RE: "We did raise taxes on some things"

Collarchat.com

Home Login Search

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things"

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: "We did raise taxes on some things"

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

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 3:06:36 PM

DsBound

Posts: 268
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

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.

(in reply to mnottertail)

Profile

Post #: 61

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 3:07:20 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

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.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to DsBound)

Profile

Post #: 62

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 3:10:42 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

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.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 9/26/2013 3:12:30 PM >

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to DsBound)

Profile

Post #: 63

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 3:11:58 PM

DsBound

Posts: 268
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

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..."

(in reply to mnottertail)

Profile

Post #: 64

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 3:13:58 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

yup, I get that, no maximum pressure, you can run that mother fucker at 2million psi if you want, no restrictions on pressure.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to DsBound)

Profile

Post #: 65

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 3:14:56 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

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?

(in reply to DsBound)

Profile

Post #: 66

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 3:18:13 PM

DsBound

Posts: 268
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

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!

(in reply to mnottertail)

Profile

Post #: 67

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 3:19:33 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

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.

(in reply to mnottertail)

Profile

Post #: 68

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 3:21:38 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

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?

(in reply to DsBound)

Profile

Post #: 69

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 3:24:12 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

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.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to DsBound)

Profile

Post #: 70

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 3:24:14 PM

DsBound

Posts: 268
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

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?

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 71

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 3:25:33 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

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.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 72

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 3:27:24 PM

DsBound

Posts: 268
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

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.

(in reply to mnottertail)

Profile

Post #: 73

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 3:30:45 PM

DsBound

Posts: 268
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

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.

(in reply to DsBound)

Profile

Post #: 74

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 3:34:15 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

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.

(in reply to DsBound)

Profile

Post #: 75

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 3:42:15 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

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.

< Message edited by thompsonx -- 9/26/2013 3:43:07 PM >

(in reply to DsBound)

Profile

Post #: 76

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 5:27:03 PM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

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.

(in reply to DsBound)

Profile

Post #: 77

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 5:28:33 PM

DsBound

Posts: 268
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

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.

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 78

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 5:38:26 PM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

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.

(in reply to DsBound)

Profile

Post #: 79

RE: "We did raise taxes on some things" - 9/26/2013 5:43:54 PM

DsBound

Posts: 268
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

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.

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 80