Call Out

weisses

Speedwell wrote: »

That happened to be specifically addressed to the person who wanted to know how to find out what the truth was. Don't throw your toys out of the pram because I didn't pay attention to YOU.

Sorry you are quoted me I responded with a question ..

Stop generalizing the whole discussion with that fallacy crap and the the world is this big scary irreducibly complex thing" comment

At least use that fallacy link to actually refute some of the points made

Speedwell

It is the job of the person making the truth claim to establish the truth of the claim. The person saying, "I don't believe you, I need evidence of your claim" is not the one who needs to provide the proof. Anyone who decides to make a claim that there is a conspiracy needs to provide proof of the claim.

"Fallacy crap"? Jesus, go join a high school debate team.

weisses

Speedwell wrote: »

It is the job of the person making the truth claim to establish the truth of the claim. The person saying, "I don't believe you, I need evidence of your claim" is not the one who needs to provide the proof. Anyone who decides to make a claim that there is a conspiracy needs to provide proof of the claim.

"Fallacy crap"? Jesus, go join a high school debate team.

What proof ? would it be called a conspiracy theory if the OP's point was proven?

Isn't the purpose of a CT to discuss certain theories

Not one post from you so far is actually dealing with what was said in the OP other then labeling him and other CT ers dumb or stupid

ScumLord

weisses wrote: »

What proof ? would it be called a conspiracy theory if the OP's point was proven?

But where does the theory come out of? There should be evidense that lead people to some up with the theory. Quite often the theories seem to be based on mistrust of different groups and evidense is then constructed around that hatred.

NIMAN

I enjoy reading the odd conspiracy idea, and of course some of what is printed on the internet is likely to be true.

But some of it is complete nonsense of the highest order. The internet is full of crazy people who believe the world is run by lizard people and we live in a Matrix type world.

Anything that comes out of Alex Jones' mouth is more than likely nonsense.

And as for the fact that we have cures for every disease and an infinite source of power/energy, where is the proof of this, or is it true because some guy on the internet says so?

Dohnjoe

weisses wrote: »

your problem is that you only look at the opener

Then you state its complicated followed by claiming she is selling a distorted version

Can I have your version ?

To be fair to myself I made it through that "article" right to the end, and was just quoting the opener to give a taster

I'll let her give a fuller explanation (this is an actual quote from Karen Hudes)

“There’s a second species on this planet. They’re not extraterrestrials. They’re very much with us. They made maps in the previous ice age. The remnants of their civilizations are all over the place – a lot of times along the coast. It’s submerged because the sea level has gone up by 400 meters.

This group has large brains. They’re very distinct from homo sapiens. Their DNA is so different, that if the two species mated, their offspring would be infertile, and we know this because their DNA was just tested. They have skulls all over the place because they have been on earth with us. But after the ice age, there weren’t that many of them, so they’ve been hiding, and one of the places that’s they’ve been hiding is in the Vatican. That’s why the Vatican are wearing those miters.

It turns out that that’s what the high priest wore in the early beginnings of Judaism. Moses was actually Akhenaten, who was a pharaoh. They know this because the papyra that was taken from one of the pyramids talks about this. The people who are doing archeology in Israel know this. And the reason is, not only is homo capensis (?) trying to keep human beings under control by divide and conquer using our money system, they’ve also been doing this with our religions – organized religions – trying to get human beings to hate people of different religious faiths so that they will kill each other off, so that the people who are manipulating human beings could … use us like cattle. That’s what’s been going on through our history.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcwnbQzNz9Q&feature=youtu.be&t=23m

weisses

Dohnjoe wrote: »

To be fair to myself I made it through that "article" right to the end, and was just quoting the opener to give a taster

I'll let her give a fuller explanation (this is an actual quote from Karen Hudes)

It was not in the article but i share your concern

Here is another piece

https://www.sprottmoney.com/blog/the-one-bank-revisited-jeff-nielson.html

More on debt slavery


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-28/most-americans-are-slaves-and-they-dont-even-know-it

www.sprottmoney.com/blog/debt-slavery-force-feeding-us-with-debt-jeff-nielson.html

There is much more to find on this subject ..

ScumLord wrote: »

But where does the theory come out of? There should be evidense that lead people to some up with the theory. Quite often the theories seem to be based on mistrust of different groups and evidense is then constructed around that hatred.

see my reply above

I think the amount of evidence required is depending on what kind of theory you present

I think a CT cannot be held to the same standards as when you present a scientific theory for instance

Wanderer78

weisses wrote:

More on debt slavery

Michael Hudson has done some great work on 'debt peonage'

Dohnjoe

weisses wrote: »

More on debt slavery

Well this is just my take ..

A house is an expensive item, in order to purchase one outright you need to either have the money or get a loan which is repaid over time

If someone does not have the cash but wishes to own a home they can get a loan

If they don't wish to purchase a home they can rent

Likewise credit card debt, car loans, personal loans, etc

There's a choice there

Calling that slavery is an affront to the definition of slavery and is classic scapegoating, shifting the blame from the individual to institutions

Want to start up a business? need capital/cash? luckily a competitive, safe, regulated market exists to make that possible.. with a large array of insurance options to hedge against risks

weisses

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Well this is just my take ..

A house is an expensive item, in order to purchase one outright you need to either have the money or get a loan which is repaid over time

If someone does not have the cash but wishes to own a home they can get a loan

Well if you can pay your house by cash the whole debt debate is moot

You almost cannot buy a house on 1 income anymore ..Heck even renting families need two incomes sometimes to even afford renting

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Want to start up a business? need capital/cash? luckily a competitive, safe, regulated market exists to make that possible.. with a large array of insurance options to hedge against risks

Starting your own business is different then the average Joe stuck in a job that he cannot afford to give up or change due to his debts

I ll take it you did not read any of the links ?

I knew you would be hung up on the slavery part though ... talk about shifting attention of the points raised

Dohnjoe

weisses wrote: »

You almost cannot buy a house on 1 income anymore ..Heck even renting families need two incomes sometimes to even afford renting

Land/property is a scarce resource, hence prices generally rise. The price is also set by the market. Everyday there are people selling houses for these prices, and buyers are buying

Starting your own business is different then the average Joe stuck in a job that he cannot afford to give up or change due to his debts

If I choose not to work the government will pay me to do nothing. They will even subsidise housing for me (rent allowance), they will also provide work incentives, education incentives among other benefits (including medical)

In such a scenario I would still be living better than 85% of the world population

My basic needs would be met, everything else is a modern day luxury

With an unskilled minimum wage job, I could still easily afford to rent, food and basic necessities, even some luxuries

No debt is involved in any of that equation - unless I desire to live above my means.. or I consider luxuries an entitlement/necessity

Travelling further back in history, less of this was possible, less employment opportunities, less rights, welfare, equality, insurance, etc

I ll take it you did not read any of the links ?

I knew you would be hung up on the slavery part though ... talk about shifting attention of the points raised

I read the Zerohedge blog, which is the concept I am addressing

ScumLord

weisses wrote: »

Well if you can pay your house by cash the whole debt debate is moot

But most people can't afford their own house. At least not until they've worked for a decade or two. In the past this would mean that people just get stuck in a certain social class.

Debt "slavery" is still better than actual slavery, it's also better than serfdom, or just having no access to any kind of wealth.

There is affordable housing all over the place. They're just not in populated areas where land is in high demand.

Tzar Chasm

I think the term 'Poverty trap' is a more accurate description than debt slavery.

ScumLord

Tzar Chasm wrote: »

I think the term 'Poverty trap' is a more accurate description than debt slavery.

Um.. If you get a loan for a house and live in a house, it's hard to call that house a sign of poverty. It's clearly the opposite.

And again, is being able to get a loan to buy things you need, or even just want, a sign of poverty? Compared to say 1950s Ireland when people had literally nothing and little chance of changing that fact.

I just can't look around Ireland today and accept that we're any worse off than we were 30 years ago or more.

Dohnjoe

ScumLord wrote: »

Um.. If you get a loan for a house and live in a house, it's hard to call that house a sign of poverty. It's clearly the opposite.

And again, is being able to get a loan to buy things you need, or even just want, a sign of poverty? Compared to say 1950s Ireland when people had literally nothing and little chance of changing that fact.

I just can't look around Ireland today and accept that we're any worse off than we were 30 years ago or more.

Indeed, and poverty is also relative, what's considered the poverty line today would be almost middle class earlier in the century

By virtually every measure possible we are better off than previous generations

Wanderer78

i think the work of michael hudson, bill black, ha-joon chang and ellen brown fit very nicely into this conversation. i agree with micheal Hudson, that debt is the new form of slavery. we are now at a point, in order to gain access to the most basic human needs, one must accumulate debt, some times in large amounts. this is an unsustainable system and since we have a debt based monetary system which is largely controlled by private finical institutions, the trend of increasing debt is set to continue, as it is an incentive in this system.

Dohnjoe

Wanderer78 wrote: »

that debt is the new form of slavery. we are now at a point, in order to gain access to the most basic human needs, one must accumulate debt,

With all due respect I've just pointed out that this is absolutely and patently untrue

On top of that, anecdotally, I actually know people who are living off the social welfare. All their basic needs are met (and more)

Wanderer78

Dohnjoe wrote: »

With all due respect I've just pointed out that this is absolutely and patently untrue

On top of that, anecdotally, I actually know people who are living off the social welfare. All their basic needs are met (and more)

please bare with me, id highly recommend the work of those ive mentioned, as they explain it far better than i ever would. i would also include the work of noam chomsky and yanis varoufakis to further knowledge on these topics.

many middle class people are in serious trouble regarding debt. at almost 40, my generation are in serious trouble, thankfully i realised these issues in the 20's and im now debt free and hopefully it remains so but life has a funny way of turning upside down from time to time. i do agree with those that i have mentioned that if we re not careful, we will end up with little of no middle class, or as michael hudson puts it, we re heading back to feudalism, where by there was no middle class just lower classes and a ruling upper class. the last few years have shown this in the form of bail outs and austerity. we re in a lot of trouble!

my counter argument with social welfare is as always, the issue isnt with the lower classes but indeed with the higher classes and ultimately the financial sector, or as those that i have mentioned, in particular michael hudson, the financial sector is parasitic in nature, it is not helping us at all but we think it is. please be aware, there is a process of slowly dissolving our social systems, this is dangerous for us all.

i beg to differ with your statement as is supported by the work of those ive mentioned. thank you

weisses

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Indeed, and poverty is also relative, what's considered the poverty line today would be almost middle class earlier in the century

By virtually every measure possible we are better off than previous generations

That is a ridiculous comparison

Compared to the time tax was collected by the sheriff of Nottingham people were better of 50 years ago

And if you want to bring in previous generations ... Their motto was save save save ... Don't buy anything you cannot afford yet

Leaving mortgages aside what do you think is left over if instantly all items were removed that were not actually owned by the people using them.

Dohnjoe

Wanderer78 wrote: »

many middle class people are in serious trouble regarding debt. at almost 40, my generation are in serious trouble,

Thanks but as previously explained, people choose debt

They are enslaved to their needs and standards (not debt)

As demonstrated, in Ireland, our basic needs are met, even if that person is not working (which in the past would have meant destitution and starvation)

Debt is not the issue here, it's people wanting to live beyond their means

Saipanne

Only the omniscient ever make these kind of threads.

Weird.

weisses

Saipanne wrote: »

Only the omniscient ever make these kind of threads.

Weird.

It also attracts the trolls

Weird

Dohnjoe

weisses wrote: »

That is a ridiculous comparison

Poverty is relative

The poverty line in Ireland is different from that in e.g. Malawi

It also changes over time (as our standards increase)

And if you want to bring in previous generations ... Their motto was save save save ... Don't buy anything you cannot afford yet

Previous generations had lower standards of living than we have today (by almost every measure)

Leaving mortgages aside what do you think is left over if instantly all items were removed that were not actually owned by the people using them.

It's a choice

People now have a choice to buy items or buy via credit. Credit allows people to buy things they may not necessarily afford up front.

It's popular because people are paid weekly/monthly, hence is makes sense to buy something now, enjoy it now and pay back monthly - rather than save up and have the item at a later date

Again there's a choice there, nothing is forced

As I've shown, in this country, we don't need to do that for non luxuries

Everything else is a luxury, which is up to the individual and their own financial responsibility

weisses

Dohnjoe wrote: »

With all due respect I've just pointed out that this is absolutely and patently untrue

With all do respect ... You did not

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Well this is just my take ..

That is as far as it gets in regards to "things being "untrue"

Saipanne

weisses wrote: »

It also attracts the trolls

Weird

Look at it though. His knowledge could not be more complete or total. Everyone else are plebs. I'm impressed and wish to subscribe.

weisses

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Previous generations had lower standards of living than we have today (by almost every measure)



It's a choice

No its not

http://www.mybudget360.com/cost-of-living-2014-inflation-1950-vs-2014-data-housing-cars-college/

Dohnjoe wrote: »

People now have a choice to buy items or buy via credit. Credit allows people to buy things they may not necessarily afford up front.

