That is just it we have a treasury dept. they are perfectly capable of printing money. I know they can I've seen'um do it. Why are bankers printing our money at intrest?? It gives them truely unpresidented power over the market they can make money availible (just like they did) then working with the banks (that own the FED) can stop the money flow almost at will to bring an economy to its knees. That is what they do every time. Expand credit then cut it off. It is a sure fire way to know when the stock market is gonna crash. It is a market timing mechanism. If you can time the market with nearly 100% accuracy think of the money to be made.
Articles of Interest...
- Thread starter CrackerJax
- Start date
CrackerJax
New Member
No, that is not what you do in a recession, you cut back the debt. Not increase it sir. PERIOD. The private sector is the engine, not the govt. Something which eludes this nooby president. he thinks he can reinvent the wheel? Even the socialists in Europe thinks he's smoking something.
It was Govt. meddling which futzed up everything med man....lawdy. The most efficient way to pull out of a slump 9and that's all it is), is through TAX CUTS , thereby creating jobs. Not one reputable economist will tell you otherwise, even European ones.
That's why Reagan was such a great financial president...he understood it, and we all benefited. Obama does not get it and we will all suffer for it.
out.
It was Govt. meddling which futzed up everything med man....lawdy. The most efficient way to pull out of a slump 9and that's all it is), is through TAX CUTS , thereby creating jobs. Not one reputable economist will tell you otherwise, even European ones.
That's why Reagan was such a great financial president...he understood it, and we all benefited. Obama does not get it and we will all suffer for it.
out.
CrackerJax
New Member
two words...
Devaluation
Inflation
Go look at germany in the 20's and 30's wheelbarrow full of marks for a loaf of bread.... hitler was an easy pill to swallow.
out.
medicineman
New Member
Oh, you mean like Hoover did, that put us in the deepest doody ever. Yeah that worked, do nothing and have a trickle down economy, perfect recipe for a great depression. Maybe you didn't notice but the rich did very well in the great depression, buying up all the worthwhile properties and selling them after. Yes, a depression does usually not bother the rich very much. As you've said, you moved all your assets off shore, typical rich man shit.No, that is not what you do in a recession, you cut back the debt. Not increase it sir. PERIOD. The private sector is the engine, not the govt. Something which eludes this nooby president. he thinks he can reinvent the wheel? Even the socialists in Europe thinks he's smoking something.
It was Govt. meddling which futzed up everything med man....lawdy. The most efficient way to pull out of a slump 9and that's all it is), is through TAX CUTS , thereby creating jobs. Not one reputable economist will tell you otherwise, even European ones.
That's why Reagan was such a great financial president...he understood it, and we all benefited. Obama does not get it and we will all suffer for it.
out.
TheBrutalTruth
Well-Known Member
Of course the Rich benefit, some one has to make the investments to turn the economy around, besides the government which has shown by its interference at GM will invest in the wrong things, and totally ignore what the market desires.
Some one has to make the investments that will lead to new businesses and thus to new employment.
Some one has to correct the malinvestments by investing in what the market desires.
Common Sense.
What doesn't make sense is when the bureaucrats benefit. The bureaucrats, especially the Fed. Reserve is responsible for this mess to begin with due to their mismanagement of the dollar, and lack of intelligence.
Experts, probably can't find their ass with both hands.
I'm well aware of Inflation isnt it is more or less attached to amount of money in currculation and demand for that money. What I propose is to trade one for one every FRN in currculation right now and replace it with US notes. buy back our debt. and require the banks hold 100% reserves to eat up all the inflation. If you look at how much money banks have outstanding Vs. our debt. its almost equil. That is how you do it. Like I said not perfect (no backing) but it would work. You just can't increase the supply to much once you have the system in place. It would be best if you could at some latter date attach it to silver or gold.
Joe Kennedy went into the depression worth 4 million and exited with 100 million tell me he didn't have some sort of inside track.
Medman what about the ressession of 21' nobody did anything with that and it lasted about a year. Ressesions are not the time to panic. They are a time to make market corrections. The market can manage itself much better then men can. Remember Greed well their is money to be made in managing a "ressesion."
Also Hoover didn't do nothing he meddled plenty FDR did shit that Obama would blush over and would probably have got him shot today.
Joe Kennedy went into the depression worth 4 million and exited with 100 million tell me he didn't have some sort of inside track.
Medman what about the ressession of 21' nobody did anything with that and it lasted about a year. Ressesions are not the time to panic. They are a time to make market corrections. The market can manage itself much better then men can. Remember Greed well their is money to be made in managing a "ressesion."
