Proud fans of a 128-year old tradition

It is currently Thu Oct 02, 2014 1:34 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 102 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 1:51 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Ollie wrote:
Congress does not have the specific power to create a central bank. Only congress has the power to regulate the value of money. I've also heard more than once that the Fed has a legislative mandated duty to stop inflation.

Citation please. If the Fed has such a duty, it would be somewhere in the U.S. Code.

Ollie wrote:
According to the Supreme Law Firm the constitution defines the U.S. dollar as a specific silver coin containing three hundred seventy-one and a quarter grains of fine silver. Eventually gold and silver coins were coined (not sure what word to use.)

Citation please. If SCOTUS said that, it would be written in an opinion that you can find for me. You certainly can't find such an assertion in the actual text of the Constitution, so my guess is that you are making this up.

Ollie wrote:
You can't deny that there's a conflict of interests going on and at the very least the Supreme Court should take a look at this.

Actually, yes I can, because you have not cited two interests that are conflicting here.

Ollie wrote:
The Fed gives 6% of its profit to shareholders (dividends!!) All this money is being created from thin air.. the elite get richer and richer while our country gets in more and more debt. The Federal Reserve Board has full authority over our financial system. Their sole purpose is obtaining the greatest possible profits.

Wrong. The Fed is an independent government institution, not a private bank. The only thing private about is that it does not require public funding; it operates on the revenues it makes, much like the US Patent and Trademark Office. It does not operate for the purpose of making a profit. Sure, the member banks do receive a 6% dividend, but all profit after expenses is returned to the U.S. Treasury or contributed to the surplus capital of the Federal Reserve Banks.

Seriously, you need to cool it with the conspiracy theories.

Ollie wrote:
When they purposely allow inflation they are redistributing wealth, aren't they? Even Milton Friedman said we needed to find a way to get rid of the Federal Reserve.

Who is purposely allowing inflation?

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:59 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 7:19 am
Posts: 1505
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 5 states that Congress has the “power to coin money” We should demand that the Federal Reserve be abolished!!

Article1. Section 10. Clause 1 specifies that “ No State shall…coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a Tender in Payment of Debt.”

TOOK ME FOREVER TO FIND THAT!! Ha!

[12 USC 225a. As added by act of November 16, 1977 (91 Stat. 1387) and amended by acts of October 27, 1978 (92 Stat. 1897); Aug. 23, 1988 (102 Stat. 1375); and Dec. 27, 2000 (114 Stat. 3028).]

The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Open Market Committee shall maintain long run growth of the monetary and credit aggregates commensurate with the economy's long run potential to increase production, so as to promote effectively the goals of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates.

What do they mean by the economy's long run potential to increase production? Does that take 100 years? Ha! This crap is all full of loopholes. I can see that now. Our economy is screwed.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 3:21 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 7:19 am
Posts: 1505
Not so much that there are loopholes but things are a bit vague.. did the founding fathers ever envision this country operating without a central bank? I read a quote from Thomas Jefferson on this very thing.. will have to look that up.

You're wrong. The Fed is an independent institution. It may have been created by congress but it acts separately from our government. The chairman does whatever he sees fit. Deals with foreign central banks are not published in congressional reports.

When they lowered the interest rate to 1% the housing crisis happened. The greedy investors weren't making enough money so the bankers started with all the sub-prime loans and the whole mess spiraled. Homeowners couldn't make their house payments.. they leave.. lowering property value in whole neighborhoods. You know the deal. Is that the fault of the Fed? Maybe not directly.. but you see how interconnected everything is. There are so many greedy people involved. Everyone acts so irresponsibly. I feel sick.

Please watch this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXlxBeAvsB8

That's our "cental bank." f-#@in' joke.

I can't explain things as eloquently as you, Econo.. but this stuff angers me. It's all about classism.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 11:04 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Ollie wrote:
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 5 states that Congress has the “power to coin money” We should demand that the Federal Reserve be abolished!!

One does not follow from the other. First, the Fed does not coin money; the U.S. Treasury does that. Second, Congress's power to coin money is what gives Congress the power to enact legislation that creates things like the U.S. Treasury. It does not mean that the only place where money may be printed is the Capitol Building in D.C. and one of the state representatives must turn the crank on the money-printing machines.

