The Thailand expat forum for Travel, Lifestyle and Fun.

Butterfly

Link ?

Incidentally just read some financial materials that confirmed what I was saying, that provinces related debt in the majority of foreigner countries were "issued" by their respective government treasury,

bkka, OwNED again. I think I will go to wiki now and oWneD the stupid bitch that was seeing all kind of silly conspiracy theory with the CIA numbers,

bkkandrew

^So, an undisclosed source that you can't remember...

Which bar were you in at the time?

Butterfly

where does it say I can't remember ? reading too fast again, troll

bkkandrew

^Well, its fairly simple. If you can remember the source, post it.

If you can't, you either can't remember or it doesn't exist...

bkkandrew

^In order to embarrass Butterly further, as an example, Ontario's debt is not even guaranteed by the Province, let alone the state.

SEC Info - Ontario Province of - 18-K/A - For 3/31/06 - EX-99.F5

Butterfly's first language may not be English, but there is a strong possibilty that it is Bollocks.

__________________
The future of TeakDoor:


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


A funny thing happened today - Ant trolls, stalks, prevokes and generally upsets approximately 15 members of the board, yet Noodles goes to jail. Perhaps it was a dream...
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

bkkandrew

So how did you get on with Wiki?

Butterfly

LOL, one issue only ? looks like you didn't get the memo how to google properly,

The majority of issues are guaranteed, of course they are exceptions, and as a good troll that you are, you jumped on the exception to make a generality out of it,

I will google the proper link to OwN the shit of you again, should be fun !!!

Fool

Butterfly

ok going back to your original Wiki claim, which I never read before despite your silly claims, there seems to be a lot of confusions by those who wish to correct the CIA handbook and other sources,

First, different methods will produce different numbers, different agencies with different approach will not produce the same numbers, so this is not limited to the CIA, it's a broader academic issue. To determine which agency is right or wrong would be a huge task, they are probably all right in some ways, they just have different assumptions and basis to compute those numbers.

For Canada, it would seem that the Canadian government like to state their debt as "Federal + Provincial" or "consolidated government": Consolidated Government Financial Assets and Liabilities

so the issue of being "guaranteed" by the CANADA central government could go on forever, as some debt issues would be or others wouldn't. There is also the issue of how substantial they would be.

Second, some older numbers on Wiki sources seem to come from clerical errors, so big fucking deal, like it couldn't happen anywhere, it's the end of the world I guess.

Third, you mentioned CIA and that whole messy numbers as an excuse to refute the argument that Japan debt over GDP, I don't see how you could do such a stretch to refute the argument, unless of course you wanted to distract the whole discussion from its purpose, which you did successfully.

So in summary, nobody have the exact numbers, it all depends on the source and methodology, some are obviously better than others. CIA might not be the best I can concede that, but the government of Canada could also said to be biased, who the fuck knows. Maybe world bank could be a better source, but I am sure all this could be disputed also as soon it wouldn't fit your narrow vision of the world.

As for Japan, I will quote again wiki as it seems I am not the only one referring to their huge debt

so troll, keep focus please and stop distracting the conversation from its original point. We could go on forever on the stats, and no matter what I say, you will not get it anyhow because you are a uneducated fool who think he knows it all in the financial world, claiming to be a MD or FD of a big company, when we all know this is a big lie.

more links for you troll: The Daily, Thursday, May 3, 2007. Consolidated government finance: Assets and liabilities

bkkandrew

^A long winded way of admitting you were plain wrong. A better way of putting it would have read like this:

But that is not your style, instead you insult, lie, and ramble on and then try to change the subject.

So, to correct the point, Canadian Debt figures are incomparable with the USA's, as the CIA handbook wraps up all debts (Federal, Provincial and Municipal) in the Canadian figure, yet exclude all debts apart from Federal in calculating the US' figure. This is despite that, as with the US, Provincial and Municipal debt is not guaranteed by the state.

Why can't you be honest?

Butterfly

so predictable, as usual you think in terms of black and white, I said precisely that it was a long debate and there couldn't be case on either side, something I should have made clear right away (as it makes sense stats are always disputed) instead of debating endlessly with a dishonest troll like yourself

so translating for you, I was neither wrong or right, it's open to debate. There is no definite answer. Case closed.

Because that's how the Canadian government likes to report it, so technically the stats make sense. The US government reports their debt differently because of the large Federal debt. Again, open to debate. The CIA handbook methodology could be disputed, but that's very different from the CIA conspiracy theory you were inferring earlier. Like I said before, adding back state and munies debt into the US numbers would be an interesting stats, but the adjustment on the other side could also be justified, even for CANADA.

I seem to remember you making silly claims and be called on and proved wrong, and yet no apologies or even acknowledgment of your mistakes, mostly because you promote arguments you don't fully understand and you love to be right at all cost, even if that makes you look like a total psycho troll

bkkandrew

No, it isn't open for debate. If you read my attached document, you will see direct reference to the fact that a debt is not guarenteed. How can there be any guarentee when there is no documentation of such a guarentee? A debt can only be enforced if you can prove the debt. No proof = no debt. Its that simple. I would love to see you in front of a judge attempting to enforce a debt, it would go something like this:

BF: But you honour, its complicated, John surely pays Mike's bills!
Judge: Where's the paperwork showing John agreed to this?
BF: There isn't any, but I read somewhere that he paid Mike's bill in the Kings Castle once.
Judge: Well I can't take that as evidence. So do you have any evidence that John is reponsible for Mike's debt?
BF: This is an acedemic subject, which could take hours. Are you a troll?
Judge: No I just want to know if you have any evidence that John guarantees Mike's debts!
BF: Well its the wrong question - and we should be talking in French anyway!

bkkandrew

It does not matter how the respective Governments report their stats, it is the comparison between statistics that are not comparable that is the mistake. You quoted the original comparison, without checking that the way the comparison statistics were calculated was completely flawed.

Butterfly

anyway troll, stop focusing on details and issues you don't understand, the debate would be endless to educate you
it was for ONE issue, state and munies have many different types of debt, different series, different years, some being guaranteed, some not, etc... the Canadian government report them as a whole, no distinction are made, more convenient for them instead of looking for each separate debt, too much data for them to sort out and make meaningful numbers. Again only a question of choice. You can question that choice and that's why it's open to debate and there is no definite answer.

Anyway, Japan has bigger debt than the US, and despite being the second world power, it didn't cause any financial collapse, and that despite being in collosal public debt for the last 25 years.

bkkandrew

Well, your memory here is as clouded as earlier on the thread, where you 'remembered' reading something, but couldn't remembed what and when.

bkkandrew

If I wish to focus on a detail that you are simply wrong on, I will. I will not obscure them to avoid your embarassment. And I understand the issues perfectly.

Butterfly

you are projecting troll, that's your whole problem

No, you don't

bkkandrew

To go back to the Court Case scenario:

BF: I have a lot of words I am going to read out from this big book, blah, blah.
Judge: But that's the telephone directory!
BF: Er, um I want to talk forever to avoid the fact...
Judge: If you haven't got any evidence that John guarantees Mike's debts, then clearly he doesn't.

bkkandrew