>>#6, Pluck, as in pluck its feathers.

But it was also a pretty sick burn on Plato.

Full story is that Plato defined humans as "featherless bipeds," and everyone thought that was so fucking clever, so Diogenes plucked the feathers off of a chicken, brought it into Plato's academy, and said "Behold! I've brought you a man." Suddenly Plato changed his definition to a featherless biped with broad, flat nails.

... I mean... You do realise that candy is supposed to be sweet and bread isn't supposed to taste like cake, yea?

uh dude, European chocalate is superior, I'm American and even I can admit this. Our chocolate tastes like vomit to them because of the fact that is is liployzed and made it turns into Butylitic acid.

That being said, I like our chocolate.

Yeah, but corn dogs aren't meant to be eaten regularly unless you're from Arkansas.

was it....was it by tooting your own horn? masturbation

Oh, I can't believe I forgot to mention this earlier... When people like them are showing the price of gold as of late and saying "See? The price of gold has been skyrocketing!" they don't realize they're judging that based on the currency with no backing. Instead of gold skyrocketing, it's actually the value of the US dollar plummeting.

I went out and found a video that clearly explains what I'm saying here www.youtube.com/watch?v=beQME8aV2e0 but you'll probably just dismiss it as "heavily biased libertarian" using his pesky facts.

The gold standard was doing great until the governments took on massive debts.

And maybe China would like to have the dominant currency for the same reasons that America holds the dominant currency.

In order to avoid inflation, backing the currency by a finite commodity is essential. I'm sure the Germans were saying their currency was very secure and there would be no possible way that they'd print off too much in 1931.

Just as you ignored my links, I'll elect to ignore yours and just post another one www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiMjT_GNg_I

Oh, I can't believe I forgot to mention this earlier... When people like them are showing the price of gold as of late and saying "See? The price of gold has been skyrocketing!" they don't realize they're judging that based on the currency with no backing. Instead of gold skyrocketing, it's actually the value of the US dollar plummeting.

I went out and found a video that clearly explains what I'm saying here www.youtube.com/watch?v=beQME8aV2e0 but you'll probably just dismiss it as "heavily biased libertarian" using his pesky facts.

The gold standard was doing great until the governments took on massive debts.

And maybe China would like to have the dominant currency for the same reasons that America holds the dominant currency.

I see that you're not even going to watch the videos I recommended, but oh well. Explain to me how having money backed by faith is better than having money backed by a commodity. Don't just assert that it's more secure - convince me that it is through facts.

In order to avoid inflation, backing the currency by a finite commodity is essential. I'm sure the Germans were saying their currency was very secure and there would be no possible way that they'd print off too much in 1931.

Just as you ignored my links, I'll elect to ignore yours and just post another one www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiMjT_GNg_I

Oh, I can't believe I forgot to mention this earlier... When people like them are showing the price of gold as of late and saying "See? The price of gold has been skyrocketing!" they don't realize they're judging that based on the currency with no backing. Instead of gold skyrocketing, it's actually the value of the US dollar plummeting.

I went out and found a video that clearly explains what I'm saying here www.youtube.com/watch?v=beQME8aV2e0 but you'll probably just dismiss it as "heavily biased libertarian" using his pesky facts.

The gold standard was doing great until the governments took on massive debts.

And maybe China would like to have the dominant currency for the same reasons that America holds the dominant currency.

When discrimination is illegal and socially unacceptable, don't you think it might be something other than the employers who are at fault? Maybe it's the fact that 72% of black people are born out of wedlock. Maybe it's the communities that they grew up in, which are caused not by racism, but generations of poverty. If people would be raised properly by responsible parents, they could escape poverty.

Instead of blaming employers on the disproportionate work forces, maybe they should look at their own communities and families and decide "Y'know what? I'm going to bring my children up in a functional family and get them out of this cycle of poverty so they don't have to deal with this."

Having money be backed by gold means they can't just print off more money to make it look like things are better than they are. Your work and its usefulness would be represented by the amount of gold you got. Your time would be represented something tangible and finite, something with real value. Paper money and eventually digital money (like through debit cards) would be just a representation of that gold.

So if you worked and earned $1,000, that meant you earned $1,000 worth of gold. You could go to a bank and exchange the money for the tangible object you earned. Let's say your bank has 10 other people just like you, which means they have $10,000 altogether. If they have the $10,000 of gold that you all have earned, they can still invest it and what not as they always have done, but if you go in, they have to be prepared to return $1,000 of your money as gold within a reasonable time span. If they cannot give you your money as gold, that shows that there's a real problem in their investments or methods, and they're basically in deep shit until they either get the money back or are shut down for their incompetence. With the FDIC backing it up, which has been around far longer than the gold standard's fall, you'd still get your money (and thus your gold) back.

However, if there's no gold backing, who's to say that they can't just print off more money when shit happens like that? The person who earned the money gets money back, right? Yeah, but there's now more money in the economy than was earned because it had to be printed off. That lessens the value of all the money that's been earned in the system. Yeah, sure, when times are tough and people can't earn the money they used to, it sucks, but printing off more and more money to say "Hey, see? You're still getting your old paychecks! Things aren't that bad!" is just a lie that helps only in the short term. It winds up causing inflation. You can't print off more gold - you can only earn more. Money should be printed off only as fast as the inflation of gold (which is much, much more stable than a fiat currency) and enough to represent the amount of gold in circulation.

You seem to be under the pretense of countries only having a certain amount of gold from start to finish. But it doesn't work that way. The country's people earn the money through work. The more people and the more productivity, the more gold is earned as GDP. Gold and other precious metals are mined and traded for goods and services, which spreads nationally and internationally. But if you can just print off more and more money, it may look like you're rich, but those 5 million marks wouldn't be backed by anything and might just buy you one loaf of bread. Look at Germany back in 1930's when they got off the gold standard - it seemed all fine and dandy at first, but then inflation took its heavy toll as they had to keep printing off more and more money with nothing to represent it.

I recommend watching this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdyHso5iSZI and this www.youtube.com/watch?v=8V9tmvoqTzM

TL; DR - I'd rather have money tied to something rather than blind faith.

I see that you're not even going to watch the videos I recommended, but oh well. Explain to me how having money backed by faith is better than having money backed by a commodity. Don't just assert that it's more secure - convince me that it is through facts.

In order to avoid inflation, backing the currency by a finite commodity is essential. I'm sure the Germans were saying their currency was very secure and there would be no possible way that they'd print off too much in 1931.

Just as you ignored my links, I'll elect to ignore yours and just post another one www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiMjT_GNg_I

Oh, I can't believe I forgot to mention this earlier... When people like them are showing the price of gold as of late and saying "See? The price of gold has been skyrocketing!" they don't realize they're judging that based on the currency with no backing. Instead of gold skyrocketing, it's actually the value of the US dollar plummeting.

I went out and found a video that clearly explains what I'm saying here www.youtube.com/watch?v=beQME8aV2e0 but you'll probably just dismiss it as "heavily biased libertarian" using his pesky facts.

The gold standard was doing great until the governments took on massive debts.

And maybe China would like to have the dominant currency for the same reasons that America holds the dominant currency.

.dat mining

ur so kewl