|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
|
Quote:
ballsalsa said: ...since Federal Reserve Notes are also backed by Treasury Bonds, it seems to me that even if SSI kept its reserves in cash, at the end of the day, that cash would still represent U.S. debt that would have to be repayed at some point by the taxpayers.
Not at all, because cash has already been collected from the taxpayer. When SSI exchanges their excess cash for Treasury Bonds, Congress spends that cash, and then will have to recollect it from the taxpayer to pay it back to SSI.
Quote:
ballsalsa said: The only real difference is that by holding the bonds instead of cash, SSI collects the interest instead of the Fed.
Treasury bond interest is just as meaningless to SSI as treasury bonds; it’s money that has to be collected from the taxpayer in the future. Sure, SSI can claim the Treasury owes it a ton money plus interest if that makes it feel better, but the money doesn’t exist today because it’s all been spent.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (02/25/16 06:20 PM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
|
Quote:
starfire_xes said:
Quote:
Webster10 said:
Quote:
starfire_xes said: I thought this thread was about BLOWHARD? 
Ted Cruz is a fucking idiot. Why do you want a fucking idiot as president?
Why would you support someone whow:
Sucks up to Big Ethanol
Tells us he will fight immigration but imports 1100 foreign workers to take american jobs
Tells everyone he doesn't know what Cruz is talking about about Trump wanting the Federal Government to keep Federal Lands on states, when Trump told Field and Stream in an interview that 'he thinks the US Government should keep all those federal lands>?>
Hes a pathological liar. Exactly what he accuses everyone else of, He hasn't really discussed much about issues in the last 3 months, he just says something outrageous and then moves on before anyone fact checks him, or calls anyone who disputes him a liar.
The Press and people are eating this shit up and don't even question it. You are being played like a violin.
One of my favorite lines: "When I want to get a rise out of people I bring up the wall"
Why dont you fact check the loud mouthed jackass?
Maybe he will do what he said, but what he says is whatever people want to hear and no one questions him. I don't trust him as far as I could throw Hillary with one arm.
For what it's worth, I agree with starfire_xes's assessment of Trump.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Eywa_devotee
Goddess Worshiper


Registered: 10/04/10
Posts: 1,088
Loc: State of Confusion, Arkan...
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
|
|
IMO this election picks of 2016 are the worst ever.
As bad as Trump is, at least he's open an honest about what he wants. Let's face it- he wants POWER and is shameless about going for it. I'm sure if he is elected, we'll certainly have the "Change you can believe in" but i don't think we'll like it! To be blunt, he is a frank psychopath. When he speaks it kind of reminds me of Adolph Hitler, though he had more brains in a evil genius sorta way. One word: SCARY!
Hillary is sneaky and underhanded. She'll tear up what's left the Constitution and burn it. She already got caught selling our soul to China, and openly committed high TREASON. Any one of us shroomerites doing what she did would get us life in the federal pen, or worse. Yet she is still campaigning. Seriously, WTF?
Is this honestly the best we can do? Good God, what is wrong with our country?
-------------------- "Love one another." "To Love is to know me." "Love is the Law, Love under Will." "In Compassion, all sorrows end." Regardless of the Master, the message is the same- Choose love and you shall live, Choose Fear and you shall die. Help bring peace to this Earth: Love one another, and serve others before yourself.
|
ballsalsa
Universally Loathed and Reviled



Registered: 03/11/15
Posts: 20,816
Loc: Foreign Lands
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
ballsalsa said: ...since Federal Reserve Notes are also backed by Treasury Bonds, it seems to me that even if SSI kept its reserves in cash, at the end of the day, that cash would still represent U.S. debt that would have to be repayed at some point by the taxpayers.
Not at all, because cash has already been collected from the taxpayer. When SSI exchanges their excess cash for Treasury Bonds, Congress spends that cash, and then will have to recollect it from the taxpayer to pay it back to SSI.
Quote:
ballsalsa said: The only real difference is that by holding the bonds instead of cash, SSI collects the interest instead of the Fed.
Treasury bond interest is just as meaningless to SSI as treasury bonds; it’s money that has to be collected from the taxpayer in the future. Sure, SSI can claim the Treasury owes it a ton money plus interest if that makes it feel better, but the money doesn’t exist today because it’s all been spent.
I get what you're saying i think, but wouldn't the same thing be true of any bond that the Treasury issued? In other words, i am failing to see the difference between the Treasury selling a bond to the Federal Reserve, then spending the cash and having to raise tax money to pay off the bond, and the Treasury selling bonds to SSI, then spending the cash and having to raise tax money to pay off the bond. The only difference i can see is the interest on the bonds, since the money that was taken in in the first place is being replaced by the same value in bonds plus interest. so in terms of taxation, it should be a wash minus the interest. what am i missing here?
--------------------
Like cannabis topics? Read my cannabis blog here
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
|
Quote:
ballsalsa said: i am failing to see the difference between the Treasury selling a bond to the Federal Reserve, then spending the cash and having to raise tax money to pay off the bond, and the Treasury selling bonds to SSI, then spending the cash and having to raise tax money to pay off the bond. The only difference i can see is the interest on the bonds, since the money that was taken in in the first place is being replaced by the same value in bonds plus interest. so in terms of taxation, it should be a wash minus the interest. what am i missing here?
Technically, the Treasury doesn't sell bonds to the Fed, it sells them to the general public (except for "special issue" bonds that are sold to the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds). But you're right in that they are similar.
The point is that if SSI kept the money in savings, it would be there for them to use in the future. But instead the money is spent by Congress and converted into new debt. So the money is no longer there anymore and it has to be raised by the taxpayer once again in the future.
In case you're wondering why the Fed owns trillions in Treasury bonds when I just said the Treasury doesn't sell them to the Fed, it's primarily because of quantitative easing, where the Fed purchases these from the banks in order to increase the money supply. That, by the way, does NOT increase the debt, because the Fed does not buy them from the Treasury, and it also uses new money for that which it creates out of thin air.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (02/26/16 12:35 AM)
|
ballsalsa
Universally Loathed and Reviled



Registered: 03/11/15
Posts: 20,816
Loc: Foreign Lands
|
|
When you say that the Federal Reserve buys the notes from banks, what kind of banks are we talking about? Also, if treasury notes are being claimed as assets to create money, doesn't that mean that these types of securities are essentially the same as cash? Both the money, and the securities represent U.S. debt do they not? If that is the case, and congress spends the "money" and issues bonds in its place, what is the difference? the cash was just a marker in place of a treasury note (or some fraction thereof) in the first place and as such will have to be paid for with interest by taxpayers anyway.
--------------------
Like cannabis topics? Read my cannabis blog here
|
Astral Pain
Strange

Registered: 11/10/14
Posts: 2,923
Loc: Chicago
|
|
Good old Whorehay Ramos crawled out of his hole.
Former Mexican President to Trump: ‘I’m not going to pay for that fucking wall’
China Warns U.S. After Trump Wins Nevada Caucus
http://freebeacon.com/politics/china-warns-u-s-after-trump-wins-nevada-caucus/
Quote:
China warned the United States on Wednesday not to adopt punitive currency policies that could disrupt U.S.-China relations after Donald Trump’s win in the Nevada caucus.
Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying told reporters in Beijing that “we are following with interest the U.S. presidential election.”
Hua was asked about China’s response to a possible Trump presidency and his announced plan to punish China for currency manipulation with a tax on Chinese goods.“Since it belongs to the domestic affair of the U.S., I am not going to make comments on specific remarks by the relevant candidate,” she said.
“But I want to stress that China and the U.S., as world’s largest developing and developed countries, shoulder major responsibilities in safeguarding world peace, stability and security and driving world development,” the spokeswoman added.
Maybe the fatass will have to pay the $4 million in back taxes ho owes.
Al Sharpton might 'get out of here' if Trump wins
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/al-sharpton-might-get-out-of-here-if-trump-wins/article/2584260
-------------------- "I don't mean to sound bitter, cold, or cruel, but I am, so that's how it comes out" -Bill Hicks-
_ _
|
fivepointer
newbie
Registered: 08/03/02
Posts: 1,428
Last seen: 7 years, 2 months
|
|
Quote:
ballsalsa said: When you say that the Federal Reserve buys the notes from banks, what kind of banks are we talking about? Also, if treasury notes are being claimed as assets to create money, doesn't that mean that these types of securities are essentially the same as cash? Both the money, and the securities represent U.S. debt do they not? If that is the case, and congress spends the "money" and issues bonds in its place, what is the difference? the cash was just a marker in place of a treasury note (or some fraction thereof) in the first place and as such will have to be paid for with interest by taxpayers anyway.
The Fed buys bills/notes/bonds from the open market. It writes a check with money it doesn't have, but it doesn't bounce, it is created. The new money enters the banking system in this way. Inter bank lending then multiplies the money, aka fractional expansion. The bills/notes/bonds eventually mature. Just as the money was created out of thin air, it then evaporates into nothingness. The Fed has stated that the QE balance sheet will not be allowed to mature but rolled over with new issues.
Nothing to stop the Treasury from issuing a trillion dollar coin and deposit it to pay for government spending.
|
hostileuniverse
Stranger



