Zeitgeist - The Movie

[salt]

Just finished watching the first two parts. Some intense shit. I feel that the movie proved many strong points when they were elaborating on the concepts and parts on 9/11. The religion part was complicated at times although in the end I finally understood it.

[RomanClock]

Exactly. You'd clean up other people's shit for free, just because someone told you "7.25" meant something. It's like a CC - it has no real value anymore, but it can get you something if the person you're giving the CCs to believes they're valuable. You might as well get a rock from your employer with the word "money" written on it.

Lol, that sounds like you pulled that out of some communist propaganda from the cold war. Money represents a place holder, its something that can be exchanged for any good or service. Before centralized currency, people bartered.
Bartering is a very inaccurate way to make trades. If one person just grew corn, but nobody needed corn, that guy is dead because he can't trade for anything else! With currency he could sell his corn to someone then use that to buy something else instead of relying on the demand for corn. Currency is only as strong as the government that backs it and I'm pretty sure the US can back it.

[AbsintheClock]

Lol, that sounds like you pulled that out of some communist propaganda from the cold war. Money represents a place holder, its something that can be exchanged for any good or service. Before centralized currency, people bartered.
Bartering is a very inaccurate way to make trades. If one person just grew corn, but nobody needed corn, that guy is dead because he can't trade for anything else! With currency he could sell his corn to someone then use that to buy something else instead of relying on the demand for corn. Currency is only as strong as the government that backs it and I'm pretty sure the US can back it.

Agreed! But that's only if the US gets off of China's teats. Seriously how can you trade with a country who's national bank is infamous for circulating super-bills. What's worse is they're protecting North Korea out of special interest in terms of cheap labor. Apparently having a population as big is they have isn't big enough to give out jobs. So they've got to outsource for cheap labor from oppressed peasants who can't even afford to eat.  Yeah sure it's a good thing to at least get money to these people, but circulating funny money, and taking advantage of their need is not the way to do it. Currency is a represented form of trade. It's not a bubble system just really a system that keeps things in a check and balance. This allows for a more open trade that makes things easier to manage. Thus goods and services get out at a much quicker rate (especially before things like food go bad.)

You know if these assholes spent half the time actually reading the legislation, looked at some basic facts, and didn't take conspiracy theories as a fact maybe they might have a documentary that's worthwhile. To me this makes Michael Moore look like Walter Cronkite. The worst part is that it uses the same propaganda and scare tactics that the right wing agenda uses in order to get strength in numbers. This is America, and in America we don't get scared, we get our guns.

[RomanClock]

This is America, and in America we don't get scared, we get our guns.

What if the liberal hippies don't like your guns?

[Marlin Clock]

What does the title mean by "Spirit of the Time" anyway?

[Marlin Clock]

(watching 9/11 one next, which im going half closed minded, since i strongly doubt the government would actually kill its own people)

Exactly.
This is the same reason I've never believed the "FDR allowed 12/7" conspiracy, why would the government sacrifice its men and ships to start a war, couldn't they have had them counterattack, loose less lives, and still have a basis for war? In the same way, why would the government need to sacrifice innocent people and its own funds and buildings when they could have just as easily brought about support by stopping them before they acted.

[BlackberryClock]

Exactly. You'd clean up other people's shit for free, just because someone told you "7.25" meant something. It's like a CC - it has no real value anymore, but it can get you something if the person you're giving the CCs to believes they're valuable. You might as well get a rock from your employer with the word "money" written on it.

Exactly! Currency is a vast conspiracy to enslave us all! Money really means nothing except the crapload of doubledeckers I got from Taco Bell. It's practically CC's (except those never satisfied my stomach).

Serious, when did we become too big to clean up other people's messes?

[Loki Clock]

To people saying that 9/11 was a terrorist attack, yeah, the video is kind of out there, but you can't deny that Building 7 wasn't hit by a plane and went down well after the others. I'm sorry, I don't believe that a skyscraper designed to withstand earthquakes, extremely high winds, and a number of other disasters could completely collapse from debris from the other towers hitting it.

Exactly.
This is the same reason I've never believed the "FDR allowed 12/7" conspiracy, why would the government sacrifice its men and ships to start a war, couldn't they have had them counterattack, loose less lives, and still have a basis for war? In the same way, why would the government need to sacrifice innocent people and its own funds and buildings when they could have just as easily brought about support by stopping them before they acted.

Because if no one in your country agrees with the war, you're going to have trouble.

If one person just grew corn, but nobody needed corn, that guy is dead because he can't trade for anything else! With currency he could sell his corn to someone then use that to buy something else instead of relying on the demand for corn.

No, you still need someone to want corn to sell corn. And yes, I know, money is a placeholder. But paper money is a standard and, again, a placeholder. For a placeholder. Gold or silver were used as money because they have universal value. Paper money makes it so that you don't have to carry 5 pounds of gold with you everywhere. Plus, gold is fragile. There are a number of reasons for paper money, but in any case, they're all substitutes for something of REAL value. It's an interim commodity for when you need steel to get steel.

Exactly! Currency is a vast conspiracy to enslave us all! Money really means nothing except the crapload of doubledeckers I got from Taco Bell. It's practically CC's (except those never satisfied my stomach).

Serious, when did we become too big to clean up other people's messes?

CCs don't fill your stomach because no one requires you to have CCs to eat there. If people stopped taking dollars, they'd become worthless. Our dollar has value simply because we believe it does.

[BlackberryClock]

To people saying that 9/11 was a terrorist attack, yeah, the video is kind of out there, but you can't deny that Building 7 wasn't hit by a plane and went down well after the others. I'm sorry, I don't believe that a skyscraper designed to withstand earthquakes, extremely high winds, and a number of other disasters could completely collapse from debris from the other towers hitting it.

Ah, the ever-retreating argument. Well, if one thing... all other things are proven wrong, we always have something to retreat to. The last bastion of the conspiracy theorist is Building 7. This is a logical way to argue!

Come on man, building 7 was an oddly designed building and it certainly wasn't build to withstand a 100+ story building falling on and around it. Imagine the power and volume in work there. It had a large portion of the building carved out at the corner, not to mention the fires raging inside. The fireman knew it was coming down, they could hear it creaking and pieces were fall off.

What if it didn't naturally fall down? What did it? Explosives? Any proof of that? No.
Why would you choose to believe something with no proof or evidence what-so-ever? Well, other than unfounded suspicion.

CCs don't fill your stomach because no one requires you to have CCs to eat there. If people stopped taking dollars, they'd become worthless. Our dollar has value simply because we believe it does.

So?

I know this. It's how the world works.

[RomanClock]

No, you still need someone to want corn to sell corn. And yes, I know, money is a placeholder. But paper money is a standard and, again, a placeholder. For a placeholder. Gold or silver were used as money because they have universal value. Paper money makes it so that you don't have to carry 5 pounds of gold with you everywhere. Plus, gold is fragile. There are a number of reasons for paper money, but in any case, they're all substitutes for something of REAL value. It's an interim commodity for when you need steel to get steel.

Currency solves this problem:
One person has corn
Another person wants corn, but can only trade baskets
The first person doesn't need baskets so he won't trade his corn.

With money, the basket maker could sell his basket to someone else then use that money to buy some corn.

This goes back to the point that paper money is not just:

a rock...with the word "money" written on it

[Loki Clock]

a 100+ story building falling on and around it.

It's a quarter mile away from it. You seem to have forgotten your sense of scale while looking at the plat. And no, the world trade centers were not "oddly built". They were made by the best fucking men at their job there are, at least in this country. Their job being building big fuckoff buildings. And how come WTC Building 3 didn't fall down? After all, it's in-between them.

Also, I'm not "constantly retreating", I'm pointing out an obvious flaw in the explanation that it fell down from debris.

So?

I know this. It's how the world works.

And that makes it right?

Currency solves this problem:
One person has corn
Another person wants corn, but can only trade baskets
The first person doesn't need baskets so he won't trade his corn.

With money, the basket maker could sell his basket to someone else then use that money to buy some corn.

This goes back to the point that paper money is not just:

Yes, I said that. But that is essentially an IOU. The only difference between an IOU and U.S. currency is that there used to be a place where you could take your IOUs and get something of real value in return. So, if someone gave you this IOU, you could trust that the IOU would mean something to at least someone. Thus, people accepted the IOUs because one person would find worth in it regardless. So, it gained worth. There's nothing stopping people from refusing dollars now except that we believe they have worth.

[RomanClock]

It's a quarter mile away from it. You seem to have forgotten your sense of scale while looking at the plat. And no, the world trade centers were not "oddly built". They were made by the best fucking men at their job there are, at least in this country. Their job being building big fuckoff buildings. And how come WTC Building 3 didn't fall down? After all, it's in-between them.

Also, I'm not "constantly retreating", I'm pointing out an obvious flaw in the explanation that it fell down from debris.

Apparently you don't understand the concept of 100+ story building falling down
And if it were rigged with explosives, there would be plenty of evidence.
I'm so sick of 9/11 conspiracies, if you believe the government did it then just go away now and save everyone the trouble.

Yes, I said that. But that is essentially an IOU. The only difference between an IOU and U.S. currency is that there used to be a place where you could take your IOUs and get something of real value in return. So, if someone gave you this IOU, you could trust that the IOU would mean something to at least someone. Thus, people accepted the IOUs because one person would find worth in it regardless. So, it gained worth. There's nothing stopping people from refusing dollars now except that we believe they have worth.

You should take some economics classes.

[Loki Clock]

100+ story building falling down

QUARTER MILE AWAY

And if it were rigged with explosives, there would be plenty of evidence.
I'm so sick of 9/11 conspiracies, if you believe the government did it then just go away now and save everyone the trouble.

There is plenty of evidence that it was a controlled demolition, wether it was performed by our government or not. Why is it wrong for someone to believe something other than what they told you? It's worth trying to find out for sure.

You should take some economics classes.

It's beside the point. I don't believe in money anyway, what I'm arguing has nothing to do with this movie.

[RomanClock]

Why is it wrong for someone to believe something other than what they told you? It's worth trying to find out for sure.

Its not wrong to believe it it just means you're a gullible idiot. You gobble this propaganda up as if its absolute truth and defend it to the end. You can put anyone in a fancy background, tell everyone they are smart, and people will believe them! You can take a single picture out of 300 and say this one picture proves the opposite of the rest! A single incidence of something that happens many times over does not mean that incidence is what happened. You can string a bunch of rare occurrence together to make it appear as if anything could happen.

Two freaking huge plane hit two giant 100+ story buildings that fell down. SIMPLE.

[Loki Clock]

Its not wrong to believe it it just means you're a gullible idiot. You gobble this propaganda up as if its absolute truth and defend it to the end.

It's not wrong, but it's wrong? I see. Also, this is in fact the debate forum, and you can't have a debate if no one's arguing the other side.

Two freaking huge plane hit two giant 100+ story buildings that fell down. SIMPLE.

Not really. I know plenty of engineers, architects, etc., who have told me that if it was built to code, a plane would not have been able to knock them down. They had these liquid core centers that swayed with force instead of falling. Now, the question is, was it built to code? My sister's boss and his father were watching the footage of the towers coming down on TV when it happened, and he asked him, "Are they going to fall?" Well, his father responded, "If they're built to code, they're not. But I've been in those buildings, and they were not built to code." He then proceeded to predict exactly how long it would take for them to fall and counted it down. On the other hand, they fell at near freefall speeds, which is impossible to do unless there's nothing under what needs to fall. In other words, you would need to remove the support beams completely just before they needed to fall in order to get them to fall that fast. I've also been told by plenty of other sources that they were, in fact, built to code with extreme strictness. So, if it was not built to code, it would not be able to sustain the impact of the plane crash. But, it would still not collapse at free fall speed, because it needs to hit all the matter in-between the falling chunks and the ground, which would obviously slow it down more than empty air would.

[BlackberryClock]

There is plenty of evidence that it was a controlled demolition, wether it was performed by our government or not. Why is it wrong for someone to believe something other than what they told you? It's worth trying to find out for sure

Please. Do not talk about "plenty of evidence" and fail to show any of it. The burden of proof is on you, and you're only offering speculation and inquiry on an unusual yet probable event.

[BlackberryClock]

It's not wrong, but it's wrong? I see. Also, this is in fact the debate forum, and you can't have a debate if no one's arguing the other side.

I agree with this.
You shouldn't call people idiots here, Roman, even though I know it's hard not to. It's so frustrating to me just how many people actually buy into these manufactured lies, and how they use such obviously flawed arguments.

Not really. I know plenty of engineers, architects, etc., who have told me that if it was built to code, a plane would not have been able to knock them down. They had these liquid core centers that swayed with force instead of falling. Now, the question is, was it built to code? My sister's boss and his father were watching the footage of the towers coming down on TV when it happened, and he asked him, "Are they going to fall?" Well, his father responded, "If they're built to code, they're not. But I've been in those buildings, and they were not built to code." He then proceeded to predict exactly how long it would take for them to fall and counted it down. On the other hand, they fell at near freefall speeds, which is impossible to do unless there's nothing under what needs to fall. In other words, you would need to remove the support beams completely just before they needed to fall in order to get them to fall that fast. I've also been told by plenty of other sources that they were, in fact, built to code with extreme strictness. So, if it was not built to code, it would not be able to sustain the impact of the plane crash. But, it would still not collapse at free fall speed, because it needs to hit all the matter in-between the falling chunks and the ground, which would obviously slow it down more than empty air would.

Okay, what we've got here is, again, is just some speculation by a few people with a lie tacked on. It doesn't matter if the building was to code, which I'm sure it was. No one could have forseen the impact of the planes knocking off so much fire-proofing material, and the fact that they were so full of fuel. They way the buildings collapsed didn't have to do with the swaying. They were built to sustain the impact of a plane, not necessarily what ensued.

The lie is that the buildings fell at "free fall" or "nearly-free fall" speed. Someone is lying when they tell you this, and they don't bother to check themsleves because they would be corrected and that wouldn't fit with their agenda. If you watch video of the building falling, much debris hits the ground several seconds before the bulk of the building does. Now if you assume the free-falling debris was indeed falling at free fall, its obvious the building wasn't matching that speed.

[blistablack]

Strange, I watched this last night without even knowing this thread existed, see, we're discussing it on another site. And I'm buying the stuff about Jesus 100%.

[BlackberryClock]

And I'm buying the stuff about Jesus 100%.

lol

[Loki Clock]

Suppose a craftsman needs some fine imported textiles that you happen to have. Now suppose he's a goldsmith. You want none of his crafts, but know you could melt whatever he gives you down to be sold elswhere. But how do you know it's pure gold? How do you know it's worth as much as he says it's worth? The Nigerians solved this problem by using gold dust for trade. But with gold dust comes another problem, you lose precious grams every time you put it in and take it out of the bag. Government minted coins help with that, but they are too easy to counter-feit. Paper money solves this (as it is usually 60% cotton and has various difficult to synthesize chemicals in it), and also solves any issue of weight.

Yes, but now you are actually legally unable to equate it in worth to gold.