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.
"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
- July 4, 1776
I really do not want to get into this. LOL Your right about the elephant however the reasoning for this arrangement may plainly boil down to credit worthiness and worldwide recognition of value. What I mean by this is if the US were to print funds on their own merit to support government programs and the like without backing, a value for those funds cannot be ascertained outside of the originating printers assessed worth. This of course proves problematic when the aforesaid nation then moves to purchase goods and services outside its jurisdiction. You basically get a currency with no recognized value outside of the US, kind of like confederate dollars after the Civil War.
Hmmm, I think you've been misled by the mass media.
A "Dollar bill" is not a dollar. (See: Title 12 USC Sec. 411, and the Coinage Act of 1792, et seq.)
Since 1933, the "Dollar bill" has had no par value. (House Joint Resolution 192)
Since 1935, the millions who signed up as "contributors" via FICA are human resources pledged as collateral on the public debt. (Which cannot be questioned pursuant to clause 4, 14th amendment)
A note, by law, is a promise to pay money IN THE FUTURE. If Congress did have the money back in its vaults, it would not need to borrow it.
In short, the "Big Lie" has vanquished the American people.
And you can't blame government because everyone "volunteered" according to their records.
So we want government involved in health care. After all, our government has the responsibility to look after the citizens of the country.
But when it comes to drugs...the government has no right to tell me what I can put in my body. If I want to smoke marijuana, I should be able to do so. The government shouldn't be all up in my business, right?
Oh, the irony.
While I appreciate the sentiment, I don't think I agree that government has the responsibility to look after the citizens.
Quote:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
more perfect Union
establish Justice
domestic Tranquility
common defence
general Welfare
Blessing of Liberty
While these precepts participate in the care of the citizens and the state, I take it to be more the responsibility of the citizens to care for themselves, with the assistance of good potty training.
Hmmm, I think you've been misled by the mass media.
A "Dollar bill" is not a dollar. (See: Title 12 USC Sec. 411, and the Coinage Act of 1792, et seq.)
Since 1933, the "Dollar bill" has had no par value. (House Joint Resolution 192)
Since 1935, the millions who signed up as "contributors" via FICA are human resources pledged as collateral on the public debt. (Which cannot be questioned pursuant to clause 4, 14th amendment)
A note, by law, is a promise to pay money IN THE FUTURE. If Congress did have the money back in its vaults, it would not need to borrow it.
In short, the "Big Lie" has vanquished the American people.
And you can't blame government because everyone "volunteered" according to their records.
No misleading here. The dollar’s value is based off faith. The US is particularly dependant on other nations faith in its currency as most of our debt is financed by those nations. Without faith that we will eventually repay this debt and the underlying value that other nations put in our economy our economic structure would crash as those nations would pull their money out of our bonds. Nations like Japan are less reliant on this measure as most of their bonds are purchased by their countrymen.
I cannot think of many government run agencies that are productive and cost effective. You cannot "throw" money at something and expect things to get better. The infusion of cash came at what cost? It's not just money, its money with buying power.
How does one think it's better when the quality of products was inferior and it cost more? example 19 of 20 candy bars were reduced in size by 25 percent. Wages didn't go up 25 percent to cover that. How can you say food was more available when we had rationing?
The US also saw rationing in rubber and gasoline. The quality of rubber products as well as cotton products dropped considerably.
You talk of full production. Efficiency during the War was awful. How does one expect the economy to get better when ~25 percent of the BEST part of the work force is gone? There was not a slight drop in efficiency either. How could it be? The best workers were now filled by women (this was the 1940's, most had very little experience), old men, and high school kids. Alot of the jobs were now filled with entry level people.
Sure jobs were created but at what cost? The cost to the average citizen in a nutshell - Efficiency went down, costs went up, buying power went down. Available of quality products went down. Private sector suffers.
LOL… you still ignore the fact that jobs were created. Before WWII a large percentage of Americans were living in tent settlements. How is that better than the conditions that most Americans lived in ten years later. Yes rationing cards were in existence however those very homeless Americans could now afford a roof over their heads. They were off the streets and no longer relied upon bread lines as their main provider of subsistence. Again I ask you how are bread lines and tent cities better? Yes candy bars may have been more expensive and smaller however they now had wages to afford that candy bar. They now had warm beds to sleep in. Yes the factories were filled with women, kids and older men however the rate at which factories in the US turned out war products was unprecedented at that time. On average the US produced 161,000 M1.30’s per month. This is small example and the women and children that you referred to performed this feat. Many social sciences scholars believe that the seeds for the women’s rights, and racial equality movements were sowed during this time period, stemming directly from the fact that jobs that were previously held by white men were then filled with women and persons of color.
Additionally you be smirk the efficiency of the American manufacturing sector however this ignores the fact that America had the largest and most efficient manufacturing sector of that time. That is why the Germans wanted to keep us out of the war because they knew that once we entered that we would and could out produce them. Also keep in mind that the Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto stated that “he feared that they had awakened a giant” after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Americas industrial complex was much feared by other nations during this time period, to state otherwise is ludicrous.
LOL… you still ignore the fact that jobs were created. Before WWII a large percentage of Americans were living in tent settlements. How is that better than the conditions that most Americans lived in ten years later. Yes rationing cards were in existence however those very homeless Americans could now afford a roof over their heads. They were off the streets and no longer relied upon bread lines as their main provider of subsistence. Again I ask you how are bread lines and tent cities better? Yes candy bars may have been more expensive and smaller however they now had wages to afford that candy bar. They now had warm beds to sleep in. Yes the factories were filled with women, kids and older men however the rate at which factories in the US turned out war products was unprecedented at that time. On average the US produced 161,000 M1.30’s per month. This is small example and the women and children that you referred to performed this feat. Many social sciences scholars believe that the seeds for the women’s rights, and racial equality movements were sowed during this time period, stemming directly from the fact that jobs that were previously held by white men were then filled with women and persons of color.
Additionally you be smirk the efficiency of the American manufacturing sector however this ignores the fact that America had the largest and most efficient manufacturing sector of that time. That is why the Germans wanted to keep us out of the war because they knew that once we entered that we would and could out produce them. Also keep in mind that the Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto stated that “he feared that they had awakened a giant” after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Americas industrial complex was much feared by other nations during this time period, to state otherwise is ludicrous.
Your points about womans rights and racially equality are correct but have ZERO to do with the facts the work force was no where near the efficiency when the able bodied men were in charge.
LMAO Some people refuse to get it. To continue to say the work done by the new force was efficient when the facts show otherwise is silly. Germany had a more efficient work force but was limited by resources. Next you're going to tell me the Sherman Tank was better than the Panzer Tank. Quantity over quality that's what the US had over Germany.
Yamamoto wasn't commenting about the efficiency he was commenting about the size and it's impact. Capable work force to produce things yes. Efficient no.
Really bread lines and tent cities abundant in ~1939? This wasn't 1930.
Please stop making things up.
I disagree with what you say because you cannot properly put the data that is out there in it's proper place. A country is not efficient when it takes money from the productive private sector and transfers it to the unproductive public sector. We're rehashing the same points imo. Feel free to get in the last word.
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.
LOL Your right about the elephant however the reasoning for this arrangement may plainly boil down to credit worthiness and worldwide recognition of value. What I mean by this is if the US were to print funds on their own merit to support government programs and the like without backing, a value for those funds cannot be ascertained outside of the originating printers assessed worth. This of course proves problematic when the aforesaid nation then moves to purchase goods and services outside its jurisdiction. You basically get a currency with no recognized value outside of the US, kind of like confederate dollars after the Civil War.
Quantity over quality that's what the US had over Germany. 
