Muhammad Rasheed's Blog, page 226

Battle Mode: Is the Black Community Better Off Without the World Religions?

Michael Balance Williams - Church flow.... 

Religion has killed more people than it has saved. Christianity is is a slave tool from an oppressor. It destroys the black community. Free.your.mind! The bible is the 29th creation story on record. LOOK IT UP! WHY weren't we taught about the other 28????? There were several other gods that died for his people before Jesus came into books. But you don't believe it so u won't look it up. I've dug deep. Christians were the pagans 2300yrs ago under a white Pharaoh Named Serapis.. whos statues are scattered all over Europe. God is not going to fix problems that you can fix yourself. Racism is not of the devil in the bible. Racism is classism to racist Europeans. Racism started in the Torah and then the bible. Blacks are a cursed people in these books. Why should you have respect for cursed people today??? How can cursed people have respect for one another? Jesus died in a book and not for people sins. Wake up. Wake up. Wake up. If you've never researched what I've researched, how can you say I'm wrong????? You don't know... that you don't know. My claims are not fallacies. They are the truth. The black mind will get better once we put christianity and islam aside. End of story 
Michael Balance Williams - You have guts if you like and or share this post!!! 
Laron Tanner - I respect your point of view and wish more people were as open minded as you are... We have been "force fed" certain things since we were little... Now we have grown up "not in charge of our own minds." We find it easier to just continue believing what we were force fed than to go out and learn for ourselves... No one knows the truth... They choose to believe in what they were told... 
Michael Balance Williams - Yup 
Michael Balance Williams - This was a comment on someone else's page. I decided to make it a post on mine. 
Oh Damn - Well said 
Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: "This was a comment on someone else's page. I decided to make it a post on mine." 
Why? 
Michael Balance Williams - This was 'my' comment on someone else's page. 
Michael Balance Williams - My choice 
Kathy J Ebert - Was told all my life that the Jews were Gods chosen people, well.........thats a bunch of nonsense. Yes in order to have peace in this world they are going to have to get away from all the nonsense we were taught growing up. 
Muhammad Rasheed - In the bible, the reason they were the "chosen people" was for God to fulfill the covenant to the patriarchs. The covenant was fulfilled once Moses brought the children of Israel to the River Jordan. At that point, God said that His chosen people were all those who chose to believe in Him and follow the righteous path. 
Michael Balance Williams - Prove it 
Muhammad Rasheed - Deuteronomy chapters 29 & 30 are Moses' final speech to the children of Israel at the edge of the Jordan. In it, among other things, he announces that they are to follow the commands of the Lord and be blessed, and if they reject those commands they will be cursed and cut off. 
Muhammad Rasheed - Now prove how "religion has killed more people than it has saved." How does religion kill people? 
Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: "Christianity is is a slave tool from an oppressor. It destroys the black community." 
The oldest Christian church in the world is a Black African one, that predates the American slave trade by many, many centuries. So how is it a tool of the oppressor exactly? Also are you aware that the driving force behind getting the Civil Rights Act passed, and removing the stench of jim crow, was the black church? Remember Martin Luther King, Jr.'s group? Does that sound as if Christianity was destroying the black community? Because it seems to me that it was strengthening it, which would be the exact opposite of your claims. 
Michael Balance Williams wrote: "Free.your.mind!" 
Based on those two items alone it doesn't sound as if your mind is free. Can you have a free mind if you are regurgitating nonsense without thinking it through while presenting it as fact? The slave mind does that.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: "The bible is the 29th creation story on record. LOOK IT UP! WHY weren't we taught about the other 28?????" 
Why are the other 28 relevant? Which ones are supported by the facts of science? I know the ones revealed in Abrahamic scripture are. Anything involving vomiting, or giant turtles, etc., probably aren't. 
Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: "Christians were the pagans 2300yrs ago under a white Pharaoh Named Serapis.. whos statues are scattered all over Europe." 
This is a confused jumble. Ptolemy I was a Macedonian general under Alexander who became the ruler of Egypt (obviously this was during a mighty low point in Egyptian history). He was no more a "pharoah" than conquering America and proclaiming yourself ruler would make you "president of the United States."  Ptolemy I was eager for the Egyptians and Greeks to get along in his new kingdom, so he created a new god called 'Serapis' and built a cult around it as part of his marketing campaign. Serapis was depicted as a Greek wearing the Egyptian costume, and was supposed to represent the perfect combination of the two. Was "Christians were the pagans" supposed to mean that Christians were the minority during that time period? Christians exhibit pagan-like behavior when they decide to worship the Christ instead of the One God of Abraham exclusively. 
Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: "God is not going to fix problems that you can fix yourself." 
This is a fake strawman argument that you are pretending belongs to religion, which is often the case with atheists. That doesn't represent a "free mind" either. Show me in scripture where it says God is supposed to fix all of your problems for you. He gave us Free Will for a reason. 
Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: "Racism is not of the devil in the bible. Racism is classism to racist Europeans. Racism started in the Torah and then the bible. Blacks are a cursed people in these books." 
Where? 
Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: "Why should you have respect for cursed people today??? How can cursed people have respect for one another? Jesus died in a book and not for people sins. Wake up. Wake up. Wake up. If you've never researched what I've researched..." 
You haven't demonstrated any research yet. What you demonstrate is someone on Facebook that posts stuff he half-assed heard from other places (like in a Facebook meme), while pretending (poorly) that he actually researched something. This is my primary critique with you. Someone that has actually researched can answer the questions asked of them based on that research. You are a professional question ducker, who gets defensive whenever someone asks him to explain one of these random posts. 
Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: "...how can you say I'm wrong?????" 
Prove that you are right. 
Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: "You don't know... that you don't know." 
I know that you know nothing. 
Michael Balance Williams wrote: "My claims are not fallacies." 
Your claims are unsubstantiated foolishness that you can't back up. 
Michael Balance Williams wrote: "They are the truth." 
The truth is supported by facts. Your claims are devoid of fact. End of story. 
Michael Balance Williams wrote: "The black mind will get better once we put christianity and islam aside." 
Because Michael Balance Williams said so? That's a fallacy.
[Michael Balance Williams blocked me from his Social Media account]
Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: "You have guts if you like and or share this post!!!"

I don't think you know what "guts" are, Michael. 

BIG OIL & Their Free US Government Welfare Check

Muhammad Rasheed - [shared meme] So Big Oil not only sky rocketed their prices from under $1 a gallon to $5 a gallon raking in crazily obscene profits, but they also rake in billions in welfare checks from the US gov as well?
But whenever their pundit, talking-head puppets start flapping their blood-sucking mouths, every problem in society is always the poor's fault?
Zodicus Zu'ul - why is it even legal for a Texas based company to give money to a Kentucky senator? oh... wait... nevermind.
Muhammad Rasheed - I'm genuinely interested in how the far right justifies it being okay for the wealthiest people and corporations in the country to regularly receive the FAR larger part of the government's Free Money Welfare Pie that they only pocket for their lives of decadent excess, but blame the poor for all of the country's ills for buying a bag of chips with their food stamp card. Please explain that situation using reason and logic where that it will actually make sense so people won't consider those who vote Republican as the actual problem. Please. I'm listening. If there is a rational explanation then I am honestly all ears.
Go.
Abdur Rasheed - That's an easy one. Corporations are people and these people are "JOB CREATORS" whose prosperity trickles down to everyone. If they don't get those billions in subsidies they would have to pay their share holders LESS and therefore would never invest in new lands to drill in or new technology to add new products to market and create more jobs for the poor.
Corporations and the wealthy are what makes the world go around and ANY talk of reducing what we pay them or even holding them accountable for their own short flaws threatens the very fabric of this NATION.
If you are against paying corporate welfare and FOR them paying their share in taxes or them paying for the worst oil spill in human history then you are a socialist and are Anti-American freedom, and you probably hate Jesus and Christmas.
Is U.S. Now On Slippery Slope To Tyranny?
Muhammad Rasheed - I'm not seeing how the referenced article relates to your selected block of far right talking points.
Also, please explain the talking points in a way that make sense to someone not a Republican.
Abdur Rasheed - I did. Read it again.
Who are you, Kirby?
Abdur Rasheed - Dafaq?
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "It seems that everybody wants a President until they get one. Then they want a dictator. Smh"
That was Sowell's point in the article. He took issue with the White House confiscating BP funds without going through the proper channels, and how no where is that within the presidential powers. He didn't say anything about them not being held accountable, just the overstepping his powers thing. It wasn't relevant.
Muhammad Rasheed - Okay, when I said break it down for the layman who isn't a rebublican, what I meant was do a compare and contrast as to how if a rich person abuses gov free money it is somehow superior to when a poor person abuses gov free money.
Why is it not considered destroying the economy if a rich person uses free gov money to buy cocaine, high-priced hookers and helicopter rides to Whole Foods and back, but it is if the poor person uses free gov money to buy lottery tickets, ugly hookers, and rims?
Gerald Welch - This is an easy fix. Only allow INDIVIDUALS to appeal to their representative. Those individuals have to have their primary address in the district of the representative in question.
Abdur Rasheed - I got nothing.
Muhammad Rasheed - Gerald Welch wrote: "This is an easy fix."
I wasn't looking for a fix, just an attempted justification for the sickening hypocrisy. There are few things that make me angrier than this one... FB posters that blame ALL OF THE COUNTRIES ILLS on the poors' petty thefts, when the greed of one wealthy jackass can outspend all of the poor street criminals combined. Everyone, rich or poor, are going to do wrong. That's what humans do. But in an intensely partisan climate that effects ALL of us whether we even want to be partisan or not, I'd like to hear a better explanation from the extremes as to why they hold onto the side that they do.

Believing in Success: Overcoming a Mindset of Poverty

John Purser - If you find something America truly excels at you've probably found something to be ashamed of.
Muhammad Rasheed - In general, people who succeed in life have to fail many times, and work very hard to overcome many obstacles before they finally make it. America has the most opportunities for people who possess that level of determination and patient perseverance to rise from poor to affluent. That's what makes it the greatest country in the world. If you truly want it and are absolutely willing to do what it takes to win it, the American Dream can indeed be yours.
John Purser - Muhammad, according to the statistics for the last couple of decades you're talking about Western Europe, maybe Australia. DEFINITELY not the USA unless you go back to the '50s.
Patrick Jb Flynn - America is the country where big biz fucks you in the ass and overcharges for the lube.
Neelam Abbas Khan - This is really sad.
Rip Spindragon - If I don't agree that this is the greatest country, then I shouldn't read the link?
Muhammad Rasheed -  @ John Purser - The statistics for what exactly? The percentage of people who try versus those who don't? Explain.
James Robert Smith - I have never thought that the USA is the greatest nation. We mainly suck.
John Purser - Yeah, the whole "people who try" thing was never anything but a fairy tale told to excuse the treatment of the working class as virtual slaves. The statistics I had in mind were from a study on class mobility. Essentially trying to answer the question "What are the odds you're going to wind up in the same income class or worse than your parents?" The odds were MUCH higher in the USA. We're stuck at best. And this was BEFORE the multiple crashes of the last decade that I think probably exacerbated the situation. In Europe and Britain (I don't remember Canada) how well you did was more closely related to education than birth class.
Jordan Haythornthwaite - Guess I'm not reading this...
Muhammad Rasheed - John Purser wrote: "Yeah, the whole "people who try" thing was never anything but a fairy tale told to excuse the treatment of the working class as virtual slaves."
That's not true. The very phrase "American Dream" was coined to describe poor immigrants or their kids who worked hard and became leaders of industry. I have close family members, friends, mentors and even FB friends who rose from poor to affluence by educating themselves, and working hard with brute determination. That's all it takes.
John Purser wrote: "The statistics I had in mind were from a study on class mobility. Essentially trying to answer the question "What are the odds you're going to wind up in the same income class or worse than your parents?" The odds were MUCH higher in the USA. We're stuck at best."
That 100% has to do with the individual in question and what their goals are. If your goal is to be in the income class of your parents, and you never try to educate yourself beyond what they taught you about success in life, and that is the formula that you use, then of course you'll repeat their lifestyle. Or if you aspire to something greater, but settle once you reach their level because you've given in to peer pressure or whatever.
John Purser wrote: "And this was BEFORE the multiple crashes of the last decade that I think probably exacerbated the situation. In Europe and Britain (I don't remember Canada) how well you did was more closely related to education than birth class."
How well do do is ALWAYS related to education combined with working hard. In order to rise up the socio-economic ladder, step one is to learn and master valuable skills that someone else is willing to pay top dollar for. That's true for everyone no matter what class you are born into. The obstacles and walls you'll have to overcome are greater and more varied the lower on the rung you find yourself, but that means you must increase in the corresponding amount of persistence, determination, patient perseverance.
John Purser - The fact that you have anecdotal evidence that advancement is possible in no way counters the fact that you're more likely to get ahead via hard work in some other developed country. And, how well you do is in fact not strongly coupled to effort and/or education in America. It is linked to those qualities LESS than in any other developed nation.
John Purser - Think about it Muhammad, if hard work and education defined success in America George W. Bush would have been begging on street corners instead of running the country.
Muhammad Rasheed - That's not true, John. But the 1% want you to believe it to be true because they hate competition. The media will show the flash-in-the-pan lottery winner before they will ever show someone make it through the tried and true education + hardwork formula, because the people who profit the most off of the lottery system WANT you to believe what you believe. These are the people responsive the whole "The American Dream is a hoax!" nonsense.
Muhammad Rasheed - John Purser wrote: "Think about it Muhammad, if hard work and education defined success in America George W. Bush would have been begging on street corners instead of running the country."
You've strayed off point. We're talking about rising from the lower poor classes and up to affluence, and what it takes to do so. What the legacy wealth kids of the rich do with their lives has nothing to do with this.
John Purser - Ummmmm Muhammad, you've got it precisely backwards. The harder we run chasing the non-existent cheese the better the 1% do.
Muhammad Rasheed - Explain. Give me a typical scenario in how that works.
John Purser - You've got nothing but fairy tales and anecdotal evidence. Here's my hand:"At least five large studies in recent years have found the United States to be less mobile than comparable nations. A project led by Markus Jantti, an economist at a Swedish university, found that 42 percent of American men raised in the bottom fifth of incomes stay there as adults. That shows a level of persistent disadvantage much higher than in Denmark (25 percent) and Britain (30 percent) — a country famous for its class constraints. "
Harder for Americans to Rise From Lower Rungs
John Purser - Seriously Muhammad? You don't understand that the rich are rich because they capture the value created by those who aren't rich? You really need someone to walk you through that?
Muhammad Rasheed - I don't need anyone to walk me through anything since myself, some of my peers and family members are actually living the principles that I'm talking about and actively encourage each other in them. If you are already from a well to do rich family, or have never tried to better your situation using that formula described, and believe in the doom & gloom "you might as well don't try because the rich have rigged everything against the poor" message, then you will never understand. For that person, it seems like magic, or cheating in some way, when a hardworking and determined poor person makes it up the ladder. They will never understand that the activating components for that "magic" are belief, and the will to succeed.
John Purser - If it makes you feel better Muhammad, 30+ years ago I was repeating the EXACT same fairy tale you are today. I was a true believer. I voted for Reagan twice. HOWEVER, about halfway through his second term I noticed that what Reagan and the conservatives said never came true. What those wacky liberals said in fact DID come true. In the REAL WORLD reality has a liberal bias.
John Purser - So you believe that Americans just don't want to "better themselves" unlike the entire rest of the developed world. Ya think it's something in the water?
Muhammad Rasheed - What in the world does Reagan's trickle-down economics philosophy have to do with what I'm talking about, John? Are we having the same conversation?
Muhammad Rasheed - John Purser wrote: "So you believe that Americans just don't want to "better themselves" unlike the entire rest of the developed world. Ya think it's something in the water?"
It's purely on the individual level. In order to pull it off, you have to step out of your comfort zone, even alienate friends and family to do it, and it takes a greater effort than MOST people possess to get to that place mentally.
Muhammad Rasheed - You need to be strongly self-motivated, and if that area is weak, someone that completely has your back and believes you can do it. I was personally blessed with having both.
John Purser - So, you don't understand capitalism, you don't understand our history, and you don't understand statistics and YOU are the model of someone who got ahead through EDUCATION and hard work? Must have been one heck of a lot of hard work since you skipped on the education so thoroughly.
Muhammad Rasheed - STEP ONE: Learn a valued skill that others are willing to pay top dollar for. Depending on what kind of life you are dealing with, it may be necessary to undergo completely new personal habits, and great discomfort to pull this off. It will be EASY to give up, like it is at the beginning of a new workout routine. Don't give up, and God will be with you.
STEP TWO: Once achieved, work really, Really, REALLY hard to apply those skills. Don't give up. Ever. Until you make the money you are looking for.
STEP THREE: Save.
STEP FOUR: Use your savings to purchase income-producing assets.
STEP FIVE: Repeat steps 1-4.
Muhammad Rasheed - lol The education part is involved with STEP ONE. Learn what you need to learn in order to make your goals happen. If an in depth study of Ronald Reagan and his philosophy leaves you feeling like giving up and never trying because The Man will never let you succeed, then immediately stop reading that nonsense "history" because it is a treacherous nonessential to the life you claim you want.
John Purser - Okay, on step one that "valued skill" is now running the fryer at MacDonalds.
How hard would you have to work at MacDonalds in order to get the money just rolling in?
MacDonalds says you should sell your christmas presents to get by. How much do you "save" living like that?
Income producing assets like the 401Ks they said were going to let us all retire rich? You know, the ones that have created a gigantic retirement crisis because they're worth nothing now? Or like the homes you had to buy in order to get ahead. You know, the ones the bank owns now because the market crashed.
Repeating those steps just drives you into a hole.
Muhammad Rasheed - ^ This post here represents the poor person who has not educated himself on what he needs to do in order to achieve an affluent lifestyle. This is what STEP ZERO sounds like. Not trying to be funny or offensive, but this is true.
John Purser - So if you blame the poor for being poor then "everyone" who is blameless gets ahead? NOW do you see why I call it a fairy tale?
Muhammad Rasheed - IN what universe, John, would operating a McDonald's fryer be considered a valuable skill?
Muhammad Rasheed - Define "blaming the poor" so we are clear on what is meant, please.
John Purser - In America. You see we outsourced our technical jobs, we're killing off the unions so there go the good jobs, and the Bush whitehouse tried to reclassify working at MacDonalds as "manufacturing". When there are 6 people looking for every available job exactly what "valuable skill" will allow you to get the next minimum wage job and how do you get ahead working for poverty wages?
John Purser - By the way Muhammad, did you read the article Ted posted? Want to tell those 22,000 homeless kids how they're supposed to "learn a valuable skill"? Kids from the middle class are graduating from college with and average of around 30,000 of debt now so you tell me how a kid without even a bed to sleep in is going to compete with them.
Muhammad Rasheed - Let me back up a bit then:
STEP ZERO-a: Do an Internet search (I recommend 'Google') and find a list of the top highest paying jobs.
STEP ZERO-b: Pick the one that appeals the most to you.
STEP ZERO-c: Determine what specific skills, classes, etc. are needed in order to do that job you picked.
STEP ZERO-d: (go to STEP ONE above)
Muhammad Rasheed - John Purser wrote: "In America."
lol No. No where in America is a fryer job considered "valuable." You're talking crazy, and are now just busting my chops.
John Purser wrote: "You see we outsourced our technical jobs..."
Then it's time to go somewhere else.
John Purser wrote: "...we're killing off the unions so there go the good jobs..."
Go where the good jobs are.
John Purser wrote: "...and the Bush whitehouse tried to reclassify working at MacDonalds as "manufacturing"."
What does that have to do with you?
John Purser wrote: "When there are 6 people looking for every available job exactly what "valuable skill" will allow you to get the next minimum wage job and how do you get ahead working for poverty wages?"
(see: STEP ZERO-a)
Muhammad Rasheed - John Purser wrote: "Income producing assets like the 401Ks they said were going to let us all retire rich? You know, the ones that have created a gigantic retirement crisis because they're worth nothing now? Or like the homes you had to buy in order to get ahead. You know, the ones the bank owns now because the market crashed."
Yes, real estate that is rented out, dividend-paying stocks, monetized intellectual property. Do another Internet search (this is all what educating yourself on what you need to succeed involves) for a list of top income-producing assets and work to acquire them. As many as you can.
Muhammad Rasheed - John Purser wrote: "By the way Muhammad, did you read the article Ted posted? Want to tell those 22,000 homeless kids how they're supposed to "learn a valuable skill"?"
That's exactly the message they NEED to hear.
John Purser wrote: "Kids from the middle class are graduating from college with and average of around 30,000 of debt now so you tell me how a kid without even a bed to sleep in is going to compete with them."
With the usual method: Hard work and determination.
Muhammad Rasheed - STEP TWO-a: Live beneath your means.
John Purser - Seen the numbers on food stamps lately? Seen the numbers on personal debt? For a lot of Americans "our means" doesn't even FEED US but you say the solution is to spend LESS.
Muhammad Rasheed - You should live beneath your means under normal circumstances so that you can save, but it is vital to the above formula needed to become affluent. If you don't build up a savings, how are you going to purchase your income-producing assets?
Living beneath your means is defined as living inside of the limits of your gross income. So if you make $100, live off of $80 and save the rest, for example. If your full expenses total $160, then you have to make major changes to get all your expenses down to $80... or figure out how to make more. Get your total income up to $220.
John Purser - Muhammad, poverty IS the "normal circumstance" for a growing percentage of the population. It's not that you have a bad plan, it's that you have a plan that never was based in reality for most of the nation when it was conceived of in the '50s. And some people CAN still get ahead that way today. But it's an ever diminishing number. And by accepting the "they're poor because they choose to be" lie you condemn the rest to crushing poverty the 1% chose FOR them.
Muhammad Rasheed - John Purser wrote: "Muhammad, poverty IS the 'normal circumstance' for a growing percentage of the population."
It doesn't have to be.
John Purser wrote: "It's not that you have a bad plan, it's that you have a plan that never was based in reality for most of the nation when it was conceived of in the '50s."
John education/hardwork has been the plan to go from poor to rich for millennia. Doing it through American manufacturing jobs was just the trendy way everyone did it in the 1950s.
John Purser wrote: "And some people CAN still get ahead that way today."
Everyone can if they want it. It's ALL about attitude and if you want it or not. If you don't want it you'll have an endless number of excuses why it can't happen. You see there's a tried-and-true formula for failure, too.
John Purser wrote: "But it's an ever diminishing number."
Of those who try? That number has always been small. Humans like being in their comfort zones, even when they're unpleasant.
John Purser wrote: "And by accepting the "they're poor because they choose to be" lie you condemn the rest to crushing poverty the 1% chose FOR them."
You still haven't explained what that means exactly. It would seem to reason that the opposite of that concept would be "they're poor because they have no choice." Is that what you are really saying? That they were born poor, will always be poor, will die poor, and ABSOLUTELY NOTHING THEY WILL EVER DO WILL CHANGE THAT. Is that what your message is? Tell me. If this is truly what you believe, then tell me what message that they do need to hear to give them some form of hope. Personally when I heard the message of "You are not stuck. Education and hard work can enable you to live your dreams" it liberated me from a pessimistic, doom & gloom attitude about life, and I saw that I had been wrong. I think the rest of the poor need to hear that message, too.
What would you deliver to them instead, O John Purser? What would YOU say that would help them? 'Cause frankly your current message depresses the shit out of ME.

The Downside of PC: Empty Words Alone Aren't Wide Enough to Cover Real Problems (pt 2 of 2)

Muhammad Rasheed - Jeremy O'Kelley wrote: "No, I said that, I didn't say they believe that. Most don't..."
No, they really do. That's what that poor mindset sounds like. "I can't because I don't have XYZ and I just can't."
Anthony Atkielski - Hard work is always enough. The only thing that varies is the amount required.
Ismail MW - Jeremy If you want to get somewhere without getting lost, study of a map is most recommended. If you want to reduce body odour, shower! If you want to get out of poverty, learn the skills that will get you paid and pursue opportunities your skills are in demand for! Pretty straight forward! Again, "The opportunities don't present themselves to everyone to escape"
Ismail MW - Jeremy "What about free day care for working single moms? " Why are they single-moms? Singapore doesn't promote single-moms in their society, and the number of single-moms is extremely low, in contrast to countries that make it easy to pop out babies AND get paid to do so. UK, USA, and Canada.
Stephanie Radakovich - Anthony Atkielski - hard work isn't always enough. There are tons of people who work hard, maybe even two jobs and still qualify for food stamps.
Ismail MW - Jeremy If you PROJECT things that are not there into people's words, I can question your own self-esteem quite easily.
Ismail MW - Define "hard work." Working two jobs that pay the same as one job is pretty much working for the sake of working.
Ismail MW - Stephanie When I was in college I had an instructor who considered coming into wipe desks and prep his class while on his 4 month PAID vacation was "hard-work."
Muhammad Rasheed - Jeremy O'Kelley wrote: "No, my solution is that hard work isn't enough..."
Well, if they are working hard digging ditches for $0.10 a month then obviously they are doing the wrong kind of work. Work hard to apply the valuable skills that you busted your ass and worked hard to learn.
Jeremy O'Kelley wrote: "and that the issue is much more complex than your simplistic interpretation."
No, it's not. Do an Internet search (I recommend Google) for the top 50 highest paying jobs in the country, pick the one that is most appealing to you, do what you need to do to learn the skills involved, and bust your ass to apply them. That's stage one. After that comes living beneath your means, saving, investing, purchasing income producing assets, but let's do stage one first.
Jeremy O'Kelley wrote: "Helping our fellow citizen could include, not only stop gap measures, but ensuring our jobs aren't shipped overseas, and making all education at every level free, including reeducation when certain trades are no longer feasible. What about free day care for working single moms? Your assumption that I suggest "free money" appears nowhere in what I said (until now, a little). Those are just some ideas."
Even if we had all of that stuff the poor would still be among us.
Jeremy O'Kelley wrote: "You're not arguing a universal truth..."
Yes, I am. Learn what you need to learn, and work hard to apply it, and you will not be poor. Only the content among them, or the lazy and without vision and focus reject that message.
Jeremy O'Kelley wrote: "...you're just trying to make yourself feel better by denigrating another class of people."
Really? So being poor wasn't already denigrating, I made them feel even poorer? awww...
What are they going to do about? Food fight? Get poorer?
Anthony Atkielski - Do the people on food stamps vote? Are they taking any classes? What type of education did they originally get? Do they have children? Are they single parents? Do they smoke, drink, or do other drugs? There are many variables.
Muhammad Rasheed - Ismail MW wrote: "Define "hard work." Working two jobs that pay the same as one job is pretty much working for the sake of working."
It's okay as long as it's done temporarily with a specific plan in mind. You're doing it to make $X.00 a month so you can pay for the certification exam fees for XYZ to get a $80K a year job. Like that.
Muhammad Rasheed - That would HARDLY be "banging your head against the wall" despite the difficulty involved.
Stephanie Radakovich - 1) well-paying jobs aren't always plentiful2) low-paying jobs are not necessarily unskilled jobs3) the alternative to poverty isn't necessarily wealth
Ismail MW - Stephanie 1: neither are low-paying jobs2: Majority are.3: Yes it is. Contrast. The contrast of poverty is wealth. Both are states of mind.
Ismail MW - Also define: skills. You need more skill to be a welder than you do to be a newspaper delivery attendant. Welder pays more than delivering papers.
Ismail MW - Low-skill set tends to equate lower pay.
Anthony Atkielski - Higher skills require more time and money to acquire, and often more intelligence.
Anthony Atkielski - I think there should be a tax law that says that all corporate officers pay 98% income tax on their total compensation unless they reside in the same country as the majority of their employees and subcontractors. Jobs would all move back to the States within a year or so.
Muhammad Rasheed - Anthony Atkielski wrote: "Higher skills require more time and money to acquire, and often more intelligence."
Well, if you've been eating nothing but poor quality cornmeal mush and garbage for all your early formative years, chances are your cerebral cortex is probably a little light. Another reason the poor will always be among us.
Stephanie Radakovich - Okay, why do we all have enough time to sit and have this extended conversation on computers, generated by electricity, ostensibly sitting in some kind of safety, maybe sipping a decaf soy latte, maybe lifting our feet so someone can vacuum under them.
Face it. All of us have resources and opportunities available to us that some folks don't have. You can argue why that is all day long. But that just gets you way far away from the original topic, which is the construction of a class structure.
Muhammad Rasheed - I thought the original topic was switching out 'poor' for 'struggling' as a kind of magic spell?
Stephanie Radakovich - no. it's about not defining people, as a group, by their financial situation. that turns into identity.
Muhammad Rasheed - And then what will happen?
Muhammad Rasheed - Magic?
Anthony Atkielski - Most unintelligent people are not that way because of malnutrition or health problems. They simply inherited low intelligence.
Anthony Atkielski - A class structure is fine … as long as there is mobility between the classes for individuals. It's only when artificial barriers to mobility exist that you'll have problems. All societies tend to stratify into classes.
Stephanie Radakovich - as long as someone believes they are poor/fat/stupid, then they will continue to be so. if they believe that those situations are temporary or changeable, then things can change.
Stephanie Radakovich - Anthony, calling people The Poor means they have no mobility.
Muhammad Rasheed - Anthony Atkielski wrote: "Most unintelligent people are not that way because of malnutrition or health problems. They simply inherited low intelligence."
No, that's a white nationalist tenant. Discard that, please.
Anthony Atkielski - If they are poor, fat, or stupid, they're that way no matter what they believe. If they want to be something else, they must first acknowledge what they are.
Muhammad Rasheed - Stephanie Radakovich wrote: "Anthony, calling people The Poor means they have no mobility."
Yeah? So where are they going?
Anthony Atkielski - Calling people poor simply means that they are poor. It has nothing to do with mobility.
Current evidence indicates that at least half of intelligence is genetically determined.
Stephanie Radakovich - you've got to be freakin' kidding me, Anthony...
Anthony Atkielski - Nope.
Tacuma Alexander - I'd like to find the person that is born intelligent and not taught anything
Stephanie Radakovich - Anthony, you've been skating around the edges of some racist ideas for awhile now... reign that stuff in, or take your argument elsewhere
Muhammad Rasheed - Stephanie Radakovich wrote: "as long as someone believes they are poor/fat/stupid, then they will continue to be so. if they believe that those situations are temporary or changeable, then things can change."
I agree. Insisting that they will never stop being poor because they lack magic good luck/connections, or because they are doomed to poverty because of genetics is what will damage and denigrate them.
Muhammad Rasheed - Tell them they can fix their situation by education/hardwork and it will empower them.
Anthony Atkielski - Intelligence and acquired knowledge are two different things.
Muhammad Rasheed - Anthony wrote: "Current evidence indicates that at least half of intelligence is genetically determined."
Evidence from where?
Anthony Atkielski - Look it up. Or choose to disbelieve me if you prefer. The reality will not change. I'm certainly not going to write a thesis on it here.
Muhammad Rasheed - 'Look it up' when it is a clear falsehood paraded around by white nationalists, Anthony?
There is no evidence to back that up.
Muhammad Rasheed - Please discard that foolishness.
Muhammad Rasheed - You're better than that.
Nathan Nicholls - Yes, pay them more
Anthony Atkielski - As I've said, you can choose to not believe me, just as some people choose to believe in magic words. It has nothing to do with white nationalists, most of whom aren't terribly bright themselves. There are unpleasant realities in the world, and one of them is that a large part of your intelligence is hard wired into your brain. You can reduce intelligence through disease and malnutrition, but genes appear to put an upper limit on how high it goes even in the best of conditions.
People who are unintelligent have a harder time becoming wealthy, but it's still possible if they compensate in other ways. Nevertheless, low intelligence is one of the most serious handicaps a person can have.
Muhammad Rasheed - How are intelligence levels measured?
Nathan Nicholls - Actually, conscience plays a huge roll. If you have one, you don't invest in human exploit for profit and you don't care to be exploited for profit. We have a society that separates the two yet allows for both. There is economic advantage in our system. As you progress, if you can save, you too can invest in exploiting others and looking down on the ones who do not do the same.
Stephanie Radakovich - Anthony, the most serious handicap a person can have is the desire to influence others, but without the communication skills to do so.
Anthony Atkielski - Usually by IQ tests. Outside of IQ tests, vocabulary is highly correlated with intelligence, even if it's not a direct measurement. Empirically, people who are smart usually appear that way to others, just as people who are dumb seem dumb to others. Being smart is a great advantage when seeking wealth, but it's not a prerequisite.
Stephanie Radakovich - IQ tests should involve a broken toaster and a screwdriver.
Anthony Atkielski - Communication skills are hugely influenced by intelligence as well. I'm not sure that a desire to influence others is a good thing.
Nathan Nicholls - Most live in denial of our system of economic advantage or we give other discriminants to it but it is economic. We grant privilege to the investment class so that they can invest in human exploit for profit without risking their personal assets or actually doing any of the work. Wealth without work is the result. Concentration of wealth is the result. The process is upward redistribution of wealth through environmental and human labor exploit for capital gain
Stephanie Radakovich - you're doing your best to influence people, but without backing up your opinions.
Anthony Atkielski - IQ tests are hard to design. Existing ones correlate well with academic success and fairly well with material success in life.
Anthony Atkielski - Unbridled capitalism always concentrates wealth.
Nathan Nicholls - Doesn't have to, it does by design. We teach toward it
Anthony Atkielski - I'm simply providing information, I do not expect or desire to influence. People have to reached conclusions on their own in order to be truly convinced, if they think for themselves. If they don't think for themselves, it doesn't matter.
Muhammad Rasheed - Anthony Atkielski wrote: "Usually by IQ tests."
That's what I thought you were talking about. The evidence you referenced earlier was a falsehood, sir. You may safely discard it.
Anthony Atkielski - The only time capitalism doesn't do that is when some non-capitalist controls intervene.
Nathan Nicholls - elf employment is capitalism without human exploit
Anthony Atkielski - I've spent years studying intelligence and measurement thereof. You have not. Don't waste your breath.
Anthony Atkielski - The self-employed can be greedy, too.
Muhammad Rasheed - How do you know what i've studied and what I haven't?
Nathan Nicholls - Greedy sure but its not upward redistribution. It alone would not redistribute or concentrate wealth in the hands of the few. That is a result of corporate capitalism and banking
Stephanie Radakovich - Anthony, you've provided no verifiable information.
Anthony Atkielski - You're repeating popular misconceptions, which you would not do if you were more familiar with the topic. In any case, it's not very germane to the topic at hand, as there is much more to poverty and escape therefrom than just intelligence.
Anthony Atkielski - Do your own verification, if you want more information.
Nathan Nicholls - Poverty could be ended with policy change. It is not ended because it is a matter of political structure
Anthony Atkielski - Which policies must change?
Nathan Nicholls - Favoring capital gain over compensation for one
Muhammad Rasheed - Dr. Flynn's research is not a misconception, Anthony. It's a nonsense smasher. lol
Nathan Nicholls - Favoring investment and return without work over real personal productivity
Muhammad Rasheed - You're the one holding onto the misconceptions. You should let them go. The only thing holding the poor back from better lifestyles, is their force of will.
Stephanie Radakovich - Anthony, I don't know who you are, but you're very adept at hijacking threads with opinions delivered with a Spock-like, emotionless affect. I don't like it.
Anthony Atkielski - Dr. Flynn is one of many. Did it really take that long to alt-tab to Google?
Nathan Nicholls - There is no tie between a persons productive energy value on the market and what they receive because wealth without work for capital investment is the priority of both government and business
Anthony Atkielski - I think that publicly-held corporations and stock markets are the real problems.
Nathan Nicholls - Pretty much
Anthony Atkielski - Stephanie, you friended me, not the other way around. If you only want to talk to people who share your opinions, stop friending people who think for themselves.
Anthony Atkielski - Anonymous institutional shareholders care only about money, nothing else. And the stock market is legalized gambling. Very bad things.
Nathan Nicholls - I don't believe genetics plays a role in a persons financial successes any more than the privileges afforded wealth and family. I think there are farm hands who are or could be far more productive and desrving than most of the best paid CEO's alive.
Muhammad Rasheed - Anthony Atkielski wrote: "Dr. Flynn is one of many."
One of many what? lol
Anthony Atkielski wrote: "Did it really take that long to alt-tab to Google?"
I'm engaged in a few convos right now.
Stephanie Radakovich - Anthony, I welcome other opinions - respectfully and intelligently delivered.
Anthony Atkielski - Success is not genetically determined. But some of the personal characteristics that influence our motivation to succeed or the ease with which we can do so are.
Anthony Atkielski - Dr. Flynn is one of many people who have studied intelligence. I look at data rather than personalities, though.
Anthony Atkielski - Stephanie, I welcome other opinions, period.
Muhammad Rasheed - It's not about the personality, it's about the data his research uncovered. And the cover up.
Nathan Nicholls - I don't know. I think exposure to external influence determines intellect and that economic standing is the most significant determinant. That is not to say that minimal economics guarantees you can't succeed. There are so many external factors involved. I sure cannot back my position.
Muhammad Rasheed - "In recent years, research by Professor James R. Flynn, an American expatriate living in New Zealand, has shaken up the whole IQ controversy by discovering what has been called 'the Flynn effect.' In various countries around the world, people have been answering significantly more IQ test questions correctly than in the past.
"This important fact has been inadvertently concealed by the practice of changing the norms on IQ tests, so that the average number of correctly answered questions remains by definition an IQ of 100. Only by painstakingly going back and recalculating IQs, based on the initial norms, was Professor Flynn able to discover that whole nations had, in effect, had their IQs rising over the decades by about 20 points.
"Since the black-white difference in IQ is 15 points, this means that an even larger IQ difference has existed between different generations of the same race, making it no longer necessary to attribute IQ differences of this magnitude to genetics. In the half century between 1945 and 1995, black Americans' raw test scores rose by the equivalent of 16 IQ points.
"In other words, black Americans' test score results in 1995 would have given them an average IQ just over 100 in 1945. Only the repeated renorming of IQ tests upward created the illusion that blacks had made no progress, but were stuck at an IQ of 85." ~Thomas Sowell
Anthony Atkielski - I'm not into conspiracy theories, either.
Unintelligent people tend to have lower socioeconomic status. Smart people tend to have higher SES. This persists even for people born into the opposite SES (although that's uncommon because intelligence tends to run in families).
Nathan Nicholls - My understanding is that IQ is simply a composition of your familiarity with the world around you. It makes sense that the environment you live in will affect your understanding.
Anthony Atkielski - No, IQ is unrelated to acquired knowledge.
The Flynn effect has been around for decades, so it's not recent, nor has it been covered up. All measurements of intelligence are relative rather than absolute, so it's hard to assess the significance of the effect, if it's real.
Nathan Nicholls - Intelligence may run in families. IQ I would think is dependent on external factors and financial success is determined by so many factors, I doubt it can be established.
Anthony Atkielski - IQ is simply a measure of intelligence, so if intelligence runs in families, so does IQ.
Nathan Nicholls - I am no professional but I understood IQ not to be an intelligence measure as much as a measure of your awareness of your surroundings. When I was tested 32 or more years ago, that was what I was told. With a 135 score. I live below the poverty line regardless that I was born into the middle class
Muhammad Rasheed - Anthony Atkielski wrote: "I'm not into conspiracy theories, either."
I'm not into people deliberately trying to uphold the concept of their race's superiority based on falsified data as an excuse to oppress them, but to each his own. You have your own reasons for wishing to hold onto that stuff; it is attractive to you. For my part I reject falsehood and prefer only truth.
Anthony Atkielski wrote: "Unintelligent people tend to have lower socioeconomic status. Smart people tend to have higher SES."
Those individuals who manage to gain the motivation to pull themselves up the socio-economic ladder increase in intelligence along the way because of what they have to learn and the new concepts they must negotiate at they transform from a victim mindset to a solutions driven one. Naturally as they are from a family that still has the victim mindset with it's corresponding atrophied and inflexible intelligence that they continue to pass on, it may superficially give the impression that it is a genetic trait, but this is obviously not so.
Race & IQ by Thomas Sowell
Anthony Atkielski - Those are popular misconceptions again, encouraged for purposes of political correctness. There are other factors that influence success; a high IQ isn't a free ticket to riches, it's just an important advantage.
Muhammad Rasheed - "Misconceptions" based on what, Anthony?
Anthony Atkielski - Intelligence is pretty much constant over a person's lifespan. Learning does not increase it. And I haven't said anything about race … you have.
Muhammad Rasheed - ^THAT is the misconception that the Flynn Effect proved as nonsense. What do you have? Throw down your rod.
Anthony Atkielski - Misconceptions that people acquire when they adopt the opinions of others instead of investigating and developing opinions of their own. As in many technical fields, in the field of intelligence there is a gulf between popular perceptions and reality.
Muhammad Rasheed - The concept that intelligence is constant over a person's lifespan is the very popular misconception that the white nationalists really, really wished to be true. The actual facts proved them wrong. You have no rod to throw.
Muhammad Rasheed - You may safely discard that nonsense you are holding onto. There's a lad.
Anthony Atkielski - Actual measurements show that intelligence is consistent throughout life, barring any disease states such as brain injuries and such. I'm not sure why you are preoccupied with white nationalists and race, nor do I see their relevance here.
Muhammad Rasheed - No, the actual measurements revealed the exact opposite of that. You can read the article. It won't bite.
The 'intelligence consistency' concept was invented by and upheld by the white nationalist community because they need it as a component for their pet ideologies. It is pseudoscience in its worst form and not backed by any real study, despite statements you've claimed to the contrary.
Again you may safely discard it as a treacherous nonessential to your repertoire as a free thinking intellectual.
Anthony Atkielski - I can see that I'm wasting my time. Perhaps we can return to the topic at hand.
Muhammad Rasheed - It does you no credit to hold on to it.
Muhammad Rasheed - I was on your side at every other turn. You really disappointed me with that one.
Anthony Atkielski - I don't need credit, and I don't take sides. I don't worry about pleasing or disappointing people. Would you like to discuss the nominal topic?
Muhammad Rasheed - No, I'm done, sir. Have a good day.

The Downside of PC: Empty Words Alone Aren't Wide Enough to Cover Real Problems (pt 1 of 2)

Stephanie Radakovich - can we change "The Poor" to "Those Who Are Struggling" ?
Jeremy Johnson - How about "victims of those who control the wealth"?
Rick Riley - You can fancy it up and call it whatever you want. That wont change the thing.
Colleen Kelly - I call it surviving. When it's done well, it can lead to thriving.
Stephanie Radakovich - yeah. For the past year, on paper, I've technically been a member of The Poor. Talk about motivation...
Emmett Sims - Currency-challenged?
Muhammad Rasheed - Stephanie Radakovich wrote: "can we change "The Poor" to "Those Who Are Struggling?"
Only if it will magically make them not poor.
Anthony Atkielski - Changing names accomplishes nothing.
Colleen Kelly - However, a person's attitude changes everything. ;0)
Muhammad Rasheed - Proclaiming to the world that you are struggling will give you a good attitude?
Rick Riley - Currency-challenged is perfect! And funny! Heck, I may be poor forever ( but I'm hoping to get rich this year with an amazing invention. Trust me, you'll want one, maybe two) but I refuse to be someone's 'victim' just because they are obscenely rich. I think everyone, EVERYONE should be obscenely rich.
Muhammad Rasheed - (how much is "obscenely rich" in dollars exactly?)
Muhammad Rasheed - ME FIRST!!!!
Rick Riley - Rich? Or on the list for my amazing invention?
Muhammad Rasheed - Rich, special fool!! I don't even know what you invented!
Rick Riley - no one does yet, but soon. you'll want one I think obscenely rich would be when you make money faster than you can count it. That'll work for me.
Muhammad Rasheed - So how much is that a month really? Estimated?
Emmett Sims - Being what we consider "poor" in the United States would be considered affluent in most other countries of the world. Our so called poor have homes to live in, TV's, cars, cell phones, computers and food to eat, and access to health care. The poor of the world would love to have a tenth of what our poor have. Should we turn our backs on our poor? Of course not! But lets put things in perspective, being poor in America isn't all that bad when you look at the rest of the world. So perhaps we should be thankful for what we have since things could always be worse.
Rick Riley - MoneyIt's a gasGrab that cash with both hands and make a stashNew car, caviar, four star daydreamThink I'll buy me a football team
Rick Riley - Yeah, Poor aint so bad once you get a glimpse of Destitute
Colleen Kelly - Exactly Emmett Sims! So very well said!
Colleen Kelly - Muhammad Rasheed, who do you suppose will thrive? The Debbie Downer who perpetually boo-hoos "I'm poor" and makes no life changes or the person who is motivated and ambitious, fueled by a positive attitude despite being faced with adversity?
Anthony Atkielski - The richest people in the world don't feel guilty because they have a million times more than you have. Why should you feel guilty because some people in the world have less than you? Becoming poor won't make those poorer people richer, it will just make richer people richer. And contrary to what one might think, most of the world is not starving. The main reason more people aren't more affluent is overpopulation. The main reason you are not more affluent is that the current trend in the developed world is towards concentration of all wealth into the hands of just a few people, much like things were 150 years ago.
Emmett Sims - I had the opportunity to see shanty towns in Cape Town and admittedly i had preconceived notions of Africa being "Third World" prior to my visit but upon reflection what i took away from my time spent there astounded me and gave me perspective...take a good look at the kids in this pic... i don't believe they consider themselves "poor".
Cynthia McGarvie - I find it interesting how quickly people respond to a nuanced situation with sweeping generalizations.
Emmett Sims - It would take only 1 percent of GDP, or a fourth of what we spend on defense every year, to lift every American below the poverty line up above it. It might be helpful to put the $175.3 billion magic number in perspective. In 2012, this number was just one-fourth of the $700 billion the federal government spent on the military. When you start hunting through the submerged spending we do through the tax code, it takes you no time to find enough tax expenditures geared toward the affluent to get to that number as well. The utterly ridiculous tax expenditures directed toward the disproportionately affluent class of people called homeowners—mortgage interest deduction, property tax deduction, exclusion of capital gains on residences—by themselves sum to $115.3 billion in 2012. Throw in the $117.3 billion in tax expenditures used to subsidize employer-based health care (also a disproportionate sop to the rich), and you’ve already eclipsed the magic number. (excerpted from http://prospect.org/.../how-much-mone...... )
Muhammad Rasheed - Colleen Kelly wrote: "Muhammad Rasheed, who do you suppose will thrive? The Debbie Downer who perpetually boo-hoos "I'm poor" and makes no life changes or the person who is motivated and ambitious, fueled by a positive attitude despite being faced with adversity?"
I guess I'm still trying to figure out how using interchangeably synonymous terms is giving me a positive attitude.
How about if I just work towards achieving the better life and don't associate myself with the lower classes at all?
Muhammad Rasheed - "I AM a winner! I AM successful!"
Muhammad Rasheed - Like that.
Muhammad Rasheed - That switching out poor for struggling is too... Sesame Street baby games to me. That's probably why it's falling on me that way, Colleen.
Cynthia McGarvie - The economic game is set up to protect those who have been blessed by birth with wealth. There are many ways this is done: taxation perks in the form of loopholes that only the wealthy qualify for, laws that benefit corporations over private citizens, offshore tax havens, and this list right here:
Six ways the rich really do get richer
Anthony Atkielski - The ballot box changed that situation before, and it can change it again. But people have to vote, and they have to expend at least a little bit of effort to choose the right candidates, both before and during the elections. It is worth noting that there are no poor candidates, at least not in recent memory.Emmett Sims The standards of living in developing countries are still nowhere near that of developed nations. but more and more people are living lives of comfort where just one generation before they struggled to survive. The necessities of life (thanks to technology, capitalism, philanthropy, and innovation) are becoming cheap and accessible to all. We may never see the “end” of money, but with an increasing base standard of living that can be available to all, eventually we may lose the need to work to just “pay our bills” and instead apply our time to have opportunities to grow and “better ourselves”… just like on Star Trek. --- ( The Human Adventure is Just Beginning.... Again: Star Trek: The Motion Picture )
Stephanie Radakovich - "The Poor" defines a group of people, which implies permanence.Muhammad Rasheed The poor class is permanent. They will always be among us.
Stephanie Radakovich - Muhammad, that's true. But why? Attitude? Opportunity? I've been without money in life, even destituted, but I never believed myself a member of an underclass...
Stephanie Radakovich - but by definition, I was a member of The Poor.
Ismail MW - Poor is a state of mind. You can have all the money in the world and STILL be poor.
Colleen Kelly - And there-in, with your belief (despite your government required confirmation 'on paper') you have defined your attitude, Stephanie Radakovich.
Stephanie Radakovich - you can argue that people without extended families & close knit communities are poor.
but calling people The Poor is a humiliation meant to perpetuate a caste system.
Muhammad Rasheed - Poor is 100% a mindset. In order to leave the ranks of the poor it requires a solutions driven/make it happen mindset.
Colleen Kelly - YES! Stephanie, by perpetuating this system it's ultimately about control.
Stephanie Radakovich - absolutely, Colleen.
Muhammad Rasheed - Stephanie Radakovich wrote: "you can argue that people without extended families & close knit communities are poor."
There are successful wealthy individuals without those things, too. They took the time and put in the work to build a network of close friends and business colleagues that share their values and goals.
Stephanie Radakovich wrote: "...but calling people The Poor is a humiliation meant to perpetuate a caste system."
What are they going to do about it?
Muhammad Rasheed - That's what I thought.
Stephanie Radakovich - I don't know the answer to that, Muhammad, because some people don't know why they struggle, or what they need to do to get out of the hole.
Stephanie Radakovich - on Jay Kelley's wall:
Pride and poverty. Lethal combination.
Muhammad Rasheed - I know the answer. They will stay poor and complain about it.
They will always be among us.
Anthony Atkielski - Calling people the poor has absolutely no influence on anything. Those who are destined or determined to escape poverty no matter what they are called. And similarly, those who are destined or content to remain poor will stay that way irrespective of what they are called. Names just do not matter.Stephanie Radakovich I'd be happy to comfortably pay my bills, get rid of my debt, have good health insurance, and take a real vacation once a year.
Colleen Kelly - ↑ Oui, Anthony!
Anthony Atkielski - At least in the USA and until recently, virtually all wealthy people made themselves that way, they didn't fall into it by luck. Like Mr. Bernstein said in Citizen Kane, making a lot of money is easy, if all you want to do is make a lot of money. Unfortunately, making a lot of money and having time to spend and enjoy it is another matter.
Muhammad Rasheed - Jeremy wrote: "...it's because they don't have the opportunities, and luck, others might have..."
Understand that I'm specifically talking about those people who start off poor and become rich. People do it, but it is rare. It is not easy to overcome that victim mindset (I'm not lucky, I just can't, I'm waiting for XYZ to happen) and make the switch to the solutions driven/make it happen mindset that MAKES opportunities where there are none and MAKES 'good luck' happen when you need it to. Those tools come with determination, patient perseverance, and laser focus.
Muhammad Rasheed - Individuals manage to get there all the time, but the group will not. They will stay.
Muhammad Rasheed - Feeding off of each other and coddling that victim mindset even though it profits them not.
Cynthia McGarvie - You know what also helps with amassing wealth? Being a sociopath. It's like found money, really.
Muhammad Rasheed - Jeremy O'Kelley wrote: "B.S. Bill Gates was lucky"
So having wealthy parents means you are poor now?
Muhammad Rasheed - How was that your example?
Cynthia McGarvie – Why Does Sociopathic Scum Rise to the Top?
Muhammad Rasheed - Jeremy O'Kelley wrote: "I was responding to Anthony."
Okay, as you were.
Anthony Atkielski - Bill Gates was lucky, but he's also quite smart, and that's a big advantage. People who say it's all about luck mysteriously seem to be the ones who never have any of that magic luck.
Being a sociopath helps, as Cynthia points out. If I were dishonest with no conscience, I'd be a billionaire today, no question.
Muhammad Rasheed - Poor people that do everything they can to manage to learn a valuable skill others are willing to pay top dollar for always make it out of the poor classes and create a great life. Those that think that they can only do it through an unattainable magic spell of luck & connections will stay poor.
Anthony Atkielski - The Salon article is a staggering exaggeration, clearly written by someone who hasn't had a lot of "magic luck" in life and is very bitter about it. Most wealthy people are not sociopaths. They do tend to be interested in making money as an end in itself, though.
Anthony Atkielski - Most people who are poor are not mentally deficient, although it is true that mental deficiency almost guarantees poverty. (Another way to ensure poverty is by becoming a single parent without a career.)
Cynthia McGarvie - Apart from the fact that you just defined one qualifying trait of sociopathy (i.e., tending "to be interested in making money as an end in itself" shows a disregard for compassion towards other people), what's your point Anthony?
Cynthia McGarvie - You're pretty much begging the question here, Anthony, when you say that being a single parent without a career ensures poverty. Again, it's a nuanced situation that you've been explaining through the use of sweeping generalizations. Sure makes it a lot easier to avoid doing research, though.
Anthony Atkielski - Only those who haven't tried believe it's all luck and connections, and since they persist in believing that, they will never try.
Being interested in making money as an end in itself is not sociopathy, any more than being interested in composing music for its own sake is sociopathy.
Colleen Kelly - I don't recall anyone saying poor people are dumb. According to Canadian Government guidelines, I am poor. I am far from dumb and wealthy beyond compare with many life blessings that no amount of money could buy. I'm very content.
Muhammad Rasheed - Jeremy O'Kelley wrote: "No, ignoring the important of luck and connections is a way of blaming people for circumstances outside of their control. It's bigotry, plain and simple."
Are you talking to me now, or if I respond to this is it spamming?
Everyone who makes it out of the poor class does it through learning what they need to learn, and working really hard to apply that knowledge. Making connections when they need it and being prepared for opportunities as they arise is part of that learning.
Anthony Atkielski - Blaming a class system is a way to be a loser without taking any responsibility for it.
Cynthia McGarvie - Magical Thinking
Anthony Atkielski - You get what you wish for in life. No doubt about that. The only problem is that many people don't know what they are wishing for, or aren't honest with themselves about it.
Cynthia McGarvie – Post Hoc Fallacy
Ismail MW - Jeremy You can have wealthy parents and STILL end up a screw-up! Bill Gates had LASER focus AND he surrounded himself with ambitious and driven friends. Tyler Perry is a BILLIONAIRE and he didn't have wealthy parents. He did have laser focus and a plan to succeed. Question for you, Jeremy, is what do you define as "hard work." 'Cause when you find something you love to do, it tends not to be work at all. It tends to be play.
Anthony Atkielski - Can't you just express an opinion, instead of a list of links?
Cynthia McGarvie - How about if you actually read them instead?
Muhammad Rasheed - Raise your hand if you are actually clicking on all of these random links.
Muhammad Rasheed - *crickets*
Anthony Atkielski - Most people who work hard enjoy what they do. It's really, really hard to do something well if you can't stand it.
Cynthia McGarvie - Besides, I have expressed opinions which you have ignored. I've resolved to listing your logical fallacies instead.
Muhammad Rasheed - And if you have a victim's attitude.
Muhammad Rasheed - Thanks for the warning. Now i'm REALLY not clicking on them...
Anthony Atkielski - I don't have time to read web pages all day, Cynthia. If you can't summarize your own opinions, I'll just move on.
Cynthia McGarvie - No. I'm allergic to a-holes.
Cynthia McGarvie - Please do. Bye, now.
Ismail MW - Cynthia McGarvie Good links! Thanks for sharing!
Muhammad Rasheed - Cynthia McGarvie wrote: "I've resolved to listing your logical fallacies instead."
So you plan to critique the posters' presentations instead of the actual discussion topic. Interesting.
Muhammad Rasheed - lol
Anthony Atkielski - When you start talking about something other than the topic, you've lost the debate.
Anthony Atkielski - Mr. X now has free time to become politically active and vote. Ultimately he lost his job because elected officials allowed abuses to occur unchecked. A purely capitalist system always goes off the deep end without checks and balances.
Muhammad Rasheed - Cynthia McGarvie wrote: "You know what also helps with amassing wealth? Being a sociopath. It's like found money, really."
Your point seems to be that anyone who develops the ambition to better their life and get out of the poor class is a sociopath. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Ismail MW - Jeremy So what? The life of Mr X. is not the life of his children. Why are his children, as adults, STILL dependent on Mr. X having a job! They can get their own jobs and pay for their own schooling. This is when I'd tell them, get into a TRADE! You get PAID while you go to school! I work with a millionaire welder! The rest of the welders I work with are high six-figure earners! Job goes overseas, open your own firm! It's not what you do as much as it is, HOW you do it that earns you the fortune! Serve more people make more money! Simple equation!
Anthony Atkielski - Calling rich people sociopaths unconditionally is a way of boosting one's own ego. Unfortunately it is not congruent with reality.
Ismail MW - Jeremy In addition, Mr. X should transition from worker bee to OWNER bee! All that expertise should be utilized more. Layoffs are opportunities!
Anthony Atkielski - Of course it's not easy to get out of poverty. But that's not a reason not to try. Those who work hard enough at it escape. The others don't. How else can anyone get out of poverty, if not by trying?
Muhammad Rasheed - Jeremy O'Kelley wrote: "You know what else isn't congruent with reality? The idea that it's easy to get out of poverty."
Strawman much? NOBODY said it was easy. It's simple. And pretty straightforward. But you have to work, strive, sacrifice definitely.
Ismail MW - Jeremy Depending where you live will determine the feasibility of your plans. If you live in a stable economy, bombs not dropping on you everyday, laws and enforcement of laws, property rights, getting out of poverty is far easier than not.
Muhammad Rasheed - You can't help someone not be poor. By doing what?
Ismail MW - Jeremy " Your point is that all poor people are just lazy or stupid."
Muhammad Rasheed - Only THEY can make themselves not poor.
Muhammad Rasheed - Jeremy O'Kelley wrote: "My point is, they're all trying."
No. They think that it takes magic luck and magic connections to get out of poverty. That's what you said, remember?
Anthony Atkielski - A lot of poor people are lazy and/or stupid, but not all. There's always some threshold of effort that is required to escape poverty. When people are willing to expend more than the threshold, they escape; when they aren't, they don't. There is never a situation in which the threshold is infinitely high, but its height varies with circumstances, and so do individual motivation and determination.
Anthony Atkielski - I've never suggested that people bang their heads against a wall. Examples?
Ismail MW - Jeremy No they didn't! YOU are making that implication based on YOUR interpretation. As for this "The opportunities don't present themselves to everyone to escape."
Muhammad Rasheed - Jeremy O'Kelley wrote: "Your point is that all poor people are just lazy or stupid."
The only way to stop being poor is to learn the skills needed that will bring in middle or upper class income. Whatever those skills need to be. If you are poor then you don't know what you need to know, or at least, haven't applied what you do know. Period.
Jeremy O'Kelley wrote: "The opportunities don't present themselves to everyone to escape, and no amount of hard work and wishful thinking will ever help them."
Successful people who go from poor to rich MAKE the opportunities. And they don't take no for an answer. They are solutions driven and make things happen.
Jeremy O'Kelley wrote: "That's the reality..."
An individual's reality is determined by a clear path of conquering objectives to each goal until he has what he claims he wants. If he's not doing that then he has proven he is content being poor.
Jeremy O'Kelley wrote: "...and why we, as good citizens, should work to help them..."
Giving them money will not make them stop being poor. It's good for your soul and all that, sure. But they will still be poor. The only way we can truly help them is to explain that they can come out of poverty by educating themselves and working hard. Telling them they will always be poor because they lack magic and "Oh, here's five dollars" is a hopeless message. Is that your only plan for them?

The Tale You Think I Want to Hear vs Your Honest Self-Expression

Muhammad Rasheed - I think it's more important as an artist to discover your own particular "voice" than to attempt to achieve the illusion of a "universal appeal."
Muhammad Rasheed - I think it's impossible to discover your own voice if your creation attempts are built around trying to determine what someone else may enjoy. Personally I don't like plastic stories built around demographic analysis and discourage them.
Tom Racine - I just did a roundtable discussion on this...creating a new thing in the age of social media and how it affects the process. Finding your own voice is KEY. Or else you're just copying. Or you're Michael Bay.
Jerry Lee Brice - I hate artist who's style looks like somebody els'es style...like a lot of dudes mimicking anime styles nowadays because they are fans....or whatever.
I always like new designs, and originality in art.
Jerry Lee Brice - ...but the motivation for a lot of what you are seeing is money, so people sometimes equate artistic talent with how much money they make from it, so they take the shortcut, and just put out more of what they see working for some other artist they admire...imo.
Muhammad Rasheed - Meanwhile the who's who of Most Successful Properties of All Time (that immediately open the flood gates of copycats and new 'genres') were made from the heart... the personal vision of the creator[s].
Jerry Lee Brice - ...one must remember that in the face of all these so called "top" talents out here, that are just giving us more anime fan art...shits taking over comic book artist, and lately, every black animated show on TV, which is not many.So do not believe the hype, no matter how many jobs mimikers get out here in Babylon, because no matter what, if their style is someone els's,..then they are basically just high tech biters...who needs that other than the folks benefitting from it's exploitation?...bring on the original artist...
Ali Rashada - A lot of this thinking is taught and reinforced through our present educational system. There is such a veneration of old ideas that you must find someone who already agrees with your thoughts or ideas or no one takes them seriously. There is always the question "who said that?" or "where did that come from?" How about, my head?
Muhammad Rasheed - Yes, especially in academia. If you don't pretty much worship the dead writers/artists/historians/historical figures, it's pretty much impossible to reach the top.
Jerry Lee Brice - Nothing wrong with learning from or respecting past talent or even current greatness, you just should not copy or mimic their style...that's all.I like to look at the life of a person behind the talent, and learn from their experience, and implement their best practices in life and business pertaining to the business of art, but not to copy of adopt their artistic style.That sais everybody should have the basic commercial skill to mimic many styles, because working on professional commercial crews, that's always a basic demand on the job.
Milton Davis - My voice is angry and self righteous.

The Trendy Naming Convention: Badge of Dignity or Unnecessary Obstacle

Muhammad Rasheed - Although they can be fun and even clever, I don’t think it’s a good idea to make up an unusual, non-word name for your child. Or worse, naming them after some popular designer label. You should give them names that are actual words with dignity and meaning to them.  The made up names can stand out in a negative way, and are widely associated with being from a lower class community, and of course there are many gate keepers who will keep people out of places of employment, or will withhold coveted opportunities, based on classism prejudices.  It’s better not to create unnecessary walls and hurdles for the children.
Marsha Warfield - There is nothing "more correct" about European names...except perception.
Randy Cash - It's like you're saying we should pick european names from a short list to make it here.
Muhammad Rasheed - Use names from an African language. All I care about is the dignity aspect of it. Stop making up names and naming kids after commercial designer labels unless you want the world to believe you have that "ghetto mind."
Muhammad Rasheed - Why give that extra obstacle to the child when black children already have extra obstacles to overcome that some other ethnicities do not possess?
Is it to make them EXTRA tough?
Muhammad Rasheed - That's a valid, but extreme side of the issue. The majority of the time it's a matter of just getting into the door so you can prove yourself. That's the area that this topic addresses.
Marsha Warfield - That’s the argument of those who wish to force assimilation on those they wish to continue to ostracize."
Muhammad Rasheed - If I'm determined to ostracize you, then why bother to force you to assimilate?
No one forces anyone to be successful. That's a conscious choice the individual makes who genuinely wants a different lifestyle. White people do not have a monopoly on being successful, but they have in many cases positioned themselves as the gate keepers.
Muhammad Rasheed - I see no point in complaining and holding on to unproductive practices that serve no purpose. For whom do such things serve? What is the benefit? If there is no benefit to making up a nonsense name, then that trend should be let go. It's not a battle worth fighting.
Marsha Warfield – It’s just blaming the victim and giving in to bullying pressure.
Muhammad Rasheed - Not accurate. What it creates is the need to find a more difficult entry way through a potential door of success. Why put the kid through that needlessly?
Marsha Warfield - Because, bottom line? If they don't want Shantellra or D'Quon, they Don't want Muhammad, either."
Muhammad Rasheed – Marsha meanwhile, some of the most powerful people in the world are named Muhammad. People named Muhammad own a good 6% of the USA, and routinely conduct billion dollar business deals with global heads of state and ex-US presidents. At the same time, "D'Quon" just got his resume sniffed at and tossed in the trash again.
Marsha Warfield - But...good night.
Muhammad Rasheed - Good night, Marsha.
Marsha Warfield - Last point, unless you're going to get the Rockeffellers to adopt you and put you in the will, naming your child Winthrop Rutherford Carnegie Rockefeller is not going to insure his success.
Muhammad Rasheed - Was that the point I made? That giving him a non-crazy name would ensure his success? Or did I say it would remove an unnecessary hurdle?
Marsha Warfield - And, even if one of the Rockefellers does adopt you, that's no guarantee that the family will accept you, or honor your adoptive parents' wishes.
Muhammad Rasheed - This is a strawman argument that has nothing to do with my point.
Marsha Warfield - Those same people who have convinced so many that it's their "ghetto names" holding them back, have been trying to get black people to "not be so black" since we got here. "Say Toby," and then expect that will make you happy and acceptable to bigots. That's insane.
Muhammad Rasheed - The extreme poor have a lot of things holding them back from success, most of which is the poor mentality itself. This isn't about whites holding them back, it's about shedding a mindset that hampers their own growth. Successful blacks have a mentality of success, one that no white person holds a monopoly on. Giving your kids crazy names that are the equivalent of branding them with a poor symbol right on their foreheads, is a part of that poor mentality package.
Marsha Warfield - And, Oprah and Barack ain't exactly European names. Free your mind.
Muhammad Rasheed - lol I thought you said, "Good night?"
It's not about having a european name. Just have a dignified name with history and meaning and strength behind it.
Marsha Warfield - Are those "Muhammads" of which you speak black, btw? Doesn't matter. You're probably right. Some of us are just ghetto.
Muhammad Rasheed - Why would being "ghetto," self-identification with the economically lowest class of society, be a badge of honor? Learning what you need to learn, and doing what you need to do to make an affluent and safe life for you and your family should be the badge of honor. You can say, "I USED to be in the ghetto, but I did what I had to do to better myself and create a better environment for my kids. See now we live in an upper-middle class black community." That's the kind of talk my people should be aspiring to emulate. Instead you’re giving me: "Tsk! I guess I'm just ghetto then!"
What kind of crazy...?!
lol
Muhammad Rasheed - I'll end by repeating this part so that I'm (hopefully) clear: White people do NOT have a monopoly on success. Affluence.  Desirable lifestyle. It is EVERYBODY'S right to be able to acquire these things. But if you don't have them, it requires a change in habits, attitude and mentality in order to achieve them. When you are at the very bottom, you often find gate keepers from varying levels of success, as well as varying ethnicities, standing in the way of some of your goals on the way to making it. "Playing the game" involves having the intelligence and wisdom to know what battles are worth fighting, when you need to negotiate, and when you need to wear the proper uniform. Making a big fiasco over a trivial matter that can easily keep you from getting past the FIRST gate keeper is flippin' insane.

Defense of the Gold Standard & the Discovery of Freedom, pt 7 of 7

Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: “A microscopic amount of gold (and getting less and less every new generation of electronics per the articles..."
You said it had no value, and I pointed out it is used in electronics. The properties gold possesses enable it to be used to make electronics work. That’s valuable, Abdur.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “PLUS the fact that it never goes anywhere means that it is headed for the down slop. 1. It's non consumable so it will be here forever.”
That’s the trait that makes it most suitable as a commodity to back currency with.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “2. Everybody is ALWAYS mining it all over the world”
That’s a trait that counters people bitchin’ about the supply.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “3. It isn't used for shit except what the gold lobby pays companies to use. The TRUE VALVUE of Gold is the same War machine that you are against. They put the shit in electronics because the lobbyist PAY THEM TOO.”
This is probably my favorite part, where you actually convert to pro-Free Market-ism just to keep from admitting gold has value. I’ve saved this post to use against you later btw. Thanks!
If it lacked value no one COULD pay anybody to use it for anything because it would be worthless as you claimed. The fact that it CAN be used for these things means it has value… it’s not worthless. Whether it SHOULD be used for these things in the current political climate is a completely different discussion. The point here is that it isn’t just a shiny rock, or the lobbyists and their clients couldn’t use it as a political tool in that way at all.
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: “1. Strong economic news while we were NOT on the gold standard is because of the gold standard. I didn't think that I needed to couter that because....uuuuummmm...it doesnt make any damn sense. “
A very pro-gold standard Alan Greenspan fought to get the Chairman of the Federal Reserve spot, and while he was there made the price of the USD mimic the price of gold as closely as he could, as well as consulting with a US president to aid him in reducing the deficit, creating the famously strong economy of the 1990s. He retired from the position in 2006, and was replaced with a very anti-gold standard Ben Bernanke who promptly ushered in the Great Recession from NOT choosing to have the USD mimic the price of gold as closely as he could. Makes a LOT of sense to me. Greenspan couldn't put us on the gold standard, but he did everything he could to force the market to behave as if it was, creating a strong economic decade. His replacement did the opposite which caused an immediate economic disaster just two years later.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “Then the fiat system or the gold standard doesn't matter and is NOT the reason for a bad economy. Right? ISN'T THAT what the facts say??”
No, of course not. The banks, if left to operate the way they want, are going to continue causing recessions/depressions/hyper-inflation because that’s their get rich quick machine. The gold standard restrains them, confining their mischief to the folk who want to play those games with them, and it also has the benefit of making politicians more fiscally responsible. “It was limited gold reserves that stopped the unbalanced expansions of business activity, before they could develop into the post-World War I type of disaster. The readjustment periods were short and the economies quickly reestablished a sound basis to resume expansion.” ~A. Greenspan. The fiat system by contrast encourages politicians to make short-term decisions that look good for their career, but are detrimental to the economy in the long term.
Abdur Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: “A microscopic amount of gold (and getting less and less every new generation of electronics per the articles..."
Muhammad wrote: "You said it had no value, and I pointed out it is used in electronics. The properties gold possesses enable it to be used to make electronics work. That’s valuable, Abdur. "
It STILL has no value. An insignificant amount in electronics doesn't justify $2000 an ounce, Muhammad.
Here's a hint: If you had to do research in order to find what something is used for...it's an indication that it has low practical value. If they are making more electronics than ever before in the history of man yet they are putting less gold in electronics than ever is a clear case as to why the cost for gold should be falling like a stone and not fluctuating with the market.
The value of gold is based off speculation and NOT what it's used for. In other words....it has no TRUE value.
I millionth of a speck in a cell phone means that every 1million cellphones made requires 1 speck of gold = no value
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "If it lacked value no one COULD pay anybody to use it for anything because it would be worthless as you claimed. The fact that it CAN be used for these things means it has value… it’s not worthless. Whether it SHOULD be used for these things in the current political climate is a completely different discussion. The point here is that it isn’t just a shiny rock, or the lobbyists and their clients couldn’t use it as a political tool in that way at all."
This looks like a miscommunication problem.
If I handed you $10,000 in US currency...would you take it?
Does it have value?
Is it true value or arbitrary value?
If the US money lobby paid congressmen to pas laws to mandate that they use a corner of a US $100 bill in the back of every TV set...would that make fiat money more valuable?
Muhammad Rasheed - If I handed you 10 ounces of gold would YOU take it?
Muhammad Rasheed - If you remove the "insignificant" amount of gold in the electronic device would the device still function?
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "If I handed you 10 ounces of gold would YOU take it?"
The fuck??
Muhammad Rasheed - No? Yes?
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "If you remove the "insignificant" amount of gold in the electronic device would the device still function?"
FUCK YES!! There are a BILLION other things you could coat shit with that are an assload cheaper than $1400 a damn ounce.
They just don't have lobbyist.
Muhammad Rasheed - lol Would it still function immediately after the gold was removed BEFORE you inserted your substitute material?
Abdur Rasheed - Neil P wrote: "No? Yes?"
Look Neil, did you just answer my question with a question and then got irritated that I didn't answer YOUR question??
Muhammad Rasheed - I didn't get irritated at all. You're the one cussin' right now. If you handed me $10,000 sure I would take it. If I handed you 10 ounces of worthless gold, would you take it? #integrityCheck
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "I didn't get irritated at all. You're the one cussin' right now. If you handed me $10,000 sure I would take it. If I handed you 10 ounces of worthless gold, would you take it? #integrityCheck"
I JUST DECIDED to try something new and started cussing just tofuckingday. I kinda like it, Fucker.
What in the hell is wrong with you?
Of COURSE I would take it.
What gave you the impression that I wouldn't?
"Buy it low (or free) and get the fuck out of it."
You member...member?
"It only has value because dumb asses gave it an arbitrary value so buy it low and sell it high."
You want me to join the he man club or whatever the hell because you seem to want to twist my words as if you can't buy shit with gold. (You can't but you can sell it) I NEVER said the you couldn't buy shit with gold. I have ALWAYS said that the value placed on gold is JUST as bullshit based as fiat money or the material from the emperor's new clothes.
It has a price...it's just based on bullshit.
Stop acting like you don't get that.
Any other simple concepts you need me to break down?
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "I JUST DECIDED to try something new and started cussing just tofuckingday. I kinda like it, Fucker."
lol

