For you democrats

[-PC-Taishar]

I haven't posted any hippie hating lately :D so I thought I would get back into it.

As you well know, liberals/progressives/democrats (whichever term they wish to use for themselves that they feel is the least derogatory at that point in time), are all about big government. The rationale behind this is the Keynesian model of economics. In short, Keynes believed that the government could control the economy by injecting and withdrawing funds as needed (of course the definition of need is solely the discretion of said government). The entire concept of progressive economics is founded on this mans writings. Given this information, let me release a few tidbits from HIS writings:

1.By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and, while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some. The sight of this arbitrary rearrangement of riches strikes not only at security but [also] at confidence in the equity of the existing distribution of wealth.

2.Lenin was certainly right. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.

3.A sentiment of trust in the legal money of the state is so deeply implanted in the citizens of all countries that they cannot but believe that some day this money must recover a part at least of its former value.... They do not apprehend that the real wealth, which this money might have stood for has been dissipated once and for all. This sentiment is supported by the various legal regulations with which the governments endeavor to control internal prices, and so to preserve some purchasing power for their legal tender....

4.The effect on foreign trade of price-regulation and profiteer-hunting as cures for inflation is even worse. Whatever may be the case at home, the currency must soon reach its real level abroad, with the result that prices inside and outside the country lose their normal adjustment. The price of imported commodities, when converted at the current rate of exchange, is far in excess of the local price, so that many essential goods will not be imported at all by private agency, and must be provided by the government, which, in re-selling the goods below cost price, plunges thereby a little further into insolvency...

Now in all fairness the last couple republican presidents have also followed the rule of government expansion so it's not just the liberals we have to worry about. But at least Republicans make some semblance of trying to keep money in the private sector. Education is key people. The more people that know about this, the better. Ron Paul is on to something with his calls for fiscal reform. We should all be supporting him.

[HangOver]

this isn't a democrat or republican thing. it's a government thing. they make the republicans SEEM to be somewhat opposing the democrats so that the ignorant sheep in this country will stay perfectly divided, thus accomplishing nothing and permitting our government to continue their agenda with no interruptions.

ron paul is a good first step, but out government will never allow us to "elect" him. we need to overthrow this defunct government and start a new one. but i don't want to do that because i'd miss this weeks episode of american idol.

[zel]

That is really a rather dressing read and after reading Ron Paul's site talking about the covert bailout of the euro the fed is currently providing i'm even more depressed. I'd vote for that guy.

His stance on immigration irks me because apparently he doesn't want to provide a method to convert illegal immigrants into legal immigrants which is kind of ridiculous. I mean what, we're going to bus/train/fly them back to their own country so they can then apply to come in legally? I get the reasoning, giving a concession will only encourage more illegal immigrants but why not 1st secure the border then give a cut off date that anyone here before X date is allowed a chance to immigrate legally without having to ship them out first? He's cool with legal immigration and says he wants it streamlined which i agree with because having been through it for my wife i can say it's a fucking mess and not at all as easy as everyone seems to think it is even when you are married to the person. Thankfully I had a good judge that while he appeared to be giving us the run-around by constantly rescheduling our hearing he was actually nudging us into a loophole that said if we were married and together for 2 years she got her residency without having to go through the miles of red tape but the question is why was it so horrible to begin with? Even once everything was good to go and we could apply for her permanent residency card it took like a freakin year to get because apparently the head of the immigration dept was sitting on the approvals and he ended up getting called out on it and resigned over the whole debacle and she finally got her card.

meh, but all that pales in comparison to all the other problems going on that I agree with his approach. I agree with hang though, i just don't think the dual party system will let him win. They'll do anything they can to keep him out because he's going to ruin their little money machine which I think the sign of a candidate who is really out for the people. Apparently paul felt the same way as noted in his wikipedia entry: “If the policies of the Republican Party are the same as the Democrat Party and they don't want to change anything on foreign policy, they don't want to cut anything, they don't want to audit the Fed and find out about monetary policy, they don't want to have actual change in government, that is a problem for me."

