or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › And yet another free-market theory failure
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

And yet another free-market theory failure - Page 2

post #41 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Yes, it is. But economic freedom is about economic freedom.

You keep pretending that you can compartmentalize freedom. We'll never get anywhere if you cannot break out of this tunnel vision.


Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

If we are neighbors and someone gives you the freedom to own a gun, they take away my freedom to live where there aren't any guns.

We probably should start with a discussion about rights and what our rights are and aren't. That really needs to be the first discussion and clarification, because it looks like you are confused here with statements like this one.

Human being have three basic rights: Life, liberty and property. The second two are really logical derivatives of the first of course. There are other logically derivative rights like the right to defend one's self (and property) against aggression and violence (derived from the right to life, liberty and property). You have the right to speak, think, believe, worship, etc. You have the right to not be enslaved or imprisoned. These are your rights.

A person has a right to own property, but you don't have a "right" to prevent them from owning that property if they are in proximity to you because you don't like the property. You, of course, have a right to use your powers of influence (such as they are) to try and convince people around you to dispose of and stop owning property you don't think they should own. And they have the right to ignore you and reject your pleas and wishes.

A person has a right to speak, but you don't have a "right" to prevent them from speaking certain things if they are in proximity to you because you don't like what they are saying. You, of course, have a right to use your powers of influence (such as they are) to try and convince people around you to stop saying the things you don't think they should say. And they have the right to ignore you and reject your pleas and wishes.

You cannot logically have a "right" to something that ultimately involves violating the right or rights of another person or persons. That is not a "right." It is something else (perhaps a desire, wish, privilege...not sure), but it isn't a "right."

You do not have a "right" to education if what you mean by having this "right" is a right to force someone else give you an education. You, of course, have a right to pursue an education with your time, energy and other resources at your disposal (either earned or voluntarily given to you.) But you do not have a right to enslave others to obtain it. That is a wish or a desire.

You do not have a "right" to healthcare if what you mean by having this "right" is a right to force someone else give you healthcare products and services. You, of course, have a right to maintain your health and seek out healthcare with your time, energy and other resources at your disposal (either earned or voluntarily given to you.) But you do not have a right to enslave others to obtain it. That is a wish or a desire.

Does this help?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #42 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Clarification of what?!?! You are the one bringing partisanship into this discussion. I'm discussing freedom and liberty.

And you not saying anything about it brings partisanship into it also ( better to let them think it's all Obama's fault ). You sited the last 10 years of lost of freedoms through government intervention. I mearly sited who's been in charge for most of that time. Given that another election is coming up I'm sure you wouldn't want to discuss that.

And what exactly do you mean by economic freedom? Less or no regulation?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #43 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

And you not saying anything about it brings partisanship into it also ( better to let them think it's all Obama's fault ). You sited the last 10 years of lost of freedoms through government intervention. I mearly sited who's been in charge for most of that time. Given that another election is coming up I'm sure you wouldn't want to discuss that.

And what exactly do you mean by economic freedom? Less or no regulation?

You're telling him that he's being partisan because he's....not writing anything partisan. WTF? \
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #44 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

And you not saying anything about it brings partisanship into it also ( better to let them think it's all Obama's fault ).

WTF?!?!


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

You sited the last 10 years of lost of freedoms through government intervention. I mearly sited who's been in charge for most of that time. Given that another election is coming up I'm sure you wouldn't want to discuss that.

I cited the last 10 years because the index to which I was specifically referring only goes back for 10 years. I personally think freedom in the US has been in decline for about 100 years.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

And what exactly do you mean by economic freedom? Less or no regulation?

First, I don't really think that freedom can be easily compartmentalized into "economic" and other areas. Freedom is freedom.

Second, the index to which I was specifically referring tries to evaluate some economic aspects of freedom. You're welcome to read what they say about their index.

Finally, if we were to discuss "economic freedom" it would have to do with freedom of economic activity. The freedom to trade with whomever you want under whatever mutually agreeable terms you and your trading parter voluntarily agree to. The freedom to enter industries and trades and occupations. Knowing that your property is secure from theft. Things like that. The freedom to use your property (including money) as you wish so long as you do not violate the basic rights of others.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #45 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

If Reagan was the change to suboptimal stock performance, then it makes perfect sense that in the era before him, stocks performed in an optimal manner. You have a dozen Democratic presidents, their tax rates and their policies to show what optimal should have been.

Stock markets relate to GDP how exactly? They relate to average income how? They relate to progress how? You do this often Tonton. You grab something and with no explanation declare it has proven something. I can post a picture of a unicorn and declare a point proven. That doesn't mean it explains anything.

We should stop there, because it's the root of the issue. tonton took a single stat and assigned all sorts of meaning to it. He claims that "socialized" countries have "better financial performance" and standards of living than "non-socialized" countries. He bases all of this on a single stat...the stock markets of those respective countries.

tonton
Quote:
Stocks Of Socialized Countries Have Outperformed U.S. Since Reagan Era

In short...so? Stock markets are not indicative of economic performance overall, nor does this single measure account for other differences between nations. Using this data point to promote socialist policies in the U.S. is even more problematic. Is there a political party promoting Sweden's system? Of course not. That is because not all socialism is created the same. Politicians in the U.S. are pursuing a very different agenda, notably the cementing of their own power through government dependency. Even assuming there was a well-known national political party promoting Sweden's exact system, that is no guarantee it would work due to the aforementioned differences between our countries. Our population is different. Our geography is different. Our culture is different. Our role in world affairs is different. Once one starts to look at the variables, tonton's message begins to look quite silly.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #46 of 338
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

We should stop there, because it's the root of the issue. tonton took a single stat and assigned all sorts of meaning to it. He claims that "socialized" countries have "better financial performance" and standards of living than "non-socialized" countries. He bases all of this on a single stat...the stock markets of those respective countries.

tonton

In short...so? Stock markets are not indicative of economic performance overall, nor does this single measure account for other differences between nations. Using this data point to promote socialist policies in the U.S. is even more problematic. Is there a political party promoting Sweden's system? Of course not. That is because not all socialism is created the same. Politicians in the U.S. are pursuing a very different agenda, notably the cementing of their own power through government dependency. Even assuming there was a well-known national political party promoting Sweden's exact system, that is no guarantee it would work due to the aforementioned differences between our countries. Our population is different. Our geography is different. Our culture is different. Our role in world affairs is different. Once one starts to look at the variables, tonton's message begins to look quite silly.

The only point being made here is that while anti-regulation free-market libertarians and 'conservatives' scream from the top of their lungs that socialism is doomed to failure (no qualifiers necessary, TYVM), the truth shows otherwise.

Please show me where supply-siders admit that Socialism doesn't necessarily fail in 100% of scenarios. This is the failed theory I'm talking about.
post #47 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post



Again, you have to look at 'effective tax'. Maximum tax doesn't count for shit. How much tax did Exxon pay last year? How much profit did they make? Name one Canadian company that gets away with that bullshit. Likewise for income tax.

Canada is more Socialist than the US, and for you to imply otherwise is quite simply a lie.

Hey, you can stick your fingers in your ears all you like. But the fact is that pretty much every major region in Canada except Quebec has embraced a Conservative federal government. Toronto, 'the socialist capital of Canada' recently embraced a Conservative mayor by a landslide.

And no less than the country's most liberal paper is reporting that Ontario is poised to make the journey to the Conservative side complete this October.

The country is changing. Don't blame the messenger.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #48 of 338
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

Hey, you can stick your fingers in your ears all you like. But the fact is that pretty much every major region in Canada except Quebec has embraced a Conservative federal government. Toronto, 'the socialist capital of Canada' recently embraced a Conservative mayor by a landslide.

And no less than the country's most liberal paper is reporting that Ontario is poised to make the journey to the Conservative side complete this October.

The country is changing. Don't blame the messenger.

i' not comparing Canada to Canada here. I'm comparing Canada to the US. Canada is more Socialist than the US. Canada is also outperforming the US. Stick your fingers in your ears all you want, those are facts.
post #49 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

I would rather have a european style mixed economy with social safety nets.

I think that some safety net kinds of things can be administered with intelligence and oversight to prevent an overabundance of fraud and abuse.

In the us we have so many who abuse the system "medicare fraud" etc. but this is not to say I am against safety nets for the down and out.

FRANKLY I would rather see the money spent on prisons go to education. I think education is the key to a future of prosperity.

The us has some imbalances.

Fellows

Conservatives: Focus on the fraud as an excuse to limit access to social safety nets.

Liberals: Yeah, some will abuse the system, but it's more important that everyone who is need gets help without hassle.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #50 of 338
Oh look.

The evil Stalinist kuluk-murdering gulag state of Sweden is bouncing back from the crash in ways that the British and the Americans can only dream of.

Freedom for Sweden!

Yes, they rank fourth on the international press freedom index, just below Norway. And they are one of the freest nations in the world. This is true.

But they have VERY HIGH EQUALITY OF INCOME!

Think of the poor millionaires!

Forgive me for the heresy, but it’s almost as if the creation of a tiny minority of super rich people isn’t the only standard by which to judge a nation’s success.
post #51 of 338
Thread Starter 
But, but, but...

If you provide everybody with what they need, even the *LAZY* ones , then there won't be any incentive for people to produce!!! The economy will collapse!!! Blah blah blah...

FAIL.
post #52 of 338
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Conservatives: Focus on the fraud as an excuse to limit access to social safety nets.

Liberals: Yeah, some will abuse the system, but it's more important that everyone who is need gets help without hassle.

Conservatives also fail to realize that often fraud prevention costs more to administer than what was being lost to fraud in the first place. This is why non means-tested healthcare for everyone who wants it is a better option than limiting help by income level. It costs far too much to do the paperwork, investigation, and litigation involved with means testing.

In fact, this is quite similar to the fact that it costs more to administer the death penalty than it does to keep a prisoner alive for the rest of his life in prison.
post #53 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post

Oh look.

Yes, let's look:

Quote:
1. Keep your fiscal house in order when times are good, so you will have more room to maneuver when things are bad.

In 2007, before the recession, the U.S. government had a budget deficit equivalent to 3 percent of its economy, as did Britain. Sweden, meanwhile, had a 3.6 percent surplus.

So when the recession hit, that surplus gave its government a cushion in the downturn and it didnt run up the huge debts that in other advanced nations have now created the risk of a future crisis. Swedens gross debt is set to reach 45 percent of the size of its economy this year, as the United States closes in on 100 percent.

Quote:
Sweden didnt do much in terms of special, one-off efforts to spend money to combat the downturn. There was some extra infrastructure spending and a well-timed cut to income tax rates, but the most basic response to the government was to do what the nations social welfare system lavish by American standards always does: Provide income, health care and other services to people who are unemployed.


Sweden's economy booms with cautious turn to the right:

Quote:
Sweden is making a political right turn, in a very Swedish way: cautiously, consensually, unflamboyantly. But decisively even so.

One of contenders for the most highly taxed country in the Western world has cut taxes significantly since 2006. Tight fiscal policy has pushed the public sector's share of GDP back down toward 50%. The economy is growing, the budget is balanced, unemployment is declining.

The governing center-right coalition was re-elected last year; the once dominant Social Democrats suffered their worst defeat since before World War I.

Quote:
Between 1980 and 1992, Sweden lost ground relative to other rich countries, according to a McKinsey study. Since 2009, however, Sweden has one of the faster-growing economies in Western Europe. The growth has been led by the private sector, where jobs are multiplying at what Radio Sweden calls "a record pace."

Quote:
American conservatives might find Reinfeldt disappointingly unconfrontational. Yet in five years in office, he has repealed Sweden's wealth taxes and inheritance taxes. He has reduced the labor taxes that pushed almost all home repairs into the black market.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #54 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Yes, let's look:

snip

:



At least you now agree that the Swedish economic and social model works.

Now you agree that the Swedish model works, can you imagine how it might be if America were to implement some of those economic policies in America?

That would be great no?
post #55 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post



At least you now agree that the Swedish economic and social model works.

Now you agree that the Swedish model works, can you imagine how it might be if America were to implement some of those economic policies in America?

That would be great no?

I think I'd be careful about making broadly generalized statements about "Swedish economic and social model"...things are often more complicated than they seem...but I agree that cutting taxes and government fiscal conservatism help the economy grow and I'd love to see that happen in the US. In fact, that's what I've been calling for for some time now.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #56 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I think I'd be careful about making broadly generalized statements about "Swedish economic and social model"...things are often more complicated than they seem...but I agree that cutting taxes and government fiscal conservatism help the economy grow and I'd love to see that happen in the US. In fact, that's what I've been calling for for some time now.

Er..?

You would like to see similar levels of social spending to those in Sweden and a similiar base tax rate to that in Sweden?

You think that that would make your economy grow like the Swedish economy?

Or is it simply that the magick is in the cutting? As if cuts are enough? On their own?

Do, please, explain.
post #57 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post

Er..?

You would like to see similar levels of social spending to those in Sweden and a similiar base tax rate to that in Sweden?

You think that that would make your economy grow like the Swedish economy?

No.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #58 of 338
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I think I'd be careful about making broadly generalized statements...cutting taxes and government fiscal conservatism help the economy grow...

LOL. The irony is insane.
post #59 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

LOL. The irony is insane.

It is ironic that I pointed to more specific and concrete government policy actions (cutting taxes and fiscal conservatism...e.g., low or no deficits, spending and debt) and state that I believe (based on ample supporting evidence) that these help economies grow vs. making a broad generalized and non-specific statement like "Swedish economic and social model" and assuming it is all about this vaguely defined "Swedish economic and social model".

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #60 of 338
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

It is ironic that I pointed to more specific and concrete government policy actions (cutting taxes and fiscal conservatism...e.g., low or no deficits, spending and debt) and state that I believe (based on ample supporting evidence) that these help economies grow vs. making a broad generalized and non-specific statement like "Swedish economic and social model" and assuming it is all about this vaguely defined "Swedish economic and social model".


Don't worry. I didn't expect you to get it.
post #61 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Don' worry. I didn't expect you to get it.

I don't worry about what you expect. I will note, however, the irony of your choice to engage in insults while expecting, in your opening post, that others would attack the messenger and level charges of ignorance.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #62 of 338
The thread title "another free market theory failure" says it all: The "free market" is only a theory anyway. Put into practice, in the real world, its an inglorious fvck-up, as it is with "communism". In the real world, outside of Friedmanite lectures, the "free market" becomes very unfree... ie controlled, manipulated and non-meritocratic. In the real world, in practice, outside of marxist lectures, "communism" becomes enforced, inegalitarian and hierarchical.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #63 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

No.

...which is always, every time, how you respond when your arguments are tested, even in the gentlest way.

Absolutely no attempt to even address the logical problem in your argument. Just a smilie in lieu of an argument. Again.

You want it both ways. You do not get it both ways.
post #64 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

You're telling him that he's being partisan because he's....not writing anything partisan. WTF? \

Because he was talking about lost freedoms in the last 10 years and he left something out about thise 10 years. Also I did mention both administrations that were in office at that time. I just mentioned the facts.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #65 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

WTF?!?!




I cited the last 10 years because the index to which I was specifically referring only goes back for 10 years. I personally think freedom in the US has been in decline for about 100 years.




First, I don't really think that freedom can be easily compartmentalized into "economic" and other areas. Freedom is freedom.

Second, the index to which I was specifically referring tries to evaluate some economic aspects of freedom. You're welcome to read what they say about their index.

Finally, if we were to discuss "economic freedom" it would have to do with freedom of economic activity. The freedom to trade with whomever you want under whatever mutually agreeable terms you and your trading parter voluntarily agree to. The freedom to enter industries and trades and occupations. Knowing that your property is secure from theft. Things like that. The freedom to use your property (including money) as you wish so long as you do not violate the basic rights of others.

Quote:

I cited the last 10 years because the index to which I was specifically referring only goes back for 10 years. I personally think freedom in the US has been in decline for about 100 years.




First, I don't really think that freedom can be easily compartmentalized into "economic" and other areas. Freedom is freedom.

Hey I was quoting you when I said " economic feedom ".

And here's nother take on the Heritage Foundation : http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archi...909miller.html

From that link :
Quote:
an annual report put out by the Heritage Foundation, Washington’s foremost right-wing think tank.

Well color me surprised!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #66 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post

...which is always, every time, how you respond when your arguments are tested, even in the gentlest way.

I'm sorry if responding no to your yes or no question bothers you in some way.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post

Absolutely no attempt to even address the logical problem in your argument. Just a smilie in lieu of an argument. Again.

I'm sorry that your non sequitur question did not elicit the response you expected or hoped for.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #67 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

And here's nother take on the Heritage Foundation : http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archi...909miller.html

From that link :

Well color me surprised!

Ohh...interesting. I wonder if this an example of what tonton was referring to as "attacking the messenger?"

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #68 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Hey I was quoting you when I said " economic feedom ".

And I was referring to a specific index that attempts to measure the economic aspects of freedom. Context matters here.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #69 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

Since Christianity plays a major aspect in your life, (according to your posts), and also supposedly the lives and outlook of a large proportion of the American public, which system would you think Jesus would approve the more?

(a) Predatory jungle-law capitalism, or (b) a European style mixed economy with social safety nets?

Hey look folks! A false dilemma. Not to mention a mis-characterization of free-market capitalism.

P.S. I'm quite certain that the model Jesus would prefer involves individuals helping other individuals and sometimes even banding together, voluntarily, in groups to help others. I'm pretty sure Jesus wouldn't expect me to steal from you to help someone else.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #70 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Conservatives: Focus on the fraud as an excuse to limit access to social safety nets.

Liberals: Yeah, some will abuse the system, but it's more important that everyone who is need gets help without hassle.

Rampant fraud and waste can poison a country's work ethic, drain its tax revenues and wreak its finances in a relatively short period.
For more on this topic, book a flight to Greece.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #71 of 338
This seems somewhat relevant to the discussion:

Quote:
But then critics shift ground and argue that trade-driven growth benefits only the elites and not the poor; it is not inclusive. In India, however, the shift to accelerated growth after reforms that included trade liberalisation has pulled nearly 200 million people out of poverty. In China, which grew faster, it is estimated that more than 300 million people have moved above the poverty line since the start of reforms.

In fact, developed countries also benefit from trades effect on poverty reduction. Contrary to much popular opinion, trade with poor countries does not pauperise rich countries. The opposite is true. It is unskilled, labour-saving technical change that is putting pressure on the wages of workers, whereas imports of cheaper, labour-intensive goods from developing countries help the poor who consume them.

If freer trade reduces poverty, it is presumptuous for critics to claim greater virtue. In truth, the free traders control the moral high ground: with at least 1 billion people still living in poverty, what greater moral imperative do we have than to reduce that number? Talk about social justice is intoxicating, but actually doing something about it is difficult. Here the free traders have a distinct edge.

As the historian Frank Trentmann has demonstrated, the case for free trade was made in 19th-century Britain in moral terms: it was held to promote not just economic prosperity, but also peace.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #72 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Ohh...interesting. I wonder if this an example of what tonton was referring to as "attacking the messenger?"

Nope. Just further clarification.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #73 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Nope. Just further clarification.

Nope. I think you were avoiding discussing the facts (nothing new there) and instead focused on who provided those facts (The Heritage Foundation) and what you perceive their bias to be (again, nothing new). That's flirting with ad hominem.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #74 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

The only point being made here is that while anti-regulation free-market libertarians and 'conservatives' scream from the top of their lungs that socialism is doomed to failure (no qualifiers necessary, TYVM), the truth shows otherwise.

Please show me where supply-siders admit that Socialism doesn't necessarily fail in 100% of scenarios. This is the failed theory I'm talking about.

Here's the thing...is Sweden actually a "socialist" country? And, has Sweden ever experienced problems from the overreaching of government intervention and taxation?

Hmmmm.

Quote:
...The Swedish economy has extensive and universal social benefits funded by high taxes, close to 50% of GDP.[12] In the 1980s, a real estate and financial bubble formed, driven by a rapid increase in lending. A restructuring of the tax system, in order to emphasize low inflation combined with an international economic slowdown in the early 1990s, caused the bubble to burst. Between 1990 and 1993 GDP went down by 5% and unemployment skyrocketed, causing the worst economic crisis in Sweden since the 1930s....

...The welfare system that had been growing rapidly since the 1970s could not be sustained with a falling GDP, lower employment and larger welfare payments. In 1994 the government budget deficit exceeded 15% of GDP. The response of the government was to cut spending and institute a multitude of reforms to improve Sweden's competitiveness. When the international economic outlook improved combined with a rapid growth in the IT sector, which Sweden was well positioned to capitalize on, the country was able to emerge from the crisis....

Hmm...so Socialist Paradise Sweden (herein referred to as SPS) realized that they were running out of other people's money. The government cut spending (that doesn't sound very socialist, now does it?) and "instituted a multitude of reforms (read: deregulation and pro-business policies) to combat the problem.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #75 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Nope. I think you were avoiding discussing the facts (nothing new there) and instead focused on who provided those facts (The Heritage Foundation) and what you perceive their bias to be (again, nothing new). That's flirting with ad hominem.

And this coming from someone who likes to call people " Sweetie ".

I didn't avoid anything. Your source is biased and therefore partisan. Nuff said.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #76 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Yes, it is. But economic freedom is about economic freedom.

You cannot have freedom in a vacuum. If we are neighbors and someone gives you the freedom to own a gun, they take away my freedom to live where there aren't any guns. Freedom is never absolute. Legal freedom is anarchy.

But he likes anarchy. Haven't you heard? Apparently freedom is in the eye of the beholder for MJ. As long as that eye is a conservative one.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #77 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Your source is biased and therefore partisan. Nuff said.

See...there you did it again. Do you have anything valuable to contribute to the thread or have you simply come in to try and pick a fight and do your drive-by posts?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #78 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

But he likes anarchy. Haven't you heard?

Here again you seem to want to make the topic about me for some reason. Do you have anything useful to contribute to the discussion?


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Apparently freedom is in the eye of the beholder for MJ.

Actually no...I think freedom is a reasonably clear concept. It is leftists, who claim to be the advocates of liberty, who have a hypocritical inconsistency on the issue of freedom which makes it look like freedom is in the eye of the beholder for them. These are the ones for whom words have conveniently squishy meanings.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #79 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Because he was talking about lost freedoms in the last 10 years and he left something out about thise 10 years. Also I did mention both administrations that were in office at that time. I just mentioned the facts.

He wasn't discussing it in a partisan political context. In fact, I think he's been pretty clear about his universal condemnation of our government's usurpation of our freedoms in general. If he was talking about what one party or person has done, I'd see what you might want to point that out. But accusing him of being partisan by pointing out he didn't say anything about partisanship is...weird. \
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #80 of 338
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

And I was referring to a specific index that attempts to measure the economic aspects of freedom. Context matters here.

LOL. But haven't you heard? You can't compartmentalize freedom.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › And yet another free-market theory failure