other recession they survived? Time and the inevitable corrosive effect of shitty union deals which were only prolonged by the original Chrysler bailout. The Chrysler bailout doomed them and GM and badly hurt Ford.Quote:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Can you not see how corrupt it is for the federal government to bail out an auto industry that was made unprofitable by auto labor unions?
What do labor unions have to do with this? Are you saying if they failed because of poor management, then they should have been bailed out? Seriously, why did you qualify your statement with labor unions?
Because they did it and because they are the ones that benefit from the bailout. Qui Bono, indeed?Quote:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
If a business is not solvent it makes no sense for government to give them lots of money. They have already demonstrated that the business sucks at life and has become a bottomless money pit.
Fair enough.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
The auto bailout is a welfare program for auto unions.
Again, what's the relevance of auto unions to your argument?
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
To answer your question regarding an economy that practiced parts of Austrian economics: civilizations throughout history used precious metals for thousands of years as money. Precious metals have shown to be much more stable than government paper. The lifespan of fiat currency is never very long.
Never? How long has the dollar lasted as a fiat currency? 75 years and counting? And it hasn't failed.
How do you measure the value of precious metals? In loaf of bread equivalents?
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11238407 - 10/13/09 08:31 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Long story short zap, when productivity is increased in the economy the medium of exchange will correspondingly have more buying power. That is real lasting prosperity....
Inflating the money supply is false prosperity because for awhile people have more buying power because there is more of the medium of exchange and prices take awhile to adjust to the influx of new money. That is the boom. When prices adjust the cycle moves into the bust phase.
Your thoughts about the increase of the money supply not being harmful is erroneous because wages do not keep pace with inflation. That is what puts the real squeeze on most people.
In regards to the loaf of bread comment... Do you remember the Weimar Republic?
Edited by Mr.Al (10/13/09 08:33 AM)
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11238912 - 10/13/09 10:35 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
No. I'm not that old, you fucker.
Purchasing power is a reasonable measure, no? All this talk about wages and inflation and whatnot being catastrophic is craziness. In the 60s, when I was a child these things were rare:
More than one car per household
Air conditioning
color television
dishwashers
I could go on ad nauseum. Even the poor today have more luxuries than most middle class families had then.
You also need to consider homeostasis vis-a-vis any measurement of prosperity, false, real or imagined. Constantly producing that ridiculous "The dollar has lost 96% of it's value since" nonsense does not facilitate your argument. If the "since" in question was "last Tuesday" you would have a point. But it isn't so you don't.
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11239438 - 10/13/09 12:07 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
How do you define "false" prosperity?
the clinton years
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11239523 - 10/13/09 12:26 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Again, you are not looking at the moral hazard created by artificially low interest rates. The federal reserve created the moral hazard. Central economic planning and banking caused the problem and you blame the market???
Greenspan had a role. I've said it at least 3 times already. Another dumbass republican appointee.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
How do you define improvement? Since the fed hijacked the currency the dollar has lost 96% of it's purchasing power. The situation we are in now constitutes improvement?
Wages have gone up significantly too. You forgot to mention that.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
I define false prosperity as the temporary good times that an influx of new money causes, before prices adjust to the increase in the money supply.
We're in agreement that money itself doesn't create prosperity. But money can be used to jump start a slow economy. Once the economy starts moving, the Government needs to step back again (which they haven't effectively done in recent decades).
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Socialism worked great for Jamestown, didn't it? http://mises.org/story/336
Dude, WTF? I'm not saying people shouldn't work. Neither does socialism (which isn't what I support by the way).
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Government taking wealth from people through taxation or inflation is certainly means a decrease in freedom, is that not a key part in the right to pursue happiness?
I don't think a nation can survive without a Government and taxes. Show me an example where I'm wrong.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Jeffrey Sachs is another useless windbag who would not be able to refute A.B.C. theory, which utterly destroys the entire keynesian school, and thus his words are worth less than nothing.
His example shows Austrian theory appears to be flawed.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
How do you not comprehend that "saving" gigantic, bankrupt, and inefficient (fucking profitless!!! W.T.F. man!) corporations occurs at the cost of the entire damn economy! Healthy businesses produce more value.
If GM doesn't return to profitability, then I agree it was a wasted bailout. The bailout was to get them through the recession, along with the rest of the country. Chrysler returned to profitability in the 80's, and I believe GM will also.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Subsidizing business failure is utter nonsense! It reinforces failure! W.T.F.!?!
Agreed. I'm not a fan of the bailouts. Especially the banks. But I understand why they were done.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
The central argument is that government spending occurs with unseen costs attached to them. It is immoral for politically well connected (sometimes also organized crime connected) unions to rob from the productivity of the entire economy through theft!
You call it theft, I call it taxes. But yes, it is immoral for Government to give to people who are well connected to Govt (Goldman Sachs, etc).
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Fiat has a short lifespan because government abuses the shit out of the power to create new money and back it with nothing but force. You would do well to read this http://mises.org/story/2868
I don't know who actually proposed the "broken window fallacy" in your link, but any retard can see it's flawed. It assumes a taxing someone is like destroying a window. Do you really think a country can survive without taxes?
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,162
Loc: [life]now[/life]
Last seen: 6 months, 12 days
|
|
Quote:
Another dumbass republican appointee.
Who was then reappointed by a Democrat.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11239540 - 10/13/09 12:32 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
I don't see any empirical evidence there about which direction the causality arrow points in. Welfare is a luxury only afforded to the most affluent societies. Affluence is not caused by welfare. See his own remarks regarding unemployment.
That's a fair point. But I would argue that any affluent society should have welfare. If you disagree that's fine. Majority vote wins.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 24 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Redstorm]
#11239546 - 10/13/09 12:33 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Redstorm said:
Quote:
Another dumbass republican appointee.
Who was then reappointed by a Democrat.
And later reappointed by a Republican, after which time the housing crisis began.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,162
Loc: [life]now[/life]
Last seen: 6 months, 12 days
|
|
All of which is irrelevant to everything.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
I don't see any empirical evidence there about which direction the causality arrow points in. Welfare is a luxury only afforded to the most affluent societies. Affluence is not caused by welfare. See his own remarks regarding unemployment.
That's a fair point. But I would argue that any affluent society should have welfare. If you disagree that's fine. Majority vote wins.
I have always supported some assistance for the truly needy. Unfortunately, I have never seen any legislation which cannot be gamed, whether unintentionally or by design.
Yes, majority vote wins. Do you want California? Because whenever a spending piece of shit actually comes to vote there it usually loses.
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Redstorm said:
Quote:
Another dumbass republican appointee.
Who was then reappointed by a Democrat.
And later reappointed by a Republican, after which time the housing crisis began.
The housing crisis was not Greenspan's responsibility. In fact, both he and Bush warned against it and were thwarted in their efforts to rein in Fannie and Freddie. You also seem to be under the impression that this was the first housing crisis. It was not. The early nineties were fucking crazy. Interest rates were through the roof but people STILL bought and bought and bought. Clearly, low interest rates by themselves do not produce a housing crisis.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 25 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11240118 - 10/13/09 02:05 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Clearly, low interest rates by themselves do not produce a housing crisis.
Agreed.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
Wages do not keep pace with inflation of the money supply...
Greenspan was a major player in creating the housing bubble. Bernanke is also a tool though, recently reappointed by the current clown. The current fed chair was supported by Dems and Repubs so acting like this is a partisan issue doesn't make sense. The depression of 1920 lasted one year because government didn't interfere with the economy. THE GREAT DEPRESSION LASTED A DECADE BECAUSE IT WAS A CENTRAL ECONOMIC PLANNING DISASTER! Which depression would you like to live through?
Can you see that using money creation to "jump start" the economy is not real growth??? You have to pay the piper later with increased prices. Then there is another economic downturn. The business cycle occurs because the market is not allowed to adjust.
You say you don't support socialism, yet you call for a welfare state. Welfare is redistribution of wealth.
Sachs did not show anything flawed in A.B.C. theory. It is idiotic to think that welfare states are economically sustainable. Welfare rewards non-production, how is that sustainable?
Frederic Bastiat's "Broken Window Fallacy" relates to government spending, which is what you appear to be calling for. Massive government spending, like what we have now, hampers the private sector from producing in the future. The future production does not occur. This is because the government spending occurs at the cost of the entire economy. Recall that government allocation of resources is far less efficient than the private sector. Can you admit that much is true?
How hard is it to understand that companies that are not capable of being profitable should go bankrupt???
If you bail out too big to fail THE ENTIRE ECONOMY BECOMES SUBJECT TO FAILURE.
Why not allow auto makers go bankrupt?
|
Yrat
Hello
Registered: 11/08/07
Posts: 1,986
Last seen: 10 hours, 52 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Government taking wealth from people through taxation or inflation is certainly means a decrease in freedom, is that not a key part in the right to pursue happiness?
I don't think a nation can survive without a Government and taxes. Show me an example where I'm wrong.
i think you should look up the date when a federal income tax was instituted in the USA.
is it merely coincidence that pure, cold hard capitalism coincided with the greatest technological boom in human history? (the industrial revolution).
--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 25 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Yrat]
#11244991 - 10/14/09 09:11 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Yrat said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Government taking wealth from people through taxation or inflation is certainly means a decrease in freedom, is that not a key part in the right to pursue happiness?
I don't think a nation can survive without a Government and taxes. Show me an example where I'm wrong.
i think you should look up the date when a federal income tax was instituted in the USA.
is it merely coincidence that pure, cold hard capitalism coincided with the greatest technological boom in human history? (the industrial revolution).
I don't know what you mean by "pure, cold hard capitalism". The industrial revolution started in Britain at about the same time Britain began to impose income taxes (late 1700's). The United States Government has always had taxes ever since our founding. Initially those were excise taxes, tariffs, customs duties, and property tax. The industrial revolution took place in spite of these taxes.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
What do you think about the astounding coincidence that the "federal" reserve hijacked the money supply in the same year of the income tax amendment??? (I surmise Yrat was hinting at that)
Now: given that competition is good for the economy why should a central bank have a monopoly over legal tender???
I thought monopolies were bad?!?
Can the "enlightened keynesian" please explain this mystical monetary conunderum??
How much doublethink does it take before someone's head explodes from holding completely conflicting ideas to be true?
Central economic planning worked great for the U.S.S.R.
We must need more of it here, komrad!
Edited by Mr.Al (10/14/09 09:21 AM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 25 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11245381 - 10/14/09 10:30 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
What do you think about the astounding coincidence that the "federal" reserve hijacked the money supply in the same year of the income tax amendment??? (I surmise Yrat was hinting at that)
I don't know. What's your theory?
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Now: given that competition is good for the economy why should a central bank have a monopoly over legal tender???
I thought monopolies were bad?!?
Can the "enlightened keynesian" please explain this mystical monetary conunderum??
How much doublethink does it take before someone's head explodes from holding completely conflicting ideas to be true?
Do you really think it's a good idea to have fiat money printed by the free market??? C'mon now, you're smarter than that.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Central economic planning worked great for the U.S.S.R.
We must need more of it here, komrad!
I don't know why you bring up the Soviet Union. Why don't we just look at the United States. The US has done better than any other country since WWII.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Yrat
Hello
Registered: 11/08/07
Posts: 1,986
Last seen: 10 hours, 52 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Now: given that competition is good for the economy why should a central bank have a monopoly over legal tender???
I thought monopolies were bad?!?
Can the "enlightened keynesian" please explain this mystical monetary conunderum??
How much doublethink does it take before someone's head explodes from holding completely conflicting ideas to be true?
Do you really think it's a good idea to have fiat money printed by the free market??? C'mon now, you're smarter than that.
wow, i'm not even sure how to respond to this ignorance. dependable currencies are generated by natural market forces, which is why after thousands of years, precious metals were used for this purpose, and fit the bill quite nicely (btw, they are still the only true currency in the world). the powers that be have successfully separated us from true currency, and we are forced to use their fiat by law. score one for them.
but aside from this fact, would you care to explain how a "market" would actually print money as you have claimed? the fact is, it wouldn't, because a market is not an entity unto itself. it is a collection of natural forces created by human psychology in response to the relationships between supply and demand. so again, how does a market print money? the very fact that precious metals were chosen as currency by human society is BECAUSE they can not be generated out of nothing (fiat) by ruling governments throughout history. they became standard money for thousands of years for this very. fucking. reason.
are you trying to say that individuals would not be prevented from printing their own fiat? well if that were the case who the hell would use that for currency? the printer would have to mandate (by threat of force) that you use their "money" as legal tender. hey wait a second, that sure sounds familiar!
can you explain how you are simultaneously arguing for and against this ability? doublethink indeed!
Edited by Yrat (10/14/09 01:21 PM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 25 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Yrat]
#11246528 - 10/14/09 01:45 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Yrat said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Do you really think it's a good idea to have fiat money printed by the free market??? C'mon now, you're smarter than that.
wow, i'm not even sure how to respond to this ignorance. dependable currencies are generated by natural market forces, which is why after thousands of years, precious metals were used for this purpose, and fit the bill quite nicely (btw, they are still the only true currency in the world). the powers that be have successfully separated us from true currency, and we are forced to use their fiat by law. score one for them.
but aside from this fact, would you care to explain how a "market" would actually print money as you have claimed? the fact is, it wouldn't, because a market is not an entity unto itself. it is a collection of natural forces created by human psychology in response to the relationships between supply and demand. so again, how does a market print money?
I didn't claim the free market should. That's why I said "C'mon now, you're smarter than that."
Quote:
Yrat said:
the very fact that precious metals were chosen as currency by human society is BECAUSE they can not be generated out of nothing (fiat) by ruling governments throughout history. they became standard money for thousands of years for this very. fucking. reason.
are you trying to say that individuals would not be prevented from printing their own fiat? well if that were the case who the hell would use that for currency? the printer would have to mandate (by threat of force) that you use their "money" as legal tender. hey wait a second, that sure sounds familiar!
can you explain how you are simultaneously arguing for and against this ability? doublethink indeed!
Again, I'm not the one arguing for this. I think your question should be direced to Mr. Al.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
zorbman
Be Prepared
Registered: 06/04/04
Posts: 5,475
|
|
Quote:
Do you really think it's a good idea to have fiat money printed by the free market???
My answer is HELL YES I do.
I would prefer there be a commodity standard imposed on the Fed but barring that I would much, MUCH rather have our money supply controlled by market forces than a secretive and unaccountable banking cartel which has successfully convinced people it is somehow essential to our economy. It isn't. Not by a longshot. We don't need to pay interest for access to our OWN MONEY and we don't need arrogant and aloof officials artificially inflating the money supply to profit them and their super rich banker buddies.
There are so many myths related to our current economy which need to be dispelled. One is that the Federal Reserve is essential to our economy as I mentioned. Another is the "Too Big To Fail" myth. If that were true, would someone tell me why the hell the banks have only gotten bigger since the financial crisis began? Simply put, this whole exercise is about concentrating wealth and power in a few hands.
--------------------
Men occasionally stumble over the truth but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened. - Winston Churchill
Edited by zorbman (10/14/09 02:24 PM)
|
Yrat
Hello
Registered: 11/08/07
Posts: 1,986
Last seen: 10 hours, 52 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Yrat said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Do you really think it's a good idea to have fiat money printed by the free market??? C'mon now, you're smarter than that.
wow, i'm not even sure how to respond to this ignorance. dependable currencies are generated by natural market forces, which is why after thousands of years, precious metals were used for this purpose, and fit the bill quite nicely (btw, they are still the only true currency in the world). the powers that be have successfully separated us from true currency, and we are forced to use their fiat by law. score one for them.
but aside from this fact, would you care to explain how a "market" would actually print money as you have claimed? the fact is, it wouldn't, because a market is not an entity unto itself. it is a collection of natural forces created by human psychology in response to the relationships between supply and demand. so again, how does a market print money?
I didn't claim the free market should. That's why I said "C'mon now, you're smarter than that."
but your questions was framed as if it could, which lends me to suggest you think that is possible.
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Yrat said:
the very fact that precious metals were chosen as currency by human society is BECAUSE they can not be generated out of nothing (fiat) by ruling governments throughout history. they became standard money for thousands of years for this very. fucking. reason.
are you trying to say that individuals would not be prevented from printing their own fiat? well if that were the case who the hell would use that for currency? the printer would have to mandate (by threat of force) that you use their "money" as legal tender. hey wait a second, that sure sounds familiar!
can you explain how you are simultaneously arguing for and against this ability? doublethink indeed!
Again, I'm not the one arguing for this. I think your question should be direced to Mr. Al.
where did Mr. Al advocate for fiat money?
--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root
|
Yrat
Hello
Registered: 11/08/07
Posts: 1,986
Last seen: 10 hours, 52 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zorbman]
#11247066 - 10/14/09 03:04 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zorbman said:
Another is the "Too Big To Fail" myth. If that were true, would someone tell me why the hell the banks have only gotten bigger since the financial crisis began?
it's unbelievable isn't it? i mean, the excuses for stealing taxpayer money are becoming more and more blatantly obvious, and sheeple just eat it right up.
--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root
|
zorbman
Be Prepared
Registered: 06/04/04
Posts: 5,475
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Yrat]
#11247233 - 10/14/09 03:29 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Yep. They are now completely in people's grills with their absurd lies but the majority of the American people don't want to rock the boat- they are hoping in vain that someone will just come along and fix the Magic Money Machine.
The Big Lie..is a propaganda technique. The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler in his 1925 autobiography Mein Kampf for a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Lie
The latest lie is that the economy is sending up "green shoots" and we are having a "jobless recovery".
What bullshit.
Ever heard of an eggless omelette or fat-free bacon?
--------------------
Men occasionally stumble over the truth but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened. - Winston Churchill
|
Yrat
Hello
Registered: 11/08/07
Posts: 1,986
Last seen: 10 hours, 52 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zorbman]
#11247287 - 10/14/09 03:41 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
i like the peter schiff line
--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 25 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Yrat]
#11247305 - 10/14/09 03:44 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Yrat said:
but your questions was framed as if it could, which lends me to suggest you think that is possible.
I suppose it's possible, but I suspect individual banks would race to print money.
Quote:
Yrat said:
where did Mr. Al advocate for fiat money?
The question was "Now: given that competition is good for the economy why should a central bank have a monopoly over legal tender???" The answer is is because we use fiat money, and it would be foolish to give control of fiat money to the free market.
Quote:
Yrat said:
it's unbelievable isn't it? i mean, the excuses for stealing taxpayer money are becoming more and more blatantly obvious, and sheeple just eat it right up.
I'm actually opposed to the financial industry bailouts.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Yrat
Hello
Registered: 11/08/07
Posts: 1,986
Last seen: 10 hours, 52 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Yrat said:
where did Mr. Al advocate for fiat money?
The question was "Now: given that competition is good for the economy why should a central bank have a monopoly over legal tender???" The answer is is because we use fiat money, and it would be foolish to give control of fiat money to the free market.
the free market would eliminate the use of fiat. there would be a natural return to asset or commodity-backed currency, whether it be gold, silver, copper, lumber, oil, or some combination of them. gold and silver have acted as the currency of the free market for thousands of years. fiat has never accomplished replacing it, no matter how much it is tried.
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Yrat said:
it's unbelievable isn't it? i mean, the excuses for stealing taxpayer money are becoming more and more blatantly obvious, and sheeple just eat it right up.
I'm actually opposed to the financial industry bailouts.
good. me too.
--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 25 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Yrat]
#11247511 - 10/14/09 04:23 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Yrat said:
the free market would eliminate the use of fiat. there would be a natural return to asset or commodity-backed currency, whether it be gold, silver, copper, lumber, oil, or some combination of them. gold and silver have acted as the currency of the free market for thousands of years. fiat has never accomplished replacing it, no matter how much it is tried.
I don't understand. Fiat money replaced commodity backed currency it in nearly every industrialized nation, hasn't it?
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Yrat
Hello
Registered: 11/08/07
Posts: 1,986
Last seen: 10 hours, 52 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Yrat said:
the free market would eliminate the use of fiat. there would be a natural return to asset or commodity-backed currency, whether it be gold, silver, copper, lumber, oil, or some combination of them. gold and silver have acted as the currency of the free market for thousands of years. fiat has never accomplished replacing it, no matter how much it is tried.
I don't understand. Fiat money replaced commodity backed currency it in nearly every industrialized nation, hasn't it?
only for 38 years. before then (1971) the US dollar was as good as gold. it was still backed by it. other countries were happy to use the USD as a reserve currency because it literally was "as good as gold." when the backing was axed by nixon in 1971, the countries were left holding fiat paper instead of gold, and that is where we find ourselves today. for some reason, foreign countries continued to buy our fiat dollars as a sort of investment in american productivity, but instead of producing anything, we spent ourselves into debt, like a college kid discovering the power of mommy and daddy's credit card for the first time. the US is insolvent under any rational analysis. how long until the rest of the world comes to its senses?
--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 25 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Yrat]
#11247642 - 10/14/09 04:46 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Yrat said:
the US is insolvent under any rational analysis. how long until the rest of the world comes to its senses?
We have one hell of a lot more debt than we should. Deficit spending should ONLY happen when the economy needs a boost; NEVER when the economy is good. But I digress.
Here is an interesting graph putting our current debt into perspective. It's still at a level we can overcome; altough I agree it's MUCH higher than it should be.
How We Get Out of the Great Depression II
By Steven Stoft, March 2, 2009
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Yrat
Hello
Registered: 11/08/07
Posts: 1,986
Last seen: 10 hours, 52 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Yrat said:
the US is insolvent under any rational analysis. how long until the rest of the world comes to its senses?
We have one hell of a lot more debt than we should. Deficit spending should ONLY happen when the economy needs a boost; NEVER when the economy is good. But I digress.
Here is an interesting graph putting our current debt into perspective. It's still at a level we can overcome; altough I agree it's MUCH higher than it should be.
How We Get Out of the Great Depression II
By Steven Stoft, March 2, 2009
that debt was able to be paid off through massive production generated by a HUGE manufacturing industry built up during WWII. today, our biggest export is our debt. we have no production capacity to overcome this situation. it is a different beast altogether.
--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 25 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Yrat]
#11250502 - 10/15/09 12:18 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Yrat said:
that debt was able to be paid off through massive production generated by a HUGE manufacturing industry built up during WWII. today, our biggest export is our debt. we have no production capacity to overcome this situation. it is a different beast altogether.
With that being the case, all I can say is that I hope stimulus money is used to bring back some of our production capacity.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11250746 - 10/15/09 01:24 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
No. I'm not that old, you fucker.
Purchasing power is a reasonable measure, no? All this talk about wages and inflation and whatnot being catastrophic is craziness. In the 60s, when I was a child these things were rare:
More than one car per household
Air conditioning
color television
dishwashers
I could go on ad nauseum. Even the poor today have more luxuries than most middle class families had then.
You also need to consider homeostasis vis-a-vis any measurement of prosperity, false, real or imagined. Constantly producing that ridiculous "The dollar has lost 96% of it's value since" nonsense does not facilitate your argument. If the "since" in question was "last Tuesday" you would have a point. But it isn't so you don't.
What part of THIS DAMN PSEUDO- ECONOMIC SYSTEM IS NOT SUSTAINABLE do you not understand.
Like Yrat has mentioned, what's the lifespan of fiat and why is it so damn short???
Sure as technology improves production becomes far more efficient, that is what you are observing. What you aren't looking at is that systemic market corrections are prevented by the inflation of the money supply! If the systemic market corrections are postponed indefinitely the entire fucking economy crashes! How do you not get that?
The prosperity we see is mortgaged with the future. When it's time to pay the piper the medium of exchange is destroyed!
There are serious consequences to inflating the money supply and if you are unwilling to see that you are just as at fault as all the other ostriches!
There is no such thing as a free lunch in economics.
Do you suppose that preventing economic corrections by endless inflation has no serious consequence???
When the soul-less oxygen thieves at the "federal" reserve creates large sums of monopoly money through a few keystrokes on a computer zap, do you think that some magical inflation fairy deposits free cash under our pillows to make up for the loss in buying power of our money?
Zap, if there is no magical inflation fairy it does not matter how stubborn or arrogant you are, on the issue of monetary inflation matters you are just plain wrong.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/15/09 02:06 AM)
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Yrat]
#11250793 - 10/15/09 01:39 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Thank you!
Mr.Al does not advocate fiat money.
The Falcon apparently has not looked into the concept of competitive free market money.
Without legal tender laws, different competing mediums of exchange would whup the shit out of government issued fiat.
Falcon needs to understand that free market fiat is an oxymoron...
I mean: the only picture that comes to mind is a group of thugs toting machine guns, demanding that everyone accept their toilet paper as money for everything they want to buy...
Falcon, if "stimulus" (economic boom & bust money, really) is used for developing production would that not mean that the value of the dollar will drop in relation to the money spent?
Again, government spending is less efficient than the private market so there would be a loss of prosperity in this scenario. What part of the economy will the government decide needs "more production"? If there is not a push for it in the market will that not mean the creation of economic distortion, or do you surmise that government is omniscient in determining what the economy needs to produce. I recall that the genius central economic planners in a South American dictatorship let their country have a toilet paper shortage.... Ah yes, the impressive wisdom of central economic planners "at work".
Can you not see that this "economic stimulus" is merely another attempt at reinflating (with more money) the economy, setting the stage for another economic bust?
Seriously man, you said you studied business cycle theory...
Regarding money Falcon, do you not suppose that monetary competition would be a good thing???
How does monopoly money benefit people?
Edited by Mr.Al (10/15/09 02:10 AM)
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zorbman]
#11251865 - 10/15/09 08:36 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zorbman said:
What bullshit.
Ever heard of an eggless omelette or fat-free bacon?
http://scottishvegan.blogspot.com/2007/03/eggless-omelette.html
http://www.indobase.com/recipes/details/eggless-omelet.php
fat free bacon has a patent
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/EP0847703.html
it still doesnt change the fact that there's no improvement in the
economy or that the job market is is still getting worse, skewing the
facts is easy when the reporting methods dont actually take any into
account
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11253024 - 10/15/09 12:00 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
No. I'm not that old, you fucker.
Purchasing power is a reasonable measure, no? All this talk about wages and inflation and whatnot being catastrophic is craziness. In the 60s, when I was a child these things were rare:
More than one car per household
Air conditioning
color television
dishwashers
I could go on ad nauseum. Even the poor today have more luxuries than most middle class families had then.
You also need to consider homeostasis vis-a-vis any measurement of prosperity, false, real or imagined. Constantly producing that ridiculous "The dollar has lost 96% of it's value since" nonsense does not facilitate your argument. If the "since" in question was "last Tuesday" you would have a point. But it isn't so you don't.
What part of THIS DAMN PSEUDO- ECONOMIC SYSTEM IS NOT SUSTAINABLE do you not understand.
Like Yrat has mentioned, what's the lifespan of fiat and why is it so damn short???
Sure as technology improves production becomes far more efficient, that is what you are observing. What you aren't looking at is that systemic market corrections are prevented by the inflation of the money supply! If the systemic market corrections are postponed indefinitely the entire fucking economy crashes! How do you not get that?
The prosperity we see is mortgaged with the future. When it's time to pay the piper the medium of exchange is destroyed!
There are serious consequences to inflating the money supply and if you are unwilling to see that you are just as at fault as all the other ostriches!
There is no such thing as a free lunch in economics.
Do you suppose that preventing economic corrections by endless inflation has no serious consequence???
When the soul-less oxygen thieves at the "federal" reserve creates large sums of monopoly money through a few keystrokes on a computer zap, do you think that some magical inflation fairy deposits free cash under our pillows to make up for the loss in buying power of our money?
Zap, if there is no magical inflation fairy it does not matter how stubborn or arrogant you are, on the issue of monetary inflation matters you are just plain wrong.
Al, my friend, I have heard this alarmist crap my entire life and nothing ever happens. The vast majority of economists think that a return to a gold standard is ridiculous and there is no evidence presented that Central Banking causes larger swings in economic activity. In fact, I believe the converse is true. A low steady level of inflation is NOT injurious. Massive inflation such as that of the seventies is hideous as were the usurious interest rates of the eighties which resulted from them. Too loose or too tight, neither is good. Goldilocks, doncha know. The preferable balance is for low inflation and interest rates at just a little higher rate. This can be managed. If there is no money supply management we will see wild homeostatic swings. This has been shown through history
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11253077 - 10/15/09 12:07 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Thank you!
Mr.Al does not advocate fiat money.
The Falcon apparently has not looked into the concept of competitive free market money.
Without legal tender laws, different competing mediums of exchange would whup the shit out of government issued fiat.
This has got to be a joke. Maybe we can set up some wildcat banks.
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11255463 - 10/15/09 06:03 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
You are not looking at the fact that the market is not allowed to adjust during the bust phase of the economic cycle. The government quick fix is to inflate the money supply and create the illusion of prosperity.
That is why they are called business cycles, they have a disturbing tendency to repeat and inflate the money supply.
There is nothing steady or normal about the rate of government spending today, it is simply unprecedented.
You did not address the fact that those who receive the increase in the money supply first benefit because they can spend the money without feeling the effects of inflation.
By the time new money reaches most folk the prices have begun to adjust to the influx of new money as the economy enters the bust phase of the cycle.
Can you see that the inflation of the money supply does not benefit most Americans?
How do you figure that there would be wild swings in money valuations if people were using precious metals? That is typically what the market uses in a free market situation.
The P.M.s would raise in value over time in relation to the increase in production caused by technological innovation. This is the definition of prosperity.
How can you think devaluing the medium of exchange benefits people?
Artificially low interest rates are what the central bank causes. Artificially low interest rates encourage debt. Inflation and low interest rates discourage savings Savings is central to capitalism itself.
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11255502 - 10/15/09 06:10 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Good money needs to be almost impossible to counterfeit. In a free market situation people tend to stay away from paper for that very reason. They gravitate towards gold and silver...
Would people want to be paid in money that declines in buying power or money that increases in purchasing power?
It really is that simple zap.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 25 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11255512 - 10/15/09 06:13 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Like Yrat has mentioned, what's the lifespan of fiat and why is it so damn short???
There is no lifespan. When too much money is created in too short a time, that's when it will fail. It's amazing how few of you Austrian scholars fail understand that inflation is caused by an excessive growth of the money supply, not by gradual growth. Gradual growth can continue indefinitely. Yes, the dollar loses value. But income levels compensate.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Sure as technology improves production becomes far more efficient, that is what you are observing. What you aren't looking at is that systemic market corrections are prevented by the inflation of the money supply! If the systemic market corrections are postponed indefinitely the entire fucking economy crashes! How do you not get that?
What do you mean inlations prevents "systemic market corrections"? Inflation IS a market correction to an increased money supply. If there wasn't this correction, we wouldn't see inflation.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
The prosperity we see is mortgaged with the future. When it's time to pay the piper the medium of exchange is destroyed!
You're confusing two unrelated points. Yes, when we borrow money, it has to be repayed in the future at the expense of the future taxpayer. I'm all for a balanced budget amendment. But how does repaying debt by the taxpayer destroy our medium of exchange?
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
There are serious consequences to OVERinflating the money supply and if you are unwilling to see that you are just as at fault as all the other ostriches!
Fixed that for you.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
There is no such thing as a free lunch in economics.
No one's arguing that point.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Do you suppose that preventing economic corrections by endless inflation has no serious consequence???
What "economic correction" is being prevented? Inflation IS a correction.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
When the soul-less oxygen thieves at the "federal" reserve creates large sums of monopoly money through a few keystrokes on a computer zap, do you think that some magical inflation fairy deposits free cash under our pillows to make up for the loss in buying power of our money?
No.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Zap, if there is no magical inflation fairy it does not matter how stubborn or arrogant you are, on the issue of monetary inflation matters you are just plain wrong.
What do statements like that accomplish? If you can't argue your point, you lose.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
Inflation is not a market correction. The market correction is prices increasing in relation to the previous inflation of the money supply.
The bust phase of the cycle is the market correction.
Inflating the money supply after the bust occurs is what sets up the next cycle. It is also where the malinvestment & misallocation of resources occurs.
How do you figure that "income levels compensate"?
The key point that you are not examining is that the increase of the money supply does not occur evenly throughout the economy. Most people find that their earnings will not keep pace with the inflation. Those who received the money first (think "bailouts") benefit. Everyone else foots the bill after prices adjust to the new money.
Inflation is caused by the central bank through the fractional reserve banking system and central economic planners. It is not a "market response".
Given that inflation is cyclical, how can you not surmise that the money supply will not become overinflated?
In my story of the inflation fairy, I am attempting to show very dense people that most people do not see enough of an increase in the money that they earn to compensate for the inflation of the entire money supply.
MOST PEOPLE ARE LEFT HOLDING A SMALLER PERCENTAGE OF THE MONEY SUPPLY AFTER THE MONEY SUPPLY IS INCREASED, THUS THEY HAVE LESS PURCHASING POWER THAN BEFORE!
That is exactly why Rothbard said, "The creation of new money confers no social benefit."
Borrowing and adding to the money supply is still inflationary to the money supply and confers no real social benefit.
|
zorbman
Be Prepared
Registered: 06/04/04
Posts: 5,475
|
|
Quote:
Yes, the dollar loses value. But income levels compensate.
Evidently only for the top 1% if I'm reading your chart correctly. For the large majority of earners wages have remained flat for decades even as inflation was rising. This seems to support what Mr. Al is saying about workers being squeezed.
--------------------
Men occasionally stumble over the truth but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened. - Winston Churchill
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 25 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11256252 - 10/15/09 08:04 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Inflation is not a market correction. The market correction is prices increasing in relation to the previous inflation of the money supply.
What!?!?! I believe you just said inflation is not a market correction. The market correction is inflation.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
The bust phase of the cycle is the market correction.
Inflating the money supply after the bust occurs is what sets up the next cycle. It is also where the malinvestment & misallocation of resources occurs.
As zappa previously said, the market doesn't appear to be very "cyclical":
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
How do you figure that "income levels compensate"?
Um, people make a lot more today than they used to 50 years ago. After inflation, it's about the same. See the chart I posted earlier.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
The key point that you are not examining is that the increase of the money supply does not occur evenly throughout the economy. Most people find that their earnings will not keep pace with the inflation. Those who received the money first (think "bailouts") benefit. Everyone else foots the bill after prices adjust to the new money.
Tell me something - how much inflation has there been since the bailouts??? Are the first people to get the money the only ones to benefit from it?
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Inflation is caused by the central bank through the fractional reserve banking system and central economic planners. It is not a "market response".
The Fed doesn't tell any business to raise their prices. It's a market response to more money.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Given that inflation is cyclical, how can you not surmise that the money supply will not become overinflated?
Wut???
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
In my story of the inflation fairy, I am attempting to show very dense people that most people do not see enough of an increase in the money that they earn to compensate for the inflation of the entire money supply.
Post a chart or other evidence to back this up. I showed evidence that inflation adjusted income has remained relatively flat.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
MOST PEOPLE ARE LEFT HOLDING A SMALLER PERCENTAGE OF THE MONEY SUPPLY AFTER THE MONEY SUPPLY IS INCREASED, THUS THEY HAVE LESS PURCHASING POWER THAN BEFORE!
That is exactly why Rothbard said, "The creation of new money confers no social benefit."
You just described inflation, genius. It's not a new concept to most people.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 25 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zorbman]
#11256270 - 10/15/09 08:07 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zorbman said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Yes, the dollar loses value. But income levels compensate.
Evidently only for the top 1% if I'm reading your chart correctly. For the large majority of earners wages have remained flat for decades even as inflation was rising. This seems to support what Mr. Al is saying about workers being squeezed.
No. Mr.Al said wages are decreasing:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Most people find that their earnings will not keep pace with the inflation.
I'd like to see his evidence of this.
The chart I posted that shows wages have remained flat is already adjusted for inflation:
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (10/15/09 11:36 PM)
|
Yrat
Hello
Registered: 11/08/07
Posts: 1,986
Last seen: 10 hours, 52 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Inflation is not a market correction. The market correction is prices increasing in relation to the previous inflation of the money supply.
What!?!?! I believe you just said inflation is not a market correction. The market correction is inflation.
the correct definition of inflation is the expansion of the money supply. you "inflate" the amount of currency in circulation. as a result, prices rise. this is the most common misunderstanding of the word. the rising prices are a market correction to match the amount of new money in circulation.
--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root
|
Yrat
Hello
Registered: 11/08/07
Posts: 1,986
Last seen: 10 hours, 52 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11258476 - 10/16/09 07:12 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Thank you!
Mr.Al does not advocate fiat money.
The Falcon apparently has not looked into the concept of competitive free market money.
Without legal tender laws, different competing mediums of exchange would whup the shit out of government issued fiat.
This has got to be a joke. Maybe we can set up some wildcat banks.
gold was chosen as money by the free market over the course of thousands of years. this might not be the case today, if again the markets were allowed to decide on a medium of exchange. one thing is for sure though, money has to represent value in order to fulfill its purpose. a free market will naturally settle on a medium of exchange that best accomplishes this. considering this, fiat is a cruel joke.
Quote:
The Gold Standard: A Standard For Freedom
By Paul Nathan
Oct 2 2009
Forward: If there are only a few articles you ever read on the gold standard, this should be one of them. The reason is that it is complete. It covers the moral case for the gold standard as well as its practicality. Although beginning with the basics it incorporates some of the more intricate aspects of it's virtues.
There is no call in this article to re-establish the gold standard today. Whether the gold standard is ever re-established is not the point. The point, is that like freedom, it is the ideal. And like freedom, while achieving it may be a distant goal, moving toward it is always the direction we should be moving.
***********
At one time the case for the gold standard was practically self-evident — undisputed by most economists and appreciated by both laymen and professionals. Today, however, the case for gold is buried under decades of propaganda, misconceptions, and myths. It has been only recently that the case for the gold standard has begun to surface from under the Policy Makers’ anti-gold debris. Consequently, gold is once again gaining the attention and interest it so rightly deserves.
Today’s free-market advocates of the gold standard differ from past advocates. For example, free-market advocates do not exclude silver or other commodities from their concept of a gold standard. Indeed, they do not even insist that gold must be money. The case for the gold standard is actually the case for market-originated commodity money, and the case against government-regulated fiat money. It is simply an extension of the case for free markets which respect the rights of man, and the case against controlled markets which violate the rights of man.
To be concerned with the gold standard is to be concerned with a free economy, regulated by the values and choices of men, rather than a controlled economy in which the values and choices of men are regulated by government. This concern for man’s freedom to express values and exercise choices is derived from the deeper concern for justice and for man’s right to property. The man concerned with justice does not aim to force others to use gold as money. Rather, he insists that government has no right to prevent him and other men from using gold as money if they choose. The man concerned with property rights does not urge government to legislate pro-gold policies in order to arbitrarily increase the value, popularity, or status of gold. Rather, he insists that government stop inflating, since this arbitrarily decreases the value of his money claims to property.
Antagonists of the gold standard claim that it is impractical. But the gold standard is, in fact, the most practical monetary system yet conceived by man. However, the gold standard’s primary virtue does not lie in its practicality: it lies in its morality. Those concerned about such things as freedom, justice, the preservation of property rights and purchasing power, would do well to consider the moral case for the gold standard, for, once understood, it is the individual’s best defense against government confiscation of property through inflation.
The fact that prevents government from indulging in inflationary schemes under the gold standard can be best summed up in a phrase: governments can’t print gold. But to understand the implications of this statement, and the virtues of having gold as money, it is first necessary to understand what money is — and what money is not.
What Money Is . . .
A man on a desert island has no need for money. He produces the goods he needs to survive, and consumes all he produces. Similarly, a primitive society has no need for money. The kinds of goods produced are extremely limited, and if individuals desire to exchange their goods with one another, they can do so through direct exchange, i.e., barter. But under a division of labor economy where men specialize in production and where there is a variety of goods produced, desired, and traded, there is a very definite need for money. For how else could Mr. Jones in Florida sell his oranges to men throughout the world and then buy Mr. Smith’s best-selling novel, unless there existed some medium of exchange acceptable to all parties.
Money originates from men’s desire for indirect exchange. And more, since indirect exchange usually occurs between strangers like Smith and Jones, money must be an object which is mutually valued. Thus, money is that commodity which serves as a medium of exchange by virtue of its high degree of marketability.
The task of discovering which commodity will be most valued by and most acceptable to men as a medium of exchange can only be accomplished through a market process; for it is only through the market that men’s values and choices are properly reflected. The verdict of the market has reflected three general requirements for any lasting medium of exchange: that money should be generally acceptable to most men; that it should be practical to use; and that it should be relatively stable in value. If these requirements are satisfied, the result is a money of trust.
Trust is the lifeblood of money, and money is the lifeblood of any economy based on the indirect exchange of goods and services. A money of trust serves to facilitate exchange among men, and in doing so, breeds a healthy and growing economy. But if men should ever begin to mistrust money, the market will immediately reflect this loss of confidence. Then money will begin to lose stability, lose its acceptability, and will soon become impractical to use in exchange.
Mistrusted money is the antithesis of the lifeblood of an economy. It’s a kind of "bad blood" circulating between men throughout the economy, breeding confusion and suspicion. The fact that men’s mistrust of money will result in monetary crises and collapse, underscores the need for a money that never contradicts men’s values, a money that at all times properly reflects men’s values, i.e., a money based on, and constantly exposed to, individual choices — which means a free-market-originated commodity money.
When one considers the complex process that must take place before men can discover which commodity money constantly reflects their changing values and choices, one can understand why it is only through a free market process that money can properly evolve as a medium of trust. And one may also understand why no man, group of men, or government, has the right to dictate what money or its value should be. This decision must be a market decision if it is to be a lasting decision.
Throughout history, almost every conceivable commodity has been used as a medium of exchange. Through the years of economic development and through trial and error, those commodities least suited to serve as money were eliminated, while those commodities best suited survived as forms of money. After centuries of exchange between men, the commodity that emerged as the most valued, the most practical, the most trusted money among men, was gold.
What gives rise to men’s trust in gold? First, men value gold as money because men value gold as a commodity. Gold at any time can be converted to its commodity role if its monetary role should ever be questioned. Second, since gold is relatively scarce and precious to men, it has stability of value. Therefore, it can be trusted to serve as a relatively stable medium of exchange. And since most individuals desire to save part of what they produce in some monetary form, gold’s stability of value provides them with a reliable monetary method of accumulating and storing wealth.
What else gives rise to men’s trust in gold? Gold is easily marketable, which means it is acceptable to men in exchanges of all kinds. Gold is also trusted because it is practical: it’s durable, so it won’t perish or rot; it’s small in bulk, so it is easily transportable. It’s a metal, which means it can be used in different forms, such as bars or coins; and, since gold does not evaporate, it will lose neither quantity nor quality if or when men should decide to melt their coins into bullion or melt their bullion for use in production.
There is one more thing that gives rise to men’s trust in gold: the knowledge that gold cannot be counterfeited; the conviction that the money supply cannot be artificially and arbitrarily increased by those who would aim to confiscate wealth rather than produce it; the knowledge that money (the claim to production and effort) will itself represent production and effort. In short, men’s trust in gold carries the conviction that the monetary system freely adopted by men is based, not on whim and decree, but on integrity and productivity.
These are some of the reasons why men have trusted gold as a medium of exchange through history — and why today’s Policy Makers damn its existence.
... And What Money Is Not
Money is not paper. Paper notes evolve from the desire for a convenient substitute for commodity money. The paper notes that circulate as money today were once money substitutes (receipts for gold), defined by and convertible into a specific amount of gold. Paper notes did not and cannot become a money of trust without first representing a commodity of trust.
Consider the reaction of free men — men who, understanding and respecting the meaning of property rights, are suddenly and for the first time offered in place of gold, non-convertible paper notes. These notes would be meaningless to such men. No man who had just come from harvesting a field of wheat would even consider trading his wheat for scrap paper.
There are only two ways in which men will accept paper notes without commodity convertibility : if they are forced to do so, or if they are conned into doing so. Americans are now legally forced to accept government’s non-convertible paper notes — but only because they have been conned into believing that commodity money is "old-fashioned" and "impractical" and that paper notes are indicative of a "modern and sophisticated economy."
Nothing could be further from the truth. Non-convertible paper "money" is fiat money that derives its value, not from its value as a commodity, not from its value as a useful medium of exchange according to the requirements of a medium of exchange, but from the decree of government. Fiat money is a throwback to the days of kings and the mentality of dictators. It is not a money evolved from the values and choices of free men in free markets, but a money created through the coercion of government.
Is commodity money old-fashioned and impractical, as today’s Policy Makers contend it is? Consider the following facts: Over the last several decades, the exchange ratios (the prices) of various commodities have not varied much in value relative to each other. For example, the value of eggs to milk or milk to bread would be at approximately the same ratios today as they were years ago.
Why Prices Rise
But if it is true that the exchange ratios of commodities are relatively the same today as they were in the past, why then have prices (the exchange ratios of dollars to goods) soared over the years? The reason is that the value of the paper money, with which government forces everyone to deal, has fallen yearly relative to all commodities. Clearly, if a commodity (theoretically, almost any commodity) had been used as a medium of exchange over the past decades instead of government’s fiat money, prices would have remained relatively stable. It is important to realize that it is not commodities that are rising in value, but fiat money that is falling in value.
Since 1933, when the U.S. severed the dollar-commodity relationship by abandoning what was left of the gold standard, the value of the dollar has depreciated by over ninety per cent in relation to other commodities. This could never occur under a commodity standard — only under a government imposed fiat standard. Had the U.S. returned to a dollar based on and convertible into gold instead of severing the dollar-gold relationship, the supply of dollars over the years would have been limited to, or checked by, the supply of gold. Therefore, the value of the dollar today would have been equal to the value of gold in relation to other commodities. Instead, the U.S. decided to print dollars whenever "needed" and to pretend that the dollar was "as good as gold" by legally fixing its value. The pretense couldn’t last, and today the dollar is worth a mere fraction of its value in terms of gold in 1933.
Paper notes that are not representative of and convertible into a commodity are not money and have never satisfied the requirements of money for long. They are notes of circulating debt which men are forced to accept, so that governments can continuously pursue their policies of inflation.
The Nature of Inflation
Inflation is the fraudulent increase in the supply of money substitutes and credit. It is a policy which allows government to artificially create and spend more money than it is able to collect in taxes or borrow from its citizens. Government is the cause of inflation — the effect is higher prices.
Consider each dollar as a claim to some tangible good. If the claims are increased, the value of each claim goes down because there are more dollars seeking goods. This bids prices up.
But inflation is not simply rising prices. In fact, inflation may exist even when prices remain the same or decrease. How is this possible? If the production of goods and services increases more than the artificial increase in paper claims, prices will drop — but not by as much as they would have, had there been no artificial increase in paper claims. Thus, in real terms, the value of paper claims is effectively reduced even though in relative terms the value of these claims may increase.
Historically, and in relatively free market economies, there are only two ways in which a general across-the-board increase in prices can occur: through a dramatic increase in commodity money (such as new gold discoveries) or through a fraudulent increase of money substitutes by banks and governments. The former type of general price increase rarely occurs and is perfectly natural. The latter is both unnatural and immoral.
In the case of new gold production, those who have produced the new commodity money will have earned the right to exchange their product for the products of others. All other non-money producers may have to pay higher prices for goods, as the supply of gold increases, but the higher prices are compensated for by having more money to spend. Who receives the "new" money will depend on individual productivity — and this is as it should be, for it is the justice of the market that the acquisition and distribution of wealth is based upon productivity rather than decree.
But, given a fiat standard where government sanctions and sponsors an artificial increase in paper money or credit, the increase in purchasing power for some men can only be obtained at the expense of other men. Given a fiat standard, income distribution is the result of chance, caprice, or government favors and loans. When government doles out its fiat money, these notes dilute the value of all other outstanding money claims. Those who receive the fiat money first, benefit from spending their money before prices rise. But as the fiat money is spent, prices are higher for all other consumers. Thus, the difference between a real increase in the money supply (i.e., commodity money) and an artificial increase (i.e., in paper claims) is the difference between production and theft.
Clearly, inflation is a moral issue. However prices respond, it is immoral that some man, agency, or government is legally permitted to obtain wealth at the involuntary expense of other men. The major challenge in the sphere of monetary relations today is how to abolish the coercive power of government to control the supply and regulate the value of money, and how to return this function to the market where it properly belongs.
The Fiat Standard at Work
Under a fiat standard, government gains control of the banking system and thus, indirectly, of the nation’s money supply. It can artificially and arbitrarily create money and furnish credit. Government paper notes are not based on or convertible into gold, or any other tangible commodity; man’s production and labor are not the sole claim to other men’s production and labor : the supply and value of money are determined by government.
Under the American version of the fiat standard, the banking system and the nation’s money supply are controlled and regulated for the most part by a twelve-man Board of Governors which is empowered to make policy decisions for the majority of the nation’s banks. Thus, America’s banking system is not a free and private banking system — it is a quasi-governmental banking system, known as the Federal Reserve System.
It should be clear that the Federal Reserve System’s power to create claims against individuals’ property is immoral. But neither the Federal Reserve System nor the fiat standard is ever defended on moral grounds; they are defended on practical grounds. Once inspected, however, these grounds turn out to be about as solid as quicksand. The primary justification given for a fiat standard is that credit can be extended far more rapidly and extensively. This, it is claimed, is the fiat standard’s major virtue. It is, in fact, a major vice.
The greatest economic threat under a fiat standard is that the Federal Reserve System will supply heavy doses of money and credit to the loan market in an attempt to reduce interest rates and "stimulate" the economy. This attempt, while temporarily stimulating economic activity, leads to malinvestment, as businessmen falsely anticipate greater profits. A "boom" results, but since the "boom" is artificially created, the prosperity is temporary and, for the most part, illusory. Government has not furnished more goods; it has not increased the nation’s prosperity; it has simply increased the money supply —which leads men to believe they are richer. The fact is, however, they only have more paper claims to goods. This cannot enrich anyone; it can only lead to future inflation, i.e., a reduction of the value of real claims to wealth.
The Illusion of Prosperity
Thus, increases of money and credit provide only an illusion of prosperity, for with increased money and credit come increased costs for producer goods and increased wage costs. Higher wages then lead to over-consumption, as consumers, too, are enticed by the illusion of prosperity. But overconsumption results in higher prices which reduce the consumer’s standard of living. Since the "boom" was inflation-inspired, producers and consumers are not better off — they are worse off. Mal-investment and over-consumption are mistakes — errors in judgment — caused by government’s attempt to con its citizens into believing that profit opportunities are better than they really are.
When the credit expansion that stimulated the "boom" ends, the mistakes that were made cannot be perpetuated. These mistakes must be liquidated: consumers buy less and begin paying off their unrealistic accumulation of debts. Producers liquidate inventories. Interest rates rise, and unemployment increases as the economy struggles to readjust. The severity of the readjustment depends on the degree and length of government’s prior credit expansion and the policies implemented to cope with the adverse effects. Given continual injections of money and credit in the inane attempt to continue the "boom" and prevent a necessary recession, hyperinflation will result. Hyperinflation must lead to monetary chaos as well as economic disaster, i.e., to depression. A major depression is not a necessary result of the fiat standard, but inflation and the "boom-bust cycle" are.
The whole purpose of fiat money is to allow government to spend more money than it can raise in direct taxes from its citizens. As a result, the American fiat standard has worked more often as a means of redistributing wealth than a means of stimulating the economy. Government, instead of furnishing money to the loan market in the attempt to continuously reduce interest rates, has created money to finance the "welfare" state. When government’s fiat money enters the economy in the form of checks for expenditures, rather than through the loan market, the sequence of events and the effects are a little different.
Men usually hold their money as savings, but as prices continue to rise over the years of government deficit spending, men realize that the pieces of paper they hold are continuously and progressively depreciating in value — that inflation is becoming a way of life. Once men begin to lose confidence in government’s fiat money, it’s only a matter of time before the years of simple inflation burst into hyperinflation and monetary collapse.
Thus, whether government tries to stimulate the economy or to finance programs that it cannot afford, the fiat standard is self-defeating and counter-productive. The consequences of America’s fiat standard have been mild by historical standards: the Great Depression of the ’30’s, an endless series of booms and busts since then, and a depreciation of the dollar by about 92 percent. So much for the "practicality" of the fiat standard!
The Meaning of the Gold Standard
In a free society, no man, group of men, or government has the "right" to infringe upon the rights of others. This means that within a free society, the initiation of force is banned. All goals must be attained through persuasion and voluntary cooperation, and no goal may be achieved at the expense of any man — not for the "good" of another man, not for the "good" of the state, and not for the "good" of society. A system of voluntary exchange is a system of laissez-faire capitalism. Under capitalism, man’s rights are supreme. They are defended by government — not violated by government.
A gold standard is an integral part of a free society; a fiat standard is an integral part of a controlled society. A gold standard cannot exist without the consent of individuals; a fiat standard cannot exist without the initiated force of government. A gold standard is based on voluntary exchange, the recognition of men’s values, and respect for private property; a fiat standard is based on compulsory "exchange," the denial of men’s values, and the insidious confiscation of private property.
Wealth is production, and gold is the equivalent of wealth produced. Because neither wealth nor gold can be created out of nothing, neither wealth nor gold are possible without men of intelligence, men of ability, and men of productivity. Fiat is force and is the equivalent of wealth confiscated. Both fiat and force are the tools of the envious and the cowardly.
Where a gold standard is welcomed by the best of men, the fiat standard is welcomed by the worst of men. Where the gold standard demands the earned, the fiat standard grants the unearned. Where a gold standard evolves from individual choice, a fiat standard evolves from government edict. Where a gold standard necessitates only that men be left free to act, to choose, and to trade, a fiat standard invites government to control, to regulate, and to dictate men’s choices, actions, and the terms of trade.
Gold limits the government’s power to spend more money than it receives in taxes, and in doing so, gold limits the government’s arbitrary power over the economy; gold checks artificial money and credit expansion; it prevents artificial "booms" which lead to very real "busts"; gold protects individuals from economically unsound government programs; and it protects citizens from the inflationary confiscation of private property. Not only is the gold standard the most practical monetary system yet discovered, it is a standard consistent with freedom — yet it is the gold standard that today’s Policy Makers either ignore or denounce.
--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 25 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Yrat]
#11259029 - 10/16/09 09:36 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Yrat said:
the correct definition of inflation is the expansion of the money supply. you "inflate" the amount of currency in circulation. as a result, prices rise. this is the most common misunderstanding of the word. the rising prices are a market correction to match the amount of new money in circulation.
I believe we're in agreement. The market DOES correct itself by adjusting prices.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 25 seconds
|
|
Quote:
Yrat said:
Quote:
The Gold Standard: A Standard For Freedom
By Paul Nathan
Oct 2 2009
.
.
.
This is material that's already been discussed and refuted. Rather than repeating old material, why not argue with the refutations?
We already KNOW printing money leads to inflation - that's NOT a new revelation! If it's done in a controlled manner, then the money supply is NOT in danger. If the Gov't decides to print too much at a time, then there can be a money crisis. We KNOW! I'm sure the US Gov't understands that too. That's why we're borrowing from China and not just printing new money.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11260095 - 10/16/09 12:48 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
You are not looking at the fact that the market is not allowed to adjust during the bust phase of the economic cycle. The government quick fix is to inflate the money supply and create the illusion of prosperity.
That is why they are called business cycles, they have a disturbing tendency to repeat and inflate the money supply.
Disturbing? Like the sun being obscured by clouds on a significant portion of the days of the year? It just is and always will be.Quote:
There is nothing steady or normal about the rate of government spending today, it is simply unprecedented.
We have truly reached a pinnacle of that. But that is not the only thing you are decrying. We agree on that 100%. What we don't agree on is central banking and fiat currency as demonsQuote:
You did not address the fact that those who receive the increase in the money supply first benefit because they can spend the money without feeling the effects of inflation.
Note the word you use there. Spend. I love rich people. They have made my living very comfortable.Quote:
By the time new money reaches most folk the prices have begun to adjust to the influx of new money as the economy enters the bust phase of the cycle.
Can you see that the inflation of the money supply does not benefit most Americans?
I do not think it is the demon you do. Like I said repeatedly, moderated inflation is not a problem. Zimbabwe inflation is. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME THING. You do not do your argument much good when you cite the Weimar Republic and that nonsense of the dollar losing 96% of it's value over the last century. It is irrelevant.Quote:
How do you figure that there would be wild swings in money valuations if people were using precious metals? That is typically what the market uses in a free market situation.
Because there were. Precious metals are commodities. Think about what would happen if technology suddenly found a huge new miracle use for some precious metal that the currency was tied to. How stable would that valuation be? And for nothing having to do with finances.Quote:
The P.M.s would raise in value over time in relation to the increase in production caused by technological innovation. This is the definition of prosperity.
Precious metal prices tend to devalue. I believe there was a rather famous bet among economists on that a few years ago.Quote:
How can you think devaluing the medium of exchange benefits people?
Artificially low interest rates are what the central bank causes. Artificially low interest rates encourage debt. Inflation and low interest rates discourage savings Savings is central to capitalism itself.
That last paragraph makes me think you have no clue. The central bank controls inter bank lending rates. That's it. Some other rates are sometimes tied to it but not all that tightly. When inflation is high, rates are high. Look at the eighties. Rate setting lags inflation. I see no reason to believe it will be otherwise with or without a central bank. Low interest rates encourage spending. Spending drives industry and jobs. Spending is central to capitalism, not saving. And by spending I do not mean government spending. Government spending is not at all capitalism, at least not when there is progressive taxation. Government spending plus progressive taxation is socialism.
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11262107 - 10/16/09 06:24 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
No, government control of the money supply is not something that historically lasts long. The government, like any monopoly, turns out an inferior product that costs too much. In this case, the lack of monetary competition has given the people a medium of exchange that does not hold it's value and could result in hyperinflation.
What you could look at is M2, which was increased by between 500-800 billion recently. I can find you the graphs on M2 if you are lacking the motivation. If other nations move away from using the dollar (like what China, Russia, and Brazil are doing now... the obvious result would be a tremendous decline in the dollar's buying power abroad. Americans would find that they can't afford cheap goods from China. Did you know that until a couple months ago we were the #1 trading partner with Brazil since James Madison was President. Now China does more business with Brazil than we do...
I can take apart the lack of logic that is the keynesian system "bit by bit" if that is what it takes.
Let's start with your support for fiat currency, why do you suppose that fiat is economically good?
I had thought that monopolies are bad for any economy, why should there be a monopoly on the medium of exchange?
Artificially low interest rates encourage debtand discourage savings. Sure, the fed sets the interbank lending rates, and the rates that they lend to the fractional reserve banks. If that rate is lower than interest rates in general are lower.
Politicians want to create the illusion of prosperity while they are in power. This is accomplished through easy money from the fed.
Here's what's funny though, keynesian "thought" does not see the value in savings... Without real savings there is no real prosperity. You can not contend with that.
When government takes large amounts of money that was just created, taxed, or borrowed and spends it into a sector of the economy that is lagging systemic economic damage is caused. One scenario would be the federal government bailing out California. They would be siphoning off the economic prosperity created by more efficient and productive states and giving money to a state that is irresponsible and unproductive. The real danger is the moral hazard it creates when other states cry out "me too"!
Do you admit that inflating the money supply has consequences???
I don't like repeating myself but, in your intellectual cowardice, you did cravenly ignore that most damning question to the keynesian inflation "argument".
"You did not address the fact that those who receive the increase in the money supply first benefit because they can spend the money without feeling the effects of inflation."
It is the same as with any form of counterfeiting. Why should counterfeiting be illegal for all but the government and the central bank, who have set themselves up with a monopoly on counterfeiting.
What says the craven keynesian, what say you!?!
M1 data recent years:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_FiNhXIv5StE/SQXKhZEMXtI/AAAAAAAACiQ/AtnGLPvOnpg/s1600-h/M1Chart.png
Zap and Falcon:
See how M2, the money held in reserve by the fractional reserve banking has increased by 7 trillion.
Recall that fractional reserve banking multiplies the fractional reserve money into the economy in the form of credit (debt).
The first graph shows that M1 has went from around 100 billion to just under 800 billion.
It is interesting that M1 and M2 increased proportionally.
The keynesian economics doesn't like to get into price theory.......
Edited by Mr.Al (10/17/09 01:57 PM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 25 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11267320 - 10/17/09 05:43 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
No, government control of the money supply is not something that historically lasts long. The government, like any monopoly, turns out an inferior product that costs too much.
How long has the British pound lasted again???
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
In this case, the lack of monetary competition has given the people a medium of exchange that does not hold it's value and could result in hyperinflation.
Once again - it is understood that inflation is part of our current system. Hyperinflation will only result if the money supply is mismanaged. So far the US Gov't has managed to keep inflation around 3% per year (plus or minus a small percentage), which is sustainable.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
What you could look at is M2, which was increased by between 500-800 billion recently. I can find you the graphs on M2 if you are lacking the motivation. If other nations move away from using the dollar (like what China, Russia, and Brazil are doing now... the obvious result would be a tremendous decline in the dollar's buying power abroad. Americans would find that they can't afford cheap goods from China. Did you know that until a couple months ago we were the #1 trading partner with Brazil since James Madison was President. Now China does more business with Brazil than we do...
Are you saying Chinese currency is on the gold standard? If so, you're wrong. If not, that's just a Red Herring.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
I can take apart the lack of logic that is the keynesian system "bit by bit" if that is what it takes.
You're free to begin anytime.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Let's start with your support for fiat currency, why do you suppose that fiat is economically good?
I had thought that monopolies are bad for any economy, why should there be a monopoly on the medium of exchange?
Have you not been reading anyone else's posts? There was already a discussion on this beginning here.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Artificially low interest rates encourage debtand discourage savings. Sure, the fed sets the interbank lending rates, and the rates that they lend to the fractional reserve banks. If that rate is lower than interest rates in general are lower.
Politicians want to create the illusion of prosperity while they are in power. This is accomplished through easy money from the fed.
Here's what's funny though, keynesian "thought" does not see the value in savings... Without real savings there is no real prosperity. You can not contend with that.
Please explain this. If I earn $250k per year, and I use it to buy a mansion, three exotic cars, luxurious vacations, etc., you're saying I only have the illusion of prosperity??? Whatever.
Edit: If you're saying deficit spending is false prosperity, then I'll agree with you. You get more now, but pay for it later in extra taxes. But that has nothing to do with fiat money. That would be the case under the gold standard as well.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
When government takes large amounts of money that was just created, taxed, or borrowed and spends it into a sector of the economy that is lagging systemic economic damage is caused. One scenario would be the federal government bailing out California. They would be siphoning off the economic prosperity created by more efficient and productive states and giving money to a state that is irresponsible and unproductive. The real danger is the moral hazard it creates when other states cry out "me too"!
I won't argue this point, but it's another red herring. Bailouts aren't a product of Keynesianism, they are a product of politics.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Do you admit that inflating the money supply has consequences???
Inflation is well understood. How many times do I have to tell you that???
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
I don't like repeating myself but, in your intellectual cowardice, you did cravenly ignore that most damning question to the keynesian inflation "argument".
"You did not address the fact that those who receive the increase in the money supply first benefit because they can spend the money without feeling the effects of inflation."
I don't like repeating myself either. Here was my answer:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Whoever receives Gov't money benefits from it. That includes soldiers, schools, the elderly, etc. Unfortunately, Goldman Sachs has recently gotten some Gov't money too, but that has nothing to do with fiat money, it's because they convinced Congress to give it to them after they lost a shitload (and I'll agree that's a real shame).
Edit #2: And by the way, inflation is relatively contant at about 3% per year. It doesn't really matter when you get your money, you know that from that point on the value of that money will decline about 3% per year. You're completely overestimating this point.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Zap and Falcon:
See how M2, the money held in reserve by the fractional reserve banking has increased by 7 trillion.
Recall that fractional reserve banking multiplies the fractional reserve money into the economy in the form of credit (debt).
The first graph shows that M1 has went from around 100 billion to just under 800 billion.
It is interesting that M1 and M2 increased proportionally.
The keynesian economics doesn't like to get into price theory.......
It is interesting that Mr.Al doesn't understand the graphs he's showing. The fractional reserve system was designed for the money supply to grow. M1 and M2 will grow accordingly. So long as the rate of growth remains relatively constant, there isn't a problem. If the Fed suddenly decides to print 10x what it used to, then there is a risk of hyperinflation. THAT'S UNDERSTOOD; YOU DON'T HAVE TO KEEP REPEATING YOURSELF.
Edit #3: By the way, your M1 and M2 graphs are deceptive. Since those money supplies were meant to grow, you should have plotted them on a logarithmic scale rather than a linear one. Here is a more accurate representation of their rate of growth:
For those that don't understand I will try to explain. If something grows 100% a year, it will go from 1 to 2 to 4 to 8 to 16 etc. On a linear scale, it appears that the rate is growing out of control, even though it's a constant 100% growth. On a logarithmic scale, it will appear as a straight diagonal line because the rate is constant. Much like the M1 and M2 growth on the charts I just posted (I chose 100% for simplicity - the same is true for any rate of growth).
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (10/20/09 02:16 PM)
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
When other countries are beginning to reject the dollar and Brazil, who traded more with us than any other country since James Madison was President I think we have a problem.
Notice the talk about tariffs on certain Chinese goods....
Trade protectionism was a key ingredient in the global descent into the Great Depression.
What do you suppose happens when dollars circulating abroad come back here when major economic players (say: Russia, China, Brazil & other South American countries) dump the dollar wholesale?
Only an ostrich could not see what would happen to the American economy in a situation of trade protectionism and a massive flood of dollars returning from abroad. Our manufacturing sector is not particularly strong, so I don't see production compensating for the skyrocketing prices....
What you don't see regarding deficit spending and government debt, is that the government debt is accumulated much faster when they have a monopoly on money.
Monetary competition would prevent government from being able to devalue the fiat too much. Otherwise the fiat falls out of use entirely. How is it that you would recognize that monopolies are bad for everything but money itself?
The keynesian system allows for the possibility for massive government bailouts. This would not be the case in a free market.
DEFICIT SPENDING HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH KEYNESIAN "ECONOMICS" BECAUSE KEYNESIAN ECONOMICS CALLS FOR MASSIVE GOVERNMENT SPENDING WHEN ECONOMIC DOWNTURNS OCCUR.
Bernanke has monetized debt. If China decides that the debt instruments they are holding are not worthwhile (they have been complaining about excessive money creation lately and I'm sure the recent tariffs aren't making them happy) they will call in that debt.
How would the fed deal with China calling in U.S. debt?
I say that keynesians aren't interested in price theory because they don't think there are consequences to inflationary monetary policy.
Do you not understand that there are consequences to inflating the money supply? You claim that "inflation is understood"? That is ducking the question. What do you think the consequences of inflation are?
Increasing the money supply has nothing to do with production. Money is the medium of exchange.
Increasing the money supply is what causes the destructive business cycles.
Again, you fail to address that the system you support creates systemic damage to the economy by handing large amounts of new money to their "too big to fail" corporate friends.
It is not logical to claim to be against government bailouts and yet support the system that does exactly that.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/18/09 12:55 AM)
|
crookedjunk
Ben of A&E's "Intervention"
Registered: 09/28/09
Posts: 340
Loc: pittsburgh, pa
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11270414 - 10/18/09 09:02 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
stop with all the filibustering, folks. the truth is this:
obama rules
clinton is a pimp
neocons and ignorant libertarians suck
that is the truth for the day
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: crookedjunk]
#11270669 - 10/18/09 09:59 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
What would we do without your pithy and insightful analysis? I wonder how we ever survived the wilderness without you. Had you not been so niggardly with your wisdom all that time we might have become truly enlightened individuals.
--------------------
|
crookedjunk
Ben of A&E's "Intervention"
Registered: 09/28/09
Posts: 340
Loc: pittsburgh, pa
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11270954 - 10/18/09 10:57 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
you sound like a sourpuss. Obama does it for your sake.
sourpuss.
|
crookedjunk
Ben of A&E's "Intervention"
Registered: 09/28/09
Posts: 340
Loc: pittsburgh, pa
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: crookedjunk]
#11270956 - 10/18/09 10:58 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
how do you resize images? my bad
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 25 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11271005 - 10/18/09 11:10 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
When other countries are beginning to reject the dollar and Brazil, who traded more with us than any other country since James Madison was President I think we have a problem.
Notice the talk about tariffs on certain Chinese goods....
Trade protectionism was a key ingredient in the global descent into the Great Depression.
This demonstrates a clear lack of understanding of economics and history on your part. The reason China has become so powerful is because businesses have outsourced so much manufacturing there. Free markets have allowed this. Whether this is good or bad is debatable, but it's not protectionism that got us into this position.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
What do you suppose happens when dollars circulating abroad come back here when major economic players (say: Russia, China, Brazil & other South American countries) dump the dollar wholesale?
Only an ostrich could not see what would happen to the American economy in a situation of trade protectionism and a massive flood of dollars returning from abroad. Our manufacturing sector is not particularly strong, so I don't see production compensating for the skyrocketing prices....
I don't think I've ever debated with anyone who keeps bring up the same point time and time again while ignoring all previous answers. Please rebut previous answers, or accept them. Don't bring up the same points over and over that have been rebutted.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
What you don't see regarding deficit spending and government debt, is that the government debt is accumulated much faster when they have a monopoly on money.
Monetary competition would prevent government from being able to devalue the fiat too much. Otherwise the fiat falls out of use entirely. How is it that you would recognize that monopolies are bad for everything but money itself?
How many times has this question been answered? Why don't you refute the previous answers rather than ask them again?
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
The keynesian system allows for the possibility for massive government bailouts. This would not be the case in a free market.
Please explain why Government could not take on debt in a free market.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
DEFICIT SPENDING HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH KEYNESIAN "ECONOMICS" BECAUSE KEYNESIAN ECONOMICS CALLS FOR MASSIVE GOVERNMENT SPENDING WHEN ECONOMIC DOWNTURNS OCCUR.
Correct. And that's not the same as massive creation of money (for the dozenth time). If we created money to cover expenses, we wouldn't have debt, would we? WHY ARE YOU SO INCAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING OR DEBATING THIS???
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Bernanke has monetized debt. If China decides that the debt instruments they are holding are not worthwhile (they have been complaining about excessive money creation lately and I'm sure the recent tariffs aren't making them happy) they will call in that debt.
How would the fed deal with China calling in U.S. debt?
You've brought this up before, and it has been answered already.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
I say that keynesians aren't interested in price theory because they don't think there are consequences to inflationary monetary policy.
This has been answered too.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Do you not understand that there are consequences to inflating the money supply? You claim that "inflation is understood"? That is ducking the question. What do you think the consequences of inflation are?
This has been answered as well. Inflation means the value of money goes down, typically about 3% per year.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Increasing the money supply has nothing to do with production. Money is the medium of exchange.
I know. And I've agreed with you on this point time and time again. What's your new point?
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Increasing the money supply is what causes the destructive business cycles.
No. And I've responded to this already. Increasing the money supply is what causes inflation. We've seen it now for the last 40 years.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Again, you fail to address that the system you support creates systemic damage to the economy by handing large amounts of new money to their "too big to fail" corporate friends.
It is not logical to claim to be against government bailouts and yet support the system that does exactly that.
I've addressed this also. It's not Keynesianism that bails corporations out. It's politicians.
Prove me wrong or quit bringing up the same points over and over
It appears you're a lot less intelligent than I thought. You don't debate things, you just repeat old arguments.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: crookedjunk]
#11271063 - 10/18/09 11:24 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
crookedjunk said:
you sound like a sourpuss. Obama does it for your sake.
Troll.
--------------------
|
numonkei
Back! From thedigestive tractof dave theiguana!
Registered: 04/12/06
Posts: 2,451
Loc: A Tree
Last seen: 2 months, 17 days
|
|
This thread is dead, and now bitching between the usual's.
Tee-Yoo-Arr-Tee-Ell-Eee-Power
Tee-Yoo-Arr-Tee-Ell-Eee-Power
Tee-Yoo-Arr-Tee-Ell-Eee-Power
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles
Tee-Yoo-Arr-Tee-Ell-Eee-Power
Tee-Yoo-Arr-Tee-Ell-Eee-Power
Tee-Yoo-Arr-Tee-Ell-Eee-Power
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turles
I quit. I can't get a noose on noose sites, noose papers, noose couriers, carrier pigeons with no(insert)r(/insert)orse gods, or chicks with dicks.
And this entire thread REALLY sucks, and has been a personal thread for partisan infighting between ol' shitty conserves without Jesus and new' faggy tweens without Jesus.
Can't we all just hate jesus together? And his douche browner ?fanboy and all the queefs that he supposedly was 'New' to?
Fuck ya'll I'm watching footloose.
(Really, if there was a topic here to discuss I would try to insert a reality-based post that was not simply snark, but I read the same fucking posts from people who think that "liberals" would post on the political section of a focus site; and folks who like Frank Zappa, or his kids, and a fantastic steakhouse during the year 2004.)
I wasted your time writing this and if you've read this far, Zappa was a great musician, but there is little to no political discussion on this forum. Mostly just demagogues jerking each other off, usually the wrong way.
Politics still sucks, this is clear, and drug dealers help you more than people and suits or on message boards.
And Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles III... still really sucks. Feudal Japan? Why?
~Monk
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: numonkei]
#11271194 - 10/18/09 11:51 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
numonkei said:
This thread is dead, and now bitching between the usual's.
Tee-Yoo-Arr-Tee-Ell-Eee-Power
Tee-Yoo-Arr-Tee-Ell-Eee-Power
Tee-Yoo-Arr-Tee-Ell-Eee-Power
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles
Tee-Yoo-Arr-Tee-Ell-Eee-Power
Tee-Yoo-Arr-Tee-Ell-Eee-Power
Tee-Yoo-Arr-Tee-Ell-Eee-Power
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turles
I quit. I can't get a noose on noose sites, noose papers, noose couriers, carrier pigeons with no(insert)r(/insert)orse gods, or chicks with dicks.
And this entire thread REALLY sucks, and has been a personal thread for partisan infighting between ol' shitty conserves without Jesus and new' faggy tweens without Jesus.
Can't we all just hate jesus together? And his douche browner ?fanboy and all the queefs that he supposedly was 'New' to?
Fuck ya'll I'm watching footloose.
(Really, if there was a topic here to discuss I would try to insert a reality-based post that was not simply snark, but I read the same fucking posts from people who think that "liberals" would post on the political section of a focus site; and folks who like Frank Zappa, or his kids, and a fantastic steakhouse during the year 2004.)
I wasted your time writing this and if you've read this far, Zappa was a great musician, but there is little to no political discussion on this forum. Mostly just demagogues jerking each other off, usually the wrong way.
Politics still sucks, this is clear, and drug dealers help you more than people and suits or on message boards.
And Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles III... still really sucks. Feudal Japan? Why?
~Monk
Thank you for that brilliant disquisition. Good bye.
--------------------
|
zorbman
Be Prepared
Registered: 06/04/04
Posts: 5,475
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: numonkei]
#11271902 - 10/18/09 02:13 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
..there is little to no political discussion on this forum. Mostly just demagogues jerking each other off
You're just now noticing this?
--------------------
Men occasionally stumble over the truth but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened. - Winston Churchill
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
There is no "free market" allowing businesses to be outsourced to China.
You are wrong.
I mention trade protectionism and tariffs because China holds a large amount of U.S. debt.
If the U.S.D. is no longer the world reserve fiat they will call that debt in.
Come on man, the Smoot-Hawley tariff act was a piece of legislation that precipitated world-wide trade protectionism.
Trade protectionism is something to look out for when forecasting world-wide economic events.
This was a major ingredient of the slide towards the Great Depression. Consider Hoover's artificially high wage fixing that created massive unemployment. Here's a free market view on the Great Depression. Ask yourself why Bernanke has been wrong for years... It's because he has a flawed understanding of history!
http://mises.org/story/3689
In case you missed it:
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2009/10/china-has-already-walked-away-from.html
Russia, China, and other major economic players have been putting together a currency basket. I can only conclude that they are backing away from holding dollars and U.S. debt instruments.
You did not give any real response to what would happen if dollars abroad flood the U.S. economy.
You fail utterly to comprehend that government would not have grown to it's Leviathan size were it not for it's control of the money supply. People would not tolerate the obvious massive taxation this would entail. Inflation is something that they have been indoctrinated, like yourself, to accept. Thus, they use inflationary monetary policy and accumulation of debt (to the degree that anyone with half a functioning brain would know that would not be possible without a monopoly on legal tender) to facilitate government expansion and spending. Government spending is less efficient than the private sector and thus any non-essential government spending makes the economy as a whole less productive.
I recommend you not attempt to debate that government spending is as efficient as the private sector.
Massive government debt is mortgaging the future. It shows that our current prosperity is borrowed against that mortgaged future.
How do you suppose government will pay that debt?
Any way you cut it the people of America foot the bill.
These are just a few reasons as to why you are wrong.
Here's a graph comparing Government Debt obligation versus G.D.P.:
courtesy shadowstats.com
Again, recall that the Keynesian system calls for central economic planners and central banks. They are the individuals who immorally bail out bankrupt corporations.
Explain your "logic" of supporting the system that bails out "too big to fail" and yet personally not support the "bail outs". You don't make sense.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/19/09 12:27 AM)
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
 Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: crookedjunk]
#11275414 - 10/19/09 12:31 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 25 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11281365 - 10/19/09 10:36 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
There is no "free market" allowing businesses to be outsourced to China.
You are wrong.
So are you claiming that everything got outsourced to China BECAUSE of protectionism and tariffs? 
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
I mention trade protectionism and tariffs because China holds a large amount of U.S. debt.
If the U.S.D. is no longer the world reserve fiat they will call that debt in.
It's not in their best interest to do that. While we're talking about "what if's", what if we were on a gold standard and someone discovered a way to make gold from water? (don't aswer, it's a hypothetical question) You can "what if" all day about anything you want.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Come on man, the Smoot-Hawley tariff act was a piece of legislation that precipitated world-wide trade protectionism.
Trade protectionism is something to look out for when forecasting world-wide economic events.
This was a major ingredient of the slide towards the Great Depression.
That ended in 1934. What relevance does it have today? Did we reinstate it?
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Ask yourself why Bernanke has been wrong for years... It's because he has a flawed understanding of history!
http://mises.org/story/3689
I ask myself why Austrians have been wrong for years on the collapse of the dollar. Actually, I know why; they don't understand Keynesianism.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
In case you missed it:
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2009/10/china-has-already-walked-away-from.html
Russia, China, and other major economic players have been putting together a currency basket. I can only conclude that they are backing away from holding dollars and U.S. debt instruments.
I didn't miss it. In fact, I pointed you to a thread on that very topic, which you failed to contribute to.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
You did not give any real response to what would happen if dollars abroad flood the U.S. economy.
More "what if's". Our exports would go up substantially due to a cheaper dollar.
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Inflation is something that they have been indoctrinated, like yourself, to accept. Thus, they use inflationary monetary policy and accumulation of debt (to the degree that anyone with half a functioning brain would know that would not be possible without a monopoly on legal tender) to facilitate government expansion and spending.
Once again, it's very clear you're not reading any of my posts. I've said before I'm against deficit spending, unless the economy is in a recession. You seem to think I'm a champion of continuous Gov't deficit spending; I'm not. I'll say it again, because you missed it the first five times I said it: I AM AGAINST CONTINUOUS GOV'T DEFICIT SPENDING. Got it this time???
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Government spending is less efficient than the private sector and thus any non-essential government spending makes the economy as a whole less productive.
I recommend you not attempt to debate that government spending is as efficient as the private sector.
I don't know what you mean that "government spending is less efficient than the private sector". Are you saying the Gov't isn't good at spending money???
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Massive government debt is mortgaging the future. It shows that our current prosperity is borrowed against that mortgaged future.
How do you suppose government will pay that debt?
Any way you cut it the people of America foot the bill.
I agree with this point, but I've already spoken out against deficit spending outside of a recession. CONSTANT DEFICIT SPENDING IS NOT A REQUIREMENT OF KEYNESIANISM. Got it???
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Here's a graph comparing Government Debt obligation versus G.D.P.:
courtesy shadowstats.com
Yes, and I've already posted a reply to that graph:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Yes deficit spending has been going out of control since Reagan. But is our debt unsustainable? Here's a historical perspective with some good commentary in the link:
National Debt Graph
Now it's YOUR turn to reply to my post, not to repeat old material. Are you not smart enough to think for yourself???
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Again, recall that the Keynesian system calls for central economic planners and central banks. They are the individuals who immorally bail out bankrupt corporations.
Explain your "logic" of supporting the system that bails out "too big to fail" and yet personally not support the "bail outs". You don't make sense.
I've said this about 10 times - Congress bails out bankrupt corporations. It's politics, and has NOTHING to do with Keynesianism. Please show me where Keynes said central banks are required to bail out failed businesses, or SHUT UP ABOUT THIS. You clearly know nothing about Keynesianism; neither did Mises.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
|
zorbman
Be Prepared
Registered: 06/04/04
Posts: 5,475
|
|
Mr.Al said:
Quote:
If the U.S.D. is no longer the world reserve fiat they will call that debt in.
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
It's not in their best interest to do that.
It is also not in anyone's best interest to retain an asset which is continually falling in value. A conundrum indeed. (Or hot potato).
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
While we're talking about "what if's", what if we were on a gold standard and someone discovered a way to make gold from water? (don't aswer, it's a hypothetical question) You can "what if" all day about anything you want.
Are you actually contending that there is an equal likelihood that science will synthetically produce gold as the dollar will be abandoned as the global reserve currency? Because the former is the stuff of science fiction while we are increasingly hearing news reports of the latter nearly every week.
--------------------
Men occasionally stumble over the truth but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened. - Winston Churchill
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 1,403
Last seen: 9 minutes, 25 seconds
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zorbman]
#11281897 - 10/20/09 12:22 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zorbman said:
Are you actually contending that there is an equal likelihood that science will synthetically produce gold as the dollar will be abandoned as the global reserve currency? Because the former is the stuff of science fiction while we are increasingly hearing news reports of the latter nearly every week.
Mr.Al was arguing against the fractional reserve system because of what could happen, but not what has happened. Murphy's law fallacy.
What if we were on the gold standard and the country went into a depression? Wait, I guess that's not a what could happen scenario. That's a what has happened scenario.
--------------------
I love how the right makes shit up about what Obama is going to do, and then scare themselves with it. - Falcon91Wolvrn03
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (10/20/09 12:38 AM)
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
Recall that Hoover had instituted artificially high wages. He did not understand that high wages are caused by an increase in economic production. Remember the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930?
What we are seeing here is another example of big government getting involved in central economic planning.
F.D.R.:
http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=258
I don't see how I am being illogical in talking about nations abandoning the dollar when they have obviously been at work putting together a currency basket to replace the world reserve fiat.
Quote:
I've said this about 10 times - Congress bails out bankrupt corporations. It's politics, and has NOTHING to do with Keynesianism. Please show me where Keynes said central banks are required to bail out failed businesses, or SHUT UP ABOUT THIS. You clearly know nothing about Keynesianism; neither did Mises.
Do you realize that central economic planners bailed out the banks and failed businesses? You have said yourself that you support increased government spending during economic downturns. Ben Bernanke is a self professed "keynesian". Is he abnormal in his views as compared to other keynesians?
Do you support the "federal" reserve's continued monopoly of the money supply?
If you do support the federal reserve it is nonsensical to complain about their actions.
If you do not like bailouts maybe you might want to reconsider your point of view of the idea of central economic planning.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/20/09 02:11 AM)
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
This one thing is actually more important than this entire discussion. Since you did not know where I was coming from I will quote you and explain more clearly.
Quote:
I don't know what you mean that "government spending is less efficient than the private sector".
We have talked before about how the purpose of the medium of exchange is to increase economic efficiency. The need for profit is what drives increased production which occurs through a more efficient allocation of resources (usually technologically driven).
I'm pretty sure you don't disagree with that.
Now, government has no incentive to allocate resources more intelligently. Especially in our current system where they can borrow vast sums, print it up, or tax the fuck out of people. Recall that it is always easier to spend money that someone else owns.
Looking at collapsed nations like the U.S.S.R. it is not difficult to see how tremendously inefficient their economy was. I mean, they could produce, but when government controls where resources go (raw material, labor, and capital) we see shortages of key goods (Was it Cuba that had a toilet paper shortage recently?) and surplus production of things that are not needed.
I recall that you do not disagree with me that "there is no free lunch in economics. Perhaps this has a different meaning for you than it does for me.
Government growth comes at the expense of loss in production in the private sector because government allocates resources less efficiently than the private sector.
That is the key reason why any time government spends or grows beyond what is essential to it's job, we see a net loss in economic productivity.
An example of essential government services would be fire fighting. Fire departments cost money but the prevention of lost lives and massive property destruction is more than worth their cost.
Bailing out the auto industry is not an example of good spending. The reason is that an inefficient sector of the economy is being subsidized at the expense of the productive sectors. That is why the auto makers should go bankrupt when they are no longer able to produce efficiently.
I view things as a system and consider long term consequences to actions taken. The keynesian economics does not do this and that is why I reject it.
|
crookedjunk
Ben of A&E's "Intervention"
Registered: 09/28/09
Posts: 340
Loc: pittsburgh, pa
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
|
 Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11282463 - 10/20/09 06:07 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
man, that's some retarded propaganda. you crazy white farm boys scare too easy, just because a black man is your superior now.
And I ain't saying nothing wrong.
|
crookedjunk
Ben of A&E's "Intervention"
Registered: 09/28/09
Posts: 340
Loc: pittsburgh, pa
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11282476 - 10/20/09 06:11 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I would like to ask why if I'm getting a warning in this thread, why zappaisgod isn't getting one too for delibertly using the word "niggardly". Yes, I know what it means. But I also know what it sounds like and how certain people like to fling it with that racist subtext in mind. Especially in conjunction of the fact that he knows my racial identity.
I say he deserves censure if I deserve it.
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 20,721
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: crookedjunk]
#11282911 - 10/20/09 08:43 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I would like to ask why if I'm getting a warning in this thread, why zappaisgod isn't getting one too for delibertly using the word "niggardly".
If you truly know what it means, then you know the answer.
Quote:
I say he deserves censure if I deserve it.
Funny thing, what you say doesn't matter. Just because you want to see a racist subtext, doesn't mean everyone else has to join in on the road to illiteracy as well.
--------------------
“In politics, few talents are as richly rewarded as the ability to convince parasites that they are victims. Welfare states on both sides of the Atlantic have discovered that largesse to losers does not reduce their hostility to society, but only increases it. Far from producing gratitude, generosity is seen as an admission of guilt, and the reparations as inadequate compensation for injustices – leading to worsening behavior by the recipients.
Thomas Sowell
-----------------------------------
A thin-skinned Mod that deletes rates of himself that he doesn't like.
-----------------------------------
|
THC Titan
Spoonman
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 590
Loc: FL, USA
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Funny thing, what you say doesn't matter. Just because you want to see a racist subtext, doesn't mean everyone else has to join in on the road to illiteracy as well.
You don't think people can use non-racial words in a racist manner?
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 20,721
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: THC Titan]
#11283409 - 10/20/09 10:05 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Read much?
