Taxes durring shut down?

[Fame]

Does this mean we don't get taxed for non essential services?

[Langrisserx]

yea put it towards your cancer research white bitch! trollolol

[Rhambuk]

Hate taxes. Pay the govnt for services I never use and when there is something thats supposed to be done IE plowing roads in the winter. they don't

Thanks a bunch! glad i could pay for all those air jordans for the welfare douches.

[Ahldagor]

if this idiocy goes for a month or more then the markets will start to crash because all US treasury bonds will become nullified which is going to disrupt the global economy. tea party figured they'd burn the house down cause they didn't get their way like the fascist in the old west germany, but those fascists failed...not sure bout this current group.

[Orruar]

if this idiocy goes for a month or more then the markets will start to crash because all US treasury bonds will become nullified which is going to disrupt the global economy. tea party figured they'd burn the house down cause they didn't get their way like the fascist in the old west germany, but those fascists failed...not sure bout this current group.

Treasury bonds become nullified? What does that mean? Last I checked, the government still collects plenty in taxes to cover the interest on all bonds. And the Fed can just buy up any that the government can't unload on the open market (as they've been doing anyway).

[Ahldagor]

Treasury bonds become nullified? What does that mean? Last I checked, the government still collects plenty in taxes to cover the interest on all bonds. And the Fed can just buy up any that the government can't unload on the open market (as they've been doing anyway).

we got proly a month then the full faith and credit, what the currency is based on (what you get from bonds) of the us gov goes bye bye. the treasury bonds won't be worth but what they're printed on.

[Langrisserx]

who gives a shit this happens all the time, nothing ever happens.. we print the money and its fake so yea im sure earth will really stop turning

[runlvlzero]

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/01/04/2147239/us-military-signs-modernization-deal-with-microsoft

Dupple writes with news that Microsoft has signed an agreement with the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Army, and the Defense Information Systems Agency to modernize the software those organizations use. According to Microsoft, the deal will cover 75% of all Department of Defense personnel, and bring to them the latest versions of SharePoint, Office, and Windows. The deal awards Microsoft $617 million, which is after discounts to the software totaling in the tens of millions. Interestingly, DISA's senior procurement executive said, "[The agreement] recognizes the shift to mobility. Microsoft is committed to making sure that the technology within the agreement has a mobile-first focus, and we expect to begin to take advantage of Microsoft’s mobile offerings as part of our enterprise mobility ecosystem.

617 mil is a drop in the bucket. But trust me theres a shitstorm of rain going on there for bullshit crap like that.

We don't fucking need windows metro to kill people with. Tanks don't cost that fucking much. We should just buy cheap Russian ones.

P.S. FUUUCK SHAREPOINT.

[runlvlzero]

There's plenty of $$ to pay for America Fuck yeah, if we stop giving it to Al-queda in Syria and elsewhere.

[fishingme]

Curious, are border guards essential?

[Cyrano]

Curious, are border guards essential?

To the south? Uhhh definitely. Mexico is a war zone and the only thing keeping it from spilling over 100% is fear of American retribution.

[runlvlzero]

Yeah Boarder patrol. But what about the corridor checkpoints on I 10 ? nah

[Ahldagor]

Yeah Boarder patrol. But what about the corridor checkpoints on I 10 ? nah

open season for smugglin

[runlvlzero]

you got that backswards lol

Border Patrol is probably essentialish.
I10 checkpoints 40 miles inland and on a major interstate in the middle of a texas desert no.

[Ahldagor]

you got that backswards lol

Border Patrol is probably essentialish.
I10 checkpoints 40 miles inland and on a major interstate in the middle of a texas desert no.

that's the one. in and out in 30 seconds.

[runlvlzero]

Yeah but they employ people there all day lol. It's not doing anything but creating several jobs and maintenance contracts.

I know those guys can sit in a patrol car or go on border patrol. We don't need that actual checkpoint.

[NizmerThafen]

we got proly a month then the full faith and credit, what the currency is based on (what you get from bonds) of the us gov goes bye bye. the treasury bonds won't be worth but what they're printed on.

They AREN'T worth the money they are printed on. The Fed (federal reserve fake bank) is buying up the MAJORITY of all Govt. "debt" because no one wants to buy that crap. The Fed buying up the bonds with their FAKE money indicates the bonds are Worthless.

[Ahldagor]

They AREN'T worth the money they are printed on. The Fed (federal reserve fake bank) is buying up the MAJORITY of all Govt. "debt" because no one wants to buy that crap. The Fed buying up the bonds with their FAKE money indicates the bonds are Worthless.

full faith and credit. can't ignore that. by creating a demand the fed creates a value. is it intangible, yes, but the tangibility of the currency isn't the issue. the value of it based on supply and demand is. if the u.s. can't cover its debt (for whatever reason) then the currency loses value and will be seen as not a decent means to trade oil with (also creates the demand). we have a currency based on nothing yet has value, there's something genius in that.

[mtb tripper]

full faith and credit. can't ignore that. by creating a demand the fed creates a value. is it intangible, yes, but the tangibility of the currency isn't the issue. the value of it based on supply and demand is. if the u.s. can't cover its debt (for whatever reason) then the currency loses value and will be seen as not a decent means to trade oil with (also creates the demand). we have a currency based on nothing yet has value, there's something genius in that.

its just paper, we need the gold standard

[Ahldagor]

its just paper, we need the gold standard

to have gold you need the paper atm though. not to mention the only thing that keeps gold with a value is the notion that it's valuable being sustained by people. love how behaviors traverse cultures and time.

[Hawala]

to have gold you need the paper atm though. not to mention the only thing that keeps gold with a value is the notion that it's valuable being sustained by people. love how behaviors traverse cultures and time.

I am actually working toward my PhD in economics, and this is one thing that's always interested me. I'm currently working on a model economy that moves from a gold standard to fiat currency, and the ultimate fate of the economy is quite grim.

The thing that gives gold its value is not only its rarity but as you say, the notion that it is valuable.

I'd say the second most important attribute aside from rarity is malleability. Malleability is important, because if an empire collapses, you can melt the gold down into new coins very easily at a relatively low heat.

In addition to malleability, and related to it, gold is valuable because of how simple it is to determine its purity. The more malleable the gold is, the purer it is. Hell even human teeth are stronger than gold at its purest.

Also, just like any other mammal, we humans have a soft spot for shiny things. I think this is one of the primary reasons the idea of gold has traversed so many disparate and uncontacted cultures.

[Ahldagor]

I am actually working toward my PhD in economics, and this is one thing that's always interested me. I'm currently working on a model economy that moves from a gold standard to fiat currency, and the ultimate fate of the economy is quite grim.

The thing that gives gold its value is not only its rarity but as you say, the notion that it is valuable.

I'd say the second most important attribute aside from rarity is malleability. Malleability is important, because if an empire collapses, you can melt the gold down into new coins very easily at a relatively low heat.

In addition to malleability, and related to it, gold is valuable because of how simple it is to determine its purity. The more malleable the gold is, the purer it is. Hell even human teeth are stronger than gold at its purest.

Also, just like any other mammal, we humans have a soft spot for shiny things. I think this is one of the primary reasons the idea of gold has traversed so many disparate and uncontacted cultures.

cool. has its usage in technology had a significant affect on its value? i know the amounts used aren't much per item, but when combined it's a lot, a lot a lot, of gold.

[mtb tripper]

malleability is a factor I never really thought much of

[Ahldagor]

malleability is a factor I never really thought much of

same here. the shiny thing is just too true. diamonds are pure carbon and not rare, but have crazy value. graphite is carbon too, but has little value yet we use it in pencils and lubricants...it's just not shiny...also this stuff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphene

[mtb tripper]

same here. the shiny thing is just too true. diamonds are pure carbon and not rare, but have crazy value. graphite is carbon too, but has little value yet we use it in pencils and lubricants...it's just not shiny...also this stuff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphene

humans are a crazy species

[Ahldagor]

humans are a crazy species

hehehe, makes it fun

[Orruar]

same here. the shiny thing is just too true. diamonds are pure carbon and not rare, but have crazy value. graphite is carbon too, but has little value yet we use it in pencils and lubricants...it's just not shiny...also this stuff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphene

The reason we don't use diamonds as currency but we do gold is that diamonds are not divisible. If you take a $100k diamond and break it into 2 smaller diamonds, they are worth far less than $100k combined. Gold is the same price per unit whether you have a milligram or a ton of it.

[Ahldagor]

The reason we don't use diamonds as currency but we do gold is that diamonds are not divisible. If you take a $100k diamond and break it into 2 smaller diamonds, they are worth far less than $100k combined. Gold is the same price per unit whether you have a milligram or a ton of it.

what are you talking about?

[Greegon]

The thing that gives gold its value is not only its rarity but as you say, the notion that it is valuable.

yeah if theres truly some really hard times coming will take a loaf of bread instead

[Toehammer]

I am actually working toward my PhD in economics, and this is one thing that's always interested me. I'm currently working on a model economy that moves from a gold standard to fiat currency, and the ultimate fate of the economy is quite grim.

