Collarchat.com

Join Our Community
Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

RE: Leftist Fundamentalism


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Leftist Fundamentalism Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/24/2017 6:46:44 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
"National Competitiveness and Economic Freedom"

quote:

At the risk of oversimplifying, libertarians want to minimize the level of government coercion is society. That’s why we favor both economic liberty and personal liberty.Simply stated, you should have the right to control your own life and make your own decisions so long as you’re not harming others or interfering with their rights.

That’s a philosophical or moral argument.

There’s also the utilitarian argument for liberty, and that largely revolves around the fact societies with more freedom tend to be considerably more prosperous than societies with lots of government.

I’ve repeatedly made this argument by comparing the economic performance of market-oriented jurisdictions and statist ones.

Let’s look at some new evidence. Based in Lausanne, Switzerland, the Institute for Management Development is a highly regarded educational institution that publishes an annual World Competitiveness Yearbook that basically measures whether a nation is a good place to do business.

So it’s not a measure of economic liberty, at least not directly. And the quality of governance matters for the IMD rankings (presumably based on something akin to the European Central Bank’s measure of “public sector efficiency“).

But you’ll notice a clear link between economic liberty and competitiveness.

Here are the top-10 nations. (you can look at the rankings for all nations by clicking here).

As you might suspect, there’s a strong correlation between the nations that are competitive and those that have smaller governments and free markets.

Indeed, three out of the top four jurisdictions (Hong Kong, Singapore, andSwitzerland) rank in the top four for economic liberty according to Economic Freedom of the World.

And I’m happy to see that the United States also scores very highly, even if we only rank 17 out of 157 for economic freedom.

Indeed, every country in IMD’s top 10 other than Sweden is ranked in the top quartile of EFW.

You also probably won’t be surprised by the countries getting the worst scores from IMD.

Congratulations to Venezuela for being the world’s least competitive nation. Though that might be an overstatement since IMD only ranks 61 jurisdictions. If all the world’s countries were included, Venezuela presumably would beat out North Korea. And maybe a couple of other squalid outposts of statism, such as Cuba.

It’s also worth noting that Greece gets consistently bad scores. And I’m not surprised that Argentina is near the bottom as well (though it has improved since last year, so hopefully the new government will continue to move in the right direction).

By the way, it’s worth noting that economic freedom is a necessary but not sufficient condition for competitiveness. Jordan, for instance, ranks in the top 10 for economic freedom but gets a low score from IMD, presumably because the advantages of good policy don’t compensate for exogenous factors such as geopolitical risk and access to markets.

The moral of the story, though, is that free markets and small government are the recipe for more prosperity. And those policies are probably even more important for nations that face exogenous challenges.


http://freedomandprosperity.org/2016/blog/national-competitiveness-and-economic-freedom/

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 81
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/24/2017 7:12:05 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

How about you? Information on the most successful countries has already been posted, and this, from Koch, is your response, with no refutation of the other data.

So what makes Koch right and everyone else wrong?

Since you're all about the different views.

Alternative facts aren't different views. They're lies.

The rankings published by Koch come from the Frasier Instititue. The rankings published by Business Insider come from the Legatum Institute. And both are in close agreement with the Heritage rankings. The United States is ranked 16th by Frasier, 17th by Legatum and Heritage.

Excluding your own post, please point out where the "lies" are here?

K.


< Message edited by Kirata -- 4/24/2017 7:17:53 PM >

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 82
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/24/2017 7:17:40 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
Sure. The issue was Democratic Socialism, and how those countries are doing.

Not the US.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 83
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/24/2017 7:21:51 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Sure. The issue was Democratic Socialism, and how those countries are doing.

Not the US.

So which set of rankings is a "lie" then?

K.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 84
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/24/2017 7:30:37 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
The point was that "alternative facts" is a phrase that really means "lies."

That's it.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 85
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/24/2017 7:36:02 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

The point was that "alternative facts" is a phrase that really means "lies."

That's it.

Oh. Did somebody besides you use that phrase?

K.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 86
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/24/2017 7:58:39 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SecondBestBoy

Socialism? Show me a Democratic Socialist country and I'll show you one of the nine most prosperous countries in the world - all ahead of some right wing mediocrity called the United States. That according to Business Insider's rankings.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-30-most-prosperous-countries-in-the-world-2014-11

Business Insider references the Legatum rankings, which include measures of both economic prosperity and "social well-being," so the rankings are not in fact reflective of where those countries would actually rank on economic prosperity alone.

But hey, I understand. It sounded good, so you ran with it. And a very fashionable fellow you are. Clicking on an article's references and actually reading them is soooo passé.

K.


< Message edited by Kirata -- 4/24/2017 8:08:28 PM >

(in reply to SecondBestBoy)
Profile   Post #: 87
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/24/2017 8:44:10 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

Today, we live in the most prosperous time in human history. Poverty, sicknesses, and ignorance are receding throughout the world, due in large part to the advance of economic freedom. In 2017, the principles of economic freedom that have fueled this monumental progress are once again measured in the Index of Economic Freedom, an annual guide published by The Heritage Foundation, Washington's No. 1 think tank.


Bounty, seriously, how can you post a statement like this without even questioning the truth of it and at least wondering what metrics are being used to come to the conclusion that this is the best of times for all people the world over? How do you measure that this is the most prosperous time in human history? Are they measuring the GDPs of OECD members? The list of members includes not one country from Africa, and with the exception of Israel and Turkey there are no countries from the Middle East, and only Japan from Asia. On the face of it the boasting for increasing wealth and prosperity is fall down laughable.

Seriously, how do we reach the conclusion that the world is in the most prosperous of times ever? We need to have a clear answer to that question before we can even begin to parse the effects of size of government and the other principals of economic freedom that have allegedly fueled this great global surge in good health and well being.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 88
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/25/2017 3:16:19 AM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

Today, we live in the most prosperous time in human history. Poverty, sicknesses, and ignorance are receding throughout the world, due in large part to the advance of economic freedom. In 2017, the principles of economic freedom that have fueled this monumental progress are once again measured in the Index of Economic Freedom, an annual guide published by The Heritage Foundation, Washington's No. 1 think tank.

Bounty, seriously, how can you post a statement like this without even questioning the truth of it and at least wondering what metrics are being used to come to the conclusion that this is the best of times for all people the world over?

I don't think he quite said that. I don't think anyone would. But the world is indeed making progress, albeit excruciatingly slowly, and there are fewer people living in extreme poverty today than ever before.

World Bank: 'extreme poverty' to fall below 10% of world population for first time

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Seriously, how do we reach the conclusion that the world is in the most prosperous of times ever? We need to have a clear answer to that question before we can even begin to parse the effects of size of government and the other principals of economic freedom that have allegedly fueled this great global surge in good health and well being.

I'll leave that one to you two.

K.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 89
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/25/2017 5:00:52 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:


As you might suspect, there’s a strong correlation between the nations that are competitive and those that have smaller governments and free markets.


Uh, just.................yeah, no.

OK. I guess we got a small government and a free-market. So lets quit whining about it, and maybe reduce the burden of our military spending and reduce our debt and work on infrastructure.



_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 90
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/25/2017 6:56:19 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

I don't think he quite said that. I don't think anyone would. But the world is indeed making progress, albeit excruciatingly slowly, and there are fewer people living in extreme poverty today than ever before.

Making progress in reducing "extreme poverty" hardly equates to "Today, we live in the most prosperous time in human history." We hear reports that the middle class is suffering stagnant income while inflation is increasing for basic necessities.

This horror story just doesn't inspire confidence in the glowing reports posted in this thread:

Poverty is a state of deprivation, lacking the usual or socially acceptable amount of money or material possessions.[1] The most common measure of poverty in the U.S. is the "poverty threshold" set by the U.S. government. This measure recognizes poverty as a lack of those goods and services commonly taken for granted by members of mainstream society.[2] The official threshold is adjusted for inflation using the consumer price index.

Most Americans will spend at least one year below the poverty line at some point between ages 25 and 75.[3] Poverty rates are persistently higher in rural and inner city parts of the country as compared to suburban areas.[4][5]

In 2015, 13.5% (43.1 million) Americans lived in poverty.[6] Starting in the 1930s, relative poverty rates have consistently exceeded those of other wealthy nations.[7] The lowest poverty rates are found in New Hampshire, Vermont, Minnesota and Nebraska, which have between 8.7% and 9.1% of their population living in poverty.[8]

In 2009 the number of people who were in poverty was approaching 1960s levels that led to the national War on Poverty.[9] In 2011 extreme poverty in the United States, meaning households living on less than $2 per day before government benefits, was double 1996 levels at 1.5 million households, including 2.8 million children.[10]

In 2012 the percentage of seniors living in poverty was 14% while 18% of children were.[11] The addition of Social Security benefits contributed more to reduce poverty than any other factor.[12]

Recent census data shows that half the population qualifies as poor or low income,[13] with one in five Millennials living in poverty.[14] Academic contributors to The Routledge Handbook of Poverty in the United States postulate that new and extreme forms of poverty have emerged in the U.S. as a result of neoliberal structural adjustment policies and globalization, which have rendered economically marginalized communities as destitute "surplus populations" in need of control and punishment.[15]

In 2011, child poverty reached record high levels, with 16.7 million children living in food insecure households, about 35% more than 2007 levels.[16] A 2013 UNICEF report ranked the U.S. as having the second highest relative child poverty rates in the developed world.[17] According to a 2016 study by the Urban Institute, teenagers in low income communities are often forced to join gangs, save school lunches, sell drugs or exchange sexual favors because they cannot afford food.[18]

There were about 643,000 sheltered and unsheltered homeless people nationwide in January 2009. Almost two-thirds stayed in an emergency shelter or transitional housing program and the other third were living on the street, in an abandoned building, or another place not meant for human habitation. About 1.56 million people, or about 0.5% of the U.S. population, used an emergency shelter or a transitional housing program between October 1, 2008 and September 30, 2009.[19] Around 44% of homeless people are employed.[20]

In June 2016, the IMF warned the United States that its high poverty rate needs to be tackled urgently by raising the minimum wage and offering paid maternity leave to women to encourage them to enter the labor force.[21]


The narrative simply does not support the political enthusiasm reported in this thread. Posters bitch about globalization and then turn about 180 degrees and try to convince us that we are making progress in eradicating poverty, disease, and ignorance. I don't buy it.

SOURCE

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 91
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/25/2017 7:41:48 AM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
more...

"Capitalism Brings Prosperity"

quote:

The long-standing argument of the Left is that the rich are getting richer and the poor poorer, presumably because the former “exploit” the latter. A lot of convincing-sounding statistics are marshalled in support of that claim, such as lower median incomes or hourly wages today versus in the past. These statistics can be manipulated in various ways (such as reporting short, outlier time periods versus trends over time), depending on what message one wants to convey. (An objective look at the long-term statistical trends confirms that median incomes today are actually higher than they were in the past. Please see the numbers here).

But even if we do not have income statistics on hand, mere observation confirms that people are economically better off than they were, say, 40 years ago. This is partly due to higher incomes today and partly due to the lower relative prices of many goods and services, thanks to freer markets in many parts of the world and a more global trade today. No, poverty has not been eliminated because we don’t have capitalism—which is the only system to eliminate poverty—but economic well-being has increased proportionally with economic freedom. Observe many of the Asian countries as examples. Even the Chinese have prospered, as the communist government there has increased economic, if not political, freedom. Closer to home, we can observe low-income families being able to afford many of the technology and other products that previously were within the reach of only the wealthy: TVs, cell phones, laptop computers, cars, better quality and/or quantity of clothes and food.

But even such concrete observations fail to persuade those leftists not open to reason; they cannot be reached, no matter how clear the argument. However, for those open to reason, the best way to show that everyone will prosper under a system of trade (the freer the better), is to explain how the principle of trade leads to improved human flourishing for all.

The rich cannot get richer by exploiting the poor; the rich can only get richer only if the poor also prosper. Wealth cannot be created by exploiting others—only by creating and trading values, for mutual benefit, by mutual consent. When the 99% (as per the claim of the Occupy movement that the richest 1% exploits the rest), shop at Wal-Mart or Costco, they aren’t being exploited. When we buy an iPhone, a Samsung Galaxy, or another smartphone, or a Sony or a Panasonic flat screen TV, we are not being exploited. When we negotiate a deal on a Hyundai or a Dodge, or any other car, we are not being exploited. When we buy goods or services, we do it to benefit ourselves, not because we are being forced to do so by ruthless producers who extort money from us.

And if the producers of the goods and services wanted to “exploit” us by charging “exorbitant” prices, there simply would not be enough buyers. If the 1% (or even the top 10%) traded just among themselves, their market would get saturated pretty quickly. It is trading with the mass consumer market that has enabled the Walton family, the owners of Costco, Apple, Samsung, Sony, Panasonic, Hyundai, Chrysler—and many others among the one per cent become wealthy. They have become wealthy, not by exploitation, but by producing and trading values that we want, to make our lives better.

To achieve the full benefits of trade, however, we need not just a little more economic freedom the typical mixed economy offers us today; we need a system of full political and economic freedom: laissez-faire capitalism. In such as system, individual rights, including property rights, are recognized and protected, all property is privately owned, and the government does not play any role in the economy (by regulating it, attempting to “stimulate” it, or “re-distributing” wealth from those who have produced it to those who have not).

It is time to reject the myth perpetuated by the Left that the wealthy are exploiting the rest of us for their own benefit. While criminals (scammers, pyramid schemers, and the like) temporarily looting others’ money are possible and must be punished, long-term wealth can only be created by earning it: by trading value for value for win-win outcomes. So instead of demonizing the wealth creators—the producers of values, let’s be grateful for their production and advocate a social system that makes increased prosperity possible for everybody: full capitalism.


http://capitalismmagazine.com/2014/12/capitalism-brings-prosperity/

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 92
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/25/2017 7:45:52 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
Yeah. They flat out pretended inflation doesn't exist.

Not surprising for an argument that's essentially "Let's not trust data. Let's just see what we happen to think we observe."

Definitely your kind of source.

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 93
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/25/2017 7:48:46 AM   
NoirMetal


Posts: 508
Joined: 3/20/2017
Status: offline
I wonder what would actually happen if we just canned the federal reserve and went on a supported standard.

Inflation is almost entirely based on fiat currency excesses.

_____________________________

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQeNASx7ksM

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 94
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/25/2017 7:54:53 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
What would happen is the same thing that happened before -- arbitragers would cash in on the discrepancies between the varying market price of the "supported standard" (which, incidentally, is still fiat money) and the fluctuating economic health of the nation, forcing devaluation of the currency.

It's why very conservative Nixon abandoned Bretton Woods and the gold standard -- and was right to do so.

(in reply to NoirMetal)
Profile   Post #: 95
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/25/2017 7:58:31 AM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
"Socialism vs. Capitalism: Which is the Moral System"
quote:

Throughout history there have been two basic forms of social organization: collectivism and individualism. In the twentieth-century collectivism has taken many forms: socialism, fascism, nazism, welfare-statism and communism are its more notable variations. The only social system commensurate with individualism is laissez-faire capitalism.

The extraordinary level of material prosperity achieved by the capitalist system over the course of the last two-hundred years is a matter of historical record. But very few people are willing to defend capitalism as morally uplifting.

It is fashionable among college professors, journalists, and politicians these days to sneer at the free-enterprise system. They tell us that capitalism is base, callous, exploitative, dehumanizing, alienating, and ultimately enslaving.

The intellectuals’ mantra runs something like this: In theory socialism is the morally superior social system despite its dismal record of failure in the real world. Capitalism, by contrast, is a morally bankrupt system despite the extraordinary prosperity it has created. In other words, capitalism at best, can only be defended on pragmatic grounds. We tolerate it because it works.

Under socialism a ruling class of intellectuals, bureaucrats and social planners decide what people want or what is good for society and then use the coercive power of the State to regulate, tax, and redistribute the wealth of those who work for a living. In other words, socialism is a form of legalized theft.

The morality of socialism can be summed-up in two words: envy and self-sacrifice. Envy is the desire to not only possess another’s wealth but also the desire to see another’s wealth lowered to the level of one’s own. Socialism’s teaching on self-sacrifice was nicely summarized by two of its greatest defenders, Hermann Goering and Bennito Mussolini. The highest principle of Nazism (National Socialism), said Goering, is: “Common good comes before private good.” Fascism, said Mussolini, is ” a life in which the individual, through the sacrifice of his own private interests…realizes that completely spiritual existence in which his value as a man lies.”

