 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
I do not wish to argue. I do not wish to cause conflict. I see contention, and that is cause, or an opportunity, to find agreement, to resolve the contention, to see the contention, to measure it, and to resolve it, to find the truth that is exposed by the contentions.
The dictatorial libeler, assumingly, is here to parrot an obsolete economic dogma, based upon scarcity, and he or she may be intimately associated with specific other dogmas.
Example:
Perhaps the dictatorial libeler is intimately association with the people who have been labeled Gold Bugs.
Bug isn't a kind word in context, some of the people associated with the label have accepted it - other's not.
The idea here and now is to show why the whole Gold Bug or Gold Standard or Gold "legal tender" support is a measurably misspent investment. The support for it is measurably less profitable than support elsewhere if the idea is the measure total profit, total production of wealth, and if the idea isn't to measure wealth flowing from specific targeted and exploited markets to specific individuals who manage to gain by that manipulation, that methodology, that "support".
To see this viewpoint clearly I now link to a previous "giant wall of text" from which an idea, or a way of seeing things, is taken.
Here is the link:
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=labadie;cc=labadie;idno=2916966.0001
.001;size=l;frm=frameset;seq=2;view=image;page=root
Here is the TinyURL version:
http://tinyurl.com/lqrpjx
The title is: "Of Interest to Goldbugs"
Here is the relevant quote:
I can explain how that may be of interest to gold bugs; because I can, if someone is "buying" the idea. If not, I can move on at liberty, and my next post may be another response to offerings from the dictatorial libeler or my next post may be something more in line with the purpose of the thread:
A field which has no fence upon one of its sides is not fenced in, no matter how high and strong its fences may be on the other sides.
Accurate currency (from a Joe's law perspective)
Legal monetary currency isn't well fenced in within the three sided fence, the fences are high, for sure, and the fences are strong too, here in this country, and other fences do exist in other countries, where high and strong fences do what they do there too - if you know what I mean.
If not, then blame me?