Money as debt (please watch x 100)

Oct 2010
68,034
27,872
Colorado
#2
This video should WAKE UP THE WORLD if we all share this!!



Its not telling US anything we didnt already know......but its simplicity and unbiasedness is astounding! I Am sure if every person in the world was shown this vid,our current banking system wouldnt continue to operate the way it has been allowed to for centurys!!!



http://www.youtube.com/v/jqvKjsIxT_8



Part II: http://www.youtube.com/v/lsmbWBpnCNk


I know few will watch that, Dude. It's a simple explanation. All currency is debt.
 
Jan 2012
957
3
Fort Rucker, Alabama
#3
Dude111' timestamp='1335431414' post='397908 said:
This video should WAKE UP THE WORLD if we all share this!!



Its not telling US anything we didnt already know......but its simplicity and unbiasedness is astounding! I Am sure if every person in the world was shown this vid,our current banking system wouldnt continue to operate the way it has been allowed to for centurys!!!



http://www.youtube.com/v/jqvKjsIxT_8



Part II: http://www.youtube.com/v/lsmbWBpnCNk


I know few will watch that, Dude. It's a simple explanation. All currency is debt.


I'd love to hear the rebuttals of this logic from a Keynesian. I'm sure it would be along the lines of, "well, it's work thus far and changing it now would catastrophic so..."
 

imaginethat

Forum Staff
Oct 2010
68,034
27,872
Colorado
#4
imaginethat' timestamp='1335488820' post='398238 said:
[quote name='Dude111' timestamp='1335431414' post='397908']

This video should WAKE UP THE WORLD if we all share this!!



Its not telling US anything we didnt already know......but its simplicity and unbiasedness is astounding! I Am sure if every person in the world was shown this vid,our current banking system wouldnt continue to operate the way it has been allowed to for centurys!!!



http://www.youtube.com/v/jqvKjsIxT_8



Part II: http://www.youtube.com/v/lsmbWBpnCNk


I know few will watch that, Dude. It's a simple explanation. All currency is debt.


I'd love to hear the rebuttals of this logic from a Keynesian. I'm sure it would be along the lines of, "well, it's work thus far and changing it now would catastrophic so..."

[/quote]



Here's the deal. Of the few Keynesians that would even begin watching it, most would stop watching the minute their Keynesian ideals were challenged. Keynesians religiously believe in the "good" of fiat money, inflation, debt, and central banks.



The universal bondage to banks and bankers has happened so incrementally, few really have noticed, but the fact is: all fiat money represents debt.
 

Fayt

Former Staff
Jul 2010
15,799
1,261
Not in MD
#5
What represented debt is the republicans spending over $14 trillion dollars. However, I believe we should nationalize our individual state banks or nationalize the Federal Reserve.
 
Jan 2012
957
3
Fort Rucker, Alabama
#6
It amazes me still that even with damning evidence that both sides of the aisle are completely corrupt one has to place sole blame on "them". US government printing it's own money to pay back debt goes against the powers that be who control the politicians. If voter fraud and politicians being bought out was not an issue we could just elect those who wouldn't be controlled. However, I see the whole house of cards tumbling before any changes are made.
 

Fayt

Former Staff
Jul 2010
15,799
1,261
Not in MD
#7
It amazes me still that even with damning evidence that both sides of the aisle are completely corrupt one has to place sole blame on "them". US government printing it's own money to pay back debt goes against the powers that be who control the politicians. If voter fraud and politicians being bought out was not an issue we could just elect those who wouldn't be controlled. However, I see the whole house of cards tumbling before any changes are made.


Hey I'm just stating the facts, facts you hate to hear. If this was the other way around and it was the democrats who spent over $14 trillion dollars and growing, you wouldn't hesitate to point your fingers at us. Matter of fact again, I believe you were one of the ones who were going around saying how Obama tripled or quadrupled the debt. But ones us libs came around and set you straight, 'OHHHH IT'S BOTH PARTIES FAULTS', which is still a lie.



You don't see any progress happening in this country for 2 main reasons. 1, the republicans are successful at blocking almost everything Obama want done that will turn this country around and 2, the Supreme Court giving more power to corporations and ruling that money equals speech.



I've explained to you before, I rather raise taxes to stimulate this country but if we have to borrow (even if our debt is $100 trillion dollars) the benefit will out weight the negative factors in the long run. Put people back to work will enable more tax revenue to pay down the debt several times over over and over again.
 
Jan 2012
957
3
Fort Rucker, Alabama
#8
Danjb25' timestamp='1336417524' post='400096 said:
It amazes me still that even with damning evidence that both sides of the aisle are completely corrupt one has to place sole blame on "them". US government printing it's own money to pay back debt goes against the powers that be who control the politicians. If voter fraud and politicians being bought out was not an issue we could just elect those who wouldn't be controlled. However, I see the whole house of cards tumbling before any changes are made.


Hey I'm just stating the facts, facts you hate to hear. If this was the other way around and it was the democrats who spent over $14 trillion dollars and growing, you wouldn't hesitate to point your fingers at us. Matter of fact again, I believe you were one of the ones who were going around saying how Obama tripled or quadrupled the debt. But ones us libs came around and set you straight, 'OHHHH IT'S BOTH PARTIES FAULTS', which is still a lie.



You don't see any progress happening in this country for 2 main reasons. 1, the republicans are successful at blocking almost everything Obama want done that will turn this country around and 2, the Supreme Court giving more power to corporations and ruling that money equals speech.



I've explained to you before, I rather raise taxes to stimulate this country but if we have to borrow (even if our debt is $100 trillion dollars) the benefit will out weight the negative factors in the long run. Put people back to work will enable more tax revenue to pay down the debt several times over over and over again.


If you viewed the movies, explain to me then how you would pay for fiat money lent at interest? How is that advantageous to our economy? You cannot ignore the insurmountable debt we already have, Europe tired to ignore it, how is the Eurozone fairing? You love to label fault. FINE, only for the sake of argument, it's all the republicans fault that the FED has made us their slaves based in debt out of a fiat currency. What now? what's your silver bullet to fix it. How on earth can keynesian economics save a broken keynesian economy? Are you in favor of ractional reserve banking? Are you in favor of any bank anywhere creating currency out of nothing that solely based on debt? Are you in favor of supplying our nation with currency that is borrowed on interest. Usury is a pervertion of economies that does nothing but indebt the entire system to the banks. Did you even watch the video?
 
Jan 2012
957
3
Fort Rucker, Alabama
#9
It is absolutely amazing that you're answer to a debt problem is trillions more debt, at interest no less, how can you even claim to be a economist? Washed up is a very nice label you gave yourself, because your idea of economics is beyond irrational.
 

Fayt

Former Staff
Jul 2010
15,799
1,261
Not in MD
#10
Fayt' timestamp='1336425236' post='400110 said:
[quote name='Danjb25' timestamp='1336417524' post='400096']

It amazes me still that even with damning evidence that both sides of the aisle are completely corrupt one has to place sole blame on "them". US government printing it's own money to pay back debt goes against the powers that be who control the politicians. If voter fraud and politicians being bought out was not an issue we could just elect those who wouldn't be controlled. However, I see the whole house of cards tumbling before any changes are made.


Hey I'm just stating the facts, facts you hate to hear. If this was the other way around and it was the democrats who spent over $14 trillion dollars and growing, you wouldn't hesitate to point your fingers at us. Matter of fact again, I believe you were one of the ones who were going around saying how Obama tripled or quadrupled the debt. But ones us libs came around and set you straight, 'OHHHH IT'S BOTH PARTIES FAULTS', which is still a lie.



You don't see any progress happening in this country for 2 main reasons. 1, the republicans are successful at blocking almost everything Obama want done that will turn this country around and 2, the Supreme Court giving more power to corporations and ruling that money equals speech.



I've explained to you before, I rather raise taxes to stimulate this country but if we have to borrow (even if our debt is $100 trillion dollars) the benefit will out weight the negative factors in the long run. Put people back to work will enable more tax revenue to pay down the debt several times over over and over again.


If you viewed the movies, explain to me then how you would pay for fiat money lent at interest? How is that advantageous to our economy? You cannot ignore the insurmountable debt we already have, Europe tired to ignore it, how is the Eurozone fairing? You love to label fault. FINE, only for the sake of argument, it's all the republicans fault that the FED has made us their slaves based in debt out of a fiat currency. What now? what's your silver bullet to fix it. How on earth can keynesian economics save a broken keynesian economy? Are you in favor of ractional reserve banking? Are you in favor of any bank anywhere creating currency out of nothing that solely based on debt? Are you in favor of supplying our nation with currency that is borrowed on interest. Usury is a pervertion of economies that does nothing but indebt the entire system to the banks. Did you even watch the video?

[/quote]



Have you even read my post #5? I wrote that we should nationalize our individual state banks or the Fed. The other truth is that we don't have a debt crisis in this country Dan, we have a demand crisis. Demand being not enough money circulating through the economy due to the lack of money in people's pockets (aka wages). If there were a real debt crisis in the U.S. (like there is in Greece), then we would be paying 10 20 30% interest on our bonds because no one would want them and therefore we have to offer a high interest rate. In stead our bonds are selling at about 2% interest rate. Japan have a debt of over 200% of their GDP, that's over twice of what ours is Dan. And Japan doesn't have a crisis either because their bonds are selling for a few points or paying interest. So there's no debt crisis in the U.S..



The real crisis as I pointed out before and I guess you acknowledged, is a republican crisis. If we made the draconian spending cuts that you, republicans and the libertarians advocate for, we still will have a massive debt. It wouldn't put a single dent in it. Even if we took our military spending down to zero (we're spending in the neighborhood of $600 or $700 billion dollars a year on our military) that's still not the $1.2 trillion of our annual debt. So even if you eliminated our military, eliminated our Department of Education, eliminated our Department of Energy, and other "large chunks" of the government, we will still have debt. And as I believe I've pointed out to you before, having a little debt is a good thing.



We never saw massive debt in the U.S. with the exception of serious war times like World War 2. The last year of World War 2 our annual debt was over 120% of GDP. In other words, we owed more than we made in a year in our economy. We then greatly reduced that debt in the next 5 years without cutting a single thing but rather growing our way out of it. This is because the republican Dwight Eisenhower promoted massive government spending (aka stimulus). He promoted building the national highway system, promoted building schools, promoted building hospitals, promoted building water treatment plants, sewer treatment plants and infrastructural all over this country. He continued with the work that FDR and Harry Truman had started of building dams, power stations, and power plants all over this country.



All of this stuff continued by the republican president Dwight Eisenhower and he was defending the 91% tax rate on the very very rich. This which by the way, caused the very rich to take only 30-40 times of what their workers were making in terms of pay. Then doing the Johnson administration in 1964, that top tax rate got dropped down to the 70s but the loop holes got closed up but because the tax rate was well over 50%, the CEOs still kept their money in their business and continue to grow them. Then Reagan came along and dropped that top tax rate from 70% down to 28% therefore starting the giant bubble economy. Almost the 50 years prior to that, it was the 1st time in our over 200 year history of the U.S. that we had gone more than 15 years without a major boom and then bank crash. That happened because the very very rich people didn't have a lot of money to make high risk speculative investments. That is what causes the cycle of boom and crash. So therefor Dan we went almost 50 years without a major boom or crash. Instead, we had nice study growth of about 3.3% per decade in the 1940s 50s 60s and 70s.
 

Similar Discussions