slydrifter39 said:Look, I don't want to play moderator here, but this guy looks like a total plant sent specifically to wreck the group we're trying to build. Feels like a paid shill to me. Honestly, just delete him. 🤷
Nicole Gomez38 said:The whole point of non-credit money issuance is to balance debt against the money supply—if you don't have that balance, debt outpaces liquidity almost immediately (under the American monetary model 4 x)
Basically, any monetary system that relies solely on long-term credit rather than primary (non-credit) issuance is a fast track to total economic collapse; it just uses interest rates to bleed every bit of value dry. We see the evidence in real life every day—people just refuse to admit it.
The real killer is what I call "cumulative interest." Picture an American city with a million productive citizens. If everyone takes a one-year loan from $333 at a 10% interest rate, they’ll eventually have to pay back $367. After that year, they owe a combined $1.1 billion. The bank pockets $100 million, leaving everyone with $33 less than they started with. To bridge the gap, they take out a new loan, but this time it's for $367. By using $33 to cover the initial loss, they end up with $333 in debt. But now, the repayment requirement jumps to $403. Two years in, everyone is left with $70 less than their starting point. Meanwhile, the bank has raked in another $110 million, totaling $210 million in profit. As people take larger loans to stay afloat, the cycle repeats—you're drowning in deeper debt while your actual cash disappears.
To maintain the same level of purchasing power, we have to borrow more and more just to keep up. And what do the political elites do? Instead of fixing the broken monetary model, they push the country and its people into even deeper debt—essentially driving us toward modern-day debt slavery. Sadly, most folks won't realize how unsustainable this is until it's too late—until the day their accounts are frozen or the collectors come knocking. And honestly, some won't even realize it then.
Both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party claim that a monetary model where the Federal Reserve acts as an exchange bureau (with currency clauses) is fine, yet they also argue that long-term non-credit money issuance isn't sustainable. But those of you reading this can see the truth! Unfortunately, to see it clearly, you practically have to bang your head against a wall. The system will keep deceiving you until enough people hit that wall and realize the entire model is unsustainable—it's predatory, plain and simple.
The current American monetary system looks a lot like the Argentine system right before its crash... http://zelenapolitika.wordpress.com/...veo-u-propast/
Mr. Pernar, please, just let people go about forming their own association; honestly, the absolute most you could possibly offer at this stage is some quiet support through your membership. We aren't out here trying to chase political glory or attempt to dismantle capitalism—that isn't the mission. The goals have been (more or less) clearly defined, yet the only tool left in the kit seems to be using voter numbers as a form of political blackmail.
I realize how cynical and rather ugly that sounds when put down on paper, but I fear it’s the only tactic that still carries any weight in this climate.
Honestly, my advice would be to just sit down for a chat with your supervisor or the manager in charge. She’s the one who dropped the ball here, and typically, unless we're talking about some massive, catastrophic loss of funds, companies tend to dock the employee's pay directly. At the end of the day, customers shouldn't have to bear the brunt of an internal blunder like this. Sure, she could technically try to fight it through a private lawsuit, but let's be real—it’s hardly worth the legal fees or the headache. Besides, if she's being that arrogant about it, maybe she actually deserves the wake-up call...
To all of me, this whole thing just smells like pre-election PR fluff. Honestly, having a functional personal bankruptcy system in place would have been absolutely vital before the credit expansion really took off. If we had actually prioritized that back then, I suspect far fewer people would be drowning in debt today, and we probably wouldn't be seeing this insane, skyrocketing surge in housing prices across the country...
Here is the link to an article detailing what our local banks have to say about the situation 😁
I really think you need to look beyond the immediate horizon and ask around out there; after all, there are so many different types of loans available, and people were successfully securing them just fine in the past, so I see absolutely no reason why they shouldn't be able to do so now. Besides, there are plenty of major institutions operating in America that simply don't have a footprint here yet...
Why not just head down to the local branches and ask them straight up? I heard through the grapevine that Chase might be offering some specific loan programs tailored for American citizensinfo@skb.si
The points sasa00 (is) omitting actually have absolutely nothing to do with what you all are looking for here.
Lawrence Wright7 said:The principal is sitting at about $80,000. I poured a ridiculous amount of sweat, blood, and tears into this place—probably another $15,000 in upgrades alone. Yeah, I’m planning to drop the price just enough to move it, but I'm not going to get fleeced. I’ve actually signed contracts with three different real estate agencies here in the States, and they all tell me the price is totally fair considering the square footage and how well-equipped everything is. http://www.zillow.com/property-details...zik=us&nid=178 It’s just that the timing for selling right now is absolutely terrible.
Or perhaps it's simply the wrong price for this particular moment in time. I suppose it all depends on which angle you choose to take, though I must say, it truly warms my heart to see someone maintaining such a remarkably positive outlook despite everything going on around us!
driftingmarlin52 said:Hey... just saw an article online saying we might be able to take out loans abroad starting January 1st. I’m actually looking into doing some major home renovations right now, so I wanted to get your take. Is this a smart move? Are their contracts better structured—like, can they just hike interest rates on a whim? Do they have better consumer protection laws? And which country is leading the pack here... just drop whatever you know...
Things seem to be getting much more regulated and streamlined, though when it comes to interest rates, don't expect them to match what we see here—in fact, they'll likely be higher than what a local citizen would pay in that particular country. We really need to wait and see how this plays out in practice, but if this initiative actually takes flight, it could potentially force our own domestic lenders to finally lower their rates. Here in the States, that would be quite something.
I’ve been scouring this forum and the rest of the web, but I can't find any concrete information on this. I'm really hoping someone here can point me in the right direction.
To get straight to the point, a friend of mine has landed himself in—to put it politely—a complete shitshow. 🙄 He’s a full-time, permanent employee at a firm based in San Francisco, earning roughly $1.50 (it fluctuates month to month depending on his hours). Recently, he took out a 10-year loan from the bank to clear out some old debts he was carrying, with monthly payments set at $633. Because it's a formal arrangement, there's an administrative garnishment on his wages, meaning the payroll department deducts those $633 immediately. On top of the loan, he's also dealing with child support garnishments, which work just like the loan deduction, $667 directly from his paycheck, because he wasn't keeping up with his previous obligations. At least with this, we know it's going to be a recurring monthly hit.
Based on his total salary of $1.50, the payroll office takes out both the loan and the support payments, totaling $1300. This leaves him with a measly $167 hitting his bank account every month.
I think I heard somewhere—or maybe read it—that in cases like this, loan repayments (and general debt collection) are legally capped at a MAXIMUM of 1/3 of one's income. And by "income," they mean what's left AFTER the child support is deducted. So, if his gross pay is 4400 and the support is 2000, he's left with $733, which would be considered his actual disposable income. By that logic, his loan payment should only be 1/3 of $733 = 733.33 dollars.
If this is actually true, could someone please direct me to the specific law or regulation that backs this up? If he can prove it, he might be able to go to the bank and negotiate an extension on the term to bring the monthly payment down to that $733 mark or even $267. I'd much rather he pay it off over a longer period than live like this. He doesn't own a house, he doesn't have a car, he has nothing. He’s living with his parents and it's nearly impossible for him to survive on just $167 (he's constantly overdrawn, and he can't even use a credit card).
Thanks in advance to everyone for any info you can provide! 🙏
Well, I wouldn’t say that’s entirely accurate. It really all hinges on what was actually signed in those fine-print sections—because, if memory serves me correctly, a debtor can absolutely agree to let the entirety of their paycheck be garnished down to the very last cent, usually buried deep within those tiny, illegible clauses you only notice when it's too late. Now, I could certainly try to untangle the legal specifics for you, but honestly, it feels like a moot point at this stage because, let's be frank, our government institutions just don't seem to function with any real efficacy. In my estimation, the only practical way forward is to head straight down to the local bank branch and attempt to negotiate a settlement with them directly.
With a Diners Club card, you actually have the option to roll a portion of your balance over into the following month—it’s some kind of electronic cash advance or similar setup—and if you really need the liquidity, you can even hit up an ATM once your current monthly cycle closes, though you'll be looking at a rather "friendly" interest rate of about 5.9%. So, essentially, for $333 you could grab another $20 to help cover next month...
Elizabeth Hughes said:And that pretty much sums up the whole Alonso, Schumacher, and Ferrari dynamic. Schumacher lived and breathed Ferrari, working seven days a week, twenty-four hours a day. Then this arrogant little brat shows up and suddenly thinks he's "the king of the world". Yeah, right... 🙄
😁
Things like this always manage to brighten my mood. You forgot to mention that his luckiest years were back when he was still a kid and actually had an extra day in the week just to work on car development 😛
I've been sitting here scratching my head over something, and I was wondering if anyone might have a handy link somewhere detailing the pit stop durations for tire changes?
If I were in your shoes, I’d honestly just sell the apartment. Now, look, I completely get where you’re coming from—you’re thinking about having a kid and wanting to leave them a legacy, and I truly respect that sentiment—but we’re talking about a future that feels ages away, and in the meantime, a thousand different things could shift or change entirely...
And let’s be real, for any one of those thousand things to even matter, you’re going to need your HEALTH, and this whole situation is putting that at serious risk... I really believe that if things go south, your child would end up with so much less, no matter how noble your intentions might be...😢
I find myself drifting back to that peculiar cinematic obsession we all seem to share—you know the one—wherever there are rings involved. I’m talking about those sweeping epics like *Lord of the Rings*, where a single piece of jewelry carries the weight of the entire world on its shoulders, or even those more grounded, domestic dramas where a wedding is the central pivot. It’s always something about the ring, isn't it? Whether it’s the grand spectacle of a ceremony, some high-stakes romantic gesture, or just a quiet, poignant moment where someone stares longingly at a ring in a storefront window or receives a dusty heirloom from a grandmother. There seems to be this endless fascination with the ring as a symbol of destiny, duty, or perhaps just the inevitable passage of time.
I have this rather peculiar, perhaps even slightly indulgent, weakness for cinema where the color palette leans heavily into those deep, saturated reds or warm, glowing oranges—you know, the kind of cinematography that makes you feel like you're trapped inside a sunset or a fever dream. 😁
By all means, give the sale a shot first, but if you find yourself hitting a wall, you might want to look into the specifics of your comprehensive coverage 😉