• 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

Misterveritis said:
LOL. Independents are people with no courage and no brains. Take a side or step aside.
Click to expand...

I would say it's exactly the opposit. When someone chooses a "club" to be in, they are allowing that club to do their thinking for them. Ask a conservative what his opinion on X is, and he has to look it up. Ask a independant what his opinion is, and he will do some thinking as there are no standard independant platforms to rely on.

I also find it ironic that you just quoted Rush Limbaugh while trying to prove that independants have no brains. Couldn't you have come up with something origional?
 
Last edited:
imagep said:
You are more than welcome to explain your point of view and to point out why you think that other viewpoints are incorrect. But please don't call people ingorant just because they disagree with you. There's a difference between having a different opinion and being ignorant.

I don't call Tea Party types and gov haters ignorant, even though I disagree with their theories and opinions.
Click to expand...

No no no...I wasn't calling Mega ignorant because he disagrees with me...I was calling him ignorant because clearly he doesn't know the first thing about economics. On the other hand....the economist David Friedman disagrees with me but I would certainly not call him ignorant in economic matters.

That you weren't able to discern that Mega is clearly ignorant in economic matters indicates that you too are ignorant in economic matters. In fact, most people are ignorant in economic matters...to claim otherwise would be ignorant in general.

So yeah...I've got my work cut out for me!
 
Xerographica said:
No no no...I wasn't calling Mega ignorant because he disagrees with me...I was calling him ignorant because clearly he doesn't know the first thing about economics. On the other hand....the economist David Friedman disagrees with me but I would certainly not call him ignorant in economic matters.

That you weren't able to discern that Mega is clearly ignorant in economic matters indicates that you too are ignorant in economic matters. In fact, most people are ignorant in economic matters...to claim otherwise would be ignorant in general.

So yeah...I've got my work cut out for me!
Click to expand...

This post is illogical and comes from a false premise.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Moved to Economics Forum.
 
Xerographica said:
You failed to substantiate your claim. In other words...you failed. Care to try again?
Click to expand...

No, actually I didn't. I just didn't point out what your false premise is. Let's see if you can figure it out.
 
AtlantaAdonis said:
The poor have no buying power....and the companies that give the fewest benefits will always have an advantage in the free market. As with any capital, it is advantageous to have the least expensive human capital possible. KKKapitalism ignores the needs of individuals and only focuses on the needs of businesses.
Click to expand...

So you want the poor to have even less buying power and even less opportunities in life? Because that's exactly what you would accomplish by wasting resources. Why do you want to waste limited resources?
 
Xerographica said:
No no no...I wasn't calling Mega ignorant because he disagrees with me...I was calling him ignorant because clearly he doesn't know the first thing about economics. On the other hand....the economist David Friedman disagrees with me but I would certainly not call him ignorant in economic matters.

That you weren't able to discern that Mega is clearly ignorant in economic matters indicates that you too are ignorant in economic matters. In fact, most people are ignorant in economic matters...to claim otherwise would be ignorant in general.

So yeah...I've got my work cut out for me!
Click to expand...

Ya, why don't you start with David Friedman. I am sure that he would appreciate your schooling.

I'm just wondering, but where did you get your economics degree? And how do you know that Mega isn't David Friedman?
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
No, actually I didn't. I just didn't point out what your false premise is. Let's see if you can figure it out.
Click to expand...
Oh...a guessing game? My guess is that you don't know about economics! Did I guess correctly? It really doesn't matter though because I also guess that you're not going to bother substantiating your response either way. But that's just my guess.
 
Xerographica said:
Oh...a guessing game? My guess is that you don't know about economics! Did I guess correctly? It really doesn't matter though because I also guess that you're not going to bother substantiating your response either way. But that's just my guess.
Click to expand...

Wong answer. Try again. I'm SURE you can get it.
 
Misterveritis said:
LOL. Independents are people with no courage and no brains. Take a side or step aside.
Click to expand...
The fact that you believe that all policies and issues can be compressed into two "sides" is frightening, there is nothing "courageous" or intellectually challenging about claiming loyalty to either political party in existence currently.
 
imagep said:
Ya, why don't you start with David Friedman. I am sure that he would appreciate your schooling.

I'm just wondering, but where did you get your economics degree? And how do you know that Mega isn't David Friedman?
Click to expand...
Eh. My degree isn't in economics...it's in International Development studies. Not that it matters...I'm self-taught with regards to economics.

If you want to challenge my knowledge in economic matters...don't worry about my degrees or the lack thereof...just explain to me why taxpayers shouldn't be allowed to directly allocate their taxes.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Wong answer. Try again. I'm SURE you can get it.
Click to expand...
Clearly there was no false premise or else you would have already pointed it out by now. You've got absolutely nothing to substantiate your claim...no surprise there.
 
Xerographica said:
Eh. My degree isn't in economics...it's in International Development studies. Not that it matters...I'm self-taught with regards to economics.

If you want to challenge my knowledge in economic matters...don't worry about my degrees or the lack thereof...just explain to me why taxpayers shouldn't be allowed to directly allocate their taxes.
Click to expand...

Interesting theory. Let's see if you can find the flaw in it... which ALSO happens to be a false premise. Since you seem to claim that you know SO much about economics, I'm SURE that you have the self-assessment skills to analyze your own position and recognize the problem with it. Go ahead.
 
Xerographica said:
Clearly there was no false premise or else you would have already pointed it out by now. You've got absolutely nothing to substantiate your claim...no surprise there.
Click to expand...

No, of course there was a false premise... else I wouldn't have stated there was one. I always find it interesting to see if an individual has self-assessment skills.
 
AtlantaAdonis said:
The poor have no buying power....and the companies that give the fewest benefits will always have an advantage in the free market. As with any capital, it is advantageous to have the least expensive human capital possible. KKKapitalism ignores the needs of individuals and only focuses on the needs of businesses.
Click to expand...

its actually much easier to do what you complain about when 1 group controls all the business. Ever wonder why it took so long for America to get to the place it is today? Because it took that long for the companies to amass that power.

The difference between a democrat and a republican is who owes the favor, the politican or the business
 
Xerographica said:
Feel free to dethrone me with your grasp of economics.
Click to expand...
Aren't you the one who thinks that tax spending would be more efficient if everyone decided how to allocate their own tax money? Sorry, that is not an economic principle, it is at best a pretty illogical theory. And like so many economic theories, it fails by assuming that all people act rationally, while in real life, the opposite is true more often than not.

A great knowledge of economics is worth nothing without a passing knowledge of psychology and sociology.
 
Last edited:
CaptainCourtesy said:
Independent denotes someone who is independent in their thinking and not constrained by something prepackaged. Folks who pigeon-hole their thinking are more closed minded, and a closed mind often indicates a weak and less intelligent mind. Just saying.
Click to expand...
It is a fig leaf.

Independents have no brains and have no heart.
People who take a side generally have thought things through.

Closed mind? Straw man. Of course you already know it. As you said, Just saying.
Undisclosed lean? LOL
 
Xerographica said:
If you don't believe that you can spend your money better than I can spend your money...then we can really easily put it to the test. Just put your money where your mouth is by sending me $200 via paypal. Trust me...I'll spend it in your best interest by using it to help promote the Magna Carta movement.

Why aren't you going to send me the $200? Because you know for a fact that you can spend it "better" than I can. "Better" depends entirely on our own unique perspectives. You can spend your taxes "better" than congress can because you know your values better than anybody else. How could 150 million people's values not matter when it comes to the distribution of public funds?
Click to expand...
This is a silly analogy. To begin with, I didn't vote for you (nor would I, no offense) as a representative to decide what to do with my money. Nor were you voted into the position by a majority of the jurisdiction in which I chose to earn my money. Nor would you last long if you started giving people's money to random causes.

I'm curious, do you support representative democracy at all?
 
Last edited:
Misterveritis said:
It *is* a bad word that identifies bad thinking.
Progressive is a cover term the deceptive use when they mean liberal.
Click to expand...

I am a progressive, but not necessarily a liberal, but tend to be pretty moderate.

Kori is a progressive and is a fascist.

CC is a progressive and is just plain nuts.

Either way, progressive is a pretty broad term.
 
Krhazy said:
Aren't you the one who thinks that tax spending would be more efficient if everyone decided how to allocate their own tax money? Sorry, that is not an economic principle, it is at best a pretty illogical theory. And like so many economic theories, it fails by assuming that all people act rationally, while in real life, the opposite is true more often than not.

A great knowledge of economics is worth nothing without a passing knowledge of psychology and sociology.
Click to expand...

Seems like you suffer from the same condition as CaptainCourtesy because you conveniently forgot to substantiate your claim. Taxpayers (our most productive, talented, innovative, hard-working, dedicated, focused, skilled, creative citizens) act irrationally...therefore...[this is where you substantiate your claim]

1. Taxpayers directly allocate their taxes
2. ??
3. Failure
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom