That's not going to happen. Is your answer that you don't have an answer? Would a fry cook be a good person for the job?
cc: @dadika13
OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
cc: @dadika13
of course some of you cheat on the course as well, especially the ones saying it’s no big deal...golf isn’t life, sure, but the way in which he is demonstrating his persona on a course is what’s the point...i know clinton used to hit four tee balls before he counted it, so it’s not just this clown.
and it has nothing to do with the country club world...you completely missed the point of the book @bleeduncblue...but that’s par for the course with you, or in you and trump’s case, a net birdie.
and it has nothing to do with the country club world...you completely missed the point of the book @bleeduncblue...but that’s par for the course with you, or in you and trump’s case, a net birdie.
Someone who will at least challenge the Fed. Keynesian Economics isn't working.
The Fed is a sort of economic boogeyman that very few people outside of the field of economics actually understand. People like Ron Paul have made ridiculous and unfounded arguments about the Fed and now people actually believe them. There are legitimate criticisms to be made but all of the “MMT” stuff is total horseshit.
Ok, so you just have some broad characteristic of a person that will allow you to hate everyone involved and hope that no one notices you don't have an answer.
Agreed. When I see people go off on the Fed, I picture an old man yelling at the clouds.
The FED is nothing but a man-made attempt to deal with the pitfalls of fractional reserve banking. In a truly free market system, society would price interest rates with the availability of capital, but that isn't good enough for people who wish to manipulate the system by vying for artificially cheap capital.
Oh I get the point of the book: tear down Trump in any way possible. And yes, it's written to golfers, hence my "country club world" comment. Like anyone cares or is surprised that Donald Trump cheats (GASSSSPPPP) on the golf course. Idiots.
I lived on Wall St for 8 years. Don’t think this fry cook fits what he’s looking for either.
I believe his arguments are quite "founded" and are very informative as to the insidiousness of the institution. If our sovereignty was ever sacrificed, it was sacrificed when the Fed became the ones in charge.
I’m gonna have to respectfully disagree. There are zero credible economists (as far as I know) who take Ron Paul seriously. He’s a libertarian zealot that completely misrepresents the role of the federal reserve. The Fed has zero impact on our sovereignty.
If we actually abolished the Fed and went back to the gold standard then we would be at a huge disadvantage in the global market. It's an outdated idea that isn't really viable at all anymore.
I never said go back to the gold standard. We had the Fed AND the gold standard for a very long time. I never said, or even implied, a return to the gold standard.
The Fed has devalued American currency the entire time it has existed. The Fed takes treasuries from the US Treasury, sells them back to the Treasury, at a huge interest, and we get Federal Reserve Notes. Our government doesn't even own its own currency.
And, you mentioned "Credible economists?" I guess it depends on how you define or measure "credible." Keynesian economists definitely disagree with him, and any Austrian economists. I expect that. Endorsing Keynesian economics doesn't make one credible. Our currency is monetized debt. Money must be two things: a medium of exchange AND a store of value, in order for the currency to be sound. Our currency is backed by debt... it is monetized debt. And, the Fed encourages, or rather demands, fractional-reserve banking practices, which is creating money out of thin air. It is legalized theft. The 16th Amendment forced Americans to be taxed on their labor. That's making you indebted for life. Soooo... sovereignty is gone, individually and collectively.
Ron Paul’s plan was to go back to the gold standard. That’s why I mentioned it.
Inflation is an economic constant in almost every macroeconomic model. The Fed’s use of inflationary policy helps to mitigate against fluctuations in demand that can cause huge downswings in an economy. If we had more unionization then laborers would have the collective bargaining power to tie their wage growth to inflation and this wouldn’t even be a problem.
That’s now how the money supply works. The Fed sets interest rates on the money market which impacts the cost of interbank lending of excess reserves. This is the federal funds rate. They can lower the rate in an economic downturn to increase money velocity and increase economic activity. They also set reserve standards which prevent catastrophic bank runs that would collapse the entire economy. Without the Fed the big banks would overleverage themselves and jeopardize the entire economy.
I never said that endorsing Keynesian economics makes one legitimate. They are respected economists who are not necesarriky Keynesian. But Ron Paul endorses Austrian economics which has largely been discredited through econometrics and macroeconomic analysis. By credible I meant people with PhD’s that specialize in macroeconomics and money markets.
Our currency is not monetized debt. That’s not what fiat currency is. The US dollar is not backed by debt, it is backed by the federal government which declares it to have value. Given the fact that we are the most powerful nation in human history, that seems like a pretty safe bet to me.
Fractional reserve banking does not create money out of thin air. It allows banks to hold a fraction of deposit liabilities, and simultaneously provide loans to borrowers. Without the Fed, banks would still do this, except they wouldn’t be insured against bank runs, and they wouldn’t have a lender of last resort to turn to if the federal funds market couldn’t satisfy their demand.
The 16th amendment allows for federal income taxes, it doesn’t mandate them. And the entire idea that taxes are theft is silly. In exchange for paying taxes we receive a wide array of government services and protections, including a large scale military presence that drastically reduces the risk of large scale international conflicts like the ones that plagued the 20th century.
Lastly, taxes on future income don’t make me indebted for life. That’s absurd. I don’t owe the government taxes on money that I don’t make. I have no debt that I owe to the federal government. But if I want to do business in this country then taxes are part of the cost of doing that business. That’s completely different than a debt.
Ron Paul is an extreme libertarian zealot, who would destroy the US economy if he were in charge of it.
Oh, well, in that case, we're golden (no pun intended).
It's ABSOLUTELY monetized debt.
So, unless you can shit cash, you're in debt for life. Or, in jail for not paying your taxes, if you get caught.
Actually, it wasn't. His idea was to allow competing currencies. Even Ron knows that the damage the FED has done to the economy isn't fixable. Hell, if you even audited the FED at this point it would probably crash the economy.
You speak like a true indoctrinated zealot. Who are these "credible" economists? PoS corporate shills like Paul Krugman?
It’s not though.
You’re making zero sense. You don’t owe income taxes unless you’re making money. You don’t have to “shit money” to keep up with your income taxes, because they’re only being taken out of money you actually make. It’s not a debt at all.
I speak like the one person in this thread who actually has a degree in economics.
Krugman hasn’t been considered credible in a long time. Try anyone with a PhD in economics that teaches or does research. But of course you think you know more than people who have studied this stuff for decades and actually have the credentials.
This is really what it’s come to.
https://www.newsweek.com/democrat-c...a-1386538?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app
https://www.newsweek.com/democrat-c...a-1386538?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app
You're right... homeless people are rarely paying income tax. If you're earning money, then you're paying taxes. Sooo... the shitting cash comment was intended to illustrate how everyone who has a job is owing money to the government. If you poop cash, then nothing is traceable. No one does that. Or, if you're destitute and homeless, the government will leave you alone. Otherwise, a portion of your wages are always going to Uncle Sam.
I’m having a hard time understanding your reasoning. Maybe if you post what you think is better than the FR, it would be clearer. TIA.
I heard a bit from Tim Ryan on the radio this morning. I doubt anyone on this board has heard of him. He is a moderate Democrat who just joined the crowded Democratic primary race for president.
I think he'd have the best chance to beat DJT - he'd have strong appeal in states Dems need to win back, like OH PA WI MI......but I don't see how he wins in the primary. Who knows if he'll even get enough donations to get on the debate stage.
Ryan hasn't just swallowed whole the crazy leftist Kool-Aid and identity politics stances that the far left - and most of the presidential candidates have....
Green New Deal,
100% open borders
sanctuary cities
every white man is a racist / sexist evil
global warming is our biggest threat as a nation and our policies can fix it
we need to repeal second amendment
we need to remove electoral college
....instead he was talking about losing manufacturing jobs to China, and how to get them back. And how to improve health care. And how to have sensible immigration reform (acknowledging that it is a problem today).
In other words, appealing to centrists, independents, in swing states, but IMO not nearly far enough left to resonate with the activists who I believe are pretty far left in Dem party (same can be said - far right - for activists in Rep party)
Well, it's hard to understand what you mean when you always speak in generalities. All you have to know about the FED is that it's run by the big banks. It's essentially the inmates running the asylum.
However, some of your claims, like how fractional reserve banking and/or artificially low-interest rates don't expand the money supply, just aren't correct. They're spoken like someone who has bought into the rigged game, maybe because they expect to benefit on said game.
Homeless/poor people are still affected by increasing the money supply, either by rising prices or, more recently, by reduced job prospects and wages.
Yes, that's true. But, I'm referring to the irrational isolated aspect of his argument that only people who make money have to pay taxes. If you choose to not earn money, then how do you sustain yourself? That's what I was emphasizing.
So what's your suggestion to fix it?
How would the government pay for things if they didn't collect money from the people they're buying things for. Now granted, I think the government takes way too much money from the citizens and buys/builds/spends way too much on things it really doesn't need to be doing - but some spending is certainly necessary.
Day after claiming his dad was born in germany (he wasnt) trump claims the noise from wind mills causes cancer. Lol. http://hill.cm/OdRHak0
Trump didn't exactly claim that. He said "they say the noise causes cancer". Who knows who "they" are though.
He may not be factually correct, but he's morally correct
He may not be factually correct, but he's morally correct
Trump Approval at 51%...
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/prez_track_apr05
Ruh roh!
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/prez_track_apr05
Ruh roh!
Yep, you caught me. The big banks are paying me a fat check to argue with you on the Internet.
What I said was that fractional reserve banking does not create money out of thin air. It increases the available supply of money to borrowers by letting big banks exchange excess reserves which allows them to lend more money. Lending that money is a value add to the economy. Credit availability increases economic activity for consumers and business owners alike. But the Fed has regulatory control because they set the interest rates on the federal funds market. That’s not creating money “out of thin air.”
Printing dollars to pay the debt does not mean that the dollar is monetized debt. The dollar is the tool for monetizing debt. The dollar isn’t backed by that debt, it’s being used to pay it. The dollar is backed by the full confidence of the US treasury department, and there is zero incentive for anyone in the economy to undermine that confidence. This makes the dollar a safe medium of exchange and store of value in the economy. It’s value comes from the fact that you can buy things with dollars, and sell things for dollars. So that value is determined by the purchasing power. If wages are properly adjusted for inflation then this doesn’t hurt laborers and allows for the economy to expand at a steady rate without hyperinflation or excessive unemployment. Without this process, the business cycle would create catastrophic waves of unemployment everytime aggregate demand falls.
I wasn't insinuating that you were getting paid. I was insinuating that you're a slave to their corporatist propaganda.
Yep. Macroeconomics and monetary economics is corporatist propaganda. Got any more brilliant insights to share with us?
Similar threads
