Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
Marijuana Kills
- Thread starter Lestat
- Start date
meaning the weed? You know depending on the blend of sativa and indica it will be more of an up or more of a down sleepy high. I forget which does what.jnevin said:
The strain I get now is the "up" kind, its great before a long run or game of volleyball, gets my energy going.
chris302001
Banned
Well smoking weed may stabilize mast cells or reduce histamine, but it's going to cause inflamation on its own. So your going to help things, but cause a little damage in the process. choose your poison.
Alcohol in a CNS depressant though, has a much different action on the CNS (more direct, more profound) than THC and its variants.jnevin said:
I'm not a fan of booze myself, I'll indulge from time to time, but i usually end up regretting it as it really makes me feel like shit the next day sometimes even the same night.
mrplunkey
New member
Lestat said:
Would forcing someone to work for someone else first before they can enjoy the benefits of their own labor qualify as "negatively affect others"? It boggles my mind that someone would support confiscating a major portion of someone else's income for the greater good but be unwilling to drop something as trivial as a recreational drug habit for that same greater good.
Pot disproportionately targets the downtrodden -- people who need every advantage they can muster to compensate for their initial disadvantage. Think about the sheer number of high school and college educations destroyed by pot. Instead of shoveling welfare and medical benefits into government-subsidized housing areas we should be shoveling the pot out of it. Although our "great society" hand-out initiatives chauffeured many of those people into a poverty-sticken multi-generational existence, drugs were probably the fuel that ran the limousine that drove them there.
And still yet, pot can't be dumped for the greater good. Rich suburb kids gotta have their herb! Guess the stress over whether mom and dad are going to get you a BMW or a Range Rover for graduation is just too much without a little weed to calm your nerves.
enigma4dub
Active member
mrplunkey said:W
And still yet, pot can't be dumped for the greater good. Rich suburb kids gotta have their herb! Guess the stress over whether mom and dad are going to get you a BMW or a Range Rover for graduation is just too much without a little weed to calm your nerves.
sorry man the car was a difficult choice. had to get my head straightened out first... went with the rover.
I see taxes as helping the greater good. Funnelling money into education and even the arts. It raises the overall level of society right? I think you and I would probably agree that living in a country where all the wealth was consolidated in the hands of a select few would suck. They have a few countries like that in Africa.mrplunkey said:Would forcing someone to work for someone else first before they can enjoy the benefits of their own labor qualify as "negatively affect others"? It boggles my mind that someone would support confiscating a major portion of someone else's income for the greater good but be unwilling to drop something as trivial as a recreational drug habit for that same greater good.
Pot disproportionately targets the downtrodden -- people who need every advantage they can muster to compensate for their initial disadvantage. Think about the sheer number of high school and college educations destroyed by pot. Instead of shoveling welfare and medical benefits into government-subsidized housing areas we should be shoveling the pot out of it. Although our "great society" hand-out initiatives chauffeured many of those people into a poverty-sticken multi-generational existence, drugs were probably the fuel that ran the limousine that drove them there.
And still yet, pot can't be dumped for the greater good. Rich suburb kids gotta have their herb! Guess the stress over whether mom and dad are going to get you a BMW or a Range Rover for graduation is just too much without a little weed to calm your nerves.
mrplunkey
New member
calveless wonder said:
I did in the past, but haven't used one recreationally in a long time. I stopped doing it because (1) My gf hated it and (2) I watched a lot of my friends crash and burn with them.
That's actually a great example. For some reason those things just don't grab me. I can use one and think: "Oh, this is really nice". But if someone wanted to do another the next day, I'd just pass. Even when I took them a few days in a row after surgery, I couldn't wait to get off them. So if I were thinking like some of the pot users on this board, I'd argue that since I enjoy them and don't have a problem with them, why shouldn't they be legalized? I'm sure taking one oxy and drinking a glass of wine can't be as hard on your body as drinking the same amount of booze alone to achieve the same effect -- that would take a ton of alcohol. But once I watched my best friend and several other friends crash hard with them, I realized even if I could use responsibly, I'd be an ongoing source of temptation for them.
mrplunkey
New member
Lestat said:
And they have a few countries where all the wealth is distributed -- like Cuba and China.
Who's going to take the most advantage of education and the arts? Unless its a bowl-packing class or a tie-dye T-shirt contest, its probably not going to be stoners. If we want to raise the overall level of society, let's get initiative and thought-inhibiting drugs like pot out of their way. Sure you can spend more money on education -- or you can clean the drugs out of schools so people who need the education the most can actually receive and retain it.
mrplunkey
New member
Lestat said:
I believe for the vast, vast majority of users, pot diminishes initiative and lessens clarity of thought. Now if by "initiative" you mean playing X-box, eating a whole large pizza and watching "How High" for the 1,383th time, then you might have a point.
Lestat said:
You're not going to make the whole "pot makes me creative" argument are you? I guess those Hollywood script writers really need all that cocaine to create too.
Guess what, a lot of recreational drugs (not just pot) make you think you are more creative or that your mind is working faster -- but they don't. Rest assured that if pot made you more creative or cocaine made you more efficient, big business would have successfully lobbied it into legal status and there would be joint and blow dispensers on the walls of every cubicle.
And then of course there's LSD, which is supposed to expand your mind overall...
And as far as taxes... yeah, you're right we don't treat everyone the same. One person can stay pot (and other drugs) free, go to school, graduate at the top of their class and go earn a great living. And another guy can become a stoner in high school, drop-out, and become a bum so he can be "creative" smoking pot full-time. Sad thing is, the wage earner will be forced to subsidize the pothead. Do they drug test the second guy before the first guy is forced to pay him? Nope. Do they cut the second guy's money off after his second or third drug conviction? Nope. Its just a systematic subsidization of one lifestyle by another lifestyle.
your correlations are still false. I grew up thinking the same thing.mrplunkey said:
- pot makes you a stupid and slow
- stoners are losers
- you'll ruin your life if you do drugs
I can understand preaching this to children to scare them the fuck away, children don't have any business with these things in my opinion.
But the facts are quite contrary to the drug war propaganda. Pot doesn't "make you stupid" this has never been proven, alcohol actually damages the brain in a much more dramatic fashion, to the point where with enough habitual use an abuser of alcohol will be unable to control their motor skills.
So I went off to college, where I was one of very few people who came from a lower middle class background. (Indulge me here, I try to give a lot of personal history just to show you where my particular world view comes from). I met Indian people (from India) for the first time in college, as well as my first non fillipino asians. And let me tell you at my college (consistently ranked in the top 50 overall and top 10 public schools) there were a lot of different ethnicities, but surprisingly not all that many different economic backgrounds. Many people came from priveledge. Many people went to private schools.
So I meet my roommate, he's this jewish dude from LA. His moms a school teacher (and get to meet a lot of celebrity parents that way) his dad is a lawyer who has his own firm. Multimillionaires basically. And yes, you guessed it, pot users! They didn't tell their son though until he came to them our freshman year and told them he tried pot (in my room). I waited until the 2nd half of the year to do because I still felt like only losers did it. Until I got to college that was pretty much what the evidence I saw told me as well. But in college I all of a sudde met people who where near geniuses who binge drank, did pot, xtast, coke, anything they could get their hands on even! I'm like dude! How do you pass your classes? They would say things "I blazed up before my SATs!" "oh yeah, what did you get?" "1500" I felt lame with my stone sober 1350.
Anyway, the reality of it is, since college, I've never met a loser pot smoker. Why? Because I generally hang out with college educated, gainfully employeed people. I've met doctors, lawyers, and executives that use pot. This really boggled and blew my mind. I also felt (yet again) lied to. If pot really did make you stupid, then why on earth are these intelligent, successful professionals using it. Something didn't add up, and it didn't take very long to figure out why.
I switched my major to bio psychology and spent a year studying the effects of drugs on the brain and people's behavior. I'm talking college courses taught by M.D.s and Ph.D.'s. I also did a semester of study on alcohol and its effects on asians vs whites. People amazing stuff. We did experiments where we gave people different levels of alcohol and ran them through all sorts of tests and monitoring. I can go into that further if you like but the research was very promising, and aimed at eliminating alcohol abuse/alcoholism.
So yes, I can see where you are coming from, because a lot of money has been spent to convince people that pot indeed makes you stupid and unmotivated, but there have been medical studies done that yield results quite to the contrary. one reason that the goverment lists marijuana as schedule 1 is because its very difficult to get funding for schedule 1 substances as they have "no medical benefit." If we ever did start studyin marijuana in great depth with long term studies I think some of the evidence would really blow people away (and embarass a lot of the pioneers of the "war on drugs").
