Impossible! The deficit is falling as well as unemployment Obama wrecking economy
- Thread starter ChesusRice
- Start date
Your empty image is no less telling than your empty words.
And again. When you can't win on fact, resort to something else.tokenprep:
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Nope, you havnt a fucking clue and you're not listening.
So pictures with words it is... you basically asked for it.
Listening to what? Your baseless, naked, patently false claims? If you can't even defend them from attack--when it should be incredibly easy--obviously it's you who doesn't have a clue.
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
Hmmmm I wonder how subsidies come into existence........where do they get that magic money to subsidize......hmmm I wonder.........
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Yes, because without fractional reserve banking the government never has any money. Come on now.
A concept you evidently don't understand. When debt is monetized by the government in the way I previously described, there is no debt--it disappears. You're left with money offset by no obligation. That's the whole supposed evil of fiat currency, and yet you all are denying its reality, insisting that every Federal Reserve Note in existence is offset by lending with interest.
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
LMFAO oh is that finally sinking in?
The Fed keeps a balance sheet for its purchases from the Treasury, these must be paid back someday.
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
You're mentally retarded.
Who said Im even talking about dollars?
I wouldn't hold my money in dollars, like EVER.
That's a shit pyramid ready to topple over from excess QE.
Keep clinging to it tho, and wear your helmet in the bath.
Good lad, you're special, keep that quivering lower lip held high.
They don't ever have to be paid back. That's the point. That's what debt monetization is.
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
No. Technically they do and technically they are notes and that is not happenstance as you like to view it; I think lawyers are very careful of the words they use when defining things.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
I think that pretty much defines their jobs. cn
How do they technically have to be paid back? They already were, that's the point, with the money handed back to the treasury.
Again, it's silly to approach this with dictionary definitions. Banknotes used to be redeemable for something--that was the obligation. When they remove the obligation, they can't call it a banknote anymore? A banknote used to represent something of value--a payable obligation--but now the banknote is the obligation. Federal Reserve Notes don't represent debt, they represent value, just as gold certificates represent value even though they're technically redeemable debts. What is the Fed going to give you for your note? Nothing, even though it's supposedly some sort of obligation. Obviously the words have legal meaning, since the statute says "liabilities," but is that just a technical accounting matter or is it functionally meaningful?
Maybe they just kept the language in order to make people believe there was actually something valuable underlying the notes. I'm surprised the inflation squad isn't seriously positing that as a theory, since confidence in the house of cards is certainly necessary to the banking cabal's interests.
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
Hmmm dictionary definitions are silly and shouldn't matter, good comeback....sounds like something a nutty conspiracy theorist would say............
You don't get it dood, they get paid back by being able to purchase anything in the world that they want for FREE.....
a gold certificate does not represent value unless it is redeemable....the value is in what it is REDEEMABLE FOR......A silver certificate represents value to anyone that believes it can be redeemed for silver, it has no value to you or me really because we know that Legal Tender Laws have made it not redeemable in specie...that is to say the legal tender is no longer redeemable in specie lawful money.........I wouldn't buy one for silver spot, neither would you, Joe might, based on the wording of the note and thinking it is worth a silver dollar.....a gold or silver certificate can be just a fiat if there is no deposit to cover them....if you are holding a gold certificate and everyone cashes them in at once, you are playing musical chairs and some people will be fucked when the music stops.........
A note reps what is on deposit, so a fed note reps a bond.. So what's the bond rep? Money right? Does the bond rep FRN's? If it did the Treasury would simply issue FRN's on their own issuing authority...just like they do with coins.........so WHAT IS MONEY? Clearly not FRN's.
As to the 100 sitting in the Treasury from your earlier example that you claim has no obligation.......after your example, The Treasury deposits 100 somewhere in the real world and receives real goods or services for 100 that was created with no production associated with the 100....the 100 contributed NOTHING to the production of goods.....The Treasury is now able to engage in the act of trading nothing, for something....pulling goods and services out of the supply by 100.......AND inflating by 100...simultaneously.......less goods same money= price increase.....less goods and more money=relative price stays the same, this explains your steak....and why you think the bankers are the good guys.
but you argue that spending nothing for something stimulates production, creating something and facilitating wealth generation where there was none before, enabling the greatest standard of living increase in world history....no harm no foul you say obviously the averages all work out and everyone wins.....but resources(goods) have been moved away from real wealth creators that use it productively (ice cream company or sirloin company).....this new demand is artificial and is the crack I mentioned earlier. It encourages risky behavior and causes misallocations of resources that real demand from real markets would not permit. It promotes speculative markets that could not exist otherwise.....
so this new 100 increase in the money supply(inflation) set in motion the exchange of something for nothing...the real wealth creators, ya know the little guy that worked for his notes, is able to buy less because there is 100 less goods in the pool.....and he buys less with more (inflated) money, so it seems everything is the same....real incomes of wealth generators fall not because prices rise but because the money supply increased and the Government and the Fed were able to divert goods to themselves without making any contribution to production......before prices rose due to inflation no less.....the example I gave you of the one silver dollar minimum wage demonstrates this real loss in wealth and purchasing power lol
if 100 increase in money supply happens to be in line with 100 increase in goods leaving average price the same, inflation has still occurred. Fed and Gov still increased the money pool and goods have been diverted to them and all their friends at a cost of ZERO to them. The redistribution of wealth has still occurred even if average prices remain or, indeed even if production increases and average price falls.
This ponzi-scheme rely's on continuous borrowing to remain viable.
A note represents value is your argument, na nan a boo boo stick your head in doo doo.... when it clearly does not; and in fact is even defined as the opposite to anyone who cares to look at a dictionary, even a non legal or economic language dictionary such as Webster's defines it as such...
Remember speaking of 100 per barrel oil? Keeping in mind that peak production of oil was reached around the new millennium........ Let's see what happens when those notes used to be backed by something, I believe that low flat line on the left is only the pseudo gold standard......
Looks like 1700% price increase there even considering such a shabby, shameful thing as a CPI....
You don't get it dood, they get paid back by being able to purchase anything in the world that they want for FREE.....
a gold certificate does not represent value unless it is redeemable....the value is in what it is REDEEMABLE FOR......A silver certificate represents value to anyone that believes it can be redeemed for silver, it has no value to you or me really because we know that Legal Tender Laws have made it not redeemable in specie...that is to say the legal tender is no longer redeemable in specie lawful money.........I wouldn't buy one for silver spot, neither would you, Joe might, based on the wording of the note and thinking it is worth a silver dollar.....a gold or silver certificate can be just a fiat if there is no deposit to cover them....if you are holding a gold certificate and everyone cashes them in at once, you are playing musical chairs and some people will be fucked when the music stops.........
A note reps what is on deposit, so a fed note reps a bond.. So what's the bond rep? Money right? Does the bond rep FRN's? If it did the Treasury would simply issue FRN's on their own issuing authority...just like they do with coins.........so WHAT IS MONEY? Clearly not FRN's.
As to the 100 sitting in the Treasury from your earlier example that you claim has no obligation.......after your example, The Treasury deposits 100 somewhere in the real world and receives real goods or services for 100 that was created with no production associated with the 100....the 100 contributed NOTHING to the production of goods.....The Treasury is now able to engage in the act of trading nothing, for something....pulling goods and services out of the supply by 100.......AND inflating by 100...simultaneously.......less goods same money= price increase.....less goods and more money=relative price stays the same, this explains your steak....and why you think the bankers are the good guys.
but you argue that spending nothing for something stimulates production, creating something and facilitating wealth generation where there was none before, enabling the greatest standard of living increase in world history....no harm no foul you say obviously the averages all work out and everyone wins.....but resources(goods) have been moved away from real wealth creators that use it productively (ice cream company or sirloin company).....this new demand is artificial and is the crack I mentioned earlier. It encourages risky behavior and causes misallocations of resources that real demand from real markets would not permit. It promotes speculative markets that could not exist otherwise.....
so this new 100 increase in the money supply(inflation) set in motion the exchange of something for nothing...the real wealth creators, ya know the little guy that worked for his notes, is able to buy less because there is 100 less goods in the pool.....and he buys less with more (inflated) money, so it seems everything is the same....real incomes of wealth generators fall not because prices rise but because the money supply increased and the Government and the Fed were able to divert goods to themselves without making any contribution to production......before prices rose due to inflation no less.....the example I gave you of the one silver dollar minimum wage demonstrates this real loss in wealth and purchasing power lol
if 100 increase in money supply happens to be in line with 100 increase in goods leaving average price the same, inflation has still occurred. Fed and Gov still increased the money pool and goods have been diverted to them and all their friends at a cost of ZERO to them. The redistribution of wealth has still occurred even if average prices remain or, indeed even if production increases and average price falls.
This ponzi-scheme rely's on continuous borrowing to remain viable.
A note represents value is your argument, na nan a boo boo stick your head in doo doo.... when it clearly does not; and in fact is even defined as the opposite to anyone who cares to look at a dictionary, even a non legal or economic language dictionary such as Webster's defines it as such...
Remember speaking of 100 per barrel oil? Keeping in mind that peak production of oil was reached around the new millennium........ Let's see what happens when those notes used to be backed by something, I believe that low flat line on the left is only the pseudo gold standard......
Looks like 1700% price increase there even considering such a shabby, shameful thing as a CPI....
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
I have often wondered what an unfunded liability is...shouldn't you?
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
tokenprep said:
Bank notes still are redeemable.....just not for gold or silver...they are required to be by law.......if not then why leave little things like 12USC411 lying around? You can't be so arrogant as to thinking this is just on the "to do" list pending action. Like I said earlier this is still a Constitutional Republic subject to laws of the land.....incessantly repeating otherwise does not change this with out actual, lawful amendments.
twostrokenut
Well-Known Member
Lol nope! The obligation makes it a note for a dollar, a representation of a dollar......When the obligation is removed THAT is the dollar I was talking about waaaaaaay back in this thread .....I said it is defined as 1 troy oz silver and another member that actually knew what he was talking about corrected me........tokeprep said:
- NoDrama said: