Individual Wealth Cap

originally posted by: idiotseverywhere
a reply to: opethPA

So is someone allowed to be as free as they want in your definition if it impedes on the freedom of others?

Because the natural end to this is that an individual worth 100 trillion can take away most if not all of your spending power.

What is an example of someone being as free as they want that has impeded the freedom of others?

originally posted by: idiotseverywhere
a reply to: opethPA

So is someone allowed to be as free as they want in your definition if it impedes on the freedom of others?

Because the natural end to this is that an individual worth 100 trillion can take away most if not all of your spending power.

Absurd, nonsensical, hypotheticals can be made about anything in life.

How about sticking to reality when you explain how capping earnings helps the world.

a reply to: opethPA

anyone that has killed anyone ever?

a reply to: toolgal462

can you give evidence it doesn't work this way, because the evidence it would is directly in the banking manual

How is this OP not trolling?

23 pages of pure nonsense and silliness.

originally posted by: idiotseverywhere
a reply to: opethPA

anyone that has killed anyone ever?

What does that have to do with your argument on financial caps?

Just as many poor, just as many middle class, just as many rich have killed people. Crime isn't a function of success but rather a trait of being human.

a reply to: idiotseverywhere

the banking manual

oh goody
care to link that please

a reply to: opethPA

you wanted an example that someone's freedom could impede others and I gave it to you dude, it's literally not the only example.

you want a financial example? just look at slap suits

originally posted by: idiotseverywhere
a reply to: toolgal462

can you give evidence it doesn't work this way, because the evidence it would is directly in the banking manual

What the hell are you talking about. My question has been the same for 20 pages.

How does capping earnings help the world?

BE SPECIFIC.

I do not know what the "banking manual" says.

So, explain it to me please.

a reply to: shooterbrody

www.federalreserve.gov...

originally posted by: idiotseverywhere
a reply to: opethPA

you wanted an example that someone's freedom could impede others and I gave it to you dude, it's literally not the only example.

you want a financial example? just look at slap suits

SLAPP suits are illegal, or didn't you know that?

originally posted by: toolgal462

originally posted by: pexx421
a reply to: idiotseverywhere

Man, stop feeding the trolls. If they pretend they can’t understand simple points and context, and if they turn around what you actually say, they are not engaging in honest debate. They are feeding their fragile, attention dependent ego at your expense. In real life you could smack them around a bit. On here you just have to ignore them, or engage in kind. There’s no actual reasoning going on there.

What actual points do you ever make? Every single thread that you respond on you say the exact same thing. Always propping up your supposed "intelligence" while simultaneously insulting everyone else's.

And to you everyone who doesn't agree with you is a troll. I don't think you know what that word means, but you might want to look in the mirror first, then look the word up in the dictionary.

There have been numerous attempts by posters to discuss the OP's premise, despite the fact that the OP barely makes any sense and is sorely lacking in knowledge of the subject matter at hand.

So, instead of coming to OP's rescue with you usual "they are all just trolls and can't discuss" why don't' YOU explain to us how capping someone's income is a benefit to anyone????

Anyone at all? Please, do tell us oh brilliant one.

Sorry toolgal, but no. I have no problem with folks disagreeing with me. Plenty people on here have had civil productive discourse with me on topics we disagree upon. It’s the method and tone of your conversation that I have issue with. When you are condescending and patronizing, with ad hominem attacks and attempts to paint someone as stupid, then I’ll call you our and tell you off. And strangely, the most aggressive, offensive folks on here are the least able to have their attacks and aggression thrown back at them. Much like any bullies. If you feel singled out by this, then perhaps it’s because you act an ass towards folk trying to have a real discussion.

originally posted by: toolgal462
OP,

I thought there was "0 percent chance" of you responding to Augustus about 5 replies ago?

Again, proving that you don't know what "percent" means.

See, like this. An intentional, obnoxious attempt to ridicule another person, while adding nothing to the convo.

a reply to: idiotseverywhere
thanks for that!
think you may have missed this in the first few sentences tho
"bank manual" and all

They should not be considered a legal reference to the regulations of the Federal Reserve Board and federal banking laws.

a reply to: toolgal462

Ok, specifically, the value of the dollar is related to how many are in circulation. There are other factors, but the sudo-defacto way to improve the value of the dollar, would be to reduce it's quantity to 1. This would indeed, raise the value of the dollar to the highest amount in any fractional system. It would obviously also be worthless, because it would lose it's purpose, but the math that identifies the worth of the dollar is this.

They are ignoring it because it sounds like a liberal concept to cap wealth, but this is why Republicans are normally crying about more printed money, and actually super educated on this topic when they want to be. Printing money reduces value, burning money increases it.

With this in mind, the hypothetical consequences of an individual becoming worth 'cthulhu' amounts of money would be inherently and -very obviously- detrimental to the economy it resided in.

a reply to: pexx421
this

Much like any bullies.

is funny coming from the same person that posted this

In real life you could smack them around a bit.

so who would be the aggressive one again?

a reply to: shooterbrody

oh. and who writes the laws even tho these are unofficial versions?

surely not the board of the federal reserve, they have 0 percent impact.

a reply to: pexx421

Pointing out that a person's arguments or posts are silly, nonsensical and just plain stupid is not an ad hom attack.

But you show up on every thread with the same MO - you call everyone "trolls" and "sheep" and in my case, you have said much worse, but have been reprimanded before for it so you have attempted to moderate your past misogynist behavior.

All I ever ask for is specific answers to specific questions that I ask, always relating to the subject of the OP - and all you and in this case, the OP ever respond with is nonsense and accusations of being bullied.

You cannot simply stick to a subject or answer a specific question and you always resort to "don't bother, TG is a troll".

You've done it here, and I responded. And still you haven't once responded with something that addresses the topic of the OP.

How about you start there??? How does capping income help the world?

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: pexx421
this

Much like any bullies.

is funny coming from the same person that posted this

In real life you could smack them around a bit.

so who would be the aggressive one again?

Have you ever witnessed this person actually discuss the topic? It's always the same BS in every thread they show up in.

originally posted by: idiotseverywhere
a reply to: shooterbrody

oh. and who writes the laws even tho these are unofficial versions?

surely not the board of the federal reserve, they have 0 percent impact.

as if you had any understanding of such
what exactly is an "unofficial version" of a law?
the manual you linked appears to be used in bank audits by the fed
is that what you were going for in you posted "bank manuals"?