> On Dec 7, 10:49 am, Tony <dahiya...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > With due respect to all of the participants, I personally think that
> > the we should not consider dollar as gold anymore. There should be one
> > standard currency (X) which belongs to the world bank and let other
> > currencies fluctuate with respect to currency (X). This currency (X)
> > should be considered as Gold. This priniting of dollars is creating
> > the actual problem.

> > Can you plz tell me onething?

> > Inflation figures are about 1%. Bernanke hasn't stopped printing
> > dollars since 2008. Don't you think something is missing here. Where
> > is the money? These printing machines are about to stop working and
> > inflation is 1%. I don't understand this.

> >  Actually we are not able to connect the actual reason behind the rise
> > and fall or dollar.

> > Go back to 2007. The rise and fall of dollar was interlinked with oil.
> > Now in 2009, the dollar is interlinked with Gold.

> > On Dec 7, 8:24 pm, buyit <mmyron...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > After the Great Depression, the USA essentially became indebted to the
> > > Federal Reserve and has been in debt to the unconstitutional
> > > institution ever since. Someone explain to me how the Federal Reserve
> > > bank is NOT unconstitutional.

> > > On Dec 7, 8:40 am, Viking <grizzlybea...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > We are being restricted. We do not have the ability to determine what
> > > > money is. This is against natural law.

> > > > On Dec 7, 8:37 am, marty <marty01001...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > > So it is us who are being manipulated, not he dollar.

> > > > > On Dec 7, 8:10 am, Viking <grizzlybea...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > Not only does the government say a piece of paper is worth the value
> > > > > > of your labor, they say it is the only mechanism of money legally
> > > > > > recognized for settling transactions.

> > > > > > On Dec 7, 7:41 am, marty <marty01001...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > The mere fact that a government can hand you a paper and say it is
> > > > > > > worth the value of your labor is manipulation in and of itself.

> > > > > > > On Dec 6, 7:48 pm, buyit <mmyron...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > ...so to introduce the Amero?- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -

> On Dec 6, 12:05 pm, Sweatsock <jimmeshel...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Probably a RINO too....  What happened then?  What put you off women?

> > On Dec 6, 9:38 am, Credo <credo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > One of the hottest women I've ever dated was ex-wife of a political
> > > figure here in Tennessee.  Green-eyed brunette, with the most perfect
> > > ass I've ever seen in person.  She'd caught her Republican husband
> > > with women's clothing in his car trunk.  She thought he was cheating
> > > at first.  But, he wasn't cheating.  He was a closet transvestite.

> > > On Dec 6, 11:10 am, Mike <mike.beha...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > I have a hard time believing you date at all..................

> > > > On Dec 6, 11:41 am, Credo <credo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > > I don't date birthers.

> > > > > Palin's greatest hits video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrzXLYA_e6E&feature=related

> > > > > On Dec 6, 9:52 am, Sweatsock <jimmeshel...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > I don't think Credo is telegenic enough.

> > > > > > On Dec 6, 7:51 am, flyic...@cox.net wrote:

> > > > > > > Wow....your just enamored with that twit aren't you? Hey...pony her up
> > > > > > > for a Presidential run in 2012,if your party has the GUTS.

> > > > > > > On Dec 6, 9:34 am, Sweatsock <jimmeshel...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > I am assuming you are asking everyone to predict/recount the outcome
> > > > > > > > of the date....

> > > > > > > > Here is mine:
> > > > > > > > They agree to meet at a World Beat Coffee Shop.  No one pays a tab at
> > > > > > > > this joint, although all are expected to take a turn in the garden
> > > > > > > > hoeing coffee followed by a short stint in the kitchen washing up.
> > > > > > > > Credo believing he is the "top" orders 100% organic, 100% fair trade,
> > > > > > > > 100% Obama, 0% Tasty coffee for two.

> > > > > > > > Sarah nearly keels over trying to look into Credo's dizzyingly askew
> > > > > > > > eyes.  He opens his mouth to spew, she tries to find his fat neck and
> > > > > > > > she snaps it like a twig.  She grinds her red spiked heel into his eye
> > > > > > > > and walks out.  She tosses a "put my java on fagboys tab" comment to
> > > > > > > > the waiter and walks out.

> > > > > > > > Credo stays mad at her forever.

> > > > > > > > On Dec 5, 8:06 pm, Leo <paru...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > With a predictable result.

> > > > > > > > > Credo, it's ok. It is a numbers game. Rejections make you stronger
> > > > > > > > > person.- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> On Dec 7, 10:45 am, Skippy the Happy Acorn <kne...@excite.com> wrote:

> > "Someone explain to me how the Federal Reserve
> > bank is NOT unconstitutional. "

> > Article 1, Section 8:

> > "To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and
> > fix the standard of weights and measures;"

> > The Fed is the mechanism by which they "regulate the value thereof".

> > On Dec 7, 9:24 am, buyit <mmyron...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > After the Great Depression, the USA essentially became indebted to the
> > > Federal Reserve and has been in debt to the unconstitutional
> > > institution ever since. Someone explain to me how the Federal Reserve
> > > bank is NOT unconstitutional.

> > > On Dec 7, 8:40 am, Viking <grizzlybea...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > We are being restricted. We do not have the ability to determine what
> > > > money is. This is against natural law.

> > > > On Dec 7, 8:37 am, marty <marty01001...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > > So it is us who are being manipulated, not he dollar.

> > > > > On Dec 7, 8:10 am, Viking <grizzlybea...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > Not only does the government say a piece of paper is worth the value
> > > > > > of your labor, they say it is the only mechanism of money legally
> > > > > > recognized for settling transactions.

> > > > > > On Dec 7, 7:41 am, marty <marty01001...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > The mere fact that a government can hand you a paper and say it is
> > > > > > > worth the value of your labor is manipulation in and of itself.

> > > > > > > On Dec 6, 7:48 pm, buyit <mmyron...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > ...so to introduce the Amero?- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BE2gE-VVjBI

> On Dec 6, 1:54 pm, Credo <credo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > If anything could, it'd be that sweathog you're married to.

> > On Dec 6, 12:05 pm, Sweatsock <jimmeshel...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > Probably a RINO too....  What happened then?  What put you off women?

> > > On Dec 6, 9:38 am, Credo <credo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > One of the hottest women I've ever dated was ex-wife of a political
> > > > figure here in Tennessee.  Green-eyed brunette, with the most perfect
> > > > ass I've ever seen in person.  She'd caught her Republican husband
> > > > with women's clothing in his car trunk.  She thought he was cheating
> > > > at first.  But, he wasn't cheating.  He was a closet transvestite.

> > > > On Dec 6, 11:10 am, Mike <mike.beha...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > I have a hard time believing you date at all..................

> > > > > On Dec 6, 11:41 am, Credo <credo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > > > I don't date birthers.

> > > > > > Palin's greatest hits video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrzXLYA_e6E&feature=related

> > > > > > On Dec 6, 9:52 am, Sweatsock <jimmeshel...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > I don't think Credo is telegenic enough.

> > > > > > > On Dec 6, 7:51 am, flyic...@cox.net wrote:

> > > > > > > > Wow....your just enamored with that twit aren't you? Hey...pony her up
> > > > > > > > for a Presidential run in 2012,if your party has the GUTS.

> > > > > > > > On Dec 6, 9:34 am, Sweatsock <jimmeshel...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > I am assuming you are asking everyone to predict/recount the outcome
> > > > > > > > > of the date....

> > > > > > > > > Here is mine:
> > > > > > > > > They agree to meet at a World Beat Coffee Shop.  No one pays a tab at
> > > > > > > > > this joint, although all are expected to take a turn in the garden
> > > > > > > > > hoeing coffee followed by a short stint in the kitchen washing up.
> > > > > > > > > Credo believing he is the "top" orders 100% organic, 100% fair trade,
> > > > > > > > > 100% Obama, 0% Tasty coffee for two.

> > > > > > > > > Sarah nearly keels over trying to look into Credo's dizzyingly askew
> > > > > > > > > eyes.  He opens his mouth to spew, she tries to find his fat neck and
> > > > > > > > > she snaps it like a twig.  She grinds her red spiked heel into his eye
> > > > > > > > > and walks out.  She tosses a "put my java on fagboys tab" comment to
> > > > > > > > > the waiter and walks out.

> > > > > > > > > Credo stays mad at her forever.

> > > > > > > > > On Dec 5, 8:06 pm, Leo <paru...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > With a predictable result.

> > > > > > > > > > Credo, it's ok. It is a numbers game. Rejections make you stronger
> > > > > > > > > > person.- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > - Show quoted text -

> On Dec 7, 9:17 am, Viking <grizzlybea...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Sen. Jim Bunning to Bernanke: "You are the definition of a moral
> > hazard"

> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rka9VbPPMys

> > On Dec 7, 8:56 am, Jerry <jerryspringh...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > In the March of 2009 the Obama administration chose to attack our  JOB
> > > problem on two fronts; one to give banks Billions of dollars to
> > > distribute amongst the small business sector…That’s like giving the
> > > keys to your liquor cabinet to an alcoholic…it’s not going to work.
> > > The banks were just coming off their sub prime crises and had no
> > > intentions whatsoever of distributing these funds amongst small
> > > business stating; that it’s too risky to lend to them, so they kept
> > > these funds and decided to make their employees wealthier instead.
> > > During this time small business’ are crying for funds to increase
> > > their  inventory, advertising, payroll…etc but the administration
> > > turned their back on them, credit dried up and credit lines were cut.
> > > Business’s in the private sector had no choice but to reduce their
> > > payrolls and costs just to survive.

> > > The second front was to stimulate Wall Street to make the economy look
> > > good and hoped nobody noticed that while these companies were closing
> > > plants and laying off workers because of shrinking revenues…their
> > > stocks kept going UP and UP. We can thank the Bernanke/Geitner team
> > > for that one, wasting Billions of taxpayer’s dollars with ZERO
> > > results.

> > > I just heard Obama say the other day; "Too many members of our
> > > American family have felt the gut punch of a pink slip," and he
> > > added;
> > > “Now JOBS will be #1 on the list”, while all this is going on small
> > > business’s are just sitting on their  hands waiting patiently for the
> > > economy to turn before they hire again.

> > > These mistakes combined just set us back 3-5 years and now they want
> > > to nominate Bernanke for a second term….Can’t wait to see if they can
> > > really spend their way to prosperity?- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=44238676
> I think the fella at IHUB who posted that chart needs a few more
> indicators, damn!

> I haven't been following PMDP and don't understand their plans but
> that chart is showing Opens, Not closes.

> That .0015 open was dropped Directly back to .001, 2 minutes after
> open...
> I would say either shorter's covered or they are diluting.

> St Johns is a big river... Do they have the funds for their plans?

> ---------
> took a QUICK glance at SEC quarter report for Sept 30th and read:
> -----------------------------------------
> Quarterly Report
> Plateau Mineral Development, Inc. (PMDP)
> Period Ending September 30, 2009 (2009Q3)

> Plateau Mineral Development, Inc.
> Previously:
> August 2008; American Food Holdings, Inc. to Plateau Mineral
> Development, Inc.
> Apr. 2007: Du Fox Holding Corp, to American Food Holdings, Inc.
> Dec. 2006: CRP Holding Corp. to Du Fox Holding Corp
> Nov.1997: Boca Raton Capital Corporation to CRP Holding Corp.
> Sep.1989 Mariner Corporation to Boca Raton Capital Corporation
> Jan. 1988 U.S.Tech, Inc. to Mariner Corporation
> Jan. 1987: Originally incorporated as U.S. Tech, Inc.)
> -------------------------------
> President and CEO: None at present
> --------------------------------

> Item 4: Management Discussion and Analysis .
> A.) Plan of operation: Currently waiting on funding.

> B.) Developments of the bio-lab continued and were successful. The
> results
> were presented to the county official and consultants in St. Johns,
> St.
> Augustine. A further and final test will be conducted in the latter
> part of the
> year to model a persistent rain storm of at least one inch to four
> inches per
> day volume to determine the effect on the ability of the retention
> ponds
> under a steady rain.

> Funding for the bio-remediation lab is needed to complete the
> simulation of
> the severe rain fall and the subsequent effectiveness of the bio-
> reactor under
> those conditions. With success PMDP in concert with En Sol, will build
> a
> bio-reactor in the main settling-holding

> -----------------------------------------------------------------

> No president or CEO? -who's William Strange?

> Looks to me like there will be Dilution to help pay for the final
> test/
> bio-remediation lab before they get the contract for the St. Johns
> River....

> From Your

> AOR

> Can you plz tell me onething?

> Inflation figures are about 1%. Bernanke hasn't stopped printing
> dollars since 2008. Don't you think something is missing here. Where
> is the money? These printing machines are about to stop working and
> inflation is 1%. I don't understand this.

>  Actually we are not able to connect the actual reason behind the rise
> and fall or dollar.

> Go back to 2007. The rise and fall of dollar was interlinked with oil.
> Now in 2009, the dollar is interlinked with Gold.

> On Dec 7, 8:24 pm, buyit <mmyron...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > After the Great Depression, the USA essentially became indebted to the
> > Federal Reserve and has been in debt to the unconstitutional
> > institution ever since. Someone explain to me how the Federal Reserve
> > bank is NOT unconstitutional.

> > On Dec 7, 8:40 am, Viking <grizzlybea...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > We are being restricted. We do not have the ability to determine what
> > > money is. This is against natural law.

> > > On Dec 7, 8:37 am, marty <marty01001...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > So it is us who are being manipulated, not he dollar.

> > > > On Dec 7, 8:10 am, Viking <grizzlybea...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > Not only does the government say a piece of paper is worth the value
> > > > > of your labor, they say it is the only mechanism of money legally
> > > > > recognized for settling transactions.

> > > > > On Dec 7, 7:41 am, marty <marty01001...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > > > The mere fact that a government can hand you a paper and say it is
> > > > > > worth the value of your labor is manipulation in and of itself.

> > > > > > On Dec 6, 7:48 pm, buyit <mmyron...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > ...so to introduce the Amero?- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> On Dec 7, 8:40 am, Viking <grizzlybea...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > We are being restricted. We do not have the ability to determine what
> > money is. This is against natural law.

> > On Dec 7, 8:37 am, marty <marty01001...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > So it is us who are being manipulated, not he dollar.

> > > On Dec 7, 8:10 am, Viking <grizzlybea...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > Not only does the government say a piece of paper is worth the value
> > > > of your labor, they say it is the only mechanism of money legally
> > > > recognized for settling transactions.

> > > > On Dec 7, 7:41 am, marty <marty01001...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > > The mere fact that a government can hand you a paper and say it is
> > > > > worth the value of your labor is manipulation in and of itself.

> > > > > On Dec 6, 7:48 pm, buyit <mmyron...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > ...so to introduce the Amero?- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> Article 1, Section 8:

> "To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and
> fix the standard of weights and measures;"

> The Fed is the mechanism by which they "regulate the value thereof".

> On Dec 7, 9:24 am, buyit <mmyron...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > After the Great Depression, the USA essentially became indebted to the
> > Federal Reserve and has been in debt to the unconstitutional
> > institution ever since. Someone explain to me how the Federal Reserve
> > bank is NOT unconstitutional.

> > On Dec 7, 8:40 am, Viking <grizzlybea...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > We are being restricted. We do not have the ability to determine what
> > > money is. This is against natural law.

> > > On Dec 7, 8:37 am, marty <marty01001...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > So it is us who are being manipulated, not he dollar.

> > > > On Dec 7, 8:10 am, Viking <grizzlybea...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > Not only does the government say a piece of paper is worth the value
> > > > > of your labor, they say it is the only mechanism of money legally
> > > > > recognized for settling transactions.

> > > > > On Dec 7, 7:41 am, marty <marty01001...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > > > The mere fact that a government can hand you a paper and say it is
> > > > > > worth the value of your labor is manipulation in and of itself.

> > > > > > On Dec 6, 7:48 pm, buyit <mmyron...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > ...so to introduce the Amero?- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> On Dec 7, 9:29 am, suzireb <suzi...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > COP 15 is a test of their truth and our judgement.
> > honest scientist
> > honest reporting
> > and most important
> > honest respect

> > On Dec 7, 9:19 am, Skippy the Happy Acorn <kne...@excite.com> wrote:

> > > What James Hansen is actually saying (he is against cap and trade,
> > > still suports the science of global warming):

> > > "Next week he publishes his first book, entitled Storms of my
> > > Grandchildren, warning that “our planet, with its remarkable array of
> > > life, is in imminent danger of crashing” and declaring, “It is our
> > > last chance”.

> > > He decries the cap and trade system envisaged by governments trying to
> > > “seal the deal” at Copenhagen as ineffective in stemming carbon
> > > emissions. Under such systems, governments set limits on overall
> > > emissions and polluters trade quotas among themselves.

> > > “The fundamental problem is that fossil fuels are the cheapest form of
> > > energy. As long as they are, they are going to be used,” he said.
> > > “It’s remarkable. They refuse to recognise and address the fundamental
> > > problem and the obvious solution.” "

> > > On Dec 7, 8:15 am, suzireb <suzi...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > In an interview with the Guardian, James Hansen, the world's pre-
> > > > eminent climate scientist, said any agreement likely to emerge from
> > > > the negotiations would be so deeply flawed that it would be better to
> > > > start again from scratch.

> > > > But even before Climategate, the campaign was beginning to resemble a
> > > > Broadway musical that had run too long, with sagging box office and
> > > > declining enthusiasm from a dwindling audience. Someone needs to break
> > > > the bad news to the players that it’s closing time for the climate
> > > > horror show.

> > > > The Danish government is cunningly spending a million kroner
> > > > (£120,000) to give the protesters KlimaForum, a "parallel conference"
> > > > in the magnificent DGI-byen sports centre. The hope, officials admit,
> > > > is that they will work off their youthful energies on the climbing
> > > > wall, state-of-the-art swimming pools and bowling alley

> > > > Copenhagen climate summit: 1,200 limos, 140 private planes and caviar
> > > > wedges And the total number of electric cars or hybrids among that
> > > > number? "Five,"- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -

> The question was simply: Who pays more taxes?

> The question had nothing to do with impact.

> On Dec 7, 4:19 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > "Who pays more taxes?" is simple (I think you're looking for "the
> > rich"), but misleading.  Paying 15% is more impactful on someone
> > making $35K than 26% is on $100K.

> >http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6http://www.taxpolicycenter.o...

> > "And who benefits the most from others paying their taxes?" is tougher
> > to nail down.  I can think of some plausable examples where the rich
> > benefit from the benefits endowed on others.  Transportation
> > infrastructure is an example.  While not necessarily benefiting
> > directly as much in personal driving, the ability of people to drive
> > great distances certainly widens available labor pools for businesses,
> > as well as potentially reducing costs of product distribution and the
> > like.

> > I thnk you'd also find that wealth concentration has some disturbing
> > effects on lower income individuals, including but not limited to
> > incredible competition for profitable investments.  Consider the
> > assertion in the paper below:  "empirically plausible returns on
> > wealth are well below 10%".  In fact if there's any genuine curiousity
> > in your questions, this paper wouldn't be a bad read.  I'm going to
> > check it later myself, though

> >http://www.dse.ec.unipi.it/pubblicazioni/dsedps/files/2009-83.pdf

> > On Dec 7, 8:11 am, pdboy <pdboy_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > And who benefits the most from others paying their taxes?

> After posting a link to a Youtube video of Max Keiser??

> Well, immediately thereafter.

> But i could not let you go without posting this last link using my
> trusty Frankenstienfinance account.

> Enjoy!!

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBzR0-j0O0o

> On Dec 7, 2:15 pm, suzireb <suzi...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > In an interview with the Guardian, James Hansen, the world's pre-
> > eminent climate scientist, said any agreement likely to emerge from
> > the negotiations would be so deeply flawed that it would be better to
> > start again from scratch.

> > But even before Climategate, the campaign was beginning to resemble a
> > Broadway musical that had run too long, with sagging box office and
> > declining enthusiasm from a dwindling audience. Someone needs to break
> > the bad news to the players that it’s closing time for the climate
> > horror show.

> > The Danish government is cunningly spending a million kroner
> > (£120,000) to give the protesters KlimaForum, a "parallel conference"
> > in the magnificent DGI-byen sports centre. The hope, officials admit,
> > is that they will work off their youthful energies on the climbing
> > wall, state-of-the-art swimming pools and bowling alley

> > Copenhagen climate summit: 1,200 limos, 140 private planes and caviar
> > wedges And the total number of electric cars or hybrids among that
> > number? "Five,"

> On Dec 7, 8:40 am, Viking <grizzlybea...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > We are being restricted. We do not have the ability to determine what
> > money is. This is against natural law.

> > On Dec 7, 8:37 am, marty <marty01001...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > So it is us who are being manipulated, not he dollar.

> > > On Dec 7, 8:10 am, Viking <grizzlybea...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > Not only does the government say a piece of paper is worth the value
> > > > of your labor, they say it is the only mechanism of money legally
> > > > recognized for settling transactions.

> > > > On Dec 7, 7:41 am, marty <marty01001...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > > The mere fact that a government can hand you a paper and say it is
> > > > > worth the value of your labor is manipulation in and of itself.

> > > > > On Dec 6, 7:48 pm, buyit <mmyron...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > ...so to introduce the Amero?- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

> The question was simply: Who pays more taxes?

> The question had nothing to do with impact.

> On Dec 7, 4:19 pm, tetch <tetchmagi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > "Who pays more taxes?" is simple (I think you're looking for "the
> > rich"), but misleading.  Paying 15% is more impactful on someone
> > making $35K than 26% is on $100K.

> >http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6http://www.taxpolicycenter.o...

> > "And who benefits the most from others paying their taxes?" is tougher
> > to nail down.  I can think of some plausable examples where the rich
> > benefit from the benefits endowed on others.  Transportation
> > infrastructure is an example.  While not necessarily benefiting
> > directly as much in personal driving, the ability of people to drive
> > great distances certainly widens available labor pools for businesses,
> > as well as potentially reducing costs of product distribution and the
> > like.

> > I thnk you'd also find that wealth concentration has some disturbing
> > effects on lower income individuals, including but not limited to
> > incredible competition for profitable investments.  Consider the
> > assertion in the paper below:  "empirically plausible returns on
> > wealth are well below 10%".  In fact if there's any genuine curiousity
> > in your questions, this paper wouldn't be a bad read.  I'm going to
> > check it later myself, though

> >http://www.dse.ec.unipi.it/pubblicazioni/dsedps/files/2009-83.pdf

> > On Dec 7, 8:11 am, pdboy <pdboy_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > And who benefits the most from others paying their taxes?- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -