Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
A thread for Democrats Only
Wednesday, May 16, 2018 7:48 AM
SIGNYM
I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.
Quote:Your whole premise is based upon spending just as many taxpayer dollars as we do today, but to train troops at home and give them low paying jobs. I don't see any point at all to any of this.
Wednesday, May 16, 2018 8:44 AM
6IXSTRINGJACK
Wednesday, May 16, 2018 8:55 AM
SECOND
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: Why quote me then post that? Is the simple fact that your name brought up in the previous post justification enough to segway into whatever random thought pops up in that little pea brain of yours? Do Right, Be Right. :)
Thursday, May 17, 2018 2:28 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: What you're talking about is entirely separate from the military, and I don't necessarily argue against it. Although it would have to pay more than army wages, and it shouldn't clothe and house people doing it either.
Quote:Kiki is talking about people handing over at least 4 years of their life under 24/7 direct management from the Military, housing non-combat duty soldiers on American soil on the taxpayer dime. Huge difference.
Thursday, May 17, 2018 2:31 AM
Quote:It is the hypocrisy that while Trump seems to be blithely forgiving ZTE for breaking already in-place sanctions against Iran, he and members of his administration such as John Bolton have been unyielding to the Europeans that all of their companies must cease any economic dealings with Iran ASAP now that Trump has scuttled US participation in the deal, even though it is widely accepted in Europe that Iran is in full compliance with the deal.
Thursday, May 17, 2018 2:57 AM
JEWELSTAITEFAN
Thursday, May 17, 2018 7:16 AM
Thursday, May 17, 2018 10:18 AM
Quote: It would be nice if commentators who accuse Republicans of lacking new ideas knew something about this history.
Thursday, May 17, 2018 1:45 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: If I had to take a guess I'd say the REAL inflection point occurred around 1969. That's when the line turns around from "going lower" to "going higher". That's what "inflection point" means. (Well, technically, IIRC an inflection point is where the second derivative crosses zero.) At that time LBJ (a Democrat) was busy spending money on BOTH the Vietnam War AND his "Great Society". That led to inflation, so that by 1973 Nixon had to take the USA off the gold standard (again. FDR originally took the USA off the gold standard in 1933). Going off the gold standard meant that money could be inflated ... i.e. created by the banks without restriction. At that point, one's "access to money" becomes THE defining factor in whether your ascent to wealth remains on-par with the wealthy. And since the wealthy always have better access to freshly-created (at-the-moment un-inflated) dollars they will always get richer faster. Both Democrats AND Republicans were complicit with this scheme. Quote: It would be nice if commentators who accuse Republicans of lacking new ideas knew something about this history. FIFY
Thursday, May 17, 2018 1:55 PM
Thursday, May 17, 2018 2:24 PM
Quote: If I had to take a guess I'd say the REAL inflection point occurred around 1969. That's when the line turns around from "going lower" to "going higher". That's what "inflection point" means. (Well, technically, IIRC an inflection point is where the second derivative crosses zero.) At that time LBJ (a Democrat) was busy spending money on BOTH the Vietnam War AND his "Great Society". That led to inflation, so that by 1973 Nixon had to take the USA off the gold standard (again. FDR originally took the USA off the gold standard in 1933). Going off the gold standard meant that money could be inflated ... i.e. created by the banks without restriction. At that point, one's "access to money" becomes THE defining factor in whether your ascent to wealth remains on-par with the wealthy. And since the wealthy always have better access to freshly-created (at-the-moment un-inflated) dollars they will always get richer faster. Both Democrats AND Republicans were complicit with this scheme. Quote: It would be nice if commentators who accuse Republicans of lacking new ideas knew something about this history. FIFY - SIGNY I was 17 years old in 1969, the year Signym says the Inflection Point began. You moved that point from 1980 to shift the blame to Democrats.
Quote: I am not believing Signym's alternative history because I was in Texas in '69. Nixon was President then.
Quote:In early 1968 President Lyndon Johnson made a change in the budget presentation by including Social Security and all other trust funds in a"unified budget."
Quote: He committed treason by extending the Vietnam so he could get elected in '68.
Quote: Nixon's newly revealed records show for certain that in 1968, as a presidential candidate, he ordered Anna Chennault, his liaison to the South Vietnam government, to persuade them to refuse a cease-fire being brokered by President Lyndon Johnson. Nixon's interference with these negotiations violated President John Adams's 1797 Logan Act, banning private citizens from intruding into official government negotiations with a foreign nation.
Quote:Personally, if I had known I would not have volunteered for Vietnam.
Quote: Nixon also toke the U.S. off the gold standard. Nixon’s treasury secretary and former governor of Texas John Connally said "My philosophy is that all foreigners are out to screw us and it’s our job to screw them first." Connally convinced Nixon to unleash the infamous Nixon Shock upon Europe’s unsuspecting political leaders. At the end of a crucial weekend of consultations with key advisors, President Nixon decided to make a startling announcement on live television: the global monetary system, which America had designed and had been nurturing since the end of the war, was to be dismantled in one fell swoop. The calendar read Sunday, August 15, 1971.
Quote:And in a sentence still resonating across Europe today, Connally summed it all up succinctly, painfully, brutally: “Gentlemen, the dollar is our currency. And from now on, it is your problem!”
Thursday, May 17, 2018 3:22 PM
Thursday, May 17, 2018 3:35 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote: If I had to take a guess I'd say the REAL inflection point occurred around 1969. That's when the line turns around from "going lower" to "going higher". That's what "inflection point" means. (Well, technically, IIRC an inflection point is where the second derivative crosses zero.) At that time LBJ (a Democrat) was busy spending money on BOTH the Vietnam War AND his "Great Society". That led to inflation, so that by 1973 Nixon had to take the USA off the gold standard (again. FDR originally took the USA off the gold standard in 1933). Going off the gold standard meant that money could be inflated ... i.e. created by the banks without restriction. At that point, one's "access to money" becomes THE defining factor in whether your ascent to wealth remains on-par with the wealthy. And since the wealthy always have better access to freshly-created (at-the-moment un-inflated) dollars they will always get richer faster. Both Democrats AND Republicans were complicit with this scheme. Quote: It would be nice if commentators who accuse Republicans of lacking new ideas knew something about this history. FIFY - SIGNY I was 17 years old in 1969, the year Signym says the Inflection Point began. You moved that point from 1980 to shift the blame to Democrats. No, I did not. What the article calls "the inflection point" is NOT the inflection point, and anyone except SECOND can see that by simple visual examination of the curve. Or you can use fancy math, if you want but you'll reach the same point. Quote: I am not believing Signym's alternative history because I was in Texas in '69. Nixon was President then. Correct, he attained office in Jan 1969, my bad. All of that inflationary spending was done by LBJ BEFORE Nixon came to office. LBJ included Social Security in the Federal budget (which had a surplus) to hide the debt generated by his deficit spending. Quote:In early 1968 President Lyndon Johnson made a change in the budget presentation by including Social Security and all other trust funds in a"unified budget." https://www.ssa.gov/history/BudgetTreatment.html LBJ's inflationary spending is a historic and economic fact, so get over it. Quote: He committed treason by extending the Vietnam so he could get elected in '68. From your link ... Quote: Nixon's newly revealed records show for certain that in 1968, as a presidential candidate, he ordered Anna Chennault, his liaison to the South Vietnam government, to persuade them to refuse a cease-fire being brokered by President Lyndon Johnson. Nixon's interference with these negotiations violated President John Adams's 1797 Logan Act, banning private citizens from intruding into official government negotiations with a foreign nation. So, you mean like Kerry was/is violating with Iran? Quote:Personally, if I had known I would not have volunteered for Vietnam. You shouldn't have volunteered anyway, it was a pointless war; that aspect was being discussed then so you don't have the excuse of not being able to know or find out. Quote: Nixon also toke the U.S. off the gold standard. Nixon’s treasury secretary and former governor of Texas John Connally said "My philosophy is that all foreigners are out to screw us and it’s our job to screw them first." Connally convinced Nixon to unleash the infamous Nixon Shock upon Europe’s unsuspecting political leaders. At the end of a crucial weekend of consultations with key advisors, President Nixon decided to make a startling announcement on live television: the global monetary system, which America had designed and had been nurturing since the end of the war, was to be dismantled in one fell swoop. The calendar read Sunday, August 15, 1971. Yes, but like all government economic policies, it takes YEARS to take effect. Obama wasn't responsible for the Great Recession
Thursday, May 17, 2018 4:21 PM
Quote:Government Economic Policies for Improvement can take years to become effective. But Government Economic Policies to destroy the Economy are relatively immediate in their effect.
Thursday, May 17, 2018 4:44 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote:Government Economic Policies for Improvement can take years to become effective. But Government Economic Policies to destroy the Economy are relatively immediate in their effect. I suppose a decision to commit nuclear suicide would immediately destroy an economy, but short of that the economy has to be at a really unstable point before it can be pushed into freefall by one decision or one event.
Friday, May 18, 2018 7:25 AM
Friday, May 18, 2018 12:54 PM
Friday, May 18, 2018 12:55 PM
Quote:I suppose a decision to commit nuclear suicide would immediately destroy an economy, but short of that the economy has to be at a really unstable point before it can be pushed into freefall by one decision or one event.- SIGNY Or an event which forebodes 4 years of disaster.- JSF
Friday, May 18, 2018 2:30 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote:I suppose a decision to commit nuclear suicide would immediately destroy an economy, but short of that the economy has to be at a really unstable point before it can be pushed into freefall by one decision or one event.- SIGNY Or an event which forebodes 4 years of disaster.- JSF I don't understand. Maybe an example would help.
Friday, May 18, 2018 2:37 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: SECOND, You DO realize that you're becoming PIRATE NEWS-like? You're absolutely obsessed with Trump. You bring up one allegation, and when it's been found to be wrong, irrelevant, or trivial, rather than discussing THE TOPIC you drop that one and move on to another.
Friday, May 18, 2018 6:20 PM
Quote:I suppose a decision to commit nuclear suicide would immediately destroy an economy, but short of that the economy has to be at a really unstable point before it can be pushed into freefall by one decision or one event.- SIGNY Or an event which forebodes 4 years of disaster.- JSF I don't understand. Maybe an example would help.- SIGNY Such as the Election of Obama. Or the impending doom preceding it.- JSF
Friday, May 18, 2018 7:12 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote:I suppose a decision to commit nuclear suicide would immediately destroy an economy, but short of that the economy has to be at a really unstable point before it can be pushed into freefall by one decision or one event.- SIGNY Or an event which forebodes 4 years of disaster.- JSF I don't understand. Maybe an example would help.- SIGNY Such as the Election of Obama. Or the impending doom preceding it.- JSF Understanding-fail at this end. If you're trying to say that Obama was responsible for the financial collapse, it was well underway even before the Nov 2008 election. There were signs of impending doom in 2007, the collapse of Bear Stearns (Hey, I bought muni bonds from that company lo these many years ago!) was a harbinger of things to come. The fall of Shearson Lehman (which took down an investment of mine in the Forex) occurred Sept 15, 2008, and my bank (WAMU) was seized by the FDIC in late Sept 2008. All of the problems ... fraudulent lending, the real estate bubble, naked CDSs, low-low interest rates, banks lacking reserves and commingling customer deposits with speculative money, the widening of the wealth gap, the deficit and trickle-down ... came about because of things that Bill Clinton, George W Bush, and The Fed did all together. It was a clusterfuck of greed and speculation over many years.
