Thread: The federal Reserve is the key.

Originally Posted by Retro Fit

Where exactly did I say that Money does not function like money? Maybe our problem is in a language barrier because no one who's first language is English could of come away with that from what I wrote.

Any fallacies in my arguments are infinitesimal and/or derived from my data pool. The fallacies in your arguments, I believe, are from the way in which you process your data and possibly a language barrier.

I suppose that technically our change is by default a form of commodity currency. But by the same "token" (pun intended)the coin has to be the full amount of precious metal, by weight, that is stamped on the coin to be a true commodity coin. So, In fact, by default it is not commodity currency. If it were not deemed legal tender by government decree, it would be, by definition, counterfeit currency.

I have to disagree with you about money not functioning as money, even if it is legal tender, in any given economy. Money functioning as money would not need to distinguish between commodity or fiat as long as both enjoy a legal status of the official, perfectly competitive medium of exchange.

A fractional commodity coin could function on the same principle as a fractional reserve.

Owning and controlling are two different things. Our elected representatives to government are given a fiat concerning morals. However, they are sworn to uphold our federal Constitution and not the charter of any given bank.

Once again, what is the point here? We already know that the vast majority of elected officials do not abide by their sworn oath to obey the Constitution. If they cannot abide by a sworn oath, what makes you think they are going to be ethical in anything they do? Money talks, bullshit walks.

I have to disagree with you about money not functioning as money, even if it is legal tender, in any given economy. Money functioning as money would not need to distinguish between commodity or fiat as long as both enjoy a legal status of the official, perfectly competitive medium of exchange.

Once again, I never said that money does not function like money. Snap out of it. Commodity money carries no risk. Fiat money's value will be high when it is first introduced and from that point fluctuate on a continual downward slope until it is worthless. Listen Daniel..Now if you can show me one instance, just one, where this did not hold true, then I will concede.

A fractional commodity coin could function on the same principle as a fractional reserve.

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. I'm embarrassed for you. When you find out what we mean when we talk about "fractional reserve" you may come back and apologize for being such an idiot (happens to us all sometimes) and we can go ahead from there.

Owning and controlling are two different things.

Stop dissecting the arguments. It is a common slang terminology, if you "own" someone, you "control" them. If you have no valid point to make please do not fill in the space where a valid argument would go with empty rhetoric.

Originally Posted by Retro Fit

Once again, what is the point here? We already know that the vast majority of elected officials do not abide by their sworn oath to obey the Constitution. If they cannot abide by a sworn oath, what makes you think they are going to be ethical in anything they do? Money talks, bullshit walks.

The point is that some people want to abolish a mostly autonomous Fed, in order to let Congress handle monetary policy as well.

Originally Posted by Retro Fit

Stop dissecting the arguments. It is a common slang terminology, if you "own" someone, you "control" them. If you have no valid point to make please do not fill in the space where a valid argument would go with empty rhetoric.

Try reading the relevant arguments for a change.

The point about this particular rebuttal was that bankers do not legislate laws that can "enslave the people"; only our Congressionals can do that.

Originally Posted by danielpalos

The wars on drugs and terror could be perceived as republican forms of job creation policy. It is simply my contention that we could decrease the volatility of the business cycle through better compliance with at-will employment doctrine and laws.

However, public sector means of production could function as public sector business ventures that can lower our tax burden and other public and private sector costs.

Remember this?

You may have missed the point about how the Fed helped out with the Great Depression. They did not print enough artificial money to create easy credit to expand the economy faster than the rate of contraction.

Decreasing the volatility of the business cycle could imply consistency in the circulation of money from an expanded "consumer" base. Why would that be a bad thing for Commerce?

Originally Posted by danielpalos

Try reading the relevant arguments for a change.

The point about this particular rebuttal was that bankers do not legislate laws that can "enslave the people"; only our Congressionals can do that.

Thanks for proving why discussion with you is an exercise in futility.

All you needed was a better argument.

The point about this particular rebuttal was that bankers do not legislate laws that can "enslave the people"; only our Congressionals can do that.

Do you know what a "bribe" is Daniel? It is my contention that a majority of elected officials are offered and accept bribes in the form of cash, or favors or whatever that particular official wants. In return, the officials help to pass laws that favor the briber. This is how the bankers, in essence, legislate laws. They bribe the officials. Do you understand what I've just written? Is it clear enough? If not let me know and I will elaborate further.

Try reading the relevant arguments for a change.

I've read all your rebuttals. I'm still waiting for one to be relevant. Is English your first language?

Decreasing the volatility of the business cycle could imply consistency in the circulation of money from an expanded "consumer" base. Why would that be a bad thing for Commerce?

Yes, that would be great. Just how do you plan on decreasing the volatility of the business cycle with a currency that is worth less and less every week?