User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 85

  1. #11
    . Blank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    1,202

    Default

    Third'd. That's why I voted for him back in '08.
    Ti = 19 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Te = 16[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Ne = 16[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Fi = 15 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Si = 12 [][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Ni = 12 [][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Se = 11[][][][][][][][][][][]
    Fe = 0

    -----------------
    Tiger got to hunt, bird got to fly;
    Man got to sit and wonder why, why, why;
    Tiger got to sleep, bird got to land;
    Man got to tell himself he understand

  2. #12

    Default

    Guys without war or welfare how will the money circulate? The next most powerful economies or economic blocs would outstrip you in no time.

  3. #13
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    ^and printing money like crazy to pay for these wars and welfare programs really make us stronger?
    I redact everything I have written or will write on this forum prior to, subsequent with and or after the fact of its writing. For entertainment purposes only and not to be taken seriously nor literally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    Spamtar - a strange combination of boorish drunkeness and erudite discussions, or what I call "an Irish academic"

  4. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spamtar View Post
    ^and printing money like crazy to pay for these wars and welfare programs really make us stronger?
    Its the basis of a modern consumer economy, if you think you can live without that then that's alright but know exactly what you're looking for in preference.

  5. #15
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    In all due respect I would be willing to make the changes if it applied across the board (i.e. end corporate welfare/bankster bailouts outrageous farm subsidies "not to grow") This so called modern consumer economy seems to lack adequate foundation; like a stack of cards which is about to fall.
    I redact everything I have written or will write on this forum prior to, subsequent with and or after the fact of its writing. For entertainment purposes only and not to be taken seriously nor literally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    Spamtar - a strange combination of boorish drunkeness and erudite discussions, or what I call "an Irish academic"

  6. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spamtar View Post
    In all due respect I would be willing to make the changes if it applied across the board (i.e. end corporate welfare/bankster bailouts outrageous farm subsidies "not to grow") This so called modern consumer economy seems to lack adequate foundation; like a stack of cards which is about to fall.
    OK, well, if you're going to dump modern consumer society then you've got to dump mass production, mass employment and present standards of living, generally when people make those sorts of sweeping statements they believe they may have to do with a little less in the way of their favourite leisure time activity or a little less conspiscious consumption not like what is going to be required.

    Do you really want to get around to growing your own food? No internet, nothing like it? That's the alternative, imperfect as it is and anathema to many generations of accumulated norms, mores and values paying greater homage to producing than consuming as it is, I dont think I'd prefer the alternative.

  7. #17
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    ^I really don't think that it needs to be as extreme as that. It need not be all or nothing.

    If you could explain how perpetual war and the welfare state causes this I am willing to keep an open mind. The market economy is pretty good at handling itself for the most part. Most (although not all) of the aberrations stem from government interference/negligence/half assed measures.
    I redact everything I have written or will write on this forum prior to, subsequent with and or after the fact of its writing. For entertainment purposes only and not to be taken seriously nor literally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    Spamtar - a strange combination of boorish drunkeness and erudite discussions, or what I call "an Irish academic"

  8. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spamtar View Post
    ^I really don't think that it needs to be as extreme as that. It need not be all or nothing.

    If you could explain how perpetual war and the welfare state causes this I am willing to keep an open mind. The market economy is pretty good at handling itself for the most part. Most (although not all) of the aberrations stem from government interference/negligence/half assed measures.
    I'm afraid you're wrong about them being products of state action or inertia, the market has its own flaws, including that if people are productive and save they infact remove money from the economy, less money in the economy equals less investment funds etc. etc. less innovation, less everything, it eventually goes to seed.

    There is no way that private equivalent that could move the amounts of money necessary to keep the circulation happening, if you're more interested in the hard theory look up Says Law.

    So basically the debate, if everyone is honest, is whether the state will spend on social priorities or military ones, it will however spend if everyone wants to go on living the kinds of lives they are at present.

    The alternative while ideology attractive isnt likely to appeal in practice, although I doubt if it were to be rolled out in practice that the rolling back of it would be in any way an easy affair, it would take private "powers and principalities" which would rival those of the state driven social engineering experiments.

  9. #19
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    I'm afraid you're wrong about them being products of state action or inertia, the market has its own flaws, including that if people are productive and save they infact remove money from the economy, less money in the economy equals less investment funds etc. etc. less innovation, less everything, it eventually goes to seed.

    There is no way that private equivalent that could move the amounts of money necessary to keep the circulation happening, if you're more interested in the hard theory look up Says Law.

    So basically the debate, if everyone is honest, is whether the state will spend on social priorities or military ones, it will however spend if everyone wants to go on living the kinds of lives they are at present.

    The alternative while ideology attractive isn't likely to appeal in practice, although I doubt if it were to be rolled out in practice that the rolling back of it would be in any way an easy affair, it would take private "powers and principalities" which would rival those of the state driven social engineering experiments.
    I don't see it as black and white although there is validity in your points the final analysis or judgment is something I cant agree with. People saving money although may limit the amount of innovation ventures would also limit wasteful ventures. Says law isn't necessarily on point as to the issue of the welfare state and perpetual war. In fact Say was opposed to the idea of printing money as a remedy to suffering business (or modernly the unelected officials of the Fed having authority to write blank checks). The encumbrance of debt also has its bad points both to the individual as does the mounting deficit has to the nation.

    In general society is sick/dependent on the war fair/welfare state so I would agree with you to the degree that removing all of the safety nets overnight would be a bad idea. The aberrations within the economy will leave a vacuum or a potentially unstable environment if removed similar to complication following cancer treatment. This doesn't mean that a change from failing policies (such as those that has made the US the unpaid policeman of the world) need be abandoned.

    In addition we in the USA we have a constitution which creates the separation of powers of the judicial, legislative and executive. However we essentially have only a two party system, the Republicans and the Democrats. Relatively recently in the last few decades the neoCons (whose roots are socialism/Trotskyism) took over the Republican party. Thus the primarily way the people of the USA can change our policies are mostly a gradual change via the respective(disrespective) parties.

    The fact that the high court and its neoCon heavy justices have recently struck down legislation limiting the ability of corporations to essentially bribe the government to steal from its taxpayers with Rube Goldbergesq money funneling schemes makes it more important now than ever to change the neocon policies/positions within the Republican party as a viable alternative/check to the Democratic party.
    I redact everything I have written or will write on this forum prior to, subsequent with and or after the fact of its writing. For entertainment purposes only and not to be taken seriously nor literally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    Spamtar - a strange combination of boorish drunkeness and erudite discussions, or what I call "an Irish academic"

  10. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spamtar View Post
    The encumbrance of debt also has its bad points both to the individual as does the mounting deficit has to the nation
    Sure in the long run but in the long run we're all dead.

    In general society is sick/dependent on the war fair/welfare state so I would agree with you to the degree that removing all of the safety nets overnight would be a bad idea. The aberrations within the economy will leave a vacuum or a potentially unstable environment if removed similar to complication following cancer treatment. This doesn't mean that a change from failing policies (such as those that has made the US the unpaid policeman of the world) need be abandoned.
    The thing about the postponing inevitable disaster or collapse under the inexorable weight of their own internal contadictions arguments is that they smack of the sort of utopian vanguardism which characterised the perfectionists of yester year whether they were left or right wing.

    In addition we in the USA we have a constitution which creates the separation of powers of the judicial, legislative and executive. However we essentially have only a two party system, the Republicans and the Democrats. Relatively recently in the last few decades the neoCons (whose roots are socialism/Trotskyism) took over the Republican party. Thus the primarily way the people of the USA can change our policies are mostly a gradual change via the respective(disrespective) parties.
    Hmm, yeah, I am a socialist and much as I hate trotskyism I couldnt called Bush co. Trotskyists, they do however use a lot of Lenin-Trotsky tactics, infiltration, hijacking, vanguardism, broad fonts etc. but that's mere tactics, you cant really describe them as either, at least if they were they were only so very, very superficially.

    I dont believe that the present requirement to circulate the money in the economy is the consequence of a conspiracy of players, whether its the neocons or fifties and post war labour agitators who're framed up, I dont believe its an accident either or it could have and would have been undone before now. The development of the neocons etc. has largely been a consequence of the people in office and power and their advisors contemplating the collision of their ideology and reality and finding their ideology seriously wanting in the balance.

Similar Threads

  1. [NT] What Strategy Would Win Ron Paul the Republican Nomination/Presidency
    By Vizconde in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 01-18-2012, 03:28 AM
  2. Bob Barr or Ron Paul?
    By 6sticks in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-28-2008, 08:42 PM
  3. Ron Paul
    By Paul3144 in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 03-06-2008, 11:14 AM
  4. Ron Paul Tea Party... will you be donating?
    By file cabinet in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 95
    Last Post: 12-20-2007, 03:19 PM
  5. Ron Paul Wins Another Presidential Debate
    By FranG in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 05-18-2007, 12:31 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO