% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Silver Wheaton Corp. Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • hapiwondrer hapiwondrer Mar 3, 2012 5:51 AM Flag

    Milton Friedman on greed

    “Altruism” suggests unreachable objectives. It also suggests a soft form of socialism, and the objectives of socialism, except for those who have been sleep-walking most of their lives, never works. It leads to the “takers” constantly finding ways to plunder those who produce.

    As such it is important to be on the watch for “straw man” arguments that seek to undermine objectives of a corrective nature. The very basis of current day problems can be defined as the lack of Constitutional money, and those who wish to see that fiat money remains as “legal” tender, either overtly (Paulson on his knees before Pelosi requesting 700 Billion$ of taxpayer money as a bailout for his buddies at GS) or covertly. If the battle is to be won in returning this country to what the US Constitution defines as “money” there can be no compromise with those who wish to plunder others through deceitful pretense. Either people are in obvious support of that objective, or they are not. Unfortunately none of the political choices currently being presented to us as having the ability to win elections can be identified as those who would do their level best to move this country in that direction. Ron Paul is not included in that argument because every mass media outlet is opposed to his success. So it should be pretty obvious who they are aligning themselves with.

    Here is one obvious example. Mitt Romney was confronted by some reporters, who obviously wanted to get Romney’s take on the Fed as he left a building somewhere in Michigan to take his new Govmt Motors Chevy pickup to a family outing. After chasing him on his way to escape their clutches one reporter finally shouted at him a direct question through the open window of his truck as he was backing out: “Governor Romney, if you become President will you seek to get rid of the Fed?” Romney’s response was a flat, “NO”. This is exactly the sort of unacceptable response for which there can be no compromise if the global financial meltdown is to be averted, and the pathway to total serfdom for the vast majority of us is to be avoided. There are those who would be accepting of some of Romney’s views, but this one position demonstrates that this politician does NOT support our Constitution. Therefore, though some may view 80% of his positions as acceptable on a quantitative basis, this example being in the 20% range requires a weighting in Constitutional terms as being 99.999% unacceptable.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
27.87+0.77(+2.84%)Jul 29 4:02 PMEDT