Subject:
|
Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 28 Feb 2002 21:23:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
677 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> Of course, this is how they hose you coming and going. They (banks and
> lending institutions) charge account owners fees for services while
> returning nary a pittance of interest, but they (banks et al) charge
> considerably higher rates for loans. Naturally, we can say "the bank
> charges its account owners for the convenience and security of banking."
> Sure, but the bank is only getting its money from its account holders, so
> the bank charges for services it wouldn't be able to provide without account
> owners in the first place.
Dave! Way to keep your eye on the moving targets! This was not a small
topic you raised with your seemingly simple query.
Of course, all of the things you describe are brought to us by the friendly
passages contained in Title 12 of the Federal Codes. And you thought the
govt. was your friend. Too bad Burr's bullet couldn't have flown back to a
time after Hamilton wrote portions of "The Federalist", but before he had a
big hand in creating the dual banking and taxing messes we live under now.
> I'm not naive or foolish about this; I know this is how the system works,
> and I accept it without too much grumbling.
As do we all -- so far. But is the day of reckoning slowly approaching at
last? The more that understand, the closer we get to that day. It has
long been my belief that if people but understood their situation there
would be radical change overnight. But for now, the north american game
preserve remains a more or less comfortable place to do one's time. A
better place than most, not nearly as good a place as it should be...
> But since we live in a debt-addicted society, what would happen if everyone
> stopped incurring debt? What if, hypothetically, everyone only
> used/acquired/purchased those things that they're capable of paying for
> outright? The economy as it stands would disintegrate.
I like it. When one dreams -- why not dream BIG?!
What would happen if Gates were taken to task for stealing DOS, VisiCalc,
and the look and feel of Windows? What would happen if pirates were actually
brought before the law and exposed?
What are the lessons we are supposed to learn -- if you are going to steal,
make sure you rob from Fort Knox and get away with it? Shouldn't we be
teaching something else?
-- Hop-Frog
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
| (...) You are, of course, advocating communism: "Anyone who possesses even a single item beyond basic living requirements is equally culpable as one who possesses countless frivolous luxury items." And in fact I think there is a manifest difference (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
33 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
