The broad method of taxation is not the problem

[Black Flag]

The borrower doesn't have it. He has to undertake to repay it to a bank, whereon the bank creates it in his demand deposit account.

The bank never creates such money.

$100 deposit from A to Bank; Bank now has $100
Bank deposits $10 with the FED, and loans out $90 to a borrower, "B"

Bank has $10 with the FED and no other money.
Borrower "B" has $90 of money to spend.
"A" has no money, but a slip.

B spends money with C
C has $90 of money; B has some goods; Bank has $10 and an obligation; A has an IOU for $100.

$90 deposit from C to Bank;

C now has an IOU for $90
Bank has $100 and two obligations
A has IOU for $100.

...and so on.

There is never any money created - it is the same $100 being moved about

Because of your intense confusion, you believe that *money is being created* but there is, as shown in this example, no more than what was manufactured.... in this case, $100


<yawn>

Which fact do you deny, therefore proving you are a crackpot:

1. Money is what is generally accepted in exchange.

2. Demand deposits are generally accepted in exchange, and are therefore money.

3. Under the current US monetary system -- the "Fed" -- commercial banks create demand deposits -- money -- when they lend.

Every competent economist is aware that commercial banks create the vast majority of our money as debt. That is a debt money system.[/QUOTE]

[Black Flag]

Another confession of economic ignorance. Gold does not need any government or institution to back it. The FRN does.

You are truly lost.

Gold needs the People to back it. If the People do not value gold, it has no value.
The people in Fiji did not value gold. They threw it away. So it was not money and it had no backing.


FRN needs the people to back it.
No matter how much government proclaims the value of FRBN, if the people do not value it, it has no backing.
Zimbabwean dollars was not backed by the People, and it has essentially no value, no matter how much their government decrees.

FRBN and Gold hold the same "backing"

The only difference, one is mined.
The other is printed.

[Roy L]

"Accounting" is not a constraint ...it is merely a restraint... and you do not understand the difference.

Then your claim is even more ignorant and absurd.

The mining of gold is a constraint on its production - you have to find it before you can mine it, no matter how much you want gold.

Gibberish. The mining of gold is what increases its production.

The printing of money has no constraint on its production - you merely have to "trust" the Powers even care about "votes" (which they do not), nor do they care about destruction of wealth by inflation (given they care little about the destruction of wealth via war)

Ah, I see, that must explain why we have had hyperinflation all these years....

[Roy L]

You truly are a moron.

Prediction: you will now either evade, rant, or lie.

Palestine, 1st Century
There was a very large disparity between rich and poor.

The upper class was made up of the temple priests and priestly aristocracy (including the Sadducees – a Jewish sect)

The middle class was comprised of traders and merchants, artisans (stonecutters, masons, sculptors) and craftsman (metal, wood, cloth dye). The Pharisees (another Jewish sect), sages, scribes, and teachers were also a part of the middle class.

The lower class was made of laborers (weavers, stone carriers, slaves (non-Jewish person taken into slavery because of debt), and the unemployable (lepers, blind, insane, crippled, etc.)

The Roman government required heavy taxation of its people. Tax collectors were local employees considered to be outcasts and traitors.

OK, so you evaded by spewing irrelevancy.

[Black Flag]

Another confession of economic ignorance. Gold does not need any government or institution to back it. The FRN does.

You are truly lost.

Gold needs the People to back it. If the People do not value gold, it has no value.
The people in Fiji did not value gold. They threw it away. So it was not money and it had no backing.


FRN needs the people to back it.
No matter how much government proclaims the value of FRBN, if the people do not value it, it has no backing.
Zimbabwean dollars was not backed by the People, and it has essentially no value, no matter how much their government decrees.

FRBN and Gold hold the same "backing"

The only difference, one is mined.
The other is printed.

[Black Flag]

Then your claim is even more ignorant and absurd.

So your confusion is my absurdity... LoL!

Gibberish. The mining of gold is what increases its production.

But of course you skip right over the finding of it -- which is what is the constraint.

Ah, I see, that must explain why we have had hyperinflation all these years....

We have no had high inflation because the money created has been stored with the FED and not used for loans.

Please refer to this graph:


http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2...ate=2012-04-04

But of course, this only adds to your confusion.

[Black Flag]

Which fact do you deny, therefore proving you are a crackpot:

1. Money is what is generally accepted in exchange.

2. Demand deposits are generally accepted in exchange, and are therefore money.

3. Under the current US monetary system -- the "Fed" -- commercial banks create demand deposits -- money -- when they lend.

Every competent economist is aware that commercial banks create the vast majority of our money as debt. That is a debt money system.

So, you actually deny the process of deposits and loans that is core to the Fractional Reserve Banking system.


You are utterly clueless and moronic - and not worth another second in dialogue.

You serve as a great example of how bad one can mentally torque their own brain.

[No Free Beer]

"Modern governments don't have revenue problems. They have spending problems. They spend too much money and offer way too little for the money they spend."

I disagree. For the all the people who paid into medicare, they are receiving 3x the amount that they put in.

We are the ones who will be phukted

[Roy L]

But they are. If they are government employees, they obtain 100% of their living from the production of others.

Nope. They trade their own production for the production of others. You are simply lying. It is in fact the landowner qua landowner, not the government employee, who obtains 100% of his living from the production of others.

IF such services were valued, people would voluntarily buy them.

They do. They voluntarily pay landowners a lot of money for the services and infrastructure government employees and contractors provide.

Since it requires force and violence to seize funds to feed government employees, their services are not valued.

Wrong again. It only requires force and violence to feed government employees because the value they produce is being given away to landowners in return for nothing rather than recovered to pay those who create it. Your cretinous claim is logically equivalent to claiming that food purchased with food stamps is of no value, because the money used to buy it was obtained by force of violence.

Because they demand no competition, thus remain the only lousy providers of such services also does not render such service as "valued", but merely "required".

False, as proved above. The value of land measures the value of their services.

[Roy L]

*sigh*

Typical crackpot - confuses "price" with "value" and "wealth".

<sigh> Typical lying economic ignoramus -- makes claims without evidence, even when already proved wrong.