What do liberals want the US to be?

[Ame®icano]

Then you'll be able to explain how much government debt was paid off with Clinton surplus. Oh wait...

Sure, PUBLIC DEBT WAS PAID OFF, and excess payroll taxes, as required by law, were put unto bonds that created more INTRA Gov't obligations (DEBT)


What should they have done with excess payroll taxes?

Clinton paid down public debt by over $400+ billion, BTW

Clinton actually claims that his administration paid off $600 billion of public debt. Your number of $400 billion is closer to actual $452 billion. But those numbers are public debt, and we both know that public debt is part of national debt. Taking money from SS funds to pay off other funds doesn't count as paying off the debt. The result is national debt increase for every year he was in office.

I could use my credit card to pay my car payment, or to pay off the whole loan, then I can claim that my car is paid in full. In reality, I just owe more on my credit card. That's pretty much what Clinton did.

So you'll ignore the part where I explain US INTRA Gov't debt was created under Clinton because the US received to much revenues in payroll taxes, and by law that money was required to be INVESTED in US bonds? Stop trying to equate a Gov't with a personal finance situation, it makes you look dumb!

What should've happened with the EXCESS payroll taxes? lol

And yes, thanks for agreeing, Clinton had 4 straight surpluses in the annual budgets, 3 after vetoing the GOP's $700+ billion tax cut!

It's been explained to you earlier that you can't count the same money twice.

So, intra government debt was created... why? Please explain why not to pay existing debt? Or if there is excess of money, why to take money from SS?

Government invested???

Gawd you right wingers are fukkking dense assholes. ANY EXCESS PAYROLL TAXES ARE REQUIRED, NOT TO PAY OFF PUBLIC DEBT, BUT TO BUY UP US GOV'T BONDS. This is called savings bonds. Yes it creates debt that was created, but it's owed to itself. When you change that law, let me know!!!

Yes, AFTER EXCESS payroll monies came in, SOME of it was used to pay down public debt, AFTER it bought US savings bonds

It's called Gov't accounting, NOT a personal accounting system!!!

BUT BACK TO THE DUMMY'S POSIT, CLAIMING CLINTON NEVER HAD A SURPLUS IS STUPID. HE HAD 4. More money coming into Gov't than leaving


Understanding the Social Security Trust Funds mdash Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

It seems you got no clue what bonds are and what are they used for.

 

[kaz]

Ah, politicians have always lied, so it makes what Clinton did truth when he lied because he is a politician and they lie. I'm convinced now. Not.

Do you even understand my point? I am starting do doubt it. If Clinton counted the money as surplus, then he can't say he saved it in a trust fund and there was no surplus. If he said it was an asset saved by social security, then he can't say there was a surplus, government borrowed the money. It's not that complicated. Even FooledByEveryone gets it. He's claiming government can double count the revenue, which is ridiculous, but at least that's a grasp of the point. You have not demonstrated a grasp of the point.

The correct answer by the way is there was a surplus and there is no trust fund. No money was saved. But my point is that liberals make both arguments, which are contradictory. I'm pointing out that contradiction.

Did you ever read or did you contribute to writing this:

Alan Greenspan, who was worth his weight in gold as an advisor to Reagan, came to the rescue. He pointed out that there was a way to get more revenue without touching the income tax cuts.

Greenspan told Reagan that they could raise payroll taxes, and say they were doing it to strengthen Social Security. Then they could use the surplus revenue just like income- tax revenue.

It was a clever plan.

The surplus Social Security revenue from the payroll-tax increase wouldn’t be needed to pay actual benefits for 30 more years. Why not just put the money in the general fund, for now, and let future presidents worry about replacing it.

It probably didn’t seem like such and evil deed to Reagan and Greenspan at the time. After all, they were only “borrowing” the money. Hopefully some future president would repay it.

But the real effect of their action was to take money from working baby boomers, in the form of increased payroll taxes, and give that money to some of the richest Americans in the form of big income tax cuts. The Looting of Social Security

add this: Ronald Reagan and The Great Social Security Heist FedSmith.com

Is Dante aware that kaz is a libertarian, not a Republican? Kaz also believes in what is so and doesn't defend politicians who are wrong when they are wrong. Reagan was wrong. He should not have done that. And Greenspan was no friend of liberty. The fed is a criminal organization which steals from the American people and Greenspan was it's don and ran it as the criminal empire that it is.

Greenspan was hailed as a libertarian until people like you threw him under the proverbial bus.

Your rant is as as it gets.

Greenspan hailed as a "libertarian?" Who said that? Authoritarian leftist liberals? That's insane, he wasn't libertarian at all.

Greenspan was one of Ayn Rand's original clique members. He even wrote a chapter for one of her books about capitalism. It discussed the advantages of the gold standard. However, when he became a power broker in the government his libertarian principles got flushed down the toilet. They are so inconvenient when you are grovelling before Congressman and Senators.

I didn't know that, thanks Bripat, but as you agree there was nothing libertarian about his rule in the fed.

 

[kaz]

Ayn Rand was a virtual anarchist,

Damn, I thought she was a novelist. She did write a couple of novels. Right? Then she was made a deity by the Republican party. And now she is a "virtual anarchist".

Hell, right now I thinks she's dead.

The message of her books is individual freedom and responsibility. Her writing style is difficult so its easy to understand why the minimally intelligent do not get it.

The Republican party supports government ownership of our bodies, meddling in other country's affairs and spending increases higher than inflation, GDP or any other measure of economic growth. When Republicans got the White House and both houses, W went on a spending orgy that was a Democrat's wet dream and they knocked the fiscal conservatives who objected out of their chairmanships and the best committees. If you think that's "individual freedom and responsibility" then you are as clueless as Tyke is.

some republicans support that lunacy, ALL democrats support that lunacy.

The solution is vote out everyone who suppots govt dictatorship, loss of freedom, and fiscal insanity.

As to clueless, I think not. I am a realist. Voting for the lesser of two evils is what we are faced with in almost every election----------the alternative is to vote for the greater of two evils--------------not really a difficult decision--------is it?

That would be a great argument had not the actual retribution and purging of the fiscal conservatives I pointed out not have happened.

 

[Dad2three]

Sure, PUBLIC DEBT WAS PAID OFF, and excess payroll taxes, as required by law, were put unto bonds that created more INTRA Gov't obligations (DEBT)


What should they have done with excess payroll taxes?

Clinton paid down public debt by over $400+ billion, BTW

Clinton actually claims that his administration paid off $600 billion of public debt. Your number of $400 billion is closer to actual $452 billion. But those numbers are public debt, and we both know that public debt is part of national debt. Taking money from SS funds to pay off other funds doesn't count as paying off the debt. The result is national debt increase for every year he was in office.

I could use my credit card to pay my car payment, or to pay off the whole loan, then I can claim that my car is paid in full. In reality, I just owe more on my credit card. That's pretty much what Clinton did.

So you'll ignore the part where I explain US INTRA Gov't debt was created under Clinton because the US received to much revenues in payroll taxes, and by law that money was required to be INVESTED in US bonds? Stop trying to equate a Gov't with a personal finance situation, it makes you look dumb!

What should've happened with the EXCESS payroll taxes? lol

And yes, thanks for agreeing, Clinton had 4 straight surpluses in the annual budgets, 3 after vetoing the GOP's $700+ billion tax cut!

It's been explained to you earlier that you can't count the same money twice.

So, intra government debt was created... why? Please explain why not to pay existing debt? Or if there is excess of money, why to take money from SS?

Government invested???

Gawd you right wingers are fukkking dense assholes. ANY EXCESS PAYROLL TAXES ARE REQUIRED, NOT TO PAY OFF PUBLIC DEBT, BUT TO BUY UP US GOV'T BONDS. This is called savings bonds. Yes it creates debt that was created, but it's owed to itself. When you change that law, let me know!!!

Yes, AFTER EXCESS payroll monies came in, SOME of it was used to pay down public debt, AFTER it bought US savings bonds

It's called Gov't accounting, NOT a personal accounting system!!!

BUT BACK TO THE DUMMY'S POSIT, CLAIMING CLINTON NEVER HAD A SURPLUS IS STUPID. HE HAD 4. More money coming into Gov't than leaving


Understanding the Social Security Trust Funds mdash Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

It seems you got no clue what bonds are and what are they used for.

Says the K/K/Klown not understanding payroll taxes are REQUIRED by law to buy US Gov't bonds!

 

[bripat9643]

Clinton actually claims that his administration paid off $600 billion of public debt. Your number of $400 billion is closer to actual $452 billion. But those numbers are public debt, and we both know that public debt is part of national debt. Taking money from SS funds to pay off other funds doesn't count as paying off the debt. The result is national debt increase for every year he was in office.

I could use my credit card to pay my car payment, or to pay off the whole loan, then I can claim that my car is paid in full. In reality, I just owe more on my credit card. That's pretty much what Clinton did.

So you'll ignore the part where I explain US INTRA Gov't debt was created under Clinton because the US received to much revenues in payroll taxes, and by law that money was required to be INVESTED in US bonds? Stop trying to equate a Gov't with a personal finance situation, it makes you look dumb!

What should've happened with the EXCESS payroll taxes? lol

And yes, thanks for agreeing, Clinton had 4 straight surpluses in the annual budgets, 3 after vetoing the GOP's $700+ billion tax cut!

It's been explained to you earlier that you can't count the same money twice.

So, intra government debt was created... why? Please explain why not to pay existing debt? Or if there is excess of money, why to take money from SS?

Government invested???

Gawd you right wingers are fukkking dense assholes. ANY EXCESS PAYROLL TAXES ARE REQUIRED, NOT TO PAY OFF PUBLIC DEBT, BUT TO BUY UP US GOV'T BONDS. This is called savings bonds. Yes it creates debt that was created, but it's owed to itself. When you change that law, let me know!!!

Yes, AFTER EXCESS payroll monies came in, SOME of it was used to pay down public debt, AFTER it bought US savings bonds

It's called Gov't accounting, NOT a personal accounting system!!!

BUT BACK TO THE DUMMY'S POSIT, CLAIMING CLINTON NEVER HAD A SURPLUS IS STUPID. HE HAD 4. More money coming into Gov't than leaving


Understanding the Social Security Trust Funds mdash Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

It seems you got no clue what bonds are and what are they used for.

Says the K/K/Klown not understanding payroll taxes are REQUIRED by law to buy US Gov't bonds!

You just proved you have no clue what bonds are and what they are used for.

 

[bripat9643]

Did you ever read or did you contribute to writing this:

Alan Greenspan, who was worth his weight in gold as an advisor to Reagan, came to the rescue. He pointed out that there was a way to get more revenue without touching the income tax cuts.

Greenspan told Reagan that they could raise payroll taxes, and say they were doing it to strengthen Social Security. Then they could use the surplus revenue just like income- tax revenue.

It was a clever plan.

The surplus Social Security revenue from the payroll-tax increase wouldn’t be needed to pay actual benefits for 30 more years. Why not just put the money in the general fund, for now, and let future presidents worry about replacing it.

It probably didn’t seem like such and evil deed to Reagan and Greenspan at the time. After all, they were only “borrowing” the money. Hopefully some future president would repay it.

But the real effect of their action was to take money from working baby boomers, in the form of increased payroll taxes, and give that money to some of the richest Americans in the form of big income tax cuts. The Looting of Social Security

add this: Ronald Reagan and The Great Social Security Heist FedSmith.com

Is Dante aware that kaz is a libertarian, not a Republican? Kaz also believes in what is so and doesn't defend politicians who are wrong when they are wrong. Reagan was wrong. He should not have done that. And Greenspan was no friend of liberty. The fed is a criminal organization which steals from the American people and Greenspan was it's don and ran it as the criminal empire that it is.

Greenspan was hailed as a libertarian until people like you threw him under the proverbial bus.

Your rant is as as it gets.

Greenspan hailed as a "libertarian?" Who said that? Authoritarian leftist liberals? That's insane, he wasn't libertarian at all.

Greenspan was one of Ayn Rand's original clique members. He even wrote a chapter for one of her books about capitalism. It discussed the advantages of the gold standard. However, when he became a power broker in the government his libertarian principles got flushed down the toilet. They are so inconvenient when you are grovelling before Congressman and Senators.

I didn't know that, thanks Bripat, but as you agree there was nothing libertarian about his rule in the fed.

The Fed itself is anti-libertarian. A true libertarian would be lobbying to have it abolished, not to serve in it.

 

[Dad2three]

So you'll ignore the part where I explain US INTRA Gov't debt was created under Clinton because the US received to much revenues in payroll taxes, and by law that money was required to be INVESTED in US bonds? Stop trying to equate a Gov't with a personal finance situation, it makes you look dumb!

What should've happened with the EXCESS payroll taxes? lol

And yes, thanks for agreeing, Clinton had 4 straight surpluses in the annual budgets, 3 after vetoing the GOP's $700+ billion tax cut!

It's been explained to you earlier that you can't count the same money twice.

So, intra government debt was created... why? Please explain why not to pay existing debt? Or if there is excess of money, why to take money from SS?

Government invested???

Gawd you right wingers are fukkking dense assholes. ANY EXCESS PAYROLL TAXES ARE REQUIRED, NOT TO PAY OFF PUBLIC DEBT, BUT TO BUY UP US GOV'T BONDS. This is called savings bonds. Yes it creates debt that was created, but it's owed to itself. When you change that law, let me know!!!

Yes, AFTER EXCESS payroll monies came in, SOME of it was used to pay down public debt, AFTER it bought US savings bonds

It's called Gov't accounting, NOT a personal accounting system!!!

BUT BACK TO THE DUMMY'S POSIT, CLAIMING CLINTON NEVER HAD A SURPLUS IS STUPID. HE HAD 4. More money coming into Gov't than leaving


Understanding the Social Security Trust Funds mdash Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

It seems you got no clue what bonds are and what are they used for.

Says the K/K/Klown not understanding payroll taxes are REQUIRED by law to buy US Gov't bonds!

You just proved you have no clue what bonds are and what they are used for.

ANOTHER K/K/Klown shocking

The fund is required by law to be invested in non-marketable securities ... federal government securities bought with surplus OASI payroll tax revenue

Social Security Trust Fund - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

What do we call them? lol

 

[Dad2three]

Is Dante aware that kaz is a libertarian, not a Republican? Kaz also believes in what is so and doesn't defend politicians who are wrong when they are wrong. Reagan was wrong. He should not have done that. And Greenspan was no friend of liberty. The fed is a criminal organization which steals from the American people and Greenspan was it's don and ran it as the criminal empire that it is.

Greenspan was hailed as a libertarian until people like you threw him under the proverbial bus.

Your rant is as as it gets.

Greenspan hailed as a "libertarian?" Who said that? Authoritarian leftist liberals? That's insane, he wasn't libertarian at all.

Greenspan was one of Ayn Rand's original clique members. He even wrote a chapter for one of her books about capitalism. It discussed the advantages of the gold standard. However, when he became a power broker in the government his libertarian principles got flushed down the toilet. They are so inconvenient when you are grovelling before Congressman and Senators.

I didn't know that, thanks Bripat, but as you agree there was nothing libertarian about his rule in the fed.

The Fed itself is anti-libertarian. A true libertarian would be lobbying to have it abolished, not to serve in it.

Yes, the US was such fun pre fed reserve
List of recessions in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[bripat9643]

It's been explained to you earlier that you can't count the same money twice.

So, intra government debt was created... why? Please explain why not to pay existing debt? Or if there is excess of money, why to take money from SS?

Government invested???

Gawd you right wingers are fukkking dense assholes. ANY EXCESS PAYROLL TAXES ARE REQUIRED, NOT TO PAY OFF PUBLIC DEBT, BUT TO BUY UP US GOV'T BONDS. This is called savings bonds. Yes it creates debt that was created, but it's owed to itself. When you change that law, let me know!!!

Yes, AFTER EXCESS payroll monies came in, SOME of it was used to pay down public debt, AFTER it bought US savings bonds

It's called Gov't accounting, NOT a personal accounting system!!!

BUT BACK TO THE DUMMY'S POSIT, CLAIMING CLINTON NEVER HAD A SURPLUS IS STUPID. HE HAD 4. More money coming into Gov't than leaving


Understanding the Social Security Trust Funds mdash Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

It seems you got no clue what bonds are and what are they used for.

Says the K/K/Klown not understanding payroll taxes are REQUIRED by law to buy US Gov't bonds!

You just proved you have no clue what bonds are and what they are used for.

ANOTHER K/K/Klown shocking

The fund is required by law to be invested in non-marketable securities ... federal government securities bought with surplus OASI payroll tax revenue

Social Security Trust Fund - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

What do we call them? lol

How does that prove you understand what bonds are for?

 

[bripat9643]

Greenspan was hailed as a libertarian until people like you threw him under the proverbial bus.

Your rant is as as it gets.

Greenspan hailed as a "libertarian?" Who said that? Authoritarian leftist liberals? That's insane, he wasn't libertarian at all.

Greenspan was one of Ayn Rand's original clique members. He even wrote a chapter for one of her books about capitalism. It discussed the advantages of the gold standard. However, when he became a power broker in the government his libertarian principles got flushed down the toilet. They are so inconvenient when you are grovelling before Congressman and Senators.

I didn't know that, thanks Bripat, but as you agree there was nothing libertarian about his rule in the fed.

The Fed itself is anti-libertarian. A true libertarian would be lobbying to have it abolished, not to serve in it.

Yes, the US was such fun pre fed reserve
List of recessions in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

We became the wealthiest nation in the world pre fed reserve.

 

[Dad2three]

Gawd you right wingers are fukkking dense assholes. ANY EXCESS PAYROLL TAXES ARE REQUIRED, NOT TO PAY OFF PUBLIC DEBT, BUT TO BUY UP US GOV'T BONDS. This is called savings bonds. Yes it creates debt that was created, but it's owed to itself. When you change that law, let me know!!!

Yes, AFTER EXCESS payroll monies came in, SOME of it was used to pay down public debt, AFTER it bought US savings bonds

It's called Gov't accounting, NOT a personal accounting system!!!

BUT BACK TO THE DUMMY'S POSIT, CLAIMING CLINTON NEVER HAD A SURPLUS IS STUPID. HE HAD 4. More money coming into Gov't than leaving


Understanding the Social Security Trust Funds mdash Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

It seems you got no clue what bonds are and what are they used for.

Says the K/K/Klown not understanding payroll taxes are REQUIRED by law to buy US Gov't bonds!

You just proved you have no clue what bonds are and what they are used for.

ANOTHER K/K/Klown shocking

The fund is required by law to be invested in non-marketable securities ... federal government securities bought with surplus OASI payroll tax revenue

Social Security Trust Fund - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

What do we call them? lol

How does that prove you understand what bonds are for?

Listen low informed tool, IF you have a posit make it, otherwise GTFO

 

[Dad2three]

Greenspan hailed as a "libertarian?" Who said that? Authoritarian leftist liberals? That's insane, he wasn't libertarian at all.

Greenspan was one of Ayn Rand's original clique members. He even wrote a chapter for one of her books about capitalism. It discussed the advantages of the gold standard. However, when he became a power broker in the government his libertarian principles got flushed down the toilet. They are so inconvenient when you are grovelling before Congressman and Senators.

I didn't know that, thanks Bripat, but as you agree there was nothing libertarian about his rule in the fed.

The Fed itself is anti-libertarian. A true libertarian would be lobbying to have it abolished, not to serve in it.

Yes, the US was such fun pre fed reserve
List of recessions in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

We became the wealthiest nation in the world pre fed reserve.

LOL

NOT thanks to libertarian policy or laizze affaire economics, lol

 

[kaz]

Is Dante aware that kaz is a libertarian, not a Republican? Kaz also believes in what is so and doesn't defend politicians who are wrong when they are wrong. Reagan was wrong. He should not have done that. And Greenspan was no friend of liberty. The fed is a criminal organization which steals from the American people and Greenspan was it's don and ran it as the criminal empire that it is.

Greenspan was hailed as a libertarian until people like you threw him under the proverbial bus.

Your rant is as as it gets.

Greenspan hailed as a "libertarian?" Who said that? Authoritarian leftist liberals? That's insane, he wasn't libertarian at all.

Greenspan was one of Ayn Rand's original clique members. He even wrote a chapter for one of her books about capitalism. It discussed the advantages of the gold standard. However, when he became a power broker in the government his libertarian principles got flushed down the toilet. They are so inconvenient when you are grovelling before Congressman and Senators.

I didn't know that, thanks Bripat, but as you agree there was nothing libertarian about his rule in the fed.

The Fed itself is anti-libertarian. A true libertarian would be lobbying to have it abolished, not to serve in it.

Exactly, the Fed is organized crime, it steals from the American people.

A liberal who wasn't an idiot (OK, that's an oxymoron), would also want to abolish the Fed. When they print money, it's a regressive tax. Which again shows liberals are authoritarian leftists, there is nothing liberal about them.

 

[kaz]

Greenspan hailed as a "libertarian?" Who said that? Authoritarian leftist liberals? That's insane, he wasn't libertarian at all.

Greenspan was one of Ayn Rand's original clique members. He even wrote a chapter for one of her books about capitalism. It discussed the advantages of the gold standard. However, when he became a power broker in the government his libertarian principles got flushed down the toilet. They are so inconvenient when you are grovelling before Congressman and Senators.

I didn't know that, thanks Bripat, but as you agree there was nothing libertarian about his rule in the fed.

The Fed itself is anti-libertarian. A true libertarian would be lobbying to have it abolished, not to serve in it.

Yes, the US was such fun pre fed reserve
List of recessions in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

We became the wealthiest nation in the world pre fed reserve.

Yep

 

[bripat9643]

Greenspan was one of Ayn Rand's original clique members. He even wrote a chapter for one of her books about capitalism. It discussed the advantages of the gold standard. However, when he became a power broker in the government his libertarian principles got flushed down the toilet. They are so inconvenient when you are grovelling before Congressman and Senators.

I didn't know that, thanks Bripat, but as you agree there was nothing libertarian about his rule in the fed.

The Fed itself is anti-libertarian. A true libertarian would be lobbying to have it abolished, not to serve in it.

Yes, the US was such fun pre fed reserve
List of recessions in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

We became the wealthiest nation in the world pre fed reserve.

LOL

NOT thanks to libertarian policy or laizze affaire economics, lol

Yes, thanks to exactly that. It wasn't thanks to the Federal Reserve or the SEC, was it?

 

[kaz]

Gawd you right wingers are fukkking dense assholes. ANY EXCESS PAYROLL TAXES ARE REQUIRED, NOT TO PAY OFF PUBLIC DEBT, BUT TO BUY UP US GOV'T BONDS. This is called savings bonds. Yes it creates debt that was created, but it's owed to itself. When you change that law, let me know!!!

Yes, AFTER EXCESS payroll monies came in, SOME of it was used to pay down public debt, AFTER it bought US savings bonds

It's called Gov't accounting, NOT a personal accounting system!!!

BUT BACK TO THE DUMMY'S POSIT, CLAIMING CLINTON NEVER HAD A SURPLUS IS STUPID. HE HAD 4. More money coming into Gov't than leaving


Understanding the Social Security Trust Funds mdash Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

It seems you got no clue what bonds are and what are they used for.

Says the K/K/Klown not understanding payroll taxes are REQUIRED by law to buy US Gov't bonds!

You just proved you have no clue what bonds are and what they are used for.

ANOTHER K/K/Klown shocking

The fund is required by law to be invested in non-marketable securities ... federal government securities bought with surplus OASI payroll tax revenue

Social Security Trust Fund - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

What do we call them? lol

How does that prove you understand what bonds are for?

I didn't know that, thanks Bripat, but as you agree there was nothing libertarian about his rule in the fed.

The Fed itself is anti-libertarian. A true libertarian would be lobbying to have it abolished, not to serve in it.

Yes, the US was such fun pre fed reserve
List of recessions in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

We became the wealthiest nation in the world pre fed reserve.

LOL

NOT thanks to libertarian policy or laizze affaire economics, lol

Yes, thanks to exactly that. It wasn't thanks to the Federal Reserve or the SEC, was it?

People are too stupid to make our own choices, bripat. Don't you know that? That's why the intelligent among us want politicians to do it for us. Haven't you noticed how much politicians just care about us, damn it, and what great choices they make? People can't make choices, government has to do it. There is one snag to that. Hmmm...government is made up of...

 

[zeke]

A liberal who wasn't an idiot (OK, that's an oxymoron), would also want to abolish the Fed.

So what is it that you are? A idiot right winger that thinks, wishes, believes that the Federal Reserve banks will somehow or sometime be abolished? You are kidding right?

Do you know how long it took the plutocrats to establish the Federal Banking system? And you think they will let it go without a serious fight? How will they whipsaw the economy (boom bust cycles) without maintaining control over our banking system? You do realize that all major countries have a central bank. Cause if you control the money, you control most everything.

Federal Reserve isn't going anywhere. That is one of the most crazy things I have seen you write.

 

[Dad2three]

I didn't know that, thanks Bripat, but as you agree there was nothing libertarian about his rule in the fed.

The Fed itself is anti-libertarian. A true libertarian would be lobbying to have it abolished, not to serve in it.

Yes, the US was such fun pre fed reserve
List of recessions in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

We became the wealthiest nation in the world pre fed reserve.

LOL

NOT thanks to libertarian policy or laizze affaire economics, lol

Yes, thanks to exactly that. It wasn't thanks to the Federal Reserve or the SEC, was it?

(Re-)Introducing: The American School of Economics

When the United States became independent from Britain it also rebelled against the British System of economics, characterized by Adam Smith, in favor of the American School based on protectionism and infrastructure and prospered under this system for almost 200 years to become the wealthiest nation in the world. Unrestrained free trade resurfaced in the early 1900s culminating in the Great Depression and again in the 1970s culminating in the current Economic Meltdown.

Closely related to mercantilism, it can be seen as contrary to classical economics. It consisted of these three core policies:

1. protecting industry through selective high tariffs (especially 1861–1932) and through subsidies (especially 1932–70)
2. government investments in infrastructure creating targeted internal improvements (especially in transportation)
3. a national bank with policies that promote the growth of productive enterprises rather than speculation
   
   
   It is a capitalist economic school based on the Hamiltonian economic program. The American School of capitalism was intended to allow the United States to become economically independent and nationally self-sufficient.
   

During its American System period the United States grew into the largest economy in the world with the highest standard of living, surpassing the British Empire by the 1880s


Frank Bourgin's 1989 study of the Constitutional Convention shows that direct government involvement in the economy was intended by the Founders.


The goal, most forcefully articulated by Hamilton, was to ensure that dearly won political independence was not lost by being economically and financially dependent on the powers and princes of Europe. The creation of a strong central government able to promote science, invention, industry and commerce, was seen as an essential means of promoting the general welfare and making the economy of the United States strong enough for them to determine their own destiny.

A number of programs by the federal government undertaken in the period prior to the Civil War gave shape and substance to the American School.

American School economics - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[Dad2three]

It seems you got no clue what bonds are and what are they used for.

Says the K/K/Klown not understanding payroll taxes are REQUIRED by law to buy US Gov't bonds!

You just proved you have no clue what bonds are and what they are used for.

ANOTHER K/K/Klown shocking

The fund is required by law to be invested in non-marketable securities ... federal government securities bought with surplus OASI payroll tax revenue

Social Security Trust Fund - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

What do we call them? lol

How does that prove you understand what bonds are for?

The Fed itself is anti-libertarian. A true libertarian would be lobbying to have it abolished, not to serve in it.

Yes, the US was such fun pre fed reserve
List of recessions in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

We became the wealthiest nation in the world pre fed reserve.

LOL

NOT thanks to libertarian policy or laizze affaire economics, lol

Yes, thanks to exactly that. It wasn't thanks to the Federal Reserve or the SEC, was it?

People are too stupid to make our own choices, bripat. Don't you know that? That's why the intelligent among us want politicians to do it for us. Haven't you noticed how much politicians just care about us, damn it, and what great choices they make? People can't make choices, government has to do it. There is one snag to that. Hmmm...government is made up of...

Frank Bourgin's 1989 study of the Constitutional Convention shows that direct government involvement in the economy was intended by the Founders.


The goal, most forcefully articulated by Hamilton, was to ensure that dearly won political independence was not lost by being economically and financially dependent on the powers and princes of Europe. The creation of a strong central government able to promote science, invention, industry and commerce, was seen as an essential means of promoting the general welfare and making the economy of the United States strong enough for them to determine their own destiny.

A number of programs by the federal government undertaken in the period prior to the Civil War gave shape and substance to the American School.

American School economics - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[Dad2three]

A liberal who wasn't an idiot (OK, that's an oxymoron), would also want to abolish the Fed.

So what is it that you are? A idiot right winger that thinks, wishes, believes that the Federal Reserve banks will somehow or sometime be abolished? You are kidding right?

Do you know how long it took the plutocrats to establish the Federal Banking system? And you think they will let it go without a serious fight? How will they whipsaw the economy (boom bust cycles) without maintaining control over our banking system? You do realize that all major countries have a central bank. Cause if you control the money, you control most everything.

Federal Reserve isn't going anywhere. That is one of the most crazy things I have seen you write.

There are issues with the fed, but the US had a HORRIBLE period with boom and busts pre fed.