|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On February 04 2014 12:10 oneofthem wrote:
ofc every non-conservative report is left wing and thus must be quackery
thread clearly needs more content from freerepublic, breitbart, theblaze and stormfront
|
On February 04 2014 12:10 oneofthem wrote:
ofc every non-conservative report is left wing and thus must be quackery
You may want to actually familiarize yourself with StealthBlue's sources before you post shit like this.
|
On February 04 2014 12:12 zusch wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2014 12:03 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 12:00 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 11:53 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 11:46 zusch wrote:
You want to hear a conspiracy? The President's MyRA program is the first step in an effort to confiscate the savings of American to pay for the $16 trillion federal deficit.
Impossible? Think Cyprus. Creating a voluntary investment vehicle is a far cry from wealth confiscation. Key phrase in my post is "first step." At first it is voluntary, but who know when they will change the rules and it becomes mandatory. And what really is this "investment vehicle?" Obama described it as a "guaranteed reasonable return with zero risk." The only thing he can mean is U.S. treasuries. Not even U.S. treasuries have zero risk, contrary to popular belief. The U.S. is not immune to default. It is no more of a "first step" than selling government bonds. In other words, it is "no step" whatsoever. That is the point. Soon there will no one left to sell government bonds to except U.S. citizens, who will be forced to buy them.
...I thought the entire point of Government Bonds was to sell them to citizens...?
|
On February 04 2014 12:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2014 12:12 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:03 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 12:00 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 11:53 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 11:46 zusch wrote:
You want to hear a conspiracy? The President's MyRA program is the first step in an effort to confiscate the savings of American to pay for the $16 trillion federal deficit.
Impossible? Think Cyprus. Creating a voluntary investment vehicle is a far cry from wealth confiscation. Key phrase in my post is "first step." At first it is voluntary, but who know when they will change the rules and it becomes mandatory. And what really is this "investment vehicle?" Obama described it as a "guaranteed reasonable return with zero risk." The only thing he can mean is U.S. treasuries. Not even U.S. treasuries have zero risk, contrary to popular belief. The U.S. is not immune to default. It is no more of a "first step" than selling government bonds. In other words, it is "no step" whatsoever. That is the point. Soon there will no one left to sell government bonds to except U.S. citizens, who will be forced to buy them. ...I thought the entire point of Government Bonds was to sell them to citizens...?
So citizens pay their taxes to the gov't...and with their leftover money they buy gov't debt because the gov't doesn't have enough tax money to run a balanced budget? See the problem?
|
I do enjoy reading most of StealthBlue's topics. They're humorous and occasionally thought provoking. I'd hate to see them end! But that's the logical conclusion to throwing out politically leaning sources into the disreputable barrel.
Alleging conspiracy and using a source is one thing. Killing the source is quite another thing. I mean, that wacko Andrew Breitbart (sarcasm) of breitbart.com , may he rest in peace, helped launch The Huffington Post even though he was a conservative for most of his adult life. I think his example of bipartisanship is inspiring. May we be wary of bringing out the long knives for websites we disagree with.
|
On February 04 2014 12:20 Danglars wrote:
I do enjoy reading most of StealthBlue's topics. They're humorous and occasionally thought provoking.
...and sometimes they're just rubbish like that anti-fracking study that he posted a couple days ago.
I'd hate to see them end! But that's the logical conclusion to throwing out politically leaning sources into the disreputable barrel.
And yes, this is the correct way to look at it.
|
On February 04 2014 12:19 zusch wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2014 12:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:12 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:03 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 12:00 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 11:53 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 11:46 zusch wrote:
You want to hear a conspiracy? The President's MyRA program is the first step in an effort to confiscate the savings of American to pay for the $16 trillion federal deficit.
Impossible? Think Cyprus. Creating a voluntary investment vehicle is a far cry from wealth confiscation. Key phrase in my post is "first step." At first it is voluntary, but who know when they will change the rules and it becomes mandatory. And what really is this "investment vehicle?" Obama described it as a "guaranteed reasonable return with zero risk." The only thing he can mean is U.S. treasuries. Not even U.S. treasuries have zero risk, contrary to popular belief. The U.S. is not immune to default. It is no more of a "first step" than selling government bonds. In other words, it is "no step" whatsoever. That is the point. Soon there will no one left to sell government bonds to except U.S. citizens, who will be forced to buy them. ...I thought the entire point of Government Bonds was to sell them to citizens...? So citizens pay their taxes to the gov't...and with their leftover money they buy gov't debt because the gov't doesn't have enough tax money to run a balanced budget? See the problem?
