SerS - The Serious Squad Thread

PM sent.

Please wait for reply.

:arrow:

u guys need to PM ur leader for topics? oh come on

why don't guys just come up with something instead?

don't the squad members have the authority to do even that?

I PM'ed the topic CHANGER, so he knows his proposal for his new topic has been approved.

Oh, and quit antagonizing us!

:arrow:

sorry if i offended u somehow, i didn't mean to...

i'm just waitin for the new topic, anxiously...

Sorry I'm late

Well anyway, the new topic for discussion will be Legal Tender
______________________________________________
When currency was first introduced by our government, it served as a coupon that could be redeemed for its value in gold. Of course when the American population began to experience exponential growth there was also a huge surge in circulated currency. It was impossible to back so much currency with gold. The government had a simple solution, issue legal tender. Look at any paper money you have and it will read "This Note is Legal Tender For All Debts Public And Private". What you are holding in your hand is merely worth the paper itself. It has no tangible value. So , at any given time all of the money we hold could become worthless. With so much dependence on our currency, a modern day stock market crash would be nearly apocalyptic, and with the huge debt that America has gotten itself into with the war in Iraq this is very possible. So what are your thoughts, something we should worry about as civilians, or something that the government will do another "good job" of handling by themselves? Feel free to use any references.

I believe our government, as well as every other government in the world, is well aware of this potential danger to society, while I do say as citizens, we should be aware, we must realize, we have no other way of currency to go back to. Too many people are ignorant about the tangible value of a gold coin as they are about paper tender, I even remember paying for gas asking the cashier if they took "Federal Reserve Notes" to which she responded,"No, we only except credit cards or cash", so it's easy to assume the negligence of the majority of the population. Should the stock market crash, and our paper currency were rendered useless, the only alternative we'd have would be to go back to the good ol' days of bartering, which is a system the masses know little about.

I failed to mention in the earlier post just exactly what I meant by an apocalyptic stock market crash, so here it is:
____________________-
Modern day America is a world power. The unique thing about our country is that we rely heavily on imported goods, even our military does (we actually import weapons from Iraq!). If our market crashed, we would forfeit our position as a world power. With all the powerful enemies that America has made, it would likely become a grave situation.

@aznstoner

The main problem that I see with a barter system is the difficulty to obtain trade able goods. Many of the valuable items that we hold would be useless after a crash. Food would definitely be top priority, but now that we rely on grocery stores to provide us with those goods, how would the average person be able to fully engage in trade. Clothing would be another item of value, and the average person would not have enough clothing to trade for a ling period of time. So who would have the upper hand under this system, grocers, farmers, and clothing manufacturers?

I've thought about it many times when I was a kid. How a piece of paper could hold such value? It really doesn't. It is credit in a way, that the person who holds this has earned it by various means to use it to gain something in return. As such if the collapse of the stock market or a disaster happens that renders the legal tender usless, then I believe we will move on to the real credit system. I think instead of the government being the one to print money, it will be the giant companies that are prominant that will be the ones who hand out "credits". I don't know what form this new "credit" will take, but if it does, it will be decided by the union of these giant corporations that decide the value of it, and will be an agreement of how much a worker gets. That worker will then in turn recieve it to buy the goods he needs or wants. That's what I think will happen if the current currency system goes Kaplooey.

Tender is worth as much as people think it is. That is what the market is all about. If I buy contracts on currency I then agree that the dollar is worth that much. I then make money worth more by selling to someone else who thinks they can in turn make a profit. Based on whether they can prove to someone else by being a douche that it's worth more then the dollar goes up. If sentiment of people thinking that they won't be able to buy more with the same dollar in the next minute/week/year then they sell their contracts for less to get something tangible and the worth goes down.

Wow, isn't that insanely retarded. But that's exactly how we determine the worth of anything, by demand. Gold isn't worth jack shit, but with more people there's less of it to go around. SOooo, if you go genocidal on most of the earth's races Gold would lose value in theory... but you would increase the amount of goods the remaining people would be willing to trade with while at the same time reducing the world's gross product of goods.

Trade is mental rape, you need a lot of lubricant to get through it but in the same way thinking about is perversely fun....after the pain and bleeding.

Reminds me of Global Economics...The stock market is all in your head, and once the masses realize that, it'll all fall to the ground in a twitching heap...

if the tender's value will decrease,
wouldn't decreasing he amount tenders
in circulation increase it's value?

Limitedly, until the usage of the tender becomes scarce because it's not circulating then people start using something that's more easily accessible. I mean that's what happened to gold, it used to be easily accessible and people would use it for trade, then it became more hoarded and guarded, leaving less people to use it. People still will trade with it but good luck trying to go to your local bar and use it to buy something at trade value.

The same thing would happen to the dollar, we'd covet it as something worthwhile when it passes by but then just start using a foreign currency or rare metal as something more accessible for trade. Because when you need that beer, you get the beer.

I would have worded my reply to the topic differently but pretty much have said the same thing. +rep.

is it just me or there's a need to change the topic again?

spam's got it i think(didn't really get it myself, but it takes time to absorb all that info that's new to me)

I agree new topic spam ended it right off the start.

http://dietrichthrall.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/dark-knight-why-so-serious1.jpg
Why so serious, serious squad?

Already did that in the last serious squad thread. :roll:

Anyway I agree that the topic should be changed. I think there is room for discussion it's just no one has anything to contribute. So where's the topic changer at?

Okay I am back and I see that this thread is nearly dead.
Since the topicchanger does not want to open up a new topic, I made a new rule (also added this rule to the first post)

ADD-RULE:
basiclly we still use aznstoners suggestion with the addition of the following.

If the topicposter hasn´t changed the topic after lets say 6 hours and most people are willing to change, any person can suggest a new topic (so be sure to check the time when most people want to change topic. also be sure to check the timezone your living in). If it happens that two persons post a new topic at the same time, the last persons topic have to be deleted.

You can also suggest other delaytimes, but for now it is 6 hours.

btw new topic is now: nuclear energy

In my opinion the only way to overcome the problems of the limited amount of fuel that is left and airpollution. Not only that this energy source is already well known, it is also cleaner compared to lignite. And at least nuclear energy is the only way to assure the needed amount of energy. Okay sun,wind,water and earthheat power plants are way saver than nuclear energie but all of them can not secure to provide enough energie to cover the base load of energy that humanity needs. If we would have used nuclear enengry wisely in former times than we could have saved fuel long time ago. All the guy saying that nuclear energy is to dangerous are nuts and forgot that there is hardly any other way. I mean even germany has set the target to no longer use nuclear energy anymore, but if humanity want to use renewable sources than we have to use a few nuclear power plants to secure the base load as I have already said earlier.

Agreed. Nuclear energy is the best alternative to fossil fuel in my opinion. The Cherynobyl accident caused many to be afraid of it that there aren't many power plants built. The only reason why the accident at Chrerynobyl happened is because lack of personel training and inferior electronics. It is quite clean compared to fossil fuel, though it does have some risks, but there is a risk to everything in the world... Not only is the power almost infinite, it can provide a lot of power with just one plant which means less need to be built meaning less cost. (though I guess that is made up by the maintenence...)