Kathaksung's Super Fun Happy Thread ^_^

Status
Not open for further replies.
It is our pleasure, because bad english is easier for the government to track.
They have software that detects grammatical errors, and they use it to identify "foreigners" (AKA terror suspects) on the internet.
 
13. Fallacy (9/12/05)

Fallacy 1. "Politicians stole all the extra SS tax money and spent them in the general fund for their own purpose."

Answer: The surplus of S.S. tax are now in the form of "I.O.U." which is no difference to the national bond.

To the logic of fallacy, when people deposit their money in bank, he will rant: "The money is all gone. The bank spent it by lending it to the others. But what's the business with him how does bank spend the deposit? What people care is the bank will pay them back the deposit with interest.

In sameway, what's business with him when the Congress spend it in general fund? Only when they will pay it back with interest. Remember if they don't borrow from S.S.Trust fund, they still will borrow by issueing Treasury note.

Fallacy 2. "I like privatization because I can handle it by myself. I want have my own choice."

Answer: The original purpose to set up Social Security is to guarantee people will have a stable income when they retired. Privatization won't guarantee this. It put Social Security in a risk.

People pay insurance company. The payment is guaranteed to be used in retirement payment. Bush lured them to a casino, said that people may win more. The reality is people then will exchange their money with a paper its value may evaporate when economy turns downward.
It's not for a stable society but lead the society to an dangerous gamble.

Yes, there are many choice of gamble: Black Jack, slot machine.... but more you gamble more you will lose.

Fallacy 3. "Social Security will collapse".

Answer: It's an intimidation. A tactic Bush used to use all the time. He had cried, "sky is falling" 28 years ago, the sky didn't fall.

Re: 'For Bush, a Long Embrace of Social Security Plan

By RICHARD W. STEVENSON

Published: February 27, 2005

in the summer of 1978, in the heat of his unsuccessful race for a House seat from West Texas, G.W.Bush said Social Security "will be bust in 10 years unless there are some changes,"

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/27/p...f02348dd46b&hp&ex=1109480400&partner=homepage

He scared us into an unnecessary war. He is now scaring us to give him the power to handle our retirement fund. But insolvency is 37 years away. (2042) If US could solve the same problem in 1978, so can they do in 2042. Bush has better to deal with the historical national deficit which he created. If he can't handle the war spending and disaster spending well, US economy will collapse much earlier than S.S. he intimidated.
 
Kathakasung. What you say is true...
But what do you want me to do now that you have convinced me?
Take up arms?
 
Hi again everyone :)

I'm not a conspiracy theorist or anything so please, bear with me for a sec. I'll try to summ up what kathaksung is trying to say (at least my interpretation of it), so please take at least a second to read this.

Stock market is dependent on offer and demand. Basic 101, yes? ok

If you take the after-WW2 babyboom, around 1945, where lots of people were born. This is true, look it up.

Except for those who retired early, all those babyboom people will soon reach the age where they will want to retrieve their money to be able to pay for retirement. Still with me?

Ok, now, if you consider the stock market's demand was artificially raised by using retirement money as stock-buyer money (they used social security reserve money to buy TONS of stock), you can imagine what will happen when all those babyboomers will want to cash in on their stockmoney. There will be a huge offer on the market, and for now at least, there is nobody who will buy this stock from the babyboomers, so this means no demand, which means all the stocks who where bought with babyboomer social security money will go down. And I mean really down.

Since there is so much babyboomer social security money in the stock market, this will have a huge impact.

kathaksung is also saying they are trying to get people not to cash in their stocks.

If you don't understand how the stock market works, you won't understand what he's saying.

His points are pretty valid. A lot of people will retire soon, and they'll all want to cash in their shares around the same time. This means somebody has to be willing to buy these share, else the market will go down, or even crash (I don't know the weight of social security money on the stock market though)

So, because the babyboom happened around let's say 1945, they'll all want to cash in their (stock)money about 65 years later (to pay for their retirement), around 2010.

Think about it.

And I agree with kathaksung that it's pretty weak to throw stones at him just because you don't understand him (and only then). It really bugs me when people do that to me. I'm sure even though he sounds pretty wacky, he goes a great length to check his data, so when replying we could show a little respect. Plus, I enjoyed reading this thread.
 
john3571000 said:
Capitalism FTW!!!!!!!

seriously dude bad things happen when you start threads.....like bannings :E
Click to expand...

<3
 
Element Alpha said:
Are you guys seriously spamming this thread?
Click to expand...

Are you actually taking this guy seriously? :O

^^ Super Fun Happy Thread! No poopoo polticial discussion allowed in here, no sir.
 
KagePrototype said:
Are you actually taking this guy seriously? :O
Click to expand...

You can't dismiss a case just because of who submitted it.

I could even argue that a nutcase still makes sense sometimes. It's up to you wether you care to listen or not.

Anyway, I will investigate this for myself and make up my own mind. He got my attention, that's for sure. When you have relatives who expect to cash in on their stocks at the same time as everyone else does, you're talking about money. And that's no joke, theory conspiracist or not. So you go ahead and have a good laugh in the meantime, I guess.
 
Bloody Hell element one what do you take us for? fools? There are some very intelligent people on these boards who love to argue about anything. There is NO argument here at all.
We understand what he is saying probably better than himself and you know what, it's not even worth debating because his points MAKE NO SENSE. I would at least pride myself to know that seeing as I'm majoring in Finance.
The stock market is about risk - don't like risk? Then don't trade - you can't get any more duh than that.
 
Element Alpha said:
Stock market is dependent on offer and demand. Basic 101, yes? ok

If you take the after-WW2 babyboom, around 1945, where lots of people were born. This is true, look it up.

Except for those who retired early, all those babyboom people will soon reach the age where they will want to retrieve their money to be able to pay for retirement. Still with me?

Ok, now, if you consider the stock market's demand was artificially raised by using retirement money as stock-buyer money (they used social security reserve money to buy TONS of stock), you can imagine what will happen when all those babyboomers will want to cash in on their stockmoney. There will be a huge offer on the market, and for now at least, there is nobody who will buy this stock from the babyboomers, so this means no demand, which means all the stocks who where bought with babyboomer social security money will go down. And I mean really down.

Since there is so much babyboomer social security money in the stock market, this will have a huge impact.

kathaksung is also saying they are trying to get people not to cash in their stocks.

If you don't understand how the stock market works, you won't understand what he's saying.

His points are pretty valid. A lot of people will retire soon, and they'll all want to cash in their shares around the same time. This means somebody has to be willing to buy these share, else the market will go down, or even crash (I don't know the weight of social security money on the stock market though)

So, because the babyboom happened around let's say 1945, they'll all want to cash in their (stock)money about 65 years later (to pay for their retirement), around 2010.
Click to expand...
He has used 350,000 words to describe what you have in 59 words, and therefore, not many of us have the patience to read it.

Kathaksung will be 60 in a few days here, so is pretty concerned with the stock market/retirement. Insanely paranoid or not, sometimes just because you think someone is after you doesn't mean they aren't. :O


For instance - I am a Federal Agent working undercover, and part of my job was to join this website to monitor him. If I tell him that I am a federal agent, then he will doubt that I am. Simple.

Now since I have said that, It will help him go ****ing insane. Soon we can chalk it up to being senile, but for now, we'll just stick with paranoid delusions/batshit crazy. So he really works against himself in getting the word out. We don't really have to do much.
 
john3571000 said:
Bloody Hell element one what do you take us for? fools? There are some very intelligent people on these boards who love to argue about anything. There is NO argument here at all.
We understand what he is saying probably better than himself and you know what, it's not even worth debating because his points MAKE NO SENSE. I would at least pride myself to know that seeing as I'm majoring in Finance.
The stock market is about risk - don't like risk? Then don't trade - you can't get any more duh than that.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry baby, I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. :dork:

Nah, I'm really not judging anyone. This is a gaming website so there's bound to be at least some people here who aren't majoring in finance.

Furthermore, how does he make no sense? I agree that he seems a bit perseverent, but that doesn't mean his proposal is flawed, does it? If anything doesn't make sense, if I may, is your answer to his proposal:
john3571000 said:
The stock market is about risk - don't like risk? Then don't trade - you can't get any more duh than that.
Click to expand...

He is talking about people who are going to sell their stocks all at the same time. He's just saying there's a serious possibility for a market crash (and rambles on about "proof", which is the part that makes him annoying, I guess).

edit: a market crash would affect most of us in a very serious way, like those other times when it happened.(note: this edit was for the non-finance majoring people)

And to enter the subject, answer this:
What's the age category with the most money invested in stock? And secondly, guess when most people in this age category would sell their stock?

Anyway, I'm not saying we should all panic or whatever, I'm just more annoyed by seeing everyone jump on the "he's crazy wagon" and spamming this thread. One "this guy is a crazy internet conspiracist" would have been enough. It's also my nature to play the 'weak' persons' advocate in some instances. I'm not trying to make anyone feel stupid or be some kind of bully.

And I did enjoy his proposal. I'm sure there are a lot of lurkers (hi guys :)) who enjoyed it as well.
 
KagePrototype said:
Are you actually taking this guy seriously? :O

^^ Super Fun Happy Thread! No poopoo polticial discussion allowed in here, no sir.
Click to expand...

At least a moderator is so. He changed the topic of this thread. If It's an ordinary thread, he'd leave it alone. If he was serious, even acted to change the topic, then it means there is something in this thread. Some people can't bear it any more. It may indicate that there will be some big change in stock market. They don't want my theory may affect their manipulation.
 
kathaksung said:
At least a moderator is so. He changed the topic of this thread. If It's an ordinary thread, he'd leave it alone. If he was serious, even acted to change the topic, then it means there is something in this thread. Some people can't bear it any more. It may indicate that there will be some big change in stock market. They don't want my theory may affect their manipulation.
Click to expand...
So how exactly did you get this crazy in the first place? What was your big "realization" one day that made you "notice" all these conspiracy theories out there in the world?
 
Wow, I just read 5 pages (20 ppp) of bullshit.

But please, do go on.
 
lol, well alot details cant be substantiated unless your one of the people controlling the cashflow in the economy.

But theres one thing I do agree with, and that is pretty much every political action hinges on economic stability. Then just take into account what Carl Marx said...

Basically while all kinds of secondary factors can trigger economic crises, it is the fundamental contradictions of capitalism that are the underlying cause. The current crisis stems not from a few accountancy fiddles, but from the fact that the working class collectively cannot afford to buy back the product of their labour. Marx explains that capitalism partially overcomes this contradiction by ploughing the surplus back into industry.

But this, in turn, leads to an even greater production of goods, which the working class at a certain stage is incapable of buying back. This leads to a crisis of overproduction.

For a temporary period the US market was able to ameliorate the problems of overproduction by acting as the buyer of last resort for the world's goods.

If your economy is in crisis the last thing you want it to do obviously is have it collapse, because even the richest of rich loose all their power. It's highly undesirable and is possibly the strongest driving force behind the political decisions we are seeing take place today,

It is quite simply the basis of society and some people don't even realise this, People seem more inclined to think that terrorisim is what justifies such large scale wars recently when the politics of the situation are never that black and white, it's an all encompassing move to secure economic stability or atleast to try to do so.
 
I've only skimmed through this thread but it seems to me this guy is just spouting a conspiracy theory (in parts to prolong the life of this thread) and rather than debating he waits until a thread is locked (because he won't debate) then bitches about censorship.
 
That tidal wave is actually due in 2007 mechagodzilla. they got the date wrong.
 
14. Stock market profit came from the buyers not from the company.

Fallacy 4. "Company did spend their profit in stock market. Some of them bought the stock of their own company."

----------------

Answer. This is a typical problem how CEO of companies abusing their power. Yes, some companies did buy the stock of their own to boost the stock price. But remember the money they spent were the profit of company. It belongs to shareholders. The money should be distribute to shareholders as divident. But the CEO intercepted the profit to manipulate the stock market. They don't work for the interest of shareholders but for the interest of inside group.

So there is an important opinion you must know: that the profit gain from the stock market is not from the company but from the later buyers. (potential loser)

An individual company may gain a good profit. That profit won't play the role to raise the gain in stock trading. The company profit is paid to stock holders as divident. Whatever the media tell you the economy is good, the fact of current situation is: The average divident rate of stock market is 1.5%. You invest 10 dollars in stock, the average divident income is 15 cents per year.

Then how can you have a 11% annual gain in stock market trading? It's from the money of other buyers. When you bought "Google" at $100 a share and sold it at $300, keep in mind that it's not the "google" company paid you the $300 but another buyer paid it. So it's the other buyers' investment let you make money.

This is a point very important. Not the Company profit but the continueing coming investment push up the stock market.

To make it more easy to understand, the trading stock worth at $100,(or you can say it's 100 billion) next year new investment coming at $111, (or 111 billion) then there is a 11% growing up rate. Because government pushed the pension fund into the market these years, so you saw an average 11% gain each year. It only means more and more pension money became paper. Money was harvested by sellers. What left for later buyers are only stock papers, (they hope new buyers will take it over with even higher price).

What is the current stock market? A bunch of papers. The stock holders exchanged them with their pension fund. (with 10 years, 20years...even 40 years of their pension fund). If they want to cash these papers, who had that much money? That's why Bush desperately to push the S.S. fund to save the market from collapse.

If the Privatization succeed, it only delay the crisis from expoision but make the balloon bigger. The young generation will be the victim because Bush lured them to take over the hot potato(stock paper) with their retirement fund.
 
Don't you have something better to do?

It doesn't look like anyone takes you seriously, or even reads your posts.
 
gold!! invest in gold! when the market eventually crashes (due to unseen machinations by the illuminati) you'll have to have some form of currency to buy your cans of lentils to stock up your fall-out shelter/survival command post
 
I've got to say Kathakacrazysinger, this thread titles pretty misleading.
 
So basically, some hippie is quoting some theory and we're bashing since we all love our capitalism? :stare:
 
Stingey said:
So basically, some hippie is quoting some theory and we're bashing since we all love our capitalism? :stare:
Click to expand...
No, we're bashing him because he is incapable of having a debate and is just posting his (some rather obvious) points.
 
ríomhaire said:
No, we're bashing him because he is incapable of having a debate and is just posting his (some rather obvious) points.
Click to expand...

And not to mention the fact, if you search on the internet, his posts are on every forum out there.

Get a blog!
 
ríomhaire said:
No, we're bashing him because he is incapable of having a debate and is just posting his (some rather obvious) points.
Click to expand...

It's you have nothing to debate except throwing stones.
 
kathaksung said:
It's you have nothing to debate except throwing stones.
Click to expand...

It's you have nothing to debate except throwing stones.
 
Pwnt by sentence structure :p
Kataksung, if you tried debating instead of just mindlessly posting the same obvious stuff then MAYBE, just maybe, we'd actually give you a little more resepct
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
From Warren Spector to Arkane Studios: Half-Life 2's cancelled Ravenholm episode
Replies
2
Views
10K
Clan Wolf 2
Clan Wolf 2
B
Marc Laidlaw's Half-Life development documents
Replies
3
Views
18K
Barnz
B
B
Community Interviews: Tony Newton, co-creator of Redemption
Replies
0
Views
5K
Barnz
B
Omnomnick
Examining The Files Of "SteamVR Performance Test" & "Aperture Robot Repair"
Replies
27
Views
91K
MFL
MFL
Back
Top