America's greatness is its working classes not "wealth" creators

[JakeStarkey]

EconChick needs to ponder, "Ask around about a person called TruthMatters and discover how much anyone remembers of her posts. They only remember she was unthinking, irrational (in My opinion, mentally unstable), and the equivalent of having a five-year-old child screaming at you from the top of their lungs non-stop."

Hon, I will be civil if you will, but if you continue the nonsense, I will drown the ugliness of your posts in their own ugliness. Your foulness, whimpering, screaming, defiance will change nothing. You really don't want to be remember like the person above.

Now give me a blue hit and move on to a better place for you.

Tis what tis.

 

[EconChick]

EconChick needs to ponder, "Ask around about a person called TruthMatters and discover how much anyone remembers of her posts. They only remember she was unthinking, irrational (in My opinion, mentally unstable), and the equivalent of having a five-year-old child screaming at you from the top of their lungs non-stop."

Hon, I will be civil if you will, but if you continue the nonsense, I will drown the ugliness of your posts in their own ugliness. Your foulness, whimpering, screaming, defiance will change nothing. You really don't want to be remember like the person above.

Now give me a blue hit and move on to a better place for you.

Tis what tis.

First of all, the threat of being remembered like some other person has absolutely NO WEIGHT with me. I've spent my whole career telling Kings they have no clothes on. I've taken on a whole batch of generals at one time. And other alpha males. That one doesn't work on me.

As for my foulness and defiance.....too fucking bad....the rules say this is a forum where flaming takes place. People don't like it, they need to change the rules. The whimpering and personal attacks come from you.

As for threats from you, bring it on. I'll match you and then some.

Now having said all that, you started your post off with saying you'd be civil if I was civil. That one works, but I need to see if from you first. You're the one that showed up on my first thread with personal attacks, not the other way around.

You want to show good faith, good, show it first.

As for the blue button, I have NO idea what you're talking about.

 

[EconChick]

I notice mac ran off. So he comes to the thread, tells us we're being political (duh), adds nothing else to the discussion but discord, and then tells us if we have detailed questions, to just ask him.

Uhhhh, for the record, no one asked you to come to the thread in the first place, mac.

 

[Mac1958]

I notice mac ran off. So he comes to the thread, tells us we're being political (duh), adds nothing else to the discussion but discord, and then tells us if we have detailed questions, to just ask him.

Uhhhh, for the record, no one asked you to come to the thread in the first place, mac.

Yikes, obsess much?

"Tells us we're being political"? Huh? No, I pointed out that partisan ideologues are part of the problem, not part of the solution. That really pissed you off.

Looks like you have a little difficulty being honest.

That's okay, I'm used to it.

.

 

[Darkwind]

I notice mac ran off. So he comes to the thread, tells us we're being political (duh), adds nothing else to the discussion but discord, and then tells us if we have detailed questions, to just ask him.

Uhhhh, for the record, no one asked you to come to the thread in the first place, mac.

Yikes, obsess much?

"Tells us we're being political"? Huh? No, I pointed out that partisan ideologues are part of the problem, not part of the solution. That really pissed you off.

Looks like you have a little difficulty being honest.

That's okay, I'm used to it.

.

I"m going to quit being used to it. I have once again started ignoring people who won't at least make an effort to comprehend My position on any given subject. It is one thing to disagree and defend a position. It is another to be disagreeable while doing it. Particularly from those who appear to be of the same ideological philosophy.

I'm going to start ignoring some GOP'er too.

 

[EconChick]

I notice mac ran off. So he comes to the thread, tells us we're being political (duh), adds nothing else to the discussion but discord, and then tells us if we have detailed questions, to just ask him.

Uhhhh, for the record, no one asked you to come to the thread in the first place, mac.

Yikes, obsess much?

"Tells us we're being political"? Huh? No, I pointed out that partisan ideologues are part of the problem, not part of the solution. That really pissed you off.

Looks like you have a little difficulty being honest.

That's okay, I'm used to it.

.

No mac, what pissed me off is that we went down this path in the WEEN From Equities thread I did. I discussed it with you with much patience in that one. I thought it was settled. Then you show up here and start it all over again. THAT'S what pissed me off.

Or did you not bother to read the rest of that thread?

 

[Erand7899]

hadit wrote:

Actually, no. You are confusing money with wealth. My uncle, a chicken farmer, said once that he was tired of being a millionaire who couldn't take his wife to dinner. What he meant was he had wealth in his farming equipment, but little money with which to dine out. Wealth is the value of a good or a service, money is just an expression of that value at that point in time. What you have done in your example is increase the wealth of the person who bought the bread from you, because he valued that more than the money he gave you. You also increased your wealth because you valued the money more than the bread.
_______________________________________________

No, I am not confusing money with wealth, since money is nothing more than a convenient way of transfering wealth. Wealth is marketable property, and when that wealth is land and/or machinery, it is not easily convertable to cash. Therefore, one can have a million dollars worth of land, and still be unable to buy a sandwich.

Regardless of what I paid for the loaf of bread, or what I sold the bread for, a loaf of bread has a market value, and that value does not change because of my sale. The buyer may value it more, but its true value is what he could sell it for.

Say I had a car for sale, and that car's actual market value was $5,000. Regardless of what I received for the sale of the car, the value of the car would still be $5,000. The same would be true if I gave the car away. Every asset, has a market value, and your wealth is the collective market value of your assets, minus the cost of converting those assets to cash.

Creation of wealth is a totally different subject.

 

[Mac1958]

I notice mac ran off. So he comes to the thread, tells us we're being political (duh), adds nothing else to the discussion but discord, and then tells us if we have detailed questions, to just ask him.

Uhhhh, for the record, no one asked you to come to the thread in the first place, mac.

Yikes, obsess much?

"Tells us we're being political"? Huh? No, I pointed out that partisan ideologues are part of the problem, not part of the solution. That really pissed you off.

Looks like you have a little difficulty being honest.

That's okay, I'm used to it.

.

I"m going to quit being used to it. I have once again started ignoring people who won't at least make an effort to comprehend My position on any given subject. It is one thing to disagree and defend a position. It is another to be disagreeable while doing it. Particularly from those who appear to be of the same ideological philosophy.

I'm going to start ignoring some GOP'er too.

I've gotten to the point where I just don't stay in conversations with people who are more committed to their ideology than to civility and honesty. We all have our priorities, fine, but to hell with it, I don't have to play the part of the enabler.

.

 

[EconChick]

I notice mac ran off. So he comes to the thread, tells us we're being political (duh), adds nothing else to the discussion but discord, and then tells us if we have detailed questions, to just ask him.

Uhhhh, for the record, no one asked you to come to the thread in the first place, mac.

Yikes, obsess much?

"Tells us we're being political"? Huh? No, I pointed out that partisan ideologues are part of the problem, not part of the solution. That really pissed you off.

Looks like you have a little difficulty being honest.

That's okay, I'm used to it.

.

I"m going to quit being used to it. I have once again started ignoring people who won't at least make an effort to comprehend My position on any given subject. It is one thing to disagree and defend a position. It is another to be disagreeable while doing it. Particularly from those who appear to be of the same ideological philosophy.

I'm going to start ignoring some GOP'er too.

Try not dripping with condescension or try handling it in private and maybe you'll get a lot further. You want to talk to me like I'm 20 years old, expect me to be offended.

 

[Mac1958]

I notice mac ran off. So he comes to the thread, tells us we're being political (duh), adds nothing else to the discussion but discord, and then tells us if we have detailed questions, to just ask him.

Uhhhh, for the record, no one asked you to come to the thread in the first place, mac.

Yikes, obsess much?

"Tells us we're being political"? Huh? No, I pointed out that partisan ideologues are part of the problem, not part of the solution. That really pissed you off.

Looks like you have a little difficulty being honest.

That's okay, I'm used to it.

.

No mac, what pissed me off is that we went down this path in the WEEN From Equities thread I did. I discussed it with you with much patience in that one. I thought it was settled. Then you show up here and start it all over again. THAT'S what pissed me off.

Or did you not bother to read the rest of that thread?

I don't remember if I bothered to read the rest of that thread or not.

Either way, my opinion of partisan ideology has not changed.

.

 

[Erand7899]

EconChick wrote:

Errand, the problem is it's not an exact one for one like this suggests.
___________________________________________

I understand that, but one has to keep it simple and short. No one is going to read a detailed description of wealth creation.

 

[EconChick]

I notice mac ran off. So he comes to the thread, tells us we're being political (duh), adds nothing else to the discussion but discord, and then tells us if we have detailed questions, to just ask him.

Uhhhh, for the record, no one asked you to come to the thread in the first place, mac.

Yikes, obsess much?

"Tells us we're being political"? Huh? No, I pointed out that partisan ideologues are part of the problem, not part of the solution. That really pissed you off.

Looks like you have a little difficulty being honest.

That's okay, I'm used to it.

.

I"m going to quit being used to it. I have once again started ignoring people who won't at least make an effort to comprehend My position on any given subject. It is one thing to disagree and defend a position. It is another to be disagreeable while doing it. Particularly from those who appear to be of the same ideological philosophy.

I'm going to start ignoring some GOP'er too.

I've gotten to the point where I just don't stay in conversations with people who are more committed to their ideology than to civility and honesty. We all have our priorities, fine, but to hell with it, I don't have to play the part of the enabler.

.

And your problem is an intellectual one, which I've tried to tell you diplomatically. You keep acting like economics can be completely separated from politics. It can when you're a broker, but not when you're talking POLICY. And we are talking policy on this thread.

 

[EconChick]

I notice mac ran off. So he comes to the thread, tells us we're being political (duh), adds nothing else to the discussion but discord, and then tells us if we have detailed questions, to just ask him.

Uhhhh, for the record, no one asked you to come to the thread in the first place, mac.

Yikes, obsess much?

"Tells us we're being political"? Huh? No, I pointed out that partisan ideologues are part of the problem, not part of the solution. That really pissed you off.

Looks like you have a little difficulty being honest.

That's okay, I'm used to it.

.

No mac, what pissed me off is that we went down this path in the WEEN From Equities thread I did. I discussed it with you with much patience in that one. I thought it was settled. Then you show up here and start it all over again. THAT'S what pissed me off.

Or did you not bother to read the rest of that thread?

I don't remember if I bothered to read the rest of that thread or not.

Either way, my opinion of partisan ideology has not changed.

.

Well, I took the time to discuss it diplomatically and you didn't read it. Great, then look yourself in the mirror.

And my opinion that your fallacious belief that economics and politics can be separated like a yolk from the egg has not changed either.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I've spent my whole career telling Kings they have no clothes on. I've taken on a whole batch of generals at one time. And other alpha males. That one doesn't work on me.

OK, you are a nutter. Post as you wish, expect to be treated one better if you act up.

 

[EconChick]

EconChick wrote:

Errand, the problem is it's not an exact one for one like this suggests.
___________________________________________

I understand that, but one has to keep it simple and short. No one is going to read a detailed description of wealth creation.

LOL, very true. And this long discussion shows why it's a difficult subject for people to wrap their hands around who don't study it day in and day out.

That's why when people say our economy is a zero sum game and you try to explain that it's not, that's an important premise to get straight.

 

[EconChick]

I've spent my whole career telling Kings they have no clothes on. I've taken on a whole batch of generals at one time. And other alpha males. That one doesn't work on me.

OK, you are a nutter. Post as you wish, expect to be treated one better if you act up.

Ok, Here's for the record.

I told Jakey Fakey he could show good faith and I'd respond, and what does he do, he takes a quote from something not posted to him, and uses it to do what....................

....to go back to name calling.

What's wrong, did that intimidate you? I'm a nutter because I used to brief the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on crises and that bothers you?

I'm going to pull out this post a lot in the future.

 

[EconChick]

EconChick wrote:

Errand, the problem is it's not an exact one for one like this suggests.
___________________________________________

I understand that, but one has to keep it simple and short. No one is going to read a detailed description of wealth creation.

In fact it's probably more fruitful for people discuss whether it's zero sum or not....because the "wealth" discussion gets really complicated.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I've spent my whole career telling Kings they have no clothes on. I've taken on a whole batch of generals at one time. And other alpha males. That one doesn't work on me.

OK, you are a nutter. Post as you wish, expect to be treated one better if you act up.

Ok, Here's for the record.

I told Jakey Fakey he could show good faith and I'd respond, and what does he do, he takes a quote from something not posted to him, and uses it to do what....................

....to go back to name calling.

What's wrong, did that intimidate you? I'm a nutter because I used to brief the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on crises and that bothers you?

I'm going to pull out this post a lot in the future.

I told you that you would be treated as you act, and that if you act up as you did above, that you would be dealt with accordingly.

Just act in good faith from now. I doubt very much you told the CJCOS where to get off, but do understand I have no problem doing that with you if you can't play nicely.

Be polite, get it in return.

 

[EconChick]

I've spent my whole career telling Kings they have no clothes on. I've taken on a whole batch of generals at one time. And other alpha males. That one doesn't work on me.

OK, you are a nutter. Post as you wish, expect to be treated one better if you act up.

Ok, Here's for the record.

I told Jakey Fakey he could show good faith and I'd respond, and what does he do, he takes a quote from something not posted to him, and uses it to do what....................

....to go back to name calling.

What's wrong, did that intimidate you? I'm a nutter because I used to brief the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on crises and that bothers you?

I'm going to pull out this post a lot in the future.

I told you that you would be treated as you act, and that if you act up as you did above, that you would be dealt with accordingly.

Just act in good faith from now. I doubt very much you told the CJCOS where to get off, but do understand I have no problem doing that with you if you can't play nicely.

Be polite, get it in return.

What an idiot. You consider giving my credentials ACTING UP????? Yep, you're intimidated.

Let's get a few facts straight. There is no such thing as CJCOS. Show me that acronym. You got it wrong.

And "told to get off" is not the same as "telling the king he has no clothes on." I always told kings they had no clothes on in a respectful manner. But the still didn't like hearing it. That included CEOs much more often than anyone else.

And lastly, this is the political forum where flaming is allowed. You don't like it, get the rules changed. Or don't initiate the flame like you have.

 

[EconChick]

Listen Jakey, you need to check your words. Talk to me like your somebody's fucking father and I'm a child and you will get slammed.

You need to think about what you post before you post it.

Act up is what 10 year olds do.

Also don't call people nutters or you will get slammed.