The thing that gives gold its value is not only its rarity but as you say, the notion that it is valuable.

I'd say the second most important attribute aside from rarity is malleability. Malleability is important, because if an empire collapses, you can melt the gold down into new coins very easily at a relatively low heat.

In addition to malleability, and related to it, gold is valuable because of how simple it is to determine its purity. The more malleable the gold is, the purer it is. Hell even human teeth are stronger than gold at its purest.

Also, just like any other mammal, we humans have a soft spot for shiny things. I think this is one of the primary reasons the idea of gold has traversed so many disparate and uncontacted cultures.

Hawala brings up many good points here.

A lot of people think that rarity is the key issue, but it is not. http://www.periodictable.com/Properties/A/CrustAbundance.html

Gold has a unique set of properties (browse the above link) when compared to the other elements. Malleability and ductility, and a low melting point make it extremely useful to the metallurgist and materials scientist. High electrical conductivity, electron density, shininess, etc. but all precious metals (Au, Ag, Cu, Pt, etc.) have these qualities and are used for high-demand products like electrical wiring.

Gold is unique because it is almost chemically inert. That may sound simple, but it has profound impacts on its use as a currency (standard). Silver, platinum, copper, and other metals tend to oxidize and rust. Gold doesn't. The combination with its malleability and low melting point make it easy to distinguish from other metals and give the consumer strong confidence in its purity.

But I agree, the fact that it glitters, glitters forever (due to its complete resistance to corrosion at ambient conditions), and since it can be isolated from other metals easily by either heat or acid make it an ideal candidate that has evolved into a solid currency standard. People tend to forget that currency evolves too along with society, and gold seems to just inately possess all the right properties that humans naturally selected: it's shiny forever, "easy" to get in a pure state, and is rare enough to hold some value.

All currency basically represents a quantification of time/effort put into obtaining it. The most straightforward way to gain material wealth is to pull it out of the ground. So of course the rarer, more technologically useful, and prettier the element, the more it is worth.

People also tend to forget that human history is mainly categorized by the metals/elements we use to make stronger tools (whose power is mostly displayed through warfare/weapons). The stone, copper, bronze, iron, steel, and now silicon/petroleum ages. Although gold hasn't had immense use over the history of time, it does now with electronics and medicine, and we pull it out of the ground any time we find these other more "useful" elements.

[Orruar]

yeah if theres truly some really hard times coming will take a loaf of bread instead

Loaves of bread are not very durable.

[Orruar]

what are you talking about?

It would seem that my sentences were very clear. I know you weren't saying we should use diamonds as currency, but as we were discussing the qualities of currency, I thought it was a good place to show why one shiny substance may be more desirable than another as a currency.

[Rhambuk]

It would seem that my sentences were very clear. I know you weren't saying we should use diamonds as currency, but as we were discussing the qualities of currency, I thought it was a good place to show why one shiny substance may be more desirable than another as a currency.

Personally I value a nice ripe tomato over diamonds or gold, but thats just me.

You can actually do something with a tomato, and in the right light it is SO SHINY!

[Orruar]

Personally I value a nice ripe tomato over diamonds or gold, but thats just me.

You can actually do something with a tomato, and in the right light it is SO SHINY!

But you don't value tomatoes as currency, one would hope. They aren't very durable, nor particularly scarce. I mean, how many pounds of tomatoes would you need to haul around to buy a new TV?

[Lojik]

I think economics in general is not very intuitive, and I think the best evidence towards that is how late humans began to understand basic economic concepts. I think the ancient greeks were the first to understand a wide variety of subjects, but when it comes to economics it isn't really until Adam Smith that we made a breakthrough there.

The value of currency is more than just the goods that you can buy with it (or the amount of the commodity that backs it.) The ability to facilitate trade and provide consumers and sellers with trust is invaluable.

[Ahldagor]

It would seem that my sentences were very clear. I know you weren't saying we should use diamonds as currency, but as we were discussing the qualities of currency, I thought it was a good place to show why one shiny substance may be more desirable than another as a currency.

is you're assumption based on that people would still use a current valuing system based upon a diamond's size? (ie because we do it this way now there's no way that people could do it another way in the past or in the future) a system could be made that would make it as easy as the gold one that you mentioned, and it still would be the same behavior that is in operation.

[Greegon]

Loaves of bread are not very durable.

yes yes but i can spread some nutella on that bitch

[Orruar]

is you're assumption based on that people would still use a current valuing system based upon a diamond's size? (ie because we do it this way now there's no way that people could do it another way in the past or in the future) a system could be made that would make it as easy as the gold one that you mentioned, and it still would be the same behavior that is in operation.

"A system could be made". Are you implying that you could somehow impose an artificial value system on diamonds? Good luck with that, lol. Diamond value vs size is the way it is because you can't just combine 2 small diamonds to make a larger diamond. People understand this and the natural distribution of diamond size has great influence on the value. If all diamonds naturally came out of the ground with the exact same size (and then were only broken down when the sum of value of the smaller diamonds exceeded the value of the larger one), then you could have a system as you suggest. As that is not how it works in the natural world, your system wouldn't work. Unless you somehow got everyone to change their perception of value, which seems like a Herculean task.

[Ahldagor]

"A system could be made". Are you implying that you could somehow impose an artificial value system on diamonds? Good luck with that, lol. Diamond value vs size is the way it is because you can't just combine 2 small diamonds to make a larger diamond. People understand this and the natural distribution of diamond size has great influence on the value. If all diamonds naturally came out of the ground with the exact same size (and then were only broken down when the sum of value of the smaller diamonds exceeded the value of the larger one), then you could have a system as you suggest. As that is not how it works in the natural world, your system wouldn't work. Unless you somehow got everyone to change their perception of value, which seems like a Herculean task.

perception of value. that's the behavior i was saying. diamond has no value as it stands until a human came along and decided it was valuable (this has been previously said in the thread btw, and was the origin or my "what are you talking about") and that notion has been sustained by humans. it's like the sun only becomes "the sun" (all the symbolism and metaphors attached to it along with the scientific notions) after humans have attached those notions to it. the base perception would be unknown because we don't know how to engage the sun or diamonds as if there wasn't significance attached to them. that herculean task is possible, but uncomfortable because it forces an absolute nihilism to be the starting point; then creation begins.

how do you think that we think, and try not to use cognitive science or any notions of a ghost in the machine (matrix bullshit) kind of thing. it's a fun test.

[Orruar]

perception of value. that's the behavior i was saying. diamond has no value as it stands until a human came along and decided it was valuable (this has been previously said in the thread btw, and was the origin or my "what are you talking about") and that notion has been sustained by humans. it's like the sun only becomes "the sun" (all the symbolism and metaphors attached to it along with the scientific notions) after humans have attached those notions to it. the base perception would be unknown because we don't know how to engage the sun or diamonds as if there wasn't significance attached to them. that herculean task is possible, but uncomfortable because it forces an absolute nihilism to be the starting point; then creation begins.

how do you think that we think, and try not to use cognitive science or any notions of a ghost in the machine (matrix bullshit) kind of thing. it's a fun test.

I wasn't debating the notion of where value comes from. You went off on quite a tangent to attack that straw man. I was pointing out the reason why the value structure of diamonds is the way that it is, and that changing the value structure in a world where the production of diamonds is unchanged is probably impossible. Yes, diamonds by themselves only have value because we as people perceive them to have value. But the structure of value is mostly independent of our value judgments and primarily rooted in the physical properties (non-fusability, variability of size) of diamonds.

Take an analogy: Cars are the same in regards to their structure of value. You'll have a hell of a time selling a left half of a car for half the price of a whole car. And just saying "we could change our values so that isn't so" isn't likely to change that fact.

[Ahldagor]

I wasn't debating the notion of where value comes from. You went off on quite a tangent to attack that straw man. I was pointing out the reason why the value structure of diamonds is the way that it is, and that changing the value structure in a world where the production of diamonds is unchanged is probably impossible. Yes, diamonds by themselves only have value because we as people perceive them to have value. But the structure of value is mostly independent of our value judgments and primarily rooted in the physical properties (non-fusability, variability of size) of diamonds.

Take an analogy: Cars are the same in regards to their structure of value. You'll have a hell of a time selling a left half of a car for half the price of a whole car. And just saying "we could change our values so that isn't so" isn't likely to change that fact.

i get that. and that doesn't take away from the behavior of value being attached via a human or humans. this isn't dueling banjos, but a material notion being argued against a behavioral.

that's a bad analogy though because a car is, at base, a tool with a desired function.

[radditsu]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Beers

The only reason diamonds are expensive is due to a monopoly by one company artificially inflating prices. It's literally criminal in the US for them to run their company in this manner.

Also of note, glasses/sunglasses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxottica) and Cheerleading gear(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varsity_Spirit) are all ran in the same manner. Although in less of a scale to keep them out of the spotlight.

At least Monsanto fucks your mouth while you are looking at them. Not your ass while you aren't.


So please if you will make an argument using an item of value. Please do not use something that can be made, in a lab (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_diamond).


Sorry for the wiki references. It's my bedtime and I didn't want to do a ton of real research.

[Ahldagor]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Beers

The only reason diamonds are expensive is due to a monopoly by one company artificially inflating prices. It's literally criminal in the US for them to run their company in this manner.

Also of note, glasses/sunglasses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxottica) and Cheerleading gear(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varsity_Spirit) are all ran in the same manner. Although in less of a scale to keep them out of the spotlight.

At least Monsanto fucks your mouth while you are looking at them. Not your ass while you aren't.


So please if you will make an argument using an item of value. Please do not use something that can be made, in a lab (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_diamond).


Sorry for the wiki references. It's my bedtime and I didn't want to do a ton of real research.

very true. most diamonds are found in extinct volcanoes or around active ones, and they are pretty common. had a geology prof rant for 15 minutes on how stupid people were for buying diamonds. one of my favorite classes ever.

[Orruar]

i get that. and that doesn't take away from the behavior of value being attached via a human or humans. this isn't dueling banjos, but a material notion being argued against a behavioral.

I don't even know what you're arguing at this point.

that's a bad analogy though because a car is, at base, a tool with a desired function.

I said..
"Cars are the same in regards to their structure of value."

And that is still true. In that one respect, it's a perfectly fine analogy.

[Orruar]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Beers

The only reason diamonds are expensive is due to a monopoly by one company artificially inflating prices. It's literally criminal in the US for them to run their company in this manner.

So please if you will make an argument using an item of value. Please do not use something that can be made, in a lab (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_diamond).

The price structure of diamonds would still be the same even if DeBeers wasn't restricting the supply. Prices would be lower overall, but the fact that one diamond of size 2 would be more valuable than 2 diamonds of size 1 would not be changed.

And are you suggesting that because people can produce something, suddenly it has no value?

[Ahldagor]

I don't even know what you're arguing at this point.


mainly that you're caught up in specificity and hammering away on your point without regarding what has been previously said by me or anyone else in the thread. the whole thing about the value structure of diamonds isn't even relevant to how a default on u.s. debt would effect the value of the u.s. dollar. i brought up carbon to show how three different forms of it have different values which are dependent upon how people wish to utilize that carbon, which as it stands as is has no value (value is a subjective word) much like u.s. currency.

[Orruar]

mainly that you're caught up in specificity and hammering away on your point without regarding what has been previously said by me or anyone else in the thread. the whole thing about the value structure of diamonds isn't even relevant to how a default on u.s. debt would effect the value of the u.s. dollar. i brought up carbon to show how three different forms of it have different values which are dependent upon how people wish to utilize that carbon, which as it stands as is has no value (value is a subjective word) much like u.s. currency.

We're just talking past each other then. I wasn't making any statement regarding US debt or the dollar. I was only making a specific point about the possibility of the use of diamonds as money. Considering much of this thread changed into a discussion on what makes a good money, it didn't seem like much of a derailment...

[Ahldagor]

We're just talking past each other then. I wasn't making any statement regarding US debt or the dollar. I was only making a specific point about the possibility of the use of diamonds as money. Considering much of this thread changed into a discussion on what makes a good money, it didn't seem like much of a derailment...

it did. gotta step back and get some context sometimes. that's why i asked what you were talking about earlier in the thread. anything can be used as a currency as long as enough humans are willing to use it, shells for an example. and that stuff about de beers is true, sadly. carbon isn't that rare.

[radditsu]

The price structure of diamonds would still be the same even if DeBeers wasn't restricting the supply. Prices would be lower overall, but the fact that one diamond of size 2 would be more valuable than 2 diamonds of size 1 would not be changed.

And are you suggesting that because people can produce something, suddenly it has no value?


I am saying that diamonds are a terrible example for making your point

[Orruar]

I am saying that diamonds are a terrible exwmple for making making your point

Diamonds are a terrible example for making the point that diamonds wouldn't make a very good currency? That's an odd position to take.

[radditsu]

Diamonds are a terrible example for making the point that diamonds wouldn't make a very good currency? That's an odd position to take.



Carry on!

[Ahldagor]

Diamonds are a terrible example for making the point that diamonds wouldn't make a very good currency? That's an odd position to take.

perfectly logical. consider the malleability of gold that was mentioned earlier in the thread.