• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Teaching Economics to Liberals - Class is in Session

imagep said:
How many hours of study do you really think the voter gives to each issue at hand? Fourty? Twenty? A half hour? 30 seconds?
Click to expand...

Neither of us know that, but why sell the American people short? Why not instead show photos of American inventors, scientists, Nobel Prize winners,etc. This is the European attitude of Americans.
If you trust the general public more than the people that they elect, then you have never seen Funny Pictures at WalMart
Click to expand...

If Americans are as foolish as you say, what makes you think their elected representatives would be any better?
 
Xerographica said:
My mission is to teach economics to liberals. For example...check out this blog entry by a liberal economist...Why Should China Just Innovate When It Can Just Steal? If you scroll down to the comments section you can see where I schooled two liberals on basic economic principles.

If any liberals have any economic questions...now's your chance to ask them. If you ask your questions nicely then I will try and answer your questions nicely. It's better to ask now...rather than complaining later when I "ruin" your threads by pointing out your economic ignorance...for example...
Click to expand...

Why should Americans produce physical goods with their hands... it's a fiat currency in a service economy of franchises that sell **** we generally dont want or need from other countries.

Durp-a-nawmics.
 
imagep said:
Most independents are thinkers, so to the extent that "core values" means that one just picks an ideology and sticks with it, most independents do not have core values. They have to think to come up with each and every position. Sometimes thought is a good thing. New and improved ideas and systems come from thinking.
Click to expand...
When one is very young one might want to go through the motions of thinking up their rationale for holding each and every position. It seems quite wasteful to me. After a while one can gain wisdom. One need not touch the hot stove with each and every finger to determine that it is hot and it burns. Care values are like that. Eventually adults figure out what their core values are.

"Do you have a Limbaugh fixation? Awesome."

No, but you apparently do because you keep on parroting him.
Click to expand...
I cannot recall quoting him. I do listen every time I can but I have responsible job so that usually means on days off or the weekends.

Did you know that people who listen to conservative talk radio tend to know more about politics than those who listen to liberal entertainment?
Perhaps you ought to consider listening to him at every opportunity.
 
imagep said:
Just because they are productive doesn't mean that they are intelligent. A large percent of humans really don't have the intellectual capacity to budget well, thats why we have so many people who have decent salaries but who don't have a dime of net worth. A large percent of Americans have no idea how our gov works, and they don't want to know. A large percent of Americans are basically morons.
Click to expand...

You've just described the elected reps in Washington. Not only can they not balance a budget they can't even present one. In fact balancing a budget is being argued as the greatest danger facing the American people today.

Wait and see how flexible he'll be | president, obama, new - Opinion - The Orange County Register

I will concede that if anyone were vote for the present administration come November they would indeed be morons.
 
Grant said:
You've just described the elected reps in Washington. Not only can they not balance a budget they can't even present one. In fact balancing a budget is being argued as the greatest danger facing the American people today.

Wait and see how flexible he'll be | president, obama, new - Opinion - The Orange County Register

I will concede that if anyone were vote for the present administration come November they would indeed be morons.
Click to expand...

A national government that cannot run debt is not a functional national government, since... you know... modern currency.

Lots of economies have higher debt to gdp ratios than the US. The debt argument is a cover for other porkulus methods by which the united states is sinking itself. Slightly easier to digest than... 2 simultaneous wars and a third on the way on the other side of a gigantic sphere in outer space.

Golly it's hard to use your thinker sometimes.
 
imagep said:
Independents wrote the Declaration of Independence and our Constitution. I wouldn't call that wishy-washy.
Click to expand...

LOL. Except that you are wrong.

Personally, I scarcely find that anyone can call me wishy-washy.
Click to expand...
Maybe you have misidentified yourself.

I'm not being wishy-washy when I say that I am against Obamacare but for socialized major medical insurance. I am not being wishing-washy when I say that I am against welfare but I am pro-progressive income taxes. Yes, I am taking the best position from each ideology, but I am in no way being wishy-washing or flip-floping. I am very stubborn in my beliefs because I have thought through them well. It's very rare, next to never, that I will flip-flop positions on anything, however I see democrat and republican politicians do that every election.
Click to expand...

In sociology one cannot tell how any individual may act. One can tell only what the trends are and only what the groups do. You take the views that most closely match those things you have given thought to and believe. Okay. Everyone does that. Independents, as a whole, are wishy-washy. I think you know it.

Remember, it's Independents who decide each election, not self proclaimed conservatives or progressives or libertarians or liberals or Republicans or Democrats.
Click to expand...
Yes. Flaky people who almost no intellectual curiosity vote in some way that makes them feel good. And we get Clinton and the one term Marxist flexible president Barack Hussein Obama. I regret that Independents, who are very much like sheep, can be herded better by liberals than by conservatives. I believe it is because independents tend to be more like liberals, they respond to their feelings, more than upon their intellect. I understand it. I don't like it but I do understand it. Sheep eventually are shorn and become someone's meal.
 
