Time Equals Profit for Banks

Started by Econ4Every1, December 23, 2016, 11:52:34 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Econ4Every1

Quote from: Solar on December 28, 2016, 09:40:37 AM
Are you fuckin serious?

Yes, tell me how you define "big government".

Would you agree with Google?

"government perceived as excessively interventionist and intruding into all aspects of the lives of its citizens."

Solar

#16
Quote from: Econ4Every1 on December 28, 2016, 09:50:49 PM
Yes, tell me how you define "big government".

Would you agree with Google?

"government perceived as excessively interventionist and intruding into all aspects of the lives of its citizens."
You'll do anything to avoid actual debate, won't you?
The reason for my astonishment in your inquiry is it's tantamount to asking what are my issues with child rape.
The answer should be self-evident, that is, to anyone with a modicum of understanding or common sense.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

Econ4Every1

Quote from: Solar on December 29, 2016, 07:19:41 AM
You'll do anything to avoid actual debate, won't you?
The reason for my astonishment in your inquiry is it's tantamount to asking what are my issues with child rape.
The answer should be self-evident, that is, to anyone with a modicum of understanding or common sense.

"Common sense is not so common."
― Voltaire

The question was a simple one.   When debating, it's customary to ensure that when talking about a word or a concept that people agree on what those concepts mean, so while I agree that some things should be obvious, given the radical disagreement in our positions, I don't think it's "astonishing" to assure that we're defining a group of words the same way.  Now it's ironic because you could have simply responded to my request, either time and that would be the end of it, yet you continue to obfuscate and then, project  upon me the very tactic you are employing.  How very narcissistic of you.

Now here is what strikes me as odd.

Despite the collective belief that I'm an inexperienced idiot, I came here in good faith to share some ideas and debate them with people who clearly don't agree.  That's fine.  That's one of the reasons I do it.  I want to know how people I disagree with think.  I haven't been overtly rude, though I have responded to some to some rudeness.

But here is the thing.  You believe to have the superior opinion.  That I am mistaken, why not be amicable and take some time to help me understand you point of view?  The insults, taunts, claims of disinterest, they are all consistent with people who aren't secure in their own positions.  All of this bickering and partisan name-calling and accusations of wrongdoing are signs, to anyone that understand human psychology, consistent with insecurity and anti-intellectual behavior.  You despise me because I am smart and I can't be intimidated or angered.

I hope you fellas can learn to respect that and live up to the "Christian ideal" most of you claim to value so highly.

Here are a few quotes to remind you.

https://www.openbible.info/topics/getting_along_with_others

Solar

Quote from: Econ4Every1 on December 29, 2016, 08:29:07 AM
"Common sense is not so common."
― Voltaire

The question was a simple one.   When debating, it's customary to ensure that when talking about a word or a concept that people agree on what those concepts mean, so while I agree that some things should be obvious, given the radical disagreement in our positions, I don't think it's "astonishing" to assure that we're defining a group of words the same way.  Now it's ironic because you could have simply responded to my request, either time and that would be the end of it, yet you continue to obfuscate and then, project  upon me the very tactic you are employing.  How very narcissistic of you.
Here's the problem. You don't get the fact that you're trying to debate the intricacies of a system that can't support itself under free mkt principles.

QuoteDespite the collective belief that I'm an inexperienced idiot, I came here in good faith to share some ideas and debate them with people who clearly don't agree.  That's fine.  That's one of the reasons I do it.  I want to know how people I disagree with think.  I haven't been overtly rude, though I have responded to some to some rudeness.

But here is the thing.  You believe to have the superior opinion.  That I am mistaken, why not be amicable and take some time to help me understand you point of view?  The insults, taunts, claims of disinterest, they are all consistent with people who aren't secure in their own positions.  All of this bickering and partisan name-calling and accusations of wrongdoing are signs, to anyone that understand human psychology, consistent with insecurity and anti-intellectual behavior.  You despise me because I am smart and I can't be intimidated or angered.
How much clearer can I be? You're trying to debate the efficacy of socialism/cronyism in a free mkt/Capitalistic society.
Can you see just how ludicrous that is to people that had successful careers under a system where the govt had yet to dominate?

QuoteI hope you fellas can learn to respect that and live up to the "Christian ideal" most of you claim to value so highly.

Here are a few quotes to remind you.

https://www.openbible.info/topics/getting_along_with_others
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

What the Hell? Not one person posting in Finance is a Christian as far as I know, aside from the fact that debate and religion are in no way synonymous to one another.

Now do you get why no one wants to entertain your lunacy? By doing so, validates its existence in a world that despises communism.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

Solar

Still waiting!

"There is an argument to be made for income inequality".

So what's your argument?
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

Econ4Every1

Quote from: Solar on December 29, 2016, 10:10:26 AM
Here's the problem. You don't get the fact that you're trying to debate the intricacies of a system that can't support itself under free mkt principles.

Setting aside for just one second that I haven't prescribed (advocated for) an economic system, what is it exactly that you think I'm endorsing that is inconsistent with the free market?

Quote from: Solar on December 29, 2016, 10:10:26 AMHow much clearer can I be? You're trying to debate the efficacy of socialism/cronyism in a free mkt/Capitalistic society.
Can you see just how ludicrous that is to people that had successful careers under a system where the govt had yet to dominate?
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Define "Socialism" for me, because despite your (possible) objections to the idea that it's obvious, it most certainly is not.

Now I'll do you the favor of sharing my basic understanding.

A socialist system is one where the government controls the means of production.

Do you believe that I'm endorsing (again despite the fact that I haven't actually endorsed anything) socialism as I have defined it?

Quote from: Solar on December 29, 2016, 10:10:26 AMWhat the Hell? Not one person posting in Finance is a Christian as far as I know....

Really?  Color me surprised.  I certainly didn't mean it in a derogatory sense.  There is a lot to like about Christianity.  Would you mind sharing your religion/ non-religion with us?  I'm curious.

Solar

Quote from: Econ4Every1 on December 29, 2016, 11:13:05 AM
Setting aside for just one second that I haven't prescribed (advocated for) an economic system, what is it exactly that you think I'm endorsing that is inconsistent with the free market?

Define "Socialism" for me, because despite your (possible) objections to the idea that it's obvious, it most certainly is not.

Now I'll do you the favor of sharing my basic understanding.

A socialist system is one where the government controls the means of production.

Do you believe that I'm endorsing (again despite the fact that I haven't actually endorsed anything) socialism as I have defined it?
Like printing money out of thin air? :rolleyes:
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

Solar

Quote from: Solar on December 29, 2016, 10:42:59 AM
Still waiting!

"There is an argument to be made for income inequality".

So what's your argument?
Still waiting....
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

Econ4Every1

Quote from: Solar on December 29, 2016, 11:53:28 AM
Like printing money out of thin air? :rolleyes:

All currency is created out of thin air.  If there were no money created out of thin air, there wouldn't be any currency.

Having said that, creating currency has nothing to do with Socialism.  It's hard to believe you sit here and attempt to decry my lack of knowledge when you know so little about something so simple.

Please, find me an accepted definition of socialism that includes, as a requirement, "creating money out of thin air".  Are you saying that a Socialist government couldn't work under a gold standard?


Econ4Every1

Quote from: Econ4Every1 on December 29, 2016, 01:17:44 PM
All currency is created out of thin air.  If there were no currency created out of thin air, there wouldn't be any currency.

Having said that, creating currency has nothing to do with Socialism.  It's hard to believe you sit here and attempt to decry my lack of knowledge when you know so little about something so simple.

Please, find me an accepted definition of socialism that includes, as a requirement, "creating money out of thin air".  Are you saying that a Socialist government couldn't work under a gold standard?

Ghoulardi

#25
Quote from: Econ4Every1 on December 29, 2016, 01:17:44 PM
All currency is created out of thin air.  If there were no money created out of thin air, there wouldn't be any currency.

No its not, its created by mutal agreement of the populace. For example, what makes gold so valuable? Mutual agreement.

Quote
Having said that, creating currency has nothing to do with Socialism.

Strawman. Just when was that said?

Quote
  It's hard to believe you sit here and attempt to decry my lack of knowledge when you know so little about something so simple.

You mean when you really want to push the strawman.

Quote
Please, find me an accepted definition of socialism that includes, as a requirement, "creating money out of thin air".  Are you saying that a Socialist government couldn't work under a gold standard?

You mean find an acceptable  definition as you deem. How bout you find an acceptable definition as I deem?

After all, weren't we all versed on socialism and its evils in middle school? How'd you get left out of the loop?

zewazir

Quote from: Econ4Every1 on December 29, 2016, 01:17:44 PM
All currency is created out of thin air.  If there were no money created out of thin air, there wouldn't be any currency.
You keep getting this wrong. In a properly balanced free market economic system currency is issued in response to the growth of real wealth within that system.

When the government creates currency out of thin air, they do so through deficit spending. The act of doing so has two basic consequences. First, it creates inflation due to the fact that money is simply a concept to represent real wealth. If you create more money to represent the same amount of wealth, the buying power of each economic unit of money is diminished.

Second, government deficit spending alters free market. Now the second consequence does not HAVE to occur, if the government contract were limited to expectation and performance. But the fact is government contracts invariably come with a whole host of government regulations. Any affected markets dealing with government contracts become influenced by those regulations, thus putting at least a significant aspect of those markets under government control (ie: socialism.)

Solar

Quote from: Econ4Every1 on December 29, 2016, 01:17:44 PM
All currency is created out of thin air.  If there were no money created out of thin air, there wouldn't be any currency.

Having said that, creating currency has nothing to do with Socialism.  It's hard to believe you sit here and attempt to decry my lack of knowledge when you know so little about something so simple.

Please, find me an accepted definition of socialism that includes, as a requirement, "creating money out of thin air".  Are you saying that a Socialist government couldn't work under a gold standard?
I can see I don't need to address this nonsense, considering Gouhlardi and Zewazir spelled it out better than I would have, though getting into detail with you truly is a waste of time because you are still stuck on the basics of econ 101.

Now, last chance or face a timeout.

"There is an argument to be made for income inequality".


You said it, now address it, here or in a new thread, matters not.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

taxed

Quote from: Solar on December 29, 2016, 03:13:50 PM
I can see I don't need to address this nonsense, considering Gouhlardi and Zewazir spelled it out better than I would have, though getting into detail with you truly is a waste of time because you are still stuck on the basics of econ 101.

Now, last chance or face a timeout.

"There is an argument to be made for income inequality".


You said it, now address it, here or in a new thread, matters not.

Is this what he's on now?  He really is a Marxist.  It's becoming obvious to me he's one of Bernie's kids...
#PureBlood #TrumpWon

Solar

Quote from: taxed on December 30, 2016, 05:47:24 AM
Is this what he's on now?  He really is a Marxist.  It's becoming obvious to me he's one of Bernie's kids...
I really don't think he knows what it even means, Hell the guy came in with Econ for a moniker and proved he knows absolutely zero about the free mkt.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!