Well, if he's on the ballot i'll vote for him but i'm not getting my hopes up.

[-PC-Taishar]

I really do hope he runs as an independent. The way I see it, Romney doesn't have much of a chance of winning (and frankly I don't care, I don't think he'll be much better than Obama). So at least if Ron Paul runs we'll see just how much people vote for him. If he can take down 10% of the popular vote, that's a win in my book. It might let the other two parties know the people are 'fed' up...haha I crack me up.

[-PC-Taishar]

On a related note. This just disgusts me. I suppose lottery winners didn't 'earn' their money so I don't mind so much if they get hit, but seeing the taxes broken down like that really makes you wonder. You think you're getting 214 million and actually it pans out to be 74 million. And god help you if you're a generous person and give some money away...Funny how the government wants our taxes to support handout programs but if you try and give handouts yourself WHAMO taxman city.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/mega-mill ... bills.html

[HangOver]

it's a REALLY good thing our government has spent the last 100 years turning americans into lazy dependent morons or they'd NEVER be able to get away with this kind of highway robbery.

[zel]

Holy shit. I mean it's still millions but WTF man. I hate how the same money can get taxed repeatedly, it's so retarded. I've always wondered why income can get taxed more than once, it's just stupid. Every time i hear about these horror stories i start to seriously consider those "fair tax" type tax schedules where all the crazy rules are done away with and replaced with much simpler methods.

I would love to win that lotto though, even if a large percentage went to taxes. Hell i'd be happy with a cool million after taxes. Pay the cars, the house, and just keep working the same job coasting through life. :P

[[Creep]-Tyrant]

I still lean away from calling one side or the other because I know the government as we 'think' we know it has been bought a paid for years ago, central banking and the federal reserve system assured the acquisition of our political system a long time ago, and since then one small freedom after another has been taken away, the media continues to feed us whatever garbage lies the republicans, or democrats, would like us to believe. They incite fear, insecurity and discontent with propaganda to seed in the masses the ideas that these things happen for our own good, in reality it only to further their own objectives, fatten the wallets of people to rich to comprehend, so much so they can afford to privately, and exclusively, and quite literally OWN our government without any public knowledge whatsoever.
Watch ETHOS , this stuff hits way closer to truth than anyone would like to admit, and the facts are easy to find and quite clearly portray the real picture in a very different light. if you really think it makes any difference what party runs the country, you are so very very wrong, every last one of those suits sold their souls to the banks long before we knew who they even were.
The truth is not pretty and we need to change it, soon, preferably before the oil runs out and the environment is completely obliterated for our little wickedneteers.
Credit is the most diabolical invention ever created, our entire system is entropy in the making, and it is going to self destruct within all our lifetimes, if we don't seriosuly stand up and do something about it. We all know it, we all see the signs clearly, Patriot Act anyone? Yea, almost anyone at anytime making any noise about the government can pretty much disappear with no rights, be imprisoned, tortured and interrogated without warning, without warrants, without due process. The very foundations that the forefathers laid out in our constitution to protect the people from it's own government, gone, and we just let them do it.......

[HangOver]

the final straw ... the thing that will wake up the sleeping masses, i think, will be when they start preventing people from LEAVING this sinking ship. it's an absolute shame and embarrassment that we're going to witness a world where the USA isn't the place everyone WANTS to be.

you gotta hand it to our "government" though. they have done an absolute MASTERFUL job setting this up. they played the long game and it's finally starting to pay off for them.

[[Creep]-Tyrant]

you gotta hand it to our "banks" though. they have done an absolute MASTERFUL job setting this up. they played the long game and it's finally starting to pay off for them.

^^ fixed

[awp-killer]

Hey, I haven't been on for a while. I'm missing the point you are trying to make by quoting Keynes. I think you are trying to say big government is bad, somehow Keynes' own words somehow show this. (Is this what you are trying to say?)

Let me release a few tidbits from HIS writings:

1.By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and, while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some. The sight of this arbitrary rearrangement of riches strikes not only at security but [also] at confidence in the equity of the existing distribution of wealth.

Okay? Keynes also argued that we should avoid inflation. Also, this really doesn't have much to do with big government...

2.Lenin was certainly right. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.

Are you agreeing or disagreeing with him? He's not saying this should be done.

3.A sentiment of trust in the legal money of the state is so deeply implanted in the citizens of all countries that they cannot but believe that some day this money must recover a part at least of its former value.... They do not apprehend that the real wealth, which this money might have stood for has been dissipated once and for all. This sentiment is supported by the various legal regulations with which the governments endeavor to control internal prices, and so to preserve some purchasing power for their legal tender....

And eventually we even went off the gold standard. (What does this have to do with anything?)

4.The effect on foreign trade of price-regulation and profiteer-hunting as cures for inflation is even worse. Whatever may be the case at home, the currency must soon reach its real level abroad, with the result that prices inside and outside the country lose their normal adjustment. The price of imported commodities, when converted at the current rate of exchange, is far in excess of the local price, so that many essential goods will not be imported at all by private agency, and must be provided by the government, which, in re-selling the goods below cost price, plunges thereby a little further into insolvency...

Price fixing and protectionism are bad. I think we are all in agreement?

Now in all fairness the last couple republican presidents have also followed the rule of government expansion so it's not just the liberals we have to worry about.

In all fairness, these quotes on monetary policy have little to nothing to do with the expansion of government (either social safety nets in the case of democrats or defense spending for republicans).

[awp-killer]

I hate how the same money can get taxed repeatedly, it's so retarded.

This really isn't a double tax. It gets taxed as income once (what they pay in federal tax is deducted from state tax). The other taxes only happen if it becomes someone else's income. Or you could think of this as a transfer tax, like sales tax.

I live in Maryland, and they double taxed me on income that I made in Illinois when I was living in Illinois. I threw a shitstorm. But this isn't really a double tax, at least anymore than sales tax is.

[-PC-Taishar]

1. It has everything to do with the expansion of government. Since they have NO IDEA how to balance a budget (SS, Welfare, Medicaid/care, USPS, all programs operating at a loss). The larger the government gets the more the US citizens pay to support the bureaucracy. Government is inefficient. Period. You can't argue it. Don't try.
2.I am agreeing with him. This isn't a right or a left thing. Both seek to expand government. Progressives just do it more quickly (DOUBLED THE DEFICIT IN 3.% yrs ANYONE).
3.Going off the gold standard opened the flood gates for a debt based monetary system. There is no incentive against printing money hence it is done with aplomb by our government (right and left)
4.Agreed. However, this is exactly what the left is shooting for with the Affordable Care Act.
5. See #1

[awp-killer]

1. It has everything to do with the expansion of government. Since they have NO IDEA how to balance a budget (SS, Welfare, Medicaid/care, USPS, all programs operating at a loss). The larger the government gets the more the US citizens pay to support the bureaucracy. Government is inefficient. Period. You can't argue it. Don't try.

Keynes is talking about inflation. You are arguing about whether public spending should be 30 or 40% of GDP. You two are talking about two very different things. Show me where Keynes says the same negative consequences about public spending as he does for inflation.

2.I am agreeing with him. This isn't a right or a left thing. Both seek to expand government. Progressives just do it more quickly (DOUBLED THE DEFICIT IN 3.% yrs ANYONE).

The deficit has increased because of the massive tax cuts and lost revenue from the recession. Obama has the lowest increase in spending increase in 60 years. I shit you not: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... -lowest-s/

3.Going off the gold standard opened the flood gates for a debt based monetary system. There is no incentive against printing money hence it is done with aplomb by our government (right and left)

Inflation is a pretty big incentive against printing money.

4.Agreed. However, this is exactly what the left is shooting for with the Affordable Care Act.

Providing subsidies to make health insurance affordable isn't price fixing. Price fixing is setting a price floor or ceiling to control prices. ACA clearly isn't protectionism, either.[/quote]

[zel]

1 quick observation: Inflation is only something the NEXT president worries about, it's not really an incentive to not print money if in the short term it gets you re-elected.