Friday, May 18, 2018 8:46 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: SECOND, You DO realize that you're becoming PIRATE NEWS-like? You're absolutely obsessed with Trump. You bring up one allegation, and when it's been found to be wrong, irrelevant, or trivial, rather than discussing THE TOPIC you drop that one and move on to another. Clearly, you have a longstanding hard on for the guy. Just to go back to a previous discussion about your personal history, I can't imagine what would have propelled you to volunteer for Vietnam. Was it your family? I don't think so, because they're Jehovah's Witnesses, right? And eschewing politics, don't they also eschew military service? So, not your family. Republican friends, maybe? The zeitgeist of Texas? Desire for action and adventure? Whatever it was, it left you with permanent consequence. Well, whatever. I wanted a child, and we ALL have permanent consequences! Life happens, and at least it wasn't fatal. You were 17 at the time, give yourself a break. If we knew the future, we wouldn't make mistakes. But we don't, and we do. Stop blaming everyone else for your decision, and then forgive yourself. Shit happens. Really.
Saturday, May 19, 2018 12:36 AM
Quote: If you're trying to say that Obama was responsible for the financial collapse, it was well underway even before the Nov 2008 election... SIGNY Nice try, Signym, but ...
Saturday, May 19, 2018 6:58 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote: If you're trying to say that Obama was responsible for the financial collapse, it was well underway even before the Nov 2008 election... SIGNY Nice try, Signym, but ... Wow, I can't even DEFEND Obama without you disagreeing with me! Yes, I know .... the causes of the Great Financial Collapse were many and varied, and the reasons why one event went "viral" through the financial system were even more varied. I just didn't want to detail all of them because that wasn't my point.
Quote:In April 2007, Moody’s announced it was revising the model it used to evaluate subprime mortgages. It noted that the model “was first introduced in 2002. Since then, the mortgage market has evolved considerably.” This was a rather stunning admission; its model had been based on a world that no longer existed. Poring over the data, Moody’s discovered that the size of people’s first mortgages was no longer a good predictor of whether they would default; rather, it was the size of their first and second loans — that is, their total debt — combined. This was rather intuitive; Moody’s simply hadn’t reckoned on it. . . . And homeowners without equity were making what economists call a rational choice; they were abandoning properties rather than make payments on them. Homeowners’ equity had never been as high as believed because appraisals had been inflated. Over the summer and fall of 2007, Moody’s and the other agencies repeatedly tightened their methodology for rating mortgage securities, but it was too late. They had to downgrade tens of billions of dollars of securities. By early this year (2008), when I met with Moody’s, an astonishing 27 percent of the mortgage holders in Subprime XYZ were delinquent. Losses on the pool were now estimated at 14 percent to 16 percent — three times the original estimate.
Saturday, May 19, 2018 7:08 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: SECOND, You DO realize that you're becoming PIRATE NEWS-like? You're absolutely obsessed with Trump. You bring up one allegation, and when it's been found to be wrong, irrelevant, or trivial, rather than discussing THE TOPIC you drop that one and move on to another. Clearly, you have a longstanding hard on for the guy. Just to go back to a previous discussion about your personal history, I can't imagine what would have propelled you to volunteer for Vietnam. Was it your family? I don't think so, because they're Jehovah's Witnesses, right? And eschewing politics, don't they also eschew military service? So, not your family. Republican friends, maybe? The zeitgeist of Texas? Desire for action and adventure? Whatever it was, it left you with permanent consequence. Well, whatever. I wanted a child, and we ALL have permanent consequences! Life happens, and at least it wasn't fatal. You were 17 at the time, give yourself a break. If we knew the future, we wouldn't make mistakes. But we don't, and we do. Stop blaming everyone else for your decision, and then forgive yourself. Shit happens. Really. This. Do Right, Be Right. :)
Saturday, May 19, 2018 8:09 AM
Saturday, May 19, 2018 2:57 PM
Quote:Signym wrote: "I just didn't want to detail all of them because that wasn't my point." Don't even try to detail anything, Signym. Your overly articulate brain is always tricking you into thinking you understand more than you do. A truer summation would be that the financial collapse was completely beyond the control of President Obama, Bush, or Bill Clinton, - SECOND
Saturday, May 19, 2018 7:29 PM
1KIKI
Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.
Saturday, May 19, 2018 8:49 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: Quote:Kiki is talking about people handing over at least 4 years of their life under 24/7 direct management from the Military, housing non-combat duty soldiers on American soil on the taxpayer dime. Huge difference. Which we are ALREADY doing. It's generically called the military. All I'm proposing is that we change the military's tasks and locale - from killing overseas, to providing societal value here.
Saturday, May 19, 2018 10:18 PM
Saturday, May 19, 2018 11:37 PM
Quote:If not for Nixon, I would have been a Burger King manager like my father.- SECOND
Sunday, May 20, 2018 12:00 AM
Quote: So here I am, making a simple suggestion that we redirect the military - from pointless, money-wasting adventures overseas, to useful, value-producing work at home. It seems a modest proposal, and non-partisan, in that neither side has any financial or cultural reason to be more against it than the other.= KIKI
Sunday, May 20, 2018 2:03 AM
Sunday, May 20, 2018 7:08 AM
Sunday, May 20, 2018 8:12 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote: So here I am, making a simple suggestion that we redirect the military - from pointless, money-wasting adventures overseas, to useful, value-producing work at home. It seems a modest proposal, and non-partisan, in that neither side has any financial or cultural reason to be more against it than the other.= KIKI Hi. I think that this would be OK as a TRANSITION to a smaller army as recruits finish out their contracts, but I would rather that the money be turned over to a civilian program over time.
Sunday, May 20, 2018 8:48 AM
Quote:I'm making this particular suggestion because nether party seems to object to the size of the military we have, the number of people in it, or the amount of money that is spent. And a civilian corps would be too much like socialism. - KIKI
Sunday, May 20, 2018 1:37 PM
Sunday, May 20, 2018 1:55 PM
Sunday, May 20, 2018 2:22 PM
Quote:Originally posted by second: In the third part of the great Indian epic the Mahabharata, a powerful spirit named Yaksa asks the oldest and wisest of the Pandava, Yudhistira, what is the greatest of all mysteries. The answer given resounds across millennia: “Every day countless people die, and yet those who remain live as if they were immortals.” Immortals would be fearless, yet there is a worldwide shortage of courage. That can’t be the mystery. But immortals also have infinite time to waste. There is the mystery! People kill time with trivia as if they are immortals. The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
Sunday, May 20, 2018 8:54 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: I've come to the realization (above) by watching Homicide Hunter, which is a real crime TV show. But because it's in Colorado Springs - which has a large collection of military bases and offices in and nearby (within 10 miles) - I've learned a lot about the scope and function of the US military in the economy. Your concern is that it will get that bad. Watching this show I can say it IS that bad. The military is HUGE. Collected all together, it would be a substantial city on a map. We just don't see it because we don't live next to military bases.
Sunday, May 20, 2018 9:21 PM
Sunday, May 20, 2018 9:42 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote:Your whole premise is based upon spending just as many taxpayer dollars as we do today, but to train troops at home and give them low paying jobs. I don't see any point at all to any of this. Do you know who the patron saint of Democrats is? FDR, Franklin Delano Roosevelt. He was President during much of the Great Depression, when the financial system and the economy collapsed at the same time. FDR's plan was to print money and put it in the hands of the average person. He was basing his policy on Keynes' work, who suggested that injecting money into the economy would improve it. But rather than undirectedly tossing money into "the economy" or (worse) tossing money at the wealthy (trickle down) FDR believed that money should be directed to the poor. THEIR demand (for food, clothes, homes, refrigerators, cars etc) would lead to a resurgence in manufacturing (of said items) leading to an increase in employment and a further increase in demand ... a reverse of the negative spiral that propelled the Great Depression in the first place. He called it "pump priming". One way to direct money at the poor were various "public works" projects, where the government would pay people to put in infrastructure. My grandfather, who was a carpenter before the Great Depression, got a job on public works. He helped put in a railway overpass, which I traveled under at least once an month. There was the public works of rural electrification, infrastructure, the building of the Hoover Dam, and the Civilian Conservation Corps. We have been living off that infrastructure ever since Now. Do THESE jobs take away from private jobs? Absolutely not. There is no for-profit business that would invest in public roads, public bridges, public waterways, and environmental conservation. Why? Because these are PUBLIC goods, and there's no profit in it. Even though infrastructure and environmental conservation form the basis of long-term wealth, "monetization" of these factors would simply kill the goose that laid the golden eggs. The programs that KIKI suggests sound very similar to the various public works and conservation programs that FDR implemented lo these many years ago, which formed the basis of our prosperity. I don't see anything wrong with the idea .... unless, of course, you can find an alternate (private, for profit) way to reconstruct our environment and infrastructure.
Sunday, May 20, 2018 9:53 PM
Quote:Originally posted by second: In the third part of the great Indian epic the Mahabharata, a powerful spirit named Yaksa asks the oldest and wisest of the Pandava, Yudhistira, what is the greatest of all mysteries. The answer given resounds across millennia: “Every day countless people die, and yet those who remain live as if they were immortals.” Immortals would be fearless, yet there is a worldwide shortage of courage.
Sunday, May 20, 2018 10:19 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote: So here I am, making a simple suggestion that we redirect the military - from pointless, money-wasting adventures overseas, to useful, value-producing work at home. It seems a modest proposal, and non-partisan, in that neither side has any financial or cultural reason to be more against it than the other.= KIKIHi. I think that this would be OK as a TRANSITION to a smaller army as recruits finish out their contracts, but I would rather that the money be turned over to a civilian program over time.This. Do Right, Be Right. :)
Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM: Quote: So here I am, making a simple suggestion that we redirect the military - from pointless, money-wasting adventures overseas, to useful, value-producing work at home. It seems a modest proposal, and non-partisan, in that neither side has any financial or cultural reason to be more against it than the other.= KIKIHi. I think that this would be OK as a TRANSITION to a smaller army as recruits finish out their contracts, but I would rather that the money be turned over to a civilian program over time.
Sunday, May 20, 2018 10:43 PM
Monday, May 21, 2018 8:28 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: "So your solution to the problem is to expand the huge bad" NOT expand it !!! I've said that many times already. What part of EVERYTHING ELSE STAYS THE SAME do you not understand? The military doesn't get larger. They house, feed and pay them the EXACT same way they do now. The military chain of command is the same. There are only two differences. 1 the military doesn't get deployed overseas 2 instead of doing combat duty they get trained to work on, then work on, public, not-for-profit projects. I've been though this over a half a dozen times with you. You are incredibly dense.
Monday, May 21, 2018 7:24 PM
Monday, May 21, 2018 8:55 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: "What your proposing would expand it." Well, that's one way to try and win an argument. Lie about what I said, and then tell me I'm wrong. Jack, you have such a powerful reaction, you can't stop blubbering and hyperventilating long enough to comprehend what I posted. Unless you have something that factually addresses my proposal, I'm just going to write off your posts. Unless I take the time to point out that you're lying. Again. And then maybe make fun of you.
Monday, May 21, 2018 9:39 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: "What your proposing would expand it." Well, that's one way to try and win an argument. Lie about what I said, and then tell me I'm wrong. Jack, you have such a powerful reaction, you can't stop blubbering and hyperventilating long enough to comprehend what I posted. Unless you have something that factually addresses my proposal, I'm just going to write off your posts. Unless I take the time to point out that you're lying. Again. And then maybe make fun of you. SECOND is a troll because it constantly misrepresents what people post, fails to address their actual positions, and resorts to personal attacks when its brain isn't working (which is most of the time).
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL