Zeitgeist Addendum (Topic)

Quote

Judging by your reply, you don't understand how banks work... Any and every bank works on Fraud.. They create an open-ended contract (in a TRUE contract, both parties must sign. When you get a loan from a bank, they don't sign shit), get you to sign it without disclosing the full details and information of the contract (which is also illegal), monetize YOUR signature to create the value stated in the open-ended contract they've created and tricked you into signing to create a value from your signature, then sell it off to balance their budget to $0 because if they still have your monetized signature, they're in debt to YOU however much their open-ended contract states because YOU created the value from your signature. In my father's case the total amount of the loan he took out for the semi-truck (which was not $40,000 but the judge decreed the bank give a $40,000 to the court, as requested by my father) was the debt the bank owed TO him.

In order to understand this, you must understand how The Federal Reserve and its fiet money, works.

Whatever the value was of the loan (I'll just call it 40,000 because that's a nice even number), if the bank owed it to him than it clearly was what I called it: bad accounting or corruption. That is a topic entirely of its own.

Kellimus, I think you're falling into a spiral that I've seen before. Rather than address the substantitive material in my post, you simply reiterated your claims from before. For example:

Quote from Kellimus

How can there be 'money' if there is debt? Look at the National Debt. Over so many TRILLIONS of Dollars, right? OF DEBT. Now explain to me how there can be 'money' that has WORTH and VALUE, if it is backed up by DEBT?

Quote from

Vrael

First, there IS 'money' to back it up. Your house, your computer, the ride on the ferris wheel at the amusement park, a cord of wood, a meal at a resturant, all these are "money" The reason these worthless scraps of paper are so useful is because as a socety we come together and say this: "Not every item has a value to every person, and bartering the actual items we own for the actual items we need is very inefficient. So, we will all accept a single standard of "money" that has value in terms of every good and service, and since we do not need to waste time finding mutually beneficial trades, we can live a little easier and more efficiently by accepting this as a standard of the value of our possessions and time."

I have addressed this, however you have not addressed my address.

Quote from Kellimus

Note in Economical terms, means: Form of debt. Or, a form of an IOU. Either way, it shows that you are indebted to someone/something. So if you have five $100 bills, you are indebted to The Federal Reserve $500 because you have five $100 Federal Reserve Notes that they have printed out and put out there.

Quote from

Vrael

Wrong. There is definitely money (for example, what do you use to purchase things? certainly you don't trade your chickens), and the federal reserve passing these notes onto us is not passing debt onto us, but rather passing a note that says "you may trade this scrap of paper for any other good or service with equivelent value to X" It is in reality, passing value on to us.

I have addressed this as well.

Quote from Kellimus

how can you continue to believe that the United States of America has 'money' when its Centralized BANK is TRILLIONS of dollars IN DEBT?

You're reiterating something you already reiterated, two quotes above.

Furthermore, you are displaying an extremely close-minded set of "arguments" and refusing to accept anything other than what you currently believe, for example:

Quote from Kellimus

You can't. You can try to rationalize it in any way, shape, or form, but it just doesn't work in the world of Economics.

Not only that, but you are making assumptions about my knowledge:

Quote from Kellimus

In order to understand this, you must understand how The Federal Reserve and its fiet money, works.

Quote from Kellimus

We're not backed by gold like they want you to think

Quote from Kellimus

Ever heard of a United States Note?

I can understand if these were unintentional.

Quote from Kellimus

Judging by your reply, you don't understand how banks work...

I have some knowledge of banks. Granted, I don't work at one, but I have loans and an account and such. And I certainly know that if I were to go to a judge saying that a bank owes me a large sum of money because I signed my promissory note, I would probably get laughed at. (Assuming I had recieved the actual funds and was in the process of paying them back.)

Referring back to this,

Quote from Kellimus

You can't. You can try to rationalize it in any way, shape, or form, but it just doesn't work in the world of Economics.

I would say that the entire class of classical economists would agree with the points I have put forth. I had an economics class recently, and the classical economists, like adam smith, seem to at least agree that there is some value by which we trade. That's not to say other economists don't agree that we trade in valuable items, but I only need a single counter example to break your rule stated above.

