On 7/1/2012 4:38 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 7/1/2012 10:14 AM, George Plimpton wrote:

As long as we continue to allow the ultra-rich to remove an
ever-increasing
percentage of the total money supply from circulation,

Not happening, you stupid clueless ****.


The stupid guy is you.

No, not even close. I'm far smarter than you. Even your allies here
recognize that.

What's not close is how much higher my level of knowledge is than

Your "level of knowledge" is low - that is agreed upon by all.



You haven't even noticed that over the last two
decades the richest 1% has seen tremendous gains in wealth while the
average American has lost 40% of theirs.

Irrelevant - it doesn't mean that any part of the "money supply" is
being withdrawn from circulation.

I'm not interested in the money supply.

Your fellow and equally clueless left-wing ****wit, who inaccurately
uses "precision machinist" as part of his nym, is the one who blabbered
incoherently about the money supply.



That's the Federal Reserve's
problem, and is irrelevant in relation to the negative effect of having
so much money held by so few individuals.

There are *NO* negative effects from that. You just don't like it.
Because you're a brainwashed left-wing dupe and dope, you think wealth
should be redistributed. It should not be. There is no valid ethical,
legal or economic rationale for it. The only one you can come up with
is political: you and your fellow downmarket looters don't have as much
as you want, and you want more, and you just want to seize it from those
who created or otherwise legally and ethically acquired it.

You want to steal it.



Talk about stupid - you don't even know what the money supply is. I do,
but you don't. You're stupid. You like being stupid - being stupid is
the only thing at which you work.

**** you!

Gotcha.


I knew what the money supply was when you were still in grade
school.

No. No, because first, you're only a couple of years old than I am, so
we were in grade school at least partly at the same time. Second,
because you didn't go to college until late, whereas I went on time, as
one is expected to do, and my major was economics, and money and banking
is a core part of an economics degree. Finally, it's not true because
you *still* don't know what the money supply is.



You're a stupid little punk that

No. I'm smart. I'm much smarter than you, and I'm not a punk. You,
Hawwwke-Ptooey, life-long do-nothing, are the punk. You're just a punk
- a squat-to-****, pansy punk.

On 7/1/2012 4:46 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 7/1/2012 10:15 AM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 7/1/2012 10:06 AM, Hawke wrote:
On 6/29/2012 3:43 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 6/29/2012 2:36 PM, whoyakidding wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 17:11:43 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
news:KJOdnal_H5EdknPSnZ2dnUVZ_o6dnZ2d@scnresearch. com...

--rather, it will end up languishing someplace as excess cash
reserves
-that aren't going do one bit of good for anybody save for a handful
-of ultra-rich puppet-masters.

You really have no clue about smart investing, do you?

The investments with good returns support a LOT of economic activity.

Extend the trend. If eventually there's one guy with all the money

Can't happen.


Maybe not. But it can get close. It was estimated that when John D.
Rockefeller was the richest man in America that of every eight dollars
in the country one of them belonged to him.

No, it wasn't "estimated" that that was true, and not so long ago - some
time in the last four years - I completely debunked that. I'll find it
again and repost it later.



You're so damn stupid that you always miss the salient point anyway

I didn't miss any salient point. Anyway, I found your bull**** from
last January when you made that bull**** claim that I debunked, and I
debunked it again.


The point is that the U.S. now ranks in the top five or six countries in
the world where income and wealth disparity is the worst. Get that?

What do you mean, "worst"? What does that even mean? There isn't any
"standard" for what it ought to be.



The WORST!

Meaningless. The distribution itself doesn't mean anything. The only
thing that can mean something is how it got to be that way. If the rich
got to be rich by literally sticking guns in people's faces and taking
their things, that's bad. But that didn't happen here. The rich got to
be rich here by creating value, and they *remained* rich here by
preventing the looters - you and your dirty smelly mob - from taking it
from them.

There is nothing unjust about the wealth distribution in the US, because
the wealth was neither acquired nor maintained illegally or unethically.
When rich people work the political system to put a stop to your
attempted looting, that is neither illegal nor unethical.


So much money is held by so few people that we are just like a
banana republic

We are not at all like a banana republic.


when it comes to how our country's economic pie is cut
up.

You don't deserve any part of someone else's "slice of the pie."


Now, to someone like you that means nothing. But to normal humans

Nope. *I* am the normal person here, because I'm not a looter. You are
a looter. You really should be shot on sight.


Unknown to economists, when wealth becomes too unfair

No such thing.

On 7/1/2012 4:48 PM, Hawwwke-Ptooey, looter, bull****ted:
On 7/1/2012 11:50 AM, Too_Much_A_Fool, looter, bull****ted:
On Jul 1, 12:11 pm, Hawwwke-Ptooey, looter, bull****ted:
On 6/29/2012 8:25 PM, Too_Much_A_Fool, looter, bull****ted:





On Jun 29, 4:11 pm, "Jim Wilkins" wrote:
"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message

news:KJOdnal_H5EdknPSnZ2dnUVZ_o6dnZ2d@scnresearch. com...

--rather, it will end up languishing someplace as excess cash reserves
-that aren't going do one bit of good for anybody save for a handful
-of ultra-rich puppet-masters.

You really have no clue about smart investing, do you?

The investments with good returns support a LOT of economic activity.

You have no clue about what serious illiness does to a family's
finances, do you?

One illiness can WIPEOUT a lifetime of investments with good returns.

TMT

Half of the personal bankruptcies in the country are the result of
medical problems. But it's like they say. This is the best health care
system in the world; as long as you are rich. If you're not it stinks.

Hawke

Correct

No, incorrect.


...and that half of personal bankruptcies is for people who HAD
health insurance when the medical incident occurred.

All of us are just one silliness from bankruptcy with the current
medical system.

Anyone who doesn't think the American medical system didn't need
change is a fool.


Oh, you have to be talking about Pimpton.

This "change" is going to worsen medical care and access to it for most
Americans.

On 7/1/2012 5:16 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 7/1/2012 10:13 AM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 7/1/2012 9:57 AM, Hawke wrote:
On 6/29/2012 3:42 PM, George Plimpton wrote:
On 6/29/2012 3:05 PM, whoyakidding wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 14:48:41 -0700, "PrecisionmachinisT"
wrote:


"whoyakidding" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 17:11:43 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
news:KJOdnal_H5EdknPSnZ2dnUVZ_o6dnZ2d@scnresearch. com...

--rather, it will end up languishing someplace as excess cash
reserves
-that aren't going do one bit of good for anybody save for a
handful
-of ultra-rich puppet-masters.

You really have no clue about smart investing, do you?

The investments with good returns support a LOT of economic
activity.

Extend the trend. If eventually there's one guy with all the money
then what would he invest in? Cake factories?

As long as we continue to allow the ultra-rich to remove an
ever-increasing
percentage of the total money supply from circulation, the number of
people
in need of "handouts" will continue to rise exponentially.

What gets me is how many of the rightards don't understand that THEY
are some of those in need of handouts. They want lower taxes AND more
war for example.

No, but even if they did, that wouldn't show that they're in need of
chortle "handouts."


Who says they have to "need" them for conservatives to want handouts?

Your ****witted leftard pal said,

What gets me is how many of the rightards don't understand that
THEY are some of those in need of handouts.

Conservatives and libertarians don't want handouts and don't need
handouts. Only leftards believe in rewarding sloth.


You're a rightard in need of a functioning brain.

My brain works very well, which is a big part of why I'm far smarter
than you. You're stupid; I'm smart.