Does anyone think we need the Fed?

[The Rabbi]

We dont care about the original intent of the constitution. We care even less about your interpretation of the original intent.

your new pic is awesome, btw. i almost cried i laughed so hard.

i know that the Constitution has been all but thrown out. I'm just pointing it out. The Constitution had one purpose: to prevent the conditions which the founders knew would lead to tyranny. Are there conditions that they didn't know about? Sure. But it used to be common knowledge that central banks creating money and credit from nothing was not a good idea. Suddenly, it's indispensable. Where are we headed? It's not a conspiracy. The government is using the inflation tax to fund wars and entitlements the likes of which the world hasn't seen since the Roman empire.

It is fine. The man spewed so much crap out of his mouth it is nice to see it in real terms.

As to your theory, if what you say is true then we have a conundrum.
From colonial times people (and states) paid debts in a variety of currencies, including paper scrip. So according to you from the instant the constitution was adopted people were violating it.
Alternatively, the clause means something other than what you think it means.
Now, which one do you think makes more sense?

 

[The Rabbi]

Um. Are you American? You dont care about the original intent of the constitution??

Um,not really. That isn't the way our government works. We don't know what the original intent of the first amendment was. Was it really meant to cover giving the finger to police officers? I doubt it. But that's how it is.
And I care even less about your interpretation of what you think it was.

It may not be the way the government works now, but that doesnt make it right. It makes our government fucked up.

What interpretation? The Constitution isnt written in Chinese.. Its in English. Just read it and come to your own conclusion then just like you did with the 17th amendment.

So that's why we have court cases all the time? To restate what's written there?
No. The constitution was subject to interpretation from the moment it was ratified. It still is. We worked on a body of laws and interpretative system from the very beginning, and it hasn't changed one iota since.

 

[The Rabbi]

Rabbi I like your posts, but please remove that photo of Al spitting up turds. I never voted for the man, but a former VP of the United States should be shown some respect even if you disagree totally with him. That is just too gross! It does not belong on this forum.

Your comment is noted.

 

[HUGGY]

We dont care about the original intent of the constitution. We care even less about your interpretation of the original intent.

your new pic is awesome, btw. i almost cried i laughed so hard.

i know that the Constitution has been all but thrown out. I'm just pointing it out. The Constitution had one purpose: to prevent the conditions which the founders knew would lead to tyranny. Are there conditions that they didn't know about? Sure. But it used to be common knowledge that central banks creating money and credit from nothing was not a good idea. Suddenly, it's indispensable. Where are we headed? It's not a conspiracy. The government is using the inflation tax to fund wars and entitlements the likes of which the world hasn't seen since the Roman empire.

It is fine. The man spewed so much crap out of his mouth it is nice to see it in real terms.

As to your theory, if what you say is true then we have a conundrum.
From colonial times people (and states) paid debts in a variety of currencies, including paper scrip. So according to you from the instant the constitution was adopted people were violating it.
Alternatively, the clause means something other than what you think it means.
Now, which one do you think makes more sense?

I think it would make more sense if you two queers got a room.

 

[Mike Mitrosky]

We dont care about the original intent of the constitution. We care even less about your interpretation of the original intent.

your new pic is awesome, btw. i almost cried i laughed so hard.

i know that the Constitution has been all but thrown out. I'm just pointing it out. The Constitution had one purpose: to prevent the conditions which the founders knew would lead to tyranny. Are there conditions that they didn't know about? Sure. But it used to be common knowledge that central banks creating money and credit from nothing was not a good idea. Suddenly, it's indispensable. Where are we headed? It's not a conspiracy. The government is using the inflation tax to fund wars and entitlements the likes of which the world hasn't seen since the Roman empire.

Did you know that Rome had welfare also? The constant wars on their frontiers are well known, but they also had to feed many of the city-dwellers from the Emperor's coffers. So do you know what they did in the 3rd and 4th century when they couldn't afford the wars and entitlements anymore? They started debasing the currency. There were many factors that contributed to the fall of Rome, but the weakening economy certainly caused the internal unrest both in civilized society and the military that facilitated the eventual collapse.

You said it...

 

[The Rabbi]

That's why Alexander Hamilton chartered the first Bank of the US?

 

[Mike Mitrosky]

That's why Alexander Hamilton chartered the first Bank of the US?

Hamilton wanted Washington to be a king too....


ANyways, the central bank back then, was much much different than what we have today..

As much as I despise private central banking.. I would love to have the BUS instead of the FED.

 

[rubberhead]

Do you have any support for this current fantasy of yours? ANy court cases, legal articles, etc?
You are about 2 posts away from going on my ignore list.

I don't care if you ignore me, so that's not really a threat. The three major supreme court cases on the subject came about in the New Deal era:

Norman v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co

Nortz v. United States

Perry v. United States

I've only read a little bit of Perry v. US. It's kind of funny, also kind of sad.

 

[rubberhead]

Rabbi I like your posts, but please remove that photo of Al spitting up turds. I never voted for the man, but a former VP of the United States should be shown some respect even if you disagree totally with him. That is just too gross! It does not belong on this forum.

Your comment is noted.

Don't listen to him! Everytime I look at it I laugh my ass off! If Al Gore wanted respect he wouldn't be a hypocritical profiteering fearmonger. He's an insult to the Nobel Prize.

The paper currency that was printed by banks in the early days was not legal tender. That is, it was only guaranteed by the bank, who agreed to exchange it for legal tender on command. If you took it to another bank, it would be worthless. Bank notes were generally taxed (until McCulloch v. United States) and not recognized as a payment of taxes.

Those were the good ol' days, when banking was a competitive business and not a fucking cartel.

 

[rubberhead]

I think it would make more sense if you two queers got a room.

Is that all you have to add? God I wish I could get on your list! That would make me so happy!

 

[rubberhead]

I'd just like to submit for the record that no one has actually made the case for fiat currency and central banking here yet.

 

[Mike Mitrosky]

I'd just like to submit for the record that no one has actually made the case for fiat currency and central banking here yet.

Oh theres a case of fiat currency allright.. It becomes worthless everytime.

Whats the old saying... "Paper money eventually seeks out its instrinsic value - zero."

 

[rubberhead]

I'd just like to submit for the record that no one has actually made the case for fiat currency and central banking here yet.

Oh theres a case of fiat currency allright.. It becomes worthless everytime.

Whats the old saying... "Paper money eventually seeks out its instrinsic value - zero."

Well, that's more of a case against it, but I don't want to squabble over details.

 

[The Rabbi]

Do you have any support for this current fantasy of yours? ANy court cases, legal articles, etc?
You are about 2 posts away from going on my ignore list.

I don't care if you ignore me, so that's not really a threat. The three major supreme court cases on the subject came about in the New Deal era:

Norman v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co

Nortz v. United States

Perry v. United States

I've only read a little bit of Perry v. US. It's kind of funny, also kind of sad.

OK, now it's one post.

 

[rubberhead]

Do you have any support for this current fantasy of yours? ANy court cases, legal articles, etc?
You are about 2 posts away from going on my ignore list.

I don't care if you ignore me, so that's not really a threat. The three major supreme court cases on the subject came about in the New Deal era:

Norman v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co

Nortz v. United States

Perry v. United States

I've only read a little bit of Perry v. US. It's kind of funny, also kind of sad.

OK, now it's one post.

Oh no! Please don't!

 

[Paulie]

Anyone want to take the bet that Rabbi is rhodescholar reincarnated?

Similar posting style, similar type of avatar mocking a dem, threatening with the ignore list.

Really Rabbi??? The ignore list??

Your father skipped out on raising you not to be a pussy, didn't he?

 

[The Rabbi]

Anyone want to take the bet that Rabbi is rhodescholar reincarnated?

Similar posting style, similar type of avatar mocking a dem, threatening with the ignore list.

Really Rabbi??? The ignore list??

Your father skipped out on raising you not to be a pussy, didn't he?

Are you still around? Not sick of getting your ass handed to you every time you post misinformation and stupidity?
btw, your new avatar is a big improvement. That skanky crack whore just wasn't making it.

 

[Paulie]

As opposed to the information you posted that didn't even apply to what I was talking about?

I talk about the correlation between interest rates and personal investment, and you throw out CapEx and GDP like it's got SHIT to do with what's being discussed.

Have you read ANYTHING on Keynes yet, rhodes? You've already proven you don't know jack fucking shit about him. Maybe it's time to hit the books?

 

[rubberhead]

I think Rabbi's starting to realize the inexorable truth. He's tired of being a tool. He realizes that the FRS and fiat money is indefensible, he just doesn't want to back down because he came out so strong in favor of it.

 

[The Rabbi]

As opposed to the information you posted that didn't even apply to what I was talking about?

I talk about the correlation between interest rates and personal investment, and you throw out CapEx and GDP like it's got SHIT to do with what's being discussed.

Have you read ANYTHING on Keynes yet, rhodes? You've already proven you don't know jack fucking shit about him. Maybe it's time to hit the books?

Please show the post where you mentioned "personal investment."
I asked where Keynes wrote he supported lower interest rates during a recession. I am still waiting.
"Don't know jack shit"? Maybe what psychologists call "projection", eh?