Excellent! Throw us some stories!

Weeeeelll, isn't that what the government is for and isn't Barr the head of the exact department that's supposed to act?

Yeah but obviously that is now no consequence, unless you have a time machine.

So swallow down your pride and focus on the helping towards goal, not against it. Remember the "big tent" idea.

I'm actually impressed by Barr's clear look at things and how well he expresses it. By his actions so far though? Not so much.

Oh I see. And now that's there's traction against censorship, you're mad about people talking against it. Makes perfect sense...

You're just assuming and then rambling about your assumptions. Perhaps that's your way of having fun, but does it make any sense?

13th century Europe. It means "teacher".

Well, do you prefer to increase the debt and stop Dems from getting the Presidency (and then everything) in a few months, or would you prefer to be frugal for a few months and see the whole ship go down in the course of a few years? Which one makes more economic sense?

You're absolutely right. Consider the transgression against you as your very own personal contribution to GEOTUS reelection. Because this money thing is going to count a lot.

See my long post above and it will become very clear to you: https://thedonald.win/p/Gc7YTeVx/x/c/15HvBhxA3V

Currency and money are the same thing, a means to store and transfer value. But there are different kinds of money, just like with cars. Depending on what you want to do, you (well, the government) pick the right "car" for the job.

That of course, doesn't mean that institutional interests align with individual interest. The government as an institution has only to gain by fiat money. Sound money "keeps it honest" and that's a "bad thing". Fiat is actually a bad thing for the individual if you're generating more value than needed for sustainable. But hey, who has more clout?

First of all, thank you for the response and the write-up.

There are major problems with the whole train of thought, both of its parts. I'll address them in the same order as you mentioned them.

The Federal Reserve is supervised by the Board of Governors. It has 14 members and 7 of them (including the chairman) are appointed by the US government, ans specifically the President. Therefore, the US government controls the Fed.

Now of course, you can rightfully argue that this is a sham and the politicians are controlled by the banks etc. But accepting the argument, then what would be the difference if credit was created instead by the Department of X? Same politicians, same banks, same corruption.

The Fed does not really loan the government and the government does not really have to pay it back with interest. On the contrary, the Fed is the instrument by which the government sucks out money from the economy (and other economies!). Read this again and I'll explain how it works.

The government wants to borrow value on the cheap:

• It issues Treasuries
• You, me, institutional buyers (think pension funds) and China buys them (i.e. both locals and foreigners)
• If the process is left on its own, interest payments will skyrocket and the payments to foreigners are going to be especially painful and tricky to avoid. This is bad, so we need a plan.
• Those who bought the Treasuries go to the commercial banks and exchange them for credit (money), for example $1 in bond, $0.95 in credit to your bank account. Where did the commercial banks get all that credit though? From the Fed.
• The Fed comes in and tells the commercial banks, "hey guys, here's the credit you want, I want the Treasuries as collateral and oh, btw, you'll pay me 0.25% interest."
• Commercial banks happily oblige because they themselves sell that credit to the market at a much higher rate.
• Treasuries' interest rate goes down very very much (because the Fed-held ones are out of circulation), keeping the scheme going for a much longer period of time.
• The Fed keeps the Treasuries on its balance sheet. Eventually they mature (i.e. they have to be paid by the government).
• How exactly does the government pay for them? You guessed it, it issues new Treasuries, which locals and foreigners buy and get bought by commercial banks and get bought by the Fed.
• The wheel goes on and on, powered by compressed air.
• The government will never actually provide value to the Fed to "pay". Once this is not sustainable any more, it - the government - will forcefully depreciate the pay-out value of the Fed-held Treasuries.
• There will be a short period of waves and the scheme will start over again in some variation.

This is an ingenious way of leeching value from the economy and foreign countries. And if we disregard the moral vector, we can say it's a beautiful pyramid scheme where all practitioners profit until it breaks down.

Naturally, that's not all there is to the Fed's activities but that's enough in our context.

And now you can see that the example with Citi is incoherent. The very role of the Fed is to create credit for the commercial banks and earn interest from them, as part of the "leech value" scheme.

And now to the second part.

The proposed "frugal fiat" scheme is worthless because it serves nobody. It's basically a virtual gold replacement (since production is more or less stable and predictable, just like gold).

• If you're on the monetary expansion side, you lose all the benefits of fiat (the magic wheel we described above included).
• If you're on the sound money side, it makes no sense because a) it's still affecting the natural interest rate (this is a bit technical, I won't expand on it for now) and b) it's fragile as hell. There's always an emergency or two that justifies raising the monetary ceiling (remember that debt ceiling that goes up every time with a Kabuki theater?).

What is "debt free money"?

This art style needs to be in the library of Congress!

Well, there was no war around the explosion, therefore we can conclude it was perfectly peaceful.

Losers gonna lose.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Much better than the tick tok.

Then after making billions because of capitalism many of these players are those that fund leftist.

It is no surprise. What's the biggest threat to established companies? New entrants. And how can you stop new entrants? By yourself, you can't. Therefore, you need to be buddy buddy with the government, i.e. the institution who can wield violence with impunity.

Freedom was great when you were an upstart but oh so dangerous when you're the top dog.

there's an ... uhhmm .. committee ... that's ....ummmhh ... looking into making an ... umhhhh .... report about it.

Shit has to hit the fan BEFORE it's to late. Winter (November) is coming.

EO to ban the for election interference until the reverse policy.

The numbers are low. Once we have the total death count for 2020 and we can calculate the crude death rate and then compare it to past years, it will be totally obvious.

Basically it's totally obvious to anyone who can do basic math today, but given the fake news hysteria, few bother.

Because everyone on twitter says so. Are you some kind of integrity, science and reason extremist?

Math is racist.

Was wearing the shirt a job requirement?