Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-11-2012, 12:09 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,101,577 times
Reputation: 9383

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cletus Awreetus-Awrightus View Post
You can if you have been given the authority by congress to create money out of nothing.

Funny how your link didn't mention that anywhere.
Since the US Government doesnt pay 6% interest rates to the Fed, where do you think the money comes from to pay the dividens?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cletus Awreetus-Awrightus View Post
Step 1: be the Federal Reserve
Thats not an answer. Are you going to validate what you say by giving me an example?

So tell me how I can buy US Treasuries, and have the same amount of money to pump into the economy
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-11-2012, 12:11 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,101,577 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwynedd1 View Post
I have come one step to believing in alien abduction because I suspect I have been abducted and placed in an alien zoo which craftily has recreated my reality. However a glitch in the system seems apparent since "pghquest" has posted a link to Ellen Brown.

Her view on credit would be much more in agreement with your opponent.
I post data to accurate information, regardless as to where it comes from.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 12:15 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,191,640 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cletus Awreetus-Awrightus View Post
Step 1: be the Federal Reserve
Step 2: create money
Step 3: loan that money you just created
Step 4: collect the interest on the loan you just made
It's too bad that in many cases they skipped step 4.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 01:10 PM
 
20,716 posts, read 19,360,295 times
Reputation: 8282
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
I post data to accurate information, regardless as to where it comes from.

That's nice. So when are you going to post something about the current bulk of the money supply being debt issued to the debt saturated middle class by banks and largely owned by the wealthy? As a little reminder, the people who actually do any work is the middle class which is to the exclusion of lumpenproles and super wealthy asset barons who can only crack open a can of scam. The ejecta of the middle class, who see no sense in working to just pay interest, are lining up to create the welfare state you claim to hate.

The central idea of her book is to use public credit as a replacement for the bulk of our money supply. She particularly prefers credit in the form of state charted banks being the principle form of state financing which will also serve as the money supply. I may shiver at her solution, but at least she knows what the problem is. Why don't you, seeing as she is now your favorite source on the Federal Reserve?

All the liquidity of our economic system has been mortgage debt for the last 30 years. Yeah, one more ply of the same old tissue will finally fix this asinine system ...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 01:53 PM
 
531 posts, read 501,538 times
Reputation: 488
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Even the US Treasury Office confirms there was no surplus,
Just because you've read it repeatedly on Townhall and Freerepublic doesn't make it true.

Craig Steiner is defining the deficit as the increase in the national debt from one year to the next. That is factually incorrect. Debt and deficit are related but DIFFERENT things. His claim is that if there really was a budget surplus then the debt would have gone down and see,...it didn't, in fact it went up, so n'yah! Problem is: you don't calculate the budget deficit or budget surplus by looking at whether the national debt increases year to year. You calculate it on whether or not expenses exceeded revenues. Read the bold statement again. Let it sink in.

Also, every single budget deficit (or surplus) is a combination of on-budget and off-budget numbers. So, it's ridiculous to say that oh, Clinton didn't *really* have a budget surplus because he borrowed $123 billion to get his $125 billion budget surplus for 1999. And he borrowed $160 billion from the off-budget surplus to mask a $32 billion deficit in 2001. That's how the budget deficit is calculated....using both on-budget and off-budget numbers.

In Clinton's second term, the annual federal budget had more money coming in than going out. (Table 1.1) That means there was a budget surplus. Period. Take off your partisan blinders and re-join reality. We miss you.



P.S. can you post the link to the U.S. Treasury statement? I must have missed it. Unless you just meant Steiner's link to the Treasury's national debt ticker.

Last edited by John Dark; 06-11-2012 at 02:16 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 02:00 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,191,640 times
Reputation: 17209
Clinton took from the Social Security fund to create his surplus. That is, he wrote IOU's to Social Security. Never mind that it's all really just one big pot. So while the budget wasn't going in the hole, social security was.

In the end though Clinton didn't spend as recklessly as Bush and Obama.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 02:19 PM
 
20,716 posts, read 19,360,295 times
Reputation: 8282
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Clinton took from the Social Security fund to create his surplus. That is, he wrote IOU's to Social Security. Never mind that it's all really just one big pot. So while the budget wasn't going in the hole, social security was.

In the end though Clinton didn't spend as recklessly as Bush and Obama.
Again what trust fund? What credit market actually exists above da guberment at this point? There is no such thing as revenue when you are the primary issuer of credit. Its their own poker chips. They don't need their own poker chips. They need what exists in the economy.

Now had a fund been built of gold, silver, grain or donut coupons, then a hard source of credit would exist. I suppose even Mexican Pesos would help too because then we might bend leaf blowers into bed pans, assuming they honored their debt, the Mexican Peso.

The trust fund rolled into general obligations is a real time tax here and now that cannot possibly fund anything 30 year from now. The fund is the people and the economy that exists then.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 02:22 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,101,577 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Dark View Post
Just because you've read it repeatedly on Townhall and Freerepublic doesn't make it true.
I stopped here laughing at you..

Again, even the US TREASURY OFFICE confirms debt climbed every year under Clinton and there was no surplus.

Go to the US TREASURY OFFICES OWN WEBSITE, and tell me what year a surplus existed..
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Dark View Post
You calculate it on whether or not expenses exceeded revenues. Read the bold statement again. Let it sink in.
No ****.. let this sink in.. EVERY YEAR EXPENSES EXCEEDED REVENUES.. Thats why the DEBT WENT UP EVERY YEAR..
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Dark View Post
In Clinton's second term, the annual federal budget had more money coming in than going out. (Table 1.1) That means there was a budget surplus. Period. Take off your partisan blinders and re-join reality. We miss you.
LIE, thats only public debt, not counting intragovernmental debt.. I find this particularly funny since you are the one claiming others dont know the difference between debt, and deficits.. ooh the humor
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Dark View Post
P.S. can you post the link to the U.S. Treasury statement? I must have missed it. Unless you just meant Steiner's link to the Treasury's national debt ticker.
Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 1999

Sucks to be wrong, doesnt it? Maybe you can point out where the debt went down under Clinton and prove me wrong.. I'll be waiting..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 02:36 PM
 
531 posts, read 501,538 times
Reputation: 488
Let's try a metaphor:

Just because you got a bit of additional overtime in the same month that you ate out less and ended up with $86 more than you budgeted that month, doesn't mean that your $5,000 credit card balance automatically went down by the money you saved.

And if you used the difference in the balance on your credit card bills from one month to the next to figure out if you had wound up with any extra money that month, it would show that you didn't (because the balance went up). But you would have to be pretty stupid to use your credit card balance to determine if you went over or under your monthly budget.

Get it? No, of course not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 02:40 PM
 
531 posts, read 501,538 times
Reputation: 488
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
When I'm wrong, I admit it. I am not wrong.

you don't calculate the budget deficit or budget surplus by looking at whether the national debt increases year to year.


P.S. That's not a statement from the U.S. Treasury. That's a table of raw figures that were misapplied and misinterpreted.


Quote:
Maybe you can point out where the debt went down under Clinton and prove me wrong.. I'll be waiting..
I can't for the same reason I can't score touchdowns in baseball.

you don't calculate the budget deficit or budget surplus by looking at whether the national debt increases year to year.

Last edited by John Dark; 06-11-2012 at 02:52 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:00 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top