And if you would be so kind, could you say your overall claim once for me? Like, the statement you are trying to prove. "There is no money" or "THe Fed is a lie" for example.

None.

Quote from

Vrael

Quote

Judging by your reply, you don't understand how banks work... Any and every bank works on Fraud.. They create an open-ended contract (in a TRUE contract, both parties must sign. When you get a loan from a bank, they don't sign shit), get you to sign it without disclosing the full details and information of the contract (which is also illegal), monetize YOUR signature to create the value stated in the open-ended contract they've created and tricked you into signing to create a value from your signature, then sell it off to balance their budget to $0 because if they still have your monetized signature, they're in debt to YOU however much their open-ended contract states because YOU created the value from your signature. In my father's case the total amount of the loan he took out for the semi-truck (which was not $40,000 but the judge decreed the bank give a $40,000 to the court, as requested by my father) was the debt the bank owed TO him.

In order to understand this, you must understand how The Federal Reserve and its fiet money, works.

Whatever the value was of the loan (I'll just call it 40,000 because that's a nice even number), if the bank owed it to him than it clearly was what I called it: bad accounting or corruption. That is a topic entirely of its own.

Kellimus, I think you're falling into a spiral that I've seen before. Rather than address the substantitive material in my post, you simply reiterated your claims from before. For example:

Quote from Kellimus

How can there be 'money' if there is debt? Look at the National Debt. Over so many TRILLIONS of Dollars, right? OF DEBT. Now explain to me how there can be 'money' that has WORTH and VALUE, if it is backed up by DEBT?

Quote from

Vrael

First, there IS 'money' to back it up. Your house, your computer, the ride on the ferris wheel at the amusement park, a cord of wood, a meal at a resturant, all these are "money" The reason these worthless scraps of paper are so useful is because as a socety we come together and say this: "Not every item has a value to every person, and bartering the actual items we own for the actual items we need is very inefficient. So, we will all accept a single standard of "money" that has value in terms of every good and service, and since we do not need to waste time finding mutually beneficial trades, we can live a little easier and more efficiently by accepting this as a standard of the value of our possessions and time."

I have addressed this, however you have not addressed my address.

Quote from Kellimus

Note in Economical terms, means: Form of debt. Or, a form of an IOU. Either way, it shows that you are indebted to someone/something. So if you have five $100 bills, you are indebted to The Federal Reserve $500 because you have five $100 Federal Reserve Notes that they have printed out and put out there.

Quote from

Vrael

Wrong. There is definitely money (for example, what do you use to purchase things? certainly you don't trade your chickens), and the federal reserve passing these notes onto us is not passing debt onto us, but rather passing a note that says "you may trade this scrap of paper for any other good or service with equivelent value to X" It is in reality, passing value on to us.

I have addressed this as well.

Quote from Kellimus

how can you continue to believe that the United States of America has 'money' when its Centralized BANK is TRILLIONS of dollars IN DEBT?

You're reiterating something you already reiterated, two quotes above.

Furthermore, you are displaying an extremely close-minded set of "arguments" and refusing to accept anything other than what you currently believe, for example:

Quote from Kellimus

You can't. You can try to rationalize it in any way, shape, or form, but it just doesn't work in the world of Economics.

Not only that, but you are making assumptions about my knowledge:

Quote from Kellimus

In order to understand this, you must understand how The Federal Reserve and its fiet money, works.

Quote from Kellimus

We're not backed by gold like they want you to think

Quote from Kellimus

Ever heard of a United States Note?

I can understand if these were unintentional.

Quote from Kellimus

Judging by your reply, you don't understand how banks work...

I have some knowledge of banks. Granted, I don't work at one, but I have loans and an account and such. And I certainly know that if I were to go to a judge saying that a bank owes me a large sum of money because I signed my promissory note, I would probably get laughed at. (Assuming I had recieved the actual funds and was in the process of paying them back.)

Referring back to this,

Quote from Kellimus

You can't. You can try to rationalize it in any way, shape, or form, but it just doesn't work in the world of Economics.

I would say that the entire class of classical economists would agree with the points I have put forth. I had an economics class recently, and the classical economists, like adam smith, seem to at least agree that there is some value by which we trade. That's not to say other economists don't agree that we trade in valuable items, but I only need a single counter example to break your rule stated above.

And if you would be so kind, could you say your overall claim once for me? Like, the statement you are trying to prove. "There is no money" or "THe Fed is a lie" for example.

So because you don't understand anything about our true rights and you're assuming you'd be laughed at by a judge, you're going to disregard the whole case my father had, which is the case that EVERYONE HAS when it comes to banks? Okay, cool. That's fine by me.

I'm reiterating because they are the point. You are ignoring the point about how there is no money. Debt != Money.

Our society runs on Debt.

None.

Oh, and also. Go take Economics outside of a University. Universities are tools for the 'elitists' if you wanna call them that, to teach you what you need to be taught to keep under their lies.

None.

Quote from Kellimus

So because you don't understand anything about our true rights and you're assuming you'd be laughed at by a judge, you're going to disregard the whole case my father had, which is the case that EVERYONE HAS when it comes to banks? Okay, cool. That's fine by me.

I'm reiterating because they are the point. You are ignoring the point about how there is no money. Debt != Money.

Our society runs on Debt.

First, this is another assumption about my knowledge and understanding. Secondly, I have not disregarded your fathers case. If I have however missed some crucial relevancy it has to this post, please explain it more thoroughly rather than simply say I don't understand it. However, I also believe you have left some data out, regarding your father's case. Was he never originally given the money? What exactly was it that he took them to court for? Failure to pay?

Thirdly, you must PROVE your points, not simply reiterate them. Use reason, argument, experience, ect, don't simply claim something without backing it up. I am not "ignoring the point about how there is no money," I am proving it incorrect. If my argument shows that your point is incorrect, you must either A). Show my argument to be wrong or B). Show some way that my argument is inapplicable or C). Show some other way that your claim can be supported. (There may be a fourth alternative but these are the main ones)

Fourth, what are your economics credentials? Yours, not your fathers. Mine are certainly not sufficient enough to write an award-winning-paper on economics or anything, but with proper analytical skills much can be done with little information. Besides that, where would I take "Economics" outside a university? Online? Sure I'll read up wikipedia on the subject, or some other accredited article, but guess who writes those? People from Universities. Who writes the books on the subject? People from universities. Who runs the banks of which we are discussing? People from universities. I cannot think of a better place to learn about such a topic than a University, short of maybe running my own bank. Perhaps I should draw on what my parents and others know? I am quite certain that they would agree money has value. A university is a tool for ME, not a tool for "elitists" Or maybe I'm just an elitist

Quote from Kellimus

Quote from

Vrael

Furthermore, you are displaying an extremely close-minded set of "arguments" and refusing to accept anything other than what you currently believe, for example:

You can't. You can try to rationalize it in any way, shape, or form, but it just doesn't work in the world of Economics.

You are reinforcing this assertion by refusing to argue with substantitive material.

Quote from Kellimus

You are ignoring the point about how there is no money.

I have already cited myself multiple times in relation to this and you still refuse to offer any rebuttal other than your original claim.

Quote from Kellimus

Our society runs on Debt.

Then prove it. Show my arguments to be false and provide conclusive evidence towards the matter. I don't expect a reasearch paper on the matter, I mean this IS only SEN, but you are still going to have to do better than acting like a broken record to change anyone's mind.

None.

Quote from

Vrael

Quote from Kellimus

Our society runs on Debt.

Then prove it. Show my arguments to be false and provide conclusive evidence towards the matter. I don't expect a reasearch paper on the matter, I mean this IS only SEN, but you are still going to have to do better than acting like a broken record to change anyone's mind.

Dude, I've proven it time and time again, just look at our National Debt, and how we do business with the rest of the world based off this NATIONAL DEBT.

If you don't understand how that's running off debt, then I don't know how to help you understand.

None.

Quote

Use reason, argument, experience, ect, don't simply claim something without backing it up

Have I not given you examples of what a Note in Economic terms is and how our Federal Reserve CENTRALIZED-BANK runs on them and circulates them throughout the United States?

Have I not given you something to research called United States Note and you will see that was what our country used when we were on a Gold and Silver standard instead of a debt-based elastic economy?

