what so bad about socialism

I've seen and experienced great things in countries that are more geared to socialism. The happiest rated countries in the world are all highly socialistic countries. Why can't we do what we already know that works?

socialism has a bad name given that it killed 120 million very slowly. If many socialist countries countries are superior to the USA why not tell us your best example??
 
I already told you.l?

for 12th time why not tell us who controls the money supply if not the Fed? What does your fear tell us?

for 12th time why not tell us who controls the money supply if not the Fed?


what so bad about socialism | Page 26 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

what so bad about socialism | Page 26 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

what so bad about socialism | Page 26 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

what so bad about socialism | Page 27 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

If you're still too stupid to understand my explanations, let me know.

What does your fear tell us?


What does your stupidity tell us?
 
, it [Fed] would decide what it wanted and just do it.

again you are being silly by assuming absolute and real time control when no economist ever said the Fed had absolute and real time control.

you are being silly by assuming absolute and real time control when no economist ever said the Fed had absolute and real time control.

Federal Reserve had total control of money supply and let it shrink 34%. You idiot, you've learned that 134 times. Are you going for 135? See why we have to be positive that a liberal will be stupid? What other conclusion is possible?

what so bad about socialism | Page 18 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

You said they had total control. LOL!
 
, it [Fed] would decide what it wanted and just do it.

again you are being silly by assuming absolute and real time control when no economist ever said the Fed had absolute and real time control.

you are being silly by assuming absolute and real time control when no economist ever said the Fed had absolute and real time control.

Federal Reserve had total control of money supply and let it shrink 34%. You idiot, you've learned that 134 times. Are you going for 135? See why we have to be positive that a liberal will be stupid? What other conclusion is possible?

what so bad about socialism | Page 18 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

You said they had total control. LOL!

for 13th time. Who controls the money supply if not the Fed? The Girl Scouts??
 
, it [Fed] would decide what it wanted and just do it.

again you are being silly by assuming absolute and real time control when no economist ever said the Fed had absolute and real time control.

you are being silly by assuming absolute and real time control when no economist ever said the Fed had absolute and real time control.

Federal Reserve had total control of money supply and let it shrink 34%. You idiot, you've learned that 134 times. Are you going for 135? See why we have to be positive that a liberal will be stupid? What other conclusion is possible?

what so bad about socialism | Page 18 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

You said they had total control. LOL!

for 13th time. Who controls the money supply if not the Fed? The Girl Scouts??

The Fed controls reserves and currency.
Banks and their customers control the rest.

Clear enough for you? Moron.
 
what is wrong with Socialism, not enough Persons of social morals for free.

wrong with it? It slowly starved 120 million to death. Other than that, not much. For Daniel its a promising system though because the number was only 120 million human beings
 
When loans are made, the money supply increases.
When loans are repaid (or defaulted), the money supply decreases.

but banks are independent of one another so how do the work together to control the money supply

but banks are independent of one another

Yes they are.

so how do the work together to control the money supply

Who said they worked together?

I'm still curious about your previous claims that the Fed has total control over money supply.
Any follow up? Or will you admit your error?
 
what is wrong with Socialism, not enough Persons of social morals for free.

wrong with it? It slowly starved 120 million to death. Other than that, not much. For Daniel its a promising system though because the number was only 120 million human beings
dear, socialism is merely an evolution from capitalism where people starve by merely not having enough capital.

What excuse could any Good social State have for not bailing out Capitalism, with an official public Mint and an official public Commerce Clause to work with?
 
Last edited:
What makes you think they have to work together?

well if you had 10 guys controlling the water level in a pool and each filled or lowered according to his own inclinations it would be difficult to imagine the 10 guys controlled the water level with a specific objective.
 
What makes you think they have to work together?

well if you had 10 guys controlling the water level in a pool and each filled or lowered according to his own inclinations it would be difficult to imagine the 10 guys controlled the water level with a specific objective.

it would be difficult to imagine the 10 guys controlled the water level with a specific objective.

The objective is to make money, not hit a specific money supply target.

You claimed the Fed had total control over money supply and I showed you that banks and their customers add and subtract from money supply, without permission from the Fed, which one of us is correct?
 

The objective is to make money, not hit a specific money supply target.

dear, we are not concerned about their objective to make money but rather how they control the money as you claim they do. So far you have conceded that their object is to make money not coordinate to control the money supply. Perhaps you feel their second objective is to coordinate and control the money supply??
 

Forum List

Back
Top