Or they could, you know, put their money into the other dozen investment options available...
I don't even see why you're concerned. Investing money into Government Bonds, even if they were some nefarious, shady scheme from a corrupt power, is still a step up from the current norm for Americans...which is to not have any money and rack up thousands in credit card debts.
|
On February 04 2014 11:12 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +JON STEWART: Why do we have so much trouble executing the plans with any kind of efficiency?
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): Well, again, if you're dealing with people who have no agenda, you know, who nothing -- nothing is their agenda and never is our timetable, it's very hard to negotiate with them. So we are responsible. In other words, call us responsible. They know we're going to vote not to shut down government. They know we are going t o vote for the budget no matter how unpleasant it is. The choice we have is to be irresponsible and follow their path or we don't want to be fearmongers but to explain this to the public is very bad news. We want to be positive.
STEWART: Aside from that aspect, I meant more in terms of, 'Okay, we are going to set up a health care web site that is an exchange. People are going to come to it.' Why is it so hard to get a company to execute that competently?
PELOSI: I don't know. As one who was very --
[Laughter]
PELOSI: No, and that is my question.
STEWART: Let me get the House Minority Leader here, I can ask her. Hold on. What do you mean you don't know? How do you not know?
PELOSI: It's not my responsibility. But I will say this, we worked very hard to honor our responsibility to pass the bill that honors the vowels of our founders: life, a healthier life, liberty to pursue your happiness. sourceMany of my leftist and lean-leftist nonpolitical friends depend on Comedy Central for their news. Now the majority leader claims to be responsible (in contrast to the mean government shutdown opponents), and simultaneously claims she doesn't know why her government health plan turned out so badly. I mean, not even the standard "Well health care and health insurance is so complex and there's so many people so there was bound to be problems." I had become used to the party of Big Government downplaying the size of the problem and emphasizing the complexity of the issues. I guess focus groups showed that ignorance was better than an intricacy discussion.
I think its a great question since most civilized countries actually are capable of delivering government owned healthcare at a lower cost than the Americans without nearly as much mess. It would be great to have a series of hearings on the way government contractors work in the US and it would certainly benefit the Republic.
|
On February 04 2014 12:25 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2014 12:19 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:12 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:03 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 12:00 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 11:53 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 11:46 zusch wrote:
You want to hear a conspiracy? The President's MyRA program is the first step in an effort to confiscate the savings of American to pay for the $16 trillion federal deficit.
Impossible? Think Cyprus. Creating a voluntary investment vehicle is a far cry from wealth confiscation. Key phrase in my post is "first step." At first it is voluntary, but who know when they will change the rules and it becomes mandatory. And what really is this "investment vehicle?" Obama described it as a "guaranteed reasonable return with zero risk." The only thing he can mean is U.S. treasuries. Not even U.S. treasuries have zero risk, contrary to popular belief. The U.S. is not immune to default. It is no more of a "first step" than selling government bonds. In other words, it is "no step" whatsoever. That is the point. Soon there will no one left to sell government bonds to except U.S. citizens, who will be forced to buy them. ...I thought the entire point of Government Bonds was to sell them to citizens...? So citizens pay their taxes to the gov't...and with their leftover money they buy gov't debt because the gov't doesn't have enough tax money to run a balanced budget? See the problem? Or they could, you know, put their money into the other dozen investment options available... I don't even see why you're concerned. Investing money into Government Bonds, even if they were some nefarious, shady scheme from a corrupt power, is still a step up from the current norm for Americans...which is to not have any money and rack up thousands in credit card debts.
And now we go in a circle back to my "conspiracy" that the gov't will force American's to buy gov't debt (and call it an investment).
I've already explained why gov't bonds are not a viable investment option. I'm sure that if you have no money the gov't will just give you some U.S. treasuries for free since they are worthless anyway.
|
On February 04 2014 12:00 zusch wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2014 11:53 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 11:46 zusch wrote:
You want to hear a conspiracy? The President's MyRA program is the first step in an effort to confiscate the savings of American to pay for the $16 trillion federal deficit.
Impossible? Think Cyprus. Creating a voluntary investment vehicle is a far cry from wealth confiscation. Key phrase in my post is "first step." At first it is voluntary, but who know when they will change the rules and it becomes mandatory. And what really is this "investment vehicle?" Obama described it as a "guaranteed reasonable return with zero risk." The only thing he can mean is U.S. treasuries. Not even U.S. treasuries have zero risk, contrary to popular belief. The U.S. is not immune to default.
You could just as well say "Government is the first step towards wealth confiscation"
As an aside, if we are getting really cynical here had Obama just forced every American to have an S&P index the day he announced stocks are a good investment back in 09 when the bailout really got rolling...well, they'd be a hell of a lot richer today.
|
On February 04 2014 12:35 zusch wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2014 12:25 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:19 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:12 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:03 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 12:00 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 11:53 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 11:46 zusch wrote:
You want to hear a conspiracy? The President's MyRA program is the first step in an effort to confiscate the savings of American to pay for the $16 trillion federal deficit.
Impossible? Think Cyprus. Creating a voluntary investment vehicle is a far cry from wealth confiscation. Key phrase in my post is "first step." At first it is voluntary, but who know when they will change the rules and it becomes mandatory. And what really is this "investment vehicle?" Obama described it as a "guaranteed reasonable return with zero risk." The only thing he can mean is U.S. treasuries. Not even U.S. treasuries have zero risk, contrary to popular belief. The U.S. is not immune to default. It is no more of a "first step" than selling government bonds. In other words, it is "no step" whatsoever. That is the point. Soon there will no one left to sell government bonds to except U.S. citizens, who will be forced to buy them. ...I thought the entire point of Government Bonds was to sell them to citizens...? So citizens pay their taxes to the gov't...and with their leftover money they buy gov't debt because the gov't doesn't have enough tax money to run a balanced budget? See the problem? Or they could, you know, put their money into the other dozen investment options available... I don't even see why you're concerned. Investing money into Government Bonds, even if they were some nefarious, shady scheme from a corrupt power, is still a step up from the current norm for Americans...which is to not have any money and rack up thousands in credit card debts. And now we go in a circle back to my "conspiracy" that the gov't will force American's to buy gov't debt (and call it an investment). I've already explained why gov't bonds are not a viable investment option. I'm sure that if you have no money the gov't will just give you some U.S. treasuries for free since they are worthless anyway.
Ah, cool. So...
1) Government bonds.
2) ????
3) SKY IS FALLING WORLD IS DOOMED WE'RE ALL DEAD
Seems sensible.
|
On February 04 2014 12:38 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2014 12:35 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:25 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:19 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:12 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:03 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 12:00 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 11:53 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 11:46 zusch wrote:
You want to hear a conspiracy? The President's MyRA program is the first step in an effort to confiscate the savings of American to pay for the $16 trillion federal deficit.
Impossible? Think Cyprus. Creating a voluntary investment vehicle is a far cry from wealth confiscation. Key phrase in my post is "first step." At first it is voluntary, but who know when they will change the rules and it becomes mandatory. And what really is this "investment vehicle?" Obama described it as a "guaranteed reasonable return with zero risk." The only thing he can mean is U.S. treasuries. Not even U.S. treasuries have zero risk, contrary to popular belief. The U.S. is not immune to default. It is no more of a "first step" than selling government bonds. In other words, it is "no step" whatsoever. That is the point. Soon there will no one left to sell government bonds to except U.S. citizens, who will be forced to buy them. ...I thought the entire point of Government Bonds was to sell them to citizens...? So citizens pay their taxes to the gov't...and with their leftover money they buy gov't debt because the gov't doesn't have enough tax money to run a balanced budget? See the problem? Or they could, you know, put their money into the other dozen investment options available... I don't even see why you're concerned. Investing money into Government Bonds, even if they were some nefarious, shady scheme from a corrupt power, is still a step up from the current norm for Americans...which is to not have any money and rack up thousands in credit card debts. And now we go in a circle back to my "conspiracy" that the gov't will force American's to buy gov't debt (and call it an investment). I've already explained why gov't bonds are not a viable investment option. I'm sure that if you have no money the gov't will just give you some U.S. treasuries for free since they are worthless anyway. Ah, cool. So... 1) Government bonds. 2) ???? 3) SKY IS FALLING WORLD IS DOOMED WE'RE ALL DEAD Seems sensible.
Was a pleasure having a sensible debate with you.
|
On February 04 2014 12:35 zusch wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2014 12:25 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:19 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:12 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:03 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 12:00 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 11:53 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 11:46 zusch wrote:
You want to hear a conspiracy? The President's MyRA program is the first step in an effort to confiscate the savings of American to pay for the $16 trillion federal deficit.
Impossible? Think Cyprus. Creating a voluntary investment vehicle is a far cry from wealth confiscation. Key phrase in my post is "first step." At first it is voluntary, but who know when they will change the rules and it becomes mandatory. And what really is this "investment vehicle?" Obama described it as a "guaranteed reasonable return with zero risk." The only thing he can mean is U.S. treasuries. Not even U.S. treasuries have zero risk, contrary to popular belief. The U.S. is not immune to default. It is no more of a "first step" than selling government bonds. In other words, it is "no step" whatsoever. That is the point. Soon there will no one left to sell government bonds to except U.S. citizens, who will be forced to buy them. ...I thought the entire point of Government Bonds was to sell them to citizens...? So citizens pay their taxes to the gov't...and with their leftover money they buy gov't debt because the gov't doesn't have enough tax money to run a balanced budget? See the problem? Or they could, you know, put their money into the other dozen investment options available... I don't even see why you're concerned. Investing money into Government Bonds, even if they were some nefarious, shady scheme from a corrupt power, is still a step up from the current norm for Americans...which is to not have any money and rack up thousands in credit card debts. And now we go in a circle back to my "conspiracy" that the gov't will force American's to buy gov't debt (and call it an investment). I've already explained why gov't bonds are not a viable investment option. I'm sure that if you have no money the gov't will just give you some U.S. treasuries for free since they are worthless anyway. government bonds as a concept have existed since the Dutch Republic, maybe even the Italian city state period.
They issuance of bonds did not cause England to become some totalitarian nightmare and the US has been issuing debt since before independence...and has also failed to become a totalitarian state. If you are going to go full zero hedge here at least take the time to research the history of debt as an investment vehicle. But hey, thats what makes zero hedge so great, if you throw enough random predictions and you wait long enough just randomly something might come true and then you are the only one who had the balls to speak truth to power or whatever.
|
On February 04 2014 12:40 zusch wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2014 12:38 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:35 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:25 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:19 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:12 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:03 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 12:00 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 11:53 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
Creating a voluntary investment vehicle is a far cry from wealth confiscation. Key phrase in my post is "first step." At first it is voluntary, but who know when they will change the rules and it becomes mandatory. And what really is this "investment vehicle?" Obama described it as a "guaranteed reasonable return with zero risk." The only thing he can mean is U.S. treasuries. Not even U.S. treasuries have zero risk, contrary to popular belief. The U.S. is not immune to default. It is no more of a "first step" than selling government bonds. In other words, it is "no step" whatsoever. That is the point. Soon there will no one left to sell government bonds to except U.S. citizens, who will be forced to buy them. ...I thought the entire point of Government Bonds was to sell them to citizens...? So citizens pay their taxes to the gov't...and with their leftover money they buy gov't debt because the gov't doesn't have enough tax money to run a balanced budget? See the problem? Or they could, you know, put their money into the other dozen investment options available... I don't even see why you're concerned. Investing money into Government Bonds, even if they were some nefarious, shady scheme from a corrupt power, is still a step up from the current norm for Americans...which is to not have any money and rack up thousands in credit card debts. And now we go in a circle back to my "conspiracy" that the gov't will force American's to buy gov't debt (and call it an investment). I've already explained why gov't bonds are not a viable investment option. I'm sure that if you have no money the gov't will just give you some U.S. treasuries for free since they are worthless anyway. Ah, cool. So... 1) Government bonds. 2) ???? 3) SKY IS FALLING WORLD IS DOOMED WE'RE ALL DEAD Seems sensible. Was a pleasure having a sensible debate with you.
You know, I actually came up with a fun brainstorming challenge from this...
Find something that still sounds good after you force an entire country to do it to the utmost extreme.
Meanwhile, I shall ponder the horrors of my government recommending I breathe fresh air, drink plenty of water and do proper exercise.
On February 04 2014 12:41 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2014 12:35 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:25 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:19 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:12 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:03 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 12:00 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 11:53 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 11:46 zusch wrote:
You want to hear a conspiracy? The President's MyRA program is the first step in an effort to confiscate the savings of American to pay for the $16 trillion federal deficit.
Impossible? Think Cyprus. Creating a voluntary investment vehicle is a far cry from wealth confiscation. Key phrase in my post is "first step." At first it is voluntary, but who know when they will change the rules and it becomes mandatory. And what really is this "investment vehicle?" Obama described it as a "guaranteed reasonable return with zero risk." The only thing he can mean is U.S. treasuries. Not even U.S. treasuries have zero risk, contrary to popular belief. The U.S. is not immune to default. It is no more of a "first step" than selling government bonds. In other words, it is "no step" whatsoever. That is the point. Soon there will no one left to sell government bonds to except U.S. citizens, who will be forced to buy them. ...I thought the entire point of Government Bonds was to sell them to citizens...? So citizens pay their taxes to the gov't...and with their leftover money they buy gov't debt because the gov't doesn't have enough tax money to run a balanced budget? See the problem? Or they could, you know, put their money into the other dozen investment options available... I don't even see why you're concerned. Investing money into Government Bonds, even if they were some nefarious, shady scheme from a corrupt power, is still a step up from the current norm for Americans...which is to not have any money and rack up thousands in credit card debts. And now we go in a circle back to my "conspiracy" that the gov't will force American's to buy gov't debt (and call it an investment). I've already explained why gov't bonds are not a viable investment option. I'm sure that if you have no money the gov't will just give you some U.S. treasuries for free since they are worthless anyway. government bonds as a concept have existed since the Dutch Republic, maybe even the Italian city state period. They issuance of bonds did not cause England to become some totalitarian nightmare and the US has been issuing debt since before independence...and has also failed to become a totalitarian state. If you are going to go full zero hedge here at least take the time to research the history of debt as an investment vehicle. But hey, thats what makes zero hedge so great, if you throw enough random predictions and you wait long enough just randomly something might come true and then you are the only one who had the balls to speak truth to power or whatever.
Government bonds were also implemented in the US during WW2, so...yeah.
|
On February 04 2014 08:06 itsjustatank wrote:
Per capita or not, GDP only measures the size of an economy. It does not translate to the well-being of each and every person within that economy (and certainly does not begin to measure the well-being of those people who are systematically left out of that economy).
Such a silly and ridiculous thought that you can't extrapolate on a variable... very glad you're not in charge of anything analytically based at all. It's hard to have a back and forth when you present such an extreme that empirical evidence states the complete opposite (that GDP per cap is very highly correlated with standard of living).
|
A group of Democratic lawmakers have introduced a bill in both the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives to restore net neutrality rules at the U.S. Federal Communications Commission.
The two bills, introduced Monday, come about three weeks after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District Columbia Circuit struck down rules, passed by the FCC in late 2010, prohibiting broadband providers from selectively blocking or slowing Web traffic.
The new bill, called the Open Internet Preservation Act, would restore the FCC’s net neutrality, or open Internet, rules. The rules would remain in effect until the FCC takes new action on net neutrality, after the court left open the agency’s authority to pass new rules if it finds a new way to write them.
Among the nine Democratic cosponsors in the House are Representatives Henry Waxman, Anna Eshoo, Zoe Lofgren and Doris Matsui of California. Among the six Senate cosponsors are Senators Ed Markey of Massachusetts, Al Franken of Minnesota and Ron Wyden of Oregon.
The bill faces an uphill battle in the House, where majority Republicans pushed to repeal the FCC’s net neutrality rules before the appeals court threw them out.
“The Internet is an engine of economic growth because it has always been an open platform for competition and innovation,” Waxman, senior Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said in a statement. “Our bill very simply ensures that consumers can continue to access the content and applications of their choosing online.”
Waxman called on the FCC to take action on net neutrality, but said the bill would “protect” consumers and innovators in the meantime.
The bill may meet a more receptive audience in the Democrat-controlled Senate.
Source
|
On February 04 2014 12:44 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2014 12:40 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:38 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:35 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:25 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:19 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:12 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:03 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 12:00 zusch wrote:
[quote]
Key phrase in my post is "first step." At first it is voluntary, but who know when they will change the rules and it becomes mandatory. And what really is this "investment vehicle?" Obama described it as a "guaranteed reasonable return with zero risk." The only thing he can mean is U.S. treasuries. Not even U.S. treasuries have zero risk, contrary to popular belief. The U.S. is not immune to default. It is no more of a "first step" than selling government bonds. In other words, it is "no step" whatsoever. That is the point. Soon there will no one left to sell government bonds to except U.S. citizens, who will be forced to buy them. ...I thought the entire point of Government Bonds was to sell them to citizens...? So citizens pay their taxes to the gov't...and with their leftover money they buy gov't debt because the gov't doesn't have enough tax money to run a balanced budget? See the problem? Or they could, you know, put their money into the other dozen investment options available... I don't even see why you're concerned. Investing money into Government Bonds, even if they were some nefarious, shady scheme from a corrupt power, is still a step up from the current norm for Americans...which is to not have any money and rack up thousands in credit card debts. And now we go in a circle back to my "conspiracy" that the gov't will force American's to buy gov't debt (and call it an investment). I've already explained why gov't bonds are not a viable investment option. I'm sure that if you have no money the gov't will just give you some U.S. treasuries for free since they are worthless anyway. Ah, cool. So... 1) Government bonds. 2) ???? 3) SKY IS FALLING WORLD IS DOOMED WE'RE ALL DEAD Seems sensible. Was a pleasure having a sensible debate with you. You know, I actually came up with a fun brainstorming challenge from this... Find something that still sounds good after you force an entire country to do it to the utmost extreme. Meanwhile, I shall ponder the horrors of my government recommending I breathe fresh air, drink plenty of water and do proper exercise. Show nested quote +On February 04 2014 12:41 Sub40APM wrote:On February 04 2014 12:35 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:25 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:19 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:12 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:03 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 12:00 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 11:53 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
Creating a voluntary investment vehicle is a far cry from wealth confiscation. Key phrase in my post is "first step." At first it is voluntary, but who know when they will change the rules and it becomes mandatory. And what really is this "investment vehicle?" Obama described it as a "guaranteed reasonable return with zero risk." The only thing he can mean is U.S. treasuries. Not even U.S. treasuries have zero risk, contrary to popular belief. The U.S. is not immune to default. It is no more of a "first step" than selling government bonds. In other words, it is "no step" whatsoever. That is the point. Soon there will no one left to sell government bonds to except U.S. citizens, who will be forced to buy them. ...I thought the entire point of Government Bonds was to sell them to citizens...? So citizens pay their taxes to the gov't...and with their leftover money they buy gov't debt because the gov't doesn't have enough tax money to run a balanced budget? See the problem? Or they could, you know, put their money into the other dozen investment options available... I don't even see why you're concerned. Investing money into Government Bonds, even if they were some nefarious, shady scheme from a corrupt power, is still a step up from the current norm for Americans...which is to not have any money and rack up thousands in credit card debts. And now we go in a circle back to my "conspiracy" that the gov't will force American's to buy gov't debt (and call it an investment). I've already explained why gov't bonds are not a viable investment option. I'm sure that if you have no money the gov't will just give you some U.S. treasuries for free since they are worthless anyway. government bonds as a concept have existed since the Dutch Republic, maybe even the Italian city state period. They issuance of bonds did not cause England to become some totalitarian nightmare and the US has been issuing debt since before independence...and has also failed to become a totalitarian state. If you are going to go full zero hedge here at least take the time to research the history of debt as an investment vehicle. But hey, thats what makes zero hedge so great, if you throw enough random predictions and you wait long enough just randomly something might come true and then you are the only one who had the balls to speak truth to power or whatever. Government bonds were also implemented in the US during WW2, so...yeah.
