Hubbs Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Actually, one of the odd things is that they talk a lot about global wealth disparity. I'd think that any process by which you are going to do anything about that is going to have to include the devaluing of the dollar with respect to other currencies. Who's "they"? The Zeitgeist people? I was just chiming in about the dollar. The Zeitgeist movies are somewhat entertaining, but that's about it. They're full of holes, and the second one really falls into a weird sort of political philosophy trap. I'm not trying to back them up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Who's "they"? The Zeitgeist people? I was just chiming in about the dollar. The Zeitgeist movies are somewhat entertaining, but that's about it. They're full of holes, and the second one really falls into a weird sort of political philosophy trap. I'm not trying to back them up. Sure, but in the context of the movie, it seems odd to simultaneously complain about the devaluation of the dollar, and disparities in global wealth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 I'm suggesting that if you take zJs of energy (they talk about 0.4 zJ of energy for our use, but realistically if you are going to bring the whole world up to our life style (and even beyond), which is really what most of the piece is about, you are going to need more than that per a year) out of the core for the Earth ever year for an extended period of time through man made processes, it is likely to have unattended consequences, which are then very likely to negatively affect humanity.I'd actually argue the same thing with respect to wind, tidal, wave, and ocean currents too. The only place where I'd be pretty comfortable with harnasing that much energy every year for long periods of time without unattended consequences is solar, and that's because the sun doesn't care how much energy we harness. Collecting solar energy on the Earth is not going to affect the sun (at least it is difficult to imagine processes by which it is likely to affect the sun). It won't affect the sun, but might affect the earth. Presumably the solar energy is that is currently not collected is imparted into the earth in some format whether that be heat, photosynthesis or whatever. So presumably if you take that energy and put it towards something else you are reducing the energy going towards heat, photosynthesis or whatever. What would the potential long-term adverse effects be of removing that? Perhaps we could use a multi-faceted approach using wind, solar, tidal, wave, geothermal, nuclear and fossil fuels. That way the energy drain and potential long-term adverse effects of any one particular source/method would be at least 1/7th of using that method alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chachie Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Perhaps there's no conspiracy to it. But I have no background or understanding of monetary systems. This is all new to me. And I find it apalling. And, if true, I can't believe we allow this to happen. I was actually agreeing with you. I was basically saying that I think the FedRes is a big conspiracy but no mystery. Any entity designed to make money is going to do whatever it can to screw everyone else out of money. I think we allow it to happen because 99% of us are ignorant. We simply don't care as long as we collect our paychecks, play our XBoxes, and go to our nightclubs. I bet that most people don't even know what the Federal Reserve is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 It won't affect the sun, but might affect the earth. Presumably the solar energy is that is currently not collected is imparted into the earth in some format whether that be heat, photosynthesis or whatever. So presumably if you take that energy and put it towards something else you are reducing the energy going towards heat, photosynthesis or whatever. What would the potential long-term adverse effects be of removing that?Perhaps we could use a multi-faceted approach using wind, solar, tidal, wave, geothermal, nuclear and fossil fuels. That way the energy drain and potential long-term adverse effects of any one particular source/method would be at least 1/7th of using that method alone. I believe in the past I've said that the real solution to our problem is a combination of technologies. Though with respect to the sun, I don't think those issues are going to be a great concern. Over the last 200 years, the amount of sun light that is being captured by natural processes has been substantially altered, w/o real drastic consequences. So much energy is simply lost to space. I wouldn't completely push it a side, and it will depend on how much and for how long, but I'd be most comfortable with solar by a long measure, if I had to pick one. All the others give you the double whammy of altering the energy source itself and altering the downstream processes related to the energy source, and historically very little of the energy really being lost from the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 I bet that most people don't even know what the Federal Reserve is. That's true. However, many people who claim they understand what the Fed is, actually don't. Especially on this board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 A couple of thoughts. 1, movies like this are an outstanding vehicle for discounting personal accountability. House just got foreclosed on? Working a job you don't like? Too much credit card debt? Take care, children. It's not your fault. You are simply a victim, a pawn. It's the monetary system and the Fed that are flawed, not you. Don't believe me? Just watch the movie again. You'll come around. (this is a very common profile of the libertarian/Ron Paul crowd. spend 5 minutes with a group of them and you'll see what I mean) 2. If everything is as straightforward and as black and white as portrayed, it should be no problem for the Zeitgeist disciples to take advantage of the system and make tons of money. Any rigged system that is inherently flawed is easily manipulated. So knock yourselves out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCSaints_fan Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 What I don't understand is.... why does the US government need the Federal Reserve? Why would it cost the US government $10 billion to create $10 billion with of bank notes? If the US government has the capacity to create "bonds"... why doesn't it just create its own currency and skip the middle men (Reserve) altogether? It doesn't cost the US $10 billion to create $10 billion in currency. US Securities are auctioned off by the Treasury (edit: they are sold by the Fed, apparently. but it looks like they have to return all profits minus operating costs). What the Fed does in terms