Results 2,526 to 2,550 of 8466
Thread: General Politics Thread
- Join Date
- Apr 2006
- Rep Power
Last edited by Ixion; 09-25-2012 at 14:08.
and again, we wouldn't be in the $#@! debt we are currently in. take a close look at the worst problems we are currently in. you say that the dollar has value like your happy it's only worth half of what it use to be.
Last edited by Bigdoggy; 09-25-2012 at 14:51.
The gold standard was dropped around the end of the first world war. Natural inflation would always make one dollar worth less now than it was nearly 100 years ago.
Also the worlds gold supplies are so uneavenly spread currencies everywhere would drastically alter. Britain has the 8th or 9th largest economy but we own virtually no gold (we sold hundreds of millions of it off in late 90s early 2000s ) judging money and thus an economy based on gold is ludicrous.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
09-25-2012 #2529The CIA's programme of "targeted" drone killings in Pakistan's tribal heartlands is politically counterproductive, kills large numbers of civilians and undermines respect for international law, according to a report by US academics.The study by Stanford and New York universities' law schools, based on interviews with victims, witnesses and experts, blames the US president, Barack Obama, for the escalation of "signature strikes" in which groups are selected merely through remote "pattern of life" analysis.
Families are afraid to attend weddings or funerals, it says, in case US ground operators guiding drones misinterpret them as gatherings of Taliban or al-Qaida militants.
"The dominant narrative about the use of drones in Pakistan is of a surgically precise and effective tool that makes the US safer by enabling 'targeted killings' of terrorists, with minimal downsides or collateral impacts. This narrative is false," the report, entitled Living Under Drones, states.
The authors admit it is difficult to obtain accurate data on casualties "because of US efforts to shield the drone programme from democratic accountability, compounded by obstacles to independent investigation of strikes in North Waziristan".
The "best available information", they say, is that between 2,562 and 3,325 people have been killed in Pakistan between June 2004 and mid-September this year – of whom between 474 and 881 were civilians, including 176 children. The figures have been assembled by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, which estimated that a further 1,300 individuals were injured in drone strikes over that period.
The report was commissioned by and written with the help of the London-based Reprieve organisation, which is supporting action in the British courts by Noor Khan, a Pakistani whose father was killed by a US drone strike in March 2011. His legal challenge alleges the UK is complicit in US drone strikes because GCHQ, the eavesdropping agency, shares intelligence with the CIA on targets for drone strikes.
"US drones hover 24 hours a day over communities in north-west Pakistan, striking homes, vehicles, and public spaces without warning," the American law schools report says.
"Their presence terrorises men, women, and children, giving rise to anxiety and psychological trauma among civilian communities. Those living under drones have to face the constant worry that a deadly strike may be fired at any moment, and the knowledge that they are powerless to protect themselves.
"These fears have affected behaviour. The US practice of striking one area multiple times, and evidence that it has killed rescuers, makes both community members and humanitarian workers afraid or unwilling to assist injured victims."
The study goes on to say: "Publicly available evidence that the strikes have made the US safer overall is ambiguous at best … The number of 'high-level' militants killed as a percentage of total casualties is extremely low – estimated at just 2% [of deaths]. Evidence suggests that US strikes have facilitated recruitment to violent non-state armed groups, and motivated further violent attacks … One major study shows that 74% of Pakistanis now consider the US an enemy."
Coming from American lawyers rather than overseas human rightsgroups, the criticisms are likely to be more influential in US domestic debates over the legality of drone warfare.
"US targeted killings and drone strike practices undermine respect for the rule of law and international legal protections and may set dangerous precedents," the report says, questioning whether Pakistan has given consent for the attacks.
"The US government's failure to ensure basic transparency and accountability in its targeted killings policies, to provide details about its targeted killing programme, or adequately to set out the legal factors involved in decisions to strike hinders necessary democratic debate about a key aspect of US foreign and national security policy.
"US practices may also facilitate recourse to lethal force around the globe by establishing dangerous precedents for other governments. As drone manufacturers and officials successfully reduce export control barriers, and as more countries develop lethal drone technologies, these risks increase."
The report supports the call by Ben Emmerson QC, the UN's special rapporteur on countering terrorism, for independent investigations into deaths from drone strikes and demands the release of the US department of justice memorandums outlining the legal basis for US targeted killings in Pakistan.
The report highlights the switch from the former president George W Bush's practice of targeting high-profile al-Qaida personalities to the reliance, under Obama's administration, of analysing patterns of life on the ground to select targets.
"According to US authorities, these strikes target 'groups of men who bear certain signatures, or defining characteristics associated with terrorist activity, but whose identities aren't known'," the report says. "Just what those 'defining characteristics' are has never been made public." People in North Waziristan are now afraid to attend funerals or other gatherings, it suggests.
Fears that US agents pay informers to attach electronic tags to the homes of suspected militants in Pakistan haunt the tribal districts, according to the study. "[In] Waziristan … residents are gripped by rumours that paid CIA informants have been planting tiny silicon-chip homing devices that draw the drones.
"Many of the Waziris interviewed spoke of a constant fear of being tagged with a chip by a neighbour or someone else who works for either Pakistan or the US, and of the fear of being falsely accused of spying by local Taliban."
Reprieve's director, Clive Stafford Smith, said: "An entire region is being terrorised by the constant threat of death from the skies. Their way of life is collapsing: kids are too terrified to go to school, adults are afraid to attend weddings, funerals, business meetings, or anything that involves gathering in groups.
"George Bush wanted to create a global 'war on terror' without borders, but it has taken Obama's drone war to achieve his dream."
Obama's considerable hypocrisy aside when it comes to military intervention, I can no longer see why my fellow Americans support our military objectives and its political backers.
Our military is enormously bloated and inefficient*, our nearest 'competitor' doesn't even have an aircaft carrier fleet and just refurbished an extremely old soviet era ship as their 'first'*. We're completely failing to understand how asymmetric warfare works and subsequently failing to adapt in any meaningful way.
Our continued presence in the Middle East serves as an agitator, to say the least. I'm not denying that "the spice must flow" and without oil this whole planet would grind to a halt. It just so happens to be controlled and stored in a region that is undeniably primitive and volatile. But our increased 'intervention' has only served to poke the proverbial hornets nest.
Look, I'm not at all denying that war has and will remain a part of foreign policy. It definitely has its place. But war is changing.. As is the world.. At an ever increasing pace. Yes, Europe are a bunch of massive hypocrites who sneer at US military aggression but still profit from our actions through continued oil flow and 'safeguarding' them with our military to the point where without us they'd have no meaningful military force.
The candidates should be discussing this. South east asia is an area deserving of our attention given China's aggression towards China and Taiwan and of course propping up Best Korea's insane regime. Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea are our allies and so a military presence there makes some sense. For one because this is a 'traditional' scenario of nation state vs nation state. Not asymmetric. For another we have legitimate interests in that region.
But Europe? They can fend for themselves. Remove our bases, yank military aid and support and let them deal with themselves and the Russians.
The only place, to me, that needs some serious sit down time to analyze the situation and reassess our modus operandi is the Middle East. But nobody is really talking about viable solutions to the problem. How Israel is just as much of a problem as Iran or Saudi Arabia. Or how Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, despite being our so-called "allies" are truly scum bags in every sense of the word. A part from having caveman tier ethics and civil liberties, they also deal both ways. Funding and aiding terrorist organizations (like Saudi Arabia helping Wahabi Bin Laden hide and passing him off to Pakistan for safe keeping). Yes, I don't like Saudi Arabia. With great intensity.
Or perhaps the solution isn't a 'foreign policy' one at all per se. Maybe we should spend a far greater focus on developing alternative energy solutions to ween ourselves off of oil and then let that region do its own thing (read: fall apart and drown itself in sand). This would bypass the issue of 'controlling' that region altogether.
We are part of the problem (US). Same a Europe\West. We consume and have high demand for oil, we have considerably wealth and power and so like any powerful entity we throw our weight around. This comes back to bite us (Iran) routinely, and we fail to learn.
And most of the problems stem from our populace's inability to critically think a situation through and ignore the talking bobbleheads on Fox\MSNBC\ABC who are trying to influence, not INFORM, us. Our lazy ass population doesn't get enraged enough over the warrantless spying being done on all of us by the NSA\FBI. About our government's continual efforts to regulate the internet. Our erosion of civil liberties.
Or how the political machine draws arbitrary lines and pits 'teams' of adherents against each other in a sports like match. "GOVERNMENT IS EVIL!" "PRIVATE SECTOR ONLY CARES ABOUT MONEY!"
But what if the two, at this point, are not really all that distinguishable from each other? What if the government, who has had a hand in shaping and empowering 'corporate' elite all along, willingly allows itself to be seduced in exchange for campaign contributions and promises of continued support?
And in return gives away favors, turns the other eye, and passes legislation that is sketchy at best?
Let the Galaxy Burn.
*Yes, I understand that this serves as a training vessel and that they will be rolling out their own ships in the coming years.
*I now view the military as something of a social\welfare program for people who otherwise are incapable of making it in "the real world". It's a step above our current welfare system. At least you're (usually) learning skills and giving something back.
But the patriotism and near-religious fervor over "service men and women!" and "fighting for your freedom!" has pushed me over the edge to near disgust.
You're not drafted. You volunteer. Compared to your private contemporaries in similar pay brackets you are grossly over compensated (all benefits\pay accounted for) and are often given private incentives in the market. Like discounts at restaurants for showing military ID etc.
You willingly become a political pawn for the federal government and don't meaningfully protect the people's interests so much as your\their own.
As a citizen, I owe you nothing. You take more than your allotted pound of flesh for your services from my paycheck.
come at me bro. My cognitive dissonance and turmoil over this issue has started to reach critical mass and I'm about to go supernova.
Last edited by Vulgotha; 09-25-2012 at 16:42.
But that's not all, not only is the United states printing money at a fast rate but they are also borrowing money as well. the fact that people are still in favor of a Fiat system in America proves the idiocy in the United States. Only a person that wants to see the united states crumble would be in favor of such a ridiculous system and that is Fiat.
Fiat does work but it only works in a country that has Communism, I mean the system did come from China after all (think about that for a second). that is the entire point of Fiat. the fact that other countries started doing that and don't sit there and tell me that European countries are fine as well. that's a big laugh.
Last edited by Bigdoggy; 09-25-2012 at 18:03.
Ok just did some research. We (uk) left traditional gold standard at outbreak of ww1 and then during the 30s abandoned any linkage between currency and gold.
Currently no currency is on the gold standard (in any form)
And yeah I am aware of how the system works and that the states just prints money out of thin air. However because they do that to some extent the extra money doesn't cause too much inflation because its not intrinsically linked to any value.
Also the recent recession was caused by low interest rates which created an unsustainable property bubble. These were set by the fed under Bush (who supported the manipulation of interest rates) and as such this was the real issue. Not the fact that the money wasn't tied to gold.
Also yeah fiat money came from China, but C11th China. 700 years before communism was even a thing.......
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
I never said it started the recession but it's still apart of the recession whether you like it or not. communism was still there, they just didn't call it communism back then, it was called something else that was in their own language,,,, (Gòngchǎn zhǔyì) yes I copied and pasted that
,o.O. The english language is what called it communism. besides that, Obama made it worse he didn't make it better, now while bush definitely spent a ton of money, while Obama inherited the debt, he also helped by making it worse and that is also another fact.
Now back to fiat money.
since there is no currency on the gold standard notice how many problems so many countries are having, they are not getting any better. like I said, the proof is visually and noticeably there.
What we are talking about is why the dollar is worthless. the recession while it does partially tie in with the why the dollar is worthless and nothing is getting any better, it still should be talked about within a separate thing. right now we are on the worthless dollar. Last time I checked it usually isn't a good thing to follow what China is doing and I believe many people can vouche for that.
you don't have to tie our dollar with gold, you could use diamonds or something else. Fiat uses nothing, because of that every single year the dollar will become more and more worthless.
Last edited by Bigdoggy; 09-26-2012 at 01:56.
The Chinese govermeny at the time (cross over between dynasties) was a semi feudal dictatorial bureaucracy. Not really communist.
Anyway as to the problems of countries because of fiat the cycle of boom and bust has been repeated as when it was on gold standard. The 70s were ok but pretty stagnant. The 80s were booming, in the early to mid 90s there was a bit of a recession and house prices dropped, but then we enjoyed the best growth and economy for a generation from end of 90s through to around 06 and then we ended up in the recession we are in now.
Before loss of gold standard. Massive boom in the 20s, depression in the 30s. Us has massive war growth everybody else struggles, but then in 50s a boom for everybody, continues into early 60s but then some troubles which in turn cause mass protests in 1968 throught the streets of Europe.
Furthermore much of the 19th century followed a similar pattern. Indeed haylek in his early work referred to the boom and bust cycle as the nineteenth century problem.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
what we are witnessing right now with this economic downfall is the cause of what happens when your dollar isn't tied to anything. Sorry Squirrel you still have yet to convince me that the dollar is better off now then it was before. the proof is in how the dollar is working out right now and it's crap, it's devalued and before it wasn't. since you are obviously pro fiat, you are one of many causes of most problems within the world. lol
understanding there is freedom of choice but that freedom also causes ridiculous choices and ridiculous outcomes.
- fiat system devalued the dollar
- fiat system is the cause of the federal printing money at an irresponsible rate
- fiat system has made this recession even worse then it should have been regardless of the cause
- gold over time can deflate (it fluctuates), Fiat overtime inflates it does not deflate at all.
- The federal reserve had less freedoms to do things irresponsible during the USA having the gold standard, the fiat system is another system made to give the federal reserve more power then it should have, before the fiat system the federal reserve didn't have as much power, therefor it wasn't able to $#@! as much things up compared to now.
- When the USA had the gold standard, when a recession hit, people didn't spend which in turn would drive up demand for businesses, it would create a deflation, that deflation was caused by the gold standard. With the Fiat system, you can't deflate the problem, instead you are forced to inflate the problem. this inflation without deflation is a fiat system. it's another reason why you wont see deflation happen in the USA as long as the USA uses the Fiat system. it's another reason why all the European countries have yet to see a deflation.
basically squirrel, you are for inflation rather than deflation. since you are for Fiat, you are 100% for inflation. meaning the bubble wont burst. the problem we are seeing right now isn't a single problem, it's a few different problems that ended up combining into one giant mess of things.
The banks let lower income families get loans for houses, those banks provided those loans to those people/families even though they knew those people/families couldn't afford it, this resulting in the housing market collapsing. At the same time oil prices started rising up in the middle eastern countries, so we go to war and send more and more troops to police the world resulting in taxes going up to support all that stuff going on overseas. Now that those taxes have gone up, the inflation kicks in, the USA can't afford to keep all those troops over seas so now they are printing money. Now, because we don't have a gold standard attached to the dollar, the USA is able to print money as they see fit and at the same time they are borrowing money from china. Now the USA gets hit by another inflation boom which results again in taxes for certain things going up. now the states within the USA have to also make up for this $#@! that is going on in the white house and the federal reserve/government. so now the states decide to add taxes to a few other things to counter this problem, which again results in another while minor it's still an inflation hike.
Now all of this happen with Bush and the congress. But now to make it worse the USA gets a dingbat named Obama, which copied what japan did awhile ago with stimulus packages. when japan did that stimulus package it failed, Obama didn't even research it, he just did it like a dumbass without any thought or without any thought of what problems it could have. so basically many many problems actually started with Nixon, it then grew and grew. not paying attention to the bubble bursting in the 70's, but completely unaware of what future problems a fiat currency is going to cause in the future. what we are seeing now is everything crumbling and the fiat system is sticking out like a sore thumb basically saying "I am one of the few problems but people still like this system".
Last edited by Bigdoggy; 09-26-2012 at 17:59.
On Japan, their package wasnt the greatest success and although they have a great amount of state debt, a considerable amount of that debt is actually to state own and run banks (they are run as private enterprise but are majority state owned) so basically they just owe themselves money.
And yeah inflation is guarentee anyway. Cost of stuff goes up regardless, plus remember an overly strong currency harms exports, which is a major part of any economy.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
claud3 likes this post
by the way squirrel, what you see now from every country isn't even the tip of the iceberg, worse is still to come and I'll bet put $10,000. the reason we wont see any deflation is because of fiat system.
Yeah you don't get deflation but that's not necessarily a bad thing. The trick is to keep inflation very low. Deflation of currency can have negative effects.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Why does it have negative effects..
what does it effect..
all you've been doing is disagreeing just for the sake of disagreeing and if that's the case which is starting to seem obvious then you have yet to make one valid point and back it up.
you also agreed with me that you don't get deflation so that right there should be pointing you in the right direction from what I'm talking about, but it isn't which is quite odd. your entire discussion is basically "pro inflation" in that case, I have nothing more to say to you. I have yet to see someone that is pro-inflation make any sense of why they are pro-inflation.
lets get one thing straight squirrelbo1, inflation is not good regardless on what you think. If minimum wage is on idle, inflation isn't good. There is really no point in inflation and a fiat system causes inflation and opens up way to many abusive freedoms. there is no country with normal people that want to see inflation. lower and middle class workers don't want to see inflation. multimillionaires don't care about inflation, they can afford it, which is usually why you see a rich person that doesn't care if the USA has a fiat system or a gold standard.
- Join Date
- Apr 2006
- Rep Power
I'm no economist but I know that the gold standard isn't the greatest thing in the world.
Furthermore many leading economist seem to disagree with the points about gold standard stability.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Just throwing this out there, if "leading economists" include Krugman I'm gonna take that with a massive grain of salt lol.
At the moment I'm trying to find ways of retaining some of my income.. Make proper investments you know? So far its been a bit obvious- invest in myself with skills (schooling etc) and firearms.
I've been contemplating buying silver..
Weapons and ammo are pretty good at keeping value. They're immediately usable and have practical benefits (hunting, self defense). So, normally, they're good investments.
They will retain their value better then cash sitting in a bank with interest.
Squirrel, you do understand that it's better doing your own research then following up on what politicians or "economists" believe for themselves right? half of those people don't know their head from their ass and it doesn't matter if they would agree with my belief. I do my own research, if I want to understand something about the fiat system and the gold standard, trust me on this I have and still have graphs and charts with comparisons stating as far back as 1922 which I started those graphs and charts 8 years ago and finished towards the end either 2003 - 2004. either way it doesn't matter to anyone else what I believe but I will still push my belief. point is, is I have done the research and the gold standard is better then a Fiat currency system or whatever else you want to call it, period.
as for the beginning of your post, you actually don't know. because again, your logic is basically this. "we will get inflation no matter what so it doesn't matter" .....actually it does. because while with a fiat system we will get a steady climb of inflation with big bursts of more inflation within inflation. so basically like a retirement fund where people get interest upon interest, with a gold standard you get Deflation within inflation within deflation. With a Fiat system you get inflation within Inflation. basically it's this.
Retirement fund = interest upon interest
Gold standard = Deflation upon Inflation upon Deflation
Fiat system = inflation upon Inflation upon bigger spurts of inflation
It's just the way the system works. don't get mad at a gold standard for what a Fiat system is doing, the problem here isn't the gold standard, the problem here is a Fiat system.
Last edited by Bigdoggy; 10-01-2012 at 17:21.
- Join Date
- Apr 2006
- Rep Power
ROFL!!!! Who cares about anyone's record.... Mitt Romney doesn't like you and Obama does!! That's why you should vote for Obama!
"you are both the product and the architect of your environment"
Wow, since when does being a nice person mean that they will be a good president? Obama is a very cool guy, but a $#@!ty president.////Taking sig/avatar requests, PM if interested\\\\
Debates start on the 3rd. This will prob be what wins the election. Obama has the advantage going in and is generally a great orator so Romney has a good chance to exceed expectations. Withe 1001 debatesGOP had surely he has some practice. I'd say Romney has more debate practice but Obama is the better speaker. Let's see if that translates into a win.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)