Registered: 05/14/15
Posts: 8,602
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 6 years, 7 months
|
|
Quote:
A professor of political science at Stony Brook University has forecasted that Donald Trump has a minimum 97 percent chance of winning the general election as the Republican nominee.
Professor Helmut Norpoth’s forecast presentation took place Monday evening in the SUNY Global Center in Manhattan, which was organized by the Stony Brook Alumni Association.
Norpoth created a statistical model of presidential elections that uses a candidate’s performance in their party’s primary and patterns in the electoral cycle as predictors of the presidential vote in the general election.
Donald Trump has a 97 percent chance of defeating Hillary Clinton and a 99 percent chance of defeating Bernie Sanders in the general election, according to Norpoth’s formula.
“The bottom line is that the primary model, using also the cyclical movement, makes it almost certain that Donald Trump will be the next president,” Norpoth said, “if he’s a nominee of the [Republican] party.”
Norpoth’s primary model works for every presidential election since 1912, with the notable exception of the 1960 election. These results give the model an accuracy of 96.1 percent.
Norpoth began the presentation with an introduction of the potential matchups in the general election, including a hypothetical Sanders vs. Trump general election.
“When I started out with this kind of display a few months ago, I thought it was sort of a joke.” Norpoth said referring to Trump and Sanders, as many alumni in the audience laughed. “Well, I’ll tell you right now, it ain’t a joke anymore.”
As the presentation continued, laughter turned to silence as Norpoth forecasted a 61 percent chance of a Republican win in the general election.
This forecast was made using the electoral cycle model, which studies a pattern of voting in the presidential election that makes it less likely for an incumbent party to hold the presidency after two terms in office. The model does not assume who would be the party nominees or the conditions of the country at the time.
“You think ‘This is crazy. How can anything come up with something like that?’ ” Norpoth said “But that’s exactly the kind of equation I used to predict Bill Clinton winning in ‘96, that I used to predict that George Bush would win in 2004, and, as you remember four years ago, that Obama would win in 2012.”
Norpoth then added data from the New Hampshire and South Carolina primaries to narrow down the forecast to specific candidates. As he brought up the first slide with matchup results, the silence was broken by muttering from the audience.
“Trump beats Hillary 54.7 percent to 45.3 percent [of the popular vote]. This is almost too much to believe.” Norpoth said, with a few members of the audience laughing nervously. “The probability of that [outcome] is almost complete certainty, 97 percent. It’s almost ‘Take it to the bank.’ ”
The primary model predicts a Trump victory with such certainty due to Trump’s relatively high success in the Republican primaries, Norpoth said. Clinton, in comparison, is in an essential tie with Sanders in the Democratic primaries. As a result, Sanders would also lose to Trump in a similar landslide if Sanders were to be the Democratic nominee, Norpoth said.
In contrast, Norpoth forecasted that a hypothetical presidential race with Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio on the Republican ticket would be a much closer race. The results showed Clinton with a 55 percent chance of winning the race against Cruz or Rubio with a 0.3 percent lead in the popular vote.
Norpoth’s model showed Sanders losing against Rubio or Cruz with a 0.6 percent gap in the popular vote, giving a Rubio or Cruz ticket a 60 percent chance of winning against the Vermont senator.
Norpoth added that while the non-Trump Republican ticket would be much more unlikely to win the general election due to differences in the popular vote and the electoral college vote, there is almost no chance that Trump would lose the electoral college vote with his forecasted lead in the popular vote.
“If you win by 54 percent [of the popular vote], you have a big majority in the electoral college,” Norpoth said. “Nobody who has ever gotten 54 percent has lost.”
https://www.sbstatesman.com/2016/02/23/political-science-professor-forecasts-trump-as-general-election-winner/
|
starfire_xes
I Am 'They'



Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 21,590
Loc: Dallas with all the assho...
Last seen: 7 months, 22 hours
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
starfire_xes said:
Quote:
Webster10 said:
Quote:
starfire_xes said: I thought this thread was about BLOWHARD? 
Ted Cruz is a fucking idiot. Why do you want a fucking idiot as president?
Why would you support someone whow:
Sucks up to Big Ethanol
Tells us he will fight immigration but imports 1100 foreign workers to take american jobs
Tells everyone he doesn't know what Cruz is talking about about Trump wanting the Federal Government to keep Federal Lands on states, when Trump told Field and Stream in an interview that 'he thinks the US Government should keep all those federal lands>?>
Hes a pathological liar. Exactly what he accuses everyone else of, He hasn't really discussed much about issues in the last 3 months, he just says something outrageous and then moves on before anyone fact checks him, or calls anyone who disputes him a liar.
The Press and people are eating this shit up and don't even question it. You are being played like a violin.
One of my favorite lines: "When I want to get a rise out of people I bring up the wall"
Why dont you fact check the loud mouthed jackass?
Maybe he will do what he said, but what he says is whatever people want to hear and no one questions him. I don't trust him as far as I could throw Hillary with one arm.
For what it's worth, I agree with starfire_xes's assessment of Trump. 

Did you see the debate--Rubio and Cruz fried Trump. Trump was all red-faced, and instead of Cruz and Rubio taking the BS from Trump, they pulled his own crap on him. He was completely owned and exposed as a BLOWHARD.
But he will still probably win, because its too little, too late, and people already have the Trump Fantasy planted in their minds.
|
Webster10
Up like Trump



Registered: 12/03/13
Posts: 9,966
Loc: Strawberry Fields
Last seen: 6 years, 2 months
|
|
Did you even watch the debate? Trump made those rookies look like children. The donald will be the president.
--------------------
|
Loyola10
Stranger

Registered: 02/06/16
Posts: 863
|
|
I thought trump did a good job standing his ground against rubiobit!
|
Webster10
Up like Trump



Registered: 12/03/13
Posts: 9,966
Loc: Strawberry Fields
Last seen: 6 years, 2 months
|
|
He exposed them for the inexperienced children they are. Seriously how can someone vote for people so beta when an alpha is right next to them
--------------------
|
Loyola10
Stranger

Registered: 02/06/16
Posts: 863
|
|
Quote:
Webster10 said: He exposed them for the inexperienced children they are. Seriously how can someone vote for people so beta when an alpha is right next to them
Trump gets stuff done the politicians are all talk no action. So yea maybe Rubio scored a nice soundbite but he is impotent when it comes to governing. Trump would make a fantastic ruler.
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 1 day, 1 hour
|
|
Quote:
ballsalsa said: When you say that the Federal Reserve buys the notes from banks, what kind of banks are we talking about? Also, if treasury notes are being claimed as assets to create money, doesn't that mean that these types of securities are essentially the same as cash? Both the money, and the securities represent U.S. debt do they not? If that is the case, and congress spends the "money" and issues bonds in its place, what is the difference? the cash was just a marker in place of a treasury note (or some fraction thereof) in the first place and as such will have to be paid for with interest by taxpayers anyway.
T-bonds are not assets for the government, they're are liabilities. Cash (assets) and debt (liabilities) are NOT the same thing when it comes to accounting.
|
fivepointer
newbie
Registered: 08/03/02
Posts: 1,428
Last seen: 7 years, 2 months
|
Re: Trump [Re: qman]
#22947811 - 02/26/16 09:09 AM (7 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Trump's record at business:
Trump Taj Mahal, 1991, filed for bankruptcy Trump Castle Associates, 1992, filed for bankruptcy Trump Hotel & Casino Resorts, 2004, filed for bankruptcy Trump Entertainment Resorts, 2009, filed for bankruptcy
How will he make us great again? Spy on our cell phones, take away our healthcare, destroy world trade, drive huge deficits, maybe drive the US to bankruptcy?
Who wants to look at that guy's face for 4-8 years and put up with his clownery? No sane person.
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 1 day, 1 hour
|
|
Quote:
fivepointer said: Trump's record at business:
Trump Taj Mahal, 1991, filed for bankruptcy Trump Castle Associates, 1992, filed for bankruptcy Trump Hotel & Casino Resorts, 2004, filed for bankruptcy Trump Entertainment Resorts, 2009, filed for bankruptcy
How will he make us great again? Spy on our cell phones, take away our healthcare, destroy world trade, drive huge deficits, maybe drive the US to bankruptcy?
Who wants to look at that guy's face for 4-8 years and put up with his clownery? No sane person.
News update- "world trade" doesn't work for the US worker, but Obama and Republicans don't give a fuck.
"drive the US to bankruptcy"
We have $19 trillion of debt, we are already bankrupt.
|
fivepointer
newbie
Registered: 08/03/02
Posts: 1,428
Last seen: 7 years, 2 months
|
Re: Trump [Re: qman]
#22947875 - 02/26/16 09:39 AM (7 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said:
Quote:
fivepointer said: Trump's record at business:
Trump Taj Mahal, 1991, filed for bankruptcy Trump Castle Associates, 1992, filed for bankruptcy Trump Hotel & Casino Resorts, 2004, filed for bankruptcy Trump Entertainment Resorts, 2009, filed for bankruptcy
How will he make us great again? Spy on our cell phones, take away our healthcare, destroy world trade, drive huge deficits, maybe drive the US to bankruptcy?
Who wants to look at that guy's face for 4-8 years and put up with his clownery? No sane person.
News update- "world trade" doesn't work for the US worker, but Obama and Republicans don't give a fuck.
"drive the US to bankruptcy"
We have $19 trillion of debt, we are already bankrupt.
Trump has a proven record of no giving a a shit about workers, look at all those bankrupt companies. How many thousands have been kicked to the street due to his incompetence.? Also, his Trump clothing line is made in China. Do you think a billionaire cares about workers?
His tax / trade plan will push us over the edge to full blown economic catastrophe.
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 1 day, 1 hour
|
|
Putting up tariffs and returning the jobs back home to the US will bring real economic growth back to the economy.
Did you see 4th quarter GDP today? 1% !!!! What a joke.
How does shipping Ford and GM manufacturing down to Mexico help the US worker? It fucks them over, this is basic economic sense.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
|
Quote:
ballsalsa said: When you say that the Federal Reserve buys the notes from banks, what kind of banks are we talking about? Also, if treasury notes are being claimed as assets to create money, doesn't that mean that these types of securities are essentially the same as cash? Both the money, and the securities represent U.S. debt do they not? If that is the case, and congress spends the "money" and issues bonds in its place, what is the difference? the cash was just a marker in place of a treasury note (or some fraction thereof) in the first place and as such will have to be paid for with interest by taxpayers anyway.
Remember that the Treasury gets to keep Federal Reserve profits, including interest on Treasury bonds (less nominal dividends and operating expenses). So Treasury bonds in the hands of the Fed isn't debt any more than Treasury bonds in the hands of SSI (even though it is counted as such).
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
|