Should The US End The Federal Reserve
Started by: GZento | Replies: 28 | Views: 1,676
Apr 10, 2012 2:19 AM #631499
You're telling me why it's bad to try to improve it without completely shutting it down, but you're not telling me why it's not bad to just start over.
Apr 10, 2012 2:35 AM #631502
Quote from FusionYou're telling me why it's bad to try to improve it without completely shutting it down, but you're not telling me why it's not bad to just start over.
I'll put it this way: you cant polish shit so it looks like gold. It's impossible
they have laws that they've lobbied using our taxes, and those laws are pretty much impenetrable, and so we would have to start over. ALL OF THE laws regarding the Fed Reserve would have to be repealed, all of the employees there that witnessed and allowed corruption, or had partaken in it, would have to be replaced by new employees that would have to be monitored, if that's not starting over, then tell me your definition
Apr 10, 2012 5:35 AM #631569
no, but you can polish a turd
Apr 10, 2012 6:09 AM #631576
Quote from 2-Dno, but you can polish a turd
Still looks like a turd, just polished :/
Apr 10, 2012 6:22 AM #631579
Apr 10, 2012 6:28 AM #631582
I saw that episode, it was pretty "shitty" (troll face)
EDIT: I forgot how they got the lion poop....you know what, never mind
EDIT: I forgot how they got the lion poop....you know what, never mind
Apr 10, 2012 7:01 AM #631589
Quote from GZentoI saw that episode, it was pretty "shitty" (troll face)

Quote from GZento
EDIT: I forgot how they got the lion poop....you know what, never mind
from a lion
Apr 10, 2012 7:15 AM #631594
Quote from 2-D

Apr 11, 2012 12:17 AM #632330
Quote from GZentoI'll put it this way: you cant polish shit so it looks like gold. It's impossible
they have laws that they've lobbied using our taxes, and those laws are pretty much impenetrable, and so we would have to start over. ALL OF THE laws regarding the Fed Reserve would have to be repealed, all of the employees there that witnessed and allowed corruption, or had partaken in it, would have to be replaced by new employees that would have to be monitored, if that's not starting over, then tell me your definition
Everything here makes sense, but why would witnesses have to be replaced? They haven't done anything wrong.
Apr 11, 2012 10:50 AM #632621
Quote from FusionEverything here makes sense, but why would witnesses have to be replaced? They haven't done anything wrong.
*witnessed AND allowed corruption
Apr 11, 2012 7:07 PM #632843
Oh, I thought you meant those as separate groups.
Apr 11, 2012 8:16 PM #632908
Quote from FusionOh, I thought you meant those as separate groups.
Nah bro
Apr 11, 2012 10:10 PM #633024
Well I suppose it'd be quite a difficult situation for them; if they told on their superiors they'd be fired, and their reputation as a worker would be tarnished because their prospective managers may think that they are untrustworthy. People who witness their superiors do inappropriate things are in a bad situation, so I wouldn't say they deserve to be fired, because they are only doing what they feel is best for their economic well-being in the long run.
Apr 12, 2012 12:43 PM #633432
Quote from FusionWell I suppose it'd be quite a difficult situation for them; if they told on their superiors they'd be fired, and their reputation as a worker would be tarnished because their prospective managers may think that they are untrustworthy. People who witness their superiors do inappropriate things are in a bad situation, so I wouldn't say they deserve to be fired, because they are only doing what they feel is best for their economic well-being in the long run.
that is a good point, I guess not all of them have to be removed