Originally Posted by eric.bell
Eric,
Try again. And this time, try, okay?
Regards,
Istvan
Eric,
Try again. And this time, try, okay?
Regards,
Istvan
"It is time we realized that to presume knowledge where one has only pious hope is a species of evil."
— Sam Harris
Babblanja,
I will gladly do so tonight or tomorrow morning when I am able to devote more than two minutes to it. Are you only wanting supporting arguments for regulatory systems being one of the contributing factors (if not the main contributor) to the housing market crash?
Sincerely,
Eric
What a crock. There have been presidents and admnistrations from both parties equally over the last hundred years. In fact, the Democrats ruled the House of Representatives for 44 years straight from 1950 to 1994. Out of the last 110 years, going back to the turn of the new century, the Democrats have controled the House for 66 years to the republicans 42 years. There is a mutual consensus in this country for capitailism frrom both parties, despite the rhetoric. It's just that one party has to lie so they can get the left leaning suckers to keep voting for them.
I'm always amazed at how little people really know about American politics.
This thread has entered current politics.
LET THERE BE LIGHT
"Love follows knowledge." – St. Catherine of Siena
My literature blog: http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.com/
I think Virgil has displayed an unfair focus on only one party's lying. Let's get rid of all of this current politics stuff, and not pretend that the last word, or the latest spin or unbalanced presentation in the thread wins. Because, yes, some people don't know enough about politics, and they eat that inflammatory crap up.
Eric,
If you're merely going to hammer away at the kind of superficial talking points that are written on Sarah Palin's hand, don't bother.
I'm not interested in discussing partisan politics or current events. My post critiqued the flawed logic, insecure foundation, and systemic weaknesses of a predatory social philosophy. If you support the notion that the financial system doesn't need responsible oversight and creates liberty, prosperity, and equality, then defend your opinion.
Regards,
Istvan
"It is time we realized that to presume knowledge where one has only pious hope is a species of evil."
— Sam Harris
Haha, yeah! Lets trust corporations to take care of the well being of the populace, no need for regulation, they've got America's back! Pffft, how amazingly, mind-blowingly stupid. What a screwed up situation. I can't even believe that some people (*cough cough*) can see what's going on and still support capitalism.
Last edited by JuniperWoolf; 03-12-2010 at 07:12 AM.
__________________
"Personal note: When I was a little kid my mother told me not to stare into the sun. So once when I was six, I did. At first the brightness was overwhelming, but I had seen that before. I kept looking, forcing myself not to blink, and then the brightness began to dissolve. My pupils shrunk to pinholes and everything came into focus and for a moment I understood. The doctors didn't know if my eyes would ever heal."
-Pi
Istvan,
First of all I ask you kindly to not compare my ideas with Mrs. Palin’s. How she thinks she is prepared (at the least of which foreign policy-wise) to run this country I cannot even claim to comprehend. But then again I cannot see how a one term Senator, such as President Obama was, thinks that he (whose only accomplishments being his writing an auto-biographical book and beating an elderly black woman out of office by a legal technicality [having to do with a signature on pre-election paperwork]) has any real sense of how to lead this country either. But I digress...for this is merely opinion and nearly banter.
Free-market Capitalism, I hope we can agree, is a market in which the government never intervenes economically (a ready example of government intervention being the bank bailouts and the bailouts of businesses such as GM) nor does the government have the power of regulation except for (judicial) regulation, which protects citizens (and businesses alike) from force or fraud. (Sadly, our government, itself, uses coercive action both at home and abroad: examples being Immanent Domain, the governments “right” to take land from any citizen so that the “common good” might be achieved [i.e. groups such as TVA or DOT], and the Iraq war (i.e. if there isn’t a stabilization of governments in the near east, then we cannot get oil; and if we cannot get oil, we will be without light and most foods; so we must make stability by setting up “proper” governments by use of the United States Armed Forces {note that I did not include the Afghan war}]).
It—free-market Capitalism, that is—is Materialistic in the most basic sense: material (in this case, man) is its own entity and therefore is its own property; and that one man does not need another’s consciousness of him in order to exist just as a mountain does not need our being conscious of it in order to be. If man is his or her own property, then any thing which is created from that man’s movements belong to him (till his death at which time he gives back to earth all which he has taken). So, if a woman works the earth and grows from it a garden, the fruits thereof belong to her and she may do with them as she pleases. No man and no woman, no matter how much they plead or coerce, may take said fruit from the gardener without her consent. And if any man or woman tries coercive means to attain said fruit, then the government (in the shape of the police) must intervene on the farmers behalf to stop the person from taking the fruits of her labor from her.
Taxation is an issue that could be argued in a myriad of directions; but needless to say, it is a necessary evil. I would put forward that we use a sales tax, because it is the most equalized tax out there—if you buy things you get taxed—the taxes pay to keep up police, as well as other regulatory program. Each state would divide itself into counties or parishes, and each county would decide what form of local government they would have—and thus would establish within said county’s borders any form of self taxation thought proper.
Can we agree so far? I understand that this is nearly utopian in thought, but it can work (especially in a state or smaller country).
I believe that Charity is of utmost importance (especially in free-market Capitalism). Do not misunderstand me though: Charity comes from each man’s heart and cannot be forced from a man. It is good for this thing, which many call a soul, to give. I believe that Charity is a nourisher* (yeah, I just invented that word I think) of the soul, just as bread is a nourisher of the body; and therefore Charity is done truly out of selfishness in order to nourish the soul. But that takes not from it—Charity still is a foundation that any society would think well to establish itself upon.
Respectfully,
Eric.
What? This is absolutely delusional. This is idiocy. The US number of casualties from WWI was about 117,000. The population of the US at the time was 92 million. And that caused the labor movement to collapse in the United States? What about the other 91.89 million people? Whoa, I didn't think you were too smart to begin with, but now you're in moron land.
Really? Where and when was that book published and who read it? Good grief.Since Reagan rewrote history for a populace...
LET THERE BE LIGHT
"Love follows knowledge." – St. Catherine of Siena
My literature blog: http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.com/
Eric,
The point is that, if the economic system were truly fair and equitable, there would be no need for charity. This capitalist system only values people if they are producing or consuming; those marginalized by the competition for limited jobs and resources are simply out of luck. That's not a system that promotes liberty. It's predatory and immoral.
Virgil, my man, I didn't think you'd be taking any further part in this discussion, since it offended you enough to alert the administrators.
I also figured that with your profound knowledge of history, politics, and economics, you'd grasp what I actually mean about WWI. Again, I've overestimated your erudition. What I meant was that Wilson had the USA enter the war and immediately characterized any domestic concerns as unpatriotic. Didn't Wilson sign laws such as the Espionage Act and Sedition Act into law after America entered WWI, and use such wartime legislation to put many of his radical political enemies behind bars?
Please, Virgil, if you're going to get so upset by this discussion that you'll complain to the moderators and resort to personal slurs, perhaps you'd be better sitting this one out.
Regards,
Istvan
"It is time we realized that to presume knowledge where one has only pious hope is a species of evil."
— Sam Harris
-
Discussion of current politics is not allowed.
-
~
"It is not that I am mad; it is only that my head is different from yours.”
~
Posting Permissions
