Your writing is full of contradictions and confusion. And your claims that you have been misunderstood are a testament to that.
“Counterfeit money is its own problem--it has nothing to do with the abrogation of a custom and tradition of a single employer for decades, resulting in a small pension and a gold watch. …”
What exactly are you doing on a message board devoted to a company mining PMs? So you apparently really think that employers haven’t been taking advantage of the fact that they can scam their employees with counterfeit money, the value of which lags behind its real worth?
“…History is ripe with retirement funds being raided for real money, and the company printing IOU's in the form of bonds in its place to fund the effort. …”
And you say that “Counterfeit money is its own problem…”?
“…we didn't lay aside money (emphasis added) to pay you in your retirement years" doesn't sell. …”
You really need to do some research on what real money is. If that is what had been laid aside it couldn’t be raided, if placed in a truly segregated account. Not the sort that Jon Corzine should be in jail for.
“…One of the reasons you work for Uncle Sam IS because he can print the money and make good those promises. …”
“…If that's Socialist you've certainly an interesting definition. …”
Maybe it is YOU that has a $crewed up definition.
“…One of the reasons you (emphasis added) work for Uncle Sam IS because he can print the money and make good those promises. …”
And would the you be you?
As aligned with your subsequent answer: “…For your information, I am a Barry Goldwater Republican and Ron Paul supporter …”
Well good for you. But please don’t attempt to provide your version of what these politicians represent, because it is WAY off base.
“…If you went for the brass ring and didn't become a soldier, sailor, or Fed employee, that's too bad. …”
“…Looks like being one of those guys paid off handsomely while corporatocracy raped and pillaged and plundered. …”
That sure sounds like you’re promoting the idea of doing so. Maybe you should ask a Microsoft employee if there is any truth to your claim.
“…The ones that made and fired the weapon systems that protected America get their pension, the guys that made more money manufacturing bunny rabbits didn't work out as well. …”
Again, what exactly are you doing on a message board devoted to a company mining PMs? So you apparently really think that employers haven’t been taking advantage of the fact that they can scam their employees with counterfeit money, the value of which lags behind its real worth, thus allowing these companies to produce better results than if they were operating on an honest Constitutional money system.
“…Just like the nineteenth century, everybody raced to be the next Horatio Alger and be a business tycoon while all those lawyering schools and medical schools couldn't make quota until they allowed the Chews in.
Now everybody complains about all the Chewish doctors and lawyers that predominate those fields. …”
“…Government as solution is completely off topic. …”
Some recent history harking back to the WWII era vividly points to where that scapegoat historical interpretation leads, so none of this is “off topic”.
The Constitution for the united States of America specifies in no uncertain terms what is required to commit American military power, i.e., to go to war. It was done that way so that the people would have some impact on the decision to go to war thus precluding the actions of an dictator.
James Madison declared the War Powers Clause to be the most important in the Constitution because history had shown that “the executive is the branch of power most interested in war,” and therefore must be tempered by a deliberative Congress.
No act of the CONgress, say the War Powers Act, for example, can modify that situation. Thus the Act is unconstitutional, or as specified in Marbury v. Madison, 'Null and Void and of no effect.' By consequence, then, those that disregard such limitations, even if historically disregarded by others, as though once once a bank has been robbed no subsequent bank robberies are subject to prosecution are, in my view and in the view of a steadily growing number of Americans, and have been committing acts of treason along with misprision of treason.
What arguments might we also forward that comments like yours, opinion or no, serve to aid and abet said treason by pretending, for whatever reason, that such actions are somehow legitimate in addition to encouraging their undertaking?
Instead of attempted abrogation as a matter of conspiracy to ignore, perhaps the matter should become one of open and honest debate. I say that because the Constitution is, in many respects, merely a piece of paper, a piece of paper incapable of defending itself, which all those elected to public office are obligated by solemn oath to "uphold and defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic," an oath I've offered myself, but seldom do we see those oaths fulfilled. More curiously yet, those that actually do are denigrated and ridiculed, an intolerable situation.
It is quite obvious that a great many "power wielders" are deserving of being subjected to scrutiny by juries of their peers and treated accordingly else the Republic is doomed.
I agree. I call the Petrodollar the greatest protection racket since the Mafia. US play both sides against the middle, and force Arabs to collect printed dollars for oil to "keep the peace".
All we have to do is sacrifice our kids, our financial futures, and our prosperity on a mountain of debt in an unending war cycle.
No wonder we like the Godfather Trilogy. It's US.
Not to slam anyone here, but isn't it about making money in the industrial complex, not ending anything. The powers that be want to make money and control resources, not end the wars.
Again, I come beck to the petrol dollar.
"The situation here is hardly the same as the one that caused Truman to choose dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki; no state of war exists and we are involved in an unconstitutional “police action”, a euphemism adopted to make Americans think that somehow what it was doing was legitimate.
You can have all the lawyerly phraseology you want, in order to make an engagement legitimate. Notice how well that is going since 1951. NOT.
You missed the word "if" which envelopes the concept of "conflict" as a given. I restate, "if" (legal, illegal, ill advised, muddleheaded, god given, whatever) you're going to engage war with an embedded enemy, however you get past that point and decide (legally, illegally) you don't go all 11th Century on him engaging in fist fights house to house in Fabreezitstan, draining troops and treasure in an endless muddle trying to recreate the victory of WWII in America's mind so one religion triumphs over another.
You nuke the muthaphukka to get his attention and get him to "stop".
You don't engage in limited war making endlessly as a good repeat business venture.
The situation here is EXACTLY the same as the Truman scenario.
We are running out of money, unless we print up more worthless scrip to sell to an unsuspecting but slowly understanding world--Truman's bond run of 1945 left him with less than two years of warfighting capability and no more money. Our value system then, was, limit debt. What is it now? Print worthless scrip till everybody is paying $50 for a Micky D's?
1945 we were fighting an entrenched enemy that felt its Emperor, a godhead, leading them to salvation. Sound familiar?
Our troops were exhausted, and we weren't willing to stretch them further. We are now, and look at the results, rampaging murdering frenzies--it's even MORE imperative we act decisively.
Yeah, it's not the Truman situation.
“but if we engage an enemy that is embedded, you nuke the bastid and stop engaging in decade long fist fights, house to house in Fablungastan --you know, the Barry Goldwater/Harry Truman solution.”
The situation here is hardly the same as the one that caused Truman to choose dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki; no state of war exists and we are involved in an unconstitutional “police action”, a euphemism adopted to make Americans think that somehow what it was doing was legitimate.
A job is like an investment, you don't fall in love with it, the oath you take as a Fed is to uphold the Constitution, not support government for every solution.
Thanks for the psychobabble. Your post doesn't have a single phrase, let alone sentence, that holds water with respect to yours truly. If you've done better than the average Fed or senior non com or officer, what are you complaining about?
For your information, I am a Barry Goldwater Republican and Ron Paul supporter, which means I don't believe in entangling alliances like Paul, but if we engage an enemy that is embedded, you nuke the bastid and stop engaging in decade long fist fights, house to house in Fablungastan --you know, the Barry Goldwater/Harry Truman solution.
If that's Socialist you've certainly an interesting definition.
If you don't use nukes to play endgame, you get servicemen who crack and run rampage during duty, not having the decent to wait thereafter. Call in CSTD, contemporary stress traumatic disorder from ten years bombing camel jockeys out of existence for Jesus and George Bush. I go nuts just thinking about the concept, let alone running around with machine pistols breaking into houses looking for who knows what.
You've also mistaken the advocation of a good job with benefits, with the need to somehow believe in government as solution to civilian problems in the economic world in order to get a job and fill your gut on a steady basis. I said nothing of the kind. Government as solution is completely off topic.
Do you have to believe in Bunny Rabbits to be an account executive with a stuffed animal factory? No. You just need a good salary and benefits.
With respect to a job, I said, the job structure and raise structure of the Federal employee is fixed to annual increases for both longevity and CPI, which has blown away private industry last ten years--by just keeping up with inflation. Private industry compensation has not. You don't have to be a card carrying Socialist to know a good job with benefits from one that is screwing you running around on a forklift. On the other hand, if you were really clever, you'd be a stock market maven for Sodomy Smith Baloney or Merril's Lynched, and be making oodles watching other people gamble their savings away and collecting a chunk win lose or draw.
I also said, the compensation package for a Serviceperson relieves them of 50% the tax burden, and the promulgation of both housing allowances tax free separate from salary, and local housing supplements on top of those allowance also tax free, adds 25% to the average military compensation package. Try returning to the draft and moving away from an all volunteer force, and see just how many worthless wars we entangle ourselves with, when salaries and benefits drop and we stop kidding ourselves, we've mercenaries, not "volunteer" military forces. Bring back the draft.
I was one of those military guys, and part of my motivation was, extraordinary compensation. I also looked pretty good in uniform. My values run differently.
Good luck changing the system. Look how well my candidate Ron Paul is doing. Look at the success rate of a Barry Goldwater ending the Vietnam war, by nuking N Vietnam.
That's why yourdeadmeat69 times over. Which is why I use that handle, so I can use that phrase.
Take your meds and try again.
“…If you went for the brass ring and didn't become a soldier, sailor, or Fed employee, that's too bad. Looks like being one of those guys paid off handsomely while corporatocracy raped and pillaged and plundered….”
Apparently you haven’t been paying attention to the news lately out of Afghanistan. Or the news of the suicide rate among our military.
For some reason you are really pumping the public sector. Maybe you ought to go a bit more in depth on that point rather than being superficial. It does seem that you are trending down the socialist pathway where only big government has the answers and provides the opportunities. Perhaps you could enlighten us on how we have advanced to a new age in history where government really DOES provide the best pathway to success in life, whereas all previous attempts at making governments the end all means for human existence ended in disaster for all concerned.
Just Wondring at how socialists are able to make that leap whilst avoiding all the obvious pitfalls along the way. Maybe it is best understood by your screen name, a comment most others will understand in the context of your belief system.
You are right about the Fed govt simply printing money to make good on all those entitlement promises they made to everyone from postal workers, DEA agents, IRS employees, military personnel (activated or not). They get to retire from those 'jobs' in their 40s and 50s, and enter the private sector at their leisure if they decide to keep working. Either way, health benefits and pension income until death is guaranteed by a govt promise they have no way to keep without 'counterfeiting' (dollar printing). Republican and Democrats will both defend this practice because they are all govt insiders who benefit from these promised entitlements.
Obama already said he wants people to work until 80, and by that I think he means only private sector folks. At least that's what his actions say.
“You want us to pay for all the Made in China junk with gold? …”
That’s how things always used to be paid for. So you have a problem with that?
Apparently you just don’t want to live within your means. You want to follow the example of the robber barons, in your own small way.
If you don’t like what is made in China, then don’t buy it.
As far as the greed part, you don’t point to where it really originates, which is with the central banks worldwide, and not just the Fed. They print the “money”, and on top of that they charge interest on what they’ve counterfeited. Since you haven’t pointed that out apparently you are clueless about whom the really greedy are and certainly don’t understand that this sort of theft has nothing to do with chasing jobs to other countries where things are “cheaper”. It has everything to do with counterfeit currency manipulation that gives the illusion that things are cheaper elsewhere. That is a transitory phenomenon as “elsewhere” eventually needs to demand more funny money as they “prosper”, whereas if they were compensated with real money their output would remain pretty much the same everywhere else except for differences in quality. So those who complain about poor quality from places like China could easily go to sources from other places where the quality is better, while at the same time paying about the same. It is the gold anchor that makes that possible because it is a reliable exchange constant.
So tell us. Wouldn’t you like to have a printing press that you can pump out the fake money on and on top of that charge interest to those who borrow it? Maybe you should check out a dictionary to see what it says about greed because somewhere along the line your definition got all mixed up.
You can’t win this argument because you’ve failed to identify the source of the greed. That goes for some others on this topic for which the time is not available to respond. It does seem that we’ve got some “plants” here that are trying their mightiest to get others to buy their false premise that the symptoms are really the disease. In other words what they identify as inflation (resulting in vanishing pensions, for example) is the greed of some, most often referred to with the catch-all description as banksters, to favor a deteriorating currency so they can continually downgrade living standards by compensating with “money” that is progressing towards worthlessness. In the process they are creating slaves because the very definition of being one is working for nothing in return. So by arguing that fiat money is not the problem you are nothing but the “masters’ overseers”.