Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Freer The Economy The Better
#41
Everybody was intrigued with Engels and Marx when their ideas first hit the street, and seemed to improve the lives of the people. It took awhile for reality to set in and allowed the evil side to be seen.

What is immoral now, is for Alinskyites and Machiavellians to inflict the now-known shortcomings onto the people because it awards the elites huge power. Putin left the helm in the Kremlin to take over the UN environmentalist captaincy. It is questionable which position gave him the most power.
Reply
#42
quadrat Wrote:[Image: Henry-Wallace.jpg]

So true... And that is exactly why government should be limited.

I just wanted to point out that Henry Wallace before being a VP was Secretary of Agriculture. He used his power to manipulate markets in a way that makes him one of the american fascists he is speaking about.
He was also a progressive, and progressives have used government to build the power of business in exactly the way he is speaking about.
He appears to be speaking against this and in doing so becomes a perfect example of a hypocrite. Nice speech, too bad he couldn't stand behind his own principles.
Reply
#43
BillPrestonEsq Wrote:He appears to be speaking against this and in doing so becomes a perfect example of a hypocrite. Nice speech, too bad he couldn't stand behind his own principles.

What he was doing is exactly what the Left is more than capable of engaging in, on a regular basis. And that is "Projection", where they just love to assign their own traits, fallacies, shortcomings, you name it, on to others, while they overlook their own.

Of course, anyone standing back, looking on, can readily see it being practiced.

What is also so telling is that he was the Progressive Party's 1948 candidate for president. And American Progressive is just another name for Fascist.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it" - Jonathan Swift, 1710
Reply
#44
yes, the government of a gang of plutarchs represented by bush and obama must be limited indeed. privileges for the super rich at the expense of small and mid-sized businesses; the very backbone of america, hinder the growth of wealth for by far most americans, most notably its middle class. as nixon's advisor kevin phillips, not a progressive stated, "there is a fusion of money and government in the usa". that was some 40 years ago, when the middle class flourished.
"You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Dick Cheney
Reply
#45
quadrat Wrote:yes, the government of a gang of plutarchs represented by bush and obama must be limited indeed. privileges for the super rich at the expense of small and mid-sized businesses; the very backbone of america, hinder the growth of wealth for by far most americans, most notably its middle class. as nixon's advisor kevin phillips, not a progressive stated, "there is a fusion of money and government in the usa". that was some 40 years ago, when the middle class flourished.

40 years ago the machine was already set in motion. The success of small and mid-sized businesses should be dependant on hard work and ingenuity, not government intervention. That is where you go wrong.
The problem with government power is that it is destined to become corrupt. Any lawmaker or regulator is bound to use their power to help out their buddies in business. The only way to keep a level playing field that you desire is to keep government out of business entirely. I hear that people want business out of government, I am one of them, but as long as government is meddling in business, there is no way to keep business out of government.

I do believe that personal income tax should be used to control the balance somewhat. When you focus on a bracket of income you rule out any collusion since it is expected of everyone in that bracket. Though taxes are way way way too high as it is. So rather than raise taxes for the rich I would like to lower taxes for the poor and middle class. I read yesterday about some Dem, can't remember who, wants to create a new federal tax bracket that will raise taxes on the super rich(millionaires and billionaires) upward to 49%. Can you imagine if you made 1 bill. dollars and the government took HALF of your money? HALF! At around 300,000 they are taking 35%. That is ridiculous. But HALF?!? "Here you go take my 500,000 million dollars"...you have to admit that is pretty f'd up.
Reply
#46
BillPrestonEsq Wrote:The success of small and mid-sized businesses should be dependant on hard work and ingenuity, not government intervention.
they are. big businesses however depend on government intervention.

Quote:I read yesterday about some Dem, can't remember who, wants to create a new federal tax bracket that will raise taxes on the super rich(millionaires and billionaires) upward to 49%.
that's easily avoided by investing the income back into the economy, so i think only rich folks who don't want to invest cry about taxes. i don't believe you need $1 bln for your private consumption per year. there should be a law however that taxes investments abroad with 49% or more.
"You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Dick Cheney
Reply
#47
quadrat Wrote:
BillPrestonEsq Wrote:The success of small and mid-sized businesses should be dependant on hard work and ingenuity, not government intervention.
they are. big businesses however depend on government intervention.

Actually, the word is "Protection". And it's true name(the relationship between State and Corporations), is called Corporatism, or better yet, Fascism. It's the next best thing to Socialism.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it" - Jonathan Swift, 1710
Reply
#48
quadrat Wrote:
BillPrestonEsq Wrote:The success of small and mid-sized businesses should be dependant on hard work and ingenuity, not government intervention.
they are. big businesses however depend on government intervention.

Quote:I read yesterday about some Dem, can't remember who, wants to create a new federal tax bracket that will raise taxes on the super rich(millionaires and billionaires) upward to 49%.
that's easily avoided by investing the income back into the economy, so i think only rich folks who don't want to invest cry about taxes. i don't believe you need $1 bln for your private consumption per year. there should be a law however that taxes investments abroad with 49% or more.

"The success of small and mid-sized businesses should be dependant on hard work and ingenuity, not government intervention".
To put it another way: that success means they have grown to compete with that big business. If the government has the power to intervene they will most likely be protecting (as John pointed out) the big business considering they are the one's with the money and power and not the small rising business. That's what you are not getting. If you believe that government is there to protect small business and fight for the little guy, then why aren't they? Why is it that you believe business is more powerful than government? Businesses cannot create laws. Businesses rely on YOU to become powerful. If you want to take power from a business in a free and fair market, STOP BUYING THEIR PRODUCTS. It is really quite simple. If you want to take power from government, what do you do? No really what do you do? Because I am having the hardest time with this....


As far as the taxes. I am not sure what you are talking about investing, that is for income tax. It doesn't matter what you invest in, you are going to be doing it after taxes.

Quote:i don't believe you need $1 bln for your private consumption per year

Oh really so if you made a billion dollars a year you would have no problem giving HALF of it to the government? What if you want to donate it? Instead your money goes to bombing the crap out of the middle east.
What if I don't want HALF of my money -$500,000- to go to bombing the crap out of the middle east? What if I don't want MY money going to pay welfare for some deadbeat crack dealer leaching off the system while banking off of the destruction of his own neighborhood? How about if I want to invest in that neighborhood instead? Why is it you believe government knows best? You need to do some homework. I don't think you realize how bad government really is. You really don't get it. You need to research till you just about have a mental breakdown, then you need to read some more till you start to feel like it is you that is misinformed in order to cope with such an unbelievably horrible reality, and then read some more and maybe we will be on the same level.

So let's use 1 mill. instead. More realistic. Jan Schakowsky wants you, if by chance you become a millionaire, to give the government 45% of your money. Yeah I finally made it! I am a millionai- oh wait the government is now going to take 45% of my money. You are ok with that? Actually... don't answer that if you are going to say yes because I think my head will finally explode.
Reply
#49
i don't care much how you do things in the fledgling countries of the new world. if you make say euro 200k in a year in germany, and you invest half of it in any business, your tax of this year is calculated from the remaining 100k. up to you to decide how much to invest, and by how much to minimise taxes.
"You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Dick Cheney
Reply
#50
quadrat Wrote:i don't care much how you do things in the fledgling countries of the new world. if you make say euro 200k in a year in germany, and you invest half of it in any business, your tax of this year is calculated from the remaining 100k. up to you to decide how much to invest, and by how much to minimise taxes.

Well here in the U.S. (the country that you are commenting on) if you make 200k a year you are taxed on 200k. Anything you invest after that is subject to capital gains tax when you sell your investment.

So you are from Germany? Not a fledgling country like ours....you have at all it figured out by now, huh? I have to ask, if you don't care much how we do things here then why do you bother posting? If I don't care about something, then I don't have an interest in learning anything about it. So, why would I insist I have any idea what I am talking about as you do? Why post quotes of American politicians and post statistics about a country that you said yourself you don't care about? What am I missing here?
Reply
#51
because i'm bored. living now amongst the most dim-witted people of the planet. watched something about one of pol pot's lieutenants on the telly yesterday, the man explained why and how he conducted the ethnic cleansing against the vietnamese. my girlfriend watched it too, and asked me "bank no give them money to go to japan?" incoherent babble all day long.
"You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Dick Cheney
Reply
#52
quadrat Wrote:because i'm bored. living now amongst the most dim-witted people of the planet. watched something about one of pol pot's lieutenants on the telly yesterday, the man explained why and how he conducted the ethnic cleansing against the vietnamese. my girlfriend watched it too, and asked me "bank no give them money to go to japan?" incoherent babble all day long.

Who's fault is that "Q"? Are you being bribed to remain in the world's largest whorehouse?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it" - Jonathan Swift, 1710
Reply
#53
sex addiction. you probably can't imagine how different it is compared with civilization. nothing you think is granted works. say, the tv. when you need an update of your indoctrination and turn to foxnews, you expect it's in english, the videoclips fit seamlessly, and they show what they announce. say if dr. manni is announced, you don't see the hideous face of glen beck. i watched foxnews recently, curious what they report on the nucular disaster in japan. what i expected, trivialisation, and belittlement. glen beck demonstrating with cooking pots how reactor security is supposed to work. first i thought that's quite silly, then i realised that the clientele is of course the most illiterate americans, who don't understand texts larded with foreign words such as nucular, or containment vessel. they need pictures to connect things in their minds, just like in the kindergarten. anyway, if foxnews were anymore stupid, even you would realise you are twitted.
it's worse here. there are two channels on our cable tv reserved for foreign language movies, that's mostly english and with thai subtitles. like in the cinemas. when i checked one of them yesterday, there was an american movie i didn't know, thai subtitles, sound not english, but the director's commentary. later on, they showed the same jason bourne movie three times back to back. the monkey's brain is certainly overburdened with multiple choices such as on a dvd. that's why the ancient vcd are still popular, poor picture, but they have only one language. the challenge here is to put the two to four cd a movie is on in the right succession into the player, and to change the cd when a part is relapsed. that's the very basics of intellect, recognizing single-digit numbers. again, to complicated for thais.
"You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Dick Cheney
Reply
#54
Well, until you are able to control your addiction, and move elsewhere, you will have to accept the other things that go along with the gratification of your addiction.

As for your outrage at being treated like a child, by the evil Fox News, perhaps you should look for Fox Business, and step up in the world.

Also, would you rather be treated to the lowest common denominator, which is an honest appraisal, or be lulled to sleep by talking heads, who use good English, but haven't the slightest idea about much else, other than language itself?

Usually, I don't read your complete posts, because I have learned, over time, that they are not straight forward, and serious. But I did wade through this one, out of curiosity. If you continue to be a little more openly honest I'll start reading more. Wink1
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it" - Jonathan Swift, 1710
Reply
#55
Q, maybe TV Burma has some good shows. Can flicks from N. Korea be bootlegged into Thighland?

Ennui is a terrible thing. Your mind is too good to waste.

Maybe Fox will hire Pretty Perky Katie Couric when she gets fired so you can watch some real news.
Jefferson: I place economy among the first and important virtues, and public debt as the greatest of dangers. To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our choice between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of caring for them, they will be happy.
Reply
#56
Here is an excellent case for the benefit of a Free Economy over that of a planed one. And this has significant implications to rising economic dragons, such as Japan, and now China.

This comes to us via the Adam Smith Institute, and is a critique of Why Entrepreneurial Capitalism
Is Needed Now More Than Ever
. But relate this to what happened to Japan in the 1990s and where China is at the threshold. And note that China never relinquished it's policy of using a "Planned Economy".

Quote:
There's an idea out there I regard as pernicious. Roughly stated, it's that the economy is now so complex that we've got to guide it. Plan it, let the Wise Men in Whitehall decide where investment should go, get them to pick winners to the benefit of us all. Brink Lindsey has a paper out which argues against this case. Worth reading in full but here's the nub of the argument.

We can regard economic growth as coming in two forms. There's catch up growth, such as what China is doing now and Japan did 50 years ago. What to do is largely known, for there are the examples of the richer, more advanced, economies that can be followed. To an extent it's as simple as pulling people out of low productivity agriculture and into high productivity industry, raising the education levels and increasing participation in the formal economy. But the important point is, in Lindsey's view, that it is at least feasible for a government to work this out and to manage the process. Clearly not all do for not all have followed this path but it is at least possible that some will.

However, once a place has got rich the problem changes. Catch up growth is no longer possible, for there's no one to catch up with. The economy has arrived at the technological frontier so there's no one to copy. Any further growth is going to come from innovation, new ways of doing things, rather than mobilising extant resources to simply do more. At which point governments can't do that planning and directing thing.

For, as Hayek pointed out, the only information system we've got to calculate what the economy should do next in such a situation is that very economy. It simply isn't possible for a central planner to decide whether capital should be allocated to gluten free bread, discounts on golfing holidays, weird metals extraction, wedding photography or software for computer based gambling (to mention only a few businesses extant among the readers of my blog). It is only that great calculating engine of the entire economy, with that interplay of supply and demand determining prices, which can possibly give us the information necessary to direct where to go next. For none of us know what's going to be the next big thing, all we can do is experiment and find out, the experiment being the means by which we find out.

All of which means that it's the very complexity of the modern economy, it's pushing up against the technological frontier, which means that planning, the State direction of industry, cannot work and that we need to be ever more free market in our approach if we are to continue to grow.

So, will China make the transition to that higher plane? I don't think so, not without a Fall first, just as with