Also Hoover didn't do nothing he meddled plenty FDR did shit that Obama would blush over and would probably have got him shot today.
medicineman
New Member
The rich benefit at the expense of the poor that have lost their property to foreclosure. It has always been that way. The rich dangle that carrot, then in the end, they snatch it back and make more money on it. Class warfare, the only answer. It's coming, you righties better have a contingency plan. I'll be one of those with a pitchfork, no make that an AK47.
TheBrutalTruth
Well-Known Member
:: cough :: the bankers, and who represents the interest of the bankers, the Federal Reserve, and the Federal Reserve is a "branch" of the government.
Plenty of contingencies...
but they can all be summed up into four categories
Laugh my ass off at idiots like you when the tanks run you over.
Join you, and hope the tanks don't run me over, and that I can influence enough people to ignore the tyrannical elements included to restore the Constitution, and scrap the majority of government.
Run
Do Nothing
medicineman
New Member
You joining me, wow, that's hard to get my head around. A class war revolution will not work without first having a coup in the military. We must nulify the military or we'd be toast. My AK is no match for a helicopter gunship, although, they have been brought down by AKs if they are hit in the right place. AK or SK, they are the peoples weapons. They are used all over the world by guerillas and revolutionaries.
Killing tanks is fun and easy.
I don't see the need to harm anyone really. Just some people should be banned from government or banking or investment managment for treason. I don't understand the hatred towards your fellow man who all they did was be sucsessful within the rules they were given. Now if they were involved in some sort of plot i.e. finacial terrorism well maybe we just take their heads. that I can see.
If shit gets bad I go postal thats my plan. Hurt them die fighting cause I don't want to live in a world of slavery.
You need to know your enemys Med they are NWO people they are Dem. and Repub. They are Banksters and Monsanto not the guy with a nice house in the city and a cabin on the lake he ain't rich even if he has 10 million he ain't rich if you have 1 billion you may be a canidate for investigation. You a member of the CFR well you may not live, sorry.
I don't see the need to harm anyone really. Just some people should be banned from government or banking or investment managment for treason. I don't understand the hatred towards your fellow man who all they did was be sucsessful within the rules they were given. Now if they were involved in some sort of plot i.e. finacial terrorism well maybe we just take their heads. that I can see.
If shit gets bad I go postal thats my plan. Hurt them die fighting cause I don't want to live in a world of slavery.
You need to know your enemys Med they are NWO people they are Dem. and Repub. They are Banksters and Monsanto not the guy with a nice house in the city and a cabin on the lake he ain't rich even if he has 10 million he ain't rich if you have 1 billion you may be a canidate for investigation. You a member of the CFR well you may not live, sorry.
CrackerJax
New Member
The poor lose their homes because the received mortgages they shouldn't have ...at the behest of the GOVERNMENT. Poor choices lead to POOR RESULTS.
And yes, rich folks wish to keep their HARD EARNED monies just like everyone else. How else can I give YOU a JOB?
out.
Thats just it Jobs don't come from the Government they come from people building homes and skyscrapers, tractors and cars, farmers and watchmakers those are jobs. The government exploits steals and justifies its exsistance. That is really all it does. It gets us in wars it uses force at every turn.
Do you think their should be as many prison guards as their is now?? Maybe we hire a few thousand more?? but who will they guard?? make something else illegal round up a few hundred thousand people and feed and cloth them provide them with medical care. That will make thousands and thousands of jobs. Does it help society??? NO. Does it help government justify its excitance?? You Bet. Does it help the economy for the people sucking at the government tit I supose it does. But overall no it hurts.
Do you think their should be as many prison guards as their is now?? Maybe we hire a few thousand more?? but who will they guard?? make something else illegal round up a few hundred thousand people and feed and cloth them provide them with medical care. That will make thousands and thousands of jobs. Does it help society??? NO. Does it help government justify its excitance?? You Bet. Does it help the economy for the people sucking at the government tit I supose it does. But overall no it hurts.
CrackerJax
New Member
Okay, here's another interesting article on how Obama's mind works... tick tick tick.
To Russia With Love
Degrading the U.S. nuclear arsenal. President Obama met Russian President Dmitri Medvedev in London this week, and you'd have thought topics like the financial crisis and Iran would have more than filled the conversation. But when a U.S. President meets his Russian counterpart, the reflex left from the Cold War is always to sign another arms control deal. So here we go again.
AP
The Obama Administration wants to replace the soon-to-expire 1991 START treaty with a new regime that would set a ceiling of 1,000 nuclear warheads apiece for the U.S. and Russia. That would dramatically cut the two countries' existing number of operational weapons, both strategic and nonstrategic, from a current estimated total of about 4,100 for the U.S. and 5,200 for Russia. It would also exceed the terms agreed by the Bush Administration in the 2002 Moscow Treaty, which committed each side to reduce their arsenals to between 1,700 and 2,200 strategic warheads by 2012.
As we learned in the 1970s, the devil of arms control often lies in the technical arcana of warheads and delivery systems, so we'll await the text before pronouncing judgment. But the devil of arms control also lies in the overall concept, with its implicit assumption that the weapons themselves are inherently more dangerous than the intentions of those who develop and deploy them.
We would have thought this thinking was discredited after the Second Lateran Council outlawed the use of crossbows in 1139, or after the Hague Convention of 1899 banned aerial bombardment, or after the Kellogg-Briand Pact outlawed war. Nope. Mr. Obama has set the ultimate goal of eliminating nuclear weapons, and as one of his first official acts he pledged to "stop the development of new nuclear weapons."
What Mr. Obama wants to kill specifically is the Reliable Replacement Warhead, which the Bush Administration supported over Congressional opposition, and which Mr. Obama now opposes despite the support of Defense Secretary Robert Gates and the military. Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told us this week that "we do need a new warhead." When we asked about Mr. Obama's views on the warhead, the Admiral said, "You would have to ask him."
The RRW is not, in fact, a new weapon; it has been in development for several years and is based on the W89 design tested in the 1980s. It is said to be a remarkably safe and long-lasting warhead, a significant consideration given the gradual physical deterioration of the current U.S. arsenal, particularly the mainstay W76.
The irony is that Mr. Obama's opposition is making substantial reductions in the total U.S. arsenal that much riskier. In the absence of actual testing, which hasn't happened in the U.S. since 1992, the only real hedge against potentially defective weapons is a larger arsenal. Naturally, arms-control theologians are instead urging the Senate to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and ban the production of weapons grade uranium and plutonium.
The thinking here is that somehow the American example will get Russia, as well as North Korea, Pakistan and perhaps Iran, to reject nuclear weapons. In fact, a U.S. nuclear arsenal that is diminished in both quantity and quality would be an incentive for these countries to increase their nuclear inventories, since the door would suddenly be opened to reach strategic parity with the last superpower. Mr. Medvedev, for one, recently announced Russia would pursue "large-scale rearmament" of its army and navy, including nuclear arsenals.
France also plans to deploy new sea-based nuclear missiles next year, even as it reduces the overall size of its arsenal. The French understand that a credible nuclear deterrent requires modern and reliable weapons. The Obama Administration should understand that the best security for both the U.S. and the allies that rely on our nuclear umbrella lies in an unchallengeable arsenal, and not an invitation to the world's Mahmoud Ahmadinejads to compete on equal terms.
The way to discourage other countries from trying to keep up is not by letting them gain on you. If they see that you are so technologically superior, they will cease struggling to achieve parity. What is wrong with this guy???????????????????????????????????
Russia must LOVE this guy.
out.
To Russia With Love
Degrading the U.S. nuclear arsenal. President Obama met Russian President Dmitri Medvedev in London this week, and you'd have thought topics like the financial crisis and Iran would have more than filled the conversation. But when a U.S. President meets his Russian counterpart, the reflex left from the Cold War is always to sign another arms control deal. So here we go again.
The Obama Administration wants to replace the soon-to-expire 1991 START treaty with a new regime that would set a ceiling of 1,000 nuclear warheads apiece for the U.S. and Russia. That would dramatically cut the two countries' existing number of operational weapons, both strategic and nonstrategic, from a current estimated total of about 4,100 for the U.S. and 5,200 for Russia. It would also exceed the terms agreed by the Bush Administration in the 2002 Moscow Treaty, which committed each side to reduce their arsenals to between 1,700 and 2,200 strategic warheads by 2012.
As we learned in the 1970s, the devil of arms control often lies in the technical arcana of warheads and delivery systems, so we'll await the text before pronouncing judgment. But the devil of arms control also lies in the overall concept, with its implicit assumption that the weapons themselves are inherently more dangerous than the intentions of those who develop and deploy them.
We would have thought this thinking was discredited after the Second Lateran Council outlawed the use of crossbows in 1139, or after the Hague Convention of 1899 banned aerial bombardment, or after the Kellogg-Briand Pact outlawed war. Nope. Mr. Obama has set the ultimate goal of eliminating nuclear weapons, and as one of his first official acts he pledged to "stop the development of new nuclear weapons."
What Mr. Obama wants to kill specifically is the Reliable Replacement Warhead, which the Bush Administration supported over Congressional opposition, and which Mr. Obama now opposes despite the support of Defense Secretary Robert Gates and the military. Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told us this week that "we do need a new warhead." When we asked about Mr. Obama's views on the warhead, the Admiral said, "You would have to ask him."
The RRW is not, in fact, a new weapon; it has been in development for several years and is based on the W89 design tested in the 1980s. It is said to be a remarkably safe and long-lasting warhead, a significant consideration given the gradual physical deterioration of the current U.S. arsenal, particularly the mainstay W76.
The irony is that Mr. Obama's opposition is making substantial reductions in the total U.S. arsenal that much riskier. In the absence of actual testing, which hasn't happened in the U.S. since 1992, the only real hedge against potentially defective weapons is a larger arsenal. Naturally, arms-control theologians are instead urging the Senate to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and ban the production of weapons grade uranium and plutonium.
The thinking here is that somehow the American example will get Russia, as well as North Korea, Pakistan and perhaps Iran, to reject nuclear weapons. In fact, a U.S. nuclear arsenal that is diminished in both quantity and quality would be an incentive for these countries to increase their nuclear inventories, since the door would suddenly be opened to reach strategic parity with the last superpower. Mr. Medvedev, for one, recently announced Russia would pursue "large-scale rearmament" of its army and navy, including nuclear arsenals.
France also plans to deploy new sea-based nuclear missiles next year, even as it reduces the overall size of its arsenal. The French understand that a credible nuclear deterrent requires modern and reliable weapons. The Obama Administration should understand that the best security for both the U.S. and the allies that rely on our nuclear umbrella lies in an unchallengeable arsenal, and not an invitation to the world's Mahmoud Ahmadinejads to compete on equal terms.
The way to discourage other countries from trying to keep up is not by letting them gain on you. If they see that you are so technologically superior, they will cease struggling to achieve parity. What is wrong with this guy???????????????????????????????????
Russia must LOVE this guy.
out.
medicineman
New Member
The way to discourage other countries from trying to keep up is not by letting them gain on you. If they see that you are so technologically superior, they will cease struggling to achieve parity. What is wrong with this guy???????????????????????????????????
This is absolutely the most rediculous statement you've ever made. Everyone knows (Except you it seems) that trying to keep up with your opponents "superiority" is the crux of the arms race. Always has been, always will be. By agreeing to limits and enforcing them by mutual observation, the parties involved can keep tabs on any cheating. Setting limits is a start to dismanteling them altogether.Trying to put the genie back in the bottle may be the most difficult task we've ever taken,
This is absolutely the most rediculous statement you've ever made. Everyone knows (Except you it seems) that trying to keep up with your opponents "superiority" is the crux of the arms race. Always has been, always will be. By agreeing to limits and enforcing them by mutual observation, the parties involved can keep tabs on any cheating. Setting limits is a start to dismanteling them altogether.Trying to put the genie back in the bottle may be the most difficult task we've ever taken,
CrackerJax
New Member
Wrong again Med man... that is what crushed the USSR my misinformed friend...they went broke.
Obama thinks letting your opponents catch you is somehow going to get them to stop...??? lawdy.
out.
Obama thinks letting your opponents catch you is somehow going to get them to stop...??? lawdy.
out.
medicineman
New Member
Continuing escalation of the nuclear arms race is the defination of madness. With a hundred nukes for each of the nuclear brotherhood, mutual assured extinction for all living species is guaranteed. How much more do we need? Madness for sure.Wrong again Med man... that is what crushed the USSR my misinformed friend...they went broke.
Obama thinks letting your opponents catch you is somehow going to get them to stop...??? lawdy.
out.
CrackerJax
New Member
No one is talking about escalation, but upgrades are needed. We must keep current. If you actually digested the post above....I wouldn't have to explain that to you.
out.
out.
medicineman
New Member
So, we upgrade, they upgrade, basically madness. BTW, 2000 word posts lose me in the first paragraph. learn to make your point with a short paragraph or two and you'll get a lot more people that will read it in it's entirety.No one is talking about escalation, but upgrades are needed. We must keep current. If you actually digested the post above....I wouldn't have to explain that to you.
out.
CrackerJax
New Member
no it isn't madness. if nk can't keep up...that's good...the race has already started. face reality. this is no time to let up. this is a time to increase the pressure, to show the futility.
your attention span isn't my concern. no wonder you are so misinformed
i read at least a book a week plus three newspapers daily.
out.
your attention span isn't my concern. no wonder you are so misinformed
i read at least a book a week plus three newspapers daily.out.
medicineman
New Member
Good for you: I certainly won't waste my time reading your right wing drivel. I also read other things, but paying attention to your long maddening posts is not high on my priority list. Over and OUT.no it isn't madness. if nk can't keep up...that's good...the race has already started. face reality. this is no time to let up. this is a time to increase the pressure, to show the futility.
your attention span isn't my concern. no wonder you are so misinformed
out.