[SK in CV]

[quote=urbanrealtor]
Thankfully, SK is back and we can get back to more clear discussions about how his involvment with the Fed has caused our large shark subsidies to wane.[/quote]

That’s the difference between you and me. I’m all for shark subsidies. But only SMALL shark subsidies. You just want to subsidize the large sharks, which, over the last 40 years, have grown bigger and bigger, as the small sharks shrink. Our economy grew strong during the middle of this century on the jobs created by small sharks. The nurses, the sands, the Dwarf Lanternfish (yeah, I looked that one up)….and you want to fund the threshers, the great whites and the hammerheads. That trickle down sharkonomy just doesn’t work. It’s a fallacy. Probably invented by Ronald Reagan.

[SK in CV]

[quote=urbanrealtor]
Thankfully, SK is back and we can get back to more clear discussions about how his involvment with the Fed has caused our large shark subsidies to wane.[/quote]

That’s the difference between you and me. I’m all for shark subsidies. But only SMALL shark subsidies. You just want to subsidize the large sharks, which, over the last 40 years, have grown bigger and bigger, as the small sharks shrink. Our economy grew strong during the middle of this century on the jobs created by small sharks. The nurses, the sands, the Dwarf Lanternfish (yeah, I looked that one up)….and you want to fund the threshers, the great whites and the hammerheads. That trickle down sharkonomy just doesn’t work. It’s a fallacy. Probably invented by Ronald Reagan.

[SK in CV]

[quote=urbanrealtor]
Thankfully, SK is back and we can get back to more clear discussions about how his involvment with the Fed has caused our large shark subsidies to wane.[/quote]

That’s the difference between you and me. I’m all for shark subsidies. But only SMALL shark subsidies. You just want to subsidize the large sharks, which, over the last 40 years, have grown bigger and bigger, as the small sharks shrink. Our economy grew strong during the middle of this century on the jobs created by small sharks. The nurses, the sands, the Dwarf Lanternfish (yeah, I looked that one up)….and you want to fund the threshers, the great whites and the hammerheads. That trickle down sharkonomy just doesn’t work. It’s a fallacy. Probably invented by Ronald Reagan.

[SK in CV]

[quote=urbanrealtor]
Thankfully, SK is back and we can get back to more clear discussions about how his involvment with the Fed has caused our large shark subsidies to wane.[/quote]

That’s the difference between you and me. I’m all for shark subsidies. But only SMALL shark subsidies. You just want to subsidize the large sharks, which, over the last 40 years, have grown bigger and bigger, as the small sharks shrink. Our economy grew strong during the middle of this century on the jobs created by small sharks. The nurses, the sands, the Dwarf Lanternfish (yeah, I looked that one up)….and you want to fund the threshers, the great whites and the hammerheads. That trickle down sharkonomy just doesn’t work. It’s a fallacy. Probably invented by Ronald Reagan.

[SK in CV]

I can’t believe i missed the damn party.

(And i never considered myself an academic. I am, however, seriously thinking of calling myself a doctor. Who wants to volunteer to be my first patient? Fresh gloves, i promise.)

[SK in CV]

I can’t believe i missed the damn party.

(And i never considered myself an academic. I am, however, seriously thinking of calling myself a doctor. Who wants to volunteer to be my first patient? Fresh gloves, i promise.)

[SK in CV]

I can’t believe i missed the damn party.

(And i never considered myself an academic. I am, however, seriously thinking of calling myself a doctor. Who wants to volunteer to be my first patient? Fresh gloves, i promise.)

[SK in CV]

I can’t believe i missed the damn party.

(And i never considered myself an academic. I am, however, seriously thinking of calling myself a doctor. Who wants to volunteer to be my first patient? Fresh gloves, i promise.)

[SK in CV]

I can’t believe i missed the damn party.

(And i never considered myself an academic. I am, however, seriously thinking of calling myself a doctor. Who wants to volunteer to be my first patient? Fresh gloves, i promise.)

[SK in CV]

[quote=pri_dk][quote=SK in CV]While the specific ownership isn’t public record[/quote]

Why is this kept secret?

I’m not losing any sleep over this, but it is kinda curious.[/quote]

That is a good question. I don’t really know the answer. I suspect it’s because there aren’t any regulations that make it mandatory. Solely in order to quell the paranoia of conspiracy theorists, it might not be a bad idea to create those regulations. On the other hand, since the paranoid conspiracy theorists don’t believe audited financial statements as it is, they probably wouldn’t believe any published ownership listing either.

[SK in CV]

[quote=pri_dk][quote=SK in CV]While the specific ownership isn’t public record[/quote]

Why is this kept secret?

I’m not losing any sleep over this, but it is kinda curious.[/quote]

That is a good question. I don’t really know the answer. I suspect it’s because there aren’t any regulations that make it mandatory. Solely in order to quell the paranoia of conspiracy theorists, it might not be a bad idea to create those regulations. On the other hand, since the paranoid conspiracy theorists don’t believe audited financial statements as it is, they probably wouldn’t believe any published ownership listing either.

[SK in CV]

[quote=pri_dk][quote=SK in CV]While the specific ownership isn’t public record[/quote]

Why is this kept secret?

I’m not losing any sleep over this, but it is kinda curious.[/quote]

That is a good question. I don’t really know the answer. I suspect it’s because there aren’t any regulations that make it mandatory. Solely in order to quell the paranoia of conspiracy theorists, it might not be a bad idea to create those regulations. On the other hand, since the paranoid conspiracy theorists don’t believe audited financial statements as it is, they probably wouldn’t believe any published ownership listing either.

[SK in CV]

[quote=pri_dk][quote=SK in CV]While the specific ownership isn’t public record[/quote]

Why is this kept secret?

I’m not losing any sleep over this, but it is kinda curious.[/quote]

That is a good question. I don’t really know the answer. I suspect it’s because there aren’t any regulations that make it mandatory. Solely in order to quell the paranoia of conspiracy theorists, it might not be a bad idea to create those regulations. On the other hand, since the paranoid conspiracy theorists don’t believe audited financial statements as it is, they probably wouldn’t believe any published ownership listing either.

[SK in CV]

[quote=pri_dk][quote=SK in CV]While the specific ownership isn’t public record[/quote]

Why is this kept secret?

I’m not losing any sleep over this, but it is kinda curious.[/quote]

That is a good question. I don’t really know the answer. I suspect it’s because there aren’t any regulations that make it mandatory. Solely in order to quell the paranoia of conspiracy theorists, it might not be a bad idea to create those regulations. On the other hand, since the paranoid conspiracy theorists don’t believe audited financial statements as it is, they probably wouldn’t believe any published ownership listing either.

[SK in CV]

[quote=investor]Cute. Answer me this, why has the organization that controls the money in the US never been audited to see who owns what and who is making money off of the selling of our money? [/quote]

It HAS been audited. In fact, every single year. The profits are divided, with substantially all of the profits going to the federal government, with a relatively small amount going to pay dividends to the shareholder banks at a statutory rate based on their investment. (I believe it’s 4%) While the specific ownership isn’t public record, the no member banks are getting rich with that dividend. There may be information you want. It won’t be revealed in any kind of audit. It isn’t in the flow of specific dollars, or in any Fed transactions. It’s in the policy.

(And I haven’t read griffen’s book. But if you have accurately portrayed his arguments, he’s a moron. Most of these claims are just too easily debunked.)

[Author]

Posts