of "target" rates does have an indirect affect on what rate the US is likely to get on its debt, however. It is thought that allowing the printing of currency to be directly in the hands of politicians leads to populist measures like printing a bunch of money to buy votes. The people (especially debt holders) might love a move like that, but it would ruin the economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 It doesn't cost the US $10 billion to create $10 billion in currency. US Securities are auctioned off by the Treasury (edit: they are sold by the Fed, apparently. but it looks like they have to return all profits minus operating costs). What the Fed does in terms of "target" rates does have an indirect affect on what rate the US is likely to get on its debt, however. This is an important point that I'm not sure that people know from the above discussion. The salaries of the Fed leaders are set by Congress so they aren't making more money based on the operation of the Fed. The US federal government though is a different story. "The Fed will return about $45 billion to the U.S. Treasury for 2009, according to calculations by The Washington Post based on public documents. That reflects the highest earnings in the 96-year history of the central bank. The Fed, unlike most government agencies, funds itself from its own operations and returns its profits to the Treasury. " http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/11/AR2010011103892.html If the Fed is operating in a manner that maximizes profits, it as at the behest of the US federal government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 A couple of thoughts.1, movies like this are an outstanding vehicle for discounting personal accountability. House just got foreclosed on? Working a job you don't like? Too much credit card debt? Take care, children. It's not your fault. You are simply a victim, a pawn. It's the monetary system and the Fed that are flawed, not you. Don't believe me? Just watch the movie again. You'll come around. (this is a very common profile of the libertarian/Ron Paul crowd. spend 5 minutes with a group of them and you'll see what I mean) 2. If everything is as straightforward and as black and white as portrayed, it should be no problem for the Zeitgeist disciples to take advantage of the system and make tons of money. Any rigged system that is inherently flawed is easily manipulated. So knock yourselves out. Folks. We have a winner. End Thread. And Zoony. The blame game is the most common cause of stupidity I have yet found. For proof, all you have to do is look in the stadium after a Redskins loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 This movie was apparently the Tucson punks motive. Not Palin or any of those righties. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/01/12/report-alleged-arizona-gunman-did-watch-news-television/ Media speculation swirled after Loughner allegedly opened fire at a Tucson rally last Saturday, critically wounding Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and 13 others and killing six. Immediately, the Tucson sheriff and liberal pundits and lawmakers chimed in that the shooting somehow was politically motivated and a result of the extreme rhetoric being used by conservatives such as Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. But Osler said Loughner wasn't shooting at people, "he was shooting at the world." Osler said he instead suspects that Loughner was motivated by a documentary called, "Zeitgeist: The Movie," which slams currency-based economics. "I really think that this 'Zeitgeist' documentary had a profound impact upon Jared Loughner's mindset and how he viewed the world that he lives in," he said. - continued at link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 This movie was apparently the Tucson punks motive. Not Palin or any of those righties. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/01/12/report-alleged-arizona-gunman-did-watch-news-television/ - continued at link I thought about bumping this too when they were talking about it on the nightly news. This movie and "Loose Change" Who says the internet isn't dangerous? These "abolish the fed" "down with the WTO" ultra right wing libertarian dingbats who live with their parents and spend all day talking about out of control government, one world currencies, etc. on libertarian chat sites are a real threat to this country, and growing. It's an interesting part of human psychology, isn't it? That which you don't understand must be destroyed... how many times have we seen it throughout history? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 Sadly, I've lost two friend to zealotry. One was to Jesus and I can accept that loss, although if he ever tells me I'm going to hell again I might crack him one. The other is to this idiocy. Too much time on his hands and not enough exposure to normal people. Not his parents house but his girlfriends (/mother) up in the mountains in Colorado. Talk about someone who fears what they don't understand my friend there is the poster child for that. I liked him when all he spent his time on was Dio and music in general now...his FB is a constant barrage of wack job NWO, conspiracy nut ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACW Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 Okay, first off, libertarian is NOT right-wing. Second, many (hell, probably MOST) libertarians think Zeitgeist is crackpottery. Also, how can libertarians-who think government is inefficient-think they could pull off 9/11? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 http://www.articlesbase.com/international-business-articles/famous-quotes-on-banking-701216.html "I sincerely believe ... that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity under the name of funding is but swindling futurity on a large scale." -- Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, 1816. "Banks lend by creating credit. They create the means of payment out of nothing." -- Ralph M. Hawtrey, former Secretary of Treasury, England "Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money and control credit, and with a flick of a pen they will create enough to buy it back." -- Sir Josiah Stamp, former President, Bank of England "The truly unique power of a central bank, after all, is the power to create money, and ultimately the power to create is the power to destroy." -- Pringle, Robert; and Deane, Marjorie: The Central Banks; Viking, 1994, page viii. "Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are U.S. government institutions. They are not ... they are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the U.S. for the benefit of themselves and their foreign and domestic swindlers, and rich and predatory money lenders. The sack of the United States by the Fed is the greatest crime in history. Every effort has been made by the Fed to conceal its powers, but the truth is the Fed has usurped the government. It controls everything here and it controls all our foreign relations. It makes and breaks governments at will." -- Congressman Charles McFadden, Chairman, House Banking and Currency Committee, "When you or I write a check there must be sufficient funds in our account to cover that check, but when the Federal Reserve writes a check, it is creating money." -- Boston Federal Reserve Bank in a publication titled "Putting It Simply" ".. We conclude that the [Federal] Reserve Banks are not federal ... but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations ... without day to day direction from the federal government.." -- 9th Circuit Court in Lewis vs. United States, June 24, 1982 IMO, anyone who doesn't want to abolish the Fed is out of their minds or ignorant on the topic. I guess it's easier to call everything a conspiracy theory instead of worrying about enslaving your kids and grandkids to bankers. I'm sure the day before the government came out and apologized to Guatemala for intentionally infecting them with gonorrhea, syphilis and other sexually transmitted diseases in a sick experiment, it was probably blown off as a conspiracy theory. Some laugh and considered those concerned about Sodium Fluoride to be conspiracy theorist. Now the Government is recommending a reduction of fluoride in water. http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/01/07/fluoride.recommendations/index.html The federal government is recommending changing the amount of fluoride in drinking water for the first time in 50 years. I'm glad there are many patriots out there who aren't afraid to stand up. I guess it's easier to roll over in a fetal position and suck one's thumb and brush everything off as a conspiracy. Who cares about bankers and corporate interests influence over our politicians? As long as I have a Big Mac and Dancing With the Stars, I'm fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 mmmmmmmmmmm... Big Mac! I'd prefer a whopper though. And now I know what's for lunch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 mmmmmmmmmmm... Big Mac!I'd prefer a whopper though. And now I know what's for lunch. Don't forget your side order of Chicken McNuggets. Everyone needs a serving of silicone that is found in silly putty and tertiary butylhydroquinone, a petroleum-based product in their diet. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfmoms/detail?entry_id=66729 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 okay. I'll be sure to get the New World Order on rye as well. but back on topic... let's say the Fed is abandoned like libertarians want. And as CT's want. Then what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRSmith Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 Sadly, I've lost two friend to zealotry. One was to Jesus and I can accept that loss, although if he ever tells me I'm going to hell again I might crack him one. The other is to this idiocy. Too much time on his hands and not enough exposure to normal people. Not his parents house but his girlfriends (/mother) up in the mountains in Colorado. Talk about someone who fears what they don't understand my friend there is the poster child for that. I liked him when all he spent his time on was Dio and music in general now...his FB is a constant barrage of wack job NWO, conspiracy nut ****. You mean like Dio and the devil's horn bit? I knew girl who went on and on about Dio then went on about government run churches and then the one world government Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 I'm glad there are many patriots out there who aren't afraid to stand up. I guess it's easier to roll over in a fetal position and suck one's thumb and brush everything off as a conspiracy. Who cares about bankers and corporate interests influence over our politicians? As long as I have a Big Mac and Dancing With the Stars, I'm fine. Or it's also possible that people don't have to fall into one of the two ridiculous extremes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRSmith Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 okay. I'll be sure to get the New World Order on rye as well. but back on topic... let's say the Fed is abandoned like libertarians want. And as CT's want. Then what? Your economy contracts as you are not using the same system the rest of the world is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 Gold nuggets dude. Gold nuggets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubbs Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 Your economy contracts as you are not using the same system the rest of the world is Do explain the mechanics of the economy contracting simply by virtue of "not using the same system the rest of the world is". (Hint: If you think that it's a binary choice between just two systems, you're not going to be very convincing.) (Second hint: If you're like zoony and get your jollies by erecting strawmen, then doubling down by feeling the need to reduce your own strawmen to caricatures of themselves, all while never standing up and first articulating the kind of monetary system you'd support and then defending your position, well, you're probably not going to be very convincing, either.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 Okay, first off, libertarian is NOT right-wing. Second, many (hell, probably MOST) libertarians think Zeitgeist is crackpottery.Also, how can libertarians-who think government is inefficient-think they could pull off 9/11? I've sadly learned here that no matter what you say your actual beliefs are, somehow soomeone else feels they know you better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRSmith Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 Do explain the mechanics of the economy contracting simply by virtue of "not using the same system the rest of the world is".(Hint: If you think that it's a binary choice between just two systems, you're not going to be very convincing.) (Second hint: If you're like zoony and get your jollies by erecting strawmen, then doubling down by feeling the need to reduce your own strawmen to caricatures of themselves, all while never standing up and first articulating the kind of monetary system you'd support and then defending your position, well, you're probably not going to be very convincing, either.) The entire world pretty much uses central banks and as one way to increase their credit and to value or devalue their currency So you get rid of the reserve if you cut off credit for American banks, who then in turn cut off credit for business It is has been the fed that has allowed America to become a economic power house Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.