Chavez says crisis-hit U.S. needs new constitution

Originally posted by yellowcard

Yeah, because the government speaks for all people

Freedom of choice through a capitalist structure is totally anti-Freedom and anti-Human...because humans hate freedom, trust me, don't ask them though, because they don't really know what they want.

Don't waste your time with him, he's a lost cause.

Originally posted by yellowcard

Originally posted by QuetzalcoatlAlien
Great, nice to know you can link.

Capitalism is the ultimate anti-human philosophy

Yeah, because the government speaks for all people

Freedom of choice through a capitalist structure is totally anti-Freedom and anti-Human...because humans hate freedom, trust me, don't ask them though, because they don't really know what they want.

Oh you are completely right. Like the freedom of the Greensboro Massacre in which a there was a Communist rally and the KKK and Nazi Party fired and killed innocent people and what happened? Oh nothing! Because they were communists! Capitalism is NOT the way for humans to go forward and survive, it's the antithesis of human survival.


A Paulie saying i'm a "lost cause" haha. Oh the irony.

[edit on 29-9-2008 by QuetzalcoatlAlien]

Once the mainstream sees through the propaganda that has heavily guarded these crooks in our nation that have raped our treasury and destroyed our values and unity as a strong nation they will see that many of our so called enemies around the world our actually our allies. If you ever look into speeches from Chavez, Putin, prime minister of China they all can see clearly our failing system.. Its time we wake up as a nation and break through the 2 party corrupted sytem that we are all enslaved to.

reply to post by QuetzalcoatlAlien Oh you are completely right. Like the freedom of the Greensboro Massacre in which a there was a Communist rally and the KKK and Nazi Party fired and killed innocent people and what happened? Oh nothing! Because they were communists! Capitalism is NOT the way for humans to go forward and survive, it's the antithesis of human survival. A Paulie saying i'm a "lost cause" haha. Oh the irony. [edit on 29-9-2008 by QuetzalcoatlAlien]

Yes, there was more freedoms under Stalin, Mao, and Castro. What about the MILLIONS that died under these FREEDOM loving regimes. Not to mention the MASS starvation under each system.

And yes, you are a lost cause. Go enroll in your nearest community college fer Christ sakes...

*****************

By the way, for future reference: Racism, Communism, Fascism, Neocon-ism, all derive their roots in leftist ideology, because they judge people as collectives not as individuals. So, as much as you hate Pinochet, Hitler, David Duke, Mussolini, Franco or even Karl Rove, they all have roots in your leftist ideology, not ours.

Don't believe me, go pick-up a book...





[edit on 29-9-2008 by Gateway]

Originally posted by Gateway
This is precisely why the Chicagoist are wrong. They think deflation is a bad thing, and hence have no problem with manipulating interest rates be it through a Central Bank or some other Federal Bureaucracy. Goods and services in the long run should decrease in prices because as production in technology increases it creates cheaper and more affordable goods and services, so long as the money supply is neither increased or decreased, and left alone. Think of computers and televisions; should the money supply be increased because these goods continue to decrease/deflate in price over time?

Wrong, Deflation creates malinvestment, if your cash is going to appreciate faster than an asset value then you aren't going to invest your cash and take a loss, it's common sense.

Originally posted by GatewayNo I said, Inflationary environment does not encourage investment it wipes out investment. When in an inflationary environment, consumers are discouraged from saving, since the dollar they poses today will be worth less tomorrow, hence they purchase more goods. As far as entrepreneurs or investors, they too are hampered in a inflationary environment to take on new ventures and thus decrease production, because rates of return on investments are distorted.

Uhm, if your cash is depreciating in value then you are going to get rid of it and put it into something else. That's why Gold is a hedge against inflation...hyperinflation destroys investments in that it creates a liquidity bubble and undercuts savings.

Originally posted by GatewayChicagoist think SPENDING causes inflation. I don't think they tie the money supply with inflation. They view inflation as a side effect of demand. When in fact demand, as in aggregate demand is solely caused by increase levels in the money supply.

Government spending is believed to cause inflation, which it does, we have historical proof of it. Inflation is a side effect of demand, it's common sense and is simple supply and demand, to assume otherwise is to act as if there is unlimited supply for each level of demand, which is NOT true. Your idea of inflation is the expansion of money supply, my idea of inflation is the rising of prices. The money supply and inflation are connected, but not in ever aspect...that's why the money supply should ignore some naturally occurring perceived excess/shortages in supplies of money. Instead it should grow with population. The idea of Chicago school is to create an environment where there is no real inflation and no real deflation, but that the money supply must keep up with population growth to create the scenario that I explained earlier. Deflation creates malinvestment and we don't get the growth you would get under a flat system and with inflation you get too much investment and it leads to asset bubbles, like the housing bubble. The market will always chase something that is going up in value faster than their money, and people will always be hesitant to buy when something is going to drop in price...such as buying a computer, we all do it, we all wait for a price drop. The gold standard does do what Chicago School is trying to achieve, except it has an underlying problem, which is supply, once the supply of Gold is tight, it creates rapid deflation.

Originally posted by GatewayThis is a price increase, if the price of corn goes up then people cut back on other goods and services to offset this price increase. For example, if corn does go up, and demand is inelastic then consumers will decrease consumption in another good. Reason being is that consumers have a limited amount of money. If it is elastic and the price goes up, then consumers purchase less of the product.

The market is much more flexible than that, you're assuming the demand curve will shift to any effect...which is not true, and the very idea of inflation in one sector and deflation in another is why the CPI reading is completely wrong.

Originally posted by GatewayBut how do Chicagoist explain the cause of prices for the aggregate DEMAND of ALL goods and services going up or going down in unison? How can we have, the cost of housing, food, energy, and services increase in prices and nothing left for consumers to offset these price increase. The only true explanation for this is that, an increase in the money supply. So, the supply of money has everything to do with inflation.

That's inflation due to "too much money chasing too few of goods," that's a fault of the government. Both schools agree on this topic, that's why you don't grow the money supply based on money demand because money demand always exists, you grow the supply of money based on population growth as to keep both inflation and deflation at bay.

Originally posted by GatewayFriedman, in his book advocated FED intervention in the marketplace during the great depression, he claims that the Depression would have been averted if Strong, turned on the monetary faucet to increase liquidity, and thus advocated the lowering of interest rates to increase the money supply, during the great depression, which is precisely what his disciple Bernanke is trying to do.

Instead of blaming the the lowering of interest rates, during the twenties for the cause of the great depression, they blame the lack of loose monetary after the crash, to be the cause. Which is backwards.

Wrong, at least in interpretation, the Fed had their rates ABOVE the market rate during the Great Depression, which created rapid deflation, which is what the Great Depression was...a deflationary spiral. Had the Fed not been able to set rates the market rate would have existed in purity and it wouldn't have caused rapid deflation, had the Fed cut rates to match the market...well then that's good, which is what both Bernanke and Friedman are saying. Friedman never argued against the idea that the Fed didn't undercut the markets in the early 20s. In fact, many Chicago School Economists blame much of the current crisis on the Federal Reserve (under Greenspan), which set the rates UNDER the market rate, which created rapid inflation. Bernanke is playing a fools game, but currently the Federal Reserve rate is actually above the market rate...

[edit on 29-9-2008 by yellowcard]

Originally posted by Gateway

reply to post by QuetzalcoatlAlien Oh you are completely right. Like the freedom of the Greensboro Massacre in which a there was a Communist rally and the KKK and Nazi Party fired and killed innocent people and what happened? Oh nothing! Because they were communists! Capitalism is NOT the way for humans to go forward and survive, it's the antithesis of human survival. A Paulie saying i'm a "lost cause" haha. Oh the irony. [edit on 29-9-2008 by QuetzalcoatlAlien]

Yes, there was more freedoms under Stalin, Mao, and Castro. What about the MILLIONS that died under these FREEDOM loving regimes. Not to mention the MASS starvation under each system.

And yes, you are a lost cause. Go enroll in your nearest community college fer Christ sakes...

*****************

By the way, for future reference: Racism, Communism, Fascism, Neocon-ism, all derive their roots in leftist ideology, because they judge people as collectives not as individuals. So, as much as you hate Pinochet, Hitler, David Duke, Mussolini, Franco or even Karl Rove, they all have roots in your leftist ideology, not ours.

Don't believe me, go pick-up a book...





[edit on 29-9-2008 by Gateway]

The Stalin, Mao, and Castro argument again? Sad.

17 Million+ died, under Capitalism. The genocide on the Native Americans. Ever heard of Burkina Faso? Didn't think so. It was actually very prosperous as a Socialist nation. The Soviet Union had one of the highest, if not the highest, literacy rate and education in the world. Is Russia doing better under Capitalism? I think not.

"Fer"? I love the way you display your Master degrees!

Individualism is actually a good thing in your eyes? Of course Mussolini, why do you think they call it the Mussolini Flip? Nice try but Capitalism is still the complete backwards ideology of man and will lead to our destruction until Socialism is accepted.

I have some links on this computer that are proof that Chavez is a woman. No really! I will find them and post it. It had to do with his PT tests in the ARMY. He is a no kidding fat woman.

reply to post by jtma508


Yeah, what is up with this, "The country is dead"/ give me stars and flags garbage? The US is in no way 'dead'. People claim not to watch the news and claim to be part of this "esoteric conspiracy awareness network" but secretly watch the news and drink it in, loving every minute of sensationalist alarm. Not to say this is not a time of economic trouble, but the US has gone through harder times than this. Much harder. The Civil War, The Great Depression, The economic nightmares of the 1800s, and the Revolution itself. This is worrisome but people need to stop being prophets of doom and be positive. People need to STOP worrywarting and figure ways to help out.

reply to post by yellowcard Wrong, Deflation creates malinvestment, if your cash is going to appreciate faster than an asset value then you aren't going to invest your cash and take a loss, it's common sense.

So, inflation is good for investment then I take it? Investments are made with interest rates in mind. So if interest rates are manipulated downward as the fed, does. Rates of returns are distorted, the seemingly unprofitable venture of investing in a new plant is now profitable, since the capital’s price (interest rates) has gone down. This inflationary aspect or the decrease in interest rates causes the malinvestment. Here the investor or entrepreneur should have not taken this venture, but because of manipulation in interest rates causing cheap capital he thus is makes the false assumption that he will generate a worthy rate of return.

Deflation is a decrease in prices for goods, and they are good for businessmen. A decrease in prices, causes greater demand, ergo more profit. That’s why the business man increase his investment, to generate better productivity in the result that he will produce more of the good at a cheaper price, thus increasing demand.

What better way is there to encourage demand than by lowering prices. An increase in prices, decreases demand.

Uhm, if your cash is depreciating in value then you are going to get rid of it and put it into something else. That's why Gold is a hedge against inflation...hyperinflation destroys investments in that it creates a liquidity bubble.

Your cash or cash denominated holdings only depreciates if new money is introduced into the system. So long as the supply of money is not changed your purchasing power will not only stay the same, in will grow, because as I stated above prices for goods and services should decrease over-time.

Government spending is believed to cause inflation, which it does, we have historical proof of it. Inflation is a side effect of demand, it's common sense and is simple supply and demand, to assume otherwise is to act as if there is unlimited supply for each level of demand, which is NOT true. The idea of Chicago school is to create an environment where there is no real inflation and no real deflation, but that the money supply must keep up with population growth to create the scenario that I explained earlier. Deflation creates malinvestment and we don't get the growth you would get under a flat system and with inflation you get too much investment and it leads to asset bubbles, like the housing bubble. The market will always chase something that is going up in value faster than their money, and people will always be hesitant to buy when something is going to drop in price...such as buying a computer, we all do it, we all wait for a price drop.

Your argument doesn’t stand up, to scrutiny. If prices decrease, then demand for the good increases. Which is precisely why more people buy computers and TVs. Back in the 50’s owning TVs was a luxury, only the very well off could afford it, which were a few. But as prices have come down, everyone is now able to afford one. Simply because prices for these goods have come down i.e. TVs and Computers does mean or not make it a profit earning venture.

Why do you think the demand for electric car does not yet exist? Because owning one is still more expensive than a combustible engine type vehicle. Of course this may change do to interference by governments in markets.

The market is much more flexible than that, you're assuming the demand curve will shift to any effect...which is not true, and the very idea of inflation in one sector and deflation in another is why the CPI reading is completely wrong.

No, Austrians never said the CPI was an accurate way to gauge inflation. Only the Keynesians and and Neoclassicist believe in the CPI. Let’s forget the CPI, for a second: What I’m saying is that prices for energy, food, housing, and services have all increased, have they not? How did this occur? Are people just irrationally buying more goods and services? No, new money has been created, and has thus bid-up the prices for these goods and services.

That's inflation due to "too much money chasing too few of goods," that's a fault of the government.

There is only one type of inflation, and that’s because money has been created, whether spent by the government or consumers it is irrelevant, money and the creation of it has bid-up prices.

Both schools agree on this topic, that's why you don't grow the money supply based on money demand because money demand always exists, you grow the supply of money based on population growth as to keep both inflation and deflation at bay.

No this is where both schools seriously disagree. While Friedman thinks that increasing the money even though he thinks some odd arbitrary rate should be done to avoid deflation. The Austrians argue that doing so is no different than having a steady constant rate of inflation. Thus if you increase the supply of money even if on a steady rate of say 3% annum, which generates no productive value so far as real investment is concerned, then it is good as creating inflation of 3% or maybe higher, because investors will seek a premium on their rates of return given that there is constant inflation.

Also, Chicagoist ignore the redistributive effect of raising the money supply in this way. Will everyone’s accounts be increased overnight by 3%? If not then you have the problem of those that get the new money will be the ones that buy up these goods and services first pre-adjusted for inflation. In other words, those that get the new money will enjoy the benefits of having it first, and those that get it last will be hurt the most, because the prices will have already been bid-up.

Wrong, at least in interpretation, the Fed had their rates ABOVE the market rate during the Great Depression, which created rapid deflation, which is what the Great Depression was...a deflationary spiral.

No, wrong. I already made a post of this. Interest rates were decreased BEFORE THE CRASH, causing the malinvestment and inflation in the economy. The FED then reversed course and raised the rates in 1928, to stop the bubble. After that the FED continued to decrease the money supply, which turned a recession into a depression. Here, I’ll re-post what I said: (see next post)

reply to post by yellowcard

The FED took two actions which caused the market to crash and then caused the great depression, back in the 30s, and are also culpable for our current financial instability.

1) They lowered interest rates in the 1920s, creating the roaring twenties and expanded the money supply.

2) They then raised the interest rates in 1928 to try to stop the bubble they created, thus in 1929, the stock market crashed. But if you don't believe me read it from their own website. Of course, it says they raise interest rates in 1928, but they won't say anything about the easy credit they created throughout the 1920s, for that information see the data I provided below.

The first episode analyzed by Friedman and Schwartz was the deliberate tightening of monetary policy that began in the spring of 1928 and continued until the stock market crash of October 1929.

Source:CPI/M2 Money Supply


CONSUMER PRICE INDEX AND M2 MONEY SUPPLY: 1800-2003
(M2 in billions of dollars)


Year CPI-U M2
---- ----- ------ ------ ------- ------ ------
1917 38.4 24.37 16.88 7.86
1918 45.1 26.73 9.68 8.96
1919 51.8 31.01 16.01 9.48
1920 60.0 34.80 12.22 10.18
1921 53.6 32.85 -5.60 9.04
1922 50.2 33.72 2.65 8.59
1923 51.1 36.60 8.54 9.04
1924 51.2 38.58 5.41 9.17
1925 52.5 42.05 8.99 9.33
1926 53.0 43.68 3.88 7.87
1927 52.0 44.73 2.40 6.42
1928 51.3 46.42 3.78 5.83
1929 51.3 46.60 0.39 4.27
1930 50.0 45.73 -1.87 2.86
1931 45.6 42.69 -6.65 2.75
1932 40.9 36.05 -15.55 0.93
1933 38.8 32.22 -10.62 -0.98
1934 40.1 34.36 6.64 -0.86
1935 41.1 39.07 13.71 -0.39
1936 41.5 43.48 11.29 0.35
1937 43.0 45.68 5.06 0.62
1938 42.2 45.51 -0.37 0.20
1939 41.6 49.27 8.26 0.99
1940 42.0 55.20 12.04 2.38

Source:CPI/M2 Money Supply

I'm going to make this very simple for you. I removed unnecessary figures which may confuse you. The first column on the left is the years, the second column represents CPI, the third M2, which is the supply of money, (M3 was not really prevalent at the time) by the way what matters for the economy is total money supply and not the monetary base. As you can see from the chart above starting from 1917 on through about 1929 M2 money supply was steadily rising to as I said 1929 to 46.60. This increase in the money supply provided excess money which drove production, and began to cause the malinvestment in the economy, just like we have today, which led to the speculative bubble in the Stock Market. And like today, back then there was growing inflation, see the first column see the CPI rising in 1917 38.4, till 1929 51.3. After 1929 we had slight deflation or prices falling, but pay close attention the prices generally hovered and really didn't come down too much. Why? Because as I've already pointed out the Federal government imposed certain restrictions which didn't allowed for prices to decrease as they should have.

How the hell are people supposed to eat when prices are curiously staying the same and in the case of some years actually going up, when their is A DEPRESSION GOING ON?? I'll tell you why, BECAUSE AGAIN government is interfering and making things worse. Instead of letting prices come down for food, clothing, and shelter as they should have during a depression for those that needed it most, government propped up certain businesses (THINK AGI, OR FINANCIAL BUSINESS OF TODAY) with tariffs and other forms of trade restrictions.

I don't know if you are astute enough to have read Milton Friedman's, A Monetary History of the United States, 1867-1960, but in this book he has outlined the mistakes that the FED made that:
a) Caused the Crash (raised rates in 1928)
b) Turned a recession into a Depression. (kept raising them, after the crash, shrinking the money supply)

But Friedman mentions nothing about the loose monetary all throughout the 20's which led to the malinvestment and inflated the stock market. His gripe is that they should have not raised the rates in 1928. Which is wrong headed, since it could have led to a bigger asset bubble.



Also, the reason why a 1/3 of the banks failed was because there was no FDIC at the time.

Economists blame much of the current crisis on the Federal Reserve (under Greenspan), which set the rates UNDER the market rate, which created rapid inflation. Bernanke is playing a fools game, but currently the Federal Reserve rate is actually above the market rate...

No, this is wrong. Bernanke is keeping rates not above market it is still below market. He wants to encourage lending not discourage it. According to him, he wants to avoid the mistakes made during the Great Depression, which was setting rates ABOVE market interest rates, causing the shrinkage in the money supply.

Banks want to interest rates higher right now for two reasons.

1) Inflation- (Prices are going-up) This causes a premium for rates of return. Banks want their rates of return + an inflation premium.
2) Home forecloses as well as defaults on homes mortgages and other loans are causing the banking industry losses, so to curb lending and thus prevent insolvency and more loses banks would prefer higher rates.







[edit on 29-9-2008 by Gateway]

Originally posted by yellowcard
Ok, let me set the record straight, and this is no personal attack, this is truth. If you agree with Chavez on this you are a complete and utter idiot.

Yes, I am

Originally posted by yellowcard
... There has been no "down fall," this is a global issue, it is not an American issue, European economies are much worse off than we are, trust me.

Really? Please provide proof of that statement - because this is simply not true. It is a global issue because European Banks work with US Banks, but at the end (now) the consequences are much worser in the US.

And, you won't find any data proofing that the US Economy is better off, then the European - This is a simple lie broadcasted by your corrupt mainstream media - Just look at the numbers.

Originally posted by yellowcard

The U.S. Constitution is one the most important documents ever created, and you don't simply get a new Constitution, which shows how stupid Chavez is, you can Amend to the current one. So to those who agree with Chavez, pardon my criticism, but you deserve it...you're a complete idiot. Go read "The Federalist Papers."

Important? Who the f**k cares about that document anymore? Most Americans even don't know what it contains. This is not a single page like in the movies. And anyway, what parts of the constitution are still being respected by the government? - none.



Chavez is maybe not the best leader, but at least he is doing something for his people - inform yourself a little bit about Venezuela, just the last 10 years and you will see that Chavez is not the dictator FOX News is trying to tell you.

And, at least he has no fear in telling you the truth right up to your face - you even don't understand the quote: What he is telling is "If you continue likes this, your constitution will get worthless" - read between the lines, people!

Originally posted by QuetzalcoatlAlien The Stalin, Mao, and Castro argument again? Sad.

It's only sad for those that deny truth.

17 Million+ died, under Capitalism.

And that would be which nations?

The genocide on the Native Americans. Ever heard of Burkina Faso? Didn't think so.

Huh? What does colonialism, have to do with Capitalism? Capitalism is freedom of exchange for goods and services, owning the fruits of your labor, and property rights. None of which occurs in a communist/socialist state. Thus in a communist/socialist STATE, IT owns everything, which by default means it OWNS YOU.

It was actually very prosperous as a Socialist nation.

Yes, I can see what a prosperous nation this is/was, truly a marvel and model nation to be envied...

The Soviet Union had one of the highest, if not the highest, literacy rate and education in the world. Is Russia doing better under Capitalism? I think not.

Who says Russia is Capitalist. It is still very much socialist, in fact there is a trend towards more nationalizing. Would you like to see photos of what life was like in Communist U.S.S.R? How good life was under rationing, shortages, oppression of speech?

What good is reading if you can't feed your family. Oh that's right we can all feast on the "Communist Manifesto" for dinner.

Oh yeah, and Communist regimes or any other type of government are not in the business of fudging numbers so yeah, WE should all believe the statistics provided by the State. The STATE does not lie.

"Fer"? I love the way you display your Master degrees!

I was using a colloquial term...look it up.

Individualism is actually a good thing in your eyes?

No, I much prefer the system of labeling everyone the same, and using generalities. It's a better way to live.

Of course Mussolini, why do you think they call it the Mussolini Flip? Nice try but Capitalism is still the complete backwards ideology of man and will lead to our destruction until Socialism is accepted.

Socialism is dead, Capitalism also appears to be dead, but corporatism or fascism seems to be very much alive today, this is certainly closer to your type of leftist ideology, then mine. You should be dancing in the streets because of this BAIL-OUT.



[edit on 29-9-2008 by Gateway]

Originally posted by Gateway

Originally posted by QuetzalcoatlAlien The Stalin, Mao, and Castro argument again? Sad.

It's only sad for those that deny truth.

17 Million+ died, under Capitalism.

And that would be which nations?

The genocide on the Native Americans. Ever heard of Burkina Faso? Didn't think so.

Huh? What does colonialism, have to do with Capitalism? Capitalism is freedom of exchange for goods and services, owning the fruits of your labor, and property rights. None of which occurs in a communist/socialist state. Thus in a communist/socialist STATE, IT owns everything, which by default means it OWNS YOU.

It was actually very prosperous as a Socialist nation.

Yes, I can see what a prosperous nation this is/was, truly a marvel and model nation to be envied...

The Soviet Union had one of the highest, if not the highest, literacy rate and education in the world. Is Russia doing better under Capitalism? I think not.

Who says Russia is Capitalist. It is still very much socialist, in fact there is a trend towards more nationalizing. Would you like to see photos of what life was like in Communist U.S.S.R? How good life was under rationing, shortages, oppression of speech?

What good is reading if you can't feed your family. Oh that's right we can all feast on the "Communist Manifesto" for dinner.

Oh yeah, and Communist regimes or any other type of government are not in the business of fudging numbers so yeah, WE should all believe the statistics provided by the State. The STATE does not lie.

"Fer"? I love the way you display your Master degrees!

I was using a colloquial term...look it up.

Individualism is actually a good thing in your eyes?

No, I much prefer the system of labeling everyone the same, and using generalities. It's a better way to live.

Of course Mussolini, why do you think they call it the Mussolini Flip? Nice try but Capitalism is still the complete backwards ideology of man and will lead to our destruction until Socialism is accepted.

Socialism is dead, Capitalism also appears to be dead, but corporatism or fascism seems to be very much alive today, this is certainly closer to your type of leftist ideology, then mine. You should be dancing in the streets because of this BAIL-OUT.



[edit on 29-9-2008 by Gateway]

The Great Leap Forward was indeed a huge mistake on Mao's part and Stalin did a lot of great things for the USSR as well as mistakes. No leader is perfect except your God, Ron Paul!

Nations? All of the Natives in the Americas.

Colonialism is fueled by Capitalism. The Spanish Conquistadors were entrepreneurs.

Nice try but that attempt at being clever failed. Thomas Sankara, the leader of Socialist Burkina Faso, was assassinated but you are too ignorant to know this.

Still very much Socialist? Wow, you throw that word around like if it means nothing. Actually, families were very well fed until the fall and Capitalism was introduced. Fascist groups are actually on the rise and there is tons of murder and starvation. Feast on the Manifesto? That all you got? Pretty pathetic. Go drool of some von Mises

A better way to live? You're an idiot


Fascism is actually right, not leftist. Do you know what you are talking about? Did you get your "Masters" from a IloveRonPaul.com test?

You lack any sort of knowledge on Socialism, if I said I liked Dr. Pepper you'd say that was Socialist because I drink it out of a can

[edit on 29-9-2008 by QuetzalcoatlAlien]

While you guys were arguing amongst yourselves Congress and the president have worked out a bailout to save their major contributors screwing us over in the process.That's what Chavez was trying to say we get caught up in petty arguments,then these triators ingnore the Constitution simply because they know damn well the general public will never take the time to read it.

[edit on 29-9-2008 by mike dangerously]

[edit on 29-9-2008 by mike dangerously]

Originally posted by newagent89
reply to post by jtma508

 

Yeah, what is up with this, "The country is dead"/ give me stars and flags garbage? The US is in no way 'dead'. People claim not to watch the news and claim to be part of this "esoteric conspiracy awareness network" but secretly watch the news and drink it in, loving every minute of sensationalist alarm. Not to say this is not a time of economic trouble, but the US has gone through harder times than this. Much harder. The Civil War, The Great Depression, The economic nightmares of the 1800s, and the Revolution itself. This is worrisome but people need to stop being prophets of doom and be positive. People need to STOP worrywarting and figure ways to help out.

Well said. Much of this is a media induced self-fulfilling prophecy!

Back to point, nice to see Chavez crawl out from under that rock again and rear his ugly head. What better a distraction from the plight of his own. I'm sure Chavezs grasp of fiscal ethics would be hugely beneficial to Bernake and co. There is a rather big tongue in my cheek if you hadn't noticed!

Originally posted by ohioriver
Hey Chavez:
Sit down and STFU!

You worry bout your own country and America will fix her own.

Lol I dont suppose youre the kind of spain are you?

(King of Spain was the guy who said the exact same thing to Chavez: "Why dont you just sit down and shut up").

On topic: Of course the constitution doesn't need to be changed. It needs to be followed instead of ignored.

reply to post by cbass
Don't let the trolls get to you. You and Chavez are absolultely correct.

While our Constitution itself is / was a fine piece of work, many parts of it have become outdated and we need to "update" it.

When you're 200 years advanced in your thinking, it takes the average person twice that long to catch up. They just don't want to see the writing on the wall yet and it will take yet many more "issues" before they do.

Good post!

Originally posted by ofhumandescent
reply to post by cbass

 

Don't let the trolls get to you. You and Chavez are absolultely correct.

While our Constitution itself is / was a fine piece of work, many parts of it have become outdated and we need to "update" it.

When you're 200 years advanced in your thinking, it takes the average person twice that long to catch up. They just don't want to see the writing on the wall yet and it will take yet many more "issues" before they do.

Good post!

Ok if you think the Constitution is outdated then what part of it needs to be updated? Please indulge me.

reply to post by ofhumandescent


Fundamental freedoms and rights are outdated?!

Habeas Corpus has been around in some form or another since the Magna Carter. Is it outdated?

Free speech. Outdated?

Come on, dont be ridiculous! Im not even American, yet I respect the constitution as the best article of governance anywhere in the world.

reply to post by mike dangerously


Are they really doing it for their friends or to cover their own ass. And you are correct to say many will never read it. As long as they get a piece of the pie also why should they care. Wouldn't surprise me if this happens again. I am sure they will just say that the last bailout wasn't big enough.