New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Oh My, What To Do?

JackDallas

Senator
Supporting Member
You didn't read any of the links he provided did you?

How come?
Lying Liberals always depend on sources of information that are provided by people as equally ill-informed as they are and also not burdened with moral restraints against lying and making shit up.
 

FakeName

Governor
Lying Liberals always depend on sources of information that are provided by people as equally ill-informed as they are and also not burdened with moral restraints against lying and making shit up.
If the sources were I'll informed I would think it would be easy to refute them.

Your way is more convenient though.....then you never have to refute anything a liberal says no matter how many facts they put in front of you ......kind of like a kid sticking his fingers in his ears and yelling "I can't hear you".
 

JackDallas

Senator
Supporting Member
If the sources were I'll informed I would think it would be easy to refute them.

Your way is more convenient though.....then you never have to refute anything a liberal says no matter how many facts they put in front of you ......kind of like a kid sticking his fingers in his ears and yelling "I can't hear you".
Your Nic is FAKE NAME. With this post I've responded to you twice. That's more time than anyone ought to waste on a poster who calls itself FAKE NAME.
 

redtide

Mayor
Not true. All mixed economies allowed the dirt floor poor to climb out of poverty and the evidence shows that in just about every way of measuring it the quality of life and levels of happiness are higher in the countries with higher levels of gov. Involvement like those in northern Europe.
Not sure if your motivation for such a bogus comparison is born of racism or a Desire for a fixed cast system. Perhaps you can clear it up for US. Which of the two are you seeking, a society that is almost entirely homogenous, or one who's culture is founded out from the lack of freedom found in feudal rule?
 

kaz

Small l libertarian
There was a huge difference between Trump and Hillary Clinton. A huge difference between Gore and George w Bush, a huge difference between bill Clinton and George H. W. Bush, etc.

Depending on your policy preferences one of each pair was a far better choice than the other.

Avoiding the actual choice by voting for someone who you know will not be president is illogical.
There was virtually no difference between Gore and W or between Slick and HW. Almost none at all.

There was little difference between Trump and Hillary. And that was the biggest difference in the candidates since Reagan
 

kaz

Small l libertarian
Because we are a capitalist society in name only.

Did you know that? Kind of like one claiming to be "conservative".
Typical Democrat.

You're going to have to show me where I said we are still a capitalist country. Hint, I didn't say that. You are just being an ass
 

OldTrapper

Council Member
After twenty years on these forums, I have found that those who try to use faux intellectual superiority in an argument are usually trying to give their erroneous interpretations of reality more weight than they deserve. FWIW.
This one got me to thinking. I got my first access to the internet with WebTv when it came out in Iowa back in 1997. Then it was $99.00 on a special deal. I found Talk City, and the forums there. We talked about Gingrich and his "Contract with America", and the lack of healthcare, taxes, abortion, the Homosexual agenda, Iraq/Kuwait and Saddam Hussein, etc. Pretty much what we talk about today, and guess what, the arguments are the same, and nothing has changed. Just the names.

You obviously do not understand capitalism, because anyone who suggests that the capitalism we have now (or have had in the past 100 years for that matter) is "unfettered," is (quite frankly) full of shit.
If it was as regulated as much as you seem to think we would not have the multi-national corporations we have, and the Founders opposed, and warned against. Workers unions would not be under constant attack, and less money would be spent subsidizing corporations.
 

FakeName

Governor
There was virtually no difference between Gore and W or between Slick and HW. Almost none at all.

There was little difference between Trump and Hillary. And that was the biggest difference in the candidates since Reagan
Ridiculous.
 

OldTrapper

Council Member
Typical Democrat.

You're going to have to show me where I said we are still a capitalist country. Hint, I didn't say that. You are just being an ass
That is not what you meant when you said this:

Capitalism is just economic freedom. Crony capitalism and corporatism are forms of socialism where government picks market winners.

Do you know that? How is economic freedom "destroying the economy?"
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
And I find it is the fools who cannot grasp what the comment was about that usually feel they are superior to all others. Where id d I say that the "capitalism" of today is unfettered? Did I not say "Greatly unfettered"? If it were otherwise we would not see the multi-corporations we see today that are smothering competition, and workers rights.

https://www.vox.com/2019/1/2/18130630/american-capitalism-neoliberalism-steven-pearlstein

But I am sure you know better. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
I would suggest you look in the mirror.

Ignorant people citing propaganda is unhelpful. From your link:

Neoliberal policies of global free trade and unregulated markets were embraced, and the US was suddenly facing competition from all over the globe.

That is poppycock! If this clown really believes trade is "free" and markets are "unregulated" then he really has no business opining on the economy. Maybe you don't understand economics and that all sounds reasonable to you based on your ideological bias against capitalism, but to me it just sounds ridiculous.

First off, you guys get googly-eyed when someone curses global "free" trade as being anathema to the interests of US workers, and then turn around and claim Trump is an economic fool for imposing restrictions on imports. Make up your freaking minds!

Now, as for the ridiculous claim that markets have become "unfettered:"

Screen Shot 2019-05-19 at 10.39.57 AM.png

Show me, please, on that chart, where markets became even relatively unregulated. You can't because they haven't been! The fact of the matter is that markets became overwhelmingly more regulated during the Obama years, and none of it had the effect that you economic neophytes claim (more widespread prosperity and higher incomes).

So you pretend (with the help of propagandists like Pearlstein) that it never happened and we are still reeling from some massive unleashing of capitalist malevolence upon our wretched existence. Nothing could be further from the truth!

The actual facts on this matter is that regulation has the opposite effect of what you leftists claim - it reduces competition, which is why it has led to stagnating incomes anemic economic growth. The entire "financialization" of the economy is a direct result of what you see in that chart. It has become inexorably more difficult to make money in America by making things. So the bankers found a way to make money from trading things that already exist - no surprise to those of us who understand this subject. And when it contributed to the crash in 2009, the Fed doubled down on what has engendered the whole thing and turned up the free money spigot to facilitate this economy based on trading, rather than making.

Screen Shot 2019-05-18 at 7.07.28 AM.png

The whole thing, of course, is unsustainable over the long run, but the vast amount of wealth created over the middle of the twentieth century has created a deep pool of tradable (and liquidatable) assets that, fueled by the Fed's quantitative easing, has led to a financial asset bubble every bit as insane as the tulip mania of the 17th century.

And it will inevitably end as badly. But, make no mistake - nothing in any of that is "free market" or even ostensibly capitalist. In fact, it looks more like crony socialism to me than like capitalism in any way shape or form. However, as long as it supports the anti-capitalist movement's purposes, the lie that it is "capitalism" and a result of "un-regulation" will get plenty of coverage by the progressive media.

So I hope by now you realize (but almost certainly do not care) that your arguments are based on unreality supported by propaganda (like your link), and that you will get nowhere using these specious arguments in any discussion with me on the subject of economics. But feel free to keep trying - I enjoy deconstructing liberal fantasies.
 

kaz

Small l libertarian
Ridiculous.
Should be easy then. Name some of the real differences. Don't go to words, go to actions. The words are different, sure. The actions? Not so much.

So differences between HW and Slick?

Differences between Gore and W?

Only real ones, go ...
 

kaz

Small l libertarian
That is not what you meant when you said this:
Gotcha. This is your black and white all or nothing Democrat view of the world. Either the United States is a capitalist country or there is no capitalism at all in any way.

Remember how you used to claim you were smarter than Republicans because you weren't all black and white like they are? LOL. Turned out to be another lie
 

OldTrapper

Council Member
Gotcha. This is your black and white all or nothing Democrat view of the world. Either the United States is a capitalist country or there is no capitalism at all in any way.

Remember how you used to claim you were smarter than Republicans because you weren't all black and white like they are? LOL. Turned out to be another lie
Never claimed such so the lie is ours as usual. Same as I never claimed that the US had to be capitalist, or nothing.

Two lies in one post. Common for the low IQ poster/voter
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
This one got me to thinking. I got my first access to the internet with WebTv when it came out in Iowa back in 1997. Then it was $99.00 on a special deal. I found Talk City, and the forums there. We talked about Gingrich and his "Contract with America", and the lack of healthcare, taxes, abortion, the Homosexual agenda, Iraq/Kuwait and Saddam Hussein, etc. Pretty much what we talk about today, and guess what, the arguments are the same, and nothing has changed. Just the names.



If it was as regulated as much as you seem to think we would not have the multi-national corporations we have, and the Founders opposed, and warned against. Workers unions would not be under constant attack, and less money would be spent subsidizing corporations.
Interestingly, most of the folks on this forum have been debating each other for twenty years. We've moved, together, from forum to forum. But I disagree that the arguments are the same. Most folks flip and flop on the issues based on what party is in power. Only a very few of us hold the same positions regardless of which party is doing the shit.

As for the effects of regulation, you obviously don't understand how it works. The more regulation an industry or market has, the less competition there is, and the bigger the corporations tend to become. Regulations serve as a "moat" that prevents smaller competitors from being able to scale up and take business away from the behemoths. The large companies can defray the cost of regulation easier, and in fact, have the wherewithal to shape it (in a self-serving way, of course). This is what is known as "regulatory capture." It is not a coincidence, for instance, that as government has gotten bigger and bigger, so too have the corporations. None of that is the result of "free" markets, or deregulation for that matter. The truth, in fact, is quite the opposite.

Screen Shot 2019-05-19 at 11.33.48 AM.png
 

OldTrapper

Council Member
I would suggest you look in the mirror.

Ignorant people citing propaganda is unhelpful. From your link:

Neoliberal policies of global free trade and unregulated markets were embraced, and the US was suddenly facing competition from all over the globe.

That is poppycock! If this clown really believes trade is "free" and markets are "unregulated" then he really has no business opining on the economy. Maybe you don't understand economics and that all sounds reasonable to you based on your ideological bias against capitalism, but to me it just sounds ridiculous.
I really have to laugh when fools like you pretend to even know what you are speaking of. One of the main reasons why American corporations moved out of the country was to avoid the regulations (workmans comp, minimum wages, pensions, environmental regulations, child labor regulations, etc.) that have been passed in this country. However, being the fool you are, you espouse American regulations in a ass backward attempt to prove that the global system is somehow regulated as the American system is.

In the real world, you posted nothing that would persuade a rational person to believe that the American system is over-regulated. Corporate profits continue to grow while wages remain stagnant, corporations continue to spew garbage into rivers, ponds, and the environment in general, CEO salaries continue to rise while the worker sees none of the benefits, etc. And even though these practices continue regulations are being dismantled under Trump.

Why you think you even have a basic knowledge of what capitalism stands for is amusing:

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/adam-smith-and-inequality/
 
Top