"The pessimistic view is that markets might indeed freak out. The coin might be a sign that the U.S. government has become even more dysfunctional than anyone thought."
You don't say?
Printing more money = devaluation. Don't think this is news to anyone.
From what I understand of the plan (and that isn't much, admittedly), the coin wouldn't be the same as printing off money, and there wouldn't be any devaluation, except a devaluation of the USA's prestige.
The sources I've seen have suggested that the coin is a negotiation tactic, a means of pulling the rug out from under the Republicans in Congress, and something like a nuclear weapon that's never supposed to be used but will be in a worst case scenario.
__________________
“Where the longleaf pines are whispering
to him who loved them so.
Where the faint murmurs now dwindling
echo o’er tide and shore."
-A Grave Epitaph in Santa Rosa County, Florida; I wish I could remember the man's name.
I can't believe that when Congress originally tried to close the loophole that allows this they went and specified "no gold coins worth over $100, no silver coins worth over $100 ..." rather than just say "no coins worth over $100".
__________________
Graffiti outside Latin class.
Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
A juvenal prank.
Don't really follow that, as that would literally still be printing (or coining in this case) more money, as the coin would be legal US tender and not Monopoly money. But okay.
Then the issue would be a trillion dollar bill, which—funnily enough—reminds me of that one Simpsons episode. Either way, of course the idea is bad. In order for a company to make money it has to have investors. To invest all your savings into one coin means that you wouldn't have any more money to spend, making it difficult-to-impossible for new international companies to arise and bring money into the system.
Gender: Male Location: Stuck In the future where Akus evil
But the thing about the coin is we don't need the funds to back it up. In fact from my understanding the coin itself is being used as the funds to back up more government spending without raising the debt.
anyways yes we can say SIMPSONS DID IT SIMPSONS DID IT! on this on lol
If there was recourse for a trillion dollar bill they'd be talking about that instead of the coin--I think the point of the coin is that it is (somehow, I'm not certain how) fundamentally different from printing a bill and that it won't have the drawbacks of printing a bill. That, or bills over a certain amount have already been ruled out by some kind of legislation.
__________________
“Where the longleaf pines are whispering
to him who loved them so.
Where the faint murmurs now dwindling
echo o’er tide and shore."
-A Grave Epitaph in Santa Rosa County, Florida; I wish I could remember the man's name.
You'd ruin the economy to preserve the debt? I suspect that millions of people would lose their jobs and the corporate executives would reestablish their businesses in other countries to receive the benefits their governments have to offer.
Sweden, and we have some of the highest taxes in the world. And coincidently it's also one of the best places to live economically. In fact, my top-class education didn't cost me a dime, so in summer I'll be fresh on the market with a lot of well-payed job opportunities and no loans to worry about. We also have free dental care up to the age of 21, and universal health care.
I think what Sym was trying to tell you is that there's never a "simply" involved when you talk about raising taxes in America.
If it were that easy we would have already done it. Raising taxes at the levels required to make any kind of dent in the debt would be as hard a battle in the US Congress as reinstating the death penalty or outlawing abortion would be in Sweden.
__________________
“Where the longleaf pines are whispering
to him who loved them so.
Where the faint murmurs now dwindling
echo o’er tide and shore."
-A Grave Epitaph in Santa Rosa County, Florida; I wish I could remember the man's name.
Last edited by Omega Vision on Jan 12th, 2013 at 01:19 AM
Gender: Male Location: Stuck In the future where Akus evil
I didn't propose the idea so no I wouldn't lol. I am personally against the idea of the coin and not just for the economic impacts. The Idea in theory I understand but yes it would have an impact in some way. It's also an entirely underhanded abuse of power. Lets be honest this isn't just being talked about because its "a way to stop the debt" It's also the democrats way of saying "well republicans you have your way to do things but even if you do we will find a loop hole and do what we want anyways so just do it our way." That is unconstitutional even if only ethically. I don't care what party who is on, everyone has to admit (even if your for the idea) this sh*ts all over the idea of checks and balances in America. Everyone is suppose to come together and agree on how to handle things. If majority doesn't rule then thats where the idea comes to an end, not "ok so you want to cap the debit at this limit so I can't spend more money...do it....i'll just create more funds so I can still spend whatever I want." We have both sides wanting to do it there own way and not enough back and forth...but I guess that just been politics in America for awhile lol
It takes more than a platinum coin to realize that our form of government has been growing perpetually less effective as the complexity our nation itself perpetuates at an eery rate from a political standpoint.
Yet our system has thus far been the most efficient system worldwide, which is perhaps why this thing is global. While browsing through various videos, I came across a video explaining a monetary bell curve, in which production is way up and yet everyone is flat out broke. I have watched hundreds of various methods to creating some wierd futuristic utopian society - robotic civilizations, the Singularity, Venus Project, Zeitgeit Movement, etc.
So, whatever is happening, it's something big.
__________________ "Compounding these trickster aspects, the Joker ethos is verbally explicated as such by his psychiatrist, who describes his madness as "super-sanity." Where "sanity" previously suggested acquiescence with cultural codes, the addition of "super" implies that this common "sanity" has been replaced by a superior form, in which perception and processing are completely ungoverned and unconstrained"
Gender: Male Location: Stuck In the future where Akus evil
not in the least.
My point is that its ethically unconstitutional while its not technically. While it doesn't break any laws or actually break the constitution its manipulating the laws in a way to achieve something (more spending) in a fashion that says "ok lower the debt cap to my spending and I will just find a way to spend anyways". That doesn't sound like a very good democracy to me.
Gender: Male Location: Stuck In the future where Akus evil
you know Ethically, Morally....ect
Basically what im trying to say its an unethical idea that is entirely, at its very core, the plan is the opposite of something that you would expect in a country founded in democracy.
KMC Community Forums
Jan 11th, 2013 07:35 PM
