Composers' Forum

Music Composers Unite!

Can you hear the music in this?

http://billionsinchange.com/film

Views: 2589

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

O, perhaps my wording was too obscure and tricky to grasp.

Please let me try again, as plain and simple as I can.

Where does Government money come from?

Can you address this simple question?

Let's postpone the allocations until after we have solidly

established the source of the monies to be allocated.

You are, I assume, familiar with progressive logic.... No?    RS

Fred, if you are already enlightened, then this isn't for you. Go take a nap.

You are obviously well settled in your comfy home in Smuggsville.

Why must you belittle those who are trying to catch up to you and

your omnisciousness.

I would like to update an earlier comment I made on another thread;

You are either a student or a teacher.... or a Fred.               RS


 
Fredrick zinos said:

I don't believe that everyone in Washington is a crook or a charlatan and I don't believe everyone on the internet is a cultists. I do believe that those who posture as though they have some special insight about the way the world "really" works significantly overstate their sagacity. To me they look like loonies and very frightened loonies at that. You know....the Hannity-Limbaugh crowd, midgets of AM radio with all the answers but only a dim view of the question.

Who do I think has some real answers? Sorry, no one comes to mind. (OK maybe Bach, but he declines to participate, being dead and all)

Thanks for the good wish Fred. I hope there's no alligators under you bed.

NEWS FLASH; Oct. 20th 2015

Putin says to America- Don't let them take your guns.  Why would he say that?

He could have said, Don't let them take your musical instruments... but he didn't.

Gosh Fred, what is he saying? Is he hinting that there may be something afoot

with our most excellent government? Or is he just another 'loonie' ?     RS
 
Fredrick zinos said:

I think I'll take you up on that. A nap represents a significant qualitative improvement over the contents of this discussion. Meanwhile don't let the boogie man get you.

"O, perhaps my wording was too obscure and tricky to grasp.  Please let me try again, as plain and simple as I can.  ... "Where does Government money come from?"

 

I believe I told you, Roger.  Let me look back.

 

Yes.  It was in this paragraph:

 

“Government money” is whatever the government decides to take out in taxes. (Here “government” can be defined as the executive committee that makes laws which represent the interests of the employers, the bankers and landlords)    They may tax the secretary a greater percentage of his or her wealth than the CEO of a company whose tax payments can range from 15% to zero, in many cases, if sufficient loopholes are found and quantities of money are deposited, legally or illegally in banks in safe haven countries.).  So, some of the “government money” is stolen by very rich.  The government never gets it, and that’s okay to the authors of the tax code.  If large corporations go broke, through bad investments, they can receive “government money” for free from the bureaucrats and lawmakers,  who increase taxes on the middle classes, such as they are, and also by quantitative easing, the creation of money out of thin air, and injected into the banks, given to them for free, to be loaned out at interest.  That’s a kind of “government money.”

 

 

So, in short, government money comes from taxes, and from printing presses.  I thought that was clear enough.  I am sure you know what "quantitative easing" is.

 

Why do you ask where "government money" comes from, in light of all the information contained in my last response?

Did you read my answer.  Here, I'll post it again, upside down, just in case that helps.

”˙ʎǝuoɯ ʇuǝɯuɹǝʌoƃ“ ɟo puıʞ ɐ s’ʇɐɥʇ  ˙ʇsǝɹǝʇuı ʇɐ ʇno pǝuɐoן ǝq oʇ 'ǝǝɹɟ ɹoɟ ɯǝɥʇ oʇ uǝʌıƃ 'sʞuɐq ǝɥʇ oʇuı pǝʇɔǝɾuı puɐ 'ɹıɐ uıɥʇ ɟo ʇno ʎǝuoɯ ɟo uoıʇɐǝɹɔ ǝɥʇ 'ƃuısɐǝ ǝʌıʇɐʇıʇuɐnb ʎq osןɐ puɐ 'ǝɹɐ ʎǝɥʇ sɐ ɥɔns 'sǝssɐןɔ ǝןppıɯ ǝɥʇ uo sǝxɐʇ ǝsɐǝɹɔuı oɥʍ  'sɹǝʞɐɯʍɐן puɐ sʇɐɹɔnɐǝɹnq ǝɥʇ ɯoɹɟ ǝǝɹɟ ɹoɟ ”ʎǝuoɯ ʇuǝɯuɹǝʌoƃ“ ǝʌıǝɔǝɹ uɐɔ ʎǝɥʇ 'sʇuǝɯʇsǝʌuı pɐq ɥƃnoɹɥʇ 'ǝʞoɹq oƃ suoıʇɐɹodɹoɔ ǝƃɹɐן ɟı  ˙ǝpoɔ xɐʇ ǝɥʇ ɟo sɹoɥʇnɐ ǝɥʇ oʇ ʎɐʞo s’ʇɐɥʇ puɐ 'ʇı sʇǝƃ ɹǝʌǝu ʇuǝɯuɹǝʌoƃ ǝɥʇ  ˙ɥɔıɹ ʎɹǝʌ ʎq uǝןoʇs sı ”ʎǝuoɯ ʇuǝɯuɹǝʌoƃ“ ǝɥʇ ɟo ǝɯos 'os  ˙(˙sǝıɹʇunoɔ uǝʌɐɥ ǝɟɐs uı sʞuɐq uı ʎןןɐƃǝןןı ɹo ʎןןɐƃǝן 'pǝʇısodǝp ǝɹɐ ʎǝuoɯ ɟo sǝıʇıʇuɐnb puɐ punoɟ ǝɹɐ sǝןoɥdooן ʇuǝıɔıɟɟns ɟı 'sǝsɐɔ ʎuɐɯ uı 'oɹǝz oʇ %51 ɯoɹɟ ǝƃuɐɹ uɐɔ sʇuǝɯʎɐd xɐʇ ǝsoɥʍ ʎuɐdɯoɔ ɐ ɟo oǝɔ ǝɥʇ uɐɥʇ ɥʇןɐǝʍ ɹǝɥ ɹo sıɥ ɟo ǝƃɐʇuǝɔɹǝd ɹǝʇɐǝɹƃ ɐ ʎɹɐʇǝɹɔǝs ǝɥʇ xɐʇ ʎɐɯ ʎǝɥʇ    (spɹoןpuɐן puɐ sɹǝʞuɐq ǝɥʇ 'sɹǝʎoןdɯǝ ǝɥʇ ɟo sʇsǝɹǝʇuı ǝɥʇ ʇuǝsǝɹdǝɹ ɥɔıɥʍ sʍɐן sǝʞɐɯ ʇɐɥʇ ǝǝʇʇıɯɯoɔ ǝʌıʇnɔǝxǝ ǝɥʇ sɐ pǝuıɟǝp ǝq uɐɔ ”ʇuǝɯuɹǝʌoƃ“ ǝɹǝɥ) ˙sǝxɐʇ uı ʇno ǝʞɐʇ oʇ sǝpıɔǝp ʇuǝɯuɹǝʌoƃ ǝɥʇ ɹǝʌǝʇɐɥʍ sı ”ʎǝuoɯ ʇuǝɯuɹǝʌoƃ“

 

 

 

 

 

Actually Mr. OO, I was looking for a conversation with YOU and was asking for a commitment

from YOU with YOUR words and beliefs. We can all google answers which make us look like we

are part of a grander entourage. Bernie Sanders included.

So then, government money comes from 2 basic sources- correct?

The printing press and taxes.( note; taxes also pay for the printing paper and ink and

employees that do the work of printing, making them a secondary factor) Do you agree?

ps- any one else interested is welcome to participate           RS

Fredrico, thanks for your honesty. I think that is important.

So the American gov'mt has spent a lot of time and money over there

in the ole Mid East trying to keep us safe from this faceless enemy

they call terrorism. Yet they just seem to be getting nowhere. Then along

comes this 'loonie' guy with sharp teeth, and things start to get done.

How is that possible? Don't ya think we may be being conned?

Do you see how 'terrorism' is the perfect endless war? They are everywhere!    oh no!

What flavor of kool-aid are they servin' there in Smuggsville?

You have to remember, when it comes to the rich elite, the politicians and the

people in control, Bach was just a musician who may have influenced the psyche

of many, but he didn't calm and redirect the greed of the psychopaths and the

egomaniacs that seek power over others by force and deception.     RS

Roger, you said,

 

'Bach was just a musician who may have influenced the psyche of many, but he didn't calm and redirect the greed of the psychopaths and the egomaniacs that seek power over others by force and deception."

 

How do you know that, Roger?  Mikhail Gorbachev was the dictator of the USSR, and he said listening to a Mahler symphony gave him the revelation he needed to end totalitarianism in his nation, and institute a free press, representative government and economic restructuring (glasnost and perestroika).  If one symphony of Mahler could do that, what do you think all of Bach's works might have been doing to the minds of German Counts, Princes, Kings, Dukes another autocrats in Central Europe?  Maybe his works have done more good than 9/10ths of all the economic, social and political theories of the last 400 years.  

 

 

 

 

"Actually Mr. OO, I was looking for a conversation with YOU and was asking for a commitment from YOU with YOUR words and beliefs."

 

I think you can trust that you are having a conversation with ME.  What in the last two posts I have written did you think were NOT my words or my beliefs? Please be specific.  If you doubt whether the things I say, in my own words, are my own beliefs, then should I doubt whether the things you say in your own words, are YOUR beliefs?  I try not to do that.  Or should I think your posts are expressing the beliefs of people who run the web sites you link us up to?  I will take your word, when you say that your beliefs are not anti-Semitic (in spite of the fact that patently anti-Semitic beliefs were expressed by speakers in that last video we discussed). 

 

"We can all google answers which make us look like we are part of a grander entourage. Bernie Sanders included."

 

So it is your view that no one should speak favorably of another public figure?  And if one speaks favorably of someone, then you are automatically assumed to be part of that person's entourage?  I've never met Bernie Sanders or any of the members of his political campaign (Should I be embarrassed and ashamed, if I did? – I would be far more ashamed if I had been listening to videos that contain anti-Semitic sentiments.  Should I conclude that you are a part of David Duke's entourage?  I have no reason to, unless I use the type of reasoning, or a similar type of reason to the method you are using.  Please try NOT to jump to conclusions, either about what you think I BELIEVE or do not believe, or about whose "entourage" I belong to, and I will do you the same favor ).

 

 

"So then, government money comes from 2 basic sources- correct?"

 

This is a bit puzzling.  Why are you asking again?  I already told you twice.  You have to ask me a third time?  I don't know why.  Do you want me to tell you where each and every cent of "government money" comes from?

 

Government money can come from other sources, too.  For instance, during the Iran-contra affair, the US government obtained money from the sale of cocaine, as the CIA ran guns illegally to Nicaragua. During that time, the government oversaw cocaine transfers to the US, and afterwards used that money to buy more weapons to give to the contras.  During the Vietnam era, drug sales made by the US government of opium from Laos and Vietnam were also a major source of government funds for covert operations. Now this is happening in Afghanistan, with heroin.  There are many sources of "government money." Kickbacks, bribes, graft, campaign contributions, illegally maintained bank deposits are also sources of money used by both members of the government and by corporate officials, working together in many cases.  Did we learn today that Hillary Clinton was involved in some sort of unholy alliance of business interests mixed with state department interests, during the whole Benghazi Affair, and the war on Libya?  The Republicans have done even worse.  One government official, Dick Cheney, did his best to push forward the war in Iraq, as "government money" and armies were used to bring profits to Halliburton, and then Halliburton could use it's influence to get more contracts so the Defense Department could also get "more money."  The US government can steal an entire country for a time, or permanently, to justify it's push for  more "Government money."  But I assume you know that.  There are many other sources of "government money," as well.   I don't intend to list all of them at this point. 

 

But you seem to want to ignore the main points I am making, which have to do with the question posted here.   Could you explain how your question about "government money," and your views on the issue are pertinent to the question posed by this thread?   (Not that they have to be, but you seem to be trying to make a point, and I am suggesting that you get to it, rather than ask me the same question three times).

 

 

You said, "note; taxes also pay for the printing paper and ink and employees that do the work of printing, making them a secondary factor) Do you agree?"

 

Making what a secondary factor?  Making printing a secondary factor, making ink a secondary factor, or making employees who do the work of printing a "secondary factor?"  Or all of them.  Note:  I never consider living, working human beings a "secondary factor."

 

Now, having answered the same question three times in a row, I think I have the right to ask you a question:  Do agree with the statement to the effect that capitalist factory owners, employers, landlords and bankers exploit the working class person?    I think it's amounts to being a basic fact, and sometimes you appear to believe it, and express the view that an elite class is fooling and taking advantage of the people.  At other times, you appear not to believe it.  Can you clarify your views on the issues having to do with class, exploitation, and current economic structures?

 

Ondibbity-do, What Iwas attempting to do was get to the basic ABC's of the

idea of where the money comes from for an honest gov'mt- and yes I know that

it purely hypothetical. Then you have to add CIA drug money and other corrupt

sources into the mix. Why? Then you twist the context and sense of what I was

implying about the fact that the federal printing and issuing of money is financed

by the tax payers- making it a secondary source. Do the printers print money to pay

themselves to print money and pay for all the materials it takes to print this money?

Let's establish the Basic ABC's before we move on to D thru Z. Or would you prefer

that corrupt monies be channeled into the arts equally with the military?       RS

Yeah Peter, my brother is somewhat like that... I dare not suggest thay Bill O' is

anything but a demigod.

ps- sometimes you can poke a dead frog with an electrode and they will twitch   8< }
 
Peter Brown said:

Roger,

I'm afraid you're beating a dead horse. (wasting your bullets on a dead dog) One who gets his news and entertainment from the MSM? I also have a cousin who's stuck in the Bill O'Reilly syndrome incarcerated by The Fox Network and Fox News.

He's pretty much dead to the family. I blame it on his age. He's still waiting for Walt Cronkite to return... Remember those days when the new was, well, the news? Yeah, I wish......

https://www.google.com/search?q=old+news+anchors&rlz=1C1GTPM_en...

Hey there Dave, thanks for your insight. How does it help us further the conversation towards the possibility

of understanding why more money is spent on the military than the arts? I did say that I believe what I know

to be true, and then ran it up the flag pole, as they say, to attempt to get some feedback. I don't claim to be

'The Knower' ( of absolute truths) at all.


 Would you agree that the main source of the money that the gov'mt has to allocate and spend is received

from the pockets of the tax payers?( bionary opposite- it doesn't naturally grow on trees)

Do you think or believe that there is a reason that the Fed weaned us off the gold standard?

There are clues throughout the past 100 years, that suggest that there was/is something other than the

 best interest of the American citizens going on behind the scenes.

For some, it may be a faint whisper.... to me, it screams loudly.   RS
Dave Dexter said:

It's worth mentioning that you're doing the binary opposite of what you seem to take issue with, being (or perceived as being) belittled. Which is just kind of funny. Fred paints himself as a skeptic, and you paint yourself as the Knower. There are ironies here. Delicious, tender ironies.

roger stancill said:

Fred, if you are already enlightened, then this isn't for you. Go take a nap.

You are obviously well settled in your comfy home in Smuggsville.

Why must you belittle those who are trying to catch up to you and

your omnisciousness.

I would like to update an earlier comment I made on another thread;

You are either a student or a teacher.... or a Fred.               RS

But Dave ... You fail to understand that someone attempting to belittle me is

totally irrelevant and of no real consequence. Just because someone may use that 'tactic'

does not mean that it is true or effective. This is not an ego trip. (tho' I do think there is something to be said for

fighting fire with fire)

so you are a watcher... delighting in the foibles of other humans.... everyone needs a hobby.     RS

ps- feel free to participate in the real discussion

"What I was attempting to do was get to the basic ABC's of the idea of where the money comes from for an honest gov'mt"

 

Oh, you didn't say that.  You initially asked, "where does money come from?" not "where does money come from for an honest government?"

 

"- and yes I know that it purely hypothetical."

 

Yes, that is purely hypothetical.  In fact, the whole notion (on this planet) of "government money" and it's relation to a mythical "honest government" is so very hypothetical that it bears almost no relationship at all to historical, social, political or economic reality.  Some governments, in US history, and in the history of other nations, have been less dishonest than others, so I suppose we can extract an idea of this kind of money from a wide study of various governments.  Lycurgus of Sparta implemented a kind of monetary unit, based on a very large coin that was so bulky no one could exchange it or hide it without everyone else knowing where it came from, who had it, or where it went.  Theoretically, you could start there.

 

"Then you have to add CIA drug money and other corrupt sources into the mix. Why?"

 

 

Well, I didn't "have to."  I offered it because you asked me three times about "government money," without saying you were interested in "where the money comes from for an honest gov'mt" ...  I think you can see why I might simply give you more answers to the question about where government money in the US has come from, historically and in the present reality.

 

"Then you twist the context and sense of what I was

implying about the fact that the federal printing and issuing of money is financed by the tax payers- making it a secondary source."

 

There was no twisting as I see it.  And rather than simply imply (in what seems to me a very indirect way) what you want to get at, why not simply come out and say what you mean?  I think your pronoun reference may have been a little unclear. Your use of words like "it" or "them." The use of the word "them" (in your post before last came) after the phrase "employees that do the work of printing." Recall you said,

 

"note; taxes also pay for the printing paper and ink and employees that do the work of printing, making them a secondary factor) Do you agree?"

 

It is hard to agree or disagree with what seems unclear.  In the phrase, "making them a secondary factor," the word "them," according to logic of the sentence must ordinarily refer to "employees that do the work of printing."  So I wondered if you thought the "employees" were "secondary."

 

Now you speak of, "the fact that the federal printing and issuing of money is financed by the tax payers- making it a secondary source."

 

Here the pronoun "it" seems to refer to "the federal printing and issuing of money."  And therefore you are saying that "the federal printing and issuing of money is "secondary source."

 

Now is this how it should be ideally?  You just spoke of where money should come from under an honest government.  I think, both in theory and practice, you may want to distinguish "money" from "paper currency," because these are not exactly the same thing.  Now you appear to want to talk about paper currency, rather than money (It's really a very small subset of money, if we examine all monies in the economy).  We can talk about all of them if you like. But I thought you wanted to talk about money in general.

 

You ask, "Do the printers print money to pay themselves to print money and pay for all the materials it takes to print this money?"

 

The amount of "money" (either in the form of paper cash or in the form of credit deposited into the accounts of printers to pay for their wages) is so miniscule that it hardly matters.  In any case, that question has virtually nothing to do with the issue you want to talk about, which is "where does money come from (under an honest government)"

 

 

 

You say,  "Let's establish the Basic ABC's before we move on to D thru Z."

 

By all means, go ahead.  This is how I started a while back, when I said that money was a universal commodity.  Historically speaking, money was simply any commodity used to "pay for" another commodity, to exchange for another commodity.  If I were a maker of "clothing" and you were a maker of "food" in a primitive society, I would give you a certain quantity of clothing for a certain amount of meat, for instance.  Only later did copper, silver and gold come to be what we now refer to as money.

 

But you seem to want to refer to money, in the modern age, as if it can be discussed entirely separately from process of economic production, the creation of profit and surplus value, and the process of the distribution of wealth.  It cannot, in practice. 

 

So by all means, let's have a rudimentary definition of money, which is where I started. Please proceed, not simply be "implying" what you mean; just say straight out what you think "money" itself is, making clear what money is "under an honest government," where it comes from, and what it is under an existing government in our time, and where that comes from.

 

You end by asking:  

 

"Or would you prefer that corrupt monies be channeled into the arts equally with the military?"

 

The word "prefer," implies I have a choice.  So you are asking me to choose between "corrupt monies being channeled into the arts equally with the military" and what else?  I think I have already told you that I believe the military in the US should be abolished and replaced by a civilian citizen's militia, similar to what exists in Switzerland and in Costa Rica. All 700 or more bases in over 130 countries should be closed down, and all US troops should return to the US.   A full audit of military spending should be done by the people.  Monies saved can be channeled into programs that benefit the people, including the arts.  That's what we could have under an "honest government," or at least under a "less dishonest one."   The military is just the beginning.  Banks and their monetary credit resources could be seized and run democratically by the people, as "credit unions" are; or in accordance with ideas put forward by people by the "social credit" movement, which originated in Canada, and is growing in strength there.  One can think of many more "honest" and transparent ways that the money issue can be handled.   So I have told you what I think.  Why don't you just tell me what you think?

 

[Remember, I agree with you when you say, "So the American gov'mt has spent a lot of time and money over there in the ole Mid East trying to keep us safe from this faceless enemy they call terrorism. Yet they just seem to be getting nowhere."]

 

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Sign up info

Read before you sign up to find out what the requirements are!

Store

© 2020   Created by Gav Brown.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service