Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

What planet are they on ?

124»

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 643 ✭✭✭swordofislam


    jmayo wrote: »
    The amount of people around here who lecture others, particularly about where the should live, is fooking unbelievable.
    I find it amusing to be lectured about the rights of the rich and the importance of entrepreneurship by people who are poor and have never paid a late filing charge at the CRO.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 643 ✭✭✭swordofislam


    Valmont wrote: »
    Please please at least read the first line of the wikipedia article on libertarianism. You are so clueless it's hard for me to even acknowledge it.
    Please don't subscribe to the Nirvana fallacy. By the standards of any political organisation in Irish history the PDs were libertarian.

    I don't need a Wikipedia article; I can see the results of PD policies all around me.

    The claim that the PDs were not socially liberal has already been rebutted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    jmayo wrote: »
    The amount of people around here who lecture others, particularly about where the should live, is fooking unbelievable.
    I find it amusing to be lectured about the rights of the rich and the importance of entrepreneurship by people who are poor and have never paid a late filing charge at the CRO.

    Huh ?

    Are you saying that they didn't pay their company's fines because they're poor, or what ?

    Or maybe you're commending them for never being late despite being poor ?

    Either way, the issue isn't "rich people's rights"; it's "rich people's rights taking precedence over others, and us having to foot the bill".


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭Valmont


    By the standards of any political organisation in Irish history the PDs were libertarian.
    By the standards of the USSR the politicians in Finland are libertarians-- only we both know they aren't. Your logic is atrocious. The PDs are not libertarians; they were centre-right. Ron Paul is a libertarian. Why can't you understand this distinction? I think you do need to read something about libertarianism because conflating policies that added 65,000 workers to the state with libertarianism is wildly inaccurate to the point of being quite funny.

    You'll be telling us that Castro is a social democrat next. Or that Bertie was a Mormon.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,227 ✭✭✭✭jmayo


    This post had been deleted.

    I don't understand what you are on about. :confused:
    I don't understand how you can assume I am poor or indeed rich.
    BTW I am neither.
    I am one of those in the middle who happens to pay for the fookups and tax loopholes of a chunk of the rich and the laziness of some of the poor. :mad:
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    Thanks for links.
    BTW what do you think he should have done.
    Sat and let the market sort it out ?
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    I didn't say that they were justified by having a power grab and ending up as the primary super power.
    I said it was an result of them entering the war.
    The justification was really to stop some countries who were led by some not very nice people invading other countries and slaughtering innocent people they considered lesser human beings.
    Oh and if you check the Japanese they had a superiority complex every bit as much as the Germans.
    They just never turned into an industrial operation.

    Ehh please tell me why the US should have stayed out of the war and secondly do you think that we in this part of the world would have benefitted from their non participation ?

    Now I hope people don't start some sh** about how bad the Allies were and that they were no better than the Axis forces.
    The answer to that is the DEATH CAMPS and Nanking.

    I seriously cannot believe someone of your intelligence thinks it would be better off for everyone if the US had not entered the war. :eek:

    I am not allowed discuss …



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 643 ✭✭✭swordofislam


    jmayo wrote: »
    I don't understand what you are on about. :confused:
    I don't understand how you can assume I am poor or indeed rich.
    BTW I am neither.
    I am one of those in the middle who happens to pay for the fookups and tax loopholes of a chunk of the rich and the laziness of some of the poor.
    I wasn't taking about you.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 643 ✭✭✭swordofislam


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Roosevelt was elected in 1933. His monetary policy was very different from Hoover's.
    http://www.marshall.edu/etd/masters/napier-steven-2005-ma.pdf
    Permabear wrote: »
    The impact of this on the economy was absolutely wrenching, as we have seen. But the government should have addressed the root cause, which was monetary policy, rather than going the Keynesian route with the New Deal.

    Roosevelt did in fact address monetary policy.
    The options are not binary. One can loosen monetary policy and implement Keyensian policies.

    What is this fallacy called where one puts forward a statement of fact and then makes an unrelated claim to use the credibility generated from the first statement?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 643 ✭✭✭swordofislam


    Valmont wrote: »
    The PDs are not libertarians; they were centre-right.
    Absolute rubbish. The PDs led the charge on Divorce, Legalising Homosexuality and yes gay marriage such as it is.
    I don't need to worry about what libertarians say I have seen what they do.

    You are engaging in a Nirvana fallacy.

    Light touch regulation followed by a socialisation of debt is libertarianism in action.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,700 ✭✭✭irishh_bob


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    one of the reasons the usa is so rich is because it has invaded and interfered with other nations since the end of WW2


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,583 ✭✭✭Suryavarman


    jmayo wrote: »
    So pray tell us with all your wisdom what should he have done to shorten the depression ?

    Cut spending and cut taxes like they did for the 1920-21 depression and not go around regulating everything that moved.
    Bloody hell.
    Funny how most US scholars disagree. :rolleyes:

    What was so great about him? He was an evil person that did a great amount of damage during his presidency.
    Yeah bush was fooking great and ronnie was a wet dream for the neo liberals.
    Except the seeds that old ronnie sowed ultimately resulted in the banking meltdown.
    Oh and his tax regime increased the gulf between rich and middle class never mind the poor.
    Added to that he tripled the debt.
    And guess who appointed mr greenspan?

    Bush and Reagan were both pretty poor presidents. It just shows ho bad FDR was that both of them were better.

    What did Reagan do that sowed the seeds for the current crisis apart from hiring Greenspan?

    So what if income inequality increased because of his tax system? Who cares? His tax system helped America recover from the lost decade of the seventies.
    irishh_bob wrote: »
    one of the reasons the usa is so rich is because it has invaded and interfered with other nations since the end of WW2

    How did it become so rich before WW2 then?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 643 ✭✭✭swordofislam


    Cut spending and cut taxes like they did for the 1920-21 depression and not go around regulating everything that moved.
    The 1920-21 depression and the 1929 depression had different causes. Why would the same medicine be applicable?

    Further could I have say 150 examples of regulations imposed in the early new deal period?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 643 ✭✭✭swordofislam


    How did it become so rich before WW2 then?
    By killing Indians and enslaving blacks.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭Valmont


    Light touch regulation followed by a socialisation of debt is libertarianism in action.
    I never thought I'd say this but... I miss you 20Cent!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,583 ✭✭✭Suryavarman


    The 1920-21 depression and the 1929 depression had different causes. Why would the same medicine be applicable?

    So what if they had different causes? They were the same disease so the same cure would have worked.
    Further could I have say 150 examples of regulations imposed in the early new deal period?

    Are you asking me to list out 150 examples imposed during the earlier part of the new deal?
    By killing Indians and enslaving blacks.

    How on earth would either of those things make them rich? The US economy started to grow faster after they abolished slavery. Also the states with slavery were poorer than the ones without.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,373 ✭✭✭Dr Galen


    We're veering OT here people. Can we get things back to the subject of the OP please and thanks

    Cheers

    DrG


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Valmont wrote: »
    I never thought I'd say this but... I miss you 20Cent!

    The VAT increase will cost you a lot more than 20c, so get used to missing multiples of that!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,227 ✭✭✭✭jmayo


    Dr Galen wrote: »
    We're veering OT here people. Can we get things back to the subject of the OP please and thanks

    Cheers

    DrG

    Damm libertarians and Americans derailing the thread. :D
    What was usbject of the thread again ?
    Oh yes gobsh**e economists with their heads up their asses.
    Now speaking of which does anyone know what Dr dan mclaughlin thinks on the matter ?

    I am not allowed discuss …



Advertisement