Banking and Conspiracies

[mikeinworthing]

INow, I don't know if Tarannau is an expert on the philosophy of money, but I am, or at least I've published quite a bit on the subject.

You have also published a lot about trolling on Internet forums, so can we take it that you are an expert troll?

 

[slaar]

sure slaar, we disagree strongly over whether FRB is a good or bad thing. But the purpose my last post was really to point out that I am in no way attacking capitalism by questioning FRB.

wikipedia defines capitalism as

"Capitalism generally refers to an economic system in which the means of production are mostly privately[1] owned and operated for profit, and in which distribution, production and pricing of goods and services are determined in a largely free market."

And all that's fine by me. Just wanted to make that clear.

Sure thing. One interpretation of what FRB is really doing though is extending private property rights and contracts to future economic activity. I presume that since you're not averse to capitalism that you're not averse to interest on monetary loans backed by current real assets?

It's not that big a step to then project that forward to future assets that are yet to exist. So I would then guess your objections are more in terms of what this does in terms of the need for exponential future economic growth, or its distributional impacts?

But I may be completely wrong.

 

[soulman]

Because of who posted it? Because Jazzz always bangs on about it, and he's a nutcase? Because phil then writes nonsense about money being supernatural?

It would be nice to see a discussion on the topic without the usual paranoid idiots.

Or the usual small minded pricks like yourself and mikeinworthing.

 

[Jazzz]

My objection is that it's a shabby con trick

 

[Meltingpot]

Do we have to have all these flames and insults? I come here partly to get away from that sort of unpleasantness on other debate boards.

 

[soulman]

Do we have to have all these flames and insults? I come here partly to get away from that sort of unpleasantness on other debate boards.

I'd love to see a serious discussion about this without the insults...

 

[soulman]

My objection is that it's a shabby con trick

Of course it is, as is the whole concept of capital. Have you read Robert Tressel's 'The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists' Jazzz? The chapter on The Great Money Trick is very good.

 

[mikeinworthing]

I'd love to see a serious discussion about this without the insults...

And Soulman arrives with insults again.

 

[Lock&Light]

And Soulman arrives with insults again.

Have you already forgotten what YOU did in post 31?

 

[phildwyer]

And Soulman arrives with insults again.

Sorry Mike, you're not welcome on this thread. Kindly stop pestering us.

 

[mikeinworthing]

Have you already forgotten what YOU did in post 31?

I am sorry, but did I insult anyone?

No, I poked fun at a troll, I didn’t insult him.

I stated fact, and had a laugh at him.

Nothing to do with soulman, who than posted that both Blagsta and me are ‘pricks’!

And than posted ‘I'd love to see a serious discussion about this without the insults...’.

Get real L&L!

 

[phildwyer]

Because phil then writes nonsense about money being supernatural?

You would do well, Blagsta, to participate in our discussion without dismissing ideas with which you are evidently unfamiliar as 'nonsense.' You are certainly not incapable of learning.

Perhaps you could start by explaining *why* you think this is nonsense? Do you think money is natural? How would you define 'supernatural?' What is your understanding of the term 'magic?' Because most theorists of magic would say that it consists in the ritual manipulation of signs or images to achieve objective effects. And I put it to you that this is precisely what the financial system does.

Your considered, non-abusive thoughts on this or related subjects are most welcome.

 

[phildwyer]

I am sorry, but did I insult anyone?

No, I poked fun at a troll, I didn’t insult him.

I stated fact, and had a laugh at him.

Nothing to do with soulman, who than posted that both Blagsta and me are ‘pricks’!

And than posted ‘I'd love to see a serious discussion about this without the insults...’.

Get real L&L!

Once again Mike, I must ask you to stop pestering us. We are trying to have a serious conversation. There are plenty of other threads available for you to act the fool on.

 

[Lock&Light]

I am sorry, but did I insult anyone?

You're always attempting to insult Phil.

It's sad to see how miserably you fail.

 

[mikeinworthing]

Sorry Mike, you're not welcome on this thread. Kindly stop pestering us.

I will, on one condition, which is when you come onto threads started by others, who ask you to leave, you do.

Seems fair to me.

Deal or no deal?

 

[phildwyer]

Again Phil, you're taking classical and neo-classical economics, equating it with the entire discipline, then knocking it down. There is ethical content to neo-classical economics, it's just not how most people, including me, would like to see society operating (i.e. rational, individual self-interest being the sole motivator). But to say there is no ethical content in, for example, Sen's writings on poverty and famine, even if you don't agree with what he says, would be silly.

Well I suppose you could say that there was 'ethical content' in Nazism too. My point is that classical and neo-classical economics violates all traditional ethical systems, from Aristotle and the Bible on. Barbon, Petty and the other founders of what we call 'economics' did not even attempt to defend their ideas on ethical grounds. They argued, rather, that traditional ethics do not apply to the realm of the economy.

Even Smith and Ricardo agreed that the personal ethics of capitalists were repugnant. They portrayed capitalists as sacrificial victims, engaging in self-degradation for the greater good of society. It is not until Marshall that we find an economist prepared to claim that capitalist ethics are positive.

 

[mikeinworthing]

You're always attempting to insult Phil.

It's sad to see how miserably you fail.

Can you link to one post where I’ve ‘insulted’ dwyer recently?

I only attempt to point out facts about him, so others can understand his posting style.

 

[phildwyer]

Can you link to one post where I’ve ‘insulted’ dwyer recently?

I only attempt to point out facts about him, so others can understand his posting style.

Stop pestering us. There are lots of people here who want to have a proper discussion without you. Go away.

 

[mikeinworthing]

Stop pestering us. There are lots of people here who want to have a proper discussion without you. Go away.

Funny enough, I’ve seen that said, or something similar, so often to you when you have gone out of your way to derail other posters’ threads!

How does it feel phil?

Deal, or no deal?

Answer the question!

 

[phildwyer]

sure slaar, we disagree strongly over whether FRB is a good or bad thing. But the purpose my last post was really to point out that I am in no way attacking capitalism by questioning FRB.

wikipedia defines capitalism as

"Capitalism generally refers to an economic system in which the means of production are mostly privately[1] owned and operated for profit, and in which distribution, production and pricing of goods and services are determined in a largely free market."

And all that's fine by me. Just wanted to make that clear.

I think you are right to point out that what we're discusing on this thread is not best defined as 'capitalism.' I'd be quite happy to employ the term 'usury' instead (and by 'usury' I intend *any* lending of money at interest, not just excessive interest-taking). That is what I really object to. I don't believe you could have capitalism without usury, but if you could, I wouldn't have a problem with it.

 

[phildwyer]

Funny enough, I’ve seen that said, or something similar, so often to you when you have gone out of your way to derail other posters’ threads!

How does it feel phil?

Deal, or no deal?

Answer the question!

Stop pestering us. Can't you see that you are not wanted here?

 

[mikeinworthing]

Stop pestering us. Can't you see that you are not wanted here?

And likewise, you are often not wanted on other threads!

Yet, you don’t leave them, so why should I?

I will, once again, offer you a deal – I’ll leave your thread, if you promise to leave other posters’ threads when asked to do so, and generally stop trolling.

Deal, or no deal?

 

[Crispy]

so, 40 posts in and then we're back to this
was looking interesting on page 1.

 

[soulman]

so, 40 posts in and then we're back to this
was looking interesting on page 1.

Hoping it still will be if you shoo away the people who are more interested in insults and wrecking than discussing this sensibly.

 

[mikeinworthing]

Hoping it still will be if you shoo away the people who are more interested in insults and wrecking than discussing this sensibly.

Like you calling people pricks by any chance?

 

[Crispy]

I'm not going to tell anyone how to behave. You're all sensible adults

 

[soulman]

I'm not going to tell anyone how to behave. You're all sensible adults

Who's suggested you tell anyone how to behave? Just shoo the pricks away using your moderating powers eh Crispy...

 

[Blagsta]

You would do well, Blagsta, to participate in our discussion without dismissing ideas with which you are evidently unfamiliar as 'nonsense.' You are certainly not incapable of learning.

Perhaps you could start by explaining *why* you think this is nonsense? Do you think money is natural? How would you define 'supernatural?' What is your understanding of the term 'magic?' Because most theorists of magic would say that it consists in the ritual manipulation of signs or images to achieve objective effects. And I put it to you that this is precisely what the financial system does.

Your considered, non-abusive thoughts on this or related subjects are most welcome.

How can a human activity be "supernatural"? It makes no sense.

Is televison magic? Art? Literature? They all manipulate symbols to objective effect.

 

[mikeinworthing]

I'm not going to tell anyone how to behave. You're all sensible adults

And having some Sunday night fun, prior to the start of the working week.

 

[mikeinworthing]

Who's suggested you tell anyone how to behave? Just shoo the pricks away using your moderating powers eh Crispy...

Look in the mirror