Jump to content

Survivalist, Self Sustainable Lifestyles or Whatevs....


villain

Recommended Posts

This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.
good luck with the bear grylls fantasy.

not knocking your skills, but its unrealistic to think that one would be able to survive for any length of time in the woods in an actual SHTF situation.

 

well i have lived in a wilderness area for 6 months with nothing but a flyfishing rod and my backpacking gear. I am def not on some bear grylls fantasy. If you go to the right ecosystems (esp areas like the northwest coast up into BC where there is an abundance of fish, forage food, thick hard to access locations, and you can be set for a long time. esp if u seek out a good location and start producing more permanent living situation and can start to cultivate plants and whatnot.

 

you realzie how much food a 40 lb king salmon is for 2 people??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have known many michigan militia members personally throughout my life and there are many neo nazis under it's umbrella. The michigan militia itself has been run by cryptofascists. The militia is not overtly fascist but if you delve deep enough into its seedy underbelly you will find a very well entrenched fascist corp. At least that's how it was 10 years ago, the last time I spent a significant amount of time in michigan. The militia even seemed dead for a while. Their website wasn't updated for what seems like at least five years. But checking it now I see it has been updated. It's interesting that you say they have been garnering media attention in the last year or so. They will most likely be more active in this time of crisis. I can't help but wonder if the media is setting us up for cryptofascist takeover though. White, flag waving, christians are the face of fascism in America today. Not exactly nazi skinhead thugs. Some people don't realize that. These people are lumped in with neonazis but maybe they should be more appropriated called "all american fascists" or "good old boy fascists". You have all the characteristics of fascist ideology, extreme nationalism, majority demographic, zealous religious fundamentalism.... all that bitches brew you will find in copious amounts in the militia.

Read this book:

51yEOu8pkCL._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA300_SH20_OU01_.jpg

The Beast Reawakens

It traces fascism from the nazi era to its modern incarnations, such as within militias.

 

seriously man... what are you talking about.

 

'good ol boy fascists?'

 

give me examples of policies that the militia types support that are 'fascist?'

in the 90's some nazi's were around in the militia movement, but to demonize the entire militia movement as fascist nazi's is not on bit different than the actual nazi's saying that all blacks are criminal thugs who are the scum of society. its no different than right wingers saying all lefties are earth first molotov cocktail throwing idiots. it shows absolute ignorance.

 

you've contributed some 'non mainstream' points to this thread.

most 'outsiders' would view any economic doom and gloom you put forth to be a bomb shelter building nazi survivalist when in reality you are a noam chomsky lefty. running around painting the entire militia movement as nazi's is just absolutely silly, childish and totally ignorant.

 

do nazi style 'militia's exist? yes, in small number. its estimated by people in the 'know' that actual nazi factions compose less than 5% of 'militia' groups.

 

the michigan militia and its current factions are probably the most moderate of all 'militia groups.' lee miracle works for the damn post office. do you really consider these guys a threat? cmon. as if the hutaree militia was a threat? several dudes and a few agent provacateurs are really going to over throw the US govt and install a fascist dictatorship? cmon.

 

since when is talking about liberty, voting for ron paul, denouncing socialism and corporate fascism, defending natural rights, maximum freedom... 'fascist?'

 

do you also get your information from the SPLC that says any white male with a gun is a nazi and that chris broughton the black guy with the AR and Sig at the obama rally in phoenix is an undercover nazi? and that oathkeepers, ron paul and judge napolitano are fascists?

if you actually believe what you are saying... you are sadly misinformed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i've flipped through a lot of that book. its mostly splc propaganda. a more unbiased book is 'they shake their fists in the tyrants face...' or something along those lines.

 

i said it and i'll restate it... neo nazi's/fascists compose of less than 5% of the militia movement.

 

describe this mythical 'fascism' in the militia movement. seriously. i want specifics. exact specifics of what you are talking about.

 

your conclusions are silly. to say that the militia movement is dominated by 'crypto fascists' and 'nazi's' is no different than the people who think that all of the left is composed obama's and stalins. for instance i love gore vidal, alexander cockburn, thomas naylor, kirkpatrick sale, etc. leftists.

 

do you really think that a guy like lee miracle is a threat to you? seriously? the guy works for the federal government. the south east vol. michigan militia openly mocked the ron paul movement and said that it was an absurdity and an impossibility of anyone like him winning so everyone should vote for mccain. seriously alot of these people are political moderates.

 

looking at the militia movement as a whole, where a neo nazi element comprises possibly 5%, the overall message is liberty and a return to a constitutional govt. these is the anti thesis of nazism.

 

omg! another nazi tea bagging militia cryptofascist!!

jj johnson. omg he is a race traitor black dude!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bew_9GeuGA4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIQ9Oa7xpW0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V62I3g4cXFE

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tellurian, anything your talking about is probably mostly just Fed provocateurs who create and infiltrate these groups within local militias etc. Most of those neo nazi groups your talking about are Fed organized and ran, and only stick around and are upheld for when they need them to provocateur some kind of situation. Feds regularly infiltrate militias around the nation and attempt to get them to do something stupid so they can come down with the hammer. And you're correct, that a lot of these militia movements start out virtuous but end up going down the "tea party" road like you said in your post, but that's true for mostly any major movement. There is always infiltration at some point.

 

But. militias are necessary to protect liberty. I think it's dangerous of you to be implying that militias are filled with fascists/bigots and it's the same unfair argument that I think is going on now with the Tea Party movement. If you saw my other post, you'd see just exactly what the mainstream media is attempting to portray that movement as, and you can also see within that portrayal how they mix the militias and nazi propaganda in there too to scare people. The reality of the situation is that we need militias and our gun rights to protect ourselves against out of control government. That's why the feds constantly infiltrate these groups, and thats why the media constantly demonizes them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you are exactly right about agent provocateurs. if anyone is talking about blowing anything up, converting semi auto to full auto or anything like that... you are 99% sure to be talking to a FED.

 

i mean the feds practically ran elohim city. the provocateur in the recent hutaree militia show incited the entire situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it is the same thing as people tarring anyone who has socialist/liberal views as being a government supporting stalinist who wants the government to interfere in every aspect of a persons life.

 

Everyones viewpoints are just that, their view. I know I have leftist ideas on somethings, right sided views on others. People just like to get bogged down in wide sweeping generalisations and stereotypes.

 

just like some people calling all militia members neo nazis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... anyone who has socialist/liberal views as being a government supporting ___STATIST___ who wants the government to interfere in every aspect of a persons life.

 

this is a true statement if i ever saw one.

i have not found one aspect in the lives of americans that liberal and conservative statists do not want to regulate or havent already regulated. conservatives are slightly better on the economy and liberals are slightly better on the bedroom. other than that... they have already regulated every part of our lives.

 

but i see the point you are trying to make and i agree with the point, but your analogy is flawed because the statists have already regulated everything we do and continue to regulate and control everything we do. the 'militia' is nothing but a group of people prepared to defend constitutional and/or natural liberties from all enemies foreign or domestic. defense of liberty is no where near fascism.

 

some lefties like gore vidal dont want to regulate every aspect of ones life. but the super vast majority have not found a law that they dont like or a regulation they wish to repeal. where as the super small minority of the 'militia' movement are nazi/fascis and the majority of the militia movement just wants their freedom back. see a difference?

 

but the way i see it is different than a simple left right paradigm. i see it also having a north and south axis as well as a right and left axis.

 

obviously gore vidal or mother theresa are 'good' and stalin is 'bad' but they are both on the left. obviously ron paul is 'good' and hitler is 'bad' but they are both on the right. what constitutes good and bad? whether you use force to coerce others. that is all that matters.

 

so you can see that while the nazi militia member is on the right with the libertarian militia member... the libertarian militia member willing to use force only in defense is in the 'good' category and the fascist militia member seeking domination of others and violence against non whites...is in the bad category

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the problem is though, is the 'good' and 'bad' is merely in the eye of the beholder

 

I just find you have a real dislike of any left/socialist views AOD, sometimes I feel it clouds your judgement. Take me for instance, I don't like regulation but I do see it as a necessary evil in some instances, like big business, because they cannot go unchecked. They cannot be trusted to go unchecked it is that simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I meant more that the neo nazi believes what he is doing is good, whereas anyone with half a brain knows it is wrong.

 

Also in my original statement I said Stalinist not Statist, 2 completely different things in my book, just because someone is a socialist or has left view points does not mean they are a statist that wants government to regulate every aspect of life, but that is not for this thread, or for discussion really AOD because we both know we have had this conversation a million times now haha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I meant more that the neo nazi believes what he is doing is good, whereas anyone with half a brain knows it is wrong.

