The Rabbit Hole | Page 163 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Peering down the algorithmic trading rabbit hole 11 replies

Badgers Bolt hole 39 replies

Different Charting software: Hole in charts? 0 replies

Pipbuilder's hole 2 replies

Black Hole Trading 0 replies

Attachments: The Rabbit Hole
Exit Attachments

The Rabbit Hole

  • #3,241
  • Edited 8:41pm Apr 17, 2017 5:09pm | Edited 8:41pm
Quoting Exodus
{quote} {image}
Whose standard are you judging this on Exodus? Your own standard?

What about a standard were we compare the USA against other countries. Would you invest your money China, or Russia, or South American countries, Africa countries, eastern European countries in preference to the USA? - I know I wouldn't.

It's very easy to point the finger at America, but name countries with better regulated capital markets, a government with a track record comparable to the USA, which guarantees financial protection for individuals and corporations? The UK (maybe), the Swiss (maybe).

I think when people come to compiling a list of places where they would actually put their own hard earned cash America would be top 3 of nearly everyone in this thread.
  • #3,242
  • Apr 17, 2017 8:44pm Apr 17, 2017 8:44pm
Quoting verv
{quote} I never said you did, I was just passing comment because many of the people who talk about the Fed in such terms as you have also believes in a dynastic cabal controlling world affairs. Clearly though you do think along those lines also. Firstly you have taken issue with a quote of mine that concerns a private bankster global political conspiracy and secondly you later say .....
Oh I see. First ... So because "other" people who speak of the FED the way I did believe in such a Cabal controlling world affairs, your assumption is I must as well? Despite my words clearly saying the opposite? Interesting.

Second, I took no issue with your comment at all. I replied to Jen. YOU quoted me and took issue with my answer to her. I simply clarified my position in reply to your post. (That's kind of how things work around here)

At any rate, it's clear you have a lot on your mind that you're working out. That's a good thing.
Ghost Rider - WWTBMD?
  • #3,243
  • Edited 9:22pm Apr 17, 2017 8:58pm | Edited 9:22pm
Quoting albchr
{quote} Oh I see. First ... So because "other" people who speak of the FED the way I did believe in such a Cabal controlling world affairs, your assumption is I must as well? Despite my words clearly saying the opposite? Interesting. Second, I took no issue with your comment at all. I replied to Jen. YOU quoted me and took issue with my answer to her. I simply clarified my position in reply to your post. (That's kind of how things work around here) At any rate, it's clear you have a lot on your mind that you're working out. That's a good...
First, my comment about your belief in the world controlling cabal was not the only a part of my post and not even a particularly important part of my post. I think it is fair to say you are being a bit contradictory by claiming you don't believe in a cabal in controlling world affairs, when your first post insinuates it controls the financial system of the USA. How much of world affairs are controlled by debt and money - most of them? Then in your second post, directly after attempting to divorce yourself from a cabal controlling world affairs, you say "being that they do control the issuance of money and the terms, I think it would be somewhat short sighted to not consider that a nation's policies are made with that in mind". The implication being that they might actually be involved in policy making after all. You are trying to ride two horses here even though you might not think so.

Second, the actual guts of my post attempted to offer a) a possible explanation for the structure of the Fed that might make more sense, and b) highlight the improbable nature of the Fed being a secret cabal by making what I consider are some common sense assumptions, which link into and apply to other central banks around the world. The bulk of my post, and the prior post, you have essentially ignored. I know its unlikely I have changed your mind, but I feel I must point out that you have not directly addressed any arguments I've made. You have attempted to only clarify your positions yes, but you haven't attempted to defend it.
  • #3,244
  • Apr 17, 2017 9:31pm Apr 17, 2017 9:31pm
Quoting verv
{quote} I know its unlikely I have changed your mind, but I feel I must point out that you have not directly addressed any arguments I've made. You have attempted to only clarify your positions yes, but you haven't attempted to defend it.
Very true. You have not changed my mind. No offense but, I never had any desire to address your arguments or engage in any conversation with you at all.

Again, I was replying to Jen, not you.

Thus, my position needs no defense. A position by the way, you know nothing about. I've never spelled out "my position" on the whole subject and I have no intention of doing so.

Through my years of research I've satisfied "my position" for myself. Clearly, you have as well. I'm not here to debate it. Have a nice day.
Ghost Rider - WWTBMD?
  • #3,245
  • Apr 17, 2017 10:31pm Apr 17, 2017 10:31pm
Quoting Johnramb0
{quote} jimmy dore or the MIT professor?
Jimmy Dore.
If you are good at something, never do it for free--Joker
  • #3,246
  • Apr 18, 2017 1:21am Apr 18, 2017 1:21am
Apologies for not reading to the end of all the comments in the thread, I did read all your post before replying...

Quoting verv
{quote} Whose standard are you judging this on Exodus? Your own standard? ....
The US government has a history of removing Gold from public ownership. Admittedly they didn't steal it, in fact they bought it from the public at an attractive rate as far as the public could judge, but I believe the public had to make a choice between doing as bidden or facing prosecution. As for never defaulting .. well depends upon who you are and how you judge 'default'. In recent brinkmanship the US government was not paying certain groups of people, in fact some state Governors were funding the shortfall whilst people like Boehner (?sp) argue about raising the government's borrowing ceiling. After the fact they made good on the deficit, but technically that was default.

Quoting verv
..... 5) that all governments around the world in fact DO know of the dynastic cabal and all have each independently decided that they are OK with this arrangement, and it would be better if this secret private cartel just siphoned of the countries 'wealth' (in spite of the fact that the Fed sends the profits to the treasury). ....
I vote this one. Look to Russia and the rise of Putin. Look to the US and the histories of the Kennedy and Bush families (yes, that Bush who could not pronounce 'nuclear'), and the Clintons....

It is not that there is a cabal particularly, it is more that there is a standard of behaviour. A bit like being a Mason .
Carbon-Dioxide: the gas of life! https://youtu.be/ttJBdr6eBuo
  • #3,247
  • Edited 3:21am Apr 18, 2017 2:49am | Edited 3:21am
Quoting verv
{quote} Rather than being vague and talking in generalities about 'dogma', and 'confirmation bias', be precise and ask a closed end question. I have no clue what you are asking, I'm not sure you do either - so what exactly are you asking? What specifically do you find disagreeable from what I said?

I am pretty sure I asked you direct questions and you failed to answer them directly in post 3.212

Did you have personal experiences with the players involved? Did you or do you have former experiences with government agencies that gave you privy to certain information to corroborate your perspectives? It is seems you are rooted in your own dogma to really not know the actual facts, but only accepting of your view as being the truth. (this is assuming you actually watched the video in it's entirety to refute anything that it has been asserted as being fact based vs. made up ones as you suggest)

Then your response to them was:

Corroborate what exactly? What Claim did I make that couldn't be googled?

You didn't provide sources or proof that your assertions are the truth or as being fact. I am sure your sources just as much as you like to refute other sources as being lies can be challenged as well!

As if Google is all you need to shape your opinions as being fact, or for that matter how your world views are shaped as being facts or reality based on the simple use of google. This is what I am challenging you on.

I can say with 100 percent certainty that a lot of the assumptions you assert in your arguments is inaccurate and untruthful. It seems your opinions and the way you have arrived at shaping your views on certain subject matters, is caught between moral relativism and the post modernist paradigm in which such tools are used.

Is it below you to accept or acknowledge that some of your assertions could be wrong? Or the possibility of them? Or are you set in your ways that no matter what views are presented to you as being contrary will be outright dismissed because doing so would shatter you own beliefs as it relates to your constructed realities reinforced by such social stratifications?

Over all, our experiences are different in the way we arrive in our perceptions, and conclusions of what the truth is, particularly as it relates to these subjects that forms our differing opinions. Some are made with actual seeing, boots on the ground, being in the places that have forever changed in their political discourse, or carrying out objectives for a certain strategy implemented for intended consequences, while others are formed sitting behind a computer screen using such tools like google, is the difference of actual experience vs. an educated opinion that conflict in our discourse.

Now in the bigger picture if you were to asked me to prove this for you in more concrete terms, I will admit that I can not do so simply by articulating it on this forum. But, if you are willing to meet in person over a cup of coffee, then I might entertain that idea where I am free to speak, without fear of reprisals.

My final question to you is, and I hope you sincerely answer this truthfully is:

Do you believe a god or "God" exists? Do you believe that there in such a thing as Ghosts? (human spirits that roam the Earth?)
  • #3,248
  • Apr 18, 2017 2:59am Apr 18, 2017 2:59am
Quoting Exodus
{quote} {image}
My thoughts exactly! Honesty?




One only look at the atrocities committed in their expansion westward in the late 1800's to know where it's origins of honesty comes from. Treaties are made to be broken, hence the real source in which the term "white guilt" comes from.
  • #3,249
  • Apr 18, 2017 3:36am Apr 18, 2017 3:36am
Quoting albchr
Hey sweetie. Long time ... Hope all is well. {quote} This is what most of the world (and sadly now, the vast majority of Americans as well) just don't understand. The answer? Simple. The USA dose NOT own those printing machines. The FED does. Contrary to popular belief, and the propaganda that supports the lie, the FED is NOT owned by, controlled by, or in any way even part of America. We, just like all those you correctly mention who need to buy (or exchange for) "dollars", have to "borrow" our money from that FED and they charge us interest...
Heeeeyyyy Chris! Where have you been? Hope life is treating you well these days.

A clear explanation, thanks!
  • #3,250
  • Apr 18, 2017 3:37am Apr 18, 2017 3:37am
Quoting Exodus
{quote} {image}
I want that emoticon!
  • #3,251
  • Apr 18, 2017 3:42am Apr 18, 2017 3:42am
Quoting verv
some dumbass youtuber.
Me included? Here is my contribution to Youtube. Wanna race, Verv? We can film it and stick it on Youtube!
https://youtu.be/oiN_cE6FQB8
  • #3,252
  • Apr 18, 2017 6:00am Apr 18, 2017 6:00am
Any statement from Nige yet?
Carbon-Dioxide: the gas of life! https://youtu.be/ttJBdr6eBuo
  • #3,253
  • Edited 3:21pm Apr 18, 2017 6:56am | Edited 3:21pm
Quoting DrManhatten
{quote} I am pretty sure I asked you direct questions and you failed to answer them directly in post 3.212 Did you have personal experiences with the players involved? Did you or do you have former experiences with government agencies that gave you privy to certain information to corroborate your perspectives? It is seems you are rooted in your own dogma to really not know the actual facts, but only accepting of your view as being the truth. (this is assuming you actually watched the video in it's entirety to refute anything that it has been asserted...
"Did you have personal experiences with the players involved?"
- I don't believe this secret cartel exists, nothing in my reading has ever produced any hard proof that it does. It would therefore go without saying that of course I've never met any 'players' involved.

"Did you or do you have former experiences with government agencies that gave you privy to certain information to corroborate your perspectives?"
- how could I if the secret cabal doesn't exist?

"It is seems you are rooted in your own dogma to really not know the actual facts, but only accepting of your view as being the truth."
- what facts? Why can you find them and I cannot?

You are assuming a lot of things here that don't make sense. You have assumed that my opinion is based on wealth of evidence that proves this kinds of cartel doesn't exist. When my current belief, after some study, was actually formed in the absence any corroborating evidence that such a cartel exists - and I mean hard proof, not second hand youtube videos.

So when you say:
"You didn't provide sources or proof that your assertions are the truth or as being fact."
- that doesn't make sense, the burden of proof is YOURS not MINE. How can I prove something doesn't exist?

"I can say with 100 percent certainty that a lot of the assumptions you assert in your arguments is inaccurate and untruthful."
- and for all your talk you haven't shown what assumptions of mine are inaccurate or untruthful. It's not a hard thing to do, put your fingers to the keyboard and explain what I have got wrong.

"It seems your opinions and the way you have arrived at shaping your views on certain subject matters, is caught between moral relativism and the post modernist paradigm in which such tools are used."
- sorry, but you are actually talking rubbish now. Lets talk facts, where are yours?

"Is it below you to accept or acknowledge that some of your assertions could be wrong? Or the possibility of them? Or are you set in your ways that no matter what views are presented to you as being contrary will be outright dismissed because doing so would shatter you own beliefs as it relates to your constructed realities reinforced by such social stratifications?"
- you are talking more rubbish 'social stratifications' wtf are you talking about lmao. Of course I can change my opinion, haven't you been reading my posts? I have said several times I used to believe in this cabal but I changed my mind. I've changed my mind on this issue before, and can change my mind again, one of us is certainly capable of changing their opinion.

"Now in the bigger picture if you were to asked me to prove this for you in more concrete terms, I will admit that I can not do so simply by articulating it on this forum"
- case closed then, since you have admitted you cannot prove it? What you have just admitted is that in the absence of evidence you believe in a secret cabal. Fine but I think that is illogical, its illogical because in the absence of 'concrete' evidence the logical position would be that the cabal doesn't exist.

"My final question to you is, and I hope you sincerely answer this truthfully is: Do you believe a god or "God" exists? Do you believe that there in such a thing as Ghosts? (human spirits that roam the Earth?)"
- this is totally irrelevant to the question at hand. The very nature of a diety is that they cannot be empirically proven. The difference with the cabal is that it is operating by living, breathing people and that can be empirically proven.

This is a ridiculous conversation. Even after all your waffle you still provided ZERO evidence to back up your claims.
I happen to think that facts matters in worldly matters.
  • #3,254
  • Apr 18, 2017 6:57am Apr 18, 2017 6:57am
Quoting albchr
{quote} Very true. You have not changed my mind. No offense but, I never had any desire to address your arguments or engage in any conversation with you at all. Again, I was replying to Jen, not you. Thus, my position needs no defense. A position by the way, you know nothing about. I've never spelled out "my position" on the whole subject and I have no intention of doing so. Through my years of research I've satisfied "my position" for myself. Clearly, you have as well. I'm not here to debate it. Have a nice day.

That's your right of course. It also happens to be very weak
  • #3,255
  • Apr 18, 2017 7:07am Apr 18, 2017 7:07am
Quoting Exodus
Apologies for not reading to the end of all the comments in the thread, I did read all your post before replying... {quote}The US government has a history of removing Gold from public ownership. Admittedly they didn't steal it, in fact they bought it from the public at an attractive rate as far as the public could judge, but I believe the public had to make a choice between doing as bidden or facing prosecution. As for never defaulting .. well depends upon who you are and how you judge 'default'. In recent brinkmanship the US government was not...
I thought someone would bring up the 'technical default'.

Attached Image



Thankfully it was only a technical default and not a real one. We both know everyone got paid. Regarding the state vs federal bodies, they are separate, the states are supposed to provide much of their own funding - are they not? In any event, that is an internal issue, doesn't affect us as investors.

"It is not that there is a cabal particularly, it is more that there is a standard of behaviour"
- well you said it lol

Plenty of things like the masons are obviously real. There are plenty of fraternal or other types of organisations that are real, and can be proven.
The central bank cabal - it makes no sense to me anymore.
  • #3,256
  • Apr 18, 2017 7:37am Apr 18, 2017 7:37am
Jen!

Right-click >> save picture as >> (choose name and location) [ save ]
Carbon-Dioxide: the gas of life! https://youtu.be/ttJBdr6eBuo
  • #3,257
  • Apr 18, 2017 7:44am Apr 18, 2017 7:44am
Quoting verv
{quote} "Did you have personal experiences with the players involved?" - I don't believe this secret cartel exists, nothing in my reading has ever produced any hard proof that it does. It would therefore go without saying that of course I've never met any 'players' involved. "Did you or do you have former experiences with government agencies that gave you privy to certain information to corroborate your perspectives?" - how could I if the secret cabal doesn't exist? "It is seems you are rooted in your own dogma to really not know the actual facts,...
argumentum ad ignorantiam

Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence.
If you are good at something, never do it for free--Joker
  • #3,258
  • Edited 8:18am Apr 18, 2017 7:54am | Edited 8:18am
Quoting jmn5611
{quote} argumentum ad ignorantiam Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence.
I'm not sure if you are referring to me or the guy I'm responding to, but I never claimed absence of evidence WAS evidence of absence - or more appropriately worded the absence of evidence was PROOF of absence.

I suggested that in the absence of evidence it was more logical to assume the organisation didn't in fact exist.

I also said on the page previously that because of this lack of evidence, and the highly improbable chain of events that would be required for said organisation to exist, that it was my belief that the "probability of that organisation being successful for so long (read being real) as very very low." I don't think there any contradiction there, I even left open the possibility that the organisation does.
  • #3,259
  • Apr 18, 2017 8:03am Apr 18, 2017 8:03am
Quoting verv
{quote} I'm not sure if you are referring to me or the guy I'm responding to, but I never claimed absence of evidence WAS evidence of absence - or more appropriately worded the absence of evidence was PROOF of absence. I suggested it was more logical to assume that in the absence of evidence the organisation didn't in fact exist. I also said on the page previously that because of this lack of evidence, and the highly improbable chain of events that would be required for said organisation to exist, that it was my belief that the "probability of that...
It was a general reply to stir the pot. I used to be true believer too. It took me a long time to shake myself of conspiracy theories. But that said, maybe I am Winston, and I now love Big Brother. Maybe you and I got worn down, and they still seek truth.
If you are good at something, never do it for free--Joker
  • #3,260
  • Apr 18, 2017 9:05am Apr 18, 2017 9:05am
Quoting verv
{quote} It also happens to be very weak
That's your opinion. Thankfully, everyone has a right to their own. Mine? It's a sign of strength to not bother debating what one already knows to be true.

Unless of course, you're trying to sway others to your way of thinking. I am not. It would seem apparently, you are.
Ghost Rider - WWTBMD?
0 traders viewing now