> That requires intervention prohibiting credit > expansion. It is a major contradiction in the so- > called "libertarian" philosophy.
-->You are welcome to offer a quote, but again, if you disagree, perhaps you would simply offer a clear alternative. Maybe it is time for you to open one of those Mises books and look for the alleged "pro- intervention" Mises political manifesto. You might find something interesting in the process.<-- ------------- The contradiction is they would prohibit fractional reserve banking and every creditary mechanism that evolved in the marketplace to facilitate transactions beyond simple one hundred percent backed gold certificates. That prohibition is a restriction on the right to contract for future performance. It's beyond me how that can be reconciled with libertarianism. It is a contradiction--there's no way around it. -- -->So? Mises certainly wrote a bit about fiat currencies pretending to be money (that is, people pretending or believing that they were money). If Rothbard was "too conservative," only recognizing gold, silver, and 100%-backed certificates of such as money,<-- ------------ Actually, he would only permit gold. He would acquiesce to silver in the same manner that he acquiesced to free banking. -- -->Your opinion is noted. Did you get my point, though?<-- ---------- Probably not. Will you restate it please? -- -->Relative to growing a delicious mix of biodynamic salad greens, organizing a sporting event is not productive.<-- ------------ That's your personal opinion. -->How about if I knock a ball into the hole, then take it out, then knock it in another hole- all day long? What if ESPN broadcasts it across the globe to sell advertising for internet casinos by paying Jack Nickalaus to comment on my aim, swing, and fashion statements?<-- ------------ That's your personal opinion. -- -->Whatever, Bill. Anybody want some tickets to my next tournament? I'll even accept federal reserve notes.<-- ------------ That means they have value. -- -->And why do you do that? Did I say something that provoked you to criticize phraseology? That way, everyone can be clear on how not to provoke your criticism or my sarcasm and we can talk about like, um, how to apply the micromacro to the real world or something- if we weren't pretty much happy just chatting anyway- you know- what we would do if it wasn't raining- not that it is.<-- ------------ This is not a chat group--it's a discussion group centered on the subject of social credit. These are matters related to social credit. -- -->Cool, Bill. After all this, I think we may actually be from the same planet. I don't have empirical evidence of that though.<-- ------------ Now who's being sarcastic? Look, this is a discussion group. There are various rhetorical tools to drive home points. You are very thin skinned if you take any of it personally. -- -->Science- isn't that the theory that if the earth is not flat, we will cut off your head?<-- ------------ No. It's a method to get to the truth. Praxeology will never get there because it relies on articles of faith that allow no deviation. --------- Original Message --------- DATE: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 17:10:09 From: Jeff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [snipped] ____________________________________________________________ Get advanced SPAM filtering on Webmail or POP Mail ... Get Lycos Mail! http://login.mail.lycos.com/r/referral?aid=27005 ==^================================================================ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84IaC.bcVIgP.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html ==^================================================================
