The will of the bank to enslave the people

Home :: Search :: Memberlist :: Privacy Policy :: Donate!

The will of the bank to enslave the people

Home // Liberals Versus Conservatives

Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3

exton
Forum Elder

Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218

Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:06 am Post subject:

Lester wrote:

The dollar is given value by the strength of the economy in which it is spawned from, I assume thats what jusdeadphunky meant.

But it's not what amoralanimal meant - the guy i was responding to.

amoralanimal
Newbie

Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 36
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 2:42 am Post subject:

exton wrote:

*smacks forehead*

The dollar isn't backed by anything. That's not how modern currency works.

But then, i get my information from things like "books", so never mind me.

I like it. Ignore the resources I post and just knee jerk your way through this one. Helpful.

Let me help you to understand - I said:

"In effect, our US dollar is backed, not by gold or silver, but by oil"

The part you must have missed was the first two words. 'In effect'. Here's what the dictionary says about this useful little phrase:

in effect,
a. for practical purposes; virtually: His silence was in effect a confirmation of the rumor.

So - as a careful reading would have shown, I was not claiming that the dollar is backed by oil, but that it is, in effect, backed by oil. See how that works?

I'm a pretty serious guy, and, after investigation and research into this issue, I've concluded that there are some serious questions about the Fed. I've pointed you to easily accessible resources that make solid arguments that support this.

If you disagree, tell me WHY. Make a LOGICAL argument, or provide some FACTS, not a knee jerk reaction and a smart ass remark masquerading as an argument. Dismissing a serious argument out of hand is a sign of weakness in your own. I'd hoped for better.

So - I'll give you a second chance - you like books? What a coincidence - so do I!

So if you're interesting in coming to an INFORMED conclusion about this issue, here's my suggestion:

'The Case Against the Fed' by Murray Rothbard.
http://www.amazon.com/Case-Aga.....amp;sr=1-1

'The Creature from Jekyll Island' by G. Edward Griffin.
http://www.amazon.com/Creature.....amp;sr=8-2

How The World Really Works, by Alan B. Jones
http://www.amazon.com/gp/produ.....amp;sr=8-2

Secrets of the Temple: How the Federal Reserve Runs the Country, by William Greider
http://www.amazon.com/gp/produ.....amp;sr=8-2

A History of Money and Banking in the United States: The Colonial Era to World War II, by Murray N. Rothbard
http://www.amazon.com/History-.....sr=8-2[/i]

amoralanimal
Newbie

Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 36
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 3:11 am Post subject:

While on the subject, and while I have my quotes file open, might as well share these...all from Thomas Jefferson (and available in various *books*):

"I sincerely believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a moneyed aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

"Paper is poverty,... it is only the ghost of money, and not money itself."

"Experience has proved to us that a dollar of silver disappears for every dollar of paper emitted."

"It is a [disputed] question, whether the circulation of paper, rather than of specie, is a good or an evil... I believe it to be one of those cases where mercantile clamor will bear down reason, until it is corrected by ruin."

exton
Forum Elder

Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218

Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 4:25 am Post subject:

Thomas jefferson envisioned the united states as an agrarian society.

That is not the civilization that we live in, and it's not the civilization i want to live in.

exton
Forum Elder

Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218

Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 4:27 am Post subject:

amoralanimal wrote:

If you would like a serious argument in response to your posts, then you should fill you posts with more content. Content, like, say, serious arguments backed by logic.

Lester
Forum Elder

Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 4650

Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 7:34 am Post subject:

exton wrote:

Lester wrote:

The dollar is given value by the strength of the economy in which it is spawned from, I assume thats what jusdeadphunky meant.

But it's not what amoralanimal meant - the guy i was responding to.

Oh sorry, i thought jusdeadphunky posted it.

amoralanimal
Newbie

Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 36
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 5:35 pm Post subject:

exton wrote:

amoralanimal wrote:

If you would like a serious argument in response to your posts, then you should fill you posts with more content. Content, like, say, serious arguments backed by logic.

In reviewing this thread, I note that your posts all seem to be utterly lacking in content, while mine have plenty.

I gave you videos - you asked for books, I gave you books - chock full of logic and fact - you insist I regurgitate the contents of all these resources explicitly for you. Sorry, not worth it to me.

I'll give you directions to where the water is, but I won't try to make you drink...if you prefer to remain uneducated, then as a libertarian, I will fight for your freedom to pursue happiness in this way.

amoralanimal
Newbie

Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 36
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 5:45 pm Post subject:

exton wrote:

Thomas jefferson envisioned the united states as an agrarian society.

That is not the civilization that we live in, and it's not the civilization i want to live in.

Yep - that's not too disingenuous. Tell us, given the historical context, what other type of society could Jefferson possibly have envisioned?

Also, explain to us the link you imply between a non-agrarian society and a fiat currency? That is, you are implying that a gold-backed currency is suitable for an agrarian society but not for a 'modern' society. Back that up, please, because I do not see the difference.

And if that's the case, why did it take until the 70s to take us off the gold standard? During all of that time between the Industrial Revolution and 1973, if you are correct that a gold backed currency was unsuitable, it follows logically thsat there must have been lots of negative monetary effects which caused Nixon to take us off the gold standard and move to a fiat currency, right? What were those negative monetary effects that led to this (in your view) wise decision?

exton
Forum Elder

Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218

Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2007 2:08 am Post subject:

amoralanimal wrote:

Yep - that's not too disingenuous. Tell us, given the historical context, what other type of society could Jefferson possibly have envisioned?

An industrialist one.

Quote:

Also, explain to us the link you imply between a non-agrarian society and a fiat currency? That is, you are implying that a gold-backed currency is suitable for an agrarian society but not for a 'modern' society. Back that up, please, because I do not see the difference.

I was actually implying that jefferson's conclusions are not appropriate for the society we live in because his conclusions were geared towards a different sort of society. That is to say, you can't quote him and then claim that you've made some sort of point.

exton
Forum Elder

Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218

Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2007 2:10 am Post subject:

amoralanimal wrote:

In reviewing this thread, I note that your posts all seem to be utterly lacking in content, while mine have plenty.

You have posted assertions, and when asked to justify them, you have posted internet videos and the names of books.

Just as you don't want to waste your time explaining yourself to me, i don't want to waste my time watching videos on the internet and hunting down books.

amoralanimal
Newbie

Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 36
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2007 2:47 am Post subject:

exton wrote:

amoralanimal wrote:

Yep - that's not too disingenuous. Tell us, given the historical context, what other type of society could Jefferson possibly have envisioned?

An industrialist one.

Jefferson - in 1776 - could have envisioned an industrialist society. Hmmm...an exceedingly unlikely prospect, unless he was psychic or a time traveler. The Industrial Revolution didn't even get started until about 1780, and did not really take full hold until the 1830s. Methinks you expect too much of poor Mr Jefferson.

But this is really beside the point. Jefferson was a man of the Enlightenment. The philosophical ideals of Locke and others are what drove him.

Can I take it from your dismissal that you disagree with these ideals? That is, the unalienable rights to life, liberty and so forth? That governments are instituted to protect people's rights and property, and that this is the only legitmate function? That all people are created equal? You think these notions are, it seems, 'primitive'? So in short, you disagree with the Declaration of Independence, which was largely an explicit postulation of Jefferson's 'agrarian' ideals?

Or do you think his ideals were on target, and it is his policies as President with which you disagee? Please clarify. It is not at all clear to me what, precisely, you are attempting to say.

exton
Forum Elder

Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218

Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2007 2:58 am Post subject:

amoralanimal wrote:

"Industry" existed in his time. Just not mechanised industry.

Quote:

Can I take it from your dismissal that you disagree with these ideals? That is, the unalienable rights to life, liberty and so forth? That governments are instituted to protect people's rights and property, and that this is the only legitmate function? That all people are created equal? You think these notions are, it seems, 'primitive'?

The word i would use is "simplistic".

Quote:

So in short, you disagree with the Declaration of Independence, which was largely an explicit postulation of Jefferson's 'agrarian' ideals?

Pretty much.

Lester
Forum Elder

Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 4650

Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2007 6:12 am Post subject:

Calm down ladies, talk about the point, not your opponents content.

amoralanimal
Newbie

Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 36
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2007 6:25 pm Post subject:

exton wrote:

amoralanimal wrote:

"Industry" existed in his time. Just not mechanised industry.

Quote:

The word i would use is "simplistic".

Quote:

So in short, you disagree with the Declaration of Independence, which was largely an explicit postulation of Jefferson's 'agrarian' ideals?

Pretty much.

So - this set of foundational philosophical ideals not to your liking, what is your proposal? What is your political philosophy?

That is, since you do not subscribe to the doctrine of popular sovereignty, nor the doctrine of natural rights, what stands in their place? Rule of the elites? Feudal system? Church oligarchy? Merchant-State? Direct democracy? Anarchy?

Your terse responses leave much to be desired, and do not seem to indicate a willingness to debate. Do you in fact *have* a well thought through political philosophy that can be articulated, or are you just going on instinct?

exton
Forum Elder

Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218

Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2007 2:16 am Post subject:

amoralanimal wrote:

That is, since you do not subscribe to the doctrine of popular sovereignty, nor the doctrine of natural rights, what stands in their place? Rule of the elites? Feudal system? Church oligarchy? Merchant-State? Direct democracy? Anarchy?

I didn't say i disagreed with the structure of the government of the united states. I said i disagreed with these things:

That is, the unalienable rights to life, liberty and so forth? That governments are instituted to protect people's rights and property, and that this is the only legitmate function? That all people are created equal?

I don't think that "natural rights" exist in any real sense - rights are a concept invented by humans. And a good one, i think. It's useful. But i don't think rights are natural.

I do not believe that the government's "only" function is to "protect people's rights and property". I think that the government is the organizational structure through which a society intentionally manages itself. The government can do anything it's set up to do. Whether or not a govermnet *should* perform a particular duty depends on whether or not the government performing that duty would work best.

I do not think that all people are created equal. In fact, it should be plainly obvious that some people are better at some things than others are.
I do think we should, for the most part, *treat* everyone equally, though. That seems to have the best outcome for everyone.

	LVC Home // Liberals Versus Conservatives	All times are GMT Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

Political Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory