Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yeah lets just give away the "profits" and keep on socializing the loses.
Why do you even bother? You have no understanding of economics at all, and play these infantile gimmicks of manufacting any ambiguity into your straw man argument. Get lost.
I wasnt being serious, I was making fun of you for thinking we should nationalize the mortgage industry. Note the
Hell, you complain about socializing the losses and then you say something that dumb. Have you seen the recent foreclosure numbers?
Well not completely agreeing with RP isn't an issue for me. The "dupe" or "over reaction" desc seems extreme to me, however. Let's set RP aside.
I am actually unclear about some of your views though I have read what you wrote. So maybe you can articulate them w/o the superfluous stuff.
Seems you don't like debt based systems? That big changes in money supply are problematic? Not a fan of fractional reserve? The FED? You believe debt based systems are a dead end and unsustainable?
As put by J.S Mill, the two great threats to democracy are tyranny of the majority, and the low grade intelligence of the populous. Thus a complex monetary system that is a paradox in the mind of the populous, will want to pay it off and expand it at the worst possible time. Thus as a derivative of the principle ,one ought to realize such a system is inimical to democracy. It makes the populace effectively ignorant. We defaulted into a chartalist money system. So why not treat it as such for good , ill or with the intent to replace it. Few people even know what it is.
Fractional reserve lending is even worse. Without productive loans that expand the currency with the addition of widgets, its inherently inflationary. Its mostly because we have a good deal of monetary expansion supported by increasing economic rents, which is an quality of its scarcity, not as a product. In fact, the more production there is, the poorer the store of value the previous product is, so everyone rolls it into something like real estate which is a ponzi scheme of economic rent. Furthermore, the interest is compensation for well placed capital and risk. Since they just bloat asset prices and were bailed out, what risk? What well placed capital? What are we paying them for?
Quote:
If so, I agree with all of that.
That taxes are inevitable? (Not sure I agree here, though there is a strong tendency.) There are ways to eliminate taxes, though I am not entirely opposed to taxes mind you. I do think the form of tax matters though.
You are gonna pay taxes and you are gonna die too I am afraid.
I'll have to try and remember you, CDusr as someone with manners, and a brain.
As put by J.S Mill, the two great threats to democracy are tyranny of the majority, and the low grade intelligence of the populous. Thus a complex monetary system that is a paradox in the mind of the populous, will want to pay it off and expand it at the worst possible time. Thus as a derivative of the principle ,one ought to realize such a system is inimical to democracy. It makes the populace effectively ignorant. We defaulted into a chartalist money system. So why not treat it as such for good , ill or with the intent to replace it. Few people even know what it is.
Fractional reserve lending is even worse. Without productive loans that expand the currency with the addition of widgets, its inherently inflationary. Its mostly because we have a good deal of monetary expansion supported by increasing economic rents, which is an quality of its scarcity, not as a product. In fact, the more production there is, the poorer the store of value the previous product is, so everyone rolls it into something like real estate which is a ponzi scheme of economic rent. Furthermore, the interest is compensation for well placed capital and risk. Since they just bloat asset prices and were bailed out, what risk? What well placed capital? What are we paying them for?
You are gonna pay taxes and you are gonna die too I am afraid.
I'll have to try and remember you, CDusr as someone with manners, and a brain.
LOL, thanks. I think "death" is more inevitable, but still a strong tendency rather than a surety.
Depends on what you define your "identity" as. I am not a body, just borrowing one for awhile best I can tell.
Personal debt. Yes, a lot of people are still shell-shocked from 2007-08 and are spending their money on paying off debt as opposed to spending at the mall. Soon they will whip out their credit cards again and put themselves in debt again, and politicians claim credit for "fixing" the economy, but all that happened was the repetition of the same problem.
Mortgage and credit card debt are decreasing while student loan debt is increasing. I think the reasons for both should be obvious.
The OP shouldn't get all excited though because personal debt ($15.957 trillion) is still higher than the public debt ($15.786 trillion) but at the current rater they'll soon be equal.
If you liquidated the U.S. right now meaning you sold basically everything they own with maybe the exception of the food they have and the clothes on their backs each taxpayer would still owe approximately $762,000 for what the U.S. (the people) have promised to themselves.
You are basically saying self interest and collective interest are the same. See any collisions between the two when stealing cars?
Is saving good? OK. If there are 10 savers on an island, what do we call that? 10 people who refuse to do any trade with each other. Depressions is everyone saving. Debts at the micro level is a liability. At the macro layer its someone's asset. That debt might have been for fire wood in the winter which will keep someone alive. The debt of wood might have been for food to keep the one chopping wood alive.
The island argument is kind of dishonest. You cannot argue in a vacuum like that because that isn't exactly what is happening here. That debt at the macro level isn't exactly fire wood for us. That's the problem with a distorted medium like fiat money...there is no transparency when understanding where that debt is allocated.
Quote:
Why? Because credit always becomes monopolized, and you lose all the benefits of private enterprise. Private industry is always regulated by the buyer's ability to choose a competitor, not just because its private. Private monopolies are the worst of everything. The only think I might consider is Hayek's idea of market money...
I agree...I subscribe to Hayek's ideology. But the truth is....with government in the way, and an amazingly unwieldy one like we have now....we will never know what is a "good money" because we've always ceded to letting the government run the "monopoly" of issuing money. And they would never let institutions set up alternative money and exchange rates to see what would be the best medium of exchange. It's what got Lincoln killed.
You really don't know what your talking about do you? This is the problem, folks that don't understand basic economics get the wool pulled over their eyes by the idiot in the whitehouse.. if they don't vote for him because he extended their entitlement programs or now, because he's granting them amnesty they ae voting because they believe his smoke and mirriors about the economy.
blah
blah
blah
Quote:
You do realize by by passing the rules for votes he has just told the boat load of people trying to get into this country legally their efforts are a waste and to simply get into the country illegally and someday the idiot will give them amnesty.
what the hell are you talking about? this isn't monetary policy. go start your own thread.
The OP shouldn't get all excited though because personal debt ($15.957 trillion) is still higher than the public debt ($15.786 trillion) but at the current rater they'll soon be equal.
personal debt isn't the issue, it's private sector debt.
Quote:
If you liquidated the U.S. right now meaning you sold basically everything they own with maybe the exception of the food they have and the clothes on their backs each taxpayer would still owe approximately $762,000 for what the U.S. (the people) have promised to themselves.
I wasnt being serious, I was making fun of you for thinking we should nationalize the mortgage industry.
Hell, you complain about socializing the losses and then you say something that dumb. Have you seen the recent foreclosure numbers?
Insuring mortgages isnt the same as nationalizing them.. And for the record, I'm against insuring them as well, but liberal crybabies want more, even though it caused the economic collapse we're all living with.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I wasnt being serious, I was making fun of you for thinking we should nationalize the mortgage industry. Note the 