Huh?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_public_debt
|
On February 04 2014 12:49 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2014 12:44 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:40 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:38 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:35 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:25 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:19 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:12 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:03 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
It is no more of a "first step" than selling government bonds. In other words, it is "no step" whatsoever. That is the point. Soon there will no one left to sell government bonds to except U.S. citizens, who will be forced to buy them. ...I thought the entire point of Government Bonds was to sell them to citizens...? So citizens pay their taxes to the gov't...and with their leftover money they buy gov't debt because the gov't doesn't have enough tax money to run a balanced budget? See the problem? Or they could, you know, put their money into the other dozen investment options available... I don't even see why you're concerned. Investing money into Government Bonds, even if they were some nefarious, shady scheme from a corrupt power, is still a step up from the current norm for Americans...which is to not have any money and rack up thousands in credit card debts. And now we go in a circle back to my "conspiracy" that the gov't will force American's to buy gov't debt (and call it an investment). I've already explained why gov't bonds are not a viable investment option. I'm sure that if you have no money the gov't will just give you some U.S. treasuries for free since they are worthless anyway. Ah, cool. So... 1) Government bonds. 2) ???? 3) SKY IS FALLING WORLD IS DOOMED WE'RE ALL DEAD Seems sensible. Was a pleasure having a sensible debate with you. You know, I actually came up with a fun brainstorming challenge from this... Find something that still sounds good after you force an entire country to do it to the utmost extreme. Meanwhile, I shall ponder the horrors of my government recommending I breathe fresh air, drink plenty of water and do proper exercise. On February 04 2014 12:41 Sub40APM wrote:On February 04 2014 12:35 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:25 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:19 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:12 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:03 xDaunt wrote:On February 04 2014 12:00 zusch wrote:
[quote]
Key phrase in my post is "first step." At first it is voluntary, but who know when they will change the rules and it becomes mandatory. And what really is this "investment vehicle?" Obama described it as a "guaranteed reasonable return with zero risk." The only thing he can mean is U.S. treasuries. Not even U.S. treasuries have zero risk, contrary to popular belief. The U.S. is not immune to default. It is no more of a "first step" than selling government bonds. In other words, it is "no step" whatsoever. That is the point. Soon there will no one left to sell government bonds to except U.S. citizens, who will be forced to buy them. ...I thought the entire point of Government Bonds was to sell them to citizens...? So citizens pay their taxes to the gov't...and with their leftover money they buy gov't debt because the gov't doesn't have enough tax money to run a balanced budget? See the problem? Or they could, you know, put their money into the other dozen investment options available... I don't even see why you're concerned. Investing money into Government Bonds, even if they were some nefarious, shady scheme from a corrupt power, is still a step up from the current norm for Americans...which is to not have any money and rack up thousands in credit card debts. And now we go in a circle back to my "conspiracy" that the gov't will force American's to buy gov't debt (and call it an investment). I've already explained why gov't bonds are not a viable investment option. I'm sure that if you have no money the gov't will just give you some U.S. treasuries for free since they are worthless anyway. government bonds as a concept have existed since the Dutch Republic, maybe even the Italian city state period. They issuance of bonds did not cause England to become some totalitarian nightmare and the US has been issuing debt since before independence...and has also failed to become a totalitarian state. If you are going to go full zero hedge here at least take the time to research the history of debt as an investment vehicle. But hey, thats what makes zero hedge so great, if you throw enough random predictions and you wait long enough just randomly something might come true and then you are the only one who had the balls to speak truth to power or whatever. Government bonds were also implemented in the US during WW2, so...yeah. Huh? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_public_debt
Not entirely sure what you're questioning, but...
I was saying the US has sold Bonds in the past without the whole nation collapsing.
|
On February 04 2014 12:52 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2014 12:49 Sub40APM wrote:On February 04 2014 12:44 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:40 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:38 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:35 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:25 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:19 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:12 zusch wrote:
[quote]
That is the point. Soon there will no one left to sell government bonds to except U.S. citizens, who will be forced to buy them. ...I thought the entire point of Government Bonds was to sell them to citizens...? So citizens pay their taxes to the gov't...and with their leftover money they buy gov't debt because the gov't doesn't have enough tax money to run a balanced budget? See the problem? Or they could, you know, put their money into the other dozen investment options available... I don't even see why you're concerned. Investing money into Government Bonds, even if they were some nefarious, shady scheme from a corrupt power, is still a step up from the current norm for Americans...which is to not have any money and rack up thousands in credit card debts. And now we go in a circle back to my "conspiracy" that the gov't will force American's to buy gov't debt (and call it an investment). I've already explained why gov't bonds are not a viable investment option. I'm sure that if you have no money the gov't will just give you some U.S. treasuries for free since they are worthless anyway. Ah, cool. So... 1) Government bonds. 2) ???? 3) SKY IS FALLING WORLD IS DOOMED WE'RE ALL DEAD Seems sensible. Was a pleasure having a sensible debate with you. You know, I actually came up with a fun brainstorming challenge from this... Find something that still sounds good after you force an entire country to do it to the utmost extreme. Meanwhile, I shall ponder the horrors of my government recommending I breathe fresh air, drink plenty of water and do proper exercise. On February 04 2014 12:41 Sub40APM wrote:On February 04 2014 12:35 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:25 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:19 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:14 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 04 2014 12:12 zusch wrote:On February 04 2014 12:03 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
It is no more of a "first step" than selling government bonds. In other words, it is "no step" whatsoever. That is the point. Soon there will no one left to sell government bonds to except U.S. citizens, who will be forced to buy them. ...I thought the entire point of Government Bonds was to sell them to citizens...? So citizens pay their taxes to the gov't...and with their leftover money they buy gov't debt because the gov't doesn't have enough tax money to run a balanced budget? See the problem? Or they could, you know, put their money into the other dozen investment options available... I don't even see why you're concerned. Investing money into Government Bonds, even if they were some nefarious, shady scheme from a corrupt power, is still a step up from the current norm for Americans...which is to not have any money and rack up thousands in credit card debts. And now we go in a circle back to my "conspiracy" that the gov't will force American's to buy gov't debt (and call it an investment). I've already explained why gov't bonds are not a viable investment option. I'm sure that if you have no money the gov't will just give you some U.S. treasuries for free since they are worthless anyway. government bonds as a concept have existed since the Dutch Republic, maybe even the Italian city state period. They issuance of bonds did not cause England to become some totalitarian nightmare and the US has been issuing debt since before independence...and has also failed to become a totalitarian state. If you are going to go full zero hedge here at least take the time to research the history of debt as an investment vehicle. But hey, thats what makes zero hedge so great, if you throw enough random predictions and you wait long enough just randomly something might come true and then you are the only one who had the balls to speak truth to power or whatever. Government bonds were also implemented in the US during WW2, so...yeah. Huh? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_public_debt Not entirely sure what you're questioning, but... I was saying the US has sold Bonds in the past without the whole nation collapsing.
oh yea. my bad. I thought you were saying that bonds were invented in the 1940s. because...some people who go to zerohedge believe that...its always hard to tell just how historically and financially illiterate its subscribers are...
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On February 04 2014 12:24 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2014 12:20 Danglars wrote:
I do enjoy reading most of StealthBlue's topics. They're humorous and occasionally thought provoking. ...and sometimes they're just rubbish like that anti-fracking study that he posted a couple days ago. Show nested quote +I'd hate to see them end! But that's the logical conclusion to throwing out politically leaning sources into the disreputable barrel. And yes, this is the correct way to look at it.
you mean this NIH study? you need to distinguish between a study having limited conclusive power and one that is flawed, i.e. mistakenly stating its own conclusions.
http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/wp-content/uploads/122/1/ehp.1306722.pdf
i see no quackery here.
edit: i even found this fracking thread to see your post against this study. it's a one liner. not sure what you have against a large cohort study of 120k cases that spent a few pages outlining the standard limitations faced by such long time elapse and regional variance studies with no dosage discrimination
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
