|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Sept 20, 2010 6:06:12 GMT -8
I know for a fact that those people who pretend they are conservatives on this forum don't have the slightest idea what Money is. They occasionally post something that they heard Ron Paul say. I, for a fact, know that Ron Paul is the biggest fuggin idiot in the history of the world when it comes to economics.
What a loser he is!
But now, let's see how you guys define money. Post your definition (Unless you have no cajones.) and let's mull it over. I will be back later to show you how you are all wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Sept 20, 2010 6:07:38 GMT -8
Of course, knowing what money is is what makes it easy to be be a Liberal. What, me worry?
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Sept 20, 2010 11:56:07 GMT -8
You will have to expand your question if you want an answer. Since our currency is no longer backed by anything real, money can be defined in various ways.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Sept 21, 2010 12:57:34 GMT -8
You will have to expand your question if you want an answer. Since our currency is no longer backed by anything real, money can be defined in various ways. Give us an answer, not a bunch of false theory crappola. Remember, the dollar is backed by the productivity of America. (That includes our natural resources.) |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Sept 21, 2010 16:09:10 GMT -8
You will have to expand your question if you want an answer. Since our currency is no longer backed by anything real, money can be defined in various ways. Give us an answer, not a bunch of false theory crappola. Remember, the dollar is backed by the productivity of America. (That includes our natural resources.) What happens when productivity increase incrementally and money supply increases exponentially? Joe, on this issue you are so full of it that it is almost dangerous to think that anyone would believe you. Some f those liberals that you know mentor may, but thinking people know better. |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Sept 21, 2010 20:05:12 GMT -8
Give us an answer, not a bunch of false theory crappola. Remember, the dollar is backed by the productivity of America. (That includes our natural resources.) What happens when productivity increase incrementally and money supply increases exponentially? Joe, on this issue you are so full of it that it is almost dangerous to think that anyone would believe you. Some f those liberals that you know mentor may, but thinking people know better. Win, you are making silly positional statements that are in no way substantiated by fact. Then you say that makes me full of it. Now, that has to be the screwiest thing that I have seen in a long time. Put your bong down, sober up, and then define money for me. It is a simple request. I have not defined it for you, so you can not attack me until I do. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Sept 22, 2010 11:24:40 GMT -8
What happens when productivity increase incrementally and money supply increases exponentially? Joe, on this issue you are so full of it that it is almost dangerous to think that anyone would believe you. Some f those liberals that you know mentor may, but thinking people know better. Win, you are making silly positional statements that are in no way substantiated by fact. Then you say that makes me full of it. Now, that has to be the screwiest thing that I have seen in a long time. Put your bong down, sober up, and then define money for me. It is a simple request. I have not defined it for you, so you can not attack me until I do. Now days, money is merely an instrument of exchange no longer backed by anything tangible. |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Sept 22, 2010 15:19:14 GMT -8
I still see no definition here. Bring some of your conservative friends, not matter how stupid they are and try to come up with a definition for MONEY.
I will not poke fun at them because they are stupid. I will try to educate them.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Sept 25, 2010 15:55:33 GMT -8
OK, without caveats, I will define money.
I will start off with a simple definition.
Money is a medium that can be exchanged for goods and services and is used as a measure of their values on the market.
By that definition money is not Gold (Which is a commodity like corn.) and it need not be Silver Certificates. (Again, Silver is a commodity just like Gold or Corn.)
All it need be is a representation of payment in equal worth. As long as people are willing to use it as a medium of exchange, financial transactions are easy to process.
The Criminally insane conservatives want money to be something that it is not, A COMMODITY. Granted, you can use a commodity as a medium of exchange, but is is difficult to do so, therefore money is extremely practical. It is so practical that it can just be electronic transactions instead of paper. So why do people want to carry Gold, Silver or Corn around with them and pretend that it is just as practical as paper money or electronic transfers. Boy, that sounds Crazy to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Sept 26, 2010 7:01:21 GMT -8
Money is nothing more than a medium of exchange. It is a physical representation of a promise to give something of value in exchange for something of value they received. Now that promise is usually an electronic notation in a computer. For money to be useful, it has to keep moving and be spread out to many. To me a better question for conservatives would be to ask why they hate contributing something of value to their own country(themselves).
I would also ask them why they get orgasmic when a tax is cut. I personally think its Freudian! ;D
Huh, I just read your post. That is the one just above this one. I didn't read it before I posted. Interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Sept 26, 2010 7:08:50 GMT -8
Win, you are making silly positional statements that are in no way substantiated by fact. Then you say that makes me full of it. Now, that has to be the screwiest thing that I have seen in a long time. Put your bong down, sober up, and then define money for me. It is a simple request. I have not defined it for you, so you can not attack me until I do. Now days, money is merely an instrument of exchange no longer backed by anything tangible. What is this if not the answer that I told Joe was previously posted and he said he could not find? This thread is silly. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Sept 26, 2010 7:13:47 GMT -8
Money is nothing more than a medium of exchange. It is a physical representation of a promise to give something of value in exchange for something of value they received. Now that promise is usually an electronic notation in a computer. For money to be useful, it has to keep moving and be spread out to many. To me a better question for conservatives would be to ask why they hate contributing something of value to their own country(themselves). I would also ask them why they get orgasmic when a tax is cut. I personally think its Freudian! ;D Huh, I just read your post. That is the one just above this one. I didn't read it before I posted. Interesting. When you get to a certain age you need to get your thrills somewhere. A well aimed tax cut is as good a way as any!  |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Sept 26, 2010 7:18:14 GMT -8
Now days, money is merely an instrument of exchange no longer backed by anything tangible. What is this if not the answer that I told Joe was previously posted and he said he could not find? This thread is silly. No, win, you started posting gibberish about Silver Certificates. Most conservatives are all totally fugged up in the head about Gold and Silver. For some insane reason they think that should be used as a medium of exchange. Money is just a means of facilitating transactions. It does not have to be a transaction within a transaction. That is just dumb. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Sept 26, 2010 7:27:44 GMT -8
What is this if not the answer that I told Joe was previously posted and he said he could not find? This thread is silly. No, win, you started posting gibberish about Silver Certificates. Most conservatives are all totally fugged up in the head about Gold and Silver. For some insane reason they think that should be used as a medium of exchange. Money is just a means of facilitating transactions. It does not have to be a transaction within a transaction. That is just dumb. Sounds like you are trying to make some sort of circular argument because you did not read the entire thread. |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Sept 26, 2010 7:28:54 GMT -8
You will have to expand your question if you want an answer. Since our currency is no longer backed by anything real, money can be defined in various ways. You see, win, this is a perfect example of why you come across as so befuddled in your old age. So, to simplify things for you, I have proposed that we go on the Corn and SoyBean standard. If we did that, we could pay for services with a bag of corn meal or a credit card. There, would that make you happy? |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Sept 26, 2010 14:44:16 GMT -8
Money is nothing more than a medium of exchange. It is a physical representation of a promise to give something of value in exchange for something of value they received. Now that promise is usually an electronic notation in a computer. For money to be useful, it has to keep moving and be spread out to many. To me a better question for conservatives would be to ask why they hate contributing something of value to their own country(themselves). I would also ask them why they get orgasmic when a tax is cut. I personally think its Freudian! ;D Huh, I just read your post. That is the one just above this one. I didn't read it before I posted. Interesting. When you get to a certain age you need to get your thrills somewhere. A well aimed tax cut is as good a way as any! Well said! |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Sept 26, 2010 14:59:01 GMT -8
You will have to expand your question if you want an answer. Since our currency is no longer backed by anything real, money can be defined in various ways. You see, win, this is a perfect example of why you come across as so befuddled in your old age. So, to simplify things for you, I have proposed that we go on the Corn and SoyBean standard. If we did that, we could pay for services with a bag of corn mean or a credit card. There, would that make you happy? Yes, mean corn would be included in a barter system before we figure out that some permanent storehouse of value must back whatever we use as a unit of exchange. |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Sept 26, 2010 16:12:49 GMT -8
And as previous stated, we do not need to back money. Just the productivity of the United States is all the backing it needs. You cam close to a valid definition. I saw it. The only problem is you keep on saying that it does not have anything to back it any more. It does not need a commodity to back it, so your attempt at a definition was wrong.
The whole point to this string is that Conservatives are totally lost when it comes to the actual use of money. If they understood what money is and how much we need to use it to correct years of Republican Fat Cat-itis, they would eagerly vote tax increases to fund all of the socialist programs that we need to help the lower classes.
Make it so!
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Sept 26, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -8
And as previous stated, we do not need to back money. Just the productivity of the United States is all the backing it needs. You cam close to a valid definition. I saw it. The only problem is you keep on saying that it does not have anything to back it any more. It does not need a commodity to back it, so your attempt at a definition was wrong. The whole point to this string is that Conservatives are totally lost when it comes to the actual use of money. If they understood what money is and how much we need to use it to correct years of Republican Fat Cat-itis, they would eagerly vote tax increases to fund all of the socialist programs that we need to help the lower classes. Make it so! The longer you stay in this BAL role, the wronger you get and the harder your head gets. The full faith and credit of the US has never been on more shaky ground. |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Oct 1, 2010 6:00:10 GMT -8
And as previous stated, we do not need to back money. Just the productivity of the United States is all the backing it needs. You cam close to a valid definition. I saw it. The only problem is you keep on saying that it does not have anything to back it any more. It does not need a commodity to back it, so your attempt at a definition was wrong. The whole point to this string is that Conservatives are totally lost when it comes to the actual use of money. If they understood what money is and how much we need to use it to correct years of Republican Fat Cat-itis, they would eagerly vote tax increases to fund all of the socialist programs that we need to help the lower classes. Make it so! The longer you stay in this BAL role, the wronger you get and the harder your head gets. The full faith and credit of the US has never been on more shaky ground. Win, all you conservatives ever try to do is terrify people into believing that the currency of the United States is going to evaporate. Remember, money is free for the US Government as long as we borrow from the FED. If you do not pay interest on the loan, you effectively can increase borrowing and never have to pay anything back. That was the reason why the FED was made independent of the US government. Granted it seems illegal but the reality is that we create the entity and it serves us in any capacity that we want it to. The FED is better than Banana Flavored IceCream with Chopped Black Walnuts in it. |
|