It's popular because people are paid weekly/monthly, hence is makes sense to buy something now, enjoy it now and pay back monthly - rather than save up and have the item at a later date

Again there's a choice there, nothing is forced

As I've shown, in this country, we don't need to do that for non luxuries

Everything else is a luxury, which is up to the individual and their own financial responsibility

You Perfectly explained how people are lured into the debt trap

Dohnjoe

weisses wrote: »

With all do respect ... You did not

I did, earlier in the thread when I wrote

"If I choose not to work the government will pay me to do nothing. They will even subsidise housing for me (rent allowance), they will also provide work incentives, education incentives among other benefits (including medical)

In such a scenario I would still be living better than 85% of the world population

My basic needs would be met, everything else is a modern day luxury

With an unskilled minimum wage job, I could still easily afford to rent, food and basic necessities, even some luxuries

No debt is involved in any of that equation - unless I desire to live above my means.. or I consider luxuries an entitlement/necessity
"

OP said basic needs cannot be met without debt

I have already given an explanation (and I have real world examples) as to why that is untrue

weisses

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I did, earlier in the thread when I wrote

"If I choose not to work the government will pay me to do nothing. They will even subsidise housing for me (rent allowance), they will also provide work incentives, education incentives among other benefits (including medical)

In such a scenario I would still be living better than 85% of the world population

My basic needs would be met, everything else is a modern day luxury

With an unskilled minimum wage job, I could still easily afford to rent, food and basic necessities, even some luxuries

No debt is involved in any of that equation - unless I desire to live above my means.. or I consider luxuries an entitlement/necessity
"

OP said basic needs cannot be met without debt

I have already given an explanation (and I have real world examples) as to why that is untrue

It is still "your take" on the issue

With an unskilled minimum wage job, I could still easily afford to rent, food and basic necessities, even some luxuries

How would you do this in and around Dublin or any other city ? (you have 335 a week)

Wanderer78

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Thanks but as previously explained, people choose debt

They are enslaved to their needs and standards (not debt)

As demonstrated, in Ireland, our basic needs are met, even if that person is not working (which in the past would have meant destitution and starvation)

Debt is not the issue here, it's people wanting to live beyond their means

i agree and disagree with you. some debt certainly is a personal choice but i actually think 'group think' comes into play regarding some choices of debt.

of course life is relative, im sure the forms of poverty experienced in developing countries are far worse than the levels of poverty experienced here in ireland.

again id have to agree with those ive mentioned that the only way to kick start the global economy,debt write down or even debt cancellation is the only way. this perverse method of austerity has got to stop. it has been shown to fail where ever it has been tried throughout history. our public services have been decimated as a result.

im extremely angered to watch how the people of ireland in particular the hard working people of this country have been treated in the last few years. even though we did make some serious mistakes ourselves in regards debt accumulation, as explained, i actually think our economic and financial systems are not fit for purpose and encourage bad economic decisions. ive always liked bill blacks idea of, bad ethics, drives good ethics out of the system, i.e. our financial systems are fundamentally flawed. they promote poor decision making leading to bad ethical decisions.

id wholeheartedly disagree with you when you say our basic needs are met in this country, obviously this is subjective, but our health care and housing needs are not met in this country, certainly not at the moment, largely due to austerity. leaving families sit in hotel rooms and people on trollies, is not meeting basic needs particularly when our economy is one of the strongest growing at the moment!

this is a complex subject matter though and has a near infinite causes with no clear solutions but we have to deal with it or we will end up back where we started which seems inevitable to me.

ScumLord

Wanderer78 wrote: »

i think the work of michael hudson, bill black, ha-joon chang and ellen brown fit very nicely into this conversation. i agree with micheal Hudson, that debt is the new form of slavery. we are now at a point, in order to gain access to the most basic human needs, one must accumulate debt, some times in large amounts. this is an unsustainable system and since we have a debt based monetary system which is largely controlled by private finical institutions, the trend of increasing debt is set to continue, as it is an incentive in this system.

You don't need to get a loan for the most basic human needs. A person can't hit 18, walk into a bank and demand money for things. You need to have at least some savings and quite often have pay slips as evidence that you'll be able to pay off the loan into the future.

Nobody needs to put themselves in debt. People want a new house, or a new car, but they don't need them. So if they put themselves into debt they can't pay it's their own fault really. Rental is a real option, 2nd hand cars are perfectly fine for most tasks. But most people go with the easy instant gratification option of getting a loan. If it's managed properly debt can just be a useful financial management tool.

The likes of Michael Hudson is also operating in the American bubble, he's talking about problems with the American economy and society that simply don't translate into Irish lifestyle or the way our economy works. We all need to be aware of the American bubble when following Americans. For the most part many don't have a clue what's going on outside of their borders, and when they do have knowledge it's more like a caricature of events and people than a respectable opinion.