It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Do Not Watch This Video...

page: 7
11
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 10:11 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


See, more ad hominem attacks by someone who can't back up their own absurd arguments.

Don't be mad, not everyone can make up a good conspiracy theory that stands up to the light of truth.


[edit on 14-12-2007 by LightinDarkness]




posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by LightinDarkness
 



Most serious offense Percent of sentenced
State inmates
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1995 2004

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total 100 % 100 %
Violent 47 52
Property 23 21
Drug 22 20
Public-order 9 7


As you can see here by the statisitcs provided by the US Department of Justice, only about half of state-prison inmates are violent offenders.

Property and drug offenses are reflective of their economic situation. Furthermore, I have a sneaky feeling that a considerable portion of violent offenders are in prison for socio-economic reasons as well. Say maybe murdering the drug dealer who tried to move into their territory, or shooting the clerk at the quicky-mart during a holdup, or even raping a doctor's pretty wife during a home-invasion.



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by LightinDarkness

No matter how you spin it, in general people make money beyond the cost of living. They get in debt generally because they buy things they cant afford. There are exceptions (acts of god, medical crises), but that is the rule.


There you go again
People are in debt and poor because they buy things they can't afford. Has nothing to do with the fact that the economy is inherently trillions of dollars in debt? Has nothing to do with the fact that each citizen is 30,000+ dollars in the hole along with their government?

Nah, it's because they buy stuff they can't afford.



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by LightinDarkness

See, more ad hominem attacks by someone who can't back up their own absurd arguments.

Don't be mad, not everyone can make up a good conspiracy theory that stands up to the light of truth.



This has become less a debate and more a display of bad-will towards the topic in general. You think the idea of a lopsided and faulty economy driven by debt is a conspiracy theory. We get it. No need to point fingers and laugh. It's also rude to continually say 'oh don't be mad just because you're wrong. 'you're foaming at the mouth because i am refuting your evidence' etc.

This is just a wee bit childish don't you think? I think you have both made your case.

By the way : there have been no ad hom 'attacks' made in this thread and I can be a witness to that. Plenty of jabs though. It seems a bit desperate to claim that he is attacking you by debating or even laughing at you... but I see people throw that accusation around ALOT on these forums.


[edit on 14-12-2007 by NewWorldOver]



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by NewWorldOverThere you go again
People are in debt and poor because they buy things they can't afford. Has nothing to do with the fact that the economy is inherently trillions of dollars in debt? Has nothing to do with the fact that each citizen is 30,000+ dollars in the hole along with their government?

Nah, it's because they buy stuff they can't afford.


There you go again
not reading. I said there are exceptions. Beyond that, yes, people are in debt because they buy stuff they cant afford. Has nothing to do with the NATIONAL DEBT? Yes, because that is the government's spending, not the individual's. Nice try. Do you receive a bill for the $30,000 of national debt that we have per capita? I know I don't. No creditors coming after me for that one. Its the government's debt, not yours.

But nah, they are poor because of some governmental conspiracy, never because of their own actions


I am not going to quote the endless ad hominem attacks. If you don't see it, I cannot help you. It is indeed a wee bit childish of you and and the tinfoil hat group to tell me that every point of fact I present must be MADE UP by the government, and obviously I must be rich because I take personal responsibility for my actions.

[edit on 14-12-2007 by LightinDarkness]



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 10:46 PM
link   
Central Banking is the wave of the future!

Check out the video posted on another thread.

Short and interesting.



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox
Violent 47 52
Property 23 21
Drug 22 20
Public-order 9 7


I appreciate you proving my point with your numbers. Do you notice NON-VIOLENT CRIME HAS GONE DOWN! OH NO! But I thought everyone was living in poverty and having to steal thanks to the government conspiracy?


You should know that just because you declare people commit crime due to their economic situation does not make it so. You have made the assertion, and I have again and again asked you to present facts showing this. You have not done so, and until you do I must yet again remind you that people commit crimes for all sorts of reasons, and there is no evidence to suggest they do it just because they are poor.

I am ready to let this die whenever you are. Or, you can keep espousing your theories, and I'll keep demanding proof and citing statistics to the contrary. Except in posts like this, where your data actually shows your conclusions to be wrong - in which case, I have no work to do.



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 10:52 PM
link   
If people weren't out buying all sort of things they didn't need, our economy would collapse. That is why our esteemed President told us the best thing we could do to fight the terrorists was to "go shopping." I don't know about you, but I think I'm gonna go do my patriotic duty with someone else's credit card!



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 10:58 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


You are correct, if people don't buy things they don't need, then our economy would not do very well. However, there is a difference between buying things you don't need when you can afford it and doing it when you have to get yourself in debt to buy. In the later situation it hurts the economy, since you create a liability through your outstanding loans, which are written off as a loss if you don't pay it back.



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 11:00 PM
link   
reply to post by LightinDarkness
 



Actually I am glad to see you prove your own ignorance yet again, and I am waiting for you do disprove any of the data I have provided.

Those numbers do not show that non-violent crime has gone down, only that criminals have become more violent.

No evidence to suggest that people commit crime because they are poor? Tell that to the banger who jacks your tore-up whip ta git to dat Fiddy show.



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 11:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox
Actually I am glad to see you prove your own ignorance yet again, and I am waiting for you do disprove any of the data I have provided.

Those numbers do not show that non-violent crime has gone down, only that criminals have become more violent.

No evidence to suggest that people commit crime because they are poor? Tell that to the banger who jacks your tore-up whip ta git to dat Fiddy show.


See, more spin with no evidence.

How exactly is it when you have a number - and then another number in a few years, and THE SECOND NUMBER IS SMALLER THAN THE FIRST - THAT IT HAS NOT DECREASED? Are you REDEFINING REALITY? Amazing. Absolutely amazing.

We still await your evidence that people commit crimes because they are poor. Just because you don't have morals doesn't mean other people don't. I'm poor, and I'm not committing any crimes. I must deduct another ten points from your score for this continued used of the sweeping generalization logical fallacy.



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by LightinDarkness
 




Just because you don't have morals doesn't mean other people don't.


Oh, more personal attacks. Thanks for proving you really have nothing valid to say. In fact, why are you still here?



How exactly is it when you have a number - and then another number in a few years, and THE SECOND NUMBER IS SMALLER THAN THE FIRST - THAT IT HAS NOT DECREASED? Are you REDEFINING REALITY? Amazing. Absolutely amazing.


Oh my bad, you're right. There were 22 people sent to prison for drugs in 1994, but in 2004 only twenty people went to prison for drugs. I wonder if any of them had a PhD?



posted on Dec, 15 2007 @ 12:37 AM
link   
Probably a function of my age, but I no longer have the competitive drive & focus required to engage in mega-post Internet debates...purged of the overpowering need to be right, am I. Besides, almost every spirited attempt I've witnessed on "the forums", to convert "the other" to one's own POV...has ultimately deteriorated into volleys of personal insult..and resulted in utter stalemate for the respective combatants. The only winners are the onlookers...receiving an abundance of new grist-for-the-mill...thanks for that


In this spirit....

At your leisure gentle-folks, please research the conflict-of-interest, and the established relationships between The War on Drugs >>> Mandatory Sentencing >>> The Privatization of the American Prison System >>> Wall St. profits.

"Prison stocks also are valued on a “per bed” basis — which is based on the number of beds provided and the profit per bed. “Per bed” is really a euphemism for people who are sentenced to be housed in their prison....

This means that we have created a significant number of private interests — investment firms, banks, attorneys, auditors, architects, construction firms, real estate developers, bankers, academics, investors among them— who have a vested interest in increasing the prison population and keeping people behind bars as long as possible.
"


With respect to what the future may hold for Gold and the Dollar...please consider the establishment of a modified Federal Reserve Gold Certificate as a possible rescue for Uncle Buck.

Cornell Corrections

More on the Federal Reserve Gold Certificate total Value Ratio



posted on Dec, 15 2007 @ 12:46 AM
link   
reply to post by OBE1
 



Thanks for watching! I was hoping this wouldn't turn out to be all for nothing.





posted on Dec, 15 2007 @ 01:56 AM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


More personal insults and no substance. Perhaps the concept of percent and the difference of means statistical tests is beyond your comprehension, but that still doesn't change reality. We *STILL* await your evidence that somehow everyone commits non-violent crime because they are poor.

I have a feeling well be waiting for a while. Perhaps someone should bring popcorn? The show is getting boring, but that doesn't mean the amusement has stopped!



posted on Dec, 15 2007 @ 01:59 AM
link   
reply to post by OBE1
 


I'm glad to see someone is watching, lets me know exposing all the propaganda isn't all for nothing.

You have a good point - the privization of prisons has been a big problem. Part of my research in economic development has focused on local government prison citings. Local governments **LOVE** getting prisons in their area because they perceive economic benefits from it, although so far all attempts to quantify or measure such benefit has shown the benefit is immaterial.

There is, however, quite a industry for privatizing prisons. Quite a few horror stories of how it's backfired, too...



posted on Dec, 15 2007 @ 03:58 AM
link   
I didn't have to see the video and the Economics Elf who Graduated from The David Stockman School of Voodoo Economics has posted more of the same repugnant cries for proof when everyone of these posts would be considered as Testimony which IS part of the discovery process and considered as evidence.

You think our monetary system and those controlling it are immune to greed, that insider trading is something only Gordon Gecko did in a fictional story about greed and by your own sig indicates that even if someone were to CALL IT THAT, you would summarily add insult invalidating it as "someones need to express evil"

I suppose you have never heard about taxation and the draconian methods used by our Government to extort money out of us to pay for overspending. You never heard about those retired on minimum wage. Many are the victims of the Enron's or shattered life's savings and pensions GONE POOF! In the meantime they are swindled in legalese or contracts that have pages and pages of legal doublespeak you would need a degree in contract law to understand. They are created for such things as Life Insurance where they have you making over payments on cheap term with with an annuity rider that earns you "Cash Value"! They even charge you interest to borrow your OWN MONEY!

Then when the creator of the policy dies you get the paltry death benefit or your cash value but not both.

You read the prospectus and it says pays dividends (another word for overpayment or the part they took and give back whenever they feel generous. They sell the "projected interest rate you will earn but sadly you find out that they are only obligated to pay you less then a passbook savings account.

What is your answer??
arrogance with words to the effect "they should have read the fine print" "they are stupid" or they should not buy things they cannot afford.

Your every man for himself answer to that and just about everything else you have said about minimum wage and that garbage about a middle class being a rumor having or an illusion when empires have fallen as this one will using the most historically proven indicator in history.

The ever increasing gap between Rich and Poor and the final elimination of the middle class.

We have a telecommunications infrastructure in bed with the FCC that we have paid over 200 billion in new taxes as surcharges our Government allowed them to steal in the promise by 1996 we would have affordable broadband using fiber optic for everyone and they renegged. I had even posted a page from Lee Iaccoca's book the same sentiments he has and warren buffet about the vulgar acts of the Fed and Bias tax laws favoring the rich. You know the rule of 72?

Do you remember the Boston Tea Party?

Well that is when the rule of 72 applies to those who think money is an expendable commodity and while your uppity attitude growing up in Ozzie and Harriet land may have kept you out of touch with us "stupid folk" it sure hasn't taught you a thing about the quality of humility.

You took that lesson and pushed it right over the cliff into humorous humiliation. People don't buy things like some bubblegum chewing finger filing bimbosapienne on a binge shopping spree . They are barely getting buy and while Gas Prices climb to record levels I have seen many making just enough after FICA, Taxes, Association fees that have jumped a hundred bucks, a kids toothache later,,

THEY ARE BROKE!

FLAT BROKE!

People today can't even afford to change jobs because they can't stay afloat while waiting that extra week to two weeks to get first check.

You talks as if the run on the banks before the depression as a cyclical anomaly not caused in purpose but rather just "happened" and Banks were just cogs in the system. That the FDIC is going to protect us from that eventuality ever happening again.

The quote of Rockefeller is either proof that convesation happened or didn't but in the event it did and in the context it said,, what MORE PROOF ?



[edit on 15-12-2007 by Conspiriology]



posted on Dec, 15 2007 @ 04:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by OBE1
Probably a function of my age, but I no longer have the competitive drive & focus required to engage in mega-post Internet debates...purged of the overpowering need to be right, am I. Besides, almost every spirited attempt I've witnessed on "the forums", to convert "the other" to one's own POV...has ultimately deteriorated into volleys of personal insult..and resulted in utter stalemate for the respective combatants. The only winners are the onlookers...receiving an abundance of new grist-for-the-mill...thanks for that





Thanks that post speaks volumes and Ill go to school on you this time. Besides I have seen his "form letter ala randi" response to the rest and frankly it bored me to tears. Besides that, my mill was foreclosed on and for some reason only the rich like trump get bailed out of such things while my own state has us paying taxes to buy a new stadium for all those prima donna sports guys. it's called "Bank One Ball Park"

It ought to be called Tax payers Ball park. This tax was done without representation by "City Supervisors" no less

sheesh



posted on Dec, 15 2007 @ 06:24 AM
link   
I get a bill from the government every two weeks. It shows up right there under the title of FED. TAXES. If I don't pay that bill according to what has been sent forth then out come the "creditors" with their calls. If that dosen't work, out come the IRS henchmen with an arrest warrant.

I watch the whole video. I really didn't want to but for some reason I was compelled to finish it. I am in no way an economist, or anything to the likes, but to me the video had the ring of truth.

As for the prison population issue... I work in law enforcement. Everyday I deal with crime and I hate to say Light but the VAST majority of them come from way below the middle class. In my 5 years in the field I have seen one, that's right, ONE person who could be considered "rich" go to jail. Make of it what you will but that IS the truth.



posted on Dec, 15 2007 @ 11:44 AM
link   
You know light,, I've just about had it with your unwillingness to recognize PROOF PRIMA FACIE while bullbaiting the threads creator as if he was Bob Kratchet insulting him for not being able to afford a Christmas turkey because he had to opt for a prosthesis for his kids leg

Meanwhile, you are missing the point as well as the proof while you are busy reaching up your colon for your next quasi beechnut and gravy cookie cutter cut down. You get it all wrapped up in terminally self righteous pseudo-intellectual Snobbery and assume you defeated yet another social infection or "CT".

It is ironic you would pull out the "Ad Hom" like most "wannabe randi complex" forum warriors do while you think your sugarcoated smack talk doesn't warrant a reprisal let alone all the necessary error corrections.

I can't tell how high fiving yourself in the most pathetic attempt at enhancing your ego by belittling others makes you feel less anxiety,, while your need to be "right" is in jeopardy.

I can tell you what it looks like,, got a mirror?

fortunately living in a bubble has spared you from seeing your posts as self deprecating humor because when it comes to the short bus comedy of errors,, WE are the audience and YOU are looking like the butt end of a sick joke.

Nevertheless we appreciate the comical relief you so desperately provide for us.

finding statistics you could have just googled yourself as you "Dared" Jackinthebox to substantiate his "allegations" while giving us a lesson in legalese of the burden of proof. I thought to myself,, wow this guy actually has no clue about an issue so commonly argued with so much case law established, I really don't know why Jack hasn't seen through your use of these forums as a catharsis for your ailing self esteem.

How anyone seeing himself so bothered by the two words "Conspiracy" and "Theory", not know they have a particular problem accepting data from same that would allow even you,, to save face and change your position? Hey,, don't knock it,, at least you would have a legitimate reason to be so smug.

While you spew your mundane platitudes about the minimum wage with your candy land vision of philanthropic employers so generous to pay more,, if only that standard of "the least someone could do" was not in the way.

It has never crossed your mind that most of the employers know they can outlast hunger and that comes fast with a job seeker playing a losing game of hardball. I guess where you come from, they have never heard of sweatshops or labor unions but we have and we understand that generosity is relative to greed winning out by things YOU say we don't need. I guess where you come from it is opposite and investigative journalists like Barbara Ehrenreich who spent years researching and proving just what Jackinthebox has tried to teach you but alas it would seem you use a stethoscope to hear the beat of a jack hammer hitting asphalt.

"Taking a tactic of your own condescending forum post style book, Ill offer the link but the truth will still not sink in and you will still NOT GET IT.


In 2001, she released perhaps her most influential book, NICKEL AND DIMED: ON (NOT) GETTING BY IN AMERICA, which chronicles the year she spent working low-income jobs and living in low-income housing. She writes:

"We would stop at a convenient store for quote 'lunch' and people just didn't have money in their pockets. By money, I mean, two bucks. That's when I realized that people...were not eating because they couldn't afford to. And I asked this one girl...'How do you get through a whole day without eating?' And she said, 'Oh, I get faint by the end of it, I feel dizzy.' So, that's no good."
Ms. Ehrenreich has since released many additional books including BAIT AND SWITCH: THE (FUTILE) PURSUIT OF THE AMERICAN DREAM, based upon her undercover work as a white-collar job seeker,"
www.pbs.org...





CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, July 30, 2007
"The US probably will continue to have a much higher proportion of its people ranked as poor than almost all other rich industrial nations. At the turn of this century, it ranked 24th among 25 countries in the proportion of its population having incomes below half of the median income - the level where half of the people have a bigger income, and half have a smaller income."
www.pbs.org...


Ive owned three business having as many as 36 employees whenever Minimum wage came up I can tell you that it wasn't because I would have paid more I wanted it to stay where it was,, It was because I didn't want to pay more then most I was obligated to pay.

That's the nature of any business owner and had there not been a mandate to pay that,, I can assure you on behalf of management,, they would have gotten less and I would have never known the hardship.

I saw the light because the truth was more imporant to me then being right and none of your randiesque ad - hom vernacular is shine brighter then the facts.

Ya know it isn't bad enough people like yourself see nothing wrong with the issues posted here and in that video that YOU call a theory while we call it being forced to settle for the crumbs of life then have you invalidate us as "stupid people" buying things they can't afford as if food were a luxury of indulgence.

Shame on you Dimlight for if their is anyone that sees the light,,

it sure isn't you, not when you need to light a candle,,

to see the sun.



With all due respect - Con



[edit on 15-12-2007 by Conspiriology]

[edit on 15-12-2007 by Conspiriology]



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join