RE: "We did raise taxes on some things"

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DsBound -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 3:06:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I dont get that at all, our money is backed by our full faith and credit. To have it backed by anything else is of no consequence. Gold? Can't eat gold, cant drink it, it is another form of fiat. What would backing your money with anything other than faith and goodwill and honest dealings do for anyone? It wont make more it wont make anything different. Fuckin cum stains on the carpet would be as useful as any other reserve. money is an idea, as are all goods and services, and they are backed by ideas. Anything else is hallucination. Wow! Its a future debt note... what you're saying is nothing is better than having it backed by something! Do you really think the trillions are going to get paid back on faith?? This is a whole new level... I'm speachless actually.

mnottertail -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 3:07:20 PM)
I dont know 'if a side in NY city', guess that is up to NY city, or what it is. Dont know how many starches can legally be in public school lunches, dont know how many can be there legally, there might be some rules on that if the fed is giving that money to the state, and why shouldnt there be? (but I am doubting this) There is no EPA mandated pressure in a shower head. So keep on a going till you find one.

mnottertail -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 3:10:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DsBound quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I dont get that at all, our money is backed by our full faith and credit. To have it backed by anything else is of no consequence. Gold? Can't eat gold, cant drink it, it is another form of fiat. What would backing your money with anything other than faith and goodwill and honest dealings do for anyone? It wont make more it wont make anything different. Fuckin cum stains on the carpet would be as useful as any other reserve. money is an idea, as are all goods and services, and they are backed by ideas. Anything else is hallucination. Wow! Its a future debt note... what you're saying is nothing is better than having it backed by something! Do you really think the trillions are going to get paid back on faith?? This is a whole new level... I'm speachless actually. No, dont start that shit again, unless what you are saying is you are a convicted child molester. I am saying that any backing of any money or form of trade is backed by an idea. There is not enough gold, diamonds, silver, rhodium, palladium, or even shit in this world to back the US outlays for more than a few weeks. And then there is the rest of the world. And the us or the world goes belly up, what will gold buy you? And what would the us buy gold with to back its money? Thats right, fiat, there is nothing else. So you got an idea for an idea.

DsBound -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 3:11:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I dont know 'if a side in NY city', guess that is up to NY city, or what it is. Dont know how many starches can legally be in public school lunches, dont know how many can be there legally, there might be some rules on that if the fed is giving that money to the state, and why shouldnt there be? (but I am doubting this) There is no EPA mandated pressure in a shower head. So keep on a going till you find one. The Energy Policy Act of 1992 (citation: Pub.L 102-486) Title I, Section 123, which went into effect January 1, 1994, says:"(j) Standards for Showerheads and Faucets. (1) The maximum water use allowed for any showerhead manufactured after January 1, 1994, is 2.5 gallons per minute when measured at a flowing water pressure of 80 pounds per square inch..."

mnottertail -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 3:13:58 PM)
yup, I get that, no maximum pressure, you can run that mother fucker at 2million psi if you want, no restrictions on pressure.

thompsonx -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 3:14:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DsBound Central planning presupposes that the government knows best... yes, its bad unless you prefer to be told what to eat, how to eat it and how many times you should chew before swallowing. That statement is disingenuous at best. Central planning presupposes that the central planer knows best not the government. Some times they are the same and sometimes not. Without central planning nothing is coordinated. Without central planning an airport would not work. Without central planning a military would not work. Without central planning nasa would not work. Without central planning the mafia would not work. To claim that central planning is something other than what it is, is disingenuous. I find it interesting that the number one example that people who claim "central planning is bad are the five year plans of the old soviet union. Without them russia would not have been able to defeat the germans in ww2. Without the central planning of the five year plans russia would still have been an agrarian country with virtually no industrial capacity when the germans attacked in 41. The central planning gave them not only an army but the logistical support needed to carry on a protracted war. So asside from trying to conflate "big brother" with central planning what is wrong with central planning?

DsBound -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 3:18:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: ORIGINAL: DsBound quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I dont get that at all, our money is backed by our full faith and credit. To have it backed by anything else is of no consequence. Gold? Can't eat gold, cant drink it, it is another form of fiat. What would backing your money with anything other than faith and goodwill and honest dealings do for anyone? It wont make more it wont make anything different. Fuckin cum stains on the carpet would be as useful as any other reserve. money is an idea, as are all goods and services, and they are backed by ideas. Anything else is hallucination. Wow! Its a future debt note... what you're saying is nothing is better than having it backed by something! Do you really think the trillions are going to get paid back on faith?? This is a whole new level... I'm speachless actually. No, dont start that shit again, unless what you are saying is you are a convicted child molester. I am saying that any backing of any money or form of trade is backed by an idea. There is not enough gold, diamonds, silver, rhodium, palladium, or even shit in this world to back the US outlays for more than a few weeks. And then there is the rest of the world. And the us or the world goes belly up, what will gold buy you? And what would the us buy gold with to back its money? Thats right, fiat, there is nothing else. So you got an idea for an idea. Correct... theres not enough, so what does that tell you about the value of our dollar? Why are China and Russia buying as much gold as possible? They just being kooky? You've got the fed... a private company controlling our economy and pumping out cash like its candy, but it has no value!

thompsonx -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 3:19:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail yup, I get that, no maximum pressure, you can run that mother fucker at 2million psi if you want, no restrictions on pressure. There is a maximum pressure. It is set by the water delivery service and not the epa. I am pretty sure it has to do with the max pressure of the system design.

thompsonx -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 3:21:38 PM)
Why are China and Russia buying as much gold as possible? How much have they increased their purchases in the past two years compared to the previous ten?

mnottertail -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 3:24:12 PM)
The fed is not a private company, it is an independent entity of the government like the post office. Well, we have borrowed and spent, and we could use a hell of a devalue. Russia and China are buying gold because their fiat money will look attractive with all that gold (but not backed by it, really) if the dollar looses the lingua franca for so many world commodities. But that is only an idea, after all, innit? We cant buy gold because we is skint, and have no infrastructure to dig our way out of our meager revenues.

DsBound -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 3:24:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: DsBound Central planning presupposes that the government knows best... yes, its bad unless you prefer to be told what to eat, how to eat it and how many times you should chew before swallowing. That statement is disingenuous at best. Central planning presupposes that the central planer knows best not the government. Some times they are the same and sometimes not. Without central planning nothing is coordinated. Without central planning an airport would not work. Without central planning a military would not work. Without central planning nasa would not work. Without central planning the mafia would not work. To claim that central planning is something other than what it is, is disingenuous. I find it interesting that the number one example that people who claim "central planning is bad are the five year plans of the old soviet union. Without them russia would not have been able to defeat the germans in ww2. Without the central planning of the five year plans russia would still have been an agrarian country with virtually no industrial capacity when the germans attacked in 41. The central planning gave them not only an army but the logistical support needed to carry on a protracted war. So asside from trying to conflate "big brother" with central planning what is wrong with central planning? On a local level, if its based on demand it makes sense. What I'm talking about is central planning in government where they determine what you need. They nudge you into x,y or z Based on what they want and what benefits them . Local level is based in demand... you're right and the above has validity.

mnottertail -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 3:25:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail yup, I get that, no maximum pressure, you can run that mother fucker at 2million psi if you want, no restrictions on pressure. There is a maximum pressure. It is set by the water delivery service and not the epa. I am pretty sure it has to do with the max pressure of the system design. Agreed, my max pressure is set by the airtank in my basement and where it would blowthefuckup. But not set by EPA.

DsBound -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 3:27:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail The fed is not a private company, it is an independent entity of the government like the post office. Well, we have borrowed and spent, and we could use a hell of a devalue. Russia and China are buying gold because their fiat money will look attractive with all that gold (but not backed by it, really) if the dollar looses the lingua franca for so many world commodities. But that is only an idea, after all, innit? We cant buy gold because we is skint, and have no infrastructure to dig our way out of our meager revenues. Show me that, because I believe you are dead wrong. It was created by the banks... the government let them print money but thats it. It is not part of government and even Wilson said he regretted giving control to banks, when speaking about the fed.

DsBound -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 3:30:45 PM)
If you ask me questions and I'm posting answers that I research, yet you dismiss it then I'll leave you guys to it. Unlike a lot of people, when a link or information is given I reseach it. You should do the same. I wish you guys where right because that would mean my state was more than just a franchise of DC.

thompsonx -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 3:34:15 PM)
On a local level, if its based on demand it makes sense. What I'm talking about is central planning in government where they determine what you need. They nudge you into x,y or z Based on what they want and what benefits them . Local level is based in demand... you're right and the above has validity. The level of central control during the five year plans was total. If you wanted to farm the old way you could but not with the company tractor or company seed. How does agri biz differ from the collective farms of russia.? I mean other than the profit they make. The control mechanism is exactly the same. Demand for automobiles took off when the government started building roads to support them. The demand for cross country transportation increased when the government built railroads across the continent. The govt decides something is in the best interest of the country and shit happens. Tva,hoover dam,nasa,interstate highway system. Theoretically we elect the govt to take care of shit while we are at work. If we are lucky they only steel half of our pay. Now if we could get the govt to make corp. illegal that would be a step in the right direction.

thompsonx -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 3:42:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DsBound I wish you guys where right because that would mean my state was more than just a franchise of DC. That is an interesting comparison. Consider for a moment that the nature of corporations is to garner market share to the point of monopoly. Is not the ultimate monopoly govt.? Once the govt is "the monopoly" something in the dynamic changes. Since the govt is "suppose" to reflect the will of the people. As earl butz/dan ackroid once put it so clearly... All "the people" want is: tight pussy loose shoes and a warm place to shit. All of the profit from "the corp" is now available to provide the above for the citizenry.

DomKen -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 5:27:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DsBound quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail A private organization. Exactly... its not part of the government. But libertarians are crazy for wanting our dollar backed by something besides debt... I don't get it. That's because that is not how our money is created. A fiat currency is not backed by anything by definition.

DsBound -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 5:28:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DsBound quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail A private organization. Exactly... its not part of the government. But libertarians are crazy for wanting our dollar backed by something besides debt... I don't get it. That's because that is not how our money is created. A fiat currency is not backed by anything by definition. Correct. We weren't intended to have fiat currency.

DomKen -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 5:38:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DsBound quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DsBound quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail A private organization. Exactly... its not part of the government. But libertarians are crazy for wanting our dollar backed by something besides debt... I don't get it. That's because that is not how our money is created. A fiat currency is not backed by anything by definition. Correct. We weren't intended to have fiat currency. So? We do now and it works so much better than a hard currency there should be no discussion.

DsBound -> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" (9/26/2013 5:43:54 PM)
Where do you live? Because here, in the states its not working. Our dollars value has greatly decreased, which we see in inflated prices, as an example.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875