 

point made... obviously if not defined...'good' and 'bad' are subjective.

 

which is why i said..'the way i see it is..' the paradigm definition should also have a 'good' and 'bad' pole defined as those who initiate force are bad and those who dont are good.

 

 

Also in my original statement I said Stalinist not Statist, 2 completely different things in my book, just because someone is a socialist or has left view points does not mean they are a statist that wants government to regulate every aspect of life, but that is not for this thread, or for discussion really AOD because we both know we have had this conversation a million times now haha

 

while Stalin was a statist, not all statists are stalinists.

sure, there are some on the left, like kirkpatrick sale who would rather secede before coercing someone else or group or community. however it is quite safe to say that 99% of the left who voted for barack obama would be distraught if congress voted to abolish the federal regulatory apparatus from the FDA to the SEC to the various depts.... education, USDA, energy, etc. so it is safe to say that nearly all obama voters do seek to impose their will on the rest of us. even so called leftist anarchists or anarcho syndicalists who seek to abolish the state would rather vote for the most statist candidate who supports the biggest govt possible in order to achieve their social goals and trying to eliminate as much private enterprise as possible.

 

we'd be very hard pressed to find any area of life in which the govt has not taxed, regulated or controlled in some manner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The majority of militia members are right wing. And as that poll says, 2/3 of republicans think Obama is a socialist, 57% think he is a muslim, and 24% think he is the Antichrist. What do you think that says about the militias? I would even argue that the average militia member's views are even more extreme than the average republicans.

 

How can you not see that the militias are rife with extremism then???

 

so let me get this right.

you are basing your entire case about militia's being 'crypto fascists' and 'neo nazi's' on a silly piece of splc propaganda (that book you mentioned) and some stupid ass poll? because someone thinks obama is a socialist, they are a 'crypto fascist' and/or a 'neo nazi?' the only way you can go by polls is if you came up with a 100% bomb proof lie detector test, gave it to each and every member of a certain group, and required each member to take the lie detector test.

 

does your same logic also apply to the huge number of 'bush is a fascist!' sign holders during the bush years? does this make them fascists, communists, *insert whatever name you want here* ???

do these people who call bush a fascist not have at least just wee little point? do the people who call obama a socialist not have just a wee little point? the merger of corporation of state is economic fascism, not capitalism like you and michael moore think. corporatism/economic fascism....something both bush and obama support. obama and bush also supports the govt owning the means of production of certain industries... this is an element of socialism. obama uses class warfare rhetoric and supports class warfare policies, denounces 'profits,' and wants 100% control of the economy if he had his way and supports wealth redistribution, and a hard and progressive income tax. these are straight out of the communist manifesto.

 

of course MOST militia members are more hardcore than the average republican. they are just as mad at republicans as they are at democrats for trashing the constitution and destroying liberty. but using the michigan militia as the example of neo nazism is using the countries most moderate militia group in existence.

 

 

I'm not saying all militia members are extremists. I'm just saying a significant number of them are. I doubt it is as low as 5%. I would like to believe that... but I can't.

 

dude. look at the number of KKK in this country. they number much less than 5,000 people. this is a piss in the ocean. do any of these guys really pose a threat to ANYONE? are they out lynching people?

 

extremist is a bad word to use. you are an extremist if you read noam chomsky. you are an extremist if you voted for ron paul. you are an extremist if you think we should repeal the patriot act or shut down the federal reserve.

 

There are numerous examples that capitalism cannot even exist without the band aids of regulation. The repeal of the Glass-Steagall act is the most recent example. That is why the global economy is collapsing now!

But I don't even believe in reforms like regulation. This profit driven system that forces us to compete with each other will be abolished after the global economic collapse.

 

what you are talking about is the failure of interventionism, not the failure of capitalism.

its absolute economic illiteracy but this is for another thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So your only defense is accusing the SPLC of propaganda (unverified and potentially inflammatory) and attacking the scientific veracity of polls themselves. I'll have you know that the margin of error for that poll is less than 3%. These are really desperate debate tactics. I think the weakness of your argument is self evident.

 

despite what you are trying to say... your whole argument, based on a poll some major news corp took, that routinely lie, manipulate and are essentially propaganda arms of the central state, is that because 2/3's of REPUBLICANS (a super majority of which are anti militia) think obama is a socialist, that the militia, which is composed of very small numbers of ideological 'big R' republicans, is composed largely of 'crypto fascist' and 'neo nazi' elements. so by holding that obama is a socialist, you are the equivalent of a nazi that is going to institute the holocaust on american soil.

 

got ya.

 

 

the thesis is absurd on its face.

not only are you equating militia groups with main stream republicans, you are then trying to use a poll, by a major corporation (which you hate) that polled REPUBLICANS (not militia members) to demonstrate some silly idea of calling obama a socialist as a 'extreme' position.

 

the splc is over 90% propaganda and if you believe it, you are just totally naive. do you know that ron paul, judge napolitano and a 20 something year old little girl named catherine bleish is on the 'hatriot' list? are you seriously telling me that ron paul, judge napolitano and this girl, who want liberty, freedom for everyone, a constitutional govt and all seek non violent means are fucking crypto fascists that are trying to over throw the US govt and are equivalent to nazis and should be lumped in with that group?? its absolutely insulted, ignorant and absurd. do you really believe that ron paul and his followers are richard fucking butlers? the splc would have you believe that there is a nazi or klansmen behind every tree in the country trying to kill you. be sure to send in your donations to keep them in business. ever think what would happen if there was no more 'nazi's and evil white dudes with guns' running around? they wouldnt be living high on the hog in their ivory alabama palace. they would have to do a job at their market wage, like flipping hamburgers. sooo.... do you ever think that there will be a time when the splc decides to declare victory and pack it up and go home? its in their economic self interest to keep the charade going as long as possible, constantly finding new enemies.

 

other than this poll.... you offer not even rhetoric that shows a super majority of militia members are nazi's. you dont even have any talking points and you wont answer my original question a few posts backs about specifics. specific statements and actions that clearly show that overwhelmingly large numbers of militia groups are nazi's and actual fascists.

 

if you want to see who the fascists are... you should be looking at DC.

 

 

Michael Moore may know this too but I can't speak for him and neither can you.

 

i have seen him talk about this when a libertarian confronted him about it and his movie. he wanted to know why he insisted on calling economic fascism 'capitalism' and after a bunch of hemming and hawing around he finally admitted that the guy was right. which undermines the entire thesis of moore and the rest that blame 'capitalism' for the current economic collapse.

 

 

Funny you should call the michigan militia the most moderate militia group in existence when members BLEW UP an Oklahoma federal building. Like I said, I've had personal experience with the Michigan Militia... alot of these crazy rednecks tried to kill me for a year straight. I still have scars from these experiences.

 

timothy mcveigh was not a member of the michigan militia. you are straight up lying and presenting false information.

the FBI themselves even cleared the michigan militia of all activity.

 

if you know so much about the michigan militia... you will then also know that the original militia formed by norm olson, in the 1990's and by 2000 was essentially defunct. norm olson lives in alaska now. he does not run any michigan militia. the michigan militia as such is not what it was in the 1990's. it is broken into various sects that operate independently. the members are moderates. they have bent over backwards to increase their image of being law abiding upstanding citizens after people like you say they were involved in blowing up the murrah federal building. if you know anything about the militia movement you will find what i said 100% true... the current factions of the michigan militia are the most moderate of all groups. is the mere act of owning a firearm a nazi extremist position? is helping and assisting the authorities in the event of a natural disaster a nazi fascist position?

 

they even told the FBI that the hutaree was bad news and up to no good... even though every all talk of violence in the group came out of a FED's mouth. as the case has demonstrated. they have NO case against them.

 

but neo nazis and elements within the militias are.

 

do you also believe that arabs with box cutters are also a threat? that the boogey man is a threat?

a threat to what? the only thing that 90% of the militia movement stands for is liberty. the other 5-10% that you are worried about are nothing to worry about at all. you know why? because the 90% of the militia movement is more against those clowns then you are.

 

What do you mean a failure of interventionism? Are you saying interventionism is necessary (which I doubt you are trying to say)? They failed to intervene by repealing the Glass-Steagall act and all hell broke loose. That's what happened. Capitalism IS a failure. Look at the global economy today.

 

we do not have capitalism. so how can capitalism have failed? we have had mixed economy. socialism. socialism is what failed.

 

you are only looking at one symptom of a huge disease of debt, inflation, manipulated central bank credit causing a boom and bust cycle, a myriad of economic interventions do numerous to count that all created unintended consequences that need more and more regulations to correct the problems that the last round caused.

 

this topic has been hashed over and over 1000 times.

read up on the austrian theory of the business cycle. that is what caused it. the austrians are the only ones that predicted the crash and knew why it would happen. by all means, lets disregard the only group of people who were right and prance around talking about some failed regulation enacted to fix a the failed institution known as the federal reserve system which should of never been instituted in the first place... which is the ultimate cause of the 20th and 21st centuries financial panics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but socialism didn't fail, what failed was the financial regualtors that allowed these major financial companies to trade in products that were toxic and harmful, it was a lack of regulation that caused the problem we are in, had there been even less regulation then the economy would be even more fucked up.

 

Those financial organisations will always look to make profit themselves at the detriment of everyone else, no free market would stop that from happening because they are more powerful than the consumer so the company will always win out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you just said that socialism failed as socialism took the form of the regulations. you just admitted that your govt socialist regulations failed.

 

the free market would not fail.

 

the regulations create moral hazard. do you know what that is?

it means that through the FDIC and the regulatory apparatus, it told the banks they can lend out money as recklessly as humanely possible. why? because if the loans default, you will be bailed out.

private profit. socialized risk.

 

the austrian theory of the business cycle explains precisely the cluster of errors made by everyone. cheap bank credit pumped into the system creating a misallocation of resources which led to malinvestment.

read about it before saying economic illiterate statements.

 

with no central bank to artificially manipulate the price of borrowing money, malinvestment cannot be made. without an fdic and a govt to bail you out, if a bank makes bad loans, they go broke. but in a system that bails out failed institutions, you can loan as recklessly as you want to because you will be bailed out.

 

its no different than if a nascar driver is told to drive a rental car however he wants to when the car was rented in someone elses name and is told not to worry about anything... the insurance company will take care of it.

how do you think the driver will act? will he drive the speed limit or will be think he is at daytona?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no that is rubbish AOD, the regualtion of the financial industry is not socialism.

 

Socialism isn't regualtion, while regulation of the markets may be a tiny facet of socialism it is the actual regulators that failed not socialism as a whole. To say that is frankly absurd.

 

You seem to think that if there was a free market then these huge coporations would suddenly develop a conscious and give everyone a fair deal, that is complete bollocks. All big business is interested in is making as much money for themselves as possible, without regulation they would do their best to screw every person that there is because they know while I may be able to leave their business and say use another bank, that bank would also then try to screw me as much as possible. there would be no choice to the consumer and no way to fight back and keep these companies in check.

 

There should have been stricter regualtion of the trading that was being done with these toxic assets rather than people being able to say these are sound investments when you are selling people a load of debt with no way to recoup your loses.

 

It was regulation that failed, but obviously to you that means socialism, which as you always come back to is a terrible thing, which quite frankly it isn't.

 

It wasn't just the banks lending policies that led us to this situation, it was the trading of this debt that caused the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

alright, i'll concede.

you are some what correct. the socialist elements of economic intervention are more like when they totally nationalize companies.

 

regulation of the economy is more properly termed economic fascism or corporatism. merger of corporation and state. a veneer of private property rights but govt control of the affairs of free born men. socialists are actually pretty decent on business regulation...because under socialism they already own the means of production so there is no regulation on others peoples affairs because the govt controls these assets.

 

socialism has been an economic basket case EVERYWHERE it was tried, the culmination of which was the soviet union.

 

so call it what you want.

 

the question is then... when and what are the miracle 'regulations' that will further prevent any economic calamity? tell me exactly what needs to be done. is it just one more law or is it total socialism? obviously we have tended toward total socialism as we havent let up yet. i'd like to know exactly what needs to be done and then will you and your fans of economic fascism then pack up and go home? the reason why you can never pack up and go home is because each and every intervention creates unseen consequences which then needs 5 more central planning laws to attempt to fix. compound this and you'll see the situation we live in.

 

look. in 1913 the federal reserve was created to eliminate all future banking panics. in 15 years they created the biggest collapse in american history. since 1900 we have heard the same damn story and we still have panics caused by the govt. when will you be satisfied with your interventions? why not just be honest and say you will not stop until there is total govt control and ownership of everything?

 

"and guess what this liberal will... guess what this liberal will be all about? socializ...uuuuhhhhh... uhhhh uhhhhhh the govt taking..... uh uh uh'

 

 

 

now. who are you going to listen to... the people who predicted all the collapses, the panics like ron paul and the austrians or the greenspans and bernankes, bushes and obama's who created the collapse and said that everything was fine and that people who were predicting it were doomsaying kooks?

 

my guess is you'll follow the people who were wrong all along and throw the only ones who were right... out the window.

but dont feel bad. its what most people think. its just like a herd of elephants running off a cliff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't really agree with Tellurian on his percentages concerning militia members beliefs. Where are you pulling these percentages from? 24% believe Obama is the Anti-Christ? You DO realize that a majority of Americans believe in the end of days, and Armageddon right? So, should pretty much the majority of this country be viewed as extremists? Many people have different world views, I don't see what this has to do with the purposes of militias. I'm not arguing with you that currently existing and established militias are filled and surrounded by some ridiculous kinds of people, but so are movements like 9/11 Truth, or anything that involves political dissent for that matter. That doesn't mean I am going to turn a deaf ear away from the cause, or invalidate the necessity of such a defense for liberty. If it comes down to it, and this global economic collapse you are speaking of occurs, then it is going to be militias and militia members who you may be seeking help from to protect your property and land. Regardless of whether or not they don't believe in abortion, or think Obama is some kind of demon from hell.

 

This profit driven system that forces us to compete with each other will be abolished after the global economic collapse.

 

Nah dude. We will ALWAYS have to compete. I don't know what kind of utopia you are imagining, but it doesn't exist. If there is a global economic collapse, it was intended to be that way and whatever replaces it was also intended. If there is no competition, then it will be replaced with subordination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

" That doesn't mean I am going to turn a deaf ear away from the cause, or invalidate the necessity of such a defense for liberty."

 

amen to that.

 

if we support ending the war in iraq... what are going to do not go to a anti war protest if that is our thing because some dudes might be wearing pink and clown hair or a communist might be there? or if we are against taxes what are we going to do not go to a tea party rally because a bone head might be in the crowd?

 

seriously.. the neo nazi 'menace' in america is so small you have 10000000 times more of a chance of being hurt just driving in a car than some heil hitler dude that lives in his moms basement or in a trailer park, owns a 9mm hand gun, flies a nazi flag, hands out fliers and posts on storm front

Link to comment
Share on other sites

all I mean was AOD is that you had these traders bundling together all these bad debts into a triple A rated investment package that people bought into, people traded these toxic debts like they were going to be making money from them. This should not have been allowed, the regulators should have stepped in and not allowed this trading to go on. The traders made money on the falling markets that THEY actually set up.

 

The traders/financial institutions basically set the market up to fail and then gambled on the fact it would fail to make themselves money at the detriment to everyone else.

 

The regulators should have outlawed this style of trading from the outset to stop the markets from crashing. Traders basically manipulated the markets so they would make money from the loses.

 

It has nothing at all to do with socialism considering that this market problem began under the republicans term. Who are FAR from being socialists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the republicans are very socialistic as well as fascist. both parties have very little difference in actual policy.

 

the thing you are not addressing is 'the cluster of errors.' why did all banks all make bad decisions simultaneously? federal reserve credit. they control the money supply and credit issuance.

if a whole bunch of teenagers get all doped up and wreck a car you have to look at what caused them to wreck.... taking the dope in the first place. you can say its the speed limit and the stop sign being the wrong place all you want, but you know the boiled down truth is they were high on drugs. and in the banking world, you are part of the federal reserve system which controls money and credit.

 

there would be no need to even think about calling to outlaw speculation in markets because it wouldnt of taken place if resources wouldnt of been improperly allocated due to federal reserve credit which gave the signal that money was cheaper than it really was. if we had a free market, any one involved in speculation would of lost money, but due to economic regulation, which benefits big business the most of anyone, which you support, we bailed out a myriad of companies that were 'to big to fail.' who wouldnt trade bad debt trying to make 'profits' if you had someone over your shoulder saying you would get bailed out if you failed and lost money??

 

the problem with your stance is that you cant imagine a world without a huge state. you think that because something is done a certain way now, it is impossible to do it another way. if we had food distribution out of the back of army trucks instead of in markets like we have now, everyone would be saying that the market couldnt possibly deliver food.

 

 

and thanks for avoiding my question.

 

the only regulation you said we needed was to outlaw 'speculation.' if we outlaw speculation, will you then reach your utopia, guarantee perfection in the economy and stop talking about passing new laws?

 

the only reason it should even matter what someone is trading is if the american people have to bail them out. other than that, people lose money all the time, which is what would happen in a free market. if you gamble and lose you lose. not in the united soviet socialist republic of corporatist america... if you gamble and you lose, the govt, with tax payer dollars and more federal reserve fiat money created out of thin air will inflate the money supply and bail you out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you cannot just blame the federal reserve when this was a world wide problem, if it was just a problem localised to America then yes, but it quite clearly wasn't.

 

I answered your question quite clearly, I said they needed to step in and stop the bad trading. It has nothing to do with speculation, there is nothing wrong with speculation. What the problem was was them taking bad debt and bundling it into a package they then sold on as if it was going to make money, then when the markets fell gambling on the markets falling.

 

It is like me saying to all my friends here I will lend you this money, then taking all that debt that was owed to me and bundling it in a nice frilly basket and saying to someone 'why don't I give you this, you will make a fortune on it' knowing full well it isn't worth the money it is written on, then going to a bookies and gambling on the person I just sold the frilly basket to going bankrupt.

 

You keep blaming it on the fed and yes they have some blame, but this was a worldwide issue not a localised one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"You keep blaming it on the fed and yes they have some blame, but this was a worldwide issue not a localised one."

 

i advise you to see how the world monetary standard operates.

who holds the worlds reserve currency? what countries dont have a central bank? which countries dont issue fiat currency? the companies trading debt are in worldwide markets.

 

"It is like me saying to all my friends here I will lend you this money, then taking all that debt that was owed to me and bundling it in a nice frilly basket and saying to someone 'why don't I give you this, you will make a fortune on it' knowing full well it isn't worth the money it is written on, then going to a bookies and gambling on the person I just sold the frilly basket to going bankrupt."

 

people make bad investments all the times. companies are constantly going bankrupt. people always go broke. the free market is a game of profit and LOSS. if you fail, you lose. its that simple. the federal regulatory apparatus does not allow failure.

 

if someone doesnt do their research, they should lose accordingly, and not have someone else bail them out.

 

if you want to talk about buying up junk debt... what do you think the bailout did? the federal govt, the state, the institution that you think is infallible that can save everyone from everything, confiscated wealth from people, inflated the currency and bought bad debt, and had the audacity to tell the american people that it was 'good' debt.

 

all the people that you want to 'fix' the problem are the exact same people who were supporting the whole charade based on malinvestment in the first place saying everything was sound and people predicting collapse were kooks. who was right? should we listen to the people who were right or the people who had it wrong from the beginning?

 

eliminate artificial interest rates, credit and fiat money and you eliminate all the problems that would need 'regulation' that you support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'people make bad investments all the times. companies are constantly going bankrupt. people always go broke. the free market is a game of profit and LOSS. if you fail, you lose. its that simple. the federal regulatory apparatus does not allow failure.'

 

I agree people make bad investments, but when you have all the financial traders passing off bad investments as triple A rated investments and all of the credit scoring companies are giving these investment products solid triple A ratings then how the hell would you know that the investment isn't sound? This is where the regulator should have stepped in, I'm not saying thatthey shouldn't have sold these assets but the fact is without transparency you don't stand a chance in hell, it is like me selling a cow to you claiming it is a horse.

 

Yea I disagree with the bailouts, i fully understand why they had to do them, but I disagree with them, so of course they had to buy up all the toxic assets.

 

I am not talking about fixing anything, I am saying that they shouldn't have been allowed to trade so freely in these types of products. I have never said that government is infallible, I have been critical of government my whole life, but the worls we live in isn't as cut and dry as you seem to think it is AOD.

 

But this is completely irrelevant to the threads subject matter, so I spologise to anyone else that wants to talk about camping and all the stuff that this thread is about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AOD let's try and break down what that poll means.

2/3 of republicans think Obama is a socialist. Republicans have a long antipathy towards socialists. This is often used to smear people they don't like. That's exactly what I think the majority of republicans are doing, trying to paint Obama as a socialist. Both you and I know however that he is more concisely described as a corporatist, or neoliberal. Does that mean that 2/3 of republicans are extremists? Not necessarily, but it doesn't reflect well on them at all.

57% of republicans believe he is a Muslim. Are they religious fundamentalists or the victims of misinformation? Perhaps both? Again this doesn't reflect well.

24% of republicans believe he may be the Antichrist. This is the most disturbing statistic of all to me. All these people believe Obama is the spawn of Satan. That certainly does reflect some scary extremism or fundamentalism.

Mostly I blame Faux News.

 

The financial collapse has a bevy of causes.... Some of the main ones include the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act, and the Fed Reserve lowering interest rates to zero which led to predatory lending by banks and the consequent real estate speculation bubble. People from all over the world were buying our AAA rated mortgage backed securities when they should have been rated junk. Banks went all out in creating these securities, not worried about the risk because of credit default swaps, which were touted as a type of insurance (which they are not).

I've been doing a lot of research into this and I've found that many of the colleagues of the Austrian School of Economics were in fact correct in predicting the collapse. I have gained a lot of respect for this school of thought. Peter Schiff is one of them that predicted the collapse:

http://www.google.com/search?q=peter+schiff+was+right&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=6FW&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=v&source=univ&tbs=vid:1&tbo=u&ei=ZtQTTN36L8P-8Abe5aT3CQ&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CCMQqwQwAA

 

Another person to watch closely is Gerald Celente who is a future trends forecaster and he has accurately predicted every major event of the last 40 years! He is saying now that we are heading for The Greatest Depression....

 

I apologize for derailing the thread... Thank you casek for your relevant contribution.

 

 

Wait, "antichrist" doesn't mean "spawn of satan". I know, I know, semantics. But really....

 

 

Celente and Schiff are both geniuses. You've heard Celente talk about the Illuminati?

He sums up what "they" are pretty nicely. Not so conspiratorial and in a way most can digest without thinking "oh, this guy is a nutbag. he's talking about conspiracy theory".

 

 

Anyhow, sorry to derail further.

 

 

Do you guys know if Les Stroud is doing more shows or has Survivorman been cancelled?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AOD let's try and break down what that poll means. That certainly does reflect some scary extremism or fundamentalism.

 

so in summation, its basically been established that a poll was conducted where the results said that 2/3s of republicans think obama is a socialist (which is largely true)and that the huge proof that the majority of the militia (which is composed mostly of non 'big R' republicans) is dominated by neo nazi beliefs.

 

got ya.

 

the reason why obama who is both a corporatist and is firmly rooted in ideological marxism/socialism is because he would rather the govt run everything and centrally plan the economy and tax the rich as much as possible to give to the 'poor' and have the state give as many services to people as possible. this is largely socialistic. we both already know his corporatist elements. bush has a huge dose of socialism in his ideology as well. in fact the neo conservative movement began as a movement of ex leftists, trotskyites and socialists.

 

lets be serious... if you think calling obama a socialist is 'extreme' or a 'fundamentalist' position... what do you think people think you are if you say good things about gerald celente and peter schiff? dont you think that if a poll was conducted... that probably 2/3's of americans would think preparing for a 'collapse' is an 'extreme' position? if 'extremism' is equivalent to 'nazism' or 'crypto fascism' then perhaps you are also a nazi and crypto fascist?

 

I've been doing a lot of research into this and I've found that many of the colleagues of the Austrian School of Economics were in fact correct in predicting the collapse. I have gained a lot of respect for this school of thought. Peter Schiff is one of them that predicted the collapse:

http://www.google.com/search?q=peter+schiff+was+right&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=6FW&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=v&source=univ&tbs=vid:1&tbo=u&ei=ZtQTTN36L8P-8Abe5aT3CQ&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CCMQqwQwAA

 

Another person to watch closely is Gerald Celente who is a future trends forecaster and he has accurately predicted every major event of the last 40 years! He is saying now that we are heading for The Greatest Depression....

 

schiff and celente are two top notch dudes.

 

you should listen to schiff more on 'regulations'

 

if you are seriously interested in more of the austrian view, you can get the total analysis on the media page of mises.org.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, "antichrist" doesn't mean "spawn of satan". I know, I know, semantics. But really....

 

 

Celente and Schiff are both geniuses. You've heard Celente talk about the Illuminati?

He sums up what "they" are pretty nicely. Not so conspiratorial and in a way most can digest without thinking "oh, this guy is a nutbag. he's talking about conspiracy theory".

 

 

Anyhow, sorry to derail further.

 

 

Do you guys know if Les Stroud is doing more shows or has Survivorman been cancelled?

 

Les Stroud put a facebook update up a few weeks ago. He was filming in some crazy place... Can't remember where though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...