MeanMrMustard

Joined

• started 67 topics
• posted 3,909 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by MeanMrMustard

• 
  41

  Cambridge professor just went full retard ...

  by LoveUniHateExams in

  1. social
  2. current

  ever heard of david runciman?.

  he's a professor of politics at the university of cambridge, no less.. he's also a complete retard, for want of a better word.

  according to prof. runciman, six year old children should get the vote, so as to counteract britain's aging population.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  So are they also eligible for the draft?
• 
  72

  Did you know Banks create money out of thin air?

  by TerryWalstrom in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  banks create money “out of thin air.”empirical studies have been undertaken to prove this thesis and this is the conclusion:.

  in the 5,000 year history of banking, banks have been thought of as “deposit taking institutions which lend money”.. 1. what is the legal reality?

  banks don’t take deposits and don’t lend money.the public is under this false impression on purpose because the language of banks is not legal language.. so--what is a “deposit”?a deposit is not actually a deposit.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  @_Morpheus:

  Looks like you just left one cult only to eagerly join another... damn globalist

  (Note: by “globalist” I am not implying what might be referred to as an “internationalist”. I mean a person that believes in the globe. Anyone ‘woke’ knows the earth is flat)
• 
  72

  Did you know Banks create money out of thin air?

  by TerryWalstrom in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  banks create money “out of thin air.”empirical studies have been undertaken to prove this thesis and this is the conclusion:.

  in the 5,000 year history of banking, banks have been thought of as “deposit taking institutions which lend money”.. 1. what is the legal reality?

  banks don’t take deposits and don’t lend money.the public is under this false impression on purpose because the language of banks is not legal language.. so--what is a “deposit”?a deposit is not actually a deposit.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  But they can loan money that they don't actually have deposited....

  Technically, they can only loan from the deposits, or possibly if the bank borrows from somewhere. If the bank has no deposits, it can’t loan. With fractional reserve banking, the banks loan out a certain percentage of deposits, but also keep that money on the accounts of the depositors. (That’s where the increase comes from... I have all my money, by 90% has been loaned out as well...)

  You are on pretty good footing if you say that banks, through FRB, cause a growth in the money supply. You can’t say they just print money or increase an account balance and then loan it out.

  Now whether you want to argue if FRB is fraud or not, that’s a different story. (How can I have my money and yet someone else has it too?)

  If you are willing to burn an hour, this lecture is pretty good. Notice Salerno doesn’t make value judgements on FRB. Rather, he just lays out what it is and gives examples:

  https://youtu.be/33RXhv0IuPc
  
• 
  72

  Did you know Banks create money out of thin air?

  by TerryWalstrom in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  banks create money “out of thin air.”empirical studies have been undertaken to prove this thesis and this is the conclusion:.

  in the 5,000 year history of banking, banks have been thought of as “deposit taking institutions which lend money”.. 1. what is the legal reality?

  banks don’t take deposits and don’t lend money.the public is under this false impression on purpose because the language of banks is not legal language.. so--what is a “deposit”?a deposit is not actually a deposit.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  @Terry:

  Dodd-Frank had nothing to do with fractional reserve banking or the money supply.

  It was passed in response to the financial crises in much the same way leeches were applied to disease (bad blood) hundreds of years ago.

  The financial crisis was caused by banks reacting to government policies - risky home loans backed by government agencies, loans that banks had to give out to appear not to “discrimate”. Add a healthy dose of fuel from the Fed, and you get a massive bubble. The air for the bubble came from the Fed, the government policies funneled it into the housing market. If the same crisis hit today, the same banks would fail - even though Dodd-Frank was recently repealed.

  https://youtu.be/Pq8yrtM2PL4
  
• 
  72

  Did you know Banks create money out of thin air?

  by TerryWalstrom in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  banks create money “out of thin air.”empirical studies have been undertaken to prove this thesis and this is the conclusion:.

  in the 5,000 year history of banking, banks have been thought of as “deposit taking institutions which lend money”.. 1. what is the legal reality?

  banks don’t take deposits and don’t lend money.the public is under this false impression on purpose because the language of banks is not legal language.. so--what is a “deposit”?a deposit is not actually a deposit.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  As Simon suggested, when you finance a car, guys with fake beards are not carrying around suitcases full of crisp $100 bills.

  But there ARE definitely guys with fake beards and hair on the lot.
  
  
• 
  72

  Did you know Banks create money out of thin air?

  by TerryWalstrom in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  banks create money “out of thin air.”empirical studies have been undertaken to prove this thesis and this is the conclusion:.

  in the 5,000 year history of banking, banks have been thought of as “deposit taking institutions which lend money”.. 1. what is the legal reality?

  banks don’t take deposits and don’t lend money.the public is under this false impression on purpose because the language of banks is not legal language.. so--what is a “deposit”?a deposit is not actually a deposit.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  Not sure how I missed this thread. I’ve gone through the thread a bit - just to be clear : we aren’t talking about the money created through fractional reserve banking, correct?

  FRB does increase the money supply through loans. It, however, does not mean banks “print” money. If the bank’s loans start to fall through, they can’t just adjust the numbers. Nor can they keep loaning. If they have the minimum reserve and their loans (assets) start to evaporate, it can get really ugly for the bank.
• 
  22

  What does 'populist' mean?

  by LoveUniHateExams in

  1. social
  2. current

  so yeah, i've been encountering the word 'populist' quite a bit recently.. e.g.

  trump's a populist president.. what does it mean?.

  does it simply mean popular?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  Social equality is not on his agenda into improving the lifestyle of the lower middle class, in spite of him politically pandering to the working class in a populist way.

  Curious, what is “social equality” to you?

  There has been no other mechanism, in all of human history, by far, hands down, without any historical doubt, that has improved the lives of ANY and ALL “classes” more than the free market. The extent to which it is undermined is the extent to which the lifestyle of the lower or middle classes suffer.

  Somehow I get the feeling you weren’t talking about that though... Rather, I get the feeling you may have been advocating for something opposite to that... but I digress.
• 
  22

  What does 'populist' mean?

  by LoveUniHateExams in

  1. social
  2. current

  so yeah, i've been encountering the word 'populist' quite a bit recently.. e.g.

  trump's a populist president.. what does it mean?.

  does it simply mean popular?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  It was only because of the Electoral College system that Trump was designated winner.

  The contest for the President is a contest of winning states. It is the “United States.”

  Imagine if a baseball team, upon losing the World Series, started to complain: “Wait, Wait! We should win. This is all wrong. Sure the other team won more games, but we had more overall hits when you add them together. Therefore, we are the better team.” Not only is it disengenous to change the rules at the end, which, amazingly favors the losing team (imagine that), but in the end, that’s not the contest the teams were in. Measuing the winning team by total number of hits is just a horrible measure for naming a series champ.

  But here’s the real kicker : even if the rules were to change, who’s to say the losing team would really be the winner? Each team would change its game play behavior from the start of the season to maximize hit count, instead of game wins.

  Same with elections. Even if you were to change the elections to a popular vote, you can’t assume the vote would come out the way you think it would. For example, take NY or CA... or any Democrat stronghold state: there are many people that stay home because they know the people in NYC outnumber them. If it were a popular vote, you would probably see those people come out, affecting the outcome in ways you can’t predict. These systems are complicated. Changing one variable doesn’t imply, in any way, that the rest of the system remains constant.

  In fact, I bet Trump would have won in a popular vote too - as long as those were the rules from the start and everyone had the opportunity to adjust their behavior.
• 
  22

  What does 'populist' mean?

  by LoveUniHateExams in

  1. social
  2. current

  so yeah, i've been encountering the word 'populist' quite a bit recently.. e.g.

  trump's a populist president.. what does it mean?.

  does it simply mean popular?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  I find it surprising that the current President has so many supporters in the Ex JW community. After all we finally woke and got wise to the cult, yet so many now latch on to and become yes men all over again..

  This is flirting with Morph’s law... Only because a debate hasn’t really started. It’s a poisoning of the well.
  
  
• 
  20

  Equality of outcome ...

  by LoveUniHateExams in

  1. social
  2. current

  ... in pol pot's cambodia.. .

  the regime freed these people from inequality and an oppressive class system by changing them from being alive to being dead, and so they were all equally dead..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  My bearded sparring partner asked them if they felt oppressed, or if they were encouraged to study whatever they want at school.

  They both said "no" - i.e. they felt discouraged.

  I felt this should have been explored a bit more..

  The language was general and leading, I think. Were they asked what they wanted to study? Could they list it? Why can’t they pursue this course? Are they being prevented in some way? Do boys need the same “encouragement”?

  I’m not sure if the video above featuring Christina Hoff Sommers is the one I’m thinking of, but there is one out there of her speaking at a university. Some feminist in the audience laments the lack of women in STEM. And she asks the obvious question to the female student: what are you studying? She listed something, can’t remember exactly, but it was far away from STEM. When asked why she didn’t enroll in a STEM field, she responded that she wasn’t interested. You could feel the collective face palm...