JohnBirchSociety
-
Posts
424 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by JohnBirchSociety
-
-
Oh is that all? I just said I was fan of that system, meaning it intrigues me. I didn't mean to say that I would support a system like that. But anyway, I'm not done reading that first book yet.
Don't worry though I'm not afraid to be called communist or whatever. I don't like to be called capitalist either. The current system of capitalism is just like glorified slavery. Don't get me wrong, I support the free market, but I think there should be strict regulation on the organizational structure of businesses. This is to prevent harm to the little guys(employees and consumers). But alas I've gotten off topic again.
So let me see if I've got this right. The gold(or precious metals) standard is good because the value of those metals is pretty much stable. Where as if you were to base currency on a product like a car or xbox or something it would lose value over time. S what other things have had a stable value over time?
You should be appalled to be called a communist. Communism is satanic, as all of our Prophets have taught.
Capitalism in the extreme, absent the checks of a free market, does indeed equate to "glorified slavery". When government intervenes, and prohibits the natural checks of a free market upon capitalism, is when the "glorified slavery" happens, as with the current banking crisis.
Strict regulation of private business (someones property) is communism and will never work, and has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of millions of people globally. Non-free market capitalism (fabian socialism) is not much better.
Free-market capitalism where the government only enforces contracts and provides sound money for trade (the proper function of government), has proven itself to be the best remedy to the problems we now face. Ironic it is that that is exactly what the American founders created with their Constitutional Republic. If only we'd follow it!
Communism is not the answer.
And thanks for reading the books we've mentioned. I do appreciate it.
-
I very much regret that you dislike progressive income tax – it is one of the least regressive of government taxes. I support and champion income tax because every citizen gets to see every year what they are paying in taxes because of their income. I am very much disturbed with those that strain at a nat to swallow a camel when it comes to taxes. Many complain about income taxes because they are so visible.
If you are going to complain about government taking advantage let’s not go after income taxes – let’s go after the hidden taxes like the corporate tax. Few Americans realize that they pay close to 60% of their income in taxes. This is because when you go and buy a loaf of bread for a dollar you will pay close to 45 percent of the cost you pay in taxes and this is before you even consider paying the state food tax – if there is any. You pay even more in what are called big ticket items, as high as 80% in some cases. Very few realize that as the price of gas drops that the tax per gallon does not decrease one red cent. Very few realize that the percent markup over 8% counted as profit by the oil companies goes to pay the oil companies taxes.
I am glad you are passionate about taxes – I just wish you were not stuck with a political bias and agenda. I believe every citizen has a right to know how much money their government is taking from them and I know of no better way of them knowing than when they fill out their income tax in April. The only tax, should be the income tax – if we want to get rid of any taxes by priority let’s make income tax the very last tax to be cut --- not the first.
The Traveler
The central reason for denouncing the PROGRESSIVE income tax (not just income tax in general) is that it is a central tenet of Marxist Communism. There is a reason Marxist Communism has it as a central tenet. Does that not concern you?
I am against the evil that is communism. I want no part of it.
On to tax. I support government taxing the citizen to pay for the proper functioning of government.
I've no problem with a level income tax. Everyone pays the same.
I'm perfectly aware of the pass-along corporate taxes we endure. We pay too much in tax because our government does too much. It does that for which it has no Constitutional mandates.
In reality, the government ran quite well without the use of income tax.
-
How do we define less fortunate. Is someone less fortunate that chooses not to work because it is easier to collect food stamps and welfare payments? I consider someone less fortunate who has to leave an abusive relationship and children need to be supported. I have seen many single mothers struggle and make ends meet and provide for their children and take little of what government has to offer.
At least that is my opinion.
Ben Raines
Yep. Who decides? The Government?
The government is the most non-efficient means of doing almost anything. Why would you want the government in charge?
It is theft, whether the government does it, or I do it.
-
Yep. I believe in the terrible ideal that it is the government's job to take care of the less fortunate.
(Insert dramatic music here). I am FunkyTown - SOCIALIST!
That ideal is bluntly stated as theft, government sponsored theft.
If the individual has no right to take of a persons labor and give to another, then no amount of individuals combined have the right.
Government has no "rights" whatsoever.
To take from one, by force, and give to another, what is not theirs, is theft.
-
Hahah.
You know I support taxation and social programs for the poor. Though I will admit that due to government bureaucracy far too much of that goes to bloat and corruption. In my ideal society, there would be minimal bloat and there would be an equality by consensus.Of course, in my ideal society, I'd be a shepherd on seaside cliffs, overlooking the ocean and smelling the salt air.
Then you are socialist.
-
I'll be offline for a bit. I'm reading those books you referred me to.
Here's one I'll refer you to: "It Seems Like Heaven Began on Earth": Joseph Smith and the Constitution of the Kingdom of God
I would also like to ask JohnBirch what elements of my views does he feel are communist?
1) The Kingdom of God as a government on Earth will come at the second coming of Christ.
2) Joseph Smith said we were to save the Constitution, not get a new one, until Christ returned.
3) The following is communism and Marxist:
"I'm also a fan of another system. It's a type of fiat system where the Government prints money as legal tender then sets it's value. With government enforcement it would always retain that set value. This would only work in a planned economy where products were of set value as well. So regardless of how much money was made it would have the same value. No inflation or deflation. Instead of the value being determined by international trading it is set. Obvoiusly this would take a lot of work to actually work."
Karl Marx said the following in his treatise, "The Communist Manifesto", wherein he gives ten steps to achieve communism:
Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
-
Deseret? Don't be concerned if someone says you're a communist. JohnBirchSociety would term me a socialist because I believe:
1) Companies are not inherently infallible or ethical.
2) Governments are not inherently infallible or ethical.
3) People are not inherently infallible or ethical.
Therefore, I believe:
4) Companies must exist with checks and balances to protect the weak from the strong. This requires government oversight in to many things.
And you would be wrong.
I to do not believe companies are inherently infallible or that government are inherently infallible or that people are inherently infallible.
I to believe that companies should have a check on them by government. Government must insure that contracts are upheld. That is the proper function of government. In the United States the Federal Government is to provide sound money (constitutional) for proper commerce. All of this insures property rights.
Your not socialist unless you believe the labor of one should be taken by force and given to another.
-
I'm sorry I've never studied any of Karl Marx's work. I'm only trying to come up with a fair system. A system where the big guys don't have unfair advantage over the little guys, and everyone gets what they work for.
I can see what you mean but those two statements don't go together. Artcile I, Section 8 of the Constitution says that congress has the power to "coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin."
This means that Congerss can coin money as you said, but it can also set the value of that money and set the value of foreign coin in relation to our money. It doesn't say that money value will be determined by the value of gold but it will be set by Congress.
Also Artcile 1, Section 10 says that the States cannot "make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts." This doesn't say that the US government can only use gold and silver but that only the states can us gold and silver. It makes no mention of what Congress can use for money.
Because coining is the way money is made.
As I pointed out it says that only States can use gold or silver.
The Federal Reserve system is definately wrong.
Very true.
YEs but even Joseph Smith knew the Constitution would fail. The Constityution has served it's purpose. It's time for us to move on to the next stage of our progression.
I never said that Congress is constrained to Gold or Silver only. However, because the States can use only Gold or Silver, and given what the Founders said about it, that was to be the primary metal(s) used.
The Coinage Act of 1792 allows for copper pennies.
The fairest system is the Free Market. Allow men to freely trade with one another, using honest money (as established by law, the ONLY proper function of Government in the economy) and you shall have the most propsperous people in history.
It is only when government intervenes where it ought not, where inequities arise.
As A-Train said, "Economics in One Lesson" is a GREAT work on the Free-Market. It is a quick read.
For a very intensive treatise of paper currency read, "The Paper Aristocracy".
For the greatest treatise on sound money ever written, read, "MONEY: Ye shall have honest weights and measures"
If you can read those three things and still espouse Marxist-Communism (knowingly or not) then so be it.
-
I'm sorry I've never studied any of Karl Marx's work. I'm only trying to come up with a fair system. A system where the big guys don't have unfair advantage over the little guys, and everyone gets what they work for.
I can see what you mean but those two statements don't go together. Artcile I, Section 8 of the Constitution says that congress has the power to "coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin."
This means that Congerss can coin money as you said, but it can also set the value of that money and set the value of foreign coin in relation to our money. It doesn't say that money value will be determined by the value of gold but it will be set by Congress.
Also Artcile 1, Section 10 says that the States cannot "make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts." This doesn't say that the US government can only use gold and silver but that only the states can us gold and silver. It makes no mention of what Congress can use for money.
Because coining is the way money is made.
As I pointed out it says that only States can use gold or silver.
The Federal Reserve system is definately wrong.
Very true.
YEs but even Joseph Smith knew the Constitution would fail. The Constityution has served it's purpose. It's time for us to move on to the next stage of our progression.
Wow, you wish to abandon the inspired Constitution? Wow!
That view is at odds with the Church and liberty.
-
Even without shells in it there is nothing more intimidating in the dark that to hear the racking of a pump shotgun.
During the day, gun on the hip. During the night shotgun next to the bed. No 20 feet for me and the sound of breaking glass and barking dog gives me plenty of time to prepare.
It is not about protecting possessions. I often leave my house unlocked when I leave it. It is about protecting life and virtue. For that I want to be the best prepared and able to defend.
I do not workout for vanity. Crooks workout all day long, ever seen what prisioners look like? Ever tried to fight with someone on crank or other drugs, I have. I am prepared to defend my wife and daughters lives and virtue. The rest of what I have in the house can be replaced or not.
Ben Raines
You work out? Hadn't noticed...just ribbin' ya!
Hey, along with your workout and guns you might find American Kenpo very useful in combating crooks on drugs. It is completely scientific and it doesn't matter what a person is on when you use it (I know this from experience).
Besides it being created by a devout LDS person...
-
JBS, so is there a record of your children being blessed and the date on the records or just a private event. No real official need to bless a baby, not a saving ordinance.
Ben Raines
No, there is no such record for any of my children. It brings up some interesting discussions with records clerks and new bishoprics.
I've just always been uncomfortable with public blessing of children that have no clue what we are doing on their behalf.
Maybe it comes from a complete dislike of my Catholic heritage and the baptism of infants?
-
I don't see why you can't defend yourself with stuff you have in the house - I have a hockey stick, a poker, drawer full of kitchen knives and I have myself,
-Charley
You can, unless confronted by a gun, which is typical in today's society.
The Second Amendment is not just about self-defense, it is also about keeping tyranny at bay.
-
God's power to create, to move elements, move mountains, heal sick, cause sun to stop in it's course, etc.
The Priesthood is the power by which it is done. Walls of Jericho falling down, parting of the Red Sea. Those types of things.
Along with the material things that can be done with the Priesthood is also the ability to perform ordinances such as baptism, sealing of couples for time and all eternity in the temples, baptism for the dead in the temple, sealing of families for eternity, based on worthiness, etc.
The power to act in God's name.
Ben Raines
Are we saying God has the priesthood? That's an interesting concept. One that I would completely disagree with.
God created the priesthood. His power is in his nature as the Supreme Being / Creator of all that exists.
-
Just an interesting note to me. I've been a convert for twenty years and I still remember the first have dozen health blessing that I performed. Being the newest I got to hear a lot of "older" brethren giving a health blessings. They had some long preambles to get the job done. It was a three minute process to anoint with the oil. Another three minute process to bless the anointing "before the blessing ever started". Where are these beautiful words came from I dont know. I ask the bishop about it once and he told me to follow the PH card that I carry in my pocket just in case something special comes up. The health blessing is simple but sometimes we get carried away and just add beautiful flowery words that just are not necessary. Its not Right or Wrong Just Different. The Lord knows our spirit and intent. If any of the priesthood ordinances had a specific exactness we would be instructed in the proper way. Just like the Baptism and Sacramental Prayers. We are all helpers of the Lord, perhaps not perfect helpers but helpers none the less. Thanks
This brought back a stickler of a lesson from Stake Conference that I nearly walked out on.
The Stake President here mandated that we use the "thee / thou" language in prayers, etc., or they weren't done right.
I kid you not!
-
No, it is not a requirement to say "...name to be known upon the records of this church..." in blessing a baby. I'm sure the blessings of your children are valid as long as the name was pronounced by the power of the Melchisidek Priesthood and in the name of Jesus Christ. It is funny how we get in the habit of standardizing things that just started somewhere, especially in words we use in public prayers and blessings.
I was under the impression that a Father always has the right, the patriarchal right to bless his children, regardless of priesthood?
The priesthood only comes into effect when performing the specific public ordinance at church, which I never did for any of my children. I just blessed them at birth, privately. It was profound and intimate.
-
Who is wanting to deprive anyone their obligation to defend themselves and their families?
Any group that would infringe upon the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution would be part of the effort to deprive us of the inalienable right to self-defense.
I'm surprised that you are not aware of such activity.
-
Well that would solve that problem. But I would still be wary of private banks controling the supply of precious metals.
What I mean by that is that everything that is of value and is available to be traded should be represented by a note. So instead of having a banknote that represents metal that can buy something. Just have a note that represents this things to be bought.
What I'm saying is, why do we need to go through gold or silver to trade? Why not trade the items directly?
No problems here. But as I mentioned above. Why would I trade land for gold when I could trdae it for something directly. Or in other words Why trade land for notes that are tradabel for gold which is tradable for something else. Just cut out the gold middleman and tie the currency to the items being traded.
Yeah as I said it would take a lot of work to get that system to work.
There shouldn't be stocks. I don't support corporations. I think that a business should be owned by all those who work in it. The profits of that corporation would be divided among the members of the business accdording to the job and time that a person contributes. Any "stocks" would be loans to help a business get funding that would be paid off with interest and the creditor ending up having no say in the what goes on in the business. Simply put there would be no corporations or emplyers and employees, only really big partnerships.
The point of this whole organization would be to keep down corruption and stop ceos from getting insane wages, while the people who actually keep the business running get next to nothing.
I believe we should have a system where every person gets what they work for. true not everyone will be equal but that will only be because some people will work harder and in different professions than others.
I'll have a look.
I don't know if you know it or not (I'm hopeful that you don't), but you are essentially quoting Karl Marx in your positions.
In the United States, under the divinely inspired United States Constitution, gold and silver coin is mandated as our money. Only Congress can coin money (not print it, which is impossible). These two facts should give pause to any person who believes in the United States Constitution.
For instance, why did the founders say "coin" money? Why were they so specific? Why did they mandate Gold or Silver coin as US money? Were they wrong, or are we, with our "Federal Reserve"?
The answer to these questions gives us the solution to today's economic fiasco.
We will never solve the problems of today's economy, absent a return to sound money as mandated by, as GOD has said, our divinely inspired constitution.
I stand with the prophets in declaring that it is akin to scripture and that it should espouse the strictest possible adherence.
-
Well, there -is-, but it's selfish.
"In a gold standard, any trade deficit results in the country with the deficit sending gold to make up the shortfall."
Since the US has had a trade deficit for decades - And a very large one - You would face massive inflation if changing didn't make people smarten up with their buying. It also would result in a poorer nation overall, but be less inclined to horrid crashes(Though it would happen if people continued to consume as they do now). I'm not saying you're wrong in this, JBS(Though this may be the only thing we have ever agreed on on here), but I am saying it isn't as rosie as you're painting it.
Gold / Silver money in the hands of the people would not make them poorer.
We would not have massive inflation. We'd have enormous deflation with foreign purchases nearly coming to all halt if the other trading nations did not follow suit (it would be illegal to exchange paper fiat currency for Gold / Silver coin or notes).
And of course, this would all take time. The Big-Banker establishment / FED would kick-n-scream all the way through their dismantling. Not to mention they would interfere at every step of the way to make it look like it would work.
-
JBS,
Your logic is pretty good there, but GDP is currently estimated at $14.3 trillion, not $10 trillion. Divided by 21.6 that is $662 billion. This would still only be a 28% growth in GDP since 1913.
-a-train
Thanks for the clarification on that. You are correct. Bad form on my behalf.
Allow me to modify my original numbers.
In 2007 the US GDP in FRN's was $13,843,825,000,000 according to the IMF.
Given a depreciation of the FRN value versus a real Gold / Silver dollar in 1913 ($1 in 1913 buys $21.60 in 2007) our real value (as measured by real dollars, 1913 style) GDP was $640,917,824,074 or just about $641Billion.
The US GDP in 1913 was $517,383,000,000. So today's real value GDP is $123,000,000,000 more than in 1913. That's a 23.8% increase from 1913.
Given the premise of M0 (Currency supply), we would need approximately $34,720,000,000 dollars of real money (Gold / Silver coin as mandated by the US Constitution) for circulation. This is well within the means of total Gold / Silver (and especially Silver) supply of today and represents essentially the same amount needed (based on population, now versus then) in 1913.
Thus, there is no problem in respect to the amount of precious metals available for coinage.
-
I'm going to go ahead and say more on the subject of having enough precious metal in supply to monetize it. Currently, there are around 305 million people in the United States. With M3 (the total money supply) currently being at around $10 trillion, that means there is only around $33,000 in supply for every individual in the country. That is $10,000 less than the median annual income for men and around $1000 less than the median annual income for women.
How do we pay all these people more money than exists? How can GDP be over $47,000 per capita when the money supply is $14,000 per capita lower? There isn't enough money right? Add to this the fact that a very large portion of that money is held in foreign reserve! Where does all the extra money come from?
Is it debt? No, all debt is included in the $10 trillion M3 figure.
What gives?
Only a tiny fraction of American household income is kept in currency reserve, the vast majority of it is spent on goods and services. Much of the money spent is spent many times in one year. Thus the GDP has to be more than the sum of all individual incomes.
A shoe maker earns money selling shoes and spends it on a car. The car dealer spends it on real estate, the real estate seller spends it on furniture, the furniture seller spends it on prescription drugs, the pharmacist spends it on shoes. Thus the same money is spent and increases the GDP and individual incomes more than once a year.
The purchasing power of the people will not and cannot catch up to the GDP's total. As the purchasing power increases, the GDP will increase and remain far and above the sum of the purchasing power of all the money at any given point in time.
-a-train
Add to this excellent treatise the fact that our REAL GDP (in terms of real money, not fiat currency as we currently have) is a fraction of $10Trillion.
In real money (In the US remember, that's Gold or Silver Coin) our GDP, based upon the devaluation of the FRN versus a real dollar of gold / silver since 1913 is 21.60 times less ($1 in 1913 can purchase $21.60 in 2007).
So $10,000,000,000,000.00 / 21.60 equals $462,962,962,962.96. So actual GDP based on real money / "dollar" value is about $470Billion.
The GDP in 1913 in the US was about $517Billion (real dollars, real money). So, today's real value GDP is less then it was in 1913.
So, given that in 1913 there was enough Gold / Silver coin to cover the nation's needs, it would seem there would be more than enough now, since there is more Gold and Silver (processed) in existence than there was in 1913.
Again, there is no real, valid argument against the Gold / Silver Standard as Constitutionally mandated.
-
Simple question. Whether you consider a gun relevant for preparadness or not, I'm interested.
My answer: Yes. And in a week or two, my wife will be taking a personal protection class offered by our local law enforcement folks that fill her training requirements to carry legally.
It is interesting to note that probably the most efficient Martial Art (in terms of its' scientific application) is American Kenpo Karate.
It was created by Edmund K. Parker, Sr., a devout LDS member:
Ed Parker - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Probably Mr. Parker's best surviving student is Dr. Ron Chap'el, Phd., from Los Angeles. Mr. Chap'el has a Phd., in Kinesiology from UCLA, and is the finest Martial Artist I've ever seen, having studied / observed the art's for over 30 years.
Much of what Bruce Lee became was because of his close friendship and interaction with Mr. Parker.
Anyways, for those who cannot carry a gun, like most of California, it is a fine option, both for physical fitness, and to be a part of Mormon secular history.
-
Got a question about the human condition.
All have sinned, and in so doing, cannot be saved, of themselves. We all require the intercession of the Atonement of Christ for our salvation.
That being said, I've never murdered, I've never stolen, I've never fornicated.
Am I better than those who have done such things in the eyes of GOD?
A follow-up would be; What is righteousness? Can we be righteous?
-
That's not what D&C 82:3 says at all. What is says is:
"For of him unto whom much is given much is required; and he who sins against the greater light shall receive the greater condemnation."
It says nothing about holding viewpoints that are out of line with the Church.
That ain't debatable at all. Having differing political viewpoints is not a sin, though it is so obvious, it hardly bears mentioning.
How can espousing that which is wrong (a wrong political viewpoint) on matters such as fundamental individual liberty NOT be a sin?
I believe the scriptures clearly teach that it is a sin.
-
If anyone here is in the apocolyptic mood (I'm not quite yet), then invest in non-perishable food. I think that if an apocolyptic scenario does come our way, even gold will lose its value once people realize that it's merely a shiny rock. Food on the other hand? There's always some value to that.
Food will be essential to survival, as it always has been, in particular in the midst of a collapse of any magnitude (Post-war Germany comes to mind). After the dust settles, 6months to a year (Post-war Germany comes to mind), then Gold and Silver coin in recognizable denominations like a "dollar" or "fifty-cent" piece, will be of great use.
At no point in all of recorded human history has Gold been worthless as a medium of exchange.
The gold standard
in Current Events
Posted
The "welfare" (now there's a misnomer if I've ever seen one) system is theft and therefore is abuse.
The alternative of not taxing people into poverty is having them be able to more efficiently care for their fellow man.
Your argument that we are incapable of doing so, absent government intervention is absurd. The history of America is the history of the most giving people in human history. Even with our absurd tax burden of today, we are still the most giving people in all of human history.
There IS a better way, it's called freedom. It's called liberty. And it is enshrined in the principles of our Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution.
Government is horribly inefficient in almost all respects.