jools
jools
Post rating:
+
slothrap
slothrap
Post rating:
+
Crow
Crow
Post rating:
+++++
getfiscal
getfiscal
Mike Nelson here.
Post rating:
+
sure when women use vibrators it's all flower petals and red wine but then the same misandrist media turn around and make a fella getting pleased with a perfectly fuckable computer into some sort of weird thing.
clanzy
clanzy
jiggago
Post rating:
~
i have a carefully maintained excel spreadsheet of all the computers i've seen that i consider fuckable
getfiscal
getfiscal
Mike Nelson here.
Post rating:
+
i'd rather be fucking adele than fucking a dell
deadken
deadken
penitent
Post rating:
+
Crow posted:
[account deactivated]
gyrofry
gyrofry
Kurdt
Post rating:
+
Kramer and Bob Sacamano search Brooklyn for a McDonald's rumored to carry the McRib year-round. George becomes a "defender of gluten".
Ironicwarcriminal
Ironicwarcriminal
Post rating:
+
Lessons
Lessons
Post rating:
+
jools posted:
This is pure ideology, I claim
[account deactivated]
dipshit420
dipshit420
political car tune
Post rating:
~
Well we seem to have a few quick replies for Debt. As it is where I started, it is probably on fair to play this one out first. If you raised another topic please hold on to it. Once the Debt thread plays out we can jump on it.
Now, on to some responses. To those that raised the point that Greece is nothing like the US; you are quite correct. Perhaps I wasnt very clear in what I was trying to say when I brought it up. The question I was trying to answer was the idea that no government can ever get into trouble from a massive National Debt. Greece is an excellent example that such is possible (which is why I raised it). If we are going to start the debate with the question of is the National Debt an issue at all, I thought it important to show that it is possible for a country (any country frankly) to suffer severe consequences from such. Now, as was mentioned, we have to move to the US specifically.
Comparing Greece to the US is extremely difficult at best due to the points raised above. Frankly, comparing any modern country to the US is extremely difficult because the economic advantages we hold are nearly unique in modern day. If someone can think of a good modern comparison, please bring it up because I can not. Therefore, it becomes important to look at those economic advantages. The US has one of the worlds strongest, if not the strongest economy in terms of a single country. The US prints its own sovereign currency. The US currency is considered the worlds currency reserve. The interesting point about this, is that the two most important advantages in my view (strongest economy and world currency reserve) are tied together. If our economy becomes unstable and weakens drastically in comparison to the rest of the world, then the USD will almost certainly no longer serve as the world's currency reserve. Such a switch has happened in the past (though it does take time), Germany and Great Britain losing such positions following World War I and II comes to mind as the most recent example.
So one of the often spoken of advantages, the USD serving as the world's currency reserve, is based on the faith in the stability of the American economy. That becomes very important when debating the issue of the National Debt. One of the responses above mentioned the US' ability to print currency. They quite rightly pointed out that the US can quite literally not run out of money. The argument I have heard most often is summarized as "if our National Debt rises to high, the government can quite simple turn on the money printing presses and devalue the currency; then the National Debt becomes much more manageable". If that is not the point you were making in regards to our currency, my apologies and please post a clarification. The problem with the "print more money solution" is that it devalues the currency and causes two problems.
First it greatly devalues the savings of any individual private citizen. From the person who is in retirement to the person is somewhat close to retirement, all their years of investment are greatly reduced over night. In other words it would cause a great deal of pain on the American Citizen level. Second, it would cause a loss of faith in the American economy by all those foreign investors who view the USD as a reserve currency. What sane individual would park a large portion of their countries wealth in the USD if the value of that investment is in serious question. This leads to the question of when it would be necessary for the USG to ever devalue the USD to deal with a National Debt Crisis? In other words at what point would the National Debt be a large enough and effecting the US economy strongly enough that a devaluation of the currency is required?
That, sadly, is extremely difficult to answer. It is usually agreed on that the immediate danger of severe economic consequences due to the National Debt is relatively slight. However, at what point does that change (if it does)? At what point does a large National Debt ever cripple a countries Economy? From what I can find, the economists cant agree on this at all. Unsurprisingly, the political parties basing their decisions off of said disagreeing economists cant agree either. The most balanced view I could find is listed below.
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Artic...Debt.aspx#page1
As I stated above, it is my belief that a rising National Debt (in relation to GDP) will have an effect on the economy and our current National Debt should be treated as an issue. Great, but what about the experts (or why the hell would I care what YOU think)? Economists cant agree on the severity of the problem or where the "cliff" is. Alright, so the experts cant agree; where does that leave us? Frankly, as was said above the US is almost unique in its current world economic position. As such, trying to figure out what is going to happen if the National Debt continues to rise is almost a guessing game (from what I can read of the various economists). They have theories, but they have almost nothing to compare it to that is valid for the current situation. As a result, the pessimistic side of me would rather err on the side of caution and believe there could be a problem for our Economy if our National Debt continues to rise in relation to our GDP. Much better to never have a problem because you spent less than you could, rather than having a massive problem because you spent more than you could. To put it another way, I would offer the following question. If it is not a problem, then why are both Democrats and Republicans agreeing that it needs to be handled (just in different ways)?
Great, so if both parties agree that it is a problem but one that is not immediately dire; why the fuss? Our current National Debt is at ~104% of our GDP. If we can agree that it is something that could be a problem, but can not agree on the "magic number that is a problem"; that puts us in an interesting situation. My personal preference is for a legal requirement for a balanced budget or a surplus budget if you are running a National Debt (with the surplus going to pay down the Debt) except in times of crisis. The reason is based on the idea that a "magic number" does exist at which point the Debt to GDP ratio becomes a major problem. Following that thought is the point that History has shown us that crisis will arise when we need to spend massive amounts of federal money in relatively short order. War is the most common example, but a massive recession or depression would also be an example. If you are already running a very high National Debt and hit one of those crisis points, the chances of you hitting the "magic number of Debt to GDP" and screwing your economy over when you can least afford it rise dramatically. This is certainly speculation at it's finest, but that is one of the functions of our elected officials when it comes to these matters. To look ahead and try to position us so that we can get over the crisis points in the smoothest manner possible. As such, I believe it should also be considered in this debate as we are the ones whom determine our elected officials via our votes.
Now, on to some responses. To those that raised the point that Greece is nothing like the US; you are quite correct. Perhaps I wasnt very clear in what I was trying to say when I brought it up. The question I was trying to answer was the idea that no government can ever get into trouble from a massive National Debt. Greece is an excellent example that such is possible (which is why I raised it). If we are going to start the debate with the question of is the National Debt an issue at all, I thought it important to show that it is possible for a country (any country frankly) to suffer severe consequences from such. Now, as was mentioned, we have to move to the US specifically.
Comparing Greece to the US is extremely difficult at best due to the points raised above. Frankly, comparing any modern country to the US is extremely difficult because the economic advantages we hold are nearly unique in modern day. If someone can think of a good modern comparison, please bring it up because I can not. Therefore, it becomes important to look at those economic advantages. The US has one of the worlds strongest, if not the strongest economy in terms of a single country. The US prints its own sovereign currency. The US currency is considered the worlds currency reserve. The interesting point about this, is that the two most important advantages in my view (strongest economy and world currency reserve) are tied together. If our economy becomes unstable and weakens drastically in comparison to the rest of the world, then the USD will almost certainly no longer serve as the world's currency reserve. Such a switch has happened in the past (though it does take time), Germany and Great Britain losing such positions following World War I and II comes to mind as the most recent example.
So one of the often spoken of advantages, the USD serving as the world's currency reserve, is based on the faith in the stability of the American economy. That becomes very important when debating the issue of the National Debt. One of the responses above mentioned the US' ability to print currency. They quite rightly pointed out that the US can quite literally not run out of money. The argument I have heard most often is summarized as "if our National Debt rises to high, the government can quite simple turn on the money printing presses and devalue the currency; then the National Debt becomes much more manageable". If that is not the point you were making in regards to our currency, my apologies and please post a clarification. The problem with the "print more money solution" is that it devalues the currency and causes two problems.
First it greatly devalues the savings of any individual private citizen. From the person who is in retirement to the person is somewhat close to retirement, all their years of investment are greatly reduced over night. In other words it would cause a great deal of pain on the American Citizen level. Second, it would cause a loss of faith in the American economy by all those foreign investors who view the USD as a reserve currency. What sane individual would park a large portion of their countries wealth in the USD if the value of that investment is in serious question. This leads to the question of when it would be necessary for the USG to ever devalue the USD to deal with a National Debt Crisis? In other words at what point would the National Debt be a large enough and effecting the US economy strongly enough that a devaluation of the currency is required?
That, sadly, is extremely difficult to answer. It is usually agreed on that the immediate danger of severe economic consequences due to the National Debt is relatively slight. However, at what point does that change (if it does)? At what point does a large National Debt ever cripple a countries Economy? From what I can find, the economists cant agree on this at all. Unsurprisingly, the political parties basing their decisions off of said disagreeing economists cant agree either. The most balanced view I could find is listed below.
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Artic...Debt.aspx#page1
As I stated above, it is my belief that a rising National Debt (in relation to GDP) will have an effect on the economy and our current National Debt should be treated as an issue. Great, but what about the experts (or why the hell would I care what YOU think)? Economists cant agree on the severity of the problem or where the "cliff" is. Alright, so the experts cant agree; where does that leave us? Frankly, as was said above the US is almost unique in its current world economic position. As such, trying to figure out what is going to happen if the National Debt continues to rise is almost a guessing game (from what I can read of the various economists). They have theories, but they have almost nothing to compare it to that is valid for the current situation. As a result, the pessimistic side of me would rather err on the side of caution and believe there could be a problem for our Economy if our National Debt continues to rise in relation to our GDP. Much better to never have a problem because you spent less than you could, rather than having a massive problem because you spent more than you could. To put it another way, I would offer the following question. If it is not a problem, then why are both Democrats and Republicans agreeing that it needs to be handled (just in different ways)?
Great, so if both parties agree that it is a problem but one that is not immediately dire; why the fuss? Our current National Debt is at ~104% of our GDP. If we can agree that it is something that could be a problem, but can not agree on the "magic number that is a problem"; that puts us in an interesting situation. My personal preference is for a legal requirement for a balanced budget or a surplus budget if you are running a National Debt (with the surplus going to pay down the Debt) except in times of crisis. The reason is based on the idea that a "magic number" does exist at which point the Debt to GDP ratio becomes a major problem. Following that thought is the point that History has shown us that crisis will arise when we need to spend massive amounts of federal money in relatively short order. War is the most common example, but a massive recession or depression would also be an example. If you are already running a very high National Debt and hit one of those crisis points, the chances of you hitting the "magic number of Debt to GDP" and screwing your economy over when you can least afford it rise dramatically. This is certainly speculation at it's finest, but that is one of the functions of our elected officials when it comes to these matters. To look ahead and try to position us so that we can get over the crisis points in the smoothest manner possible. As such, I believe it should also be considered in this debate as we are the ones whom determine our elected officials via our votes.
dipshit420
dipshit420
political car tune
Post rating:
~
lol he literally capitalizes debt every single time
jools
jools
Post rating:
~
where is that from
dipshit420
dipshit420
political car tune
Post rating:
~
jools posted:where is that from
http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3553200
cemetery
cemetery
Post rating:
~
detournemnt dentournment deontoeumrnnet domeonutnoeum dmeotnmdoneoumrt
dipshit420
dipshit420
political car tune
Post rating:
~
cemetery posted:detournemnt dentournment deontoeumrnnet domeonutnoeum dmeotnmdoneoumrt
esplain
cemetery
cemetery
Post rating:
~
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HJ56bnD7eM recuperatino
Joe_the_Plumber
Joe_the_Plumber
Post rating:
~
i dont think thats what he meant by commodity fetishism
codywilson
codywilson
Post rating:
~
Ironicwarcriminal posted:
funded by NSA
LaserJew
LaserJew
Post rating:
~
NSA intercepting ur feels, cumming all over your e-fingers
codywilson
codywilson
Post rating:
~
edit: someone already posted vid sry
AynRandAnCap
AynRandAnCap
Good morning USA!
Post rating:
~
getfiscal posted:sure when women use vibrators it's all flower petals and red wine but then the same misandrist media turn around and make a fella getting pleased with a perfectly fuckable computer into some sort of weird thing.
"if there was a sexual hole on the side of my playstation i would never leave the house" - comedian bobby lee
ChairmanMao
ChairmanMao
Post rating:
~
NoFreeWill
NoFreeWill
Post rating:
~
Honey, we're late for capitalism. *laugh track*
piss
piss
Post rating:
~
ah guys i think im gonna hit the hay its gettin late........ *walks out of room*
*sticks head backk into room*
Capitalism, that is
*all my imaginary marxist friends laugh*
*sticks head backk into room*
Capitalism, that is
*all my imaginary marxist friends laugh*
cars
cars
UNUSUALY COOL
Post rating:
~
Sen. Jeff Flake’s high school–aged son Tanner used Twitter to threaten the “faggot” who stole his bike that he “will find you, and … will beat the crap out of you,” joked about an acquaintance stealing one-liners because he’s Jewish, and went by the name “n1ggerkiller” in an online game.
NoFreeWill
NoFreeWill
Post rating:
~
names like tanner and hunter are pretty late capitalism, what archaic professions are next, baker, brewer, and weaver?
Goethestein
Goethestein
Nippon
Post rating:
~
the phrase "late capitalism" seems pretty misleading, capitalism is the strongest its ever been, and under no threat from communism for the first time in 150+ years. i mean you could argue that this period is going to be referred to as "late capitalism" in the future because some heretofore unconfirmed confluence of factors will cause it to go away very shortly, but, considering that thus far marxists have had the predictive capacity of nostradamus on a bender, that seems unlikely
cleanhands
cleanhands
Post rating:
+
hello and welcome to late night capitalism, where the lights are low and the stakes are high
Merzbow
Merzbow
Tokyo, Japan
Post rating:
~
So what's the deal with airline peanuts?
VoxNihili
VoxNihili
Post rating:
~
peak capitalism
babyfinland
babyfinland
tardy on these heaters
Post rating:
~
I found a video of clarence doing standup m.youtube.com/watch?v=ixPTf8STRJ8&feature=g-subs-u
Superabound
Superabound
Not Your S.H.I.E.L.D.
Post rating:
~
VoxNihili posted:peak capitalism
more like PEEK capitalism lately am i right
cemetery
cemetery
Post rating:
~
10 million people know the most popular guys on YouTube. Do you?
[account deactivated]
babyfinland
babyfinland
tardy on these heaters
Post rating:
~
The camera adds ten tan
cars
cars
UNUSUALY COOL
Post rating:
~
http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/06/10/190421122/a-giant-secret-vault-where-rich-people-store-their-stuff-tax-free
Freeports are the safe-deposit boxes of the offshore tax-haven world — fancy vaults where rich people store their Picassos and gold bars with maximal safety, minimal scrutiny and special tax exemptions.
Not surprisingly, the classic freeport is in Geneva. Last year, a Times reporter asked an art insurer to value the art stored there. "I doubt you've got a piece of paper wide enough to write down all the zeros," the insurer said.
Edited by cars ()
cars
cars
UNUSUALY COOL
Post rating:
~
http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/06/05/188908281/freeway-rick-ross-new-business
Ross went to prison in '96, and was released on parole in '09. Since then he's started a number of businesses. According to Los Angeles magazine, these have included a "trucking company," "rehabbing distressed properties," and "Freeway Fast Tax Service."
The magazine just did a great feature on Freeway Rick in which he talks about his latest venture — selling human hair.