Ollie wrote:
Article1. Section 10. Clause 1 specifies that “ No State shall…coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a Tender in Payment of Debt.”

TOOK ME FOREVER TO FIND THAT!! Ha!

That's a shame, because it has no relevance to the discussion. What a State can and cannot do has no relevance to what a federal agency can do.

Ollie wrote:
[12 USC 225a. As added by act of November 16, 1977 (91 Stat. 1387) and amended by acts of October 27, 1978 (92 Stat. 1897); Aug. 23, 1988 (102 Stat. 1375); and Dec. 27, 2000 (114 Stat. 3028).]

The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Open Market Committee shall maintain long run growth of the monetary and credit aggregates commensurate with the economy's long run potential to increase production, so as to promote effectively the goals of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates

That's basically a job description with goals in mind. It does not mean that the Fed is doing something illegal when inflation occurs; it just means that they aren't doing their job well when it does.

Ollie wrote:
What do they mean by the economy's long run potential to increase production? Does that take 100 years? Ha! This crap is all full of loopholes. I can see that now. Our economy is screwed.

Perhaps you should read the legislative history then. I'm no expert on fiscal policy or the Federal Reserve Act.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Sat Sep 12, 2009 9:07 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 7:19 am
Posts: 1505
You surely can't deny that the Fed manipulates the economy so investors can become richer. What they do may be perfectly legal. You have me now thinking it may be, but they are unethical. (I know.. my definition of ethics may not jive with those found in an Ivy League course on Ethics.)

*stops to adjust soapbox*

I don't consider myself a full blown socialist. I'd have no problem with "compassionate" capitalism or Reagan's "trickle down" ideas but NAFTA, Gatt, etc. opened the door to a global kind of economy that working class Americans have no way to fight. Those free trade deals were swept into being easily because our corporate media purposely hid them from the public. We were getting daily doses of O.J.

Yeah I know.. no correlation to the subject.

Maybe nations as big as the U.S. China and Russia can only be ruled with an iron hand but there is too much suffering..

When I was a kid we had a Zenith factory in Springfield, MO.. TVs were made here. My best friend's father worked there all his life. Now they make those TVs in Malaysia and elsewhere. These companies should be forced to pay overseas workers more.

I may change my line of work (I'm still jobless) because factories will only hire temporary workers now. Even if the economy picks up that is the new trend, and any kind of economic upturn will not last anyway because this nation is so far in debt.

I am collecting unemployment still and my family has no insurance.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 1:00 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 10:09 pm
Posts: 2083
Location: Hingham, MA
Willton wrote:
I don't give a damn whether a news outlet is balanced. In fact, I would think that a news organization is not doing its job correctly if it is trying to be balanced. What I care about is whether a news organization is objective, and sometimes a news organization's attempts to find both sides to a story gets in the way of that standard.


A little light reading on that subject:

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/09/15/media-malpractice-tom-brokaws

_________________
If you think nobody notices you and you're all alone, try not paying your bills.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 2:01 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:30 pm
Posts: 6272
A couple of points.
1. No mention of Richard Nixon in this article, for better or for worse.
2. There was mention of the tone of conservative commentators. It is one of my problems with taking the majority of these pundits seriously. Fred Barnes I can listen too. Also Morton Kondracke. I first started listening to them on the McLaughlin (sp?) Group on PBS which is still my favorite discussion panel. There is at least some humor and smiles during the show from both sides. R. Novak and Pat Buchanan could put smiles on faces despite opposing views. None of the newer guys, from either side, can do that.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 7:28 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 10:09 pm
Posts: 2083
Location: Hingham, MA
Az Bucco fan wrote:
No mention of Richard Nixon in this article, for better or for worse.

No need for it, AZ. That was one political scandal for which the news media happily found airtime or freed up column inches. Nixon was a Republican, doncha know. Not a conservative, mind you, but a Republican.

Quote:
There was mention of the tone of conservative commentators. It is one of my problems with taking the majority of these pundits seriously. Fred Barnes I can listen too. Also Morton Kondracke. I first started listening to them on the McLaughlin (sp?) Group on PBS which is still my favorite discussion panel. There is at least some humor and smiles during the show from both sides. R. Novak and Pat Buchanan could put smiles on faces despite opposing views. None of the newer guys, from either side, can do that

I wouldn't try to argue you out of whom to watch and enjoy. Recognize, however (and I'm sure you do), that these are grim and serious times. The Olbermanns and Chris Matthewses on the left are desperately trying to defend an ideology that they know is being rejected by a growing majority of people. If the left fails to capitalize on this moment in time, the opportunity may not come again. On the right, Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck and others are passionately trying to wake people up whom they fear are asleep politically. That is why they point fingers and shout.

Fred Barnes and Mort Kondracke are libertarians who putter around somewhere in the middle.

_________________
If you think nobody notices you and you're all alone, try not paying your bills.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:01 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:30 pm
Posts: 6272
What was Nixon then?
Az Bucco fan wrote:
Fred Barnes and Mort Kondracke are libertarians who putter around somewhere in the middle.
that is the first time I have heard those two described as Libertarians. They might be surprised at that. :o :o


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 9:51 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 10:09 pm
Posts: 2083
Location: Hingham, MA
You will notice that I didn't cap the "l." There is a difference.

_________________
If you think nobody notices you and you're all alone, try not paying your bills.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:29 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:30 pm
Posts: 6272
Well I would find it hard to believe that they were registered Libertarians. Is there a difference? :D :D :D :D :D :D


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Az Bucco fan wrote:
Well I would find it hard to believe that they were registered Libertarians. Is there a difference? :D :D :D :D :D :D

Yes: one is capitalized, and the other is not. ;)

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Bob in Boston wrote:
Quote:
There was mention of the tone of conservative commentators. It is one of my problems with taking the majority of these pundits seriously. Fred Barnes I can listen too. Also Morton Kondracke. I first started listening to them on the McLaughlin (sp?) Group on PBS which is still my favorite discussion panel. There is at least some humor and smiles during the show from both sides. R. Novak and Pat Buchanan could put smiles on faces despite opposing views. None of the newer guys, from either side, can do that

I wouldn't try to argue you out of whom to watch and enjoy. Recognize, however (and I'm sure you do), that these are grim and serious times. The Olbermanns and Chris Matthewses on the left are desperately trying to defend an ideology that they know is being rejected by a growing majority of people. If the left fails to capitalize on this moment in time, the opportunity may not come again. On the right, Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck and others are passionately trying to wake people up whom they fear are asleep politically. That is why they point fingers and shout.

Really? That's what they are trying to do? Because what they actually do appears to look a lot more like fear mongering and indoctrination. They aren't trying to wake people up; they are trying to promote a viewpoint. And the amount of hypocrisy that they exhibit in the process is enormous.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Last edited by Willton on Fri Sep 18, 2009 5:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 10:05 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:30 pm
Posts: 6272
Colbert has shown a couple of Glen Beck's crying and whimpering bouts. I fear I might throw up on my tv screen if I weren't laughing so hard.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:38 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 10:09 pm
Posts: 2083
Location: Hingham, MA
Willton wrote:
Really? That's what they are trying to do? Because what they actually do appears to look a lot more like fear mongering and indoctrination. They aren't trying to wake people up; they are trying to promote a viewpoint. And the amount of hypocrisy that they exhibit in the process is enormous.


I am in awe here at this young man's vast experience as an oracle on the mass media. Newspapers are in trouble because of an outdated business model? Well, shazaam! Brilliant! This should be shared with newspaper companies in all 57 states immediately. No doubt, it hasn't occurred to them until now.

Beck, O'Reilly, and the others are trying to promote a viewpoint? Astonishing! Why, they ought to be ashamed of themselves, exploiting the right to free speech that way.

Maureen Dowd is still influential among readers who've followed her to the Internet? You mean, people who are equally delusional and look to a bitter, frustrated, aging spinster for self-justification?

Perhaps, if asked nicely, Willton would be willing to share with the board which people in the news media he finds objective and inspiring so that we, too, may draw powerful insights from them as he has. :)

_________________
If you think nobody notices you and you're all alone, try not paying your bills.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Mon Sep 21, 2009 1:03 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Bob in Boston wrote:
I am in awe here at this young man's vast experience as an oracle on the mass media. Newspapers are in trouble because of an outdated business model? Well, shazaam! Brilliant! This should be shared with newspaper companies in all 57 states immediately. No doubt, it hasn't occurred to them until now.

Apparently, because some of them seem to think that liberals are to blame for the downfall of newspapers, which is quite possibly the most ridiculous and idiotic thing I've ever heard on the subject.

Bob in Boston wrote:
Beck, O'Reilly, and the others are trying to promote a viewpoint? Astonishing! Why, they ought to be ashamed of themselves, exploiting the right to free speech that way.

There is nothing wrong with them exercising their right to free speech. What is wrong is the characterization of them as "passionately trying to wake people up whom they fear are asleep politically," because it is foolhardy at best and lying at worst.

Bob in Boston wrote:
Maureen Dowd is still influential among readers who've followed her to the Internet? You mean, people who are equally delusional and look to a bitter, frustrated, aging spinster for self-justification?

Sure, much like there are just as many delusional people listening to a bitter, frustrated, bloated demagogue named Rush Limbaugh. These people have audiences, and those audiences will follow them so long as there is a convenient medium through which to enjoy them.

Bob in Boston wrote:
Perhaps, if asked nicely, Willton would be willing to share with the board which people in the news media he finds objective and inspiring so that we, too, may draw powerful insights from them as he has. :)

Sadly, I've only found one, and he's not even a news media guy: John Stewart.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 9:46 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 3:45 pm
Posts: 1296
Location: Bowie, Md
Quote:
Really? That's what they are trying to do? Because what they actually do appears to look a lot more like fear mongering and indoctrination. They aren't trying to wake people up; they are trying to promote a viewpoint. And the amount of hypocrisy that they exhibit in the process is enormous.


Fear mongering? Sorry Wilton, I'm going to have to call you in this one. With this whole health care situation it seems that Obama and his whole administration has the fear mongering market cornered.

I have taken the time to read this entire thread and thought I would weigh in. I am a registered Conservative myself but have taken a large step back from listening to top ranked commentators because I have grown tired of the rhetoric. Here are some of the thoughts I've had of late.

1. The more that the Government is involved in socially, the less we are free, correct?
2. I do not want anything close to Government run healthcare because of three reasons, 1) Cuba, 2) England, 3) Canada.
3. The US is NOT a democracy, its a Republic. You know... "to the Republic... for which its stands..." Democracy has always been doomed to failure.
4. What on earth are Democratic representatives of the House and Senate doing praising a bloodthirsty and power hungry dictator like Fidel Castro? I want to just kick them in their teeth!
5. How does Nancy Pelosi get a pass on lying about the CIA? How the hell do we investigate the CIA? How in the hell do we allow reporters to photograph undercover CIA operatives at their home for the viewing pleasure of GITMO detainees? If I was the CIA op, they'd never find the bodies of those reporters for putting my family in danger.
6. The United States is a Government BY THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE... sounds a whole heck of alot like the Government thinks they know how to live your life better than you. Thanks, but no thanks. I don't SERVE the President, not even when I was in the military. I served the United States as a whole, to protect our freedoms both foreign AND DOMESTIC.

I could go on and on... but


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 9:48 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 3:45 pm
Posts: 1296
Location: Bowie, Md
Willton wrote:
Bob in Boston wrote:
Whew, Willton, that's quite a complex you've built up over Fox News. You know, there's an easy remedy: If you don't like it, don't watch. :)

It's hard to avoid when it's mainstream.


Really Wilton? C'mon man... you've got a remote control. Tune to CNN and you'd never have to hear anything about FoxNews(other than when they are ridiculing them for actually producing facts instead of conjecture).


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 11:16 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:30 pm
Posts: 6272
We spend nearly 16% of our money on healthcare. The next closest is Canada at 10%. I realize that Michael Moore takes a certain view on issues but his movie Sicko gives a pretty good picture of health care in other countries and how it compares in cost and service to ours. My wife works in the health care industry so it is a topic of discussion in our house.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Soapbox Time
PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 2:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 3:45 pm
Posts: 1296
Location: Bowie, Md
I'm sorry AZ but I don't know what Moore shows in his film because I haven't seen it. Nor will I ever watch anything that he is ever involved in. Please don't misunderstand me, by no means do I say that healthcare is ok the way it is but frankly the thought of Government running any sort of program gives me the creeps.


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 102 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group  
Design By Poker Bandits