Down another 400, thanks Tea Party!

Nope. Not at all.

 

Caught in another lie. In discussing debt you posted this:

"Jane, you ignorant . . ." -- Dan Aykroyd

 

God, this is so funny to watch you pretend you haven't been schooled by Inphormer six ways to Sunday.

Maybe if you insist that he hasn't owned you, nobody will notice.

 

Those who voted "no" are **********s; right?

 

If you can't even tell me a single factual statement about the Treasury auction that occurred a few weeks ago you have NO credibility when discussing the US' creditworthiness.

I was kind of joking around at first, but now I'm beginning to realize you really have no idea what you're talking about. You seriously can't look up the publicly posted data about the last 30 year bond auction when I even give you the link to the government's treasury website? You're not THAT pathetic. Are you?

 

So in other words the claim can't be backed up?

 

You accused me of saying this:

I said this:

I don't see the words "causes debt" in my post. You lied.

 

The burden is on you to substantiate your claims. The reason for this, is because if there is no substance to your claim, one can google for hours and hours and hours and never find evidence to support a position they did not believe was correct to begin with.

This is not unknown to you. You cannot support your claim. You have been run through.

 

....needlessly.

It's like executing Ronald McDonald.

 

The progressive love-fest is in full swing now. Do you want us to give you and Inphormer some privacy?

 

Awwww, it just hurts so much for you and your little Tea Bags to be owned.

Boo hoo.

 

When I say something, I don't expect people to take my word for it. My claims are always backed up with some sort of information which proves my argument for me. To tell someone else to do their own research to support your claim is not laziness on the part of your opponent. It's laziness on the part of whoever condones this. It merely shows that you don't even take yourself seriously if you 're just telling someone else to look up your own evidence because you simply made it up or can't find it yourself.

Here are the top 5 Google searches. None of the sources actually supports his claim.

Also the source he gave at treasury.gov wasn't even specific. So I can only conclude as usually you both have no idea what you are saying.

 

Actually almost every knowledgeable person already knows what Inphormer poster.

So you're admitting you know nothing about t-bill sales!

I thought so.

 

A saying comes to mind...

Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.

 

Look guys, if he can't back up his assertions it's likely because they aren't true even a little bit.

DON'T FEED THE TROLLS!

 

At least I'm not a liar.



http://www.politicalforum.com/4301701-post260.html

 

So the US doesn't issue 30 year bonds, huh?

You're an idiot

OWNED!!!!!

 

The Fed can set short and long term interests rates as high or low as they want. In order for the Fed to borrow at the low rates we have been borrowing at they have to have a willing lender. The problem is that sometime in the near future the lenders will no longer be willing. The US is cannot attract lenders at the low rates we have for 30 years because they know rates aren't going to stay low.

 

What do you expect? America elected a guy with a resume that wouldn't get him a middle management job for any business.

 

This ^^^

Poor Miss J is some kind of masochist who has demonstrated her inability to use Google.

 

At least she's not a liar.

 

Yes, and another saying comes to mind:

OWNED!

 

Ok Miss Jonelyn, please never repeat this mindless drivel ever again. Save yourself the embarrassment. The Fed does NOT set the interest rate on 30 year bonds to whatever interest rate they want. You have NO idea how the fiscal policy of the United States works. You should not have an opinion let alone vote. You have A LOT of reading in your future before you can begin to comprehend this topic.

 

You mean you're finally going to admit that printing money doesn't cause debt.

You're all over the map, you poor bagger.

It happens

 

I never said "printing money causes debt". That is a demonstrable lie. Stop compounding your lie with obtuse denial and transparent deflection.