The Donald Trump thread

Johnnyvee

Pelican
Cr33pin said:
I know some of "you people" don't like this guy cause he doesn't look a certain way. However a lot of times his information is pretty spot on...

"You people" just close you eyes and imagine this to be the voice of the Alpha Chad you lust for.
He makes some good points I agree. But I have to question the idea that if you just transfer the power to issue money from the Fed to the treasury, people will hold politicians/Government accountable.

Most people are easily fooled, and removing the Fed as things stand now could make it even easier for politicians to buy votes by just printing and borrowing. There are many examples of citizens voting for politicians that promise to just give them free stuff, without understanding what they really ask for, and the consequences thereof.
 

Easy_C

Crow
The Fed was never intended to issue money. They were created to serve as an insurance pool that the banks would pay into, and in return no individual bank would collapse in the event of a run on the bank.


What they do now didn’t know start until the government got involved.
 

ms224

Woodpecker
Given the boomers reliance on their precious 401k and housing prices I would like to see a 90% collapse in those fields.

Maybe then the rest of us can afford a normal place to live.
 

Paracelsus

Crow
Gold Member
Johnnyvee said:
But I have to question the idea that if you just transfer the power to issue money from the Fed to the treasury, people will hold politicians/Government accountable.
It won't. And it won't meaningfully change things. Politicians have been doing similar things with their currencies for literally the last three thousand years or so, and it's always ended up the same: hyperinflation and then depression. And it always ends up that way because politicians get too scared of being voted out of office and therefore resort to printing money (or its equivalent) in order to pay for their promises or buy themselves out of trouble.

Traditionally, the gold standard kept this sort of bullshit to a minimum, because there was a finite amount of gold produced/on earth, which meant you had a much better idea about how much your money was actually worth. But since Nixon and the world's banks took everyone off the gold standard from about the end of World War 2 through to the 1960s or so, that standard has gone. Until roughly the time of Reagan onward, the US dollar functioned as the gold standard because it was basically trusted and the US's promise not to hyperinflate its currency was believed. That latter promise has been reneged on for the past 20 to 30 years, and it's been outright (if implicitly) reneged on with the QE measures. All this has happened before, and will happen again.

And now for your daily dose of soy, albeit it has some merit:

 

kosko

Peacock
Gold Member
Johnnyvee said:
Cr33pin said:
I know some of "you people" don't like this guy cause he doesn't look a certain way. However a lot of times his information is pretty spot on...

"You people" just close you eyes and imagine this to be the voice of the Alpha Chad you lust for.
He makes some good points I agree. But I have to question the idea that if you just transfer the power to issue money from the Fed to the treasury, people will hold politicians/Government accountable.

Most people are easily fooled, and removing the Fed as things stand now could make it even easier for politicians to buy votes by just printing and borrowing. There are many examples of citizens voting for politicians that promise to just give them free stuff, without understanding what they really ask for, and the consequences thereof.
I don't agree. The return of government issued money would cause some restraint as Govt would.rely more on Notes and Bonds and thier performance would be tied to the stability of such government.

Pork and waste would blow up your ability to issue notes and Bonds and you would then run yourself into the ground trying to provide high yields.

This is how most Govt got money before the central bank cartels. Outside of war and crisis many Governments had restrained books as a result.
 

ms224

Woodpecker
kosko said:
Johnnyvee said:
Cr33pin said:
I know some of "you people" don't like this guy cause he doesn't look a certain way. However a lot of times his information is pretty spot on...

"You people" just close you eyes and imagine this to be the voice of the Alpha Chad you lust for.
He makes some good points I agree. But I have to question the idea that if you just transfer the power to issue money from the Fed to the treasury, people will hold politicians/Government accountable.

Most people are easily fooled, and removing the Fed as things stand now could make it even easier for politicians to buy votes by just printing and borrowing. There are many examples of citizens voting for politicians that promise to just give them free stuff, without understanding what they really ask for, and the consequences thereof.
I don't agree. The return of government issued money would cause some restraint as Govt would.rely more on Notes and Bonds and thier performance would be tied to the stability of such government.

Pork and waste would blow up your ability to issue notes and Bonds and you would then run yourself into the ground trying to provide high yields.

This is how most Govt got money before the central bank cartels. Outside of war and crisis many Governments had restrained books as a result.
Thats the fukin point my friend.....
 

Paracelsus

Crow
Gold Member
ms224 said:
Paracelsus, how many dollars are there in the world?
Too many. Which is why we've got this problem to start with. The only reason there hasn't been a collapse thus far is because no other country in the world has yet come up with a means of exchange reliable enough to compete with the US dollar. Also see: why Russia and China are buying up gold like mad.

ms224 said:
How many bitcoins?
None.

That's precisely the whole problem with digital currency. One thirteen year old script kiddie or one bad hardware moment and it's gone, completely. Which is why nobody uses it, and why nobody will use it bar drug dealers, and even then not for long. Did you think, did you really think, after everything that Assange, Snowden et. al. told you that anything you do on a computer connected in any way to the Internet is safe, untrackable, unhackable, reliable?

You might not be able to eat gold but neither can you make it disappear unless you're a stupid country like Venezuela or Australia and you put it in the hands of a British bank.

That said: gold has its problems too. The chief one being that it's at least conceptually impossible to expand the money supply without finding more of it. On the other hand, our expansion of the money supply worldwide since abandoning the gold standard is bringing on a Hindenberg-sized disaster.
 

Valentine

Kingfisher
Gold Member
Paracelsus said:
That's precisely the whole problem with digital currency. One thirteen year old script kiddie or one bad hardware moment and it's gone, completely. Which is why nobody uses it, and why nobody will use it bar drug dealers, and even then not for long. Did you think, did you really think, after everything that Assange, Snowden et. al. told you that anything you do on a computer connected in any way to the Internet is safe, untrackable, unhackable, reliable?
Cryptocurrency has a lot of issues ahead (eg learning curve, adoption) but the things you mentioned are not obstacles.

Script kiddies or hardware issues will *cannot* affect you if you have a standard hardware wallet like a Trezor. Even if you lose it the key is recoverable because you have a seed keyword. Barring that, keeping your coins in a reputable exchange like Coinbase is the equivalent of a bank account and unlike many banks offer TOTP 2-factor authentication as standard.

That bit at the end about surveillance - read my digital privacy thread and you'll be able to eliminate most of it in a few steps, or you can use Tor always to eliminate it all. Your phrasing makes it seem like this stuff is insurmountable and all-powerful when it's really not the case.
 

Andreas

Kingfisher
Valentine said:
Paracelsus said:
That's precisely the whole problem with digital currency. One thirteen year old script kiddie or one bad hardware moment and it's gone, completely. Which is why nobody uses it, and why nobody will use it bar drug dealers, and even then not for long. Did you think, did you really think, after everything that Assange, Snowden et. al. told you that anything you do on a computer connected in any way to the Internet is safe, untrackable, unhackable, reliable?
Cryptocurrency has a lot of issues ahead (eg learning curve, adoption) but the things you mentioned are not obstacles.

Script kiddies or hardware issues will *cannot* affect you if you have a standard hardware wallet like a Trezor. Even if you lose it the key is recoverable because you have a seed keyword. Barring that, keeping your coins in a reputable exchange like Coinbase is the equivalent of a bank account and unlike many banks offer TOTP 2-factor authentication as standard.

That bit at the end about surveillance - read my digital privacy thread and you'll be able to eliminate most of it in a few steps, or you can use Tor always to eliminate it all. Your phrasing makes it seem like this stuff is insurmountable and all-powerful when it's really not the case.
VPN providers do not protect you fully. Some of them will even sell user data to other companies. I think one of them even reported user data to the FBI. Also, if there is ever a power outage you will have zero access to it or just a very short amount of time to use it. Not to mention the fact that if it can be created through thin air (I know I'm oversimplifying here), then rest assured that there will be other 'currency' creators. If bitcoin is really a speculation bubble at this point, its value will go down dramatically when people look for other alternatives. It will take more tie for people to have confidence in digital currency if they will ever reach that point.

It's best to treat crypto currency as just another asset that it's nice to have after buying land, gold and other valuables to protect yourself against inflation.
 

Easy_C

Crow
eradicator said:
His content is spot on. Hell hexenhammer should run for office in Vermont
He's currently running for Governor.
[/quote]

godfather dust said:
A transvestite with 666 in his name is running for governor?


Styx is one of the single most "Vermont" people that exists and anyone who has ever been to that state knows it. I mean...that's the place that gave us Bernie Sanders and Ben & Jerry's. Nothing from Vermont can be considered authentically "Vermont" unless it has at least a touch of weird.
 

Easy_C

Crow
eradicator said:
His content is spot on. Hell hexenhammer should run for office in Vermont
He's currently running for Governor.
[/quote]

godfather dust said:
A transvestite with 666 in his name is running for governor?


Styx is one of the single most "Vermont" people that exists and anyone who has ever been to that state knows it. I mean...that's the place that gave us Bernie Sanders and Ben & Jerry's. Nothing from Vermont can be considered authentically "Vermont" unless it has at least a touch of weird.
 

Johnnyvee

Pelican
kosko said:
Johnnyvee said:
Cr33pin said:
I know some of "you people" don't like this guy cause he doesn't look a certain way. However a lot of times his information is pretty spot on...

"You people" just close you eyes and imagine this to be the voice of the Alpha Chad you lust for.
He makes some good points I agree. But I have to question the idea that if you just transfer the power to issue money from the Fed to the treasury, people will hold politicians/Government accountable.

Most people are easily fooled, and removing the Fed as things stand now could make it even easier for politicians to buy votes by just printing and borrowing. There are many examples of citizens voting for politicians that promise to just give them free stuff, without understanding what they really ask for, and the consequences thereof.
I don't agree. The return of government issued money would cause some restraint as Govt would.rely more on Notes and Bonds and thier performance would be tied to the stability of such government.

Pork and waste would blow up your ability to issue notes and Bonds and you would then run yourself into the ground trying to provide high yields.

This is how most Govt got money before the central bank cartels. Outside of war and crisis many Governments had restrained books as a result.
If they return to a gold standard and act responsibly yes. But that usually fails when empires and Nations are on the decline. My point is that it`s really inconsequential whether we have the Fed system or not. The US was still on the gold standard when the Fed was in place after all!

Also, wars are often used as an excuse to change the system. It always ends up with permanent negative changes, whether it`s taxation, regulations, fiscal responsibility etc. Every major war that the US has participated in has in fact been associated with higher taxes and less freedom for it`s citizens in the aftermath. The federal reserve act and the US venturing into WWI was no exception.
 
Cr33pin said:
I know some of "you people" don't like this guy cause he doesn't look a certain way. However a lot of times his information is pretty spot on...

"You people" just close you eyes and imagine this to be the voice of the Alpha Chad you lust for.
The social media bubble is going to pop because democrats and the SM companies themselves overhyped the stock with nothing to show for it. That bubble burst will have many ramifications for the economy, none of which will be Trump's fault.
 

The Beast1

Peacock
Gold Member
Do you guys even research what that shirtless faggot did for the governorship race in Vermont?

He was a write in and didn’t even come close to Republican Phil Scotts’ 151,000 votes.

Write ins amounted to 1,115 and they didn’t even announce who they were. Whoop di Dee!

"You people" just close you eyes and imagine this to be the voice of the Alpha Chad you lust for.
 
Top