Socialism is the social system which institutionalizes envy and self-sacrifice: It is the social system which uses compulsion and the organized violence of the State to expropriate wealth from the producer class for its redistribution to the parasitical class.

Despite the intellectuals’ psychotic hatred of capitalism, it is the only moral and just social system.

Capitalism is the only moral system because it requires human beings to deal with one another as traders–that is, as free moral agents trading and selling goods and services on the basis of mutual consent.

Capitalism is the only just system because the sole criterion that determines the value of thing exchanged is the free, voluntary, universal judgement of the consumer. Coercion and fraud are anathema to the free-market system.

It is both moral and just because the degree to which man rises or falls in society is determined by the degree to which he uses his mind. Capitalism is the only social system that rewards merit, ability and achievement, regardless of one’s birth or station in life.

Yes, there are winners and losers in capitalism. The winners are those who are honest, industrious, thoughtful, prudent, frugal, responsible, disciplined, and efficient. The losers are those who are shiftless, lazy, imprudent, extravagant, negligent, impractical, and inefficient.

Capitalism is the only social system that rewards virtue and punishes vice. This applies to both the business executive and the carpenter, the lawyer and the factory worker.

But how does the entrepreneurial mind work? Have you ever wondered about the mental processes of the men and women who invented penicillin, the internal combustion engine, the airplane, the radio, the electric light, canned food, air conditioning, washing machines, dishwashers, computers, etc.?

What are the characteristics of the entrepreneur? The entrepreneur is that man or woman with unlimited drive, initiative, insight, energy, daring creativity, optimism and ingenuity. The entrepreneur is the man who sees in every field a potential garden, in every seed an apple. Wealth starts with ideas in people’s heads.

The entrepreneur is therefore above all else a man of the mind. The entrepreneur is the man who is constantly thinking of new ways to improve the material or spiritual lives of the greatest number of people.

And what are the social and political conditions which encourage or inhibit the entrepreneurial mind? The free-enterprise system is not possible without the sanctity of private property, the freedom of contract, free trade and the rule of law.

But the one thing that the entrepreneur values over all others is freedom–the freedom to experiment, invent and produce. The one thing that the entrepreneur dreads is government intervention. Government taxation and regulation are the means by which social planners punish and restrict the man or woman of ideas.

Welfare, regulations, taxes, tariffs, minimum-wage laws are all immoral because they use the coercive power of the state to organize human choice and action; they’re immoral because they inhibit or deny the freedom to choose how we live our lives; they’re immoral because they deny our right to live as autonomous moral agents; and they’re immoral because they deny our essential humanity. If you think this is hyperbole, stop paying your taxes for a year or two and see what happens.

The requirements for success in a free society demand that ordinary citizens order their lives in accordance with certain virtues–namely, rationality, independence, industriousness, prudence, frugality, etc. In a free capitalist society individuals must choose for themselves how they will order their lives and the values they will pursue. Under socialism, most of life’s decisions are made for you.

Both socialism and capitalism have incentive programs. Under socialism there are built-in incentives to shirk responsibility. There is no reason to work harder than anyone else becuase the rewards are shared and therefore minimal to the hard-working individual; indeed, the incentive is to work less than others because the immediate loss is shared and therefore minimal to the slacker.

Under capitalism, the incentive is to work harder because each producer will receive the total value of his production–the rewards are not shared. Simply put: socialism rewards sloth and penalizes hard work while capitalism rewards hard work and penalizes sloth.

According to socialist doctrine, there is a limited amount of wealth in the world that must be divided equally between all citizens. One person’s gain under such a system is another’s loss.

According to the capitalist teaching, wealth has an unlimited growth potential and the fruits of one’s labor should be retained in whole by the producer. But unlike socialism, one person’s gain is everybody’s gain in the capitalist system. Wealth is distributed unequally but the ship of wealth rises for everyone.

Sadly, America is no longer a capitalist nation. We live under what is more properly called a mixed economy–that is, an economic system that permits private property, but only at the discretion of government planners. A little bit of capitalism and a little bit of socialism.

When government redistributes wealth through taxation, when it attempts to control and regulate business production and trade, who are the winners and losers? Under this kind of economy the winners and losers are reversed: the winners are those who scream the loudest for a handout and the losers are those quiet citizens who work hard and pay their taxes.

As a consequence of our sixty-year experiment with a mixed economy and the welfare state, America has created two new classes of citizens. The first is a debased class of dependents whose means of survival is contingent upon the forced expropriation of wealth from working citizens by a professional class of government social planners. The forgotten man and woman in all of this is the quiet, hardworking, lawabiding, taxpaying citizen who minds his or her own business but is forced to work for the government and their serfs.

The return of capitalism will not happen until there is a moral revolution in this country. We must rediscover and then teach our young the virtues associated with being free and independent citizens. Then and only then, will there be social justice in America.


http://ashbrook.org/publications/onprin-v1n3-thompson/

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 96
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/25/2017 8:05:40 AM   
BoscoX


Posts: 10663
Joined: 12/10/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Yeah. They flat out pretended inflation doesn't exist.

Not surprising for an argument that's essentially "Let's not trust data. Let's just see what we happen to think we observe."

Definitely your kind of source.


Ad hominems and copy & paste is your kind of trolling

Why don't you just accuse him of being gay like your "sharp" mnottertroll buddy

_____________________________

Hunter is the smartest guy I know

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 97
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/25/2017 8:33:47 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
but he hasnt done anything like that and neither have I. But as for you, corpulent retarded compound gimp and pedophile. . .



_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to BoscoX)
Profile   Post #: 98
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/25/2017 9:20:12 AM   
heavyblinker


Posts: 3623
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44
Observe many of the Asian countries as examples. Even the Chinese have prospered, as the communist government there has increased economic, if not political, freedom. Closer to home, we can observe low-income families being able to afford many of the technology and other products that previously were within the reach of only the wealthy: TVs, cell phones, laptop computers, cars, better quality and/or quantity of clothes and food.


The Chinese crony capitalists have prospered for sure... they've destroyed the air, the water and the land and then they get to move to Canada where they don't have to deal with cleaning it up. And as much as we know the people at capitalistmagazine are bound to have a fair and balanced perspective, they seem to have skipped over the people who are living in factory dorms and working 12 hour shifts 7 days a week under threat of physical abuse so that Walmart and Costco can sell all those cheap TVs.

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 99
RE: Leftist Fundamentalism - 4/25/2017 9:27:53 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

To achieve the full benefits of trade, however, we need not just a little more economic freedom the typical mixed economy offers us today; we need a system of full political and economic freedom: laissez-faire capitalism. In such as system, individual rights, including property rights, are recognized and protected, all property is privately owned, and the government does not play any role in the economy (by regulating it, attempting to “stimulate” it, or “re-distributing” wealth from those who have produced it to those who have not).


The glaring, screaming fallacy here is that all property cannot be privately owned. Basic resources come from nature and their distribution (ownership) is governed by Power, either the power of guns or the power of access that accrues to money. We witnessed a clear example of that distortion when the Soviet Union came apart in 1990. The private ownership of all property is a fantasy from the start. Furthermore, there are basic essentials that must belong to the public: the military infrastructure, the roads and bridges and tunnels, the educational system (we see that even charter schools are dependent upon public financing)

Laissez-faire capitalism is just another name for survival of the strongest. As Thomas Hobbes put it, in a state of nature all would be at war with each other, and life would be short and brutish. Power accumulates to Power and is eventually monopolized. The poor are to blame for their own failures. The rich are God-chosen. Laissez-faire capitalism is a very thin and brutal advocacy of Robber Baron Capitalism. We have seen that movie before. We shall not be conned by it again, although Trump's minions have brought us near to it by succumbing to lying scum bag promises of false populism made by a mentally confused billionaire who really gives not a shit for people in need.

Bounty, please, stop plastering these Boards with 19th Century propaganda. If you cannot make your own argument for what you think you believe then give it up because your beliefs are shallow.


_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 100
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Leftist Fundamentalism Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.049