 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
I cut and pasted my reply sent moments ago:
Mike,
I didn’t check your forum. I read your e-mail and assumed that you didn’t post my reply.
Why continue using the e-mail form of currency when the forum form of currency is open and transparent?
That is a rhetorical question.
Like this one:
Why accuse me of not having the “Balls” to answer a question (among many) without identifying the question that you think I don’t have the “Balls” to answer?
That is another rhetorical question.
My question was and remains:
What is the form of currency utilized when the economy is mathematically perfected?
Your answer, if I can assume as much, is that the form of currency utilized when the economy is mathematically perfected is a ‘note’.
That is quite a huge step forward and what was the cost in getting there?
That last question is an accounting problem that can be solved with math.
I will continue to publish our e-mail exchange on a public forum. I will also check your forum to see if my reply sent to that forum was published. If my reply sent to your forum was published, then, I will try sending another reply to whatever was communicated on that forum.
Thanks for the concise and pertinent e-mail.
What can I say?
I assumed too much?
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: mike montagne [mailto:mike.montagne@advanceis.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 8:23 AM
To: Joe Kelley
Subject: Re: Mathematically Perfected Economy
So you don't have the *balls* to answer on our forum?
:-)
Joe Kelley wrote:
Mike,
I have my own forum. I will respond to your ARGUMENT on my forum.
Have a nice day and FUCK OFF ASSHOLE.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: mike montagne [mailto:mike.montagne@advanceis.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 11:21 PM
To: Joe Kelley
Subject: Re: Mathematically Perfected Economy
"Having danced in circles so many times before, I will try to cut to the quick here. "
I can cut this off now. If you insist upon blaming me for your past experiences, then, why bother participating when you have already discussed this with me? Why not simply moderate me out of this discussion and avoid wasting anymore time and energy - currently. You have the power. Why continue the circle jerk?
Your expansive regurgitation of my least important concern, from me, NOT ANYONE ELSE BUT ME, and your ignoring the previous other concerns gives me even more cause to ask of you, please, link me to these mysterious Energy Currency people who you have soundly defeating with your superior whatever.
Moving back to the two prime focal points that you ignored up to your quote above (I have yet to rest the rest of your response):
What is the form of currency used in any Mathematically Perfected Economy?
Anyone with the most basic skills of "economics" knows that the form of any currency which is a debt is a "note." This is blatantly obvious from any of the material. Why the question then?
Does the form of currency accurately transfer wealth from one individual to another individual?
Obviously too it transfers exactly the agreed value of the property/debt, and only that exact value. Not only so, it transfers exactly that value at exactly the rate of consumption/depreciation of the indebted asset.
Does the form of currency accurately avoid transferring wealth to unwanted criminals?
This is a vicious, redundant question as well. If only the producer of the wealth gets the principal debt (currency), and the regulating agency only gets the negligible costs of automated certification of credit worthiness and automated account management (payment), where in the equation is there even a place for unwanted criminals to take anything?
I can leave the rest of the ARGUMENT to those who like to argue.
Speaking for yourself then I presume.
If you prefer to ignore my questions, then, by all means do so and transfer that expressed goal to me accurately so as to avoid wasting anymore of our time - PLEASE.
Your questions were already answered, and your tantrum accomplishes nothing.
------
If you have something to say Joe, you best get it out. Nobody has blamed you for past experiences, but if you give your post an honest assessment, I think you'll wonder yourself whatever you meant to present to anyone by it. Maybe you'd like to answer *my* questions; and maybe then you'd like to make it clear what you meant to contribute by all that. Otherwise, your rude counter assertions are not well taken.
As to your claim I have not already answered to your questions, you could note easily, with the least credible study, that my answer you already have allows the debtor and producer to agree on the value of the debt, and is the only schedule of payment which pays *that* debt only at a rate which eliminates inflation, deflation, or multiplication of debt.
If you would like to argue that intelligently and politely, I'll be glad to permit your post -- and respond to it.
If on the other hand you think a serious forum with the obvious purposes of this is the place for your remarks, you best found one yourself. As for your claim I've wasted *your* time, I have half a dozen emails -- including this intended post and your initial post -- to measure that by.
Ending an exchange with a smiley face intends to communcate something specific. I can assume that the specific intention is to express happyness. I can assume that the specific intention is unknowable without accurate communcation flowing currently in some form or another.
False currency is currently the rule.