I ask you this. What does not decrease or increase in value over time.
Supply and Demand will always be in effect.
Advertisement

by Salvarity » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:24 pm

by Yootwopia » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:25 pm
Sibirsky wrote:Money could be metal, like coins. Or it could be anything. It could be electronic. But it must meet the criteria above. Fiat money fails the 3rd function?
by Sibirsky » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:26 pm
Wikkiwallana wrote:Sibirsky wrote:I showed that the 1990 formula shows 6%+ inflation. I addressed how they lower the rate as well.
I posted that before I saw your chart because I accidentally skipped a few posts using the "unread posts" feature. I still have yet to see anything resembling an addressal of rate lowering methods.

by Wikkiwallana » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:26 pm
Dumb Ideologies wrote:Halt!
Just because these people are stupid, wrong and highly dangerous does not mean you have the right to make them feel sad.
Avenio wrote:Just so you know, the use of the term 'sheep' 'sheeple' or any other herd animal-based terminology in conjunction with an exhortation to 'think outside the box' or stop going along with groupthink generally indicates that the speaker is actually more closed-minded on the subject than the people that he/she is addressing. At least, in my experience at least.
by Sibirsky » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:27 pm
New Conglomerate wrote:Sibirsky wrote:Do you?
Yes, a lower rate of inflation does 2 things. First, COLA is lower, saving the government money. 2nd, it makes GDP growth look better, so consumers and investors are more confident. Spending more, and investing more.
Damn the retirees living on fixed incomes.
COLA only includes variables that are definately inflation. Many other factors could cause rises in fuel prices, rises in cost of living, etc.
That's why they changed it. The old formula created excessive panic in the financial sector.

by Wikkiwallana » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:27 pm
Sibirsky wrote:Wikkiwallana wrote:I posted that before I saw your chart because I accidentally skipped a few posts using the "unread posts" feature. I still have yet to see anything resembling an addressal of rate lowering methods.
For like the 5th time...
Hedonics, geometric weighting, and substitution. The BLS admits that they do this, although they do not release the official formula.
Dumb Ideologies wrote:Halt!
Just because these people are stupid, wrong and highly dangerous does not mean you have the right to make them feel sad.
Avenio wrote:Just so you know, the use of the term 'sheep' 'sheeple' or any other herd animal-based terminology in conjunction with an exhortation to 'think outside the box' or stop going along with groupthink generally indicates that the speaker is actually more closed-minded on the subject than the people that he/she is addressing. At least, in my experience at least.

by Wikkiwallana » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:28 pm
Dumb Ideologies wrote:Halt!
Just because these people are stupid, wrong and highly dangerous does not mean you have the right to make them feel sad.
Avenio wrote:Just so you know, the use of the term 'sheep' 'sheeple' or any other herd animal-based terminology in conjunction with an exhortation to 'think outside the box' or stop going along with groupthink generally indicates that the speaker is actually more closed-minded on the subject than the people that he/she is addressing. At least, in my experience at least.

by Hydesland » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:28 pm


by Mad Monarch » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:31 pm
Wikkiwallana wrote:Sibirsky wrote:For like the 5th time...
Hedonics, geometric weighting, and substitution. The BLS admits that they do this, although they do not release the official formula.
Then for the 4th time what are hedonics, geometric weighting, and substitution, and why are they bad. Seriously you're just waving them about as boogeymen at this point.
by Sibirsky » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:31 pm
Mad Monarch wrote:Sibirsky wrote:Sure. We already have private hospitals. And to a limited extent roads, fire stations, police and utilities.
Ya, several states have "pay for your fire department" taxes. Here is what happens if you don't pay and your house catches fire:
They show up, don't enter the property, don't let you near the property, and watch it burn while keeping your neighbors safe (if they payed). This actually isn't fear mongering, it actually does happen in states that have this fun little idea. How do you expect private business would be any better in that regard?

by Salvarity » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:31 pm
by Sibirsky » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:32 pm
Salvarity wrote:Sibirsky wrote:Sure. We already have private hospitals. And to a limited extent roads, fire stations, police and utilities.
I'll give you private hospitals and private roads but
-Fire Fighter. Your in one of your most economic lows when your house just got set on fire. Having to Pay for a fire fighter is going to be economically draining on the victim
-Police. Well your a Libertarian. In a perfect Libertarian world how long until Private Law Enforcement become Private Offense.
-Utilities. I'll give you this also.

by Mad Monarch » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:32 pm
Sibirsky wrote:Mad Monarch wrote:Ya, several states have "pay for your fire department" taxes. Here is what happens if you don't pay and your house catches fire:
They show up, don't enter the property, don't let you near the property, and watch it burn while keeping your neighbors safe (if they payed). This actually isn't fear mongering, it actually does happen in states that have this fun little idea. How do you expect private business would be any better in that regard?
And? Your point is? Those are city run departments. You know, the fucks that write the laws.

by Salvarity » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:33 pm
Sibirsky wrote:Salvarity wrote:
What makes the 1990 Formula the true formula and the current formula the false one?
I never said the 1990s formula is the true formula, just that it is closer to reality.
Less hedonics, substitution and geometric weighting. All these are verifiable. While the BLS does not release the exact formula, they admit that they engage is such practices.

by United Dependencies » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:34 pm
Alien Space Bats wrote:2012: The Year We Lost Contact (with Reality).
Cannot think of a name wrote:Obamacult wrote:Maybe there is an economically sound and rational reason why there are no longer high paying jobs for qualified accountants, assembly line workers, glass blowers, blacksmiths, tanners, etc.
Maybe dragons took their jobs. Maybe unicorns only hid their jobs because unicorns are dicks. Maybe 'jobs' is only an illusion created by a drug addled infant pachyderm. Fuck dude, if we're in 'maybe' land, don't hold back.
by Sibirsky » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:34 pm
Mad Monarch wrote:Salvarity wrote:
I'll give you private hospitals and private roads but
-Fire Fighter. Your in one of your most economic lows when your house just got set on fire. Having to Pay for a fire fighter is going to be economically draining on the victim
-Police. Well your a Libertarian. In a perfect Libertarian world how long until Private Law Enforcement become Private Offense.
-Utilities. I'll give you this also.
Don't give him privatized hospitals, actually. not until he finds a viable answer to the blaring hole in his logic should all hospitals become privatized. Don't even give him roads until he plugs the obvious hole in that that I pointed out should roads become fully privatized.

by Wikkiwallana » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:35 pm
Salvarity wrote:Sibirsky wrote:I never said the 1990s formula is the true formula, just that it is closer to reality.
Less hedonics, substitution and geometric weighting. All these are verifiable. While the BLS does not release the exact formula, they admit that they engage is such practices.
Which Reality. I'm sorry but i'm not comprehending what this post is supposed to mean.
Dumb Ideologies wrote:Halt!
Just because these people are stupid, wrong and highly dangerous does not mean you have the right to make them feel sad.
Avenio wrote:Just so you know, the use of the term 'sheep' 'sheeple' or any other herd animal-based terminology in conjunction with an exhortation to 'think outside the box' or stop going along with groupthink generally indicates that the speaker is actually more closed-minded on the subject than the people that he/she is addressing. At least, in my experience at least.

by Mad Monarch » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:36 pm
Sibirsky wrote:**
Mad Monarch wrote:What part of "they can't legally deny you care" which you fucking quoted, do you not understand?
the part where, if there are no taxes, they have no viable to give you care. Medial supplies don't come out of thin air, they cost money. Money the hospital won't have if they don't deny you coverage in a government without taxes.
Now that I painted the obvious in bright red letters, maybe you will notice.
by Sibirsky » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:36 pm
New Conglomerate wrote:Salvarity wrote:
I'll give you private hospitals and private roads but
-Fire Fighter. Your in one of your most economic lows when your house just got set on fire. Having to Pay for a fire fighter is going to be economically draining on the victim
-Police. Well your a Libertarian. In a perfect Libertarian world how long until Private Law Enforcement become Private Offense.
-Utilities. I'll give you this also.
That's not how it works for privatized police and fire departments. Local areas that are too small to maintain a professional police force or firefighters can contract private groups to supplement volunteer services.
Privatizing utilities is a bad idea, though. Enron. 'Nuff said.

by Mad Monarch » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:40 pm
Living Freedom Land wrote:Sadly a closed system would work. They would have a very captive consumer base. They could, realistically, charge as high as they want do to that one factor.
Well, many other monopolies have been shown to deteriorate if just given time, but you very well may be right. However, just because the entire road system can't be privatized doesn't mean that the private sector can't be a part of the roads.

by Puissancevise » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:41 pm
Alyakia wrote:pritivitze the roads

by Distruzio » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:42 pm
Ravineworld wrote:Theft by Definition: The act of stealing property.
So, income taxes, are when the government forces you to give up your property. How is that not stealing property?
I believe that taxes are an act of theft. I believe that since theft is illegal, then taxes are illegal.
So, NSG, what do you think about income taxes? Illegal, legal, good, bad?

by Death Metal » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:42 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Benuty, Concejos Unidos, Ifreann, Kerwa, La Xinga, Pizza Friday Forever91, Port Caverton, The Two Jerseys, TheKeyToJoy, Thermodolia
Advertisement