Abdur Rasheed wrote: ""It only has value because dumb asses gave it an arbitrary value so buy it low and sell it high."
If Wall Street wasn't arbitrarily manipulating gold on the stock market, would you take the 10 ounces I handed you?
Muhammad Rasheed - And would the electronic device still function immediately after the gold was removed BEFORE you inserted your substitute material?
You're a slippery one...
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "If Wall Street wasn't arbitrarily manipulating gold on the stock market, would you take the 10 ounces I handed you?"
Of course I would! Even if you nuked WallStreet off the map I would.
Because the rest of the planet sets the price of gold...NOT WallStreet, Sir.
If the rest of the world who mines and trades gold collectively said,"fuck this shiny rock!"
Then so would I.
I can't refine it and make nothing out of it.
When the price dropped lower than aluminum I would start putting it in my cell phones and wrapping sandwiches in it or some shit, but it would truly be worthless (like you kept implying I was saying at first) because 99.9% of the value of gold comes from shit that day traders all over the world "say". $2000 an ounce one minute $200 and ounce the next.
Usually you have to have too much of something to get that kind of price variation out of it.
Oil reserves are low and the price goes up.
Demand for oil goes up and so does the price.
Oil reserves high and the price goes down.
A lot of dope raids so the cost of drugs goes up. Known as a drought.
All the gold that was ever mined is STILL in circulation so the supply never goes down.
The usefulness never goes up.
The people who trade gold use fear to artificially inflate the value. Just like guns.
The value of gold is bullshit and based on a scam.
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "And would the electronic device still function immediately after the gold was removed BEFORE you inserted your substitute material?"
Just so I'm clear with what you're asking me...
I said that the only value gold has is fake value like fiat money and they only use it in industries when the gold lobby pays politicians to put people to use it in microscopic portions and you are asking me that when the gold lobby has people use gold...will the "thing" still work if you take the gold out?
IF that is what you are asking me...
Please confirm.
In the mean time: if you were on an inflatable life raft in the middle of the ocean and a gold lobbyist rode up on you in a speed boat and took a gold spike with glue on it and jammed it into your raft...would THAT make the gold spike more valuable?
Would your raft STILL work without the gold?
Dafuq??
Muhammad Rasheed - India has been hoarding it like mad lately. That's probably why the price is going up.
The value of gold is based on it's physical properties. If its value was "bullshit and based on a scam" we'd be able to find a time period in which it wasn't considered valuable in an advance society. The day trading thing, in it's modern rock-n-roll, buy-quick-sell-quick trend didn't really start until the dot-com boom of the '90s. Before that it was a lot more methodical and boring.
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Would your raft STILL work without the gold?"
Would my phone still work if I stripped all of the gold out of it and then put it back together?
If an electronic phone expert stripped all of the gold out of my phone and put it back together, would the phone still work?
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "India has been hoarding it like mad lately. That's probably why the price is going up."
Is that a guess or is that a fact??
Gold prices are falling, Sir.You are fucking WRONG, Sir.Try again, Sir.
Muhammad wrote: "The value of gold is based on it's physical properties. If its value was "bullshit and based on a scam" we'd be able to find a time period in which it wasn't considered valuable in an advance society. The day trading thing, in it's modern rock-n-roll, buy-quick-sell-quick trend didn't really start until the dot-com boom of the '90s. Before that it was a lot more methodical and boring."
You are fucking WRONG, Sir.
Try again, Sir!
Historical Gold Prices
Notice the batshit spikes in the price of gold when the economy took a shit since the 1800's, Sir.
I thought you looked this shit up???
If you're not even going to try...
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Is that a guess or is that a fact??"
India has been hoarding it like crazy lately is a fact. What the price has been doing because of it was the guess.
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "We'll done integrity boy!"
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Would your raft STILL work without the gold?"
Would my phone still work if I stripped all of the gold out of it and then put it back together?
If an electronic phone expert stripped all of the gold out of my phone and put it back together, would the phone still work?"
Why YES...yes it would.
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Notice the batshit spikes in the price of gold when the economy took a shit since the 1800's, Sir. I thought you looked this shit up??? If you're not even going to try..."
What the price of gold does on the market was never my concern. That was your schtick not mine. My sole argument involved the gold standard over the fiat financial system. My interest in price fluctuations is merely peripheral, since I promote a free market supply/demand self-correcting price fluctuation.
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Why YES...yes it would."
Because the gold is just in there to make the insides pretty/shiny?
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad Rasheed wrote: "Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Why YES...yes it would."
Because the gold is just in there to make the insides pretty?"
Well YEAH! It's fucking GOLD!
The fucks wrong with you!
That shits beautiful.
Plus they only use it to coat electronic contacts so...yeah! Electronic contacts are STILL electronic contacts without the pretty shiny rock.
Muhammad Rasheed -  lol I apologize for saying the price of gold has been going up when it is actually falling. In my defense I really didn't care (I'm not into the speculative markets despite your continuously trying to pin that on me) and thought I was repeating something you said. My bad.
Abdur Rasheed - If it had actual value...you wouldn't have to guess so damn hard, bro. Don't sweat it.
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Well YEAH! It's fucking GOLD! The fucks wrong with you! That shits beautiful."
Your caucasian counterpart pointed out that beautiful was subjective earlier.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Plus they only use it to coat electronic contacts so...yeah!"
What's the contact made of that the gold coats?
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "If it had actual value...you wouldn't have to guess so damn hard, bro. Don't sweat it."
lol No. Wall Street playing with it on the markets is a separate matter than gold's actual value. It's actual value is made up of it's special properties, such as those that enable it to be used in electronic devices.
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Plus they only use it to coat electronic contacts so...yeah!"
What's the contact made of that the gold coats?"
Silver, copper, various other alloys.
You know...Shit that makes phones work.
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "Abdur Rasheed wrote: "If it had actual value...you wouldn't have to guess so damn hard, bro. Don't sweat it."
lol No. Wall Street playing with it on the markets is a separate matter than gold's actual value. It's actual value is made up of it's special properties, such as those that enable it to be used in electronic devices."
LOL
I always wondered why King Ramsey insisted on the I Phone 6.
Deep
Muhammad Rasheed - It's some non-conducting cheap metal and they put the gold over it to make the connection work.
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "I always wondered why King Ramsey insisted on the I Phone 6"
I don't follow rap music.
Muhammad Rasheed - Is he kinda like Biggie?
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Well YEAH! It's fucking GOLD! The fucks wrong with you! That shits beautiful."
Your caucasian counterpart pointed out that beautiful was subjective earlier."
That's "New BIG BROTHER" to YOU, Fucker.
You're crazy!
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "It's some non-conducting cheap metal and they put the gold over it to make the connection work."
You suuuure you want to stick to that goofy shit? Lol
I got my finger on the "BUST HIS ASS" button.
You might not want to do that.
3...2...
Muhammad Rasheed - Show me what the gold is coating.
Abdur Rasheed - In its purest state gold is number 3 in conductivity.
Silver is number 1.
Copper is number 2.
There are MANY different combinations of different alloys mixed with silver and copper (and a shit load cheaper than gold) that all conduct electricity a LOT better, Sir.
Copper is .20 cents and ounce
Silver is $19 an ounce.
They are cheaper when you add cheaper alloys to them and they STILL conduct electricity BETTER than your shiny rock with the "valuable"properties.
Copper is used in every wire (high and low voltage) in every house in the civilized world and its .20 cents and ounce.
The cost of copper fluctuates with the new home building market.
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "Show me what the gold is coating."
You do it, fucker!
You don't believe me?
If you're not sure what your gold is used to coat (yet tried to clown me for my knowledge of industry) then post up or shut up.
Maybe electronic contacts and circuits are made of wood with a gold coating. That's probably why they burn up from time to time. You think?
Muhammad Rasheed - So you're saying that they put a coating of gold over top of the better conducting silver, copper, silver/copper alloy?
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "If you're not sure what your gold is used to coat..."
*shrug*
Abdur Rasheed wrote: "(yet tried to clown me for my knowledge of industry)"
I didn't try to clown you over knowledge of YOUR industry. You just don't know about the gold standard topic. You're just pouring out a rhetoric bomb based on how you feel about it.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: "...then post up or shut up."
No. I already know gold is valuable and part of that value enables it to be used in electronics. Gold has very specific properties that has made it valuable in every advanced human society, separate from the investment/financial markets.  At no point have I argued for investing in gold on the modern speculative market, but for some retarded reason, you can’t stop arguing against it like it was my whole point to this.  And after all of this time, I still can’t tell whether you are deliberately stramanning me, or just fucking, hard-headed confused. 
Abdur Rasheed - Yeah because gold is awesome.
Muhammad Rasheed - Gold is CLEARLY awesome, and no one has EVER treated it otherwise.
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "No. I already know gold is valuable and part of that value enables it to be used in electronics. Gold has very specific properties that has made it valuable in every advanced human society, separate from the investment/financial markets."
Ancient Egyptians had I phones?
Why in the fuck didn't you just say that shit in the first fucking place???
Muhammad Rasheed - "Copper is the most common material used for electrical wiring. Silver is the best conductor, but it is expensive. It has a resistivity of 1.6×10−8 Ω⋅m. Because gold does not corrode, it is used for high-quality surface-to-surface contacts."
Electricity Conductor
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad's wiki link wrote: "Silver is more conductive than copper, but due to cost it is not practical in most cases. However, it is used in specialized equipment, such as satellites, and as a thin plating to mitigate skin effect losses at high frequencies."
Silver has a high cost which makes it not practical in most cases at $19 an ounce.
Gold is $1400 an ounce.
I think you just helped me win the Internet.
I wanna say, "thanks??"
Abdur Rasheed - Do you know what gives objects value Muhammad??
Muhammad Rasheed - The link explained that gold has special properties beyond what silver and copper possessed that made it a better choice under certain circumstances, even though it doesn't conduct as well as silver... a point already made earlier.
Abdur Rasheed - You gonna answer my question?
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Do you know what gives objects value Muhammad??"
Value is based on needs and wants. For example, if I need a material that both conducts electricity and is corrosion resistant, a metal that posseses these qualities would be valuable to me.
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "You gonna answer my question?"
Do you have OCD?
Muhammad Rasheed - wth?
Muhammad Rasheed - Why don't you comb through this thread and answer all the questions you skipped over?
Muhammad Rasheed - Damn...
Abdur Rasheed - Like what?
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Do you know what gives objects value Muhammad??"
Value is based on needs and wants. For example, if I need a material that both conducts electricity and is corrosion resistant, a metal that posseses these qualities would be valuable to me."
Is THAT what it said in your Econ book?? "Needs and wants?"
Was it a coloring Econ book? Was there a washing machine and dryer in your class room?
Do you want to actually try to answer my question or just reverse back off the answer you think you already know?
Abdur Rasheed - What happens when YOU "need" 20 and I "WANT" 20 and we have 1000 each, is it still valuable? Lol
Muhammad Rasheed - Needs and wants give an object its value. If I don't need or want it, it has no value.  That’s amazingly, fundamentally, common sense.
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "What happens when YOU "need" 20 and I "WANT" 20 and we have 1000 each, is it still valuable? Lol"
Why wouldn't it be? Are we both holding on to the 1000 because of our needs/wants? We're holding it because of it's value based on our needs/wants. If we didn't need/want it, then why hold it?
Muhammad Rasheed - You're really getting off on this new cussin' thing. You've really taken ownership of it.
Abdur Rasheed - I notice that you are getting off on this whole fuck the basic principles to economics and facts thing.
If you only need 20 but you have 1000 how much would you pay me for my 1000? I want 1 million each.
Q Tips, pounds of hamburger, left handed gloves...
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "I notice that you are getting off on this whole fuck the basic principles to economics and facts thing."
The resources making up the various components of our civilization represent our needs and wants... a finite number of resources that can be used for many different things that we need and want. The "demand" part of basic economics represents our needs and wants. The "supply" aspect represents the quantity of the resources available. That's what determines the value. Needs and wants.
Muhammad Rasheed - FROM WIKI: "The value of gold is rooted in its medium rarity, easily handling, easy smelting, non-corrosiveness, distinct colour and non-reactiveness to other elements; qualities most other metals lack."
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad Rasheed wrote: "Abdur Rasheed wrote: "I notice that you are getting off on this whole fuck the basic principles to economics and facts thing."
The resources making up the various components of our civilization represent our needs and wants... a finite number of resources that can be used for many different things that we need and want. The "demand" part of basic economics represents our needs and wants. The "supply" aspect represents the quantity of the resources available. That's what determines the value. Needs and wants."
Lol
If you beat that square peg long enough and hard enough....
If you're not even going to try...
If you need and want 20 but you have 5 are they worth MORE than if you had 1000?
If you need 20 but you have 5 how much would you pay me for my 15?
It's REALLY not that hard Muhammad.
If you are just going to flat out IGNORE basic Econ principles to try and win an argument instead of trying to find the truth then there is no need to talk to you about this anymore.
Needs and wants is HALF of it, but supply is critical.
If you don't get that I feel sorry for you.
I'm done.
It was ok until you turned into Tamara jr.
Peace
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "It's REALLY not that hard Muhammad."
From WIKI - "Note that economic value is not the same as market price. If a consumer is willing to buy a good, it implies that the customer places a higher value on the good than the market price. The difference between the value to the consumer and the market price is called "consumer surplus". It is easy to see situations where the actual value is considerably larger than the market price: purchase of drinking water is one example."
Abdur Rasheed - Note how drinking water has actual value?
Yeah. Like THAT!
Abdur Rasheed - If you need and want 20 but you have 5 are they worth MORE than if you had 1000?
If you need 20 but you have 5 how much would you pay me for my 15?
Does that effect the value?
You can do it, Man!
Muhammad Rasheed - From WIKI - "Note that economic value is not the same as market price. If a consumer is willing to buy a good, it implies that the customer places a higher value on the good than the market price."
Soooo... what is your point supposed to be, doc?
Muhammad Rasheed - You're determined to have me go through this exercise as if it proves the economic value, despite that not having anything to do with basic econ principles regarding value because why?
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad Rasheed wrote: From WIKI - "Note that economic value is not the same as market price. If a consumer is willing to buy a good, it implies that the customer places a higher value on the good than the market price."
Soooo... what is your point supposed to be, doc?You're determined to have me go through this exercise as if it proves the economic value, despite that not having anything to do with basic econ principles regarding value because why?”
So If I make a statement like “You don’t understand the BASIC principles of economics (supply and demand) you say "YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND BACIS ECON PRINCIPLES!!"
You think that VALUE is based on what was that again?
Muhammad wrote: “Value is based on needs and wants...”
Yeah, THAT goofy shit!
If you think that “Needs and Wants” is the cornerstone of what gives things value then you are not prepared to debate this with me.
Demand by itself without the factor of the SUPPLY is retarded.
“Needs and wants’ determines value if you are 4 years old and even then a 4 year old has enough sense to realize that they LOVE candy.
4 year old: ‘I NEED AND WANT CANDY!!”
Parent: “OK. You can have candy, but first you have to pick up all of your toys.
[4 year old hurries up and picks up toys excited to get candy.]
The DAY AFTER HALLOWEEN when the 4 year old has an entire pillow case full of candy and is gorging herself on candy.
Parent: “Pick up all candy paper and your toys and i will give you a snicker bar.’
4 year old: “FUCK YOU!”
The value of candy went down.
I didn’t say SHIT about a “market price.”
I understand that you have commited to "Needs and wants", so you feel like everything has to fit somehow in the "needs and wants box", but that is less than intellegent.
If all you have is two sentences from a Wiki page and bag full of strawmen to debate me with then this conversation is over.
You are looking slow and I’m trying to HELP you.
Muhammad Rasheed - [patiently]Needs/wants determine the demand for a resource. If the population has no needs or wants for the resource, then there is no value in that resource.[/patiently]
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "It's some non-conducting cheap metal and they put the gold over it to make the connection work."
SIlVER and COPPER???
This is why you should stop typing and delete this thread before somebody who respects you reads it.
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad Rasheed wrote: "[patiently]Needs/wants determine the demand for a resource. If the population has no needs or wants for the resource, then there is no value in that resource.[/patiently]"
It sure does Muhammad! Whose a good Muhammad? Whose a good Muhammad?
YOU ARE!!!
LOL
I just broke it down Romper Room style for you and everythang...
Going around in circles trying to get you to understand simple shit is exhausting (especially since I can't call you a dumbass) so I leave you to it, Bro.
Let me know how it all turns out.
Peace
Rah
Muhammad Rasheed - Are you trying to say they are putting a coating of the 3rd best conductor on top of the 1st and 2nd best conductors?
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "If you think that “Needs and Wants” is the cornerstone of what gives things value then you are not prepared to debate this with me. Demand by itself without the factor of the SUPPLY is retarded."
You can fill up North America with booger-flavored gumballs, or just have ten of them in a hidden cavern at the top of K2, but if no one wants or needs them, they have zero value.
Abdur Rasheed - Is THAT the ONLY scenario where the value of something will decrease??
Hint: See 4 year old with candy above
You can do it, Muhammad.
I KNOW you can...
One more chance...
You're so close...
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Is THAT the ONLY scenario where the value of something will decrease?"
lol I called myself using an example of something that would never have any value to decrease from.
The value of a resource will decrease if the population no longer has any need of it. "Value is intrinsically related to the worth derived by the consumer."
Muhammad Rasheed - If the needs/wants decrease, so to does the value.
Abdur Rasheed - The "worth derived by the consumer" is based upon the Haves/gives (supply).
Still no?
Muhammad Rasheed - No. "Worth derived by the consumer" is based upon whether I need it or not. That's where the value comes from. How much there is on the planet will determine the price, which will determine who actually receives it.
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: ' How much there is on the planet..."
I think this is the missing link.
NOBODY said SHIT about how much was on the planet and you know it.
Your integrity just crashed on the NADAQ.
I said "YOU FUCKER!" How much YOU HAVE determines how much you "want/need" it.
Don't play the role if you don't want the title.
Muhammad Rasheed - I have no idea what you are talking about.
Are you saying it has no value unless it's already in a warehouse somewhere, or if the consumer already has half a box in his garage?
How much of it is on the planet determines the rarity, which is the bottom line of "supply." How easy or difficult is it to get more of this item based on how much of it is available. That determines price. If nobody needs or wants it... regardless of the rarity... the price will be "free."  You’ll be able to just pick up a handful of it off the curb.
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad Rasheed wrote: "I have no idea what you are talking about."
We figured.
THAT'S why you have to answer this and stop being a Dick.
If you need and want 20 but you have 5 are they worth MORE than if you had 1000?
If you need 20 but you have 5 how much would you pay me for my 15?
Does that effect the value?
I promise it won't hurt.
last chance or i'm just going to leave you to ramble to yourself in the dark in this bullshit thread.
Just answer the question and we can go to the next step.
or not.
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "THAT'S why you have to answer this and stop being a Dick."
You sound crazy as hell.
Abdur Rasheed - Because you keep licking the damn window and you won't focus.
I NEVER said that, "needs/wants aren't "demand". You pulled that straight out of your ass.
Muhammad Rasheed - Look...
I don't care about whatever counting on your fingers and toes techniques that you use to figure out supply/demand principles. Figure out how to package whatever your argument is supposed to be in a concise, short clip that doesn't involve tag teaming with me, and make your point.
Muhammad Rasheed - needs/wants = demand. quantity available = supply.
demand = value.
Without demand there is no value. If I don't need/want your buggywhips, then who cares how much you have? I'm not going to stand there haggling with you over the price at all if I don't need/want your buggywhips... which means they have no value. It's my need/want that determines the value.
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Because you keep licking the damn window and you won't focus."
Make your point so I may scrutinize it and see if it makes any sense or not. You don't need my help to make your point.
Abdur Rasheed - I know you want/need to be right...but you have no idea what you are talking about.
Muhammad wrote: "I don't care about whatever counting on your fingers and toes techniques that you use to figure out supply/demand principles. Figure out how to package whatever your argument is supposed to be in a concise, short clip that doesn't involve tag teaming with me, and make your point."
You're not smart enough to get it. Why waste my time and lose the rest of the respect I had for you?
At this point I'm not even sure if you can really draw. Lol
Muhammad Rasheed - You were the one hinging that WHOLE segment on gold being worthless. I pointed out it's used in electronics which proves it's not worthless, i.e., it's actually used for legitimate stuff. People don't just sit an ingot of it on their fireplace. It actually does have practical usage. You said the only reason it was in the electronics is because the lobbyists wanted it in there, and that it was still worthless. I asked if you take the gold out will the gadget still function, meaning is it in the gadget for the same reason it's on the hypothetical fireplace. You said "Yes." I asked what metal was it coating that the gold could be removed and the gadget would still function. You said "SILVER & COPPER!! Dafuq??" I asked if you were saying that they were using the 3rd best conductor to coat the 1st and 2nd best conductors.
Silence from you.
Muhammad Rasheed - I pointed out that the element gold has very specific physical properties responsible for why it has always been considered valuable. I even posted the list of those properties a few times, and even pointed out some of those properties are why gold can even be used in electronics in the first place. You oddly decided to maintain your "gold has no true value" stance. To me, that is a willfully ignorant stance based on everything you are saying I'm guilty of.
Muhammad Rasheed – I started off saying, "If I opened my phone and stripped all the gold out of it, would it still function when I closed it?" But I tried anticipating how you would duck the question: "Well, yo dumbass don't know about electronics, so it probably wouldn't work, dumbass." So I changed my mind and replaced me with an electronic expert. When you STILL said "Yes" I was through with you. 
Muhammad Rasheed - You know what my point was. Gold has actual value based on its unique properties, and the continuous value the entire history of the human species has place upon it can be used to trust it is a worthy commodity to back up the currency with. Its value can be trusted based on the fact that no where in history was it ever treated like it was worthless garbage, so we can have a certain measure of faith people will continue to treat it as if it was valuable.

Defense of the Gold Standard & the Discovery of Freedom, pt 6 of 7

Muhammad Rasheed - How To Crash a Stock Market in 11 E-Z Steps
1.) "The Roaring Twenties... was a time of wealth and excess. Building on post-war optimism, many rural Americans migrated to the cities in vast numbers throughout the decade with the hopes of finding a more prosperous life in the ever growing expansion of America's industrial sector.[5] While the American cities prospered, the vast migration from rural areas and continued neglect of the US agriculture industry would create widespread financial despair among American farmers throughout the decade...
2.) "Despite the dangers of speculation, many believed that the stock market would continue to rise indefinitely. On March 25, 1929, however, a mini crash occurred after investors started to sell stocks at a rapid pace, exposing the market's shaky foundation.
3.) "...the American economy was now showing ominous signs of trouble.[7] Steel production was declining, construction was sluggish, car sales were down, and consumers were building up high debts because of easy credit.
4.) "On September 20, the London Stock Exchange (LSE) officially crashed when top British investor Clarence Hatry and many of his associates were jailed for fraud and forgery.[9] The LSE's crash greatly weakened the optimism of American investment in markets overseas."
5.) "In the days leading up to the crash, the market was severely unstable. Periods of selling and high volumes of trading were interspersed with brief periods of rising prices and recovery. Economist and author Jude Wanniski later correlated these swings with the prospects for passage of the Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act, which was then being debated in Congress.
6.) "On October 24 ("Black Thursday"), the market lost 11% of its value at the opening bell on very heavy trading. Several leading Wall Street bankers met to find a solution to the panic and chaos on the trading floor.
7.) "With the bankers' financial resources behind him, [Richard] Whitney [VP of the Exchange] placed a bid to purchase a large block of shares in U.S. Steel at a price well above the current market. As traders watched, Whitney then placed similar bids on other "blue chip" stocks. This tactic was similar to one that ended the Panic of 1907. It succeeded in [temporarily] halting the slide.
8.) "Over the weekend, the events were covered by the newspapers across the United States... [and] more investors decided to get out of the market, and the slide continued with a record loss in the Dow for the day of 38.33 points, or 13%.
9.) "The next day, 'Black Tuesday', October 29, 1929, about sixteen million shares were traded, and the Dow lost an additional 30 points, or 12%, amid rumors that U.S. President Herbert Hoover would not veto the pending Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act.
10.) "On October 29, William C. Durant joined with members of the Rockefeller family and other financial giants to buy large quantities of stocks in order to demonstrate to the public their confidence in the market, but their efforts failed to stop the large decline in prices.
11.) "After the Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act was enacted in mid-June, the Dow dropped again, stabilizing above 200. The following year, the Dow embarked on another, much longer, steady slide from April 1931 to July 8, 1932 when it closed at 41.22—its lowest level of the 20th century, concluding an 89% loss rate for all of the market's stocks."
Muhammad Rasheed - This was everything leading up to the Wall Street Crash of 1929 which started the 10 years of the Great Depression. Funny how it involved the usual gang of assholes, playing their usual asshole financial and stock speculation tricks, and not fucking ONCE was the gold standard mentioned.
Sooo... what the fuck was Mr. Princeton/Nobel Prize winner talking about?
Abdur Rasheed - Gold being valuable is pretty mainstream yet not supported by the facts.
Muhammad Rasheed - Okay, what facts demonstrate that gold has no value? It was used as the official backing of the nation's currency under the gold standard, and now out from under the gold standard it is still considered valuable by people...showed off, traded, invested, hoarded... everything you do with something of value. Even our mutual enemy, the Federal Reserve itself, has no such illusion, and keeps a big chunk of their assets in gold. These are the facts that demonstrate gold's very real value. Which facts of yours show otherwise?
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "So, I repeat, all the Panics from 1873 up to the 1907 one were actually caused by the banks themselves. What did the gold standard do exactly? Well, of course all the cash in stores has to be represented by gold, so if I do a 'bank run' with all my cash in tow, you MUST give me my gold NOW."
When the banks crashed doesnt mean that they crashed because they handed out everybodies money back to them and went under.
It means that they handed out YOUR money to farmers or buggy whip companies, and other bad investments and your shit was GONE. The rest of the money left when people stated mad mobbong them and taking their money out and stuffing it in their mattresses or burying it in the yard.
First come first serve, but before the people got wind to mad mob the bank to try and get their money/gold back MOST of the money was gone.
Muhammad wrote: "And if your ass had been illegally (or at least with special, temporary gov permissions) printing out more money than we had in stores, YOU will have to eat that, usually collapsing several banks. But I don't give a fuck. I have MY money. You shouldn't have been fucking up, Mr. Private Bank Entrepreneur. Perhaps the next bank owner that comes along WON'T be a greedy jackass. 'Tis doubtful, but it may be true through some queer twist of fate."
MOST PEOPLE WERE FUCKED.
Banks were and ARE in the business of making money WITH money. Now they use the Feds Fiat money but back then they used what they had on hand only. There was no FDIC insurance for your money.
I perfer FDIC insurance for my money. FUCK PANICKED BANK RUNS AND WAITING HOURS IN LINE TO LEARN THAT I WAS TOO LATE AND NOW I GOTTA WAIT IN THAT LONG ASS BREAD LINE TO FEED MY FAMILY!
Muhammad Rasheed  - Stop. I didn't say at any point that we should establish a gold standard AND do away with FDIC insurance.
DID I????
Didn't I BEGIN this thread saying I favored an eclectic mix of policies that would work best for everybody? SO where did you pull THAT shit from? Strawman land??? Stick to what I am ACTUALLY arguing, please. Thank you.
Me: “I believe in an ecletic mix of living principles to govern our society by, leaning in a libertarian direction.”
You & Jackals Home: [in unison] “Why are you a card-carrying, rabid Tea Partier that hates progress, love, etc.???”
Me: “dafuq?” 
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: “When the banks crashed doesnt mean that they crashed because they handed out everybodies money back to them and went under.”
FROM WIKI – “A bank run (also known as a run on the bank) occurs in a fractional reserve banking system when a large number of customers withdraw their deposits from a financial institution at the same time and either demand cash or transfer those funds into government bonds, precious metals or stones, or a safer institution because they believe that the financial institution is, or might become, insolvent. As a bank run progresses, it generates its own momentum, in a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy (or positive feedback loop) – as more people withdraw their deposits, the likelihood of default increases, thus triggering further withdrawals. This can destabilize the bank to the point where it runs out of cash and thus faces sudden bankruptcy.”
Muhammad Rasheed - I approve of something like the FDIC anyway as it functions like a kind of watchdog over the banks, who need every bit of regulation we can possibly conjure, although it's clear their influence is pretty weak.
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Banks were and ARE in the business of making money WITH money."
Our society does not need an institution like that among us. That concept has proven to be predatory in human history and has only caused harm. A bank should not have that ability. They should hold my money, guard it, and enable me to make easy and convenient financial transactions in society period. They should collect fees from regular banking services like any other admin-like business, and be a small little outfit like the independent accounting office.
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "So, I repeat, all the Panics from 1873 up to the 1907 one were actually caused by the banks themselves."
ALL panics, recessions, depressions, economic down turns, were caused by the BANKS and the unstable prices of commodities, artificially flooding markets, with certain commodities to artificially manipulate prices causing bubbles that ALWAYS pop. The gold standard didn't change ANYTHING.
The same shit we went through then...we go through right NOW...
Except...
When we were on the gold standard there was no such thing as Social Security.
If you were old you lost ALL of your money in your bank....start digging that grave gramps.
There was NO such thing as unemployment insurance.
If you worked for one of the 15,000 businesses that closed...TOUGH!
The US didn't have enough gold reserves to support these programs.
There were ZERO protections for bank depositors.
Like i said before If you were one of the first people to get in line to get your money back IF they didn't lock the damn doors you may have been good. If not you better start digging holes next to that old motherfucker.
They say that the recession in 2007 was the worst economic condition that this country went through since the great depression.
That is a fact, but if you look at the actual data side by side its hard to make a case that we were better off back then.
The unemployment rate peaked at 34% in 1929.
The Measurement and Behavior of Unemployment - Annual Estimates of Unemployment in the United States, 1900-1954 (From the National Bureau of Economic Research)
As opposed to 10% in 2009.
Inflation & Prices
Being an American means that I have the freedom to rise or fall based on my own motivation, but it also gives me the security that says that i shouldn’t have to start digging my own grave when it all goes down beyond my control. If I am gainfully employed and I quit to join the circus or to "make it" as an actor then I DON'T qualify for unemployment insurance.
You have yet to show a fact base example where life was better under the gold standard.
There has never been a 100% free market in this country or anywhere else.
It SOUNDS noble that businesses fail unless you are one of the 3 million people in this country dependent upon the auto manufacturing industry.
Free market solutions always sound good when they affect other people and not us.
"Fuck THEM!!"
Unless I need help!
Then it's,
"HELP ME!"
Banks going out of business doesn't only effect the Banks. The banks ONLY way to get money back then was from deposits from individuals and businesses.
Going out of business was a BIG DEAL for everybody.
Multiply that times HALF the banks in the country at the same time.
You best believe that EVERYBODY who could withdraw all of their money out did so whether their bank was going out of business or not.
The banks that had stable investments (loans) did well or survived even after the depositors took out all of their money.
Like i started this long ass conversation with saying: the economy is simply the flow of money.
They say that fiat money is worthless, but that's not entirely accurate.
Your countries currency is backed by your countries credit and your ability to pay loans.
A countries ability to pay back its loans is directly linked to either it's exports or its wealth. Exports being more tangible. (See: Kuwait Dinar)
If you are in a third world country and all you have is sand and mountains and you print a trillion dollar bill with a picture of you riding a Tonton...you might as well wipe your ass with it.
If you are a third world country and sitting on the largest Lithium supply in the world...your dollar is worth some shit and it will put you on the map as the civilized world NEEDS Lithium.
Gold is NOT widely used in industry mainly because it is just too damn expensive and there are MANY other cheaper options.
Nobody can afford the cost to add gold to their product at $22,400 per pound and stay competitive and if they HAD too (and nobody HAS TOO) they would actively seek to get that shit out of their product to increase their profits and beat out their competition and as SOON as they found a NON GOLD option...all of their competitors would reverse engineer their product and get the need for gold out of their product too...or go bankrupt.
The ONLY difference in a product that MUST HAVE GOLD IN IT is if it is required by government contract in the RFP.
RFP = Request For Proposal
Which means: I am a contract manager for information systems for the Government and my job is to select a contractor to build reliable government satellites. I am obligated to use the lowest bidder so i get all of the requirements (specs) for the satellite that I need to have build with the engineering and design team and i put together a Request For Proposal package to send out to all the contractors who build satellites or space suits or whatever to ensure that ALL of the contractors are on the same page and looked at the same requirements for fairness.
RFP packages, depending upon the complexity of the project (and satellites are pretty complicated) can be several volumes and each are twice the size of a phone book. In the RFP it asks for itemized pricing for all the bidders and it sets specific "MUST HAVE" guidelines. In the private sector they must have guidelines are usually things line must have original manufactures replacement parts. That way a contractor can't buy some cheap crap just to win the bid and try and beat it into place to get the knock off part to fit.
In the government sector the RFP will say something like "This portion must be made out of 99.9% pure gold so that all of the contractors are required to use gold. I guarantee you that it's because the government project manager's bosses, bosses, boss is a Congressman from the great state of who gives a shit who has a strong tie with the gold broker's lobbyist.
The cost of Gold is to artifically inflated (like guns) to be practical even if it was useful to more people than just government contractors.
I'm not the only person on earth who knows this. It has value because they place value on it no different than fiat money.
Rah
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "Stop. I didn't say at any point that we should establish a gold standard AND do away with FDIC insurance.
DID I????
Didn't I BEGIN this thread saying I favored an eclectic mix of policies that would work best for everybody? SO where did you pull THAT shit from? Strawman land??? Stick to what I am ACTUALLY arguing, please. Thank you."
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the Federal Reserve Board Announce First Resolution Plans
The FED and the FDIC work hand and hand, Sir!
The "Evil" FED is a private company that operates as some secret shadow organization that prints all of our money and stole all of our gold all under the fake guise of "Federal" which misleads the uninformed into thinking that it is a government agency.
To help with this massive con job the chairman of the fed is appointed by the President of the United States.
And so is the FDIC.
Except that the President appoints 3 out of 6 board members who are then confirmed by congress.
The FDIC has $1.3 TRILLION dollars, which is enough to give every American adult $6000,
Not a total of $1.3 TRILLION, but JUST IN NEW YORK ALONE.
Where do you think that money comes from?
Clean living and prayer?
FED, Sir.
They get a portion of EVERY bank fee under The FED.
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad Rasheed wrote regarding banks investing money to make money: "Our society does not need an institution like that among us. That concept has proven to be predatory in human history and has only caused harm. A bank should not have that ability. They should hold my money, guard it, and enable me to make easy and convenient financial transactions in society period. They should collect fees from regular banking services like any other admin-like business, and be a small little outfit like the independent accounting office."
Ok.
I'll call them and let them know.
So what happens when your payments are late from your buggy whip sales and you dont have the cash on hand to buy more kangaroo leather to make more?
Should every business go bankrupt every month through no fault of their own?
Do you never buy a house or a car unless you can cash one out?
Even WITH the highest sub prime interest rate on a home for your family you STILL put more money toward ownership than RENTING. How long will it take you to save and cash out a $150,000 house (which is $18,000 LESS than the national average cost of a house?)
20 years? How much is rent for 20 years at $1000 a month?
$1000 times 12 = $12,000 times 20 years = $240,000 you THREW AWAY because you hate banks lending money?
WAIT??
Who has time left in their life span to pay for their house AND a rental property?
There will be no houses to rent.
[shrugs]
Here you go!
http://www.practicalsurvivor.com/leanto
I don't know why I don't get all of my financial ideas from you!
Tell us more...
Rah
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad Rasheed wrote: “Okay, what facts demonstrate that gold has no value? It was used as the official backing of the nation's currency under the gold standard, and now out from under the gold standard it is still considered valuable by people...showed off, traded, invested, hoarded... everything you do with something of value. Even our mutual enemy, the Federal Reserve itself, has no such illusion, and keeps a big chunk of their assets in gold. These are the facts that demonstrate gold's very real value. Which facts of yours show otherwise?”
ALL of your “facts” that are supposed to be demonstrating the “REAL VALUE OF GOLD” are just the misguided symptoms of the arbitrary value placed on gold, Muhammad. Stevie Wonder can see that!
What are my FACTS that show that gold has no practical value?
You can’t positively prove a NEGATIVE, Skippy. The burden is on YOU to prove that it HAS VALUE other than you scrolling through your wiki page saying, “See it named industry”.
I said that it’s just a shiny rock with an artificially assigned value with no real purpose other than “What people say it’s worth” that varies from the time of the day and that you could go the rest of your life without it and it wouldn’t affect you ONE BIT.
The gold brokers that sell it say the exact same shit except THEY don’t try and make a practical value where there is NONE like you (and Mr. wiki). They just say, “It’s shiny and worthless but who cares. Buy it anyway.
http://www.frumforum.com/golds-value-...
“I won’t rehearse the myriad examples of how gold has been an integral part of human history – that topic could fill libraries. The point is that practical use is not the same thing as value where human society is concerned. Of what practical use is silver, upon which the Spanish built an empire? What can you do with a diamond, or any precious stone for that matter? What is the practical use for a bouquet of roses? Value is not often a function of utility.Gold’s value, however irrational its basis, is that which human beings have ascribed to it since the dawn of history. There’s no special reason why gold, rather than asphalt, shouldn’t be used to pave driveways, or why blood diamonds shouldn’t be used as paperweights. But, however irrationally, humans don’t use them for these purposes. We consider them too valuable – so much so that entire governments are willing to pay $1,650 per ounce of gold.” - Brad Schaeffer
“BRAD SCHAFFER is co-founder and CEO of INFA Energy Brokers, LLC, an interdealer broker of complex energy derivatives, as well as founder and principal of Occam Capital Management, LLC, a private asset management firm. He is a veteran of the commodities markets since 1990 and is a frequent guest on CNBC and Fox Business News. He is also the author of the World War II novel Hummel's Cross, the story of a decorated Luftwaffe fighter pilot who risks his life to save a family of Jews from the Nazis during the height of the air war over Europe. A Chicago native, he lives in New Jersey.”
In other words, “It has no practical uses but so what buy it anyway.” – Gold Broker
I said get in it when it’s low and sell it when it's high and then get the fuck out of it.
“As I’ve said before, gold is, quite literally, good for nothing: it has no significant industrial uses (yes, it’s used in some electronics but there’s enough in a mall jewelry store for an entire year’s worth of iPhones) and can’t actually be used to buy anything either. Speculators can, indeed, get rich on gold but they need to figure out how to time the market. And nobody has ever devised a market-timing strategy for anything that works prospectively. (A retrospective one, of course, is quite easy.)”- Eli Lehrer responding to Brad Schaffer’s article
“Eli Lehrer is Vice President of Washington D.C. operations for the Heartland Institute.”
And this fucker works for the Koch brothers.Name something that YOU use GOLD FOR BESIDES BEING A SHINY ROCK.
I’ll wait…
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: “ALL panics, recessions, depressions, economic down turns, were caused by the BANKS and the unstable prices of commodities, artificially flooding markets, with certain commodities to artificially manipulate prices causing bubbles that ALWAYS pop. The gold standard didn't change ANYTHING. The same shit we went through then...we go through right NOW...”
There’s a certain amount of ‘instability’ in prices caused normally just by the flow of business through supply & demand for goods and services. The banks use that as a screen to do their dirt by. The rest is 100% true.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “Except... When we were on the gold standard there was no such thing as Social Security. If you were old you lost ALL of your money in your bank....start digging that grave gramps. There was NO such thing as unemployment insurance. If you worked for one of the 15,000 businesses that closed...TOUGH! There were ZERO protections for bank depositors. The US didn't have enough gold reserves to support these programs.”
It sounds like you are saying that if we don’t use the fiat system then there is no other solution. That’s it’s the ONLY way. Considering Keynesian economic policies have been the only ones in effect for the last 100 years, designed around the favored practices of the Money Trust, how could you argue from that direction so definitively? Under a strong/robust economy and a strong USD backed by a commodity instrument of gold, whose value was increasing steadily just as it is currently weakening steadily, how can you tell that an alternate program[s] couldn’t be put in place to solve those kinds of problems? Especially in partnership with other companies?
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “They say that the recession in 2007 was the worst economic condition that this country went through since the great depression. That is a fact, but if you look at the actual data side by side its hard to make a case that we were better off back then.”
I’m arguing that the gold standard was a better tool for a successful society, particularly in the long term, than the fiat system is. I’m not arguing that the Industrial Revolution era gave Americans a better standard of living than the Information Age.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “The unemployment rate peaked at 34% in 1929. As opposed to 10% in 2009.”
Yes, the 1929 Stock Market Crash wiped out a lot of businesses like a hurricane. Investment policies of today probably did develop safe guards and new protection techniques learned specifically from that event.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “Being an American means that I have the freedom to rise or fall based on my own motivation, but it also gives me the security that says that i shouldn’t have to start digging my own grave when it all goes down beyond my control. If I am gainfully employed and I quit to join the circus or to "make it" as an actor then I DON'T qualify for unemployment insurance.”
No argument.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “You have yet to show a fact base example where life was better under the gold standard.”
Trashing The Gold Standard is Now The Stuff Of Amateurs
The Money Trust’s fiat system appears to actually hold down and ‘control’ economic growth in addition to weakening the economy over time. Pay particular attention to the paragraph that starts out “Promptly gold reassumed its primacy of place…”
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: “There has never been a 100% free market in this country or anywhere else."
I know. Almost from the beginning monopolies and cartels and other sabotaging influences have restricted it to our detriment. It works in small segments... like at the beginning of a brand new industry before the greedy swoop in, and that's where it can be studied and shown to function in the people's benefit.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “It SOUNDS noble that businesses fail unless you are one of the 3 million people in this country dependent upon the auto manufacturing industry. Free market solutions always sound good when they affect other people and not us.”
Not all businesses… just THAT one, if it doesn’t act right. Government protections should go to aid the victim customers, not bailout the fraudulent business.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “Banks going out of business doesn't only effect the Banks. The banks ONLY way to get money back then was from deposits from individuals and businesses. Going out of business was a BIG DEAL for everybody. Multiply that times HALF the banks in the country at the same time.”
Knowing the bank will use the money you trust it to safeguard for you on risky speculation schemes and financial industry manipulation that, like clockwork, blowup in their faces, should be a part of your summary. Gambling schemes along with attempts to rig the game in their favor is the bottom line to what they do… what they want to do even when restrained by regulation. The people should have a right not to be a part of that if they don’t want to, but still patronize a basic level establishment in which their money is safe. ACTUALLY safe.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “You best believe that EVERYBODY who could withdraw all of their money out did so whether their bank was going out of business or not.”
Yes. That’s what a bank run is all about.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “The banks that had stable investments (loans) did well or survived even after the depositors took out all of their money.”
How could a loan be “stable?” It’s instable by its nature. There can be a stable investment climate, or a measure of stability based on the experience of past performance, but how is the loan instrument supposed to be a stable one when the variables and risks the lender has to deal with are well known? Please explain.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “Like i started this long ass conversation with saying: the economy is simply the flow of money.”
The economy is how a society uses its resources. A finite amount of resources that can be used for other things, supply & demand is how a society determines how those resources are divided. That is what the economy is.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “They say that fiat money is worthless, but that's not entirely accurate.”
I didn’t say it was worthless, I said it wasn’t backed up by anything tangible. It used to be backed up by the promise of the Federal Reserve and the US government to uphold it and maintain its integrity. Since that promise was broken by devaluing it, now it is upheld by the peoples’ confidence in it.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “Your countries currency is backed by your countries credit and your ability to pay loans. A countries ability to pay back its loans is directly linked to either it's exports or its wealth. Exports being more tangible. (See: Kuwait Dinar)”
Give me an example of a country’s wealth that is less tangible than a foreign country’s currency, please.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “If you are in a third world country and all you have is sand and mountains and you print a trillion dollar bill with a picture of you riding a Tonton...you might as well wipe your ass with it.”
Was the bill made out of sand and mountain? What about the tauntaun?
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “If you are a third world country and sitting on the largest Lithium supply in the world...your dollar is worth some shit and it will put you on the map as the civilized world NEEDS Lithium.”
There was a time period recently when the Russian bank Afghanistan was connected to was deliberately over printing the afghani (AFN) to buy off the warlords. With over 100 trillion afghani in circulation watering down the currency, it took tens of thousands of AFN to match one USD. A new leader came and cancelled all of those notes, severing the relationship with the Russian bank. Today their currency trades 57.29 against one USD.
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: “The FED and the FDIC work hand and hand, Sir! The "Evil" FED is a private company that operates as some secret shadow organization that prints all of our money and stole all of our gold all under the fake guise of "Federal" which misleads the uninformed into thinking that it is a government agency. To help with this massive con job the chairman of the fed is appointed by the President of the United States. And so is the FDIC. Except that the President appoints 3 out of 6 board members who are then confirmed by congress. The FDIC has $1.3 TRILLION dollars, which is enough to give every American adult $6000, Not a total of $1.3 TRILLION, but JUST IN NEW YORK ALONE. Where do you think that money comes from? Clean living and prayer? FED, Sir. They get a portion of EVERY bank fee under The FED.”
I’m not even sure what you’re supposed to be arguing here.
The Federal Reserve is a private corporation, made up of ten other private banks, that operates in partnership with the US government. It works in partnership with the US gov. I must’ve said that a million times in this and in past threads. Are you having this discussion with ME or with a shadowy orthodox Libertarian figure in your head (no doubt stuffed full of straw) that you insist is telling you things that I have not?
I said I approve of a concept like the FDIC that is supposed to be an ‘internal affairs’ type watchdog org.
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: “Ok. I'll call them and let them know.”
Smh lol
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “So what happens when your payments are late from your buggy whip sales and you dont have the cash on hand to buy more kangaroo leather to make more? Should every business go bankrupt every month through no fault of their own?”
You can get a loan from one of your business partners. Or if the bank is to be granted that ability, it needs to only have a one-time account transaction fee. No interest. NO predatory financial practices of any kind.
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: “ALL of your “facts” that are supposed to be demonstrating the “REAL VALUE OF GOLD” are just the misguided symptoms of the arbitrary value placed on gold, Muhammad. Stevie Wonder can see that!”
So my facts… the demonstrated history of several human civilizations in which gold has never been discarded as a worthless commodity, versus your talking heads claiming that gold has no value? Talking head opinions are supposed to trump the demonstrated facts of history?
How does that work exactly?
Muhammad Rasheed - "If the United States returned to the gold standard and then faced an economic crisis, the government would not be permitted to use monetary policy (such as injecting stimulus money into the economy) to avert financial disaster. Similarly, the government would no longer have the option of creating money in order to fund a war."
What Would Happen If We Returned to the Gold Standard?
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad Rasheed wrote: "Abdur Rasheed wrote: “ALL of your “facts” that are supposed to be demonstrating the “REAL VALUE OF GOLD” are just the misguided symptoms of the arbitrary value placed on gold, Muhammad. Stevie Wonder can see that!”
So my facts… the demonstrated history of several human civilizations in which gold has never been discarded as a worthless commodity, versus your talking heads claiming that gold has no value? Talking head opinions are supposed to trump the demonstrated facts of history?
How does that work exactly?"
Is THAT what you got from that?
The gold brokers agree with you that the value of gold relies solely upon its history that everybody always loves it. They also agree that THAT is all the value it has.
And they sell the shit.
You're saying that gold is so stable because, "come on man...it's gold."
I'm just saying that is NO better than saying, "come on man...its paper money."
The artificial value of gold is not worth backing up our currency on.
It's STILL just a house of cards.
And again...History and Facts don't always jive.
As long as gold is just a want and not a need...it will have no true value.
"Name something you use gold for besides being a shiny rock."
I'm still waiting...
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "You're saying that gold is so stable because, 'come on man...it's gold.'  I'm just saying that is NO better than saying, 'come on man...its paper money.'"
But there have been numerous times when paper money has been abandoned where the peoples' trust plummeted. Where were the times when it did that over gold? If gold isn't actually valuable, and only arbitrarily imbued with that quality, show me where in history it was treated as worthless.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Name something you use gold for besides being a shiny rock."
Me? There's gold in my computer. "Gold can be found in almost all the components of a computer. These computer components include the motherboard, processor, extension cards, and the memory DIMMs." ~ www.tomshardware.com
Also in my cell phone. "43% of total production of gold in the whole world is used in electronics. Can’t believe? But its true. And its also true that cell phones have big quantity of gold in them.  If you open a cell phone, you can see gold plated connectors and pins. If you look at its motherboard, you will know that it is gold plated." ~ Gold Recovery Techniques
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "The artificial value of gold is not worth backing up our currency on."
Even though the economy was stronger when we did? Then what would make it worth it if not that?
Abdur Rasheed wrote: "As long as gold is just a want and not a need...it will have no true value."
I need my computer and phone. I use them for stuff.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: "They also agree that THAT is all the value it has."
Gold has very specific elemental properties unique to it that give it its value. It's not just a chunk of yellowish concrete.
Muhammad Rasheed - Interestingly, former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan was a highly vocal supporter of the gold standard back in the 1960s, then he got the Chairman appointment. He stopped being so vocal about the gold standard publicly while he was in that role, but many point out he did his best to link the dollar to the price of gold as close as he could so it would almost function as if we were on the gold standard. Combined with his lending support to Clinton's 1993 deficit reduction program, this was responsible for the stronger economic times experienced during the 1990s.
“We have at this particular stage a fiat money which is essentially money printed by a government and it’s usually a central bank which is authorized to do so. Some mechanism has got to be in place that restricts the amount of money which is produced, either a gold standard or a currency board, because unless you do that all of history suggest that inflation will take hold with very deleterious effects on economic activity… There are numbers of us, myself included, who strongly believe that we did very well in the 1870 to 1914 period with an international gold standard.” ~Alan Greenspan (2011)
If Alan Greenspan Wants To 'End The Fed', Times Must Be Changing
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad's web site wrote: "Collect any gold-containing metal scraps to which you have access, including jewelry, computer processors, old telephone wiring or gold tooth crowns. Keep in mind that outdated electronics are likelier to produce parts with a high enough level of gold to make the procedure worthwhile.
This is the gold I collected in a bucket over three months.
Sort the gold into circuits that need cleaning, gold plated parts, gold plated pins, gold fingers, and solid gold large and small. Use a magnet to separate all gold plated steel this needs a different process than I am demonstrating."
"There you have it gold from electronics, one troy Oz is 480 grains and I have 576.5 grains or somewhere between 600 and 1600 bucks for three months work. I think I will retire."
Three months of collecting a ton of electronics, teeth, old telephone wiring, cleaning, desolving, acid cleaning, for a little over an ounce.
"Keep in mind that outdated electronics are likelier to produce parts with a high enough level of gold to make the procedure worthwhile."
You mean they use LESS gold now than they used to since the price was artificially inflated times a factor of 4.
Interesting.
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "Interestingly, former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan was a highly vocal supporter of the gold standard back in the 1960s, then he got the Chairman appointment. He stopped being so vocal about the gold standard publicly while he was in that role, but many point out he did his best to link the dollar to the price of gold as close as he could so it would almost function as if we were on the gold standard. Combined with his lending support to Clinton's 1993 deficit reduction program, this was responsible for the stronger economic times experienced during the 1990s."
1. So any strong economic news we have had in the USA since the fiat system was sorta kinda linked to the "gold standard" if you look at it as you squint real hard in a dark room.
2. If there was a weak economy it is because of the fiat system.
3. If it was BAD DURING the gold standard it was because of the banks.
4. If it was good during the Gold Standard years it was because of the Gold Standard (of course).
5. Greenspan rocks.
If I follow these simple steps then it makes perfect sense.
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "1. So any strong economic news we have had in the USA since the fiat system was sorta kinda linked to the "gold standard" if you look at it as you squint real hard in a dark room."
Are you going to counter or make fun of it? 'Cause if making fun of it IS your counter, then I win.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: "2. If there was a weak economy it is because of the fiat system."
Yup. So weak that it would cause, say, a Great Depression. Or something similar, like say, a Great Recession.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: "3. If it was BAD DURING the gold standard it was because of the banks."
Exactly.
A-Rah wrote: "ALL panics, recessions, depressions, economic down turns, were caused by the BANKS and the unstable prices of commodities, artificially flooding markets, with certain commodities to artificially manipulate prices causing bubbles that ALWAYS pop."
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "You mean they use LESS gold now than they used to since the price was artificially inflated times a factor of 4. Interesting."
What's interesting is if it lacked value as you claimed, it wouldn't be in our electronics at all. If you open your phone up, how much paper money will you find shoved up in there do you think?
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "What's interesting is if it lacked value as you claimed, it wouldn't be in our electronics at all. If you open your phone up, how much paper money will you find shoved up in there do you think?"
No.A microscopic amount of gold (and getting less and less every new generation of electronics per the articles" PLUS the fact that it never goes anywhere means that it is headed for the down slop.
1. It's non consumable so it will be here forever.
2. Everybody is ALWAYS mining it all over the world
3. It isn't used for shit except what the gold lobby pays companies to use.
The TRUE VALVUE of Gold is the same War machine that you are against.
"Increasing pressure on electronics companies to ensure that their products do not contain illicit minerals from the killing fields in eastern Congo is beginning to have a significant impact. With bills on conflict minerals moving through Congress, the electronics industry has spent about $2 million per month lobbying Senate offices to relax the legislation, which would increase transparency in the supply chains for tin, tantalum, and tungsten, orthe 3Ts.1 These mineral ores, as well as gold, are key elements of electronics products including cell phones and personal computers, and also are the principal source of revenue for armed groups and military units that prey on civilians in eastern Congo. Congo’s mineral wealth did not spark the conflict in eastern Congo, but war profiteering has become the fuel that keeps theregion aflame and lies beneath the surface of major regional tensions."
They put the shit in electronics because the lobbyist PAY THEM TOO.
From Mine to Mobile Phone
Abdur Rasheed wrote: "1. So any strong economic news we have had in the USA since the fiat system was sorta kinda linked to the "gold standard" if you look at it as you squint real hard in a dark room."
Muhammad wrote: "Are you going to counter or make fun of it? 'Cause if making fun of it IS your counter, then I win."
Abdur wrote: "I have a poke a dot unicorn in my basement."
Muhammad wrote: "Did you just say that you...have a DAMN POKE A DOT UNICORN in your damn basement???"
Abdur wrote: "I WIN!"
k
Whatever gets your victory fist up, Bro!
Abdur Rasheed - Rule UPDATE*
1. Strong economic news while we were NOT on the gold standard is because of the gold standard. I didn't think that I needed to couter that because....uuuuummmm...it doesnt make any damn sense.
Maybe you should read them all again and see the holes in your logic Muhammad.
If you have a theory then you try and prove or disprove it and see what the FACTS say.
I WANT TO BELIEVE THAT THE GOLD STANDARD WAS BETTER, but what I WANT doesn't matter. Lets see what the FACTS SAY and see if it fits.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: "2. If there was a weak economy it is because of the fiat system."
Muhammad wrote: "Yup. So weak that it would cause, say, a Great Depression. Or something similar, like say, a Great Recession."
OK. So There were NO depressions, recessions or great recessions under the Gold Standard??
Yes there were PLENTY.
Then the fiat system or the gold standard doesn't matter and is NOT the reason for a bad economy.
Right? ISN'T THAT what the facts say??
Abdur Rasheed wrote: "3. If it was BAD DURING the gold standard it was because of the banks."
Muhammad wrote: Exactly because "A-Rah wrote: "ALL panics, recessions, depressions, economic down turns, were caused by the BANKS and the unstable prices of commodities, artificially flooding markets, with certain commodities to artificially manipulate prices causing bubbles that ALWAYS pop."
THAT is the point. the Gold Standard doesn't help at ALL. What IS the point?
Why don't you put a vote button on this thing to see how many people you have convinced to join your revolution so that we can wrap this thing up.

Defense of the Gold Standard & the Discovery of Freedom, pt 3 of 7

Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "Abdur Rasheed wrote: “I know that gold IS valuable because everybody says to get it, but you can lose you ass investing in gold just as easily as anything else.”
Yeah, compare how gold functions as a stable backing of currency to how it functions now under the Central Banks’ fiat system where it’s used as just another commodity. THAT’S the same. Sure. Lol"
You are mixing the two conversations again.
Muhammad wrote: "Abdur Rasheed wrote: “It's worth more now more than ever…”
In context because of the current usage in our technological society."
That's not even remotely true.
How much GOLD do you run into everyday? It's value is NOT based on its usefulness. It's value is based on its shininess.
The ancient civilizations weren't making satellites with it. It was shiny though. Please stop saying that.
Muhammad wrote: "Abdur Rasheed wrote: “…but its STILL just an inflated price based on the fluctuations of some magic wand, Muhammad.”
The price of the dollar is what is being manipulated, giving the illusion that those items are fluctuating in value. A troy ounce of gold will buy the same thing today as it would’ve bought 2,000 years ago."
Really? How much was a laptop 2000 years ago?
You don't have to go back that far. Lets go back say 40 years ago.
In 1975 the value of gold was set at $139 an ounce.
In 1975 the average house costed $39,300.
That's 283 ounces of gold.
Today the average cost of a house is $160,000.
The arbitrary cost of gold is about $1300 an ounce.
The same 283 ounces of gold that would buy you a house in 1974 is arbitrarily worth $367,900 today. Enough to buy 2 houses.
You literally couldn't be more wrong by a multiplier of 2.
Muhammad wrote: "Abdur Rasheed wrote: “It has ZERO value.”
Things with zero value are rarely hoarded, sir."
Is THAT a fact?
Like sub-prime mortgages, tickle me elmo, and pet rocks?
Tell me more.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “They don't make enough gold plated satellites and twin turbo plane to justify the price. If they made something that everybody could actually use with gold then the price would skyrocket and nobody could afford whatever they were making with it.”
Muhammad wrote: "Everyone uses jewelry."
Because of its arbitrarily assigned value. Like fashion.
Muhammad wrote"...People use gold for all kinds of things; its stats make it suitable for lots of things. [casual skim down the WIKI page] Oh, look. Gold is used in medicine."
Before I look this up I'm going to take a stab in the dark and say that the market share for gold ingestion or the fucking medicinal value isn't high enough to justify $1300 a damn ounce. The active ingredient in Viagra or Rogaine, or something that has an actual statistical use...priceless.
Muhammad wrote: " Sounds pretty valuable to ME. It has well-known uses in dentistry, and it has numerous applications making it a vital component for the electron microscope. But let me stop. That’s probably not valuable to you either, amIright? Stupid science!"
There are VERy few electron microscopes because they are VERY expensive to build "probably because they have gold in the damn things and very difficult to maintain because of how delicate they are.
If you were in business building electron microscopes you would be broke in 2 weeks.
Another terrible business model and horrible example of the usefulness of a shiny rock.
You keep trying to make gold more useful than just saying, "But everybody wants it!"
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “I know that is only if we go back to the economy limiting gold standard and we can no longer own it, but the REST of the world wouldn't and as I said its a GLOBAL economy.”
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "Yeah. So what does that mean exactly? We wouldn’t have a global economy otherwise? lol We could still do business with other nations… did not the ancients import/export?"
Sure they did. MY point was for you to stop wasting time on this gold standard horse shit and spend some time finding something that we could make and export. It could even have gold in it if it made you feel better.
Under the gold standard: If we had 6 trillion dollars in the treasury then that would be the total sum of our collective currency. The ONLY way to grow more wealth in this country would be to find more gold. We have about 100,000 people per month that turn 18 in this country. If we are limited by our money supply we would choke the economy to death in a matter of months. No growth for businesses.
If we have a town with $10,000 in gold in the treasury. We decide that $10,000 up in promissory notes to represent the $10,000 like starting a monopoly game.
This money circulates through the town. Everybody has some kind of goods, or service or landlord or they work for the business owners to earn their share of the money available.The ONLY way to grow your economy is to find more gold.
Then say some sharp young artist comes up with this new Wild Hunt book for $50 bucks a copy.
That's not you being greedy. It costs you $45 to make a copy of the book.
How fast can it sell?
Everybody is going to have to rob Peter to pay Paul or not buy the book.
How fast can you grow your business?
Muhammad wrote: "Explain yourself. Because the only component of a global economy that thrives on the fiat system is the War for Profit industry, as you yourself were so kind to shine a spotlight upon."
You didn't get that from me. That is FLAT out not true.
The ONLY true value of a nation is what it can export that people can actually use.
The MOStT profitable company in the history of companies is NOT a military contractor.
It's EXXON MOBLE. There is ZERO profit in war.
There is a SHIT load of profit in crude oil.
Abdur Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: “That less than .0001% usefulness proves my point unless you have one of the $52 million dollar jets that was made or modified back in the 1960's.”
Muhammad wrote: "It has usefulness in industry, but it also has recognized universal value that is based on its natural properties, properties that make it the perfect candidate to back a currency as it has proved for ages."
It has VERY limited usefulness in VERY few applications. The fact that you refuse to see that because you seem to want to worship it is mind boggling to me. The only statistical true value of gold is the same whimsical arbitrary value that they put on everything. The only reason why people use it in jewelry is because of the overinflated arbitrary value. You keep acting as if the streets are paved with it and its just sad.
Muhammad wrote: "Meanwhile the Central Bank’s preferred object to back a currency known as “zero” is the very worst candidate that has proven for centuries to create only debt while making a tiny fraction of the population obscenely rich."
It's there if you want it.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “And rich not based on theories from days long passed.”
Muhammad wrote: "Foolishness. You are rich based on learning what you need to learn, and applying hard-won developed skills to a particular goal path. You would probably be more wealthy underneath the goal standard and consistently growing economy."
There is no way.
The US CURRENTLY has less than a half trillion in gold in our reserves.
Our current debt alone is 16 trillion.
If you take all of the money in the US and devalue it by about 500% and we would ALL go broke.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “I know what works.”
Muhammad wrote: "Not on this topic."
[shrugs]
This might be THE time, but my money is on ME.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “ I am recession proof because I don't get caught in bubbles. Gold or otherwise.”
Muhammad wrote: "Staying out of debt traps and guarding against it makes anybody recession proof. But this fiat system is rigged to pull people into debt."
Again not even remotely true.
I know people who were 100% debt free who lost MILLIONS in the recession. You have no idea what you are talking about, but keep talking. Maybe you can convince me that you are the financial expert between us based on some book you read from the 1800's.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “So are PCB's. Diamonds. Did you every ask why gold over diamonds?”
Abdur Rasheed - Muhammad wrote: "So you can pound a diamond flat until it is transparent? And mercury? And uranium? And aluminum? lol And radon?Smh"
You say that as if you have a stock pile of stone beaten clear gold and you have a billion uses for it. You say that as if I haven't worked in technology, manufacturing, and INDUSTRY for over 13 years in a variety of different applications and Im somehow ignorant to the practical uses of hundreds of different elements.
OilGasSteelGlassEngineeringWater treatmentWaste Water treatmentCold forgingMiningAseptic food productionPharmaceutical production
As YOU know are SOME of the pots I have my hand in.
If its out there...it's MY BUSINESS to know about it and be up on the latest technological advancements and I'm telling you that the practical usefulness of gold is so small that it is statically useless in the real world.
Believe me or not.
I don't give a fuck what trap everybody else falls in.
You can call me naive. You'll NEVER call me poor again.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “I just spent a SHIT LOAD of money on diamond tipped drill bits. Gold drill bits are useless btw.”
Muhammad wrote: "Wow that was… remarkably relevant to this topic. How did you DO that???"
What? Talk about ACTUAL USEFUL SHIT? It's not that hard when you actually know what the hell you're talking about.
"B...but you can beat it flat with a rock!"
Ok. Best of luck.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “
But you called me a dumb ass? Interesting.">Space aliens again, Eh? Ok. Scary.”
FROM WIKI – “Central banks continue to keep a portion of their liquid reserves as gold in some form…”
Muhammad wrote: "Why do that if it has no value?"
Probably because there is a arbitrary value placed upon the rock for no reason...and they are a BANK. If I had to guess.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “
Lol I can’t explain it any more clearer than that. ">
Abdur wrote: "I know you can't. Because you would be wrong.”
Muhammad wrote: "Not. The flaw lies in the receiver, not the messenger."
k
Here are some more recessions and depressions that never happened while we were on the highly stable gold standard.
Panic of 1893
Panic of 1873
Sorry messenger, but you're STILL wrong.
Rah
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "I don't think you understand my point (despite me saying it a thousand times.)"
I'm carefully studying this, not to see what your point is because I get your point, but to see where the disconnect is. It is you who don't understand me on this. I see components of the disconnect; they manifest themselves snarkily with certain comments from both you and Jackals Home, and I'll attempt to address it later, so that you can at least better understand my side, if not agree with the position.
On certain of these items you've posted, I genuinely can't tell if you are creating misdirection strawmen, or if I just haven't explained myself well on this topic. I'm inclined to lean away from the former, because I'm inclined to believe (out of sibling loyalty primarily) that you aren't a strawman type of guy. So I'll try again. If necessary I will take you by the hand and walk you through some of these. If you still maintain your same stance, then we'll be through and I won't bother you with it again. It'll mean, to me, that its just not your fight and you'd rather have blind faith in the Central Bank system, despite how completely insane that is.
Muhammad Rasheed - Stand by...
Abdur Rasheed - Let me see if I can help you.
1. The gold standard represented the most stable our economy has ever been with ZERO recessions, inflation bubbles, or depressions.
2. The evil powers that be conspired to take over our tangible gold based economy and replace it with a fiat based currency not based on anything at all but wishes and dreams and the illusion of wealth and they succeeded.
3. Now every few years like clock work we go into a economic tail spin down the toilet and the under lying cause is that our paper money...is just fucking PAPER and not represented by anything.
4. This new system is designed to put us into debt and rape our country in interest and turn us into Britain. Britain by the way was the first to get off the gold standard and see where it led them.
5. Gold is valuable and useful in many ways and therefor awesome.
6. Our economy would be growing in leaps and bounds if we were on the gold standard and returned to a stable economic base to build on.
Am I missing anything?
Abdur Rasheed - Oh & RON PAUL 2016!!
Abdur Rasheed - How did I do?
Muhammad Rasheed - lol
Muhammad Rasheed - Did you read the Wiki articles about the Money Trust, their Federal Reserve Act meetings in GA, and the reference to what happened during the '07 Panic?
Muhammad Rasheed - How did you interpret that article you posted regarding the temp appointments? I thought you finding it was some kind of break through.
Abdur Rasheed - How did I do?
Abdur Rasheed - I'm not saying that there isn't a real C.O.B.R.A that secretly controls the world monetary system. I'm not convinced that there IS either.
I'm saying wether I believe it is or not or if YOU do doesn't mean anything unless you are the star of an action movie and can take them down with a bow and arrow and your half Indian friend to help track them.
I'm saying that you are SERIOUSLY wasting your time on shit that can only harm you and can't help you at all.
I named 3 different recessions that you must have a filter block on your computer and you "won't" see them because you have ALL of the answers with none of the proof and ZERO solutions, Bro.
All of the research you have done and for what?
A "End the Fed" tee shirt?
Holding my hand and walking ME through this conspiracy theory is point less. I have nothing to gain by wearing an aluminum foil cone hat...and neither do you.
I'll humor you ONLY because you are my brother, but you gotta know that it is a complete waste of time and energy.
That being said...how did I do with summing up your views on the gold standard?
Can you sum up mine?
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: “How did I do?”
There are key areas in your summary that show you either didn’t understand me, or you rejected it because it bumped heads against your blind faith wall. But at least it helps in making me think you aren’t deliberately making strawmen.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “1. The gold standard represented the most stable our economy has ever been with ZERO recessions, inflation bubbles, or depressions.”
Zero recessions of the type we’ve experienced since 1913. The kind caused by an unstable fiat currency. Baby recessions that took place under the stable gold standard economy were caused by over-enthusiastic investing and baby-level manipulating by the Money Trust figures, and didn’t kill the economy itself or threaten it. The worst things that happened are those investors themselves took a serious blow to their accounts/egos, and the regular citizens freaked out and snatched their money out of the banks (called a “run”), which make the banks take a loss and of course they hate that. It SEEMED like a big deal, but it really wasn’t. Unless you owned a bank during those days, or if the small business owner you worked for put ALL of his money into one of those greedy, mismanaged railroads.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “2. The evil powers that be conspired to take over our tangible gold based economy and replace it with a fiat based currency not based on anything at all but wishes and dreams and the illusion of wealth and they succeeded.”
The federal reserve note that we use today, the US Dollar, isn’t backed up by anything under the fiat system. Its force is the promise to back it by the Federal Reserve in partnership with the US government. Since we are trillions of dollars in debt (at least), that promise is now null and void. Continuing to print the currency despite this fact, further undermining the strength of the dollar, is a direct sabotage of the promise contract. In other words, you aren’t backing it by a tangible wealth object like gold; you’ve backed it with your WORD. Its strength is backed by your promise to maintain the currency’s integrity, which you IMMEDIATELY betrayed in order to generate the enormous funds to push us into WWI.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “3. Now every few years like clock work we go into a economic tail spin down the toilet and the under lying cause is that our paper money...is just fucking PAPER and not represented by anything.”
The underlying cause is the post above.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “4. This new system is designed to put us into debt and rape our country in interest and turn us into Britain. Britain by the way was the first to get off the gold standard and see where it led them.”
lol
At this time, the Central Bank’s version of two Unicroms, plowing through the galaxy (earth) and devouring planet after planet (nations) are known as The World Bank and The International Monetary Fund. They are fucking RUTHLESS and just completely destroyed Argentina a few years back In a high-profile, international case that barely made a blip on American news programs. Some national leaders are well aware of the dangers represented by signing the citizens’ lives over to that system, recognize their contracts for what they are and reject them. In which case the US president will promptly receive an intelligence report saying that national leader is against freedom or whatever. The Money Trust will get their way with or without the leader’s compliance.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “5. Gold is valuable and useful in many ways and therefor awesome.”
Your sarcasm is not lost on me.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “6. Our economy would be growing in leaps and bounds if we were on the gold standard and returned to a stable economic base to build on.”
I believe we agreed to “a snail’s pace” for the purposes of this thread.
Muhammad Rasheed - btw it's absolutely not a good look for the leader of the Herotalk stooges to say that arguing on the Internet is all of a sudden "a complete waste of time and energy" to him. You don't have a problem cramming your theories about anything else down peoples' throats, so now magically you're above it? wtf?
A-Rah wrote: "Arguing on the Internet is a complete waste of time and energy if it involves a topic that I'm not interested in."
Abdur Rasheed wrote: "I'll humor you ONLY because you are my brother..."
Okay. Thanks. Please understand that I truly appreciate it when you humor me. Since I don't want to be a burden, in the future I'll refrain from wasting all of your time and energy with my lowly attempts to get you interesting in the topics that fascinate me. Naturally I'll expect the same courtesy in return.
Muhammad Rasheed - Your findings of those baby panic attacks contain a WEALTH of info that support my side of this. I need to compile a list from them. I'm disappointed that you didn't see it after reading the articles I posted, but I'll show you.
Jeremy Travis - I wish Neil P. was here to set BOTH of you mooks straight!
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Can you sum up mine?"
Sure. I was looking forward to it. Let me get ready...


Muhammad Rasheed - FROM WIKI - "In economics, deflation is a decrease in the general price level of goods and services. Deflation occurs when the inflation rate falls below 0% (a negative inflation rate). This should not be confused with disinflation, a slow-down in the inflation rate (i.e., when inflation declines to lower levels). Inflation reduces the real value of money over time; conversely, deflation increases the real value of money – the currency of a national or regional economy. This allows one to buy more goods with the same amount of money over time.
Economists generally believe that deflation is a problem in a modern economy because it increases the real value of debt, and may aggravate recessions and lead to a deflationary spiral. Historically not all episodes of deflation correspond with periods of poor economic growth. Deflation occurred in the U.S. during most of the 19th century (the most important exception was during the Civil War). This deflation was caused by technological progress that created significant economic growth. This deflationary period of considerable economic progress preceded the establishment of the U.S. Federal Reserve System and its active management of monetary matters."
----------------------------
There are so many golden nuggets in those two paragraphs alone, it's ridiculous.
Muhammad Rasheed - "Deflation occurs when improvements in production efficiency lower the overall price of goods."
The economic boom from the 19th century's Industrial Revolution growth was a significantly faster increase than the "at a snail's pace." Deflation was possible because of the stable currency. The economic booms associated with the Information Age lacked the same deflation because of the fiat system. Deflation benefits the regular people and is a thorn in the side for the 1% and bank owners. Inflation oppresses the regular people and enriches the 1% and the banks.
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “When your money is limited by your gold reserves your economy crawls at a snails pace.”
Muhammad wrote: “Lol
1. Define “a snail’s pace.2. So?”
Abdur Rasheed wrote: “If you have goods to sell you cannot raise your price.”
Muhammad wrote: “Sure I can! If supply and demand call for it I can raise my price to where the market will sustain it. A certain good I sell is scarce but the people are demanding more, so I can raise my price up from 1/1,000,000 of a gold-backed cent to 5/1,000,000 of a gold backed cent.”
You just typed that you can raise your price by .000005 of a penny.
In order to make a profit.
With a straight face.
I hope you are just fucking with me because that is the single dumbest thing I have ever read.
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: “Can you sum up mine?”
1.) An ancient financial system, that already wrecked economies in the Old World and slants all financial benefits into the hands of 1% of the population, is exactly what is needed for a modern, complex GLOBAL economy to prosper.
2.) What I really, really need you to understand, Muhammad, about a stable currency backed by a return to the gold standard is FUCK COMMODITIES TRADING ON WALL STREET ON A SYSTEM THAT’S NOT ON THE GOLD STANDARD!! I’M RECESSION PROOF!!! I LIKE MY ASS!!!
3.) What I also really need you to understand about gold is that, in the current fiat system where it only benefits the banks that we aren’t on the gold standard, gold is traded like any other commodity despite it having all the qualities that make it the best candidate to back a currency on an economy-stabilizing precious metals standard. Because of that you shouldn’t invest in it because the banks will manipulate it like they do every other commodity.
4.) Under the fiat system, inflation dilutes the dollar, decreasing the purchasing power steadily over time, so gold costs more than it did back in the 1970s [when we still retained some of our gold reserves. ~M.R.], but I need you to understand that wasn’t inflation, it was the Fed or Wall Street or somebody arbitrarily making those numbers change. Muhammad it saddens me that you’re so wrong about all of this.
5.) The full listing of gold’s practical usage is very unimpressive when you hold it up to the other commodities in this current system. In you want to invest, there are a billion other things to spend your money on that I would recommend instead.
6.) Because it is treated in the current system just like any other commodity, with its number value arbitrarily chosen day to day by the Fed, ANY value that humans have ever had about gold over the course of the last 10,000 years is suspect. Other than being pretty, gold is completely worthless.
7.) Gold has no value, and you pointing out that it has always been an object of wealth in every single human civilization ever will never make it valuable. It’s worthless, and people repeating old clichés like “Its worth its weight in gold” as if gold is actually supposed to be valuable in a real sense is Foolishness & Fuckery of the highest order. You’re just being a willing dupe of Ron Paul and them. Making traditional wedding bands out of gold as some kind of symbol of eternal permanence is arbitrary tomfoolery that has zero relevance in how gold really is. I know this because I work in an industry where it is my job to know that gold is worthless. Its unique elemental properties that caused every people ever to use it as a universal monetary system for tens of thousands of years are an arbitrary joke. We all should just toss both it and all seven electron microscopes in the ocean. Fuck gold and science. When will people get it???
8.) Even though we were fine economy wise back in the pre-Fed days, with the only minor finance crisis problems of the time causing the 1% to take the big hits instead of the middle class and the poor, their money system was a complete joke and is worth my complete disdain. The days of olde were stupid about money. What did they know?
9.) Even if all of that alien/aluminum foil hat/conspiracy nonsense WAS true regarding the Money Trust/Federal Reserve, Muhammad, they are too big to fail. I advise you to burn all of your books, destroy those files, stop talking about it and hide under the covers before they hear you. Are you trying to get your fool self killed?
10.) The War for Profit industry showcased in Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 film demonstrating how it is making billions and billions and billions and billions of dollars for the 1% is actually not profitable to anyone.
Muhammad Rasheed - Oh, and:
11.) You’re making me sick, embarrassing me, wasting my time AND energy talking about this with me. All of a sudden typing lengthy rants on the Internet isn’t fun anymore and I want to go home.
Muhammad Rasheed - The rest of the argument with Abdur can be found here:
Abdur is Trippin'
The Note is live, and the discussion can be continued there. I didn't want it in here because it started to turn into sibling bickering stuff that dragged down the thread.
Muhammad Rasheed - "...whether free-market economies can achieve full employment without government intervention, is a purely factual question that can be answered from history. For the first 150 years of the United States, there was no policy of federal intervention when the economy turned down.
No depression during all that time was as catastrophic as the Great Depression of the 1930s, when both the Federal Reserve System and Presidents Herbert Hoover and Franklin D. Roosevelt intervened in the economy on a massive and unprecedented scale.
Despite the myth that it was the stock-market crash of 1929 that caused the double-digit unemployment of the 1930s, unemployment never reached double digits in any of the 12 months that followed the crash.
Unemployment peaked at 9 percent in December 1929 and was back down to 6.3 percent by June 1930, when the first major federal intervention took place under Herbert Hoover. The unemployment decline then reversed, rising to hit double digits six months later. As Hoover and then FDR continued to intervene, double-digit unemployment persisted throughout the remainder of the 1930s.
Conversely, when President Warren G. Harding faced an annual unemployment rate of 11.7 percent in 1921, he did absolutely nothing, except for cutting government spending.
Keynesian economists would say that this was exactly the wrong thing to do. History, however, says that unemployment the following year went down to 6.7 percent — and, in the year after that, 2.4 percent.
Under Calvin Coolidge, the ultimate in non-interventionist government, the annual unemployment rate got down to 1.8 percent." ~Thomas Sowell
Muhammad Rasheed - The banks always manipulate the interest rates. As a business that is how they make their money. It doesn’t matter why they SAY they are doing it, in order to make a profit as a for-profit company, they manipulate the interest rates.
Under a certain type of financial climate or system, the inflation rates are very low and even negative (deflation). That’s obviously a bad time for the banking business in which their regular income is dismal from the owners’ perspective. But under those conditions, the economy is stable, and the prices of goods are generally low. Of course scarce goods that in high demand are going to be higher in a free market; that’s just basic economics. The life is easier for the average person when the banks are struggling financially in this way. It’s not even necessarily that they are “struggling.” Charging regular and customary fees for general banking services very well may enable them to be profitable if they scale down. But knowing you possess a magic dial that you can use to turn up and double, triple, quadruple your income at will in your possession… as my brother asked, “What would YOU do?”
Jackals Home - Lemme tell you, Muhammad, the discussion is over. No one in their right mind is going to jump into this quagmire at this point. You're best served by shelving these arguments for another day, rather than continuing to argue after you removed the only other participant in the discussion.
Muhammad Rasheed - I didn't remove him, I just moved the bickering siblings segment to another area. I even put the link to it in the same area that that segment was in for casual readers to find it. And he's 100% welcome to return and just discuss this stuff with me without making it personal and pushing my buttons. I didn't delete that segment because there were still some good points in it he brought up worth exploring. I've learned a lot and connected some more dots just in the back and forth with him, which always makes serious discussions worth it. Saving it for another day has no value for me since I usually study this stuff all by myself with little outside feedback anyway. I need the back-and-forth. Abdur asked some questions and made me see some things from a different angle that helped me. If you would like to poke some holes in my side of the argument, then please do. Shine a light on the blind sides that you see in it, and let's just discuss it. Even if you don't want to explore it with me, I'd appreciate you just putting it out there.  What do you see? 
Muhammad Rasheed – Listen, I don't expect everybody that I know to be as interested in it as I am, but I do plan to put out some key points that I feel need to be known. That are actually important.
Jackals Home - Nah. I mean, I'll be honest, I love arguing with people, and you're one of my favorite people, but there's nothing to be gained for me, here. You're thirty-thousand words deep into your defense of the gold standard? Little-"L" libertarianism? And all I can say is that your brief, sarcastic summary of Abdur's argument was more convincing to me than pretty much anything you said in your argument (#6 and #7 especially). Like, you making fun of what he was saying convinced me more than anything you had to say. I feel some of Abdur's frustration, in that your half of the discussion does seem like someone who's discovered a new talk radio host, or self-help book series by a white-toothed charlatan, and is super enthusiastic about it, and isn't really super-willing to look at the flaws in what this charismatic mystery person (that you're clearly a fan of) has Emphasized! So! Hard!
I feel like you're in a position where you're isolated both ideologically and geographically, and what you're exposed to is maybe not the best? Almost like you're going to a daily Amway meeting? So I'm not looking for more opportunities to get into pointless arguments over stuff with you.
Muhammad Rasheed - That's clearly the general opinion that I was getting from Abdur's argument, and it's related to one of the areas I wanted to put out there, a concept I had also bumped heads with you over not too long ago (speaking of which I haven't forgotten to get back to you over our truther argument; I have my reference materials with me now). The idea that labeling someone with one of those attack labels means they aren't worth listening to. Abdur's whole side is frustrating to ME because of that. "You're a conspiracy theorist, therefore ANYTHING you type is complete horseshit. Stop talking crazy and just LISTEN TO ME for your own good!" That's the fundamental bottom line of how Abdur and you come across to me, and it's okay. I don't care enough for it to discourage me or make me feel like I'm "wasting my life until I die" for the sole reason but because you don't know. If you knew about it, and had the ability to argue either side... that level of know... and was able to discuss it rationally and break it down, then it would be a different matter altogether. I WOULD listen. Really.
But from the outside looking in, slowly shaking your head while feeling sorry for your friend the poor deluded conspiracy theorist who's ideas are not worth taking seriously for even a second to understand what he's trying to say, I CAN'T listen to you. Because you are actually part of the problem.
Muhammad Rasheed - ^I believe this 100%, but I also said it as a challenge to you (and Abdur).
Did it work?
Muhammad Rasheed - Jackals Home wrote: "Nah. I mean, I'll be honest, I love arguing with people, and you're one of my favorite people, but there's nothing to be gained for me, here."
btw I argue non-serious topics, too, as demonstrated in that Blob thread, just because of the entertainment factor. Arguing on the Internet is more fun than tv to me right now, and my #1 hobby. It's the best. There may not be anything to tangibly gain true, but it's still rip-roaring great fun.
Muhammad Rasheed - Remember that time when you, Rhonda and I were in that restaurant and we had that brief argument regarding whether Star Fox's costume was primarily white, or primarily red? That was a wasted moment that should've been in a message board forum. lol
Jackals Home - No, it didn't work, mainly because I'm not your father, and unless you're hurting yourself and/or others, it really doesn't matter to me what you believe. You can believe crazy shit and have zero negative effect on my life. And since (as near as I can tell) you're not hurting yourself or others, I'm under no ethical duress to argue with you over whatever your current life's devotion is. Starfox's costume is far more important.
Here, start a new subject, cause I won't--Avengers 2, can you make it without Robert Downey Jr., and more importantly, should you? I have a pretty solid argument on that one.
Muhammad Rasheed - James the #6 and #7 parts of that summary were the WEAKEST parts of Abdur's argument!
Muhammad Rasheed - How can something that has NEVER not represented true wealth by civilized humans SPECIFICALLY because of the unique properties it has, be considered to have been 'arbitrarily' given value? It's those very unique properties that makes gold valuable in the first place, otherwise we can just as easily use granite, or chucks of discarded sidewalk concrete... that's what 'arbitrarily chosen' would actually look like. Abdur was coming across as just willfully stubborn on that issue. Is he REALLY the only human being in civilized society to ever consider gold to be valueless? No, he was just taking a hard-headed stance against me because he didn't want to be caught in public agreeing with a notorious conspiracy theorist and getting some of my crazy on his shoes. THAT'S why I was sarcastically flip with him. He didn't have a real argument because he wasn't taking me serious AT ALL.
Consequently I'm just using the opportunity to educate on the concepts involved. People don't have to "jump into the quagmire" but I'm still going to talk about it.
Muhammad Rasheed - Jackals Home wrote: "Like, you making fun of what he was saying convinced me more than anything you had to say."
That's because you already believed it, and when you read it, like him, you said, "Yeah! That's exactly what I believe already!" It didn't "convince" you, it just summed up your side, which was the point.
Jackals Home - "How can something that has NEVER not represented true wealth by civilized humans SPECIFICALLY because of the unique properties it has, be considered to have been 'arbitrarily' given value?"
Tradition doesn't equal truth, correlation doesn't equal causation, and if gold never existed, our worldwide economy would look exactly the same. Humans looking to abandon the barter system will use literally (literally literally, not figuratively literally) anything for currency:
Rai stones
If you think your views haven't been given a fair shake, by me, all I can tell is that you are mistaken. I have no reason to lie to you.
If you think I'm prone to disregarding reasonable arguments delivered by people I respect, that's One Hundred Percent your hang-up. It's not riding on my signal, it's interference on your end.
Abdur Rasheed - Yah Sea Biscuit!
[beat]
Get up Sea Biscuit
[beat]
The problem with your argument from my dumb point of view is the you already have your answer so all the facts must support your answer or you discard the fact instead of looking for truth.
Me pointing out the holes in your argument just so you can bat the facts to the side is frustrating and nothing can be gained from it.
Muhammad : There were zero recessions, depressions, and economic down turns during the gold standard. For real though!
Rah: "What about these four different ones that happened like clock work every few years and lasted about 8 years each?"
Muhammad wrote: "Those were minor and only effected one guy on Nantucket island. Fuck HIM!"
Rah: "Well apparently 15,000 businesses went belly up and HALF of the banks in the US went out of business and took every bodies money with them. THAT is why people would panic and go and snatch all of their money out of the banks in a heart beat. No FED security. That's NOT minor."
Muhammad: "Those four recession/depressions didn't have anything to do with the GOLD STANDARD!"
Rah: "That had NOTHING to do with what you said. You didn't say that there were none ever literally CAUSED BY THE GOLD STANDARD. You said that we were so stable because our money was back up by a global commodity that there were NONE ever literally.
Muhammad wrote: "Evil bankers didn't want to lose everything that they earned in one day so those fuckers caused a global economic meltdown."
Rah: "Just like they do today. What's changed? What's the case FOR the gold standard if we went through the same shit that we go through today? Every recession/depression we have ever had are all commodities based banker shit storms and no financial system based on another kind of commodity is going to or HAS stopped it. "
Muhammad: "It was goooood and stuff back then except for that guy in Nantucket."
Rah: "Fuck it!"
After days of the "Muhammad Fuck the Facts Game" I'm good.
After a while I look for the bottom line. I can stretch my brain and ignore the facts and end up walking to Bell Isle bare foot with my family in toe as I point at people on the street and yell, "GET AWAY FROM US GOVERNMENT AGENT!"Or I can move the fuck on with reality.
I'm a fix it guy. If I can't fix it...FUCK IT.
Relationship stuff helps me put things in perspective and work through problems and maybe help somebody else.
Political shit I can fix by getting the word out to vote and hopefully make some positive change. People in Washington State and Colorado are glad that they changed their political structure and now they can smoke all the weed they want.
The BEST case scenario in your world is me and my brother in a basement in a secret location planning to topple the secret organization that finances COUNTRIES.
WE have seen what happens when we allow ourselves to get sucked into the black hole of conspiracies.
I didn't like it.
Come to my house looking all frantic and crazy saying,
Muhammad: "Abdur! Quick! Get in the van! It's all going down! We HAVE to get to Bell Isle! The Agents are coming!"
You will become the latest recipient of "The HOT SHIT" award and by that I mean I will shoot you in the ass with some hot shit and then call the World bank.
Rah: "It's me. I got him. Yeah he was looking all crazy and shit. He won't be a problem anymore. I'm going to plant some animal porn on him and dump him where you told me to discredit him. Finish the wire transfer and I will let you know where his followers are staying."
Rah>>>>>>>>>
Muhammad Rasheed - Abdur Rasheed wrote: "The problem with your argument from my dumb point of view is the you already have your answer so all the facts must support your answer or you discard the fact instead of looking for truth."
But that's exactly how you come across to me. I'm still fleshing out my argument for you to see it, but YOU think that you have all the answers. "I work in XYZ industry so I magically know all about gold standards and Rose Wilder Lane's entire philosophy." I don't have all the answers, even filling in missing pieces of the puzzle for myself by following your links in the last few days. So it's not true. I didn't expect you to jump 100% on board with me; all I was looking for was a reasonable debate partner to bounce ideas off of... what was the term for that you used, James? the 'dedicated cynic' or something like that? But you don't even want to listen to me at all. You stuck your conspiracy theorist label on me and you're done. "Why is he still talking to me about this garbage? Can't he see the label I stuck on him?" Forgive me for thinking the two of you... two of the short list of people whose opinions I respected more than any other... were better than that.