Marijuana had a long time (hundreds of thousands of years ) to destroy human culture and civilizaion, and it didn't. It only became a source of such debate (and demonized so much) in recent years. Again I'll repeat, this was very deliberate propagana, and also, very baseless. The supposed effects of Marijuana on human brains came from a SINGLE study on primates, and there were only 7 of them, and some of them died of unrelated causes before the study was over. They measured the size of the brains before and after the study and since the brains weighed less after the study was over, it was assumed that marijuana causes brain damage. This is 100% false. In humans and primates after a cerain age (for humans its 2 for primates its earlier) the brain does die, and lose size/weight and continues to do so until you die. This isn't evidence of drug abuse, this is evidence of the natural aging process of the brain.
The fact is, there are MANY drugs that are available LEGALLY by prescription that have much great effects on the brain, specifically keenes of the senses and motivation. Have you heard of benzodiazapenes? They cause people to effectively "care less" about things in the users world/mind. Also classes of drugs reduce people's ability to feel certain ranges of emotion. Of course this is supposed to be a good thing for the people they are prescribed for, but blood letting was also considered good for people when administered by a Dr. because some people reported that they felt better afterwards.
if you want to talk LSD, that's a whole different discussion, it works on the brain in a completely different way than THC/marijuana. I've never done it and don't plan on it, although I have done mushrooms and really didn't think they were much of a big deal.
Ironically in my own life, my salary is strong correlated with my marijuana use. Also my bench press for a long time was correlated with it too. So for me, and granted I'm just one person and can't speak for everyone, I can note great effects that I partly attribute to marijuana. It is great when you have no appetite and are trying to bulk. Its great when you have a high stress job or class and need some down time to relax and/or sleep. Its good for some people who have anxiety. My Ashtma syptoms are far better since I became a regular marijuana user. The list goes on and on.
When i first started smoking weed in college I was real nervous that it changed me, changed my brain. I'd ask friends if they noticed anything different. I'd take IQ tests and what not to see if my mental acuity had changed. If anything I'm smarter now than I was when I first started smoking, mostly because I know a hell of a lot more about myself and the rest of the world.
I guess that you could make the argument that had I never touched a joint I'd be even MORE successful, but that is pure speculation and could be said about almost anything. I can also say that maybe I wouldn't have gotten to where I am today without it.
mrplunkey
New member
Lestat said:
I'm somewhat familiar with neuroscience myself. I recieved my Ph.D. from Vanderbilt in Electrical Engineering in 1992 -- but my disertation was in neuroscience (cortical spike sequencing, to be more specific). So yeah, I've had (and taught) those same neuroscience classes too.
There are plenty of studies out there that document decreased blood flow and functional impairment with marijuana use. Your google is as good as mine. And before you post an article saying pot helps something, please filter out "High Times" and "Cannabus News" as credible sources. Probably the only credible good news is its use in the treatment of fringe diseases and/or the fact that it doesn't appear to do permanent damage (except to grade point averages and careers).
And we've all known a bright (or brilliant) person who smoked pot and still did well. And we all know a guy who ate horribly and stayed thin. And we all know a guy who smoked cigarettes all his life and lived to 95 too. Anecdotal stories are data points -- and a data point does not a scientific study make.
Let's work with the ridiculous premise that pot doesn't impair and demotivate everyone. Let's even say it doesn't impact 1 in 5 people. So you're willing to throw the other 80% of the masses in the dumpster for your own enjoyment of a frivolous recreational drug? That doesn't sound very "greater good" to me. Maybe those poor downtrodden people in the projects need fewer tax dollars and more drug enforcement...
enigma4dub
Active member
what about the cannabinoid receptors that all humans have?
mrplunkey said:
Wait, we're actually arguing this? I thought the purpose of ingesting recreational drugs was for intoxication?
(Entymology intoxication, root toxic, cf. poison, etc etc)
... and anyone else find it really obvious who uses weed in this thread? It's kinda humerous...
mrplunkey
New member
samoth said:Wait, we're actually arguing this? I thought the purpose of ingesting recreational drugs was for intoxication?
(Entymology intoxication, root toxic, cf. poison, etc etc)
... and anyone else find it really obvious who uses weed in this thread? It's kinda humerous...
I'm enjoying the part where the "for the greater good" crowd can't dump a recreational habit that helps keep millions of people imprisoned in poverty and crime.
enigma4dub
Active member
mrplunkey said:
i just cant see where you are coming from.. in my world alcohol is so much worse.
mrplunkey
New member
enigma4dub said:
I've never said alcohol isn't bad. I've never even said pot should or shouldn't be illegal. I have, however, said that anyone concerned with the downtrodden or proselytizing the virtues of helping the greater good could probably best start by not funding and fueling a drug that plays a major role in making them downtrodden in the first place.
mrplunkey
New member
Lestat said:
Then you're ignoring more evidence than Pat Roberson does to form his beliefs on creationism.
You yourself have cited education as a key factor to success. If I plat search long enough, I think I can even find where you feel higher education should be a right (please correct me if I'm wrong on that point).
Given that, here's what NIH says about Marijuana and school:
-----------------------------
Adolescent Marijuana Use and School Attendance.
Roebuck MC, French M, Dennis ML; AcademyHealth. Meeting (2003 : Nashville, Tenn.).
Abstr AcademyHealth Meet. 2003; 20: abstract no. 87.
AdvancePCS, Metrics & Analytics, 11350 McCormick Road, Exec. Plaza II 9th Floor, Hunt Valley, MD 21031 Tel. (41) 229-8382 Fax (410) 785-8140
RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: Several economic studies have linked educational attainment with drug use (Cook & Moore, 1993; Yamada, Kendrix, & Yamada, 1996; Dee & Evans, 1997; Bray, Zarkin, Ringwalt, & Qi, 2000). None, however, has looked at partial attendance or examined different frequencies of drug use in these equations. This paper explores the relationships between adolescent marijuana use and both school dropout and truancy. STUDY DESIGN: The analysis predicted adolescent school dropout and, conditional on being enrolled, estimated the number of days truant in the past 30 days. Dropout and truancy were estimated using four models. Along with individual and family characteristics, Model 1, the core model, included a single binary measure of any marijuana use during the past year. Model 2 segmented marijuana users into two discrete groups: chronic marijuana users with weekly or more frequent use during the past year, and non-chronic marijuana users with less than weekly use during the past year. Model 3 controlled for other drug use by adding a dichotomous measure of any drug use other than marijuana during the past year to Model 2. Finally, Model 4 augmented Model 3 with a measure of any alcohol use in the past month. The potential endogeneity of marijuana use was tested in all specifications. POPULATION STUDIED: Data pooled from the 1997 and 1998 National Household Surveys on Drug Abuse were used to form a sample of 15,168 adolescents aged 12-18 who had not completed high school. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The results indicate that any marijuana use was positively associated with school dropout and truancy in all models. However, when chronic marijuana use (weekly or more frequent) was distinguished from non-chronic marijuana use (less frequent than weekly), chronic marijuana use was found to be the dominant factor in these relationships. These results prevailed even after controlling for other drug and alcohol use. CONCLUSIONS: A general conclusion from this research is that all marijuana users are more likely to be school dropouts and, conditional on being enrolled in school, skip more school days relative to non-marijuana users. Weekly or more frequent marijuana use (chronic) had a larger positive marginal effect on school attendance than less than weekly marijuana use (non-chronic). Indeed, when non-chronic marijuana users were distinguished from chronic marijuana users in the dropout equation, the marginal effect of chronic marijuana use was more than four times the marginal effect of non-chronic marijuana use. IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY, DELIVERY OR PRACTICE: This study has several important implications for educators, substance abuse treatment providers, and policymakers. First, all levels of marijuana use were associated with increased truancy and dropout. The fact that higher frequencies of use showed larger marginal effects than lower frequencies of use further strengthens the claim that adolescent marijuana use is associated with increases in school attendance problems. Second, these analyses suggest that "one size fits all" prevention programs are probably inappropriate. While general prevention programs may be sufficient for non- or even low-frequency users, high frequency users may require more intensive early intervention or even brief treatments. Furthermore, reaching these more chronic users via school-based programs may be problematic given these adolescents attend school much less than their peers.
-------------------------
Cliffs notes: The more you smoke, the greater your chances of attendance problems and/or dropping out of school.
How can a drug that denies someone of their basic rights (your right to an education) also add to their ability to enjoy their own existence?
stosstruppe
Well-known member
enigma4dub said:
Ya, but alcohol props up entire countries, like Scotland!
enigma4dub
Active member
mrplunkey said:
lol @ subsidizing my lifestyle!
enigma4dub
Active member
redguru said:
lol @ quarter, lol @ buying from someone.
enigma4dub
Active member
mrplunkey said:
i understand that we aren't all the same and thats my point. it seems as if you have generalized everyone smoking trees as the same. now that same government housing reefer addict you referred to has probably got a 40 bottle stuck to his lip too. and i dont see you clamoring on about abolishing alcohol. just like so many conservatives talking about puling yourself up by your bootstraps financially the same should be said about ones ability to say no to reefer or anything else.
enigma4dub
Active member
redguru said:
agreed.
edit: that was reply to the one above yours.
mrplunkey
New member
enigma4dub said:
I don't think someone in gubment housing should be boozing it up either. But I'm convinced (and the NIH is too) that pot is a dominant factor in missing educational opportunities -- and that has a direct impact on someone's economic viability. Which brings me back to my point. If its so important that we shovel money to the "downtrodden" in the form of MedicAid, food stamps, welfare, subsidized housing, etc. etc. then it should be equally important that we shovel the pot and other drugs away from them as well.
And for the record, I'm pretty much a libertarian. It wouldn't bother me for pot to be 100% legal, as long as there was an iron-clad guarantee that no taxpayer or employer ever had to pay for a pot smoker's decisions. Its ludicrous that we don't already 100% drug test for eligibility for any form of government assistance already.
I have never, and do not ever see myself encouraging the use of marijuana in adolescents.mrplunkey said:
I am sure there are many other legal acitivites and substances that are not good for children.
I find a tough time drawing my own lines with what is good for the group vs good for the individuals.
I think people should be able to endanger themselves and take personal risk as much as they want so long as it doesn't affect others. This is so tough though I admit because things can indirectly impact others in ways that are tough to quantify.
mrplunkey
New member
Lestat said:
But forcing one person to financially support another does directly impact them. We live in an age where people love conferring these new "rights" on people -- healthcare, housing, income, education and food. But these new rights come at the expense of society's wage earners.
And here we have an illegal drug that has been shown to have a dominant (NIH's words, not mine) impact on a person's economic viability. It just seems incredibly hypocritical to me for anyone to be showering these new "rights" on the downtrodden while turning a blind eye (or even supporting the trade by using it yourself) to pot usage.
MrPlunkey,
Your concern about "your tax dollars" supporting the poor is invalid.
There's no such thing as "your tax dollars" or even "your dollars". Every single dollar is the property of the Federal Reserve. That's why every piece of currency is labeled as a Federal Reserve Note. They never belong to you. Ever.
The taxes you pay are actually 'interest' you're being charged for using that currency. It's the 'rent' on those notes.
Furtermore, the percentage of tax revenue spent on welfare to the poor is nothing compared to the amounts given to corporations as 'bailouts' etc.
The fact of the matter is that very wealthy people are receiving more of 'your hard earned tax dollars' than the poor.
Besides, how much do you pay in tax every year? Most likely it's somewhere between $10-25k Your contribution to the poor you despise is probably a mere $300 per annum. Geez. What a terrible burden.
The fact of the matter is that most of your tax burden goes to support the government itself, the largest percentage being military spending if I am not mistaken.
Oh, and the poor you think aren't worth $300 a year? They're the ones providing the manpower for the military. Without them, you'd likely be drafted into service.
So your $300 keeps you out of Iraq and Afghanistan.
Your concern about "your tax dollars" supporting the poor is invalid.
There's no such thing as "your tax dollars" or even "your dollars". Every single dollar is the property of the Federal Reserve. That's why every piece of currency is labeled as a Federal Reserve Note. They never belong to you. Ever.
The taxes you pay are actually 'interest' you're being charged for using that currency. It's the 'rent' on those notes.
Furtermore, the percentage of tax revenue spent on welfare to the poor is nothing compared to the amounts given to corporations as 'bailouts' etc.
The fact of the matter is that very wealthy people are receiving more of 'your hard earned tax dollars' than the poor.
Besides, how much do you pay in tax every year? Most likely it's somewhere between $10-25k Your contribution to the poor you despise is probably a mere $300 per annum. Geez. What a terrible burden.
The fact of the matter is that most of your tax burden goes to support the government itself, the largest percentage being military spending if I am not mistaken.
Oh, and the poor you think aren't worth $300 a year? They're the ones providing the manpower for the military. Without them, you'd likely be drafted into service.
So your $300 keeps you out of Iraq and Afghanistan.
Holy shit I want whatever youre smoking dude. From the looks of this post its easily the best stuff on earth.
solarclimax
New member
You've made a number of moronic posts in this thread but so far this 1 stands out the most. The point of saying that police carry out invalid warrants means that they will search you whenever they like. If people could simply "get it tossed out" Then they wouldn't bother carrying out invalid warrants. It's extremely difficult, sometimes impossible in MOST cases to prove that a warrant was not valid.
Your quite happy to be part of a society that gives rise to perfect conditions for people to turn out the way they do. Good people that make dumb choices. But then when they get caught you use it as a chance to try and make up for your ego by saying that they deserve everything they get. You're a clueless moron, along with a few of the other dummies posting in this thread. Don't care if it's an old post.
solarclimax
New member
Having a smoke with this guy would be a very good thing to be honest, because he speaks the truth. I would be willing to briefly take up smoking just to have a hit of the same stuff.
solarclimax
New member
Yea because it's always such a shame when the great people of your great country have to defer their spending from the cancer research and scientific advance... I mean selfish meaningless possessions and their selfish lives etc in order to foot the bill for the bankers and federal debts brought on by corrupt... I mean all those evil people smoking that evil weed and stuff.
Clown
And before your 2 brain cells try start a fight with each other about the obvious fact that i smoke weed. I would just like to say that not only do i not smoke weed, but i don't drink or take any drugs. All i take is good food and good supplements. Insert nonsense posts below please.
please tell me youre not talking about his post i directly quoted bor. Theres so much moonbat mentality its not even funny.
solarclimax
New member
Of course the main point is that children should not be smoking marijuana.
But that article was complete nonsense. Lets say i made up a religion, which required every school kid to pray 3 times a day, doesn't matter if they have school or not pray is more important(gotta please god or he'll bitch slap you). But also it's common practice and socially cool to smoke this new non harmful drug that i just invented, lets say i call it TWEED. I could do a school study on "TWEED" and by the same logic used in those findings you posted, conclude that there's a very strong correlation between smoking "TWEED" and kids dropping out of school 3 times a day.
What I'm getting at is that it's not the weed that caused them kids to drop out of school it's the "Social circle" that they where involved in just happened to be a group that smoked weed. It's not the weed that's the problem but the "I'm so cool I'm gonna stay home and get fucked up instead" mentality that caused them to not go to school. You could replace the weed part of that equation with lots of other things and still get very similar findings.
Weed does appear to have that calming I'll do it later effect on some people, but i also know people who claim to get an energized feeling from weed, if you sit on your fat ass all day and eat McDonalds your gonna get that can't be assed feeling, but we don't go blaming McDonalds we tell those fat asses to loose weight instead. Should be the same for weed. I personally think all drugs are a bad thing, lots of the ones i think are bad are perfectly legal, i think in the scheme of what is bad, weed is at the bottom of the list. You need to control kids compulsions to want to get fucked up not just be a lazy ass and blame it on weed. If it wasn't weed it would be something else.
I know of people what go out to work everyday who smoke weed and there's no way you would be able to look at them and say that they smoke weed. It has zero detrimental carry over to their everyday life I have studied articles on weed, and the best evidence against it is that it may (MAY) being the word to focus on, cause psychosis and short term memory loss. The psychosis claims are brought on by the paranoia associated with the "I'm doing a bad thing" worries that some weed heads have and not because they smoked a chemical. And the short term memory loss's effects appeared to completely diminish within 1 months abstinence from smoking even in long term users.
It's a proven fact that caffeine is worse for your health than weed is.
Legalize it, and then help people cut down on it's use. Don't be a sad fuck and throw people in jail. These are other human beings that your putting in a cage. How would you like to be put in a cage. Save the cages for real bad people that belong their.
solarclimax
New member
Feel free to post up facts that refute the guys claims.
What the fuck is this shit?
cryptosporidium
New member
i smoke tweed like er'day
Facts? How about a little common sense. By the way the onus is on him to prove his assertions are in fact true, since hes the one first making the claims.
What he is suggesting is that the money we all earn is not ours and in fact belongs to the government, which is of course false. The fact that our currency comes from the Federal Reserve means it simply originated from the Federal Reserve and is bonafide United States Currency and is "legal tender for all debts public, and private". It does not infer that the government owns the currency and can "take it back" whenever it wants. Think of it like you buying a TV made in China, that doesnt mean China can come in to your house and take your TV anytime it wants. Since the US is not on the gold standard anymore, the government cant recall all the currency that is possessed by the private sector and reimburse with gold. The government can offer this, but cant do it by force, not legally anyway. Even if we were still on the gold standard the government still cant take your money because of the following:
US Constitution Amendment IV:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
The government showing up and taking your money because they claim you never owned it in the first place is never going to happen. When you provide a product or service and are paid with United States currency, that currency is yours. If congress wants your money they have to pass a tax law specifically describing why they are taking the money. Show me the tax law that states when you earn money the currency was never yours in the first place and you have to pay rent or interest on it?
As for taxes being used to pay for "interest on currency", thats obviously false also. The government needs money for entitlements, defense, infrastructure, social security, and a million other things that have nothing to do with paying interest on any currency. The government pays interest on the national debt, which is nothing to do with any sort of interest we, as a nation, pay on our currency. We do not "rent" our money and nor pay any interest for using the currency itself. The federal budget, which is derived from all tax dollars, is open public knowledge and if we are renting our money or paying interest for the use of paper currency its the first Ive heard of it (more common sense here). The cost of physically making the currency is far less than any sort of interest or rent that would result from collecting taxes from private and corporate entities of the whole nation. This would never happen in the first place since this is a capitalist society and when someone earns money they are not going to pay interest or rent simply to have the convenience of using a national currency.
He says the taxes we pay is interest or rent on the currency, then a few sentences later says most of our taxes go to support the government itself. That is contradictory, but the second part is true.
As far as wealthy people receiving far more tax dollars than poor people, that is quantifiable only by knowing what the government tax revenues are as a whole, then defining "poor" and "wealthy", then ferreting out all social and entitlement programs that are for poor people, then dividing the amount of tax dollars the poor receive into the total tax revenues to get a percentage, then applying that percentage to all non-poor tax paying people's and entity's tax dollars to calculate the percentage of tax dollars paid by each tax paying entity to poor people, so that it is on a per capita basis.
Then do the same calculations for wealthy people and then compare the tax dollars received on a absolute basis (actual dollars, not %) and then you can compare who gets more tax dollars, wealthy or poor people.
As you can see, people who throw around conjecture to the effect of knowing that wealthy or poor people get so much more tax dollars probably dont know what theyre talking about. At least on this message board.
By the way, lestat and p0ink havent been on this board for a few years so quit wasting your breath debating with ghosts.
mrplunkey
New member
I've got a better idea. Keep it illegal, but zero jailtime for small-time possession. Oh, but make it a $10,000 mandatory minimum fine for getting caught with it. And make it a joint and several liability, collectible just like an IRS debt.
See how I killed two birds with one stone? And we can use the proceeds for enforcement to fund the war on drugs.
redshirt27se
New member
lol
solarclimax
New member
"We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order." - David Rockefeller
"Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes its laws." - Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild
"Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy." - Henry Kissinger
"Tell a lie loud enough and long enough and people will believe it."
- Adolf Hitler
"If the people were to ever find out what we have done, we would be chased down the streets and lynched." - George H W Bush
"A total world population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal." - Ted Turner
"If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels." - Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh
"Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes its laws." - Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild
"Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy." - Henry Kissinger
"Tell a lie loud enough and long enough and people will believe it."
- Adolf Hitler
"If the people were to ever find out what we have done, we would be chased down the streets and lynched." - George H W Bush
"A total world population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal." - Ted Turner
"If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels." - Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh
solarclimax
New member
Superdave, even Ron Paul seems to agree with Sean Cuig, I couldn't find the recorded interview i heard with Ron Paul but i found a youtube video where he says similar things.
YouTube - Ron Paul on Federal Reserve, banking and economy
The American people are forever in debt to their own federal reserve.
As for Letstat and Pl0nka not being here, that's a good thing. And so is arguing their comment whether they're here or not.
YouTube - Ron Paul on Federal Reserve, banking and economy
The American people are forever in debt to their own federal reserve.
As for Letstat and Pl0nka not being here, that's a good thing. And so is arguing their comment whether they're here or not.
Last edited:
No Ron Paul is not agreeing, in fact he's not even talking about what Sean cuig is claiming. That vid discusses the Feds manipulation of interest rates and the money supply in order to control inflation or an overheating economy. The fed accomplishes this by either cutting back on the money it prints, or changing the federal interfunds rate between the fed and banks.
None of that has anything to do with "charging rent on our money" or "our money was never ours and belongs to the fed"
Please take an economics101 class before offering a series of random quotes and a Ron Paul bid that "sort of" was like the one you wanted to show as proof of moonbat theories.
mrplunkey
New member
I find it odd that solar has reappeared right as RS has disappeared.
I smell EF mystery!
All natural vibram smoke for the win
solarclimax
New member
Interesting superdave, you provide some in depth information at least it is to me. I will have to do more reading up on the subjects you speak of. 1 quote that did stand out to me was "The taxes you pay are actually 'interest' you're being charged for using that currency. It's the 'rent' on those notes. ". <This no doubt has some truth to it in my mind, as I did read up on the history of the war of independence and Rothschilds controlling the federal reserve which put the American people into debt, which currently stands at a lot of money (seen different estimates) , as for the rest, i just like it whenever people try to defend against scumbags who want to put some of their shitty attitudes onto the poor. Do you believe in any of the conspiracy theories about NWO, Illuminati, 911 etc ?
redshirt27se
New member
lol x 2Oh Noes!!!1
I bet Bakemeacookie put him back in the red.
solarclimax
New member
You can, all you have to do is become part of the corporate elite.
solarclimax
New member
Try not paying your taxes and then see what happens to your money. If you own land try not paying your property tax and then see who's land it really is. You live in a communist country and you don't even know it. I did a little reading up and seems that you do infact have a brainwashed view of the federal reserve. I will post why i think that if you wish.
Seems that guy did infact make some sense. And you replied with the spoonfed crap that you were taught in a government influenced economics class.
LOL@ telling me to take an economics class to know the truth about the system.
Maybe i should become a NAZI to learn the truth about Hitler
This has nothing to do with paying rent or interest on the currency in your possession. Property taxes are levied by local governments, its not a vast federal government conspiracy to grab your money illegally or oppress you. In case you didnt know, property taxes are used to fund public school districts within the local jurisdictions levying the property taxes. As a society, we have decided educating our children is so important that property should be taxed to fund it, pretty much guaranteeing the schools will get funding. Whether or not you or I personally agree with this taxation is another matter, but it is what it is.
Should have just posted it up here, dont know why you need my permission.
I, as well as millions of others, attended a public university. Public universitys are partly subsidized/funded by the government. The reason its called ________ State University is because its run by the state. If you think the government is not going to influence thier own university system youre out of your mind. Same thing with all the universities that are named after states but dont have the word "state" in them (University of Texas, University of Colorado, University of California, etc etc).
So why dont you tell all the millions of people who learned economics 101 in a government funded, state run university system to get a refund because they are getting spoonfed crap and theres some sort of mysterious truth they failed to tell all the students in the nation.
Yea I dont think so bro.
The problem with arguments like this is no matter what common sense or facts I give, you will always use the "its a government conspiracy" argument and I cant do anything about it because its impossible to disprove a negative. Its like me saying "Theres life on a planet 78 million light years from here, prove me wrong". I cant prove it is true, but you cant prove me wrong either. So I just keep saying its true and it "maybe" could be true. "The government was behind 9/11, prove me wrong". No matter what is offered up it wont matter because you wont change your mind.
So at the end of the day I think Im going with the tried and true principles of economics taught to millions of people throughout the USA in thousands of public universities. Instead of a Ron Paul youtube vid.
i think it's awesome.
solarclimax
New member
Actually what you're saying is wrong, because it can be proven that you are wrong. As is clear in this video and in other videos common among youtube. You are a slave of the corporate elite. Please tell me what it is you think you're money is backed by ? Money is worthless paper "EVEN RON PAUL SAYS SO IN THIS VIDEO" Money is only legit if backed by gold. And the corporate elite have stolen your gold and left you with paper. And as Ron Paul says. All economies in history that have relied on this have crumbled. Wake up. You went to a univeristy so what. I don't care where you went i don't have any qualifications and i'm more wise to the truth than you are. Saying i went to univeristy or i took an ecomonics class is like a nazi solider under hitler saying (I went to this and i went to that so i believe everything hitler says)
Just watch the video. And there's plenty more like em.
YouTube - Aaron Russo talks with Ron Paul
Also check this out. The guy is talking about the UK not the USA but regardless it's an eye opener no matter where you live. It exposes the government for what it really is <---- I have even shown about 4 or 5 pig headed "your a conspiracy nut job" people this video and it even woke them up
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WW31w6qZllM
Similar threads