Have I not given you the idea to look up the Uniform Commercial Code, Common Law, and Admiralty Law??

Have I not used reason in my judgment about how since our nation is in debt, we have no money because DEBT is a form of OWING SOMETHING TO SOMEONE/SOMETHING?

If that isn't enough examples then I really honestly don't know what to tell you.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Feb 2 2009, 6:51 pm by Kellimus.

None.

Quote from Kellimus

Dude, I've proven it time and time again

No, you have not. You made one claim so far over and over again, and I have made one rebuttal against it. After my rebuttal you reiterated your claim, and simply reiterating your claim is not sufficient to support your claim. I have already told you how to convince me.

Take this for example:

Bob: The sky is blue.
John: prove it.
Bob: The sky is blue. Duh!

Bob may be correct, but he didn't ACTUALLY prove that the sky is blue. A proof would go more like this:

Bob: The sky is blue.
John: Prove it.
Bob: Light traveling to the surface of the earth is absorbed or deflected by the earth's atmosphere, and it happens that the wavelength of blue light happens to make it most o the surface of the earth, which we see.
John: oh.
So if you believe you are correct then PROVE it, don't just reiterate your claims.

Quote from

Vrael

Thirdly, you must PROVE your points, not simply reiterate them. Use reason, argument, experience, ect, don't simply claim something without backing it up. I am not "ignoring the point about how there is no money," I am proving it incorrect. If my argument shows that your point is incorrect, you must either A). Show my argument to be wrong or B). Show some way that my argument is inapplicable or C). Show some other way that your claim can be supported. (There may be a fourth alternative but these are the main ones)

Quote from

Vrael

If you don't understand how that's running off debt, then I don't know how to help you understand.

You can start, by addressing this argument, the one I have made so far:

1). Money is a standard of value used for efficient trading
2). $500 in federal reserve notes is a value held by the citizen, and not a debt held by the citizen, since those $500 in federal reserve notes can be used to purchase things and are accepted by everyone as a standard of value
3). It is reasonable to assume (based on certain factors like a credit score, and salary and work ethics), that a person who does not necessarily have a sum of money at the current time will be able to produce that amount in the future.

Quote from Kellimus

Have I not given you examples of what a Note in Economic terms is and how our Federal Reserve CENTRALIZED-BANK runs on them and circulates them throughout the United States?

I am quite aware of this. I however, provided you with an alternate definition. Namely: a Note is a claim on a value, or a promise to give a certain value. I am quite certain I have knowledge of how Federal Reserve Notes work. Just in case you think I don't again, here is the wikipedia article on promissory notes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_note I have read it and it conforms perfectly to what I have said.

As for the gold and silver standard, certainly the system was different back then. I think your claim is that the dollar has no actual value because it is not backed up by a single good. Rather, it is now backed up by ALL goods and services paid for in U.S. dollars, and hence has value.

Quote from Kellimus

Have I not given you the idea to look up the Uniform Commercial Code, Common Law, and Admiralty Law??

I looked them up. Feel free to use points from them to support your argument.

Quote from Kellimus

Have I not used reason in my judgment about how since our nation is in debt, we have no money because DEBT is a form of OWING SOMETHING TO SOMEONE/SOMETHING?

That does not follow logically. If I have 100 dollars, and I owe 10 dollars to my brother, I still have money. Granted, the situation with the U.S. debt is in the trillions and quite a bit more complex, but the point is we can have money while still being in debt.

And quit double posting

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Feb 3 2009, 4:13 am by Vrael.

None.

Quote from

Vrael

That does not follow logically. If I have 100 dollars, and I owe 10 dollars to my brother, I still have money. Granted, the situation with the U.S. debt is in the trillions and quite a bit more complex, but the point is we can have money while still being in debt.

And quit double posting

Do you see it working that way ANYWHERE ELSE in the world? No.

None.

meme

National Debt is not exclusive to the United States.
http://www.aneki.com/debt.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt
http://cluaran.free.fr/dette.html <-- France's national debt clock
http://cluaran.free.fr/debt.html <-- United Kingdom's debt clock
http://www.steuerzahler.de/ <-- Germany's (at top of page)
http://www.mof.go.jp/english/files.htm <-- Japan's Ministry of Finance Statistics, go into the debt statistics. Here is a link to the most recent.
http://www.rgk.se/ <-- Sweden's

Post has been edited 3 time(s), last time on Feb 5 2009, 5:04 pm by Mini Moose 2707.

None.

Quote from Kellimus

Do you see it working that way ANYWHERE ELSE in the world? No.

Even without the references from mini_moose's post, yes. For example, remove the word "dollar" from the post you were referring to, and replace it with the words "monetary unit."
(Though technically I've only ever been to canada and the u.s., so I have not literally seen it working that way, but it seems entirely reasonable that it does.)

"That does not follow logically. If I have 100 monetary units, and I owe 10 monetary units to my brother, I still have money."

It can be rocks, diamonds, scraps of paper, whatever is held as the standard of transfer. On Diablo II it used to be Soj's if you ever played that.

None.

wow russia is pretty low.

@centri: that was not an invitation for you to start ranting about the motherland

http://waitbutwhy.com/2013/09/why-generation-y-yuppies-are-unhappy.html
"We're being taught to hate downwards"

Quote from

Vrael

Quote from Kellimus

Do you see it working that way ANYWHERE ELSE in the world? No.

Even without the references from mini_moose's post, yes. For example, remove the word "dollar" from the post you were referring to, and replace it with the words "monetary unit."
(Though technically I've only ever been to canada and the u.s., so I have not literally seen it working that way, but it seems entirely reasonable that it does.)

"That does not follow logically. If I have 100 monetary units, and I owe 10 monetary units to my brother, I still have money."

It can be rocks, diamonds, scraps of paper, whatever is held as the standard of transfer. On Diablo II it used to be Soj's if you ever played that.

Monetary value is only applicable to those who continue to let The Federal Reserve monetize paper.

Hell, I can monetize my signature and use it as a valid form of tender. For example, I can have my signature pay for a brand new car as long as the dealership provides a liability and gives me no remedy.

None.

Monetary value refers to any form of tender used as money, not just the dollar printed by the federal reserve. It is applicable to any person who exchanges some medium of transfer for goods rather than directly trading the goods themselves.

If you "monetize" your signerature to buy a car, your signerature only is a legally binding confirmation that you will provide the value stated in the terms of the contract at some point in the future, it isn't "monetized" itself. The monetary value will be provided by you at a later date, else there wll be legal consequences.

Have I convinced you that money exists and is not a scam yet? (Though that's not to say people don't try and scam you ou of your money, just that money itself isn't some "fake" thing.)

None.

Quote from

Vrael

Monetary value refers to any form of tender used as money, not just the dollar printed by the federal reserve. It is applicable to any person who exchanges some medium of transfer for goods rather than directly trading the goods themselves.

If you "monetize" your signerature to buy a car, your signerature only is a legally binding confirmation that you will provide the value stated in the terms of the contract at some point in the future, it isn't "monetized" itself. The monetary value will be provided by you at a later date, else there wll be legal consequences.

Have I convinced you that money exists and is not a scam yet? (Though that's not to say people don't try and scam you ou of your money, just that money itself isn't some "fake" thing.)

Uh, no. Did you ignore everything my father went through in his court case with the bank? You can come up with 'excuses' all you want and claim the bank was at fault but the same case can be brought up with anyone and any bank because ALL banks work on fraud, even our Centralized Bank, a.k.a. The Federal Reserve

No because money only exists in the United States in the form of Credit and Debt. Look at how our Centralized Bank works. Look at how we've destroyed the World Economy from running this Debt and Credit-based society.

None.

Quote

Uh, no. Did you ignore everything my father went through in his court case with the bank? You can come up with 'excuses' all you want and claim the bank was at fault but the same case can be brought up with anyone and any bank because ALL banks work on fraud, even our Centralized Bank, a.k.a. The Federal Reserve

Quote

My father went to court against U.S. Bank over a semi-truck and he had the bank by the balls. He subpoenaed the bank and requested the Affidavit of Original Obligation (which would be the original color copy of the Promissory Note with his signature on it) and when the Bank's lawyer showed my fathers request, the banker went white. Why do you suppose that is? Well, after they take your signature and monetize it, they sell it off because they've created a value out of nothing. Its gone, vanished. They cannot get it back because its sold off so they can balance their budget to $0. ALL banks have to balance their budget to $0

Perhaps I have missed something with regards to your fathers case, so let me explain it as I understand it, and you can correct me.

Your father took out a loan for some amount (I'm going to use 40,000 for demonstrative purposes only) and the bank paid him. He bought his truck, then the bank wanted him to pay them back. Somehow your father got word that they had sold off the note he had signed, so he took them to court because they had no proof that he owed them money. In this case he was right, and he won so he didn't have to pay them back. Is that what happened?

Quote

No because money only exists in the United States in the form of Credit and Debt. Look at how our Centralized Bank works. Look at how we've destroyed the World Economy from running this Debt and Credit-based society.

Look at how we have created a world economy, and how terribly it would suffer without credit and debt.

None.

aka idmontie

Quote from Kellimus

No because money only exists in the United States in the form of Credit and Debt. Look at how our Centralized Bank works. Look at how we've destroyed the World Economy from running this Debt and Credit-based society.

I have one word that discredits everything you have said: Mexico.

Personal GitHub
Starcraft GitHub Organization - Feel free to request member status!
TwitchTV

Quote from

A_of-s_t

Quote from Kellimus

No because money only exists in the United States in the form of Credit and Debt. Look at how our Centralized Bank works. Look at how we've destroyed the World Economy from running this Debt and Credit-based society.

I have one word that discredits everything you have said: Mexico.

Can you elaborate on what it is specifically that you mean?

None.

Quote from

Vrael

Quote

Uh, no. Did you ignore everything my father went through in his court case with the bank? You can come up with 'excuses' all you want and claim the bank was at fault but the same case can be brought up with anyone and any bank because ALL banks work on fraud, even our Centralized Bank, a.k.a. The Federal Reserve

Quote

My father went to court against U.S. Bank over a semi-truck and he had the bank by the balls. He subpoenaed the bank and requested the Affidavit of Original Obligation (which would be the original color copy of the Promissory Note with his signature on it) and when the Bank's lawyer showed my fathers request, the banker went white. Why do you suppose that is? Well, after they take your signature and monetize it, they sell it off because they've created a value out of nothing. Its gone, vanished. They cannot get it back because its sold off so they can balance their budget to $0. ALL banks have to balance their budget to $0

Perhaps I have missed something with regards to your fathers case, so let me explain it as I understand it, and you can correct me.

Your father took out a loan for some amount (I'm going to use 40,000 for demonstrative purposes only) and the bank paid him. He bought his truck, then the bank wanted him to pay them back. Somehow your father got word that they had sold off the note he had signed, so he took them to court because they had no proof that he owed them money. In this case he was right, and he won so he didn't have to pay them back. Is that what happened?

Quote

No because money only exists in the United States in the form of Credit and Debt. Look at how our Centralized Bank works. Look at how we've destroyed the World Economy from running this Debt and Credit-based society.

Look at how we have created a world economy, and how terribly it would suffer without credit and debt.

Its not just in the case of my father, but ANYONE who gets a loan from a bank has that happen to them.

Where are your sources that we've 'created a world economy'?????

Name me off 20 countries in the world that has an economy like ours that runs on Debt and Credit and are STABLE Economies and uses actual legal tender like coins, silver, gold, etc... (Do not try to count Notes of any kind either) not Paper Money backed up by DEBT and CREDIT.

None.

I don't know economics but I think vrael wins since he is actually making an argument for himself. You raise your dad as an example but that story was lacking the beef part of the burger. All I know is he got a loan and he took them to court and didn't have to pay... hardly a full story is it? Now my personal opinion on this is that yes money works as a standard of trade and through that serves a value. However the banks will never get that monetary value back since once printed it will just circulate...

None.

and in the case where money is paid back to the bank they actually gained nothing. They recieve none of the products or services that make the monetary unit have value and so they aren't able to pay the debt because what good is the dollar to someone who needs more pounds? Sure if I went to America it has value, however it will end up being the cord of wood versus the ipod in the end. U.S: Hey UK want to trade your oil for dollars? UK: no thank you, but i sure could use more wood... U.S oh well we only...

None.