Misterveritis said:
You missed the creation of the United States, for starters.
Click to expand...

Conservatism seeks to preserve the existing order at its core. Conservatives, at that time, were against American independence because it upset the existing order of being ruled by a King.

The American Revolution put forth some very progressive ideas for the time. The idea of no state religion, the right to speak your mind, elected government...all very upsetting to the conservatives then.
 
Misterveritis said:
Yes. Flaky people who almost no intellectual curiosity vote in some way that makes them feel good. And we get Clinton and the one term Marxist flexible president Barack Hussein Obama. I regret that Independents, who are very much like sheep, can be herded better by liberals than by conservatives. I believe it is because independents tend to be more like liberals, they respond to their feelings, more than upon their intellect. I understand it. I don't like it but I do understand it. Sheep eventually are shorn and become someone's meal.
Click to expand...

I know, people who won't let the GOP tell them how to live and vote...just awful. How dare they question!

In your mind, anything not "Republican" is evil. Your worldview is far too childish and simplistic for me.
 
MKULTRABOY said:
A national government that cannot run debt is not a functional national government, since... you know... modern currency.

Lots of economies have higher debt to gdp ratios than the US. The debt argument is a cover for other porkulus methods by which the united states is sinking itself.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that adding a trillion dollars to the national debt every few months is a good thing?
 
cmakaioz said:
Where? Here, in post #10



Your alleged fact is not a fact (there are circumstances under which someone other than yourself -- a trusted advisor with experience and skill in a relevant specific field -- could spend your money more effectively than you). Further, even if absolutely everyone answered this prompt/challenge scenario of yours in the same way (i.e. by refusing to give away the $200 to a potentially hostile stranger), it would not demonstrate the claim you've made...merely that people are (rightly) suspicious of such a request and tend to not respond positively to it. You have repeatedly dodged this point, and ignored the example I gave already.
Click to expand...
When you give your money to a trusted advisor instead of an anonymous Internet guy haven't you validated his argument?
 
rocket88 said:
Washington refused to join a political party, and found partisan politics distasteful. Therefore he was an Independent, as he was not a member of a political party. It is generally believed that his sympathies tended to be pro-Federalist, but he never did join the Federalist Party.
Click to expand...
Okay. I agree that he had very great integrity and did things based on that core value. I do not agree that he was an Independent by today's standards. He stood for something. Independents do not.
Ventura was a good governor in many respects. His best idea was the "Jesse Checks." Basically it was a rebate of excess sales taxes collected by the State.
Click to expand...
Do you believe that the best measure of an Independent is that one of the gave some of the taxpayers money back to them?
 
megaprogman said:
Adam smith was in many ways much more moderate than the capitalists of today.
Click to expand...
Try not to be stupid. After roughly thirty years of observations he developed his theory for why some nations were very wealthy while others were not. He was very interested in why there was this paradox where people, behaving solely in their self interest, generated so much wealth for the people and the nation.

Tell me that you have read the 900 page book. Then tell me that you took the time to understand it. Whether Adam Smith was moderate or not is irrelevant in addition to being muddleheaded.
 
Misterveritis said:
...Do you believe the one term Marxist flexible president Barack Hussein Obama...
Click to expand...

Instant flush for calling Obama Marxist. He's nothing of the kind. We can add this to your growing mountain of silly statements.

Anyone else care to declare their willful ignorance?
 
rocket88 said:
Conservatism seeks to preserve the existing order at its core. Conservatives, at that time, were against American independence because it upset the existing order of being ruled by a King.

The American Revolution put forth some very progressive ideas for the time. The idea of no state religion, the right to speak your mind, elected government...all very upsetting to the conservatives then.
Click to expand...

Yeah. That is the tricky thing with language. Sometimes the meanings of terms flip. The smartest among us keep up with the subtle changes. The dull, quite frequently, do not.

Conservatism, today is roughly equal to the liberalism of the 18th century. It is what it is. Conservatives believe that the individual is sovereign. Liberals today believe the state is the only sovereign that matters. Conservatives believe that a constitutionally limited government protects the people's rights to life, liberty and property. Liberals want to do away with the Constitution as it is an obstacle that prevents them from doing as they wish. Conservatives believe that people should have the right to believe as they wish. Liberals believe the state is in the best position to decide what is right for the people.
 
rocket88 said:
I know, people who won't let the GOP tell them how to live and vote...just awful. How dare they question!

In your mind, anything not "Republican" is evil. Your worldview is far too childish and simplistic for me.
Click to expand...
Hmm. Quandary. Do you believe that Republican is synonymous with Conservative? Perhaps that is the source of your error.
 
cmakaioz said:
Instant flush for calling Obama Marxist. He's nothing of the kind. We can add this to your growing mountain of silly statements.

Anyone else care to declare their willful ignorance?
Click to expand...
His core beliefs are Marxist. Do you deny his desire to fundamentally transform the nation? From what (a capitalist, free-market nation) to what? Do you deny that his basic governmental philosophy is to wreck capitalism by steep taxes, class warfare and destructive regulations? Do you deny that his father was a communist, his mother was a socialist, his mentor (who was Frank?) was a communist? Do you deny that he said he was most comfortable with radicals, Marxist, and socialists?
Shall I go on?

Are you a fellow-traveler?
 
Xerographica said:
My alleged fact is not a fact? I can't prove it is a fact and you can't prove it's not a fact.
Click to expand...

Actually, I can and did prove it's not a fact that a given individual is always the best qualified to decide how well that individual's money is spent. See, back here in the real world, it is possible to define goals in empirical terms...for example

"I'd like to purchase the largest quantity of item Y for my finite sum of money Z." With a goal so defined, anyone capable of counting said items is capable of measuring the success of different options.

Xerographica said:
But if I give you my money...it's a fact that I'm the only person qualified to evaluate how well you spend it.
Click to expand...

No, it isn't. It depends on the goal you're pursuing. You would be the one making the choice of goal, but not all choices of goal are impervious to empirical definition. As above, a great many goals can be and are defined in empirically accessible terms. All such empirically defined goals may have their success measured by anyone with the requisite senses and cognitive abilities (i.e. in the purchase example above, anyone who can grasp counting and Less Than/Greater Than can measure success).

Xerographica said:
If I give you $200 to spend for me...what would you spend it on?
Click to expand...

I don't know you well enough to accept the task of effectively spending $200 applied to YOUR goals. Based upon your posts thus far, I'm pretty confident I wouldn't want to know you, either.

In any case, as you have failed to correctly identify what a fact is, failed to answer all visible challenges to your mistaken premise, and shown no signs of improvement any time soon...Thou Art Flushed. Have a Nice Life.
 
Last edited:
Misterveritis said:
His core beliefs are Marxist. Do you deny his desire to fundamentally transform the nation? From what (a capitalist, free-market nation) to what? Do you deny that his basic governmental philosophy is to wreck capitalism by steep taxes, class warfare and destructive regulations? Do you deny that his father was a communist, his mother was a socialist, his mentor (who was Frank?) was a communist? Do you deny that he said he was most comfortable with radicals, Marxist, and socialists?
Shall I go on?

Are you a fellow-traveler?
Click to expand...

Misterveritas, are you even living in an oxygen-rich environment ?

Such drivel passing as intelligent thought is scary indeed.
 
Xerographica said:
Lord Tammerlain, your response is the 68th response to be added to this page...Unglamorous but Important Things. It's a reasonable response. It's the TYPICAL response. Taxpayers are some of the most reasonable people in our society. They understand that our society is based on a division of labor. Therefore, when it comes to topics outside their area of expertise...they rely on the advice of subject matter experts.

But guess what 150 million taxpayers represent? They represent every single area of expertise. We will have far far far greater expert coverage with 150 million taxpayers allocating taxes than we would with 538 congresspeople allocating taxes.

Like I mentioned...I'm not advocating that we get rid of congress. I'm just advocating that people be given the freedom to bypass congress and directly allocate their taxes themselves. I trust that if they do so...it will be because they have access to some important information that congress does not have access to.

What percentage of taxpayers will choose to give their taxes to congress? I don't know...what percentage of taxpayers believe that congresspeople are subject matter experts?
Click to expand...

I disagree since some subjects are beyond the avg understanding that most people possess. Most will follow their ideology/emotions rather than appeals to reason. That's why "change we can believe in" was so effective.

This post was made from my phone.please excuse spelling mistakes
 
Last edited:
Michael Johnson said:
Can someone please fill me in on the discussion so I can participate?
Click to expand...

MrVeritas thinks he has discovered some secret formula to life and thinks anyone who disagrees with him is a liar from what I can tell.
 
Michael Johnson said:
Can someone please fill me in on the discussion so I can participate?
Click to expand...

Do you believe that taxpayers should have the freedom to choose which government organizations they give their taxes to?
 
Xerographica said:
Do you believe that taxpayers should have the freedom to choose which government organizations they give their taxes to?
Click to expand...

Sounds like a pretty good idea to me. Maybe it will eliminate some of the biased funding to certain organizations.

Just my :twocents:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom