Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options

The quickest way to rob a man..

2456789

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    klintock wrote:
    What the bearded ferk are Neo-liberal economics, and what do they have to do with a post about how banks factually operate?

    Oh dear. For someone who seems to be attempting to lord their intellectual superiority over the entire forum, you don't actually know very much do you?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote:
    Oh dear. For someone who seems to be attempting to lord their intellectual superiority over the entire forum, you don't actually know very much do you?

    no he doesnt
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Eh? Where and when did I do that?

    Let's have some facts please as opposed to this face pulling stuff.

    Oh, and I can't help but notice that the question went unanswered to boot. (again) It seems that stuff that isn't liked is just ignored on this forum.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    klintock wrote:
    Eh? Where and when did I do that?

    Let's have some facts please as opposed to this face pulling stuff.

    Oh, and I can't help but notice that the question went unanswered to boot. (again) It seems that stuff that isn't liked is just ignored on this forum.

    you are very hypocritical, you just said lets have some facts
    and you never provide any yourself or any links
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    klintock

    As I've already said - if you're going to critique governments and banks then do so. At the moment, you are totally lacking any kind of analysis.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    try Google - credit asset ratio - history of banking.

    First one on the list - "Silver State Schools Credit Union's net worth to asset ratio for 2003 was 9.18%"

    That means that they have 9.18% of all the paper money the have ever taken in actually on them, the rest has been loaned out.

    http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/history.htm -

    "In 1921 the Bank of england left the gold standard." this is when the "promise to pay gold" was taken off new notes. Email them and ask what substance a note entitles you to. they won't answer. Take one to your local bank.....

    "The 1998 Bank of England Act made changes to the Bank's governing body too. The Court of Directors, as it's known, is now made up of the Bank's Governor and 2 Deputy Governors, and 16 Non-Executive Directors."

    Did you vote for these people? Did you hell.

    http://www.dmo.gov.uk/bginfo/bofe.htm

    "It was realised that money could take on new forms, possess no intrinsic value and yet still retain qualities to fulfil payment obligations. Therefore at the same time that the National Debt was born, paper money came into existence."
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Still no analysis.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Analysis doesn't "interest" me, getting facts like this more generally known does. Talking about things I can't sense is a bit beyond my abilities, sorry.

    What does neo-whatchmacallit taste like, anyway? How much does it weigh? what colour is it? Does it have friends or family?

    As analysis is beyond me, what do you make of it?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    klintock wrote:
    Analysis doesn't "interest" me, getting facts like this more generally known does. Talking about things I can't sense is a bit beyond my abilities, sorry.

    What does neo-whatchmacallit taste like, anyway? How much does it weigh? what colour is it? Does it have friends or family?

    As analysis is beyond me, what do you make of it?

    its politics and debate, and if people around here, including yourself, complain about the lack of debate in here i will scream

    debate is the discussion/analysing bit

    come back when you learn how to do it
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    klintock wrote:
    Analysis doesn't "interest" me, getting facts like this more generally known does. Talking about things I can't sense is a bit beyond my abilities, sorry.

    What does neo-whatchmacallit taste like, anyway? How much does it weigh? what colour is it? Does it have friends or family?

    As analysis is beyond me, what do you make of it?

    Oh dear.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Nominilisation, presupposition, wild conclusion. Obviously (insert non sensory based words here like they mean anything) is the case due to (insert random element totally tangential to the issue), then proceed to waffle about whatever was on your mind when you woke up this morning.

    What do you mean by analysis? Do you want to look at evidence? i.e. Things that can be sensed. Or do you mean stuff you read in a book once, attached a long and complex name to, which you use like I have the same experiences as you?

    You have no idea how language works, do you? Think of a simple word like "rock" what where you thinking of?

    I was thinking of a piece of sandstone, about a foot accross. What did you think of? Was it the same thing? I doubt it. Now there really are "rocks" in the world, but we still don't really understand each other. If we start talking about "unicorns" we might have different ideas entirely, for a start i might be of the opinion that they don't exist.

    You may say differently, you have seen horses, and narwhals have horns, so you can combine the two to make a unicorn (in your mind).

    What points of similarity do you think you have with others when you use words like "Neo - liberal", "government" etc? Bugger all, that's what. You can't have these debates without knowing what everyone means by the words they use in the first place. I have no idea what you are on about, but the difference is that I know it and you don't.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    apollo_69 wrote:
    who are in need of a simple economics lecture.

    Go for it........
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    klintock wrote:
    Nominilisation, presupposition, wild conclusion. Obviously (insert non sensory based words here like they mean anything) is the case due to (insert random element totally tangential to the issue), then proceed to waffle about whatever was on your mind when you woke up this morning.

    What do you mean by analysis? Do you want to look at evidence? i.e. Things that can be sensed. Or do you mean stuff you read in a book once, attached a long and complex name to, which you use like I have the same experiences as you?

    You have no idea how language works, do you? Think of a simple word like "rock" what where you thinking of?

    I was thinking of a piece of sandstone, about a foot accross. What did you think of? Was it the same thing? I doubt it. Now there really are "rocks" in the world, but we still don't really understand each other. If we start talking about "unicorns" we might have different ideas entirely, for a start i might be of the opinion that they don't exist.

    You may say differently, you have seen horses, and narwhals have horns, so you can combine the two to make a unicorn (in your mind).

    What points of similarity do you think you have with others when you use words like "Neo - liberal", "government" etc? Bugger all, that's what. You can't have these debates without knowing what everyone means by the words they use in the first place. I have no idea what you are on about, but the difference is that I know it and you don't.


    You have a real good talent for writing loads but saying fuck all. You're also very arrogant, you assume that no one here has a grounding in philosophy, economics or politics, when in fact it is you that appears to be lacking.
    Get off your high horse.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I have no grounding in any of those things, whatever they are. I just ask questions and point out facts. Hegel, Marx blah blah blah.

    I kind of like evidence for things, and dismiss stuff that hasn't got any.

    Wheres the evidence?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    klintock wrote:
    I have no grounding in any of those things,

    Yes, it shows.
    klintock wrote:
    whatever they are.

    www.dictionary.com
    klintock wrote:
    I just ask questions and point out facts.

    Where? What "facts"?
    klintock wrote:
    Hegel, Marx blah blah blah.

    I kind of like evidence for things, and dismiss stuff that hasn't got any.

    Wheres the evidence?


    Evidence of what? You seem to be missing a fairly important point - ideas do not exist in some kind of vacuum, they do not suddenly arrive in people's consciousness fully formed. They are the product of many people over time, influenced by history and society. For you to sit there and write what you do as if it all came to you unbidden with no influences from anyone, fully formed, is arrogant delusional bullshit. You seem to be arguing from a libertarian capitalist position. So why not admit it, talk about the people who have influenced your ideas, state a position and an analysis, then we can all move on.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Look up the word "nominilisation" and find out why most of what you write isn't something I know about.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Seems to be a trendy buzzword used in NLP. What of it?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Nominalism is a term from philosophy however.
    http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=nominalists
    seems a fairly contradictory one though.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Nominilisation is a phrase from Bentham.....extensively used in psychiatry, it's the process of turning something that is a verb or an adverb into a noun. NLP'ers are found of it because it's a big long word that does indeed violate it's own principles. Most family therapy begins with unraveling what the individual family members mean by the stuff they say

    So i swim a few times and somehow I become a swimmer. I spend my money a few times and I become a customer. In the real world I stop being a swimmer of course, the moment I stop the action of swimming.

    Are you 100% certain of your position?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Do you have a point to make?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    OK, interesting. It seems to be saying that people often think that they are their problems, rather than their problems being a process they are going through. Something which any therapist worth his or her salt knows anyway and attempts to deal with, or at least we do in my work where we mainly use brief solution focused therapy. I still don't get your point however. You seem to be trying to say that people get trapped in language and take abstract ideas such as the state to be real and concrete entities. I take your point, but its not very useful. If I stop believing in the state, it doesn't help me because I'm still going to get slung in jail for not paying my taxes. Which is why we need to start from some kind of concrete analysis of people's lives, not some airy fairy 1st year philosophy intellectual masturbation. You say you have no grounding in philosopy, but what you're doing is attempting to philosophise (badly).

    So, you think taxation is wrong. What do you propose instead? How do we look after the poorer members of our society?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Erm, no it's crucial to my point about challenging taxation, because it's up to the prosecution to conclusively prove that the state does exist, because you are presumed innocent, using factual evidence.

    They cannot provide this proof as it does not exist.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Try not paying your taxes and see what happens. Are you a 1st year philosophy student btw?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Lol.

    I don't pay "my taxes" because I don't think that money is anything more than another excuse to control my behaviour, and it's never been proved to me that I owe anyone anything for anything.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You don't pay your taxes? What country do you live in? I'm guessing your American, right?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Geographically I am in England. No. I don't.

    I am thinking of selling a "how to" guide for getting rid of council tax/speeding tickets etc. Wnat one?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You're lying. You pay VAT on everything you buy, on your phone bill, your electric and gas bills, petrol, alcohol, car tax. Unless you get your mum to buy you everything. Do you work freelance? How do you propose we pay for the NHS? For libraries, roads and streetlights? For council housing?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Ah sorry. Of course I pay VaT on some things, other taxes are employed by force through the courts. Without the public relations scheme of the courts, they would just send large men directly, but that might even wake up the most ignorant citizen to the fact that we are a long way from a free society.

    Why do things need to be paid for? they just need to be done, and people persuaded to do them. The illusion of scarity that money brings might not be the best way. I do not know these things, I just look after me and mine, the same as everybody else.
Sign In or Register to comment.