Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content

EverCurious452

Lopster
  • Content Count

    186
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

53 Neutral

About EverCurious452

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 10/20/1953

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    earth
  • Interests
    The thread that lead to my permanent mod review status: http://dinarvets.com/forums/index.php?/topic/208123-the-sterling-currency-group-indictment/#comment-1569946

Recent Profile Visitors

757 profile views
  1. EverCurious452

    Let us have a THINK

    If you really are trying to "get this right" you do not seem to be trying very hard. I did not say I was trying to understand why folks invest. I know that, I even understand why people buy lottery tickets. What I said was that I was trying "to understand why people do such things as put money into something that can not provide a return". An investment is something where a positive return is possible (even if (extremely) unlikely). The RV is not and never was possible. Even breaking even will be extremely unlikely. But again an investment is not something where the best possible outcome if you are extremely lucky is that you might break even. And no I am not writing a book, I'm just curious. Other actual investments have a possibility of a positive return, so no I don't ask this question in actual investment forums.
  2. EverCurious452

    Let us have a THINK

    Only if IQD can not be carried across the border. If they can, then this violates the "one price" law in economics. That basically says that barring costs for transportation, tariffs, or legal limit on buying and selling this thing (currency in this case), things have to be about the same price in different locations. Otherwise you just roundtrip between the two buying at one rate and selling at the other and pretty soon you own the planet (in this case starting with $1,000, five roundtrips gets you $10T). I think you meant "they could change the rate DOWARD, i.e. more dinar per dollar)". They can not raise the rate without either adding to the reserves or lowering the size of the money supply (or placing very strict limits on currency exchanges so as to not deplete the reserves, which would mean the rate was not real, it was just a show rate).
  3. EverCurious452

    Let us have a THINK

    Useful to ME (or that is what I was hoping for). If its useful to others, that'd be an added benefit but I was mostly trying to understand why people do such things as put money into something that can not provide a return. So far only one response (I think that was Teastorm by am not sure) has offered any hint at that, who said that they understood there is no known way for this to happen but are hoping for a miracle. Ok, I sort of get that, but I don't think that explains most people's participation in this.
  4. EverCurious452

    Let us have a THINK

    The dollar floats. There is no official rate of exchange as the rate you get is determined by what a particular seller offers. The rate quoted is an average of all recent sales. Its so wide spread and the US economy is so large that the rate does not move up or down very quickly so it is very stable. The dinar is pegged. Its rate is set by the CBI and all exchanges eventually get back to the CBI. Any entity accepting dinar in exchange is only going to do so based on what they know they can get for them from the CBI. If the CBI does not have the reserves to cover the rate, no one will exchange them at that rate (which is why the CBI would never do such a thing). Iragi's will want to cash out to the more stable dollar because they have been living in a war torn country and even NOW prefer dollars to dinars (which is why the street price to get them is higher than the official rate). If the rate was raised to a value that the CBI could not actually sustain, there will be a run to cash out to get that rate before the system collapses (which again is why the CBI would never do this). Plus of course there is all the imported stuff newly wealthy (relatively speaking to what they had before) will want to buy which alone would drain the CBI of its reserves.
  5. EverCurious452

    Let us have a THINK

    True, in the FairTax idea, businesses would have to collect federal sales tax as they currently collect state and local sales taxes. Still easier then income taxes I'd think. Climate change has already had a big impact on plankton and that seems very likely to continue, though its also true that some species that could not compete before are multiplying like mad given the warming we have already had. How that will all end up? I certainly don't know. But reducing carbon to make that impact as small as possible seems like a prudent idea. There are also folks proposing things like global dimming to counter the warming (gee what could go wrong?). "We are a part of nature. We are not special ", total agreement there.
  6. EverCurious452

    Let us have a THINK

    I'm not sure what you mean by a "burden on business" SD. I think its a pretty huge burden to have to fill out tax forms for a corporation, mighty expensive too. In a fair tax system corporations do not pay sales tax. The thinking being that if profits are not sufficient after tax they are just going to raise prices so consumers end up paying anyway. As for climate change "evolve or die" off IS the case for a lot of species but humans will adapt. But, it won't be very pleasant. Fresh water and arable land moving around, sea level rise, more storms, more drought. Its all going to be expensive. We can make it less bad by getting off of carbon ASAP. Its absolutely true that we can not "make" other countries do likewise, but that is what leadership is about. Other countries know they have a huge problem, we have to help them solve it (and hey why not make money in the process?).
  7. EverCurious452

    Let us have a THINK

    Many such as yourself have made plenty of assertions on this topic but few have listened to what those whose motives are being questioned have to say for themsleves. I would not call such activities a discussion nor would I call it useful. nor do I understand why you engage in it so much. But to each their own.
  8. EverCurious452

    Let us have a THINK

    I'm not sure what "internationally traded" means. But I don't think it matters. As long as the IQD remains a pegged currency (which is needed for the CBI to do an RV) then the rate will be set by what the CBI actually can offer and any exchange anywhere eventually comes back to the CBI. Any bank will only exchange for what it knows it can get from the CBI (minus its margin). Local consumers don't buy things directly from other countries, but the importers / wholesalers do. That is what will run the CBI our of dollars. Plus of course just ordinary Iraqi's wanting to cash out just like folks here want to do. The CBI's reserves get replenished from oil dollars (by the GOI exchanging its oil dollars for IQD to pay its budget) and the CBI's reserves get depleleted by importers exchanging IQD for dollars to bring goods into the country for locals to buy. Now those two are balanced. An RV to $0.01 let alone more increase the depletion side by the RV factor (10x, 100x, 1000x) but the replenishment side remains the same so the CBI would run out of its reserves in an instant.
  9. EverCurious452

    Let us have a THINK

    Hey SD. When I said the top 10% should be taedx more as it would be more fair, I didn't mean only in the tax sense but in the overall sense that the top 10% have made out very well over the past few decades, much better than the bottom 90%. Why should one get a deduction for a mortgage but not for rent? and so on. I don't think there is anything "fair" about taxing income in the first place, and why one kind of income differently than another? If we want a fair taxation system I think it has to be a federal sales tax system so no forms, no deductions. And give everyone (so no qualification or paperwork) a refund to cover the poverty rate of the federal sales tax on basic essentials so it won't be regressive. This has no corporate tax at all. This is the so called Fair Tax, but it will never be passed. It would put to many CPAs and tax attorneys out of a job. I don't like cap and trade as it doesn't produce a net reduction nearly fast enough. Our choices at this point wrt climate change are have things be bad and expensive or really really bad and really really expensive. The former seems like the obvious pick to me, and that means we have to stop making it worse very fast. So that is why I favor a green house gas tax. And I propose the revenue form that be spent exclusively on infrastructure projects since we are in desperate need of that as well and do not have another funding source for them. So two birds with one stone so to speak. We should also of course stop federal subsides to the fossil fuel industry (around $20B a year) and that could go directly to deficit reduction. The world is clamoring for sustainable energy products so there is in fact huge money to be made here (as there is with any big industry shift) if the government would stop hindering things and lead other nations to do similar things. As it is those jobs and profits are going to go to China while we subsidize oil and coal.
  10. EverCurious452

    Let us have a THINK

    No I was responding to Caz's "BS" response (on 1/7/19 10:07am) to my post (a somewhat old one where I was answering Botzwana's question of why I was here. Rock however is correct in his core idea (even if expressed rather cryptically) that a $0.10 RV would require 100x the amount of dollars the CBI has in its reserves. When Iraqi's become 100x richer they are going to want to buy a lot of imported stuff which will require dollars. When the CBI runs dry after the first 1% exchange, what do you think will happen?
  11. EverCurious452

    Let us have a THINK

    You make my point for me Caz. No engagement or discussion just insults.
  12. EverCurious452

    Please do not spread propaganda

    I just noticed in the Politics section that there is a post on the proposed 28th amendment that requires congress members to be subject to all laws that they passes (paraphrasing). Whether or not you think this would be a good idea, there is a great deal of false information in the email chains that are going around on this issue and few seem to bother to check them before passing it on, or requesting that others do so. For example, these posts claim: Congress members, their staff, and their family members to do have to pay back student loans. This is false. There IS a program that allows government employees but not their family members and not members of Congress, to receive up to $10,000 per year for a total of (in most cases) of $60,000. https://www.factcheck.org/2011/01/congress-not-exempt-from-student-loans/ Members of congress are exempt from healthcare reform. On the contrary. Included in the ACA was a provision that all members of Congress and their senior staff had to get their insurance from the DC health care exchange instead of the FEHBP (federal employee health benefit program which operates much like insurance offered from large private sector employers). https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/members-congress-health-care/ Members of Congress can retire at full pay after only one term Again this is false. Congress DOES have a defined benefit retirement plan where as virtually all of the private sector has switched to 401K type plans, but you do not get your full pay after one term. You can never get more than 80% of the average of your highest 3 salary years and that only after serving around 20 years. https://www.factcheck.org/2015/01/congressional-pensions-update/ One can debate whether or not these programs are appropriate but any discussion should always start with the facts, at least as best as we can determine them.
  13. EverCurious452

    IQD Fact sheet

    On the subject of "fact checks", though a bit off topic since I can't post anywhere else. I really took exception to Trump lying to our troops, to their faces. (sorry about the formatting, I don't seem to have point size control..) Here is an excerpt from his speech https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-troops-al-asad-air-base-al-anbar-province-iraq/ (bold mine) The military get a pay raise every year. Here is the list since 2007 from the pentagon https://militarypay.defense.gov/Pay/Basic-Pay/AnnualPayRaise/ 1 January 2007: 2.2% 1 April 2007: 0.5% 1 January 2008: 3.5% 1 January 2009: 3.9% 1 January 2010: 3.4% 1 January 2011: 1.4% 1 January 2012: 1.6% 1 January 2013: 1.7% 1 January 2014: 1.0% 1 January 2015: 1.0% 1 January 2016: 1.3% 1 January 2017: 2.1% 1 January 2018: 2.4% The 2019 pay increase is expected to be 2.6%, but since the budget is not yet approved that is not yet certain.
  14. EverCurious452

    IQD Fact sheet

    Did he every actually say that? Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz certainly said that Iraq would pay for its own reconstruction. But, given that these guys also said the cost of the war was way less than it turned out to be why would one put any credence in their statements?. I recall Rumsfeld in a news conference of some sort saying that he could not imagine that the war would cost more than $50 Billion.
  15. EverCurious452

    IQD Fact sheet

    Come on Caz you know this is not true. Gurus make predictions on what Iraq WILL DO. All I (or any "lobster" that I have read, though I to do not claim to have read every post) do is point out the limits of what Iraq COULD DO. The first is based on some sort of crystal ball, the second is based only on a basic understanding of currency. Those are very different. I also pointed out a couple of things that while possible, are in my view very unlikely and gave my reasoning. If you disagree with any of that you could have pointed that out with support for your claim. But instead you just hurl the same old slur. Aren't you tired of that? As for the loto numbers and winning teams I'm afraid the Temporal Prime Directive prohibits me from divulging these things. As for "the secret to getting the hottest Victoria's Secret model", not even time travel will reveal that.
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.