--------------------
“In politics, few talents are as richly rewarded as the ability to convince parasites that they are victims. Welfare states on both sides of the Atlantic have discovered that largesse to losers does not reduce their hostility to society, but only increases it. Far from producing gratitude, generosity is seen as an admission of guilt, and the reparations as inadequate compensation for injustices – leading to worsening behavior by the recipients.
Thomas Sowell
-----------------------------------
A thin-skinned Mod that deletes rates of himself that he doesn't like.
-----------------------------------
|
crookedjunk
Ben of A&E's "Intervention"
Registered: 09/28/09
Posts: 340
Loc: pittsburgh, pa
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
|
|
what does that have to do with his response? If I'm getting penalized for petty crap, these people should be getting the same treatment as well, o watching moderators.
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: crookedjunk]
#11283596 - 10/20/09 10:34 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
crookedjunk said:
man, that's some retarded propaganda. you crazy white farm boys scare too easy, just because a black man is your superior now.
Quote:
crookedjunk said:
I would like to ask why if I'm getting a warning in this thread, why zappaisgod isn't getting one too for delibertly using the word "niggardly". Yes, I know what it means. But I also know what it sounds like and how certain people like to fling it with that racist subtext in mind. Especially in conjunction of the fact that he knows my racial identity.
I say he deserves censure if I deserve it.
niggardly could have racial connotations, generally that would apply to
the jews as they're claimed to be niggardly, in the previously quoted
post of yours, it certainly sounds racist as you're claiming black men
are superior, it sounds to me that once again you want to play the
victim and this certainly isnt a support group
your warning was about trolling with crap that had nothing to do with the topic
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: THC Titan]
#11283609 - 10/20/09 10:36 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
THC Titan said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Funny thing, what you say doesn't matter. Just because you want to see a racist subtext, doesn't mean everyone else has to join in on the road to illiteracy as well.
You don't think people can use non-racial words in a racist manner?
I think people like to see things that arent there simply so they can play 'victim'
this has nothing to do with the subject, if you kids want a thread on
racism and the use o certain words, feel free to create one
--------------------
|
crookedjunk
Ben of A&E's "Intervention"
Registered: 09/28/09
Posts: 340
Loc: pittsburgh, pa
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11283633 - 10/20/09 10:41 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
crookedjunk said:
man, that's some retarded propaganda. you crazy white farm boys scare too easy, just because a black man is your superior now.
Quote:
crookedjunk said:
I would like to ask why if I'm getting a warning in this thread, why zappaisgod isn't getting one too for delibertly using the word "niggardly". Yes, I know what it means. But I also know what it sounds like and how certain people like to fling it with that racist subtext in mind. Especially in conjunction of the fact that he knows my racial identity.
I say he deserves censure if I deserve it.
niggardly could have racial connotations, generally that would apply to
the jews as they're claimed to be niggardly, in the previously quoted
post of yours, it certainly sounds racist as you're claiming black men
are superior, it sounds to me that once again you want to play the
victim and this certainly isnt a support group
I didn't claim black men were superior, I just noted that as the president of the United States, a black man is their superior, in terms of social status and legal authority. You're getting a little too squeamish and wishy washy with what offends you for someone that's
modding a political forum.
Quote:
your warning was about trolling with crap that had nothing to do with the topic
I should hope you do the same to the others, for they do it far more flagrantly than I do. I should hope you consider your position beyond partisan games.
|
crookedjunk
Ben of A&E's "Intervention"
Registered: 09/28/09
Posts: 340
Loc: pittsburgh, pa
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: crookedjunk]
#11283648 - 10/20/09 10:44 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I think this thread should be locked, because it's obviously nothing but something designed to provoke slander about the former two-term president.
 approves this message.
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: crookedjunk]
#11283696 - 10/20/09 10:57 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
crookedjunk said:
I didn't claim black men were superior, I just noted that as the president of the United States, a black man is their superior, in terms of social status and legal authority.
so you're saying that dozens of white men are your superiors then, I see
myself as being equal, if you want to see superiors/inferiors, more
power to ya
Quote:
Quote:
your warning was about trolling with crap that had nothing to do with the topic
I should hope you do the same to the others, for they do it far more flagrantly than I do. I should hope you consider your position beyond partisan games.
most tend to stay on topic and arent trying to troll others with their
off topic posts, once again, this isnt the topic or even the discussion
being carried on in this thread, if you have some rant about racism or
what ever else, start one for that or find the appropriate forum
--------------------
|
crookedjunk
Ben of A&E's "Intervention"
Registered: 09/28/09
Posts: 340
Loc: pittsburgh, pa
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11284828 - 10/20/09 01:54 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
crookedjunk said:
I didn't claim black men were superior, I just noted that as the president of the United States, a black man is their superior, in terms of social status and legal authority.
so you're saying that dozens of white men are your superiors then, I see
myself as being equal, if you want to see superiors/inferiors, more
power to ya
Note the qualifying phrase "in terms of social status and legal authority". Is there something wrong with your ability to comprehend
English? This is not meant as a flame, but is out of genuine concern.
Or is it really that hard for _you_ to accept the idea of a black man
being _your_ Commander-In-Chief?
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: crookedjunk]
#11285660 - 10/20/09 03:47 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
what's so hard to understand in the thread title of 'bill clinton fucking
sucked' being that the subject is about clinton and clinton's policies,
this isnt an obama discussion or a discussion about racism
remember the warning you already have, 'trolling with off topic content'
you've yet to cease
--------------------
|
crookedjunk
Ben of A&E's "Intervention"
Registered: 09/28/09
Posts: 340
Loc: pittsburgh, pa
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11285914 - 10/20/09 04:24 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
what's so hard to understand in the thread title of 'bill clinton fucking
sucked' being that the subject is about clinton and clinton's policies,
this isnt an obama discussion or a discussion about racism
remember the warning you already have, 'trolling with off topic content'
you've yet to cease
Okay, so when the argument goes towards your political bent you have no trouble seeing people go off-topic (i.e. this turning from clinton's policies to a general discussion of the pros and cons of deregulatation) but when somebody makes a valid point that refutes your definition of reality suddenly it's trolling?
There's quite a few good reasons why I try to generally avoid talking on this board, and the hypocrisy of your stance is only one of them.
I don't know how to engage you in debate without you trying to yellow flag me for things that you greenlight under other circumstances.
This is like trying to argue with Mussolini during his control of Italy, or the current Italian PM for that matter. Hard to argue with
someone who can control and manipulate the flow of debate and propaganda with no checks or balances to stop abuse of those powers.
|
THC Titan
Spoonman
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 590
Loc: FL, USA
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Read much?
I've been aware of the word "niggardly" for a long time, and the word itself is not racist, of course, having no etymological connection to "nigger".
However, it would be remarkably ignorant to suggest that people would never use it to make a comment that, while maybe being linguistically correct, is a codeword for a more racist term, and the real motivation behind the use of the word.
People who misinterpret racist intent where there is none, obviously, need to read a dictionary.
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,162
Loc: [life]now[/life]
Last seen: 6 months, 12 days
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: crookedjunk]
#11286980 - 10/20/09 06:46 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
This is not a forum to discuss other members. If you would like to do that, I would suggest the Pub or OTD.
I'm sure they'd still listen to you there, right?
|
C.M. Mann
subconscious explorer
Registered: 05/01/08
Posts: 899
Loc: Florida
Last seen: 1 year, 1 month
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: crookedjunk]
#11287828 - 10/20/09 08:16 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
First of all, every one is equal. In the U.S.A. we have laws that will support that claim! In the U.S. our elected officials work for us, therefore are answerable to us. Only elitists think politicians are our superiors, as long as they are Democrats.
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: crookedjunk]
#11288689 - 10/20/09 09:39 PM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
crookedjunk said:
Okay, so when the argument goes towards your political bent you have no trouble seeing people go off-topic (i.e. this turning from clinton's policies to a general discussion of the pros and cons of deregulatation) but when somebody makes a valid point that refutes your definition of reality suddenly it's trolling?
a large part of Clintons work was in deregulation, banking, mortgages, investments, insurance, etc... as I stated, it was clinton and clinton's policies
Quote:
There's quite a few good reasons why I try to generally avoid talking on this board, and the hypocrisy of your stance is only one of them.
I don't know how to engage you in debate without you trying to yellow flag me for things that you greenlight under other circumstances.
This is like trying to argue with Mussolini during his control of Italy, or the current Italian PM for that matter. Hard to argue with
someone who can control and manipulate the flow of debate and propaganda with no checks or balances to stop abuse of those powers.
enjoy the break
--------------------
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 20,721
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: THC Titan]
#11290484 - 10/21/09 05:51 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
THC Titan said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Read much?
I've been aware of the word "niggardly" for a long time, and the word itself is not racist, of course, having no etymological connection to "nigger".
Good for you.
Quote:
However, it would be remarkably ignorant to suggest that people would never use it to make a comment that, while maybe being linguistically correct, is a codeword for a more racist term, and the real motivation behind the use of the word.
I don't recall making that claim. Could you point it out to me? The term was used correctly in this thread.
Quote:
People who misinterpret racist intent where there is none, obviously, need to read a dictionary.
So when you come across someone like that.... give them one.
--------------------
“In politics, few talents are as richly rewarded as the ability to convince parasites that they are victims. Welfare states on both sides of the Atlantic have discovered that largesse to losers does not reduce their hostility to society, but only increases it. Far from producing gratitude, generosity is seen as an admission of guilt, and the reparations as inadequate compensation for injustices – leading to worsening behavior by the recipients.
Thomas Sowell
-----------------------------------
A thin-skinned Mod that deletes rates of himself that he doesn't like.
-----------------------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
I was reminding you that the economy is not operating free of government and central bank shenanigans.
You were blaming a non-existent free market.
Don't worry. That is what some of the news muppets like to blame. It's just an example of sociological conditioning. Is a little bit of brain-washing kind of like monetizing a little bit of federal debt?!? Don't be concerned until they bust out the iron and start working on the wrinkles...
If China (along with Russia and other nations) wasn't attempting to cobble together a new world reserve (fiat?) I would agree with you that it is not in China's best interest to dump T-bills...
(Sigh) Think in systems man.
When nations begin screwing around with tariffs and trade protectionism it is obvious that they have completely lost their minds and economic troubles are brewing. The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act is a choice example of legislative insanity that precedes a global economic meltdown. Maybe if we study history we can stop the madness of repeating the same mistakes and expecting great results?
What is your definition of insanity?
Again, look at the lifespan of fiat. Fiat doesn't survive long even when (or is it perhaps because) government has established a monopoly on legal tender!
Compare that to free market money, the value of which is going through the roof,in spite of the fact that courts won't enforce contracts with it!
I get that you aren't for "continuous deficit spending". What you don't "get" is that increased government spending DOES NOT CREATE REAL (MEANING LASTING) PROSPERITY!
Make an attempt, at least, to form a cogent argument that supports increased government spending during economic downturn.
You said you studied Austrian Business Cycle.... How can you not see that increased government spending will only create more inefficiency, economic distortion, and personal/corporate/union welfare?
Economics is about creating efficiency. Government is a "perfect" example of inefficiency. How does increased government spending create real prosperity?
Remember that it is the central bank and keynesian central economic planners that planned, pushed, and executed the bailouts.
You didn't hear the free market camp calling for bailouts dude.
You're pissed about this because you know you don't have a metaphorical leg to stand on.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/21/09 06:21 AM)
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: THC Titan]
#11291007 - 10/21/09 09:12 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
THC Titan said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Read much?
I've been aware of the word "niggardly" for a long time, and the word itself is not racist, of course, having no etymological connection to "nigger".
However, it would be remarkably ignorant to suggest that people would never use it to make a comment that, while maybe being linguistically correct, is a codeword for a more racist term, and the real motivation behind the use of the word.
People who misinterpret racist intent where there is none, obviously, need to read a dictionary.
If you want to know the real motivation behind my use of the word "niggardly" look at the rating the guy left me. I had used the term "coon ass" in reference to New Orleans Saints football fans, GTFO in particular whose real name is Emile, a rather Cajun name. Could be wrong but irrelevant. He used that to try to impute some racist motivation to myself. The term "coon ass" has nothing to do with Negroes. It is a sometime pejorative to refer to Cajuns. I say "sometime" because many Cajuns embrace the term. I didn't use it for racial effect. I used it for idiot effect. And got what I wanted, i.e. he exposed himself YET AGAIN. Priceless. If you don't like it, tough shit.
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11298291 - 10/22/09 07:54 AM (2 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
THC Titan said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Read much?
I've been aware of the word "niggardly" for a long time, and the word itself is not racist, of course, having no etymological connection to "nigger".
However, it would be remarkably ignorant to suggest that people would never use it to make a comment that, while maybe being linguistically correct, is a codeword for a more racist term, and the real motivation behind the use of the word.
People who misinterpret racist intent where there is none, obviously, need to read a dictionary.
Maybe people who see racists everywhere do a lot of projection. They see racism because they are obsessed with race.
All this does not change that fact that you are a government cheerleader.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/22/09 07:55 AM)
|
Nejinmy
Stranger
Registered: 06/30/07
Posts: 53
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11325831 - 10/26/09 03:56 PM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
i liked clinton
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Nejinmy]
#11325885 - 10/26/09 04:02 PM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Nejinmy said:
i liked clinton
It's because you don't see that the housing bubble caused a false prosperity and systemic malinvestment.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11326588 - 10/26/09 05:15 PM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Quote:
Nejinmy said:
i liked clinton
It's because you don't see that the housing bubble caused a false prosperity and systemic malinvestment.
Oy.
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11331150 - 10/27/09 10:53 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
You complain about government taxing the shit out of you but don't have a problem with inflation?
Can you think of any good reason why government should have a monopoly on legal tender?
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11333495 - 10/27/09 05:13 PM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
The alternative is a horror show and there is ZERO reason to believe that it will do anything to curtail inflation unless government borrowing and spending is curtailed.
Go ahead. Start printing your own scrip. Back it up with your own personal testicles. See if anybody will buy it. I, for one, wouldn't touch it.
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11336737 - 10/28/09 06:18 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
The alternative is a horror show and there is ZERO reason to believe that it will do anything to curtail inflation unless government borrowing and spending is curtailed.
Go ahead. Start printing your own scrip. Back it up with your own personal testicles. See if anybody will buy it. I, for one, wouldn't touch it.
You don't get it.
I am talking about getting rid of legal tender laws so people can write contracts and pay with whatever medium of exchange they want to use.
I am referring to P.M.s and anything else the market comes up with.
We all know that monopolies are bad for the economy. End the monopoly money scheme and we will see major economic corrections.
I don't advocate using paper money because it is far to easy to counterfeit (legally or not).
Monopolies of the money supply go back to the days of kings and emperors. It has historically caused economic disasters. When you look at the history of money you might begin to understand that monopoly money is an economically archaic idea that just needs to die.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/28/09 06:22 AM)
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11336865 - 10/28/09 07:15 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Go ahead. Start printing your own scrip. Back it up with your own personal testicles. See if anybody will buy it. I, for one, wouldn't touch it.
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11337026 - 10/28/09 08:00 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Go ahead. Start printing your own scrip. Back it up with your own personal testicles. See if anybody will buy it. I, for one, wouldn't touch it.
Again, you are failing to understand that I don't support paper money because it is easy to counterfeit.
If people "lose faith" in government paper money they will look for alternatives.
Silver isn't a bad thing to stock up on...
You are an economic reactionary and a statist.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/28/09 08:02 AM)
|
Yrat
Hello
Registered: 11/08/07
Posts: 1,986
Last seen: 10 hours, 52 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11337042 - 10/28/09 08:04 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Go ahead. Start printing your own scrip. Back it up with your own personal testicles. See if anybody will buy it. I, for one, wouldn't touch it.
your sardonic comments are quite obviously a result of an inability to counter any of his points.
why does the world continue attempts at fiat monetary systems when thousands of years of history show how the process ALWAYS ends. man's desire for power and control has lead him to take control over monetary systems for millenia, and it always ends in the death of the currency, and usually the spirit of the society/civilization as well.
--------------------
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-Henry David Thoreau
Strike The Root
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11337044 - 10/28/09 08:05 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
If metal coins were worth enough they would be just as easy to counterfeit.
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11337046 - 10/28/09 08:05 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Easier.
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11337127 - 10/28/09 08:24 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
If metal coins were worth enough they would be just as easy to counterfeit.
Huh?!?
http://bullion.nwtmint.com/platinum_mapleleaf.php
Our Sell Price* Each
5 or more $1,437.50
*Price at which we sell to you. The minimum order is 5.
You really need to consider laying off the crack pipe dude.
If it was easy to counterfeit these coins, they would not be selling for 1437.50 U.S.D. each.
I guess 14 hundred dollars for an oz. of platinum isn't worth enough to you....
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,162
Loc: [life]now[/life]
Last seen: 6 months, 12 days
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11337145 - 10/28/09 08:28 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
That value isn't the issue. Why would anyone counterfeit PMs right now when almost everyone is merely holding them for the future?
You wouldn't see wide scale counterfeiting until it was used as a unit of exchange.
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Redstorm]
#11337151 - 10/28/09 08:30 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Horseshit.
If it was so easy to counterfeit them people would.
PMs are very liquid.
It is easy to sell off your PMs for government fiat.
Your argument does not hold water.
The value is the issue. If an oz of gold is worth a grand on the market people certainly would attempt to "counterfeit" the gold.
Zap's argument that PMs would be easier to counterfeit paper is just batshit insane.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/28/09 08:32 AM)
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,162
Loc: [life]now[/life]
Last seen: 6 months, 12 days
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11337171 - 10/28/09 08:33 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
It does hold water. You are just delusional and stuck on your own opinion (note: not fact).
Right now gold is traded primarily by those who know a great deal about what they are carrying and trading. The same is not true for paper currency. Obviously it would be much tougher to swindle the latter than the former.
When (more like if) you see gold getting a larger audience of passive investors, you will be more likely to see counterfeiting.
The liquidity of PMs are irrelevant if those buying and selling them can tell fakes from reals.
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Redstorm]
#11337199 - 10/28/09 08:40 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah...
Show me a tek on counterfeiting PMs.
The liquidity of PMs is not irrelevant because if it were not damn near impossible to counterfeit PMs people would be doing it because gold is at 1000/oz.
You are delusional if you think that counterfeiting PMs would be easy.
Even people not familiar with PMs would do their homework on them if they started being used for day to day purchases.
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 20,721
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11337686 - 10/28/09 10:19 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Yeah...
Show me a tek on counterfeiting PMs.
The liquidity of PMs is not irrelevant because if it were not damn near impossible to counterfeit PMs people would be doing it because gold is at 1000/oz.
You are delusional if you think that counterfeiting PMs would be easy.
Even people not familiar with PMs would do their homework on them if they started being used for day to day purchases.
Delusional?
I'd say you're delusional if, for even a moment, you truly believe that if coin was the only accepted monetary unit that counterfeits would not be made.
Using superdollars as an example..... the suspected source among others is N. Korea. Do you thing that the "Dear Leader" would suddenly decide it wasn't worth the effort to mint counterfeit coins? Bullshit. Further, the average person most likely wouldn't know a counterfeit bill if it was shoved up their ass. Suddenly they'd know a counterfeit coin?
Coins aren't counterfeited currently because bills are easy and because current coinage is of a value that makes it not worthwhile. If bills went away and high value coins took their place I have no doubt the "bad guys" would start minting their own coins.
I mean for fucks sake, some people will do whatever is necessary to defraud others.
You need a reality refresher Al.
--------------------
“In politics, few talents are as richly rewarded as the ability to convince parasites that they are victims. Welfare states on both sides of the Atlantic have discovered that largesse to losers does not reduce their hostility to society, but only increases it. Far from producing gratitude, generosity is seen as an admission of guilt, and the reparations as inadequate compensation for injustices – leading to worsening behavior by the recipients.
Thomas Sowell
-----------------------------------
A thin-skinned Mod that deletes rates of himself that he doesn't like.
-----------------------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11341694 - 10/28/09 07:58 PM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Show me a tek on counterfeiting PMs.
coins are being counterfeited, it's fairly common in the antique coin
market, I've seen several at a friends pawn shop
http://rg.ancients.info/guide/counterfeits.html
--------------------
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 20,721
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11343747 - 10/29/09 06:04 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Show me a tek on counterfeiting PMs.
coins are being counterfeited, it's fairly common in the antique coin
market, I've seen several at a friends pawn shop
http://rg.ancients.info/guide/counterfeits.html
True enough but I'm guessing he means large scale as opposed to select pieces.
--------------------
“In politics, few talents are as richly rewarded as the ability to convince parasites that they are victims. Welfare states on both sides of the Atlantic have discovered that largesse to losers does not reduce their hostility to society, but only increases it. Far from producing gratitude, generosity is seen as an admission of guilt, and the reparations as inadequate compensation for injustices – leading to worsening behavior by the recipients.
Thomas Sowell
-----------------------------------
A thin-skinned Mod that deletes rates of himself that he doesn't like.
-----------------------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
You need to get a clue.
I don't know about you but I haven't seen any counterfeit one ounce platinum or gold coins flooding the market.
You need to understand that when I talk about counterfeiting I am referring chiefly to "legal" counterfeiting.
The amount of counterfeiting that goes on illegally with paper or metal isn't even worth mentioning compared to legal counterfeiting.
It is about utilizing mediums of exchange that do not destroy the fruit of one's labor.
It is about asserting the truth that government is inferior to the individual.
http://rg.ancients.info/guide/counterfeits.html
W.T.F. I am not talking about old fucking coins that people collect. I am talking about precious metals used as a medium of exchange.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/29/09 08:19 AM)
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 20,721
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11344379 - 10/29/09 09:24 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
I don't know about you but I haven't seen any counterfeit one ounce platinum or gold coins flooding the market.
*Sigh* Are they used on an everyday basis by everyone?
No? Thanks for playing.
--------------------
“In politics, few talents are as richly rewarded as the ability to convince parasites that they are victims. Welfare states on both sides of the Atlantic have discovered that largesse to losers does not reduce their hostility to society, but only increases it. Far from producing gratitude, generosity is seen as an admission of guilt, and the reparations as inadequate compensation for injustices – leading to worsening behavior by the recipients.
Thomas Sowell
-----------------------------------
A thin-skinned Mod that deletes rates of himself that he doesn't like.
-----------------------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
I don't know about you but I haven't seen any counterfeit one ounce platinum or gold coins flooding the market.
*Sigh* Are they used on an everyday basis by everyone?
No? Thanks for playing.
They were only used on an everyday basis for thousands of years without counterfeit problems.
Sometimes government would devalue the medium of exchange through seniorage or adding inferior metals.
In a free market situation metal that is not pure isn't desired.
We only run into problems with precious metals when government controls it...
Here's the real question though...
If you recognize that monopolies are inherently bad in an economy why would you suppose that a monopoly on legal tender would be any different?
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,162
Loc: [life]now[/life]
Last seen: 6 months, 12 days
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11344424 - 10/29/09 09:35 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
They were only used on an everyday basis for thousands of years without counterfeit problems.
Because they had the technology to do so that we do now back then?
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Redstorm]
#11344450 - 10/29/09 09:41 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Redstorm said:
Quote:
They were only used on an everyday basis for thousands of years without counterfeit problems.
Because they had the technology to do so that we do now back then?
There are many independent recognizable mints that people today use to buy precious metals.
It is the market itself that prevents assholes from counterfeiting the precious metals.
Again, how do you counterfeit metal?
The weight to volume ratio of the metal would be off to begin with....
If a mint wanted to stay in business they would not be able to counterfeit very long.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/29/09 09:51 AM)
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 20,721
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11344517 - 10/29/09 09:53 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
They were only used on an everyday basis for thousands of years without counterfeit problems.
Carrier pigeons were used to communicate. Did that not change?
Horses were used instead of cars. Bicycles instead of motorcycles. Did that not change?
The Gutenberg press wasn't the fastest way to do things. Didn't that change?
If paper money is phased out and coin phased in, people will counterfeit that as well. Count on it.
Quote:
If you recognize that monopolies are inherently bad in an economy why would you suppose that a monopoly on legal tender would be any different?
I don't think monopolies are always bad. Just imagine several kinds of money.
Storekeeper: Where you from stranger? We don't use shells around here!
Customer: Dang! How bout these pebbles?
Storekeeper: Get the fuck out of my store!
Now before you tell me that there are many currencies around the world.... try taking one of these or one of
these into your local 7-11 to buy a burrito. Didn't work? Try this. What? Still no burrito?
Sucks being you.
--------------------
“In politics, few talents are as richly rewarded as the ability to convince parasites that they are victims. Welfare states on both sides of the Atlantic have discovered that largesse to losers does not reduce their hostility to society, but only increases it. Far from producing gratitude, generosity is seen as an admission of guilt, and the reparations as inadequate compensation for injustices – leading to worsening behavior by the recipients.
Thomas Sowell
-----------------------------------
A thin-skinned Mod that deletes rates of himself that he doesn't like.
-----------------------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
Government monopolizing the money supply is a statist reactionary viewpoint.
The idea of an economy that utilizes free market money is LITERALLYrevolutionary.
http://mises.org/story/2942
If you support government monopoly money I guess that makes you a redcoat !
Again explain to me how the fuck people are going to counterfeit the specific weight-to-volume measurements to each precious metal?
Precious metals are homogenous in nature. It is ridiculously difficult (read: damn near impossible) to copy the qualities that specific metals display!
Remember though that illegal counterfeiting IS NOT THE DAMN PROBLEM. It is the legal but immoral counterfeiting of money that needs to end. The legal counterfeiting could not exist without the monopoly created by legal tender laws that prevent enforcing contracts with anything but goddamn government fiat!
Your "understanding" of what might constitute free market money (I mean, shells, WTF?!?) does not need to be made fun of by me. It can stand by itself in that regard.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/29/09 10:05 AM)
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 20,721
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11344572 - 10/29/09 10:05 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Again, how do you counterfeit metal?
Wow. Who said anything about counterfeiting metal? I thought we were talking about counterfeiting coins?
Quote:
The weight to volume ratio of the metal would be off to begin with....
Yup. Up until the moment someone used the real metal to plate a fake slug. They wouldn't even have to weigh the exact same amount. Can you pick up several similarly sized pieces of metal and notice a difference? If you can tell one that's off by even a gram I'd be amazed.
Once the return on the investment of the counterfeiters was higher, they'd be doing coins as well.
--------------------
“In politics, few talents are as richly rewarded as the ability to convince parasites that they are victims. Welfare states on both sides of the Atlantic have discovered that largesse to losers does not reduce their hostility to society, but only increases it. Far from producing gratitude, generosity is seen as an admission of guilt, and the reparations as inadequate compensation for injustices – leading to worsening behavior by the recipients.
Thomas Sowell
-----------------------------------
A thin-skinned Mod that deletes rates of himself that he doesn't like.
-----------------------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
Show me some evidence of convincing fake precious metals.
http://bullion.nwtmint.com/
They would not be like anything put out by a recognized mint.
The rounds (non government coin) or bars are made of the precious metal. Again, I am not talking about coin collecting. I am referring to free market money.
If it were easy to fake the qualities that these metals display then the metals would not be recognized as having lasting value.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/29/09 10:10 AM)
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 20,721
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11344586 - 10/29/09 10:09 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
I mean, shells, WTF?!?
I weep for you.
Hopefully your ability to recognize fake money is better than your ability to recognize satire.
--------------------
“In politics, few talents are as richly rewarded as the ability to convince parasites that they are victims. Welfare states on both sides of the Atlantic have discovered that largesse to losers does not reduce their hostility to society, but only increases it. Far from producing gratitude, generosity is seen as an admission of guilt, and the reparations as inadequate compensation for injustices – leading to worsening behavior by the recipients.
Thomas Sowell
-----------------------------------
A thin-skinned Mod that deletes rates of himself that he doesn't like.
-----------------------------------
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 20,721
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11344595 - 10/29/09 10:11 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Show me some evidence of convincing fake precious metals.
http://bullion.nwtmint.com/
They would not be like anything put out by a recognized mint.
The rounds (non government coin) or bars are made of the precious metal. Again, I am not talking about coin collecting. I am referring to free market money.
Again, I weep.
If there is sufficient profit to be made counterfeiting coins, be they collectible or free market money, someone will do it.
--------------------
“In politics, few talents are as richly rewarded as the ability to convince parasites that they are victims. Welfare states on both sides of the Atlantic have discovered that largesse to losers does not reduce their hostility to society, but only increases it. Far from producing gratitude, generosity is seen as an admission of guilt, and the reparations as inadequate compensation for injustices – leading to worsening behavior by the recipients.
Thomas Sowell
-----------------------------------
A thin-skinned Mod that deletes rates of himself that he doesn't like.
-----------------------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
I mean, shells, WTF?!?
I weep for you.
Hopefully your ability to recognize fake money is better than your ability to recognize satire.
It is good that you do not support monopoly money.
Government control of the money supply is a dangerous thing that has historically led to tyranny.
I do not make light of this matter friend.
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 20,721
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11344618 - 10/29/09 10:17 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
You must be the life of any party you attend.
--------------------
“In politics, few talents are as richly rewarded as the ability to convince parasites that they are victims. Welfare states on both sides of the Atlantic have discovered that largesse to losers does not reduce their hostility to society, but only increases it. Far from producing gratitude, generosity is seen as an admission of guilt, and the reparations as inadequate compensation for injustices – leading to worsening behavior by the recipients.
Thomas Sowell
-----------------------------------
A thin-skinned Mod that deletes rates of himself that he doesn't like.
-----------------------------------
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,162
Loc: [life]now[/life]
Last seen: 6 months, 12 days
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11344648 - 10/29/09 10:24 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Government monopolizing the money supply is a statist reactionary viewpoint.
Not really.
Is government monopolizing the use of military force a statist viewpoint?
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Redstorm]
#11344684 - 10/29/09 10:30 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
It is reactionary because that is precisely what kings and emperors did.
It is statist because there is no good reason why government should have control of the money supply.
America came into being because of issues like monetary policy. Recall the link to Thomas Paine that I posted.
That is why I call those who support monopoly money "redcoats", as it is the most fitting historical example that comes to mind.
When government is the only entity that has weapons then yes it is statist. See Nazi Germany.
Pre-emptive strike doctrine is eerily similar to Hitler's blitzkrieg...
Fighting undeclared wars is certainly unconstitutional.
Armies are fine when they are only concerned with defense, not policing the world.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/29/09 10:36 AM)
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,162
Loc: [life]now[/life]
Last seen: 6 months, 12 days
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11344743 - 10/29/09 10:43 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Then why did the revolutionaries explicitly grant to ability to coin money only to the federal government?
That doesn't sound very Red Coat-ish to me?
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11345175 - 10/29/09 12:03 PM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
You need to get a clue.
I don't know about you but I haven't seen any counterfeit one ounce platinum or gold coins flooding the market.
That's because the fucking metal to make the coins cost the same as the denomination of the coin. What is wrong with you? The aren't wampum, they are a commodity. Holy fucking shit this is one of the all time stupid arguments. Next you'll be proposing that we must actually carry the bacon when we purchase hog belly futures. Quote:
You need to understand that when I talk about counterfeiting I am referring chiefly to "legal" counterfeiting.
Then why are being such a daft loon and whinging about coins being less counterfeitable than paper money?Quote:
The amount of counterfeiting that goes on illegally with paper or metal isn't even worth mentioning compared to legal counterfeiting.
Now we have a new Mr. Al definition for the O.E.D. I must alert the lexicographers.Quote:
It is about utilizing mediums of exchange that do not destroy the fruit of one's labor.
The medium of exchange is not the problem. Confiscatory taxes, insane government borrowing and wealth redistribution are. If you blame the medium of exchange you expose yourself as, well, a loon. Like Dr. Paul has on numerous occasions.Quote:
It is about asserting the truth that government is inferior to the individual.
Amen. So lets work on what is actually the problem, which is social engineering by government, and stop getting bogged down in a idiot's lament about paper currency.Quote:
http://rg.ancients.info/guide/counterfeits.html
W.T.F. I am not talking about old fucking coins that people collect. I am talking about precious metals used as a medium of exchange.
Those are precious metals.
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Show me a tek on counterfeiting PMs.
coins are being counterfeited, it's fairly common in the antique coin
market, I've seen several at a friends pawn shop
http://rg.ancients.info/guide/counterfeits.html
True enough but I'm guessing he means large scale as opposed to select pieces.
consider the time it takes to produce the striking dies to counterfeit
any coinage, wouldnt it make more sense to mass produce, if platinum is
going for $1300/oz and the maples are selling for $1400, the profit
margin is much lower than with paper money but that's because of the raw
materials, it wouldnt taee much to sandwich a slug and increase that
margin, in all honesty, modern coins would be less suspect than the
antiques because dealers generally look for the fakes, they simply test
for precious metals on the modern ones... sometimes
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11347536 - 10/29/09 06:14 PM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Show me some evidence of convincing fake precious metals.
never heard of erzats coins?
http://www.canada.com/news/arrested+Maple+Leaf+coin+scam/2051789/story.html
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11350430 - 10/30/09 06:52 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
http://www.canada.com/news/arrested+Maple+Leaf+coin+scam/2051789/story.htm
but when the jeweller questioned the authenticity of the 99 other coins delivered by the pair, one of the suspects "pulled out a black handgun and demanded the cash,"
People catch on to ILLEGAL counterfeiting pretty quickly.
Again, the important thing to consider when comparing paper fiat with free market metal is that the LEGAL COUNTERFEITING OCCURS ON AN UNIMAGINABLY LARGER SCALE THAN THE ILLEGAL COUNTERFEITING.
I am talking about what actually causes systematic damage to a nation's economy. The government does not have the means to "print up" or otherwise create new precious metals.
Stable mediums of exchange would enable people to keep the fruit of their labor and their freedom.
Government paper accomplishes the exact opposite.
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Redstorm]
#11350435 - 10/30/09 06:55 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
There were not enough private mints to take care of that at the time. Today it is a different story in that regard.
Recall Jefferson: "Central banks are more dangerous than standing armies..."
http://www.phnet.fi/public/mamaa1/jefferson.htm
The central bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the Principles and form of our Constitution. I am an Enemy to all banks discounting bills or notes for anything but Coin. If the American People allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the People of all their Property until their Children will wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered.
Every one of you that attempt to debate with me on sound money would do well to look at the above quote and our present day lives before you begin blabbering like a mindless mob again.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/30/09 07:11 AM)
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11350447 - 10/30/09 07:03 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
You don't understand that the ability for government to grow beyond it's means and thus need to tax the shit out of people is linked to their control of the money supply.
In an economy with competing mediums of exchange (no legal tender laws) government would not be able to inflate their fiat very much because competition would drive the worthless money out of the market. They would have serious difficulty instituting new taxes when the economy is using various competing mediums of exchanges . It would be extremely difficult to tax the fuck out of people. You seem to want to make it easy for them and then complain about it.
What the fuck do you think causes economic cycles?!? It is the influx of new money. Of course the medium of exchange IS THE ISSUE WHEN THE GOVERNMENT HAS A MONOPOLY ON THE LEGAL TENDER.
You don't address legal tender because you would look like a fool.
There is no rational argument for government possessing
a monopoly on legal tender.
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,162
Loc: [life]now[/life]
Last seen: 6 months, 12 days
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11350510 - 10/30/09 07:24 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
There were not enough private mints to take care of that at the time. Today it is a different story in that regard.
Then the Constitution should be amended. Otherwise, it is completely unconstitutional.
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Redstorm]
#11350541 - 10/30/09 07:33 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Redstorm said:
Quote:
There were not enough private mints to take care of that at the time. Today it is a different story in that regard.
Then the Constitution should be amended. Otherwise, it is completely unconstitutional.
Congress and Woodrow Wilson (who was funded by the federal reserves founders) fucked up when they allowed the federal reserve to take over the money supply.
The money being used today is unconstitutional.
At this point the most realistic solution to this mess is for communities to come up with their own local mediums of exchange after the dollar's demise. Local communities would coordinate with each other to arrive at more widely accepted mediums-of-exchange.
Tobacco, alcohol, drugs, bullets, and precious metals could help local communities work things out after the crash...
The best thing about an economic meltdown is that I think it would mean people "losing faith" in government...
|
whrsthespirit
Stranger
Registered: 08/16/09
Posts: 103
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
|
|
Bill might've been getting some head in his spare time and got caught. It seems to me though that he's done a far cry better than any of the other presidents in my 30 years. Judge him for his work not his immoral mistakes!!
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
|
He still bombed the shit out of foreign countries and failed to kill Bin Laden when he had the chance.
None of his actions created real prosperity.
The housing boom made things look like we were doing well. It was not actually based on production.
I think every president since J.F.K. has been either knowingly or unknowingly (Id est: Reagan) a puppet.
He did not need to lie under oath. It is not a federal crime to commit adultery. That spineless wuss had the unmitigated audacity to say "I didn't inhale". He is a weasel.
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,162
Loc: [life]now[/life]
Last seen: 6 months, 12 days
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11350888 - 10/30/09 09:04 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
At this point the most realistic solution to this mess is for communities to come up with their own local mediums of exchange after the dollar's demise.
Like I said, this is unconstitutional. A change would have to be made for it to pass muster.
Just because you think something is a good idea doesn't make it possible within the framework of the US governmental system.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11351067 - 10/30/09 09:46 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
You don't understand that the ability for government to grow beyond it's means and thus need to tax the shit out of people is linked to their control of the money supply.
Correct. I don't understand that because it is bullshit. They conduct their confiscations in the bold light of day without any need to resort to some backroom secretive currency manipulation. I'm not going to look it up again but I do believe inflation has been quite stable for over two decades. I have no problem with that. The problem with government is not their control of the value money supply. It is their control of too much money, period. They can control and confiscate gold lumps just as easily as electronic dollar records.Quote:
In an economy with competing mediums of exchange (no legal tender laws) government would not be able to inflate their fiat very much because competition would drive the worthless money out of the market. They would have serious difficulty instituting new taxes when the economy is using various competing mediums of exchanges . It would be extremely difficult to tax the fuck out of people. You seem to want to make it easy for them and then complain about it.
Because it isn't the form of the currency that is the problem, nor is it a problem with a lack of medium competition. If you want to buy bread with a pork belly, go ahead. Just how big would a gold penny be, anyway and how many could dance on the head of a pin? If the currency was some competing form how would that stop themn from confiscating it in taxes? Answer for tyros: It wouldn't. Not even a little bit. Irrelevant lunatic fringe whinging.Quote:
What the fuck do you think causes economic cycles?!? It is the influx of new money. Of course the medium of exchange IS THE ISSUE WHEN THE GOVERNMENT HAS A MONOPOLY ON THE LEGAL TENDER.
This again.  Business cycles have existed since long before there was a fed or government monopoly on the currency. That fact alone exposes your position as complete and utter nonsense.Quote:
You don't address legal tender because you would look like a fool.
I have addressed it and it is not I who looks like a fool.Quote:
There is no rational argument for government possessing
a monopoly on legal tender.
What other entity would you propose?
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Redstorm]
#11351075 - 10/30/09 09:48 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Redstorm said:
Quote:
At this point the most realistic solution to this mess is for communities to come up with their own local mediums of exchange after the dollar's demise.
Like I said, this is unconstitutional. A change would have to be made for it to pass muster.
Just because you think something is a good idea doesn't make it possible within the framework of the US governmental system.
In a hyperinflation scenario, I don't think anyone will give a fuck what the government tells them they should use for money.
Like I said before, the federal reserve monopoly money is unconstitutional and is what got us into this mess.
I'm just taking a look at how people solve the issue of indirect-exchange in an economy where the monopoly money has completely failed.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11351089 - 10/30/09 09:53 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Quote:
Redstorm said:
Quote:
At this point the most realistic solution to this mess is for communities to come up with their own local mediums of exchange after the dollar's demise.
Like I said, this is unconstitutional. A change would have to be made for it to pass muster.
Just because you think something is a good idea doesn't make it possible within the framework of the US governmental system.
In a hyperinflation scenario, I don't think anyone will give a fuck what the government tells them they should use for money.
No? People kept using dollars in the seventies. Or wasn't that hyper enough for ya? Quote:
Like I said before, the federal reserve monopoly money is unconstitutional and is what got us into this mess.
You said it but it was wrong. I even directed your attention to the clause that says it is constitutional so stop with the bullshit already.Quote:
I'm just taking a look at how people solve the issue of indirect-exchange in an economy where the monopoly money has completely failed.
It hasn't failed.
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11351094 - 10/30/09 09:55 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Horseshit zap. Shenanigans like the "stimulus" would not be possible without monopoly money.
THERE IS NO FUCKING COMPETITION IN THE MEDIUM-OF-EXCHANGE BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT HAS A MONOPOLY ON LEGAL TENDER.
You fail to address this because you can not do so without looking like a fool. You have not addressed this. You do not have a rational argument for a monopoly on the money supply because it does not exist. Government cheerleader.
Business cycles existed before the federal reserve. Fractional reserve banking did too. Fractional reserve banking does increase the money supply and results in the business cycle. The central bank is what allows the fractional reserve system to be propped up to the point where the medium of exchange collapses.
I don't propose a fucking "entity" that controls the money supply you insufferable buffoon.
What part of "I support free market economics" do you not understand?
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11351103 - 10/30/09 09:57 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
It was the job of Congress to coin money.
That does not mean hand over the money supply to a central bank.
Government monopoly money has a long history of failure.
Edited by Mr.Al (10/30/09 09:58 AM)
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11351122 - 10/30/09 10:04 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Horseshit zap. Shenanigans like the "stimulus" would not be possible without monopoly money.
More bullshit. Why not? The currency could be horse turds and the government would still borrow it and take it. IT DOESN'T FUCKING MATTER.Quote:
THERE IS NO FUCKING COMPETITION IN THE MEDIUM-OF-EXCHANGE BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT HAS A MONOPOLY ON LEGAL TENDER.
SO WHAT? Use fucking Euros, then, or pounds or yen. IT DOESN"T FUCKING MATTER.Quote:
You fail to address this because you can not do so without looking like a fool. You have not addressed this. You do not have a rational argument for a monopoly on the money supply because it does not exist. Government cheerleader.
I have addressed it several times. It doesn't matter what the medium of exchange is. They can spend it borrow and tax it NO MATTER WHAT IT IS.Quote:
Business cycles existed before the federal reserve. Fractional reserve banking did too. Fractional reserve banking does increase the money supply and results in the business cycle. The central bank is what allows the fractional reserve system to be propped up to the point where the medium of exchange collapses.
The medium of exchange hasn't collapsed. You have zero evidence to back your shit up, just parroted nonsense from a fringe nutcase. Business cycles existed before fractional reserve banking too.Quote:
I don't propose a fucking "entity" that controls the money supply you insufferable buffoon.
What part of "I support free market economics" do you not understand?
So what are you going to use for a medium of exchange and why do you think it is free from manipulation? You support nutcase economics. Even if you ended the government monopoly they would still tax, spend, borrow, manipulate. How about silver? Does the name Nelson Bunker Hunt ring a bell? What would make gold immune from that? How big is a gold penny?
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11351130 - 10/30/09 10:06 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
It was the job of Congress to coin money.
That does not mean hand over the money supply to a central bank.
Government monopoly money has a long history of failure.
It said "regulate the currency", Al, not just "coin money". You are being disingenuous. And it doesn't have a long history of failure in this country. In fact, it has NO history of failure in this country, unlike certain wildcat currency from long ago.
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11351146 - 10/30/09 10:11 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
It was the job of Congress to coin money.
That does not mean hand over the money supply to a central bank.
Government monopoly money has a long history of failure.
It said "regulate the currency", Al, not just "coin money". You are being disingenuous. And it doesn't have a long history of failure in this country. In fact, it has NO history of failure in this country, unlike certain wildcat currency from long ago.
http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A1Sec8.html
Article 1 - The Legislative Branch
Section 8 - Powers of Congress
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures
You speak of "wildcat currency". Yes those were fractional reserve banks and they failed almost as fast as they popped up. The big difference today is that there is a monopoly currency propped up by a central bank.
Government monopoly money failure goes way back...
http://mises.org/story/3498
Edited by Mr.Al (10/30/09 10:12 AM)
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11351157 - 10/30/09 10:14 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
regulate the Value thereof
I do believe that generations of Supreme Courts have upheld my interpretation and laughed in amusement at yours.
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11351236 - 10/30/09 10:34 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Only because of the influence that the federal reserve has.
The founders of this country would certainly not agree with what the supreme court had to say.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11351765 - 10/30/09 11:53 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Really? Are you channeling now? Like I said, Alexander Hamilton was also a founding Father. Are you contending that the Federal reserve got to the Supreme Court? Here we go with the hats.
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11358380 - 10/31/09 02:45 PM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
http://www.canada.com/news/arrested+Maple+Leaf+coin+scam/2051789/story.htm
but when the jeweller questioned the authenticity of the 99 other coins delivered by the pair, one of the suspects "pulled out a black handgun and demanded the cash,"
"Jewellers who were duped ended up with a shipment of ersatz coins costing up to $100,000"
meaning that some people dealing in gold were tricked by these fake gold
coins while others were not and subsequently robbed at gun point,
suggesting the use of gold as a currency today there's hundreds of ways
to get one over on the general public who will be using the coinage
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11361524 - 11/01/09 08:00 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Really? Are you channeling now? Like I said, Alexander Hamilton was also a founding Father. Are you contending that the Federal reserve got to the Supreme Court? Here we go with the hats.
You are a moron if you think that having a monopoly over the money supply of the most powerful nation on Earth does not give it a great deal of influence.
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11361535 - 11/01/09 08:04 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
http://www.canada.com/news/arrested+Maple+Leaf+coin+scam/2051789/story.htm
but when the jeweller questioned the authenticity of the 99 other coins delivered by the pair, one of the suspects "pulled out a black handgun and demanded the cash,"
"Jewellers who were duped ended up with a shipment of ersatz coins costing up to $100,000"
meaning that some people dealing in gold were tricked by these fake gold
coins while others were not and subsequently robbed at gun point,
suggesting the use of gold as a currency today there's hundreds of ways
to get one over on the general public who will be using the coinage
AGAIN YOU MUST LOOK AT THE FACT THAT LEGAL COUNTERFEITING IS WHAT DAMAGES THE ECONOMY.
Government would have a very hard time devaluing precious metals.
Realize that counterfeiting is deeply immoral and that government has a "legal" monopoly on it.
The Law is above the State.
The State is not above the Law.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11363265 - 11/01/09 01:58 PM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Really? Are you channeling now? Like I said, Alexander Hamilton was also a founding Father. Are you contending that the Federal reserve got to the Supreme Court? Here we go with the hats.
You are a moron if you think that having a monopoly over the money supply of the most powerful nation on Earth does not give it a great deal of influence.the Federal Reserve System is going to go away or that it causes business cycles or is unconstitutional.
Really, just stop drinking the Ron Paul Kool-aid. It is thin and devoid of nutritive value.
--------------------
|
ant61
Registered: 10/26/03
Posts: 1,144
Loc: colorado
Last seen: 2 hours, 14 minutes
|
|
unbelievable how closed minded people are in this forum
|
LobsterSauce
Concrete clogs
Registered: 11/09/08
Posts: 13,137
Loc: Down the rocks
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: ant61]
#11367250 - 11/02/09 03:06 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I don't post in here but you all might enjoy this.
This little town I was in at the weekend had a statue of Bill Clinton swinging a golf club.
Apparently he enjoys playing there and the town considered it an honour
--------------------
   
"Have you ever cried while playing guitar? No? Then you've never even felt your music! YOU'RE A FOOL!".
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11370207 - 11/02/09 02:28 PM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Again zap, you can not make a rational argument for the existence of the "federal reserve".
You are not debating at all.
You are a troll with nothing intelligent to add to the discussion.
I will ask you again, why should the federal reserve have a monopoly on legal tender? What benefit to society is monopoly money?
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 152,645
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11371103 - 11/02/09 04:15 PM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
AGAIN YOU MUST LOOK AT THE FACT THAT LEGAL COUNTERFEITING IS WHAT DAMAGES THE ECONOMY.
counterfeit = imitation, the money produced by government isnt imitation, it's just worthless
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Prisoner#1]
#11371457 - 11/02/09 05:07 PM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
AGAIN YOU MUST LOOK AT THE FACT THAT LEGAL COUNTERFEITING IS WHAT DAMAGES THE ECONOMY.
counterfeit = imitation, the money produced by government isnt imitation, it's just worthless
It has the same effect on devaluing the medium of exchange.
Since this occurs on a far larger scale than "illegal" counterfeiting it is far more damaging.
The government creation of new money is just as immoral as the counterfeiting. That is why I like to refer to them both as "counterfeit", because there is no moral difference.
Edited by Mr.Al (11/02/09 05:09 PM)
|
zorbman
Be Prepared
Registered: 06/04/04
Posts: 5,475
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11372559 - 11/02/09 07:41 PM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The government creation of new money is just as immoral as the counterfeiting. That is why I like to refer to them both as "counterfeit", because there is no moral difference.
It amounts to stealing, as you know, since the government and its favored institutions receives the benefit of the injection of liquidity upstream before the dilution of purchasing power occurs downstream for the consumers. They cannot or will not raise taxes or cut spending so inflating the money supply is all they have left to deal with the massive deficits they are taking on.
Expect high inflation next year due to this unspoken policy.
--------------------
Men occasionally stumble over the truth but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened. - Winston Churchill
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zorbman]
#11375636 - 11/03/09 08:46 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
If something like a commercial real estate bailout went through I think that would be the end of the dollar.
http://emac.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2009/08/07/a-us-government-rescue-for-commercial-real-estate/
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 34,515
Last seen: 8 hours, 59 minutes
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11376259 - 11/03/09 10:27 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said:
Again zap, you can not make a rational argument for the existence of the "federal reserve".
You are not debating at all.
You are a troll with nothing intelligent to add to the discussion.
I will ask you again, why should the federal reserve have a monopoly on legal tender? What benefit to society is monopoly money?
I have made the argument over and over again.
1. It is the will of the People
2. It is fulfilling a Constitutional requirement to regulate the currency
3. It does so with relatively little interference from the politicians.
4. It does in fact flatten the peaks and valleys that are inherent in every economic system that ever existed.
And if you don't like it, OPT OUT. You don't have to use fiat currency. So don't. But stop trying to cram your shit down our throats. We don't want your crap. We find our crap to be immensely convenient.
--------------------
|
Mr.Al
Alphabet soup
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 3,518
Loc: N.S.A. D.C.
Last seen: 28 days, 1 hour
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: zappaisgod]
#11382432 - 11/04/09 08:25 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Again, the Congress handed over the money supply to a group of bankers that funded Woodrow Wilson's presidential campaign.
The present system is unconstitutional.
Constitutional money was backed. It was not issued by a private central bank.
It is asinine to say that the fed has regulated the business cycles when you look at the Great Depression and the current situation we are in now.
Central economic planners make things worse. Contrast the decade long Great Depression to the one year depression of 1920. The difference? Government intervention and central planning shenanigans.
You have no damn argument for monopoly money. You don't have a leg to stand on and you are a government cheerleader.
Go buy yourself some pom-poms.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlei.html
(Article 1, Section 10 U.S. Constitution)
Section 10. No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility.
Edited by Mr.Al (11/04/09 08:31 AM)
|
zorbman
Be Prepared
Registered: 06/04/04
Posts: 5,475
|
Re: bill clinton fucking sucked [Re: Mr.Al]
#11382556 - 11/04/09 08:49 AM (2 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
It is asinine to say that the fed has regulated the business cycles when you look at the Great Depression and the current situation we are in now.
Don't forget the high inflation and unemployment of the 1970s. Nice smooth sailing, eh?
The thing people need to realize about the Federal Reserve System is:
1) It isn't Federal.
It is a partnership between government and private bankers.
2) It isn't a System.
The creators of the Fed knew the public was wary of a central bank so they designed it under the guise of 12 regional banks. In fact the New York branch runs everything and makes all important decisions. The idea of regional banks is merely a fig leaf.
3) There are no reserves.
Other than that they are completely truthful and open. 
The American people didn't sign off on this. The Federal Reserve Act was drawn up in secret by the super rich of that error era and snuck through Congress in the dead of night just before Christmas recess.
People would do well to educate themselves about this powerful institution. I think they'd be surprised what they find.
Ask yourself this question:
If the Federal Reserve is something good, something needed, why all the deception?
We don't need it. Never did.
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit 
Reply 
