General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

antonyjh1234
Richard J Murphy
comments

Comments by "antonyjh1234" (@antonyjh1234) on "Richard J Murphy" channel.

Previous
6
Next
...
All

@AlRoasteri What a load of nonsense, a teacher liking one student is not an example of corrupt govt spending, next you will say if a nurse fluffs one pillow, it's unfair and corrupt, what a load of tosh.
1
@AlRoasteri Oh no, the rubbish man put my bin in the wrong place, it's unfair govt spending against me. Oh no the police officer let me through in traffic, I am being bribed by the govt, oh no the teacher gave my kid a b plus after I waved hello last week, should have only been a B. help against this unfair govt corruption...please!
1
@sproo6412 As taxation has to happen after the spending why don't the rich people think it is good money is being paid in tax that they didn't input?
1
@sproo6412 No govt in the world depends on tax for their spending, it is the whole point of this channel.
1
You have goods because people will take printed paper thinking it is valuable, most of your products are made over seas and if those people ever say, look we'd rather take goods instead of paper like what is happening through Brics, those motorways are going to be for horses. Your definition of very well is you just don't know how far you can fall, backed up by debt, that must return to zero.
1
but the Uk uses more energy for heating than it does electricity, how will the profits stay up and how will growth continue with rising prices?
1
Rich people can get into debt a lot easier because they have other assets, money is inputted into the system through loans that they can get any time they want, yes there might be a trickle down with the things they buy but mostly they buy assets which make money, like a business or property, that we are paying rent to. As more money ( debt) enters the system, then prices for these assets are an indication of the amount of debt that has gone through the property. All money in the world is based on debt and the prices for property, that money does not actually exist, as all money is debt, as soon as the loan is taken out and paid off that money does not exist. Then what can happen is a place might have a fire, it might be a windy day, 8 or 9 fires might somehow start at the same time in different places, the state insurance company will cancel fire insurance a few months before, the reservoir that has had funding for ten years remains undone and unfilled even though last year was the wettest and they would all be full. Then during a drought and major warnings from all fire departments the mayor will go away on a goodwill trip to Ghana, after donating all spare fire equipment to Ukraine. Along with that the Governor will be trying to make the place multi density for high-rises but of course was getting a lot of pushback considering the area and the neighbours, then what can happen is the banks or Blackrock because that's what has happened in Hawaii after the fires, will either repossess or give a low ball offer and because a company like Blackrock, the 1% rich people, they can then get loans for more debt, which we peasants call money. Rich people do not hoard or store money depriving us, because they know it is debt and debt always has an interest rate applied so it must be working for you or it devalues
1
Money is debt you have to understand where it originates 1st, rich people can get into debt a lot easier because they have other assets, money is inputted into the system through loans that they can get any time they want, yes there might be a trickle down with the things they buy but mostly they buy assets which make money, like a business or property, that we are paying rent to. As more money ( debt) enters the system, then prices for these assets are an indication of the amount of debt that has gone through the property. All money in the world is based on debt and the prices for property, that money does not actually exist, as all money is debt, as soon as the loan is taken out and paid off that money does not exist. Then what can happen is a place might have a fire, it might be a windy day, 8 or 9 fires might somehow start at the same time in different places, the state insurance company will cancel fire insurance a few months before, the reservoir that has had funding for ten years remains undone and unfilled even though last year was the wettest and they would all be full. Then during a drought and major warnings from all fire departments the mayor will go away on a goodwill trip to Ghana, after donating all spare fire equipment to Ukraine. Along with that the Governor will be trying to make the place multi density for high-rises but of course was getting a lot of pushback considering the area and the neighbours, then what can happen is the banks or Blackrock because that's what has happened in Hawaii after the fires, will either repossess or give a low ball offer and because a company like Blackrock, the 1% rich people, they can then get loans for more debt, which we peasants call money. Rich people do not hoard or store money depriving us, because they know it is debt and debt always has an interest rate applied so it must be working for you or it devalues.
1
Money is debt, rich people can get into debt a lot easier because they have other assets, money is inputted into the system through loans that they can get any time they want, yes there might be a trickle down with the things they buy but mostly they buy assets which make money, like a business or property, that we are paying rent to. As more money ( debt) enters the system, then prices for these assets are an indication of the amount of debt that has gone through the property. All money in the world is based on debt and the prices for property, that money does not actually exist, as all money is debt, as soon as the loan is taken out and paid off that money does not exist. Then what can happen is a place might have a fire, it might be a windy day, 8 or 9 fires might somehow start at the same time in different places, the state insurance company will cancel fire insurance a few months before, the reservoir that has had funding for ten years remains undone and unfilled even though last year was the wettest and they would all be full. Then during a drought and major warnings from all fire departments the mayor will go away on a goodwill trip to Ghana, after donating all spare fire equipment to Ukraine. Along with that the Governor will be trying to make the place multi density for high-rises but of course was getting a lot of pushback considering the area and the neighbours, then what can happen is the banks or Blackrock because that's what has happened in Hawaii after the fires, will either repossess or give a low ball offer and because a company like Blackrock, the 1% rich people, they can then get loans for more debt, which we peasants call money. Rich people do not hoard or store money depriving us, because they know it is debt and debt always has an interest rate applied so it must be working for you or it devalues.
1
@rakdur This complete deflection doesn't answer the point Nick made about how you were incorrect in your first comment. He's not projecting and you could have just said "yes you are right" and then attempted to answer his question instead of asking another.
1
@rakdur "Given how wealthier the already wealthy have gotten since the start of QE 15 years back, we have to either accept they are doing a bloody good job of investing it sensibly & efficiently, or else the government is to blame & have incentivized bad manner in which for the rich to invest." ". I have question for you: what do you think is their main criteria when selecting their investment vehicles? Is their their own gain? Or is it the gain of society at large? " You are saying the same thing and instead of understanding you are trying to be right with your rhetoric. "I believe he was trying to challenge a detail in the way I was trying to articulate my point." Your point was wrong, are you not able to be challenged over it? " I am interested in progressing the point made in the video, not in debating rethorical technicalities. And I believe my attempts mostly fulfill that intent." You are still involved with your ego instead of listening to the point made because you didn't progress his point when he answered you. You just keep trying to be right. "Online rethoric is often about technicalities" You offered no technicalities.
1
@rakdur "Given how wealthier the already wealthy have gotten since the start of QE 15 years back, we have to either accept they are doing a bloody good job of investing it sensibly & efficiently, or else the government is to blame & have incentivized bad manner in which for the rich to invest." ". I have question for you: what do you think is their main criteria when selecting their investment vehicles? Is their their own gain? Or is it the gain of society at large? " You are saying the same thing and instead of understanding you are trying to be right with your rhetoric. "I believe he was trying to challenge a detail in the way I was trying to articulate my point." Your point was wrong, are you not able to be challenged over it? " I am interested in progressing the point made in the video, not in debating rethorical technicalities. And I believe my attempts mostly fulfill that intent." You are still involved with your ego instead of listening to the point made because you didn't progress his point when he answered you. You just keep trying to be right. "Online rethoric is often about technicalities" You offered no technicalities.
1
@rakdur @rakdur "Given how wealthier the already wealthy have gotten since the start of QE 15 years back, we have to either accept they are doing a bloody good job of investing it sensibly & efficiently, or else the government is to blame & have incentivized bad manner in which for the rich to invest." ". I have question for you: what do you think is their main criteria when selecting their investment vehicles? Is their their own gain? Or is it the gain of society at large? " You are saying the same thing and instead of understanding you are trying to be right with your rhetoric. "I believe he was trying to challenge a detail in the way I was trying to articulate my point." Your point was wrong, are you not able to be challenged over it? " I am interested in progressing the point made in the video, not in debating rethorical technicalities. And I believe my attempts mostly fulfill that intent." You are still involved with your ego instead of listening to the point made because you didn't progress his point when he answered you. You just keep trying to be right. "Online rethoric is often about technicalities" You offered no technicalities.
1
@rakdur "Given how wealthier the already wealthy have gotten since the start of QE 15 years back, we have to either accept they are doing a bloody good job of investing it sensibly & efficiently, or else the government is to blame & have incentivized bad manner in which for the rich to invest." ". I have question for you: what do you think is their main criteria when selecting their investment vehicles? Is their their own gain? Or is it the gain of society at large? " You are saying the same thing and instead of understanding you are trying to be right with your rhetoric. "I believe he was trying to challenge a detail in the way I was trying to articulate my point." Your point was wrong, are you not able to be challenged over it? " I am interested in progressing the point made in the video, not in debating rethorical technicalities. And I believe my attempts mostly fulfill that intent." You are still involved with your ego instead of listening to the point made because you didn't progress his point when he answered you. You just keep trying to be right. "Online rethoric is often about technicalities" You offered no technicalities.
1
@rakdur "Online rethoric is often about technicalities" You offered no technicalities. "Given how wealthier the already wealthy have gotten since the start of QE 15 years back, we have to either accept they are doing a bloody good job of investing it sensibly & efficiently, or else the government is to blame & have incentivized bad manner in which for the rich to invest." ". I have question for you: what do you think is their main criteria when selecting their investment vehicles? Is their their own gain? Or is it the gain of society at large? " You are saying the same thing and instead of understanding you are trying to be right with your rhetoric. "I believe he was trying to challenge a detail in the way I was trying to articulate my point." Your point was wrong, are you not able to be challenged over it? " I am interested in progressing the point made in the video, not in debating rethorical technicalities. And I believe my attempts mostly fulfill that intent." You are still involved with your ego instead of listening to the point made because you didn't progress his point when he answered you. You just keep trying to be right.
1
@rakdur "Online rethoric is often about technicalities" You offered no technicalities.
1
@edheldude Define an asset that produces value if money isn't wealth?
1
@edheldude It was more a mental exercise, you mention roofing etc, the issue is they all get paid money and money might not be able to buy the same amount of energy in the future. Having a business that does these things doesn't really add value, it means more people can consume and then we still have to agree on what value is. Everybody having jobs could be seen as a negative if they have freehold consumption.
1
Bush Senior said we had a choice between the environment or jobs and then we all went back to work.
1
@legalfictionisfraud Yes I know money is debt but that has nothing to do with my comment.
1
If 1% are wealthy and do or don't spend according to some people, and the 99% get this wealth, will this lower overall consumption or increase it?
1
@manoo422 Plastic : a synthetic material made from a wide range of organic polymers such as polyethylene, PVC, nylon, etc., that can be moulded into shape while soft, and then set into a rigid or slightly elastic form
1
@indricotherium4802 clean energy won't replace the 6000 products we get from oil
1
@indricotherium4802 I am sorry, I do not know what this means "isn't the carbon incorporated in the product?"" Clean energy is electricity, in modern countries electricity is around 20% of total energy used, nylon, asphalt, car tyres etc edit along with diesel, oil for lubricants, rubber coated wires, they all have an energy value and are part of the 80% that isn't electric.
1
@indricotherium4802 Clean energy is made with coal and oil and won't be replaced without them.
1
@maplin007 Is there more to this point?
1
@maplin007 Well in this case the bucket is us, society, what more water does once it enters the bucket is inflate the prices of things inside the bucket, the more water that flows through a particular item and out the hole, the bigger it gets (price). What we have to understand is once the water passes through said item, the price is an indication of how much water has passed through it, not how much water is in the bucket, because of course that water has drained out the hole. All us little fishes have use this water to live but we don't control the bucket or the water or the size of the hole, and if you don't keep swimming will go out it too.
1
@ PS "Well in this case the bucket is us, society, what more water does once it enters the bucket is inflate the prices of things inside the bucket, the more water that flows through a particular item and out the hole, the bigger it gets (price)." Prices of assets are not an indication of the money in society, they are an indication of the debt that passed through it.
1
@johnmulligan912 As long as you understand taxes pay for no current government spending? That by you paying taxes as we are a debt based society, you are removing money from society? Third question, why are you happy removing money from the country and its inhabitants?
1
@maplin007 Your first sentence doesn't make sense to me, your second does but not to the first. Are you replying to a post I posted to someone else? The govt does get money from the central bank, in fact all money being controlled by central banks we may as well say all money is from the central bank as debt. This debt is what we call money. If the govt gets money from the bank then all loans need to be paid back. Did you see my other post regarding the bucket?
1
@maplin007 It is easier to keep it simple and call it what it is, debt. We use debt as a means of exchange, yes, as you say it has value because of this reason but that is the debt based system that people were born into, that what the debt is based on can pay off the loan. In the govt's case they can never run out of money because they have their own banks, so if they wanted to they could get their grass cut by people with nail clippers and pay them 200 dollars an hour, this of course would raise inflation or at the very least a guild of nail clipper grass cutters. Yes the point is to take as much of your time through having to earn this debt to get food etc, and because everything is relative, paying some people too much for too long, or all the profits of our efforts going to 1%, who don't care for us, has problems. Now imagine all money in the world is bank debt, losing value every second because they input more debt, as money is a product.
1
@maplin007 "Govts not able to run out of money", the amount they put in is usually to some percentage of public loans in the form of home loans, car loans etc, as the central bank want to keep the same amount going into society, if people are stressed out at work, businesses are overheated, loans are barely serviceable, nobody getting loans, then govt change will happen and it will be the public spending side of the same coin.
1
@maplin007 The 1% have the most debt flow through them because of our actions, sure they accumulate more of it but it is all ultimately our actions that provide these things AND we are forced into this system from an early age, as soon as we enter the schooling system controlled by them, as you say your time is taken because of this system, based on growth, that has basically finished. The only reason to be happy is if the system of continual debt, and govt debt is taken out by taxes so high govt spending high taxes, is that those people who think their 250k job or multi million property will still keep its value, will have further to fall. As long as you understand debt or rather other people's debt, is what we call money, the 1% holding all our debt and us working for them for no goal, no betterment of society, is turning out to not be in our best interests.
1
@maplin007 Saying the 1% have the most debt also means they have created the most money. Saying there should be a personal level on debt/money isn't the goal of the central bank and as all money is debt based it might lower the amount overall in the economy, like subsistence farmers around the world can't get money because the loan that it is might not get paid back. Hope you understand the debt to money connection and that govt debt is nothing like our debt. it is basically a V, everything the left side of the V is govt and bank debt, everything the right side is the amount of money in society. The bottom of the V is zero.
1
@maplin007 Yes we are all products of our environment and we didn't have a hand in creating it and supposedly aren't allowed to change it. We have a world where people have done things for money thinking it was like gold and that money would build up and keep it's value forever, it doesn't. It has caused people to do things for us where we have more than if we had just asked and the case for modern living where society etc has been fractured by it in some ways has made us poorer.
1
@Tensquaremetreworkshop Costs go up because the money supply increases, if half the money was removed from society do you think the prices would stay the same?
1
@doomlord6668 Money isn't limited by how much debt the population can take on as govt debt and private debt is different but the ability to get into debt shouldn't be the reason that is the amount of money or amount of food one can have, or shelter or medical care, having to hold other peoples debt to have these things is immoral. We are not going to see growth like that again because the world had a 400% growth rate the last 80 years and the next due to old age will mean it will be lucky to be 40% the next 80 so whatever this Ponzi scheme of continual growth is, can not continue.
1
@Tensquaremetreworkshop The goal isn't to remove half the money I am commenting on your post where you said progress means costs go up but central and private banks both create money, the more money they create, the more costs and prices go up, because there is more money in the system, inflation is more money, so costs go up. Inflation is caused, it is a part of the system of money.
1
@doomlord6668 As all debt is money and all money debt, the population will take as much money as is printed, it will all find a home and because so much is govt spending and they always have to be at negative zero, they are not like a business that wants to stay above zero, as long as it is taxed out again the amount of money supplied by govt doesn't matter, the govt can't go broke as you said.
1
The best thing big tobacco could do to slow down the decline in sales was to create doubt, big oil took over the same tactics and advertisers, you are the epitome of all that is needed these days, zero proof, just a wrong opinion is all it takes and people who do this should be ashamed. The science is well past proven so hopefully all you are doing is trying to drive comments..
1
6.3 million properties are currently at risk and another 2 million added by 2050. The claim that people will always be able to insure their home, when it's washed away, I mean no-one believes that all houses are going to be insured, if they flood every year or are under water. You seem to think insurance is a right. The Environment Agency's report is an update on assessments last done in 2018 and 2017. Improved data-gathering methods have shown a 43% higher risk than previously calculated. Do you think global warming or sea level rise won't matter or insurance will stop it?
1
@fanusrust Instead of going out in a boat with a line behind you motoring tell me how something works otherwise you are doing a style of fishing. Unless you can offer something else you have wasted my and your time writing this.
1
If I can, interest applies to all money in the system, if there is not growth then new money, as all money is bank debt, can not be brought into the system, except for govt loans. Economic growth mean's more money in the system and all money can be seen as a ticket to energy that we shouldn't use, in fossil fuels. Growth in this aspect is something must cost more, that can only happen if more money is in the system and because we are a debt based society, then new debt must be entered into. Low growth equals lower consumption, which is less money available.
1
How did the state get run properly and what period of time are you assuming, surely not Thatcher?
1
Because all money is debt, new money/debt must enter society because it is always leaving through taxes, the money for the old runway has passed through society, if the public aren't taking on new debt then they must or stop taxes, because as we all know watching Richards channel, taxes pay for no current spending and they only remove money from society. Without new debt instruments, poverty will have to happen so people can get unemployment benefit. Their only goal is to input debt, telling them they can replace all hospitals, trains and runways would be great for them, repairing existing doesn't mean as much profits and debt inputted and means slavery for the masses longer.
1
He doesn't need to control himself or the Fed to collapse it.
1
You might want to add the removal of oil from your life to that list.
1
Where do overseas rich people invest?
1
@physiocrat7143 Life is an open ended commitment, I don't understand your point. The need for the basics doesn't go away, currently we have an obesity epidemic, while last year the world produced enough food for every single person to gain weight, whose responsibility is it to stop that, let people starve to death and no-one takes responsibility? If carbon or emissions are the things to control and food and shelter, medical care/services are the least we know we can emit and everybody be fine, what standard will depend on the emission value.
1
@richardharvey1732 Epicentre or epidemic? We don't need to control money, we need to control the system humans live in. Money could be done away with, should be done away with and we all have a carbon value we can spend per day. Most people of course have to stop working and we go to a rolling public service jobs for each person in their life but controlling the human system is easy, if given the chance. We have spent our lives paying off debt thinking it had value, electricity in the UK is 15.68% of total energy used and renewables are around 2% of total energy, point being unless we stop working and thinking money can be exchanged for unlimited energy, the whole thing is done. Of course, it would mean a policy of less jobs, that shouldn't be a hard sell, tell 90% of the world they will get food, shelter and medical care for free but you have to stop working and live a low impact life and it would be a step up, would people vote for a policy of less jobs and a complete reset though? PS : Even an energy value would work, people get all these for free, do not work except five or however many tears each person has to be in the three trades. they get an energy value that could mean the same products are still sold, fly to the moon, 200,000 credits better save up if you only get given 2000 a month.
1

Previous
6
Next
...
All