The Benefits of the Fair Tax
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-02-2014, 07:50 PM
RE: The Benefits of the Fair Tax
(12-02-2014 07:03 PM)Cathym112 Wrote:  I guess the news doesn't report on counterfeit gold? http://www.myfoxny.com/story/19578206/fa...-manhattan

My mistake

Yes, it is your mistake. Read that article. The "fake gold" was tungsten, and is gray, and looks nothing like gold. That's why they had to wrap it with real gold.

You just proved my point. Today, in 2014, when a counterfeiter wants to fake gold, he STILL cannot find any other substance that looks and feels like gold, and he was using REAL gold on the exterior. If, as you say, there was some substance that looked and felt like gold, why not just sell bars made entirely of that substance? Why use real gold, if there was some counterfeit substance?

Again, I will repeat the challenge you keep running from. Name one substance that is not gold, but which has the same attributes of gold... Your choice of tungsten is a fail. How many fails are you going to subject yourself to before you give in and concede you're backed into a corner can't answer any of those 3 questions?

[Image: s13.JPG]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2014, 07:54 PM
RE: The Benefits of the Fair Tax
Quote:You ignored all my questions.

Yeah. You are an idealogue who thinks that rich mother fuckers are job creators and poor people should be fucked over.

Sorry. I'm not giving you any benefit of the doubt here.

[Image: reagon1.jpg]

[Image: reality.jpg?imgmax=800]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2014, 08:02 PM
RE: The Benefits of the Fair Tax
(12-02-2014 04:43 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Gold has no inherent value

NOW do you see how wrong you are? My question to both you and to Cathy is name one substance that would make a better medium of exchange. You're both left flabbergasted unable to respond, which proves the inherent value of gold: you can't think of any other substance that has the necessary attributes to be a viable medium of exchange.

Gold's inherent value is that, even in 2014, nobody can come up with a better medium of exchange. Every time the 3,000 or so fiat currencies collapsed, people returned to using gold. Some people are betting that when the current fiat currencies inevitably collapse, the cycle will repeat since even today nobody can name a better substance to use to replace paper currency. Like I said, though, I'm not convinced because with computers and modern cryptography, it may not be necessary to return to using a physical substance when the fiat currencies collapse.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2014, 08:06 PM
RE: The Benefits of the Fair Tax
(12-02-2014 07:54 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  Yeah. You are an idealogue who thinks that rich mother fuckers are job creators and poor people should be fucked over.

Huh??? Look again at the picture you posted. It's very appropriate. Do you understand it applies to BOTH Republicans and Democrats, since BOTH are advocating trickle-down economics, where the top 1% who own the big banks can print as much money for themselves as they want in hopes that they'll spend it or lend it out and the wealth will trickle-down to the masses.

The whole idea of QE and Keynesianism _IS_ trickle-down economics. It's giving a shitload of money to those at the top, hoping it will work it's way down to everybody else. The only people I know arguing against trickle-down economics are us libertarians. So don't lump me in with the Republicans and Democrats, please.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes frankksj's post
12-02-2014, 08:09 PM
RE: The Benefits of the Fair Tax
(12-02-2014 05:57 PM)frankksj Wrote:  So predictable. I've gone on the record, laying out my opinion clearly, subjecting it to criticism, saying that the best physical substance I can think of to use as a medium of exchange is gold. You say that's dumb, so I ask you what you think is a better medium of exchange, and you...
refuse to list anything specific, so that your answer can never be subjected to criticism.

Everybody can see this means you're backed into a corner again. If you really were able to think of a better substance to use, you'd obviously have told us what it is and showed us how smart you were.

The answer is exactly the same as it always is (as ever with your bizarrely reductive and narrow-minded questions):
it depends.

It depends on time and place and circumstances.

(12-02-2014 05:57 PM)frankksj Wrote:  Pick a substance, or admit that, despite your bashing me for picking gold, you honestly can't think of a better one.

It depends.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2014, 08:10 PM (This post was last modified: 12-02-2014 08:41 PM by cjlr.)
RE: The Benefits of the Fair Tax
(12-02-2014 06:20 PM)frankksj Wrote:  But, overall, just like I said, it's the most stable currency on the planet.

Ah - so now you say you said "most stable". I wonder?

Since the nature of the internet is such that there's a record of what you actually said:
(12-02-2014 04:25 PM)frankksj Wrote:  That's why Switzerland never had inflation, why gas, food, houses, etc., cost the same in 1990 as in 1970.

Interesting.

Are your own words so hard to keep track of?

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2014, 08:22 PM (This post was last modified: 12-02-2014 08:25 PM by cjlr.)
RE: The Benefits of the Fair Tax
(12-02-2014 08:02 PM)frankksj Wrote:  NOW do you see how wrong you are? My question to both you and to Cathy is name one substance that would make a better medium of exchange. You're both left flabbergasted unable to respond, which proves the inherent value of gold: you can't think of any other substance that has the necessary attributes to be a viable medium of exchange.

There is no single ultimate perfect medium under all conceivable circumstances.

Thus I am utterly unsure of what your demand for a perfect ideal medium is supposed to accomplish.

There is nothing inherent in gold which makes it special. You might well think it's special due to its historical role. That is not inherent. That is a human construct.

For several hundred years the people of Yap used rocks as currency. Not shiny rocks like your fetishistic gold, just plain ol' rocks. And it worked very stably for a very long time, until changing circumstances (y'know - the kind of thing that inevitably happens) upended the status quo in the late 1800s.

(12-02-2014 08:02 PM)frankksj Wrote:  Gold's inherent value is that, even in 2014, nobody can come up with a better medium of exchange.

Which is why gold is the standard global medium of exchange.

OH WAIT.

(12-02-2014 08:02 PM)frankksj Wrote:  Every time the 3,000 or so fiat currencies collapsed,

You realize that very nearly all currencies have ceased to exist at some point, yes? No matter their nature? Austro-Hungarian kronen were held to a gold standard. And yet for some weird reason they aren't legal tender anymore...

Because that's just what happens? Because nothing lasts forever?

I could just as easily say that all species with thagomizers are extinct, therefore thagomizers are bad. Do you see why that's fallacious?

(12-02-2014 08:02 PM)frankksj Wrote:  ... people returned to using gold. Some people are betting that when the current fiat currencies inevitably collapse, the cycle will repeat since even today nobody can name a better substance to use to replace paper currency. Like I said, though, I'm not convinced because with computers and modern cryptography, it may not be necessary to return to using a physical substance when the fiat currencies collapse.

You have enumerated several physical attributes you say a currency should have. Gold, incidentally, is far from the only physical substance to possess said attributes. To give an extremely trivial answer, silver or platinum fulfills all the same reductive criteria. Silver, which, incidentally, has been used as a basis for physical currency to at least the same extent gold has.

And then you, yourself, like literally just now, say that those are irrelevant, because non-physical units of assigned value may suffice in any case.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2014, 09:48 PM
RE: The Benefits of the Fair Tax
(12-02-2014 08:10 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Are your own words so hard to keep track of?

You are right. I was wrong. I should have said the Swiss Franc had the least inflation, not that it had zero inflation. See, admitting it when you misspeak isn't painful. You should try it sometime.

Quote:Thus I am utterly unsure of what your demand for a perfect ideal medium is supposed to accomplish.

No strawmen, please. _I_ said repeatedly there was no perfect medium. I only said gold was the best medium I knew of. You disputed that, so I asked you to name some other medium that was better than gold.

You're clearly stumped, so you're resorting to silly strawmen. In fact you seem to have given up finding something that is "better than gold" because in your last post all you're arguing is that silver or platinum has the same desirable attributes, making them "as good as" gold. However, even that is totally wrong. One of the attributes I mentioned is that, to avoid counterfeiting, humans need to possess the natural ability to determine that the substance in question is genuine. I even mentioned that silver, platinum and many metals are gray and hard, so it's hard for an untrained lay man to tell if it's real or not. They do not have a unique color, sheen and texture like gold does. And they have not been used at least to the same extent as gold. Gold is always listed first as money, silver second.

(12-02-2014 08:10 PM)cjlr Wrote:  You realize that very nearly all currencies have ceased to exist at some point, yes? No matter their nature?

Now, why don't you have the decency to do what I did and admit that you misspoke. That statement is patently false. If you dug up some random gold coin from 3,000 years ago, you could still, today, in 2014, take it anywhere in the world and use to buy your necessities. And if you took a modern gold coin, like the South African Krugerrand, you could go back in time in almost any point in history on nearly any place on earth and spend it.

(12-02-2014 08:10 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Austro-Hungarian kronen were held to a gold standard. And yet for some weird reason they aren't legal tender anymore...

Please, again, admit you misspoke. You just proved my point. A 100 Krona gold coin TODAY still has at least as much buying power as it did when it was issued over 100 years ago. You could still use that coin to pay your rent. However, not one fiat currency from 100 years ago has any value at all today. Further, gold standard currency means that the issuer will exchange the paper money for gold. If the issuer of the kronen still did that, then even the paper kronen WOULD STILL be usable anywhere in the world to pay for anything you wanted. The only reason the kronen is now a worthless is.... because they dropped the gold standard, when the issuer stopped converting it to gold. So the gold standard didn't fail. It's the DROPPING of the gold standard that caused the currency to fail.

So, all you've done is re-affirm what I've said all along. When you use gold as money, the monetary system has NEVER collapsed. Throughout human history gold has always been usable as money. And any paper currency that remained convertible to gold has obviously also never lost it's value.

By contrast, every fiat currency that was in circulation 50 years ago is today worthless. And if you took any fiat currency back in time 1,000 years, it would be useless.

If you're going to try to dispute this, then simply name ONE fiat currency that existed more than 50 years ago that is worth anything today, OR list one gold coin ever issued in all human history that has not held its value for thousands of years.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2014, 10:17 PM
RE: The Benefits of the Fair Tax
(12-02-2014 09:48 PM)frankksj Wrote:  You are right. I was wrong. I should have said the Swiss Franc had the least inflation, not that it had zero inflation. See, admitting it when you misspeak isn't painful. You should try it sometime.

And yet you make such a habit of misspeaking and such a sparsity of acknowledging it.

(12-02-2014 09:48 PM)frankksj Wrote:  No strawmen, please. _I_ said repeatedly there was no perfect medium. I only said gold was the best medium I knew of. You disputed that, so I asked you to name some other medium that was better than gold.

That is not what happened.

I said value was a human construct. You said gold was inherently valuable.

(12-02-2014 09:48 PM)frankksj Wrote:  You're clearly stumped, so you're resorting to silly strawmen.

No, I literally and explicitly said it is dependent on time, place, and circumstance, but because you are so incredibly reductive you refuse to admit of nuance and accept such an answer.

You do realize the world has changed a great deal over its recorded history, yes? What served best as currency in 300BCE was not ideal in 1500CE; what was in use in 1500 would not be ideal now.

Please tell me you realize this.

(12-02-2014 09:48 PM)frankksj Wrote:  In fact you seem to have given up finding something that is "better than gold" because in your last post all you're arguing is that silver or platinum has the same desirable attributes, making them "as good as" gold.

Which alone would answer your claim that gold is somehow unique in possessing the very attributes you enumerated.

Since it isn't.

(12-02-2014 09:48 PM)frankksj Wrote:  However, even that is totally wrong. One of the attributes I mentioned is that, to avoid counterfeiting, humans need to possess the natural ability to determine that the substance in question is genuine. I even mentioned that silver, platinum and many metals are gray and hard, so it's hard for an untrained lay man to tell if it's real or not. They do not have a unique color, sheen and texture like gold does.

Except for the part where gold possesses neither a unique colour, nor sheen, nor texture.

I can't even begin to comprehend where you got such an idea.

(12-02-2014 09:48 PM)frankksj Wrote:  And they have not been used at least to the same extent as gold. Gold is always listed first as money, silver second.

In Europe. Chinese coins were based on silver.

The difference between the two insofar as use as currency is concerned lies in the difference in relative scarcity.

(12-02-2014 09:48 PM)frankksj Wrote:  
(12-02-2014 08:10 PM)cjlr Wrote:  You realize that very nearly all currencies have ceased to exist at some point, yes? No matter their nature?

Now, why don't you have the decency to do what I did and admit that you misspoke. That statement is patently false. If you dug up some random gold coin from 3,000 years ago, you could still, today, in 2014, take it anywhere in the world and use to buy your necessities.

Except for the part where you couldn't.

I invite you to look up the concept of "legal tender".

I could dig up some random parchment from 3000 years ago and it would have value. I could, therefore, in a sense take it anywhere in the world and use it to buy necessities.

That is a phenomenally disingenuous way of stating things. Do you understand why?

(12-02-2014 09:48 PM)frankksj Wrote:  And if you took a modern gold coin, like the South African Krugerrand, you could go back in time in almost any point in history on nearly any place on earth and spend it.

And do you know what would be worth far more at any point in human history before 1800?

Aluminum foil.

If I have something which was, in the past, recognised as valuable, then I could "go back in time" and have its value recognised. That isn't the same as currency or money.

(12-02-2014 09:48 PM)frankksj Wrote:  
(12-02-2014 08:10 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Austro-Hungarian kronen were held to a gold standard. And yet for some weird reason they aren't legal tender anymore...

Please, again, admit you misspoke. You just proved my point.

I said they were no longer legal tender anywhere, which is in fact true. Do you know what that means?

(12-02-2014 09:48 PM)frankksj Wrote:  A 100 Krona gold coin TODAY still has at least as much buying power as it did when it was issued over 100 years ago.

No. It has a market-derived value based on its precious metal content.

It does not have a value of 100 Kr because the Austro-Hungarian crown has not existed for 95 years.

Do you understand the difference?
(no, judging by the track record of this exchange so far...)

(12-02-2014 09:48 PM)frankksj Wrote:  You could still use that coin to pay your rent.

Except for the part where it's not legal tender.
(you really should look that up)

(12-02-2014 09:48 PM)frankksj Wrote:  However, not one fiat currency from 100 years ago has any value at all today.

Which of your putative 3000 fiat currencies existed 100 years ago? All major currencies I can think of at the moment were held to a metal standard.

(12-02-2014 09:48 PM)frankksj Wrote:  Further, gold standard currency means that the issuer will exchange the paper money for gold. If the issuer of the kronen still did that, then even the paper kronen WOULD STILL be usable anywhere in the world to pay for anything you wanted. The only reason the kronen is now a worthless is.... because they dropped the gold standard, when the issuer stopped converting it to gold.

So, all you've done is re-affirm what I've said all along. When you use gold as money, the monetary system has NEVER collapsed. Throughout human history gold has always been usable as money. And any paper currency that remained convertible to gold has obviously also never lost it's value.

You don't appear to understand what you're saying.

"Gold coins still represent value because gold as a commodity still has value" is in no way equivalent to saying "the monetary system underlying the coins at time of issue has not changed".

Those are incredibly divergent statements. It is incredible that you think they are equivalent.

(12-02-2014 09:48 PM)frankksj Wrote:  By contrast, every fiat currency that was in circulation 50 years ago is today worthless. And if you took any fiat currency back in time 1,000 years, it would be useless.

If you're going to try to dispute this, then simply name ONE fiat currency that existed more than 50 years ago that is worth anything today, OR list one gold coin ever issued in all human history that has not held its value for thousands of years.

You appear unwilling to recognize that value is a human concept and the value of a currency is fundamentally not the same as the commodity value of its physical content.

What is the nominal value of an Augustan aureus? As currency that is unanswerable. It is not denominated in any modern currency. As metal it possesses some value; this price will then be dependent on the market value of the metal content, which is determined in modern currencies. What is its actual value? It is incidentally worth far more than the commodity value of its component parts, given its status as a historical artifact (or, as has sailed over your head several times already, value is a human construct).

You do not appear to have any idea what you are talking about. But boy do you love yourself some shiny rocks.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
12-02-2014, 11:03 PM
RE: The Benefits of the Fair Tax
(12-02-2014 07:50 PM)frankksj Wrote:  You just proved my point. Today, in 2014, when a counterfeiter wants to fake gold, he STILL cannot find any other substance that looks and feels like gold, and he was using REAL gold on the exterior. If, as you say, there was some substance that looked and felt like gold, why not just sell bars made entirely of that substance? Why use real gold, if there was some counterfeit substance?

I know we moved away from the Fair Tax long ago, but I don't get this pissing contest you two are having over the counterfietability of gold. There just isn't anything totally fool proof. But being fool proof is not what defines a good money. It just has to be difficult and risky enough, that counterfeits are rare.

Maybe we should go back to cows and camels...they're hard to counterfeit. Tongue

Softly, softly, catchee monkey.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes toadaly's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: