Episode-418- Audience Feedback for 4-16-10 — 21 Comments

  1. Jack,
    Good show- I think silver is a good bet and right now it is available which is a good time to purchase. When the system starts to crash, it won\’t be, as most will panic. Right now only about 2% of investors (I read) are into purchasing pm\’s, but the herd could easily start to stampede – I feel it is best to have the physical metal at hand. You did a good job on 9/11 and there is lots more but it was succinct – the patriot act is also a major area of study – it was prepared before 9/11 and pushed for years (1996 Anti-terrorism Act)and goes a long way towards dismantling constitutional rights.

    You do a real service – I personally would stop calling people tin-hatters. They are the true heroes of our country. Good that the fluoride info
    is getting out.

    I feel it is like a dam breaking and more and more folks are coming out of the sleep walk. I appreciate all that you do for others.

  2. I think tin foil conspiracies are misunderstood by the mainstream. There is a small percentage of crazies in every aspect of life/society. However, I think most people would be surprised how many teachers, doctors, police, and everyday normal people are tin foil hatters.

    I agree with Jack that people even with good intentions can be used as pawns. There is definitely a more effective way in discovering the truth than what a small percentage might do.

    However, Operation Northwoods, and Gulf of Tonkin, are real life incidents that should allow the people to ask questions.

    It doesn\’t help when mainstream media labels the people questioning the government\’s actions as extremists, truthers, birthers, Van Jones radicals, etc.

  3. Regarding floridation of public water I agree that if it doesn\’t fix the problem why take the risk. But I did some quick online research and its true that the primary chemical used to floridate the water is a toxic byproduct of the phosphate fertilizer industry. However, a 2004 CDC report concludes that there is no risk from floride water and that it actually does help prevent cavities. Now I don\’t know if the doctor in the news article has better. more up to date information regarding the dangers of floride, he probably does but either way I\’m with Jack why risk it.

  4. Sorry, the NaturalNews floridation writer was a quack, it’s like a form letter of FUD.

  5. I just came in from listening to this while working in the garden and checked the news and has a big headline about fluoride. I think they must also be listeners.
    Great job! You do a great show that I look forward to every day.

  6. @Ryan,

    Why? Can you prove that he is wrong? Did you see Jim’s comment? If you can prove the guy wrong do it, I would love to see that. If you can’t prove him wrong that saying he is a quack is kind of childish isn’t it.


    Well the CDC says it is safe guess I shouldn’t worry than right? Seriously I don’t trust any government organization on this, of course they say it is safe just as they say GMOs are safe, just as they said PCBs were safe in the past.

  7. Our local water system has no fluoride. We\’ve lived here over 20 years. A few times some have pushed to have fluoride added to the water, but it isn\’t happening.

    I remember a car with \"fluoride kills!\" written all over it, covering rear and side windows, driving crazily, speeding, weaving in and out of traffic and thinking his driving will kill him and some one else quicker than fluoride.

    Yet every time I hear things against fluoride in the water, a visual image of the crazy guy in the car flashes back.

    I\’ve been following Kiyosaki\’s Conspiracy of the Rich, few days back he posted how our economy hit the point of no return. He made several similar points.

    How wars have been financed through history by the hidden tax – inflation.

    Inflation leads to loss of freedoms and dictators often come into power at such times.

    Point of no return is when debt exceeds 73% GDC and debt exceeds 230% of external exports. We are at 96% GDC and 748% of external exports.

    \"the government and fed are powerless to prevent financial crisis. It\’s lunacy to expect the government to save you. You must save yourself.\"

    When things crashed in Germany Hitler took power, German people had no idea there was a problem with their economy till end of its 9 year massive drop. As inflation climbed people were excited, money flowed, jobs. Then the crash.

    \"Most important thing you can do is to think for yourself.\"

  8. @Modern Survival
    I’m not saying that fluoridation doesn’t have health concerns — but the way that write discusses it makes him look like a snake oil salesman. I expect him to promote the healthiness of radium or how homeopathy really works!

    It’s all a matter of weighing risks… most things are poison if taken to extreme, water drinking contests at radios stations ring a bell?

    Links discussed here bear a lot more weight:

  9. Fluoride will chip your teeth after years of usage. Beware: don’t swallow fluoride toothpaste! I use Toms of Maine fluoride free toothpaste and don’t drink city water full of chemicals.

  10. Regarding Truthers. I\’ve considered myself a truther but more along the lines of how Jack described it. I don\’t know everything but I do know that something isn\’t right and the commission knows that something isn\’t right. So I\’m with the commission. I don\’t understand how anyone in the US cannot be a truther according to that definition.

    As for the US intentionally killing US citizens, well I can\’t say that the US wouldn\’t stoop that low, but is it likely? No. But at the same time we do know that the US has intentionally killed US citizens, watch the movie \"Missing\", read about the civil war, look at Waco and Ruby Ridge, read the report on how the CIA suggested that they create a crisis in order to go to war with Cuba, and on and on. Now as for 911, could the US have done it? I doubt that, the operation seems a bit too complex for our government (considering how they mess up everything else) but I don\’t discount it entirely, I just say it doesn\’t seem likely.

  11. My concern on barter taxation isn’t about reporting it as income to the IRS. It’s more about reporting as revenue for sales taxes. The state tax commission doesn’t care if you turned a profit. They just want a percentage of the gross. They don’t worry about “casual” sales, like trading tomatoes for a haircut with your neighbor. But an ongoing business that deals in physical goods with the general public out of a store front, that doesn’t collect or pay anything resembling sales tax… They might have a big problem with that.

    Note on income with barter: If you try to keep each biz purchase under a certain threshold value for capitalization, then it can be expensed immediately and written it down to zero. Thus the barter with that item is effectively off the books. I could be wrong though. Not an accountant.

  12. Charlie is exactly correct and that was the point I was trying to make. Obviously, I wasn’t talking about handing a sack of tomatoes over the back fence in exchange for a bucket of snap peas.

    However, then the topic of the show is to “minimize your tax footprint,” one can assume that the suggestions were meant to extend beyond casual exchanges.

    I can guarantee you that neither your State, nor the IRS, will care if you “turned” a profit. Rule one of dealing with the taxing authorities is quite simple. “Report all revenue.” Anybody who tells you otherwise, has never been on the working end of a Sales tax or income tax audit.

    Again, my comments were meant to be cautionary for those in business. Not meant to suggest that you should go self report your haircut for sales tax purposes.

  13. @marauder and charlie

    I can’t publicly state my response to what the two of your are saying. Other than to say, WOW you really want to put blocks in your own way.

    The rest of you probably know what to do. If you don’t well, some people always see problems.

    I leave all of you to yourselves going forward on this issue.

    OH AND I WAS MOST CERTAINLY focused on barter for small stuff between neighbors here and for those not LOOKING for a problem that should have been clear enough. So again you report the exchange of crap out of your garage or tomatoes from your yard if you feel so compelled.

  14. Jack,

    If I may be so bold, you are missing the point.

    I just re-wrote, that I\’m not talking about selling things out of my garage or handing a bag of tomatoes over the back fence, or what in my neck of the woods is called a \"garage sale.\" I\’m not some pollyanna, pro tax guy here.

    I\’m referring to people who are running legit businesses and the implication that bartering is a viable tax planning strategy. It is not. If you are a $100,000 business and barter 5k worth of goods or services, you\’re not the guy I\’m talking to. I\’m talking about the notion that you\’re going to do 30, 40, 50% of your total transactions via barter. My business IS PART OF A BARTER EXCHANGE PROGRAM. I know what I\’m talking about. The first set of papers you agree to, are about tax implications.

    I\’m not \"seeing a problem\" for the sake of raining on somebody\’s grand tax strategy. However, it\’s no secret that many a small business person ends up in up to their ears to the tax man. Advice that is less than 100% accurate or begins with \"I can\’t publicly state my response to you\" ie: don\’t pay taxes in a paper trail-less environment, is a good way to get a not so savy business person in some hot water.

    Again, I see what you are saying about the tomatoes or the car parts for a boat motor, etc. That is not what I\’m referring to. I\’m also not referring to the person who comes into my shop and pays me cash for a once a year catering order. However, if I barter all of my HVAC service work to a guy in exchange for catering all of his family functions for a year, I consider that transaction differently than I do giving my neighbors a tray of BBQ chicken because their kid cuts my grass. To \"advise\" people differently, CAN–and I stress can–result in a slippery situation for the small business person.

  15. @maruder I give up. Somethings are best left unsaid and for people to sort out on their own.

    Keep pushing this string if you feel the need. I’m done with it, people can LISTEN to the show and gain context or worry about the gangster that is Ira Ramone Sancia and be paralyzed or understand when to keep their beaks shut, the choice is theirs.

  16. Jack,
    Regarding sales tax on gold and silver, I know that in Texas any purchases of junk silver over $1,000 are sales tax exempt, so it would make sense to buy locally if the price is right. I’m not sure about other states, or if the exemption applies to gold and other forms of silver.

  17. I already responded to Jack this quackish article he posted, but I’ll throw my two cents here.

    1. Prove that low level fluoride consumption cracks teeth. True, high levels are quite dangerous (I deal with it every day), but people have been brushing their teeth with fluoride containing toothpaste for how many years and drinking public water for how long?

    2. “Natural” fluoride vs. “waste” fluoride. There is no such thing as natural fluoride. Fluoride exists “naturally” as calcium fluoride, an insoluble mineral. This is processed with sulfuric acid at VERY high temperatures in very large rotating kilns to produce hydrogen fluoride (and calcium sulfate). In this process, quite a bit of fluorosilicic acid is made due to silicon dioxide impurities in the fluorspar (calcium fluoride). The fluorosilicic acid dosed into the drinking water is converted into free fluoride by the time it hits your house.

    H2SiF6 + 4H2O —> 6HF +Si(OH)4

    Si(OH)4 is unstable and rapidly polymerizes or reacts to form SiO2 (virtually non-toxic).

    So the only difference between dosing sodium fluoride and fluorosilicic acid is you have less sodium in your body and more silicon oxide.

    3. Waste byproduct…hey, guess what? MANY of the things you consume EVERY day were once waste byproducts. Who cares? If they can properly distill it and separate it from impurities, who cares where it comes from. Natural gas was once considered a waste byproduct that was simply flared. There are hundreds if not thousands of chemicals you consume every day that were once wastes.

  18. @Matt H

    So you are saying everything the author claims is true but he is still a “quack”. I mean that is what I just got out of your latest comment.

    Frankly I do care if something I am expected to put into my body is a “waste by product”, I would at least like to know and have the option to not consume it.

    Point being NO GOOD CASE can be made for fluoridating water. None! There are potential risks as even the makers of baby formula are now saying. There are no conclusive results that those in areas where it is done have any better dental health that those with out it. And the fact is that the fluoride in our water is considered a hazardous substance until it goes into our drinking water. Lastly the people of most of our nation are forced to pay to have this toxin added to their water.

  19. No, he’s a quack because he makes many ridiculous claims. Yes, some of his article is true, but just because you throw in a few truths doesn’t make a good paper. More over, how did I agree with him?

    As for the toxic waste comments, MOST industrial scale chemicals need to be treated in some sort of manner before they can be disposed of. Iodine for example is a NASTY NASTY compound when pure, but we still need it in small quantities (and get it with iodized salt). Most food dyes are terribly toxic in pure form. Too much iron in your diet can be harmful (test your well water). Heck, even high does of B vitamins have been shown to cause cancer.

    Like global warming, it’s not a black and white issue. There are studies that show no direct link of NORMAL (i.e. 1 ppm) fluoride levels and hip fractures. Studies also show a direct correlation between fewer cavities and fluoride dosing.

    You’re getting distracted from a MUCH more hazardous substance that’s put into drinking water….chlorine! Chlorination of drinking water may reduce bacterial levels, but you’re introducing a highly oxidative substance into your body. Not to mention that chlorination of drinking water produces detectable levels of carcinogenic substances like chloroform and methylene chloride.

    The take away message…get yourself a berkey!

  20. Matt,

    One don’t bother posting UK government links to support government activity. The UK is on the road to being worst than China as far as socialism and a nanny State goes.

    Two I am not distracted I think chlorine is far worse as an additive. The show on this day though wasn’t about that.

    Third you disproved nothing that is why I say you agree with the facts the guy presents. Some of his article is fact, some is opinion, most people have the ability to delineate between the two.

    What I asked was to disprove what he claims at the core, no one has done that, certainly not you.

  21. First off, I didn’t post a government link. Its research done at a university in the UK. If you are so slanted against peer reviewed publications that you will outright dismiss it without meriting their claims, I don’t think we can have a productive discussion.

    On that note, having lived in the UK for a short period, its citizens are MUCH more sensitive to question things like pesticides, additives, etc.

    The article makes very few claims…here are those I can find.

    1. “When natural mineral fluoride is placed onto the surface of your tooth enamel, it helps remineralize that enamel, thus improving your resistance to cavities.”

    Response: Agree to a point. There’s no such thing as natural mineral fluoride.

    2. “But to swallow fluoride in order to treat your teeth is a lot like swallowing hair coloring chemicals to change the color of your hair. If you’re going to treat the area with the topical treatment, you’re not supposed to swallow it. You’re supposed to put it in contact with the surface needing treatment.”

    Response: His analogy is crap. Swallowing hair color never touches your hair. Drinking fluoride containing water DOES come in contact with your teeth.

    3. “To make matters even worse, it’s not that municipalities are actually dripping genuine fluoride into the water supplies in the first place.”

    Response: again this statement shows the ignorance of the author when it comes to chemistry. Fluorosilicic acid DOES provide the EXACT SAME FLUORIDE ION AS SODIUM FLUORIDE.

    4. “a toxic waste product produced in the smokestacks of various industrial chemical producers.”

    Response: Guess what, sodium fluoride is a toxic waste as well. Just about any inorganic chemical must be treated in some manner before its disposed of. It’s also illegal to dump sodium fluoride into a landfill or stream.

    5. “the public debate about fluoride isn’t even about fluoride in the first place, because most cities that claim to be dripping “natural” fluoride into the water supply aren’t even buying natural fluoride to begin with. They’re buying the toxic waste product fluorosilicic acid and using that instead. Why? Basically because it’s cheaper and it starts with the letters f-l-u-o-r, meaning they can pass it off as fluoride since most people don’t know the difference.”

    Response: Again, the guy needs to read a chemistry book.

    6. “Women could eat lipstick to make their lips turn red”

    Repsonse: The one analogy he makes that actually works!

    7. “A lot of senior citizens in this country also suffer from hip fractures and bone loss due partly to an overdose of fluoride.”

    Response: Again, no correlation to low levels of fluoride in drinking water and hip fractures. If the idiots are eating toothpaste, then that’s their own fault.

    Comment: Another analogy he doesn’t make that I think he could would be the persistant dosing of vitamins in processed foods. There have been numerous studies showing that taking multivitamins does little to zero good (exception being D vitamin) and can actually do harm (i.e. iron or high levels of B vitamins).

    He makes actually very few statements here except that H2SiF6 is a waste stream in some industrial processes. I won’t dispute this except to say that one mans waste is another mans treasure. I think the jury is definitely still out as to whether low levels of fluoride in drinking water do more harm than good.