Page 26 of 31 FirstFirst ... 162425262728 ... LastLast
Results 251 to 260 of 305

Thread: U.S. Police Have Shot Dead 385 People In Five Months

  1. #251
    Jedi Master
    Captain America's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    18,068

    Re: U.S. Police Have Shot Dead 385 People In Five Months

    I bet this cop was pissed off! LOL!


    It's GREAT to be me. --- "45% liberal/55% conservative"
    Diplomacy is the art of saying 'nice doggy" until you can find a gun.

  2. #252
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    15,329

    Re: U.S. Police Have Shot Dead 385 People In Five Months

    Part 1

    Quote Originally Posted by Libertie76 View Post
    1. Reading a brief history on the Republican Party according to Wikipedia does not suffice as an actual historical account.

    In fact Wikipedia is vastly vague and open to no actual academic criticism, so suggesting that the Republican Party started because they were anti-slavery is completely full of fallacies. The Whig party and it's principles, when it fell to the democrats, rebranded itself as an anti slave party to try to emerge the migrating german Lutheran population. This is according to the books money and banking, and a course the American economy by Murray rothbard.
    It doesn't take Wikipedia to know that the Republican party was founded by abolitionists.

    the Republican Platform of 1856 focused entirely on an anti-slavery platform.

    The foundation of the Republican party is traced back to the "Appeal to Independent Democrats in Congress" which was published by Fee Soil and Liberty Party members (Salmon Chase, Joshua Giddings, Charles Sumner, Alexander DeWitt and others) in 1853. The "Free Soil" were a mix of ex-Democrats and Ex-Whigs who challenged both the Democrats and Whigs on the subject of Slavery. The appeal was so well received that thousands of people turned out in rallies in support of the Anti-Slavery appeal, and the resulting political fallout sapped both Whigs and Democrats to the cause. The movement would later to called the Republican party by newspaper owner Horace Greeley in 1854, two years before the Whig party folded. So your narrative that the Republican party was a reformation of the failed Whig party is patently false. The Republican party was born of a rising abolitionist movement, and it would be more accurate to say that the Whigs were undone by the Free Soil/Republican movement.



    In fact, the reason I replied to your ridiculous argument in the manner I did is because I said you're right the Republican Party has always been authoritarian and you suggested I didn't know my history or was just making things up. Neoconservativism is a response to the expansion of federal power by the progressive era and the fdr administration. Plain and simple, if the democrats want to expand political power we have no problem with that so we will support socialist concepts like monetarism and a federally controlled money supply. Barry Goldwater was the only one who really combated the movement
    False, Neoconservatism is a movement born of the Anti-Communist left and is expressly dedicated to anti-Communist foreign policies that focus on the spread of democracy around the world by diplomacy or by force. It has NOTHING to do with domestic policy. It is possible for people who are neoconservative on foreign policy to have domestic views as you have described, but it wouldn't have anything to do with them being neoconservative. As I keep trying to tell you, your insistence of branding all bad things "NeoCon" doesn't make you look any smarter.

    2. I'll answer your response in three parts
    A. When I limit supply what I'm doing is raising prices, this is how a monopoly works, by attemptinto turn the demand curve from relatively elastic to relatively inelastic. This is easier to do with a fiat currency because you can boost sales to a foreign market meanwhile cut supply domestically. If you devalue your currency you can do this, if it is tied to a hard currency you can not

    B. By using a fiat currency system you raise prices by devaluing currency, this is pretty obvious as to why so I won't go into detail h this destroys the consumer sovereignty of capitalism because the central authority now controls prices as opposed to consumers
    C. It's authoritarian because the suppliers should be given the ability to compete by using lower prices and ways to price cut competition to increase profits, however the usage of an inflationary currency sets up huge obstacles to subsidize big business. Meaning, limiting the freedoms to enter or exit a market place. This is how it is authoritarian
    So you are arguing that businesses are not able to compete in the market business because they can't lower prices? How so and what does that have to do with inflation?

    This argument is like the 1) Buy a rabbiot 2) Buy rabbit a carrot 3)??? 4) Profit.

    The crux of your argument rests in the details of your statement "inflationary currency sets up huge obstacles". What obstacles?
    Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he stops voting for the Free Fish party.

  3. #253
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    15,329

    Re: U.S. Police Have Shot Dead 385 People In Five Months

    Part 2

    Quote Originally Posted by Libertie76 View Post
    3. In the eyes of his fellow "good cops" it might be the sense of an individual basis, but if it's the tax payer that is the victim then it's state oppression, due to the fact that a police officer is seen as authority or a representative of the state. There is no subjective response to change this mere fact, the victim will always look at it as state oppression, the state may prosecute officers but the leeway for a police officer to commit crimes is much more flexible then an average taxpayer. This is due to he mentality that they are above the law, meaning there is an authoritarian state.. Which is always the outcome of any government
    For it to be state oppression the state would have to sanction the actions of the officer. If the opfficer is dragged to court facing a murder charge then the state isn't sanctioning the murder of its citizens by police officers.

    4. Please explain the differences, but did the neocons talk **** about the cia terrorist report yes or no, did bush administration create patriot act yes or no, has every neocon administration expanded military spending yes or no
    Again, you are just a disaster of a debater. With every counter you want to send your response in 30 new unrelated directions. You also fall pray to the "every neocon" argument which is really just the precursor to a "No True Scotsman" argument. Tell me what the Patriot Act has to do with establishing democracies around the globe, for starters.

    5. I'm not saying it's a platform in saying this way of thinking is a product of the state
    So you are saying it is not really Neoconservatism, it's just Neoconservatism? You still haven't established that you understand what the word means.
    Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he stops voting for the Free Fish party.

  4. #254
    Sage
    Mycroft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    22,890

    Re: U.S. Police Have Shot Dead 385 People In Five Months

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain America View Post
    I bet this cop was pissed off! LOL!

    He was probably pissed off more at the person who called them about a guy walking around with a gun. That person just wasted the cop's time.

    LOL!!
    TANSTAAFL

    “Certain types of loudmouthism should be a capital offense among decent people.” ― Robert A. Heinlein, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

  5. #255
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    15,329

    Re: U.S. Police Have Shot Dead 385 People In Five Months

    Quote Originally Posted by Libertie76 View Post
    Yes will Bryan, it was actually an interesting time in American history what it was was the battle between chase and Carnegie vs the Rockefeller empire. So the rockefellers bought politicians and the chases bought politicians. The easiest way to finds out who was working for who is if you look at politicians from Cleveland, they are rockefeller. Sherman, McKinley = rockefeller. Sherman started the anti-trust act, and I could go into huge detail about how that actually empowered big business, but I won't. Bryan and teddy roosevelt = chase. They weren't "republican plants" they were big business cartel plants.

    Tell me the fundamental difference of having a centrally controlled currency and a central controlled economy, and then explain to me how you do not favor some of the assumptions of Marx
    Centrally controlled currency:

    Jim has a neat idea for a new item he calls a widget, he draws up his plans, gets a patent, and then secures a business loan to acquire a manufacturing facility, hire workers, and get an assembly running. He tallies that given the rate of the widget production and his overhead costs he is spending $0.15 per widget. He then checks his competition and sees that Ivan Inc. across town makes a Frizzle which performs a similar task as his new Widget and sells for $0.20. Jim then sets his price at $0.18 per widget, turns on his "Open" sign in the window, makes a sign of the cross, and unlocks his shop door.

    Centrally Controlled Economy:


    Jim has a neat idea for a new item he calls a widget, he draws up his plans, and submits it to central planning. Four months later he gets a letter "Why would people need Widget when Brother Ivan already make Frizzle? Application denied."
    Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he stops voting for the Free Fish party.

  6. #256
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Last Seen
    09-26-15 @ 03:38 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,143

    Re: U.S. Police Have Shot Dead 385 People In Five Months

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    Part 1



    It doesn't take Wikipedia to know that the Republican party was founded by abolitionists.

    the Republican Platform of 1856 focused entirely on an anti-slavery platform.

    The foundation of the Republican party is traced back to the "Appeal to Independent Democrats in Congress" which was published by Fee Soil and Liberty Party members (Salmon Chase, Joshua Giddings, Charles Sumner, Alexander DeWitt and others) in 1853. The "Free Soil" were a mix of ex-Democrats and Ex-Whigs who challenged both the Democrats and Whigs on the subject of Slavery. The appeal was so well received that thousands of people turned out in rallies in support of the Anti-Slavery appeal, and the resulting political fallout sapped both Whigs and Democrats to the cause. The movement would later to called the Republican party by newspaper owner Horace Greeley in 1854, two years before the Whig party folded. So your narrative that the Republican party was a reformation of the failed Whig party is patently false. The Republican party was born of a rising abolitionist movement, and it would be more accurate to say that the Whigs were undone by the Free Soil/Republican movement.





    False, Neoconservatism is a movement born of the Anti-Communist left and is expressly dedicated to anti-Communist foreign policies that focus on the spread of democracy around the world by diplomacy or by force. It has NOTHING to do with domestic policy. It is possible for people who are neoconservative on foreign policy to have domestic views as you have described, but it wouldn't have anything to do with them being neoconservative. As I keep trying to tell you, your insistence of branding all bad things "NeoCon" doesn't make you look any smarter.






    So you are arguing that businesses are not able to compete in the market business because they can't lower prices? How so and what does that have to do with inflation?

    This argument is like the 1) Buy a rabbiot 2) Buy rabbit a carrot 3)??? 4) Profit.

    The crux of your argument rests in the details of your statement "inflationary currency sets up huge obstacles". What obstacles?
    1. The creation of the free soil and liberty parties were the focus of the immigrants that were mainly libertarian, when the Republican Party started the free soilers who were Lutheran joined with the know nothing party as the begining stages of the Republican Party took off. This is because the Whig platform failed, and the democrats were increasingly gaining strength. This is also why a lot of liberty party members went back to the Democratic Party because the Republican Party wanted inflationary monetary system! This is the reality, the republicans, who stem from the know nothing's, used things like public schooling and immigration issues to try to convert immigrant children into being Protestant as opposed to catholic. Needless to say they became the first prohibitionists as well. This, by definition regardless of their propaganda, was the principle of state force to change the thought a of the next generation for the "moral good of the nation". I could really care less what you say about them not being authoritarian, they were. The people who initially created the Republican Party werenthe failed Whigs and the American party who wanted to appease to the newly german Lutheran vote. Same reason republicans were in favor of women's suffrage, and prohibition. Because they knew it was a blow to the democrats.

    2. You're entire argument completely validities my point when you say "spread democracy by diplomacy or by force" meaning, expanding military budget, not being afraid to torture, and using state aggression to create a stronger nation "for the moral good of the nation" as the original prohibitionists would say

    3. If you can't price cut other businesses there is no way to maintain a competitive edge, by using inflationary currency you create an international perceived monopoly, which is subsidized by the federal government by use of laws like tariffs, you then find it harder and harder with less incentive to actually invest in a competing firm. Put it this way, you had 10 million dollars, or whatever amount, and you had the ability to invest in a new software company competing with apple or Microsoft. Where is the incentive to do so? Ok, let's look in the 1860s when the railroad industry started taking off, we are talking about maintaining tons of entrepreneurs until state started subsidizing certain ones with eminent domain and etc. This is because a free market when a price goes up competition comes in. When you inflate the currency you subsidize exporting sector tremendously and maintain a non competitive monopoly, or a perceived monopoly. This makes it almost impossible to compete against which destroys incentive.
    Last edited by Libertie76; 06-02-15 at 03:23 PM.

  7. #257
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Last Seen
    09-26-15 @ 03:38 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,143

    Re: U.S. Police Have Shot Dead 385 People In Five Months

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    Part 2



    For it to be state oppression the state would have to sanction the actions of the officer. If the opfficer is dragged to court facing a murder charge then the state isn't sanctioning the murder of its citizens by police officers.



    Again, you are just a disaster of a debater. With every counter you want to send your response in 30 new unrelated directions. You also fall pray to the "every neocon" argument which is really just the precursor to a "No True Scotsman" argument. Tell me what the Patriot Act has to do with establishing democracies around the globe, for starters.



    So you are saying it is not really Neoconservatism, it's just Neoconservatism? You still haven't established that you understand what the word means.
    1. In the eyes of the state it won't be state oppression, in the eyes of the victim it is. There is literally no subjective morale response you could possibly say to make this truth false. Nothing, regardless of whether or not the state condones it or condemns it.

    2. You didn't answer my questions I said yes or no 1. Talk crap about the cia torture report 2. Patriot act 3. expand military power answer yes or no don't try to insult me because it's really not adding anything if value

    3. I'm saying the state has created a two party system where the neoconservatives actually think the expansion of the state will benefit the ideas of liberty. The platform is a replica of what our state has become, which is the inevitable outcome of every power structure. The only response to this is the fringe movements of the modern day right wing, considering the left ask for more state to combat this corruption that has taken control of our republic

  8. #258
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Last Seen
    09-26-15 @ 03:38 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,143

    Re: U.S. Police Have Shot Dead 385 People In Five Months

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    Centrally controlled currency:

    Jim has a neat idea for a new item he calls a widget, he draws up his plans, gets a patent, and then secures a business loan to acquire a manufacturing facility, hire workers, and get an assembly running. He tallies that given the rate of the widget production and his overhead costs he is spending $0.15 per widget. He then checks his competition and sees that Ivan Inc. across town makes a Frizzle which performs a similar task as his new Widget and sells for $0.20. Jim then sets his price at $0.18 per widget, turns on his "Open" sign in the window, makes a sign of the cross, and unlocks his shop door.

    Centrally Controlled Economy:


    Jim has a neat idea for a new item he calls a widget, he draws up his plans, and submits it to central planning. Four months later he gets a letter "Why would people need Widget when Brother Ivan already make Frizzle? Application denied."
    1. Centrally controlled currency, we want our production to outcompete Japan's, so we will force domestic consumers to pay more and meanwhile we will price cut Japan's production firms by use of buying Japanese yen to subsidize our business into a perceived, monopoly or duopoly

    2. Centrally controlled economy, we want our socialist production to outcompete the United States so we will use sponsor one firm to act on the states behalf, and then we will fix our exchange rate to the dollar so that even if the United States devalues their dollar from 1$=1.2 euros, to 1$=1.1 euros we will remain 1$ = 5 of our monetary units maintaining a competitive edge while using the state to control a monopoly

    Both instances, consumer price goes up, value of production goes down, consumers are forced to work longer and harder, state is forced to give social safety nets which have opposite economic effect.... Now please tell me the difference and remember we are not talking about production theory we are talking strictly monetary theory

  9. #259
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    15,329

    Re: U.S. Police Have Shot Dead 385 People In Five Months

    Quote Originally Posted by Libertie76 View Post
    1. The creation of the free soil and liberty parties were the focus of the immigrants that were mainly libertarian, when the Republican Party started the free soilers who were Lutheran joined with the know nothing party as the begining stages of the Republican Party took off. This is because the Whig platform failed, and the democrats were increasingly gaining strength. This is also why a lot of liberty party members went back to the Democratic Party because the Republican Party wanted inflationary monetary system! This is the reality, the republicans, who stem from the know nothing's, used things like public schooling and immigration issues to try to convert immigrant children into being Protestant as opposed to catholic. Needless to say they became the first prohibitionists as well. This, by definition regardless of their propaganda, was the principle of state force to change the thought a of the next generation for the "moral good of the nation". I could really care less what you say about them not being authoritarian, they were. The people who initially created the Republican Party werenthe failed Whigs and the American party who wanted to appease to the newly german Lutheran vote. Same reason republicans were in favor of women's suffrage, and prohibition. Because they knew it was a blow to the democrats.
    Again, false. The formation of the Free Soil Party had nothing to do with immigrants or monetary policy. The impetus of the formation of the Free Soil party was to push the abolition of slavery in western territories. "Free Soil" was reference to the new territories being free and unfettered by slavery. I am sorry reality doesn't fit your narrative, but it just doesn't.

    2. You're entire argument completely validities my point when you say "spread democracy by diplomacy or by force" meaning, expanding military budget, not being afraid to torture, and using state aggression to create a stronger nation "for the moral good of the nation" as the original prohibitionists would say
    That wasn't your argument. You argument was that "Neocons" are all about NSA spying and tariffs and fiat currency. That one of your litany of accusations actually falls close to the mark is not a validation for the litany of ignorant falsehoods that comprise the bulk of your manifesto.

    3. If you can't price cut other businesses there is no way to maintain a competitive edge, by using inflationary currency you create an international perceived monopoly, which is subsidized by the federal government by use of laws like tariffs, you then find it harder and harder with less incentive to actually invest in a competing firm. Put it this way, you had 10 million dollars, or whatever amount, and you had the ability to invest in a new software company competing with apple or Microsoft. Where is the incentive to do so? Ok, let's look in the 1860s when the railroad industry started taking off, we are talking about maintaining tons of entrepreneurs until state started subsidizing certain ones with eminent domain and etc. This is because a free market when a price goes up competition comes in. When you inflate the currency you subsidize exporting sector tremendously and maintain a non competitive monopoly, or a perceived monopoly. This makes it almost impossible to compete against which destroys incentive.
    Who says businesses can't price cut? Businesses price cut all the time.

    Also, what stops you from entering the battle with Microsoft? It has zero to do with regulation. In fact, as an IT specialist I can tell you that there are many, many operating systems out there for very specific pieces of hardware that you know nothing about. They fit a niche. But if you want to invest $10 million in a new Operating system and expect software developers to dedicate resources to programing to an OS nobody uses then I would question your sanity. For an OS to be successful it needs to have a large enough install base to warrant third parties to investing in programming to it. Apple and Microsoft are the two largest install bases of OSs (though I think Android is catching them), but $10 million is simply not enough money to to build an Apple or Microsoft. You can take the Linux path and build a free OS and publish it as open source, maybe you will get some foothold, probably you won't, but that has little to do with authoritarian government.
    Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he stops voting for the Free Fish party.

  10. #260
    Sage
    RDS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Singapore
    Last Seen
    05-15-17 @ 03:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,397

    Re: U.S. Police Have Shot Dead 385 People In Five Months

    Quote Originally Posted by jonny5 View Post
    Basing your opinion on a simple statistic is a heinous crime.
    You are policeman to the rest of the world. When your law enforcement **** with the law, we **** you too.

Page 26 of 31 FirstFirst ... 162425262728 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •