Gyroscopic Investing

a troll (pron:) is someone who posts inflammatory messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

fortunately we have such a level headed group here most trollish comments get passed by with no response or small asides that don't detract from the topic at hand.

i don't know if we have any conscious trolls, or just people who have trouble with formulating coherent arguments for their beliefs who fall  back on inflammatory statements and lines of questioning as a defense, if we do have people consciously trolling us based on the lack of emotionally charged arguments, they have done a very poor job of it,
i happen to enjoy hearing alternative views to my own, and enjoy arguing against them, and i like to think both my understanding and my ability to express and defend my views get better with the practice, it would be a waste of my time and the time of the people who reply to me if they don't..

L82,

Yes.  And I'd hardly call doodle's comments inflammatory. Maybe a little lacking in organizing his thoughts at times but so am I and definitely lots of libertarians I know so I don't hold it against him.

Somehow I've been able to argue with the same libertarians without being called a troll after questioning private property and states rights a few dozen times so I don't know why I haven't gotten the same treatment... Though I think some have come close .

you have a better grasp of logic and fall prey to dropping straw-men or thinly veiled adhominums into your arguments far less than some (pro big gov) posters. you also tend to listen to and address the points made in reply to your posts...

none of us is perfect of course, i would drive any grammar Nazi up a wall with most of my posts, and people here are very kind to overlook it

I enjoy debating doodle most of the time, but only when he's interested in having an actual debate. Far too often it seems like he's just trying to get a rise out of people he knows will take the bait by posting something inflammatory and provocative, often totally unrelated to the topic. It's subtle, but like some famous Supreme Court justice's porn, I know it when I see it.

moda0306 wrote:


As someone who's wanted to shake some sense into doodle in a discussion or two, I'm glad he's here.

Ive always been talented at stirring things up....at least thats the way my mom puts it 

Anyways, my understanding of the monetary system has been totally revolutionized by debates here. Look at my earliest posts....If Marc Faber or Peter Schiff were Dr. Evil, I would be Mini Me. For just this Im grateful to have found this board.

Some of what I post I truly believe (at the moment) other stuff I throw out to unsettle things because I find a one sided debate centered around one particular line of thinking rather stale. You can hate me for what I do or call me a troll, but hopefully my questions inspire thought. I dont claim to have any answers or know anything. I dont know whats best, im just another lawyer in this courtroom. If your client is always going to be libertarianism, then I guess Ill have to argue for the other side.

I dont think what we do here is so much about winning the argument or finding the answer, but rather just deepening our understanding. I dont come here to have my beliefs reaffirmed, but to have them unsettled and challenged.

Not that Im comparing our intellects....(Im a total dunce) but I should probably keep in mind that Socrates was killed for stirring things up too much around Athens...

l82start wrote: you have a better grasp of logic and fall prey to dropping straw-men or thinly veiled adhominums into your arguments far less than some (pro big gov) posters. you also tend to listen to and address the points made in reply to your posts...

There is a huge correlation between believing in the magical government hallucinotion to fix or rescue everything wrong with society ("there ought to be a law!") and sloppy critical thinking or cognitive dysfunction.  I'm sure we all know liberals like that, heck its the archetype of what is so wrong about them.  They are like naive, eternal optimists vs skeptical, intelligent optimists.

I called the forum "center-right" because archetype liberals do not have a very good grasp of economics or finance, or more likely simply don't care and want easy, feel-good solutions that are someone'e else's problem to deal with.  We only have a token few that even begin to approach the left-wing direction and that includes doodle, moda, storm and stone.  But since we're all concerned about finance which is a traditionally a right-wing interest, it moderates the forum's political consensus.  The vast majority of us seem to be moderates in the middle with a heaping dose of economic sense, i.e. libertarians in that flawed left-right political spectrum.

I enjoy opposing views from either extreme that challenges dogma.  But it cannot be a knee-jerkism or trollish provocation that is typical of wing-nuts to be a convincing logical and theoretical argument for changing underlying belief frameworks (which is always a painful process).  What's important (to me anyway) is not ideas consistent with any given political philosophy, but real-world outcomes.  If outcomes are bad, they are bad.  No if or buts about it.  The majority of people seem to have the sports-team mentality with politics and simply don't care about facts or contrary evidence.

This whole discussion is enlightening and entertaining and educational.  However I sometimes wonder if Alaric is just outside the gates of the empire biding his time, waiting for one final stupid move by the emperor, e.g. tampering with a money generating machine that he and his minions did not understand any further than how to personally benefit from the lemmings.  In other words, are we all being distracted from issues that can bring down the US, and perhaps the world, economies while focusing on our portfolios and/or MMT-MR and such? 

This quote from the linked summary article caught my attention:

"Barbarian tribes had grown stronger for some time, and united themselves to challenge Roman hegemony. In the late 4th century, however, the Huns began to overrun barbarian territories. In 376, they forced many Thervings, led by Fritigern, to seek exile into the Eastern Roman Empire. Soon after, high taxes, Roman prejudice, and government corruption turned them against the Empire. The group began looting and pillaging throughout the Eastern Balkans."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_of_Rome_(410)

Sorry, just my weird mind at work. 

Which side are we on...the barbarians or rome? Judging by the sentiments of many people here toward the federal gov. I would say they would be among the barbarians :-)

doodle wrote: Which side are we on...the barbarians or rome? Judging by the sentiments of many people here toward the federal gov. I would say they would be among the barbarians :-)

Roman taxes were generally far less than we pay today.

By the end of the empire a 1% wealth tax (just like a money manager!) and a small head tax on adults and a 1% sales tax were common.  Inheritance tax of 5% on anything left except to spouse or children.  Tariffs on imports and exports were common, and commonly avoided unless you were a major merchant.

Corrupt tax assessors triggered a rebellion on the british isles in which thousands of troops and locals were killed.  New administrators were appointed following the rebellion and things were quiet for a long time.

Very little tolerance prior to the 20th century for tax rates requiring 1/3 to 1/2 the year of work.

AgAuMoney wrote:

doodle wrote: Which side are we on...the barbarians or rome? Judging by the sentiments of many people here toward the federal gov. I would say they would be among the barbarians :-)

Roman taxes were generally far less than we pay today.

By the end of the empire a 1% wealth tax (just like a money manager!) and a small head tax on adults and a 1% sales tax were common.  Inheritance tax of 5% on anything left except to spouse or children.  Tariffs on imports and exports were common, and commonly avoided unless you were a major merchant.

Corrupt tax assessors triggered a rebellion on the british isles in which thousands of troops and locals were killed.  New administrators were appointed following the rebellion and things were quiet for a long time.

Very little tolerance prior to the 20th century for tax rates requiring 1/3 to 1/2 the year of work.

IMHO it is tough to model our present tax system after that of an empire in which 30 to 40% of the population were slaves....

AgAuMoney wrote:Very little tolerance prior to the 20th century for tax rates requiring 1/3 to 1/2 the year of work.

Speaking of which , this Thursday is Tax Freedom Day!

I luckily escape taxes by living voluntarily under the poverty line and funneling my salary into tax sheltered accounts. :-) for those who are able to do this, its a great way to get a sizeable return on your earnings right off the bat.

doodle wrote: I luckily escape taxes by living voluntarily under the poverty line and funneling my salary into tax sheltered accounts. :-) for those who are able to do this, its a great way to get a sizeable return on your earnings right off the bat.

You probably don't even need tax-sheltered accounts: http://mreverydaydollar.com/the-genius- ... ing-taxes/

Filing individually, your capital gains and dividend tax rates are ZERO if you make under $36k + the standard deduction + what you put in your traditional IRA.

Pointedstick wrote:

doodle wrote: I luckily escape taxes by living voluntarily under the poverty line and funneling my salary into tax sheltered accounts. :-) for those who are able to do this, its a great way to get a sizeable return on your earnings right off the bat.

You probably don't even need tax-sheltered accounts: http://mreverydaydollar.com/the-genius- ... ing-taxes/

Filing individually, your capital gains and dividend tax rates are ZERO if you make under $36k + the standard deduction + what you put in your traditional IRA.

I mean I pay zero income tax (state or federal)

Doodle,

Do you do any Roth?  If you are paying zero federal and state income tax, it's very likely that you're getting no tax benefit for at least some of your contributions, and several thousand more at very low rates.  When this all comes out someday, it could very likely be at much higher tax rates.  This means a mix of some Roth would be a great idea.

If you're unsure as to how traditional/Roth dilemmas should be organized in our minds, there is a really nice thread on here about how we should view the decision of how to allocate our resources. 

Pointedstick wrote: Filing individually, your capital gains and dividend tax rates are ZERO if you make under $36k + the standard deduction + what you put in your traditional IRA.

This only applies to long-term and qualified dividends.  What slips through to the short-term would be pretty regressive at a flat 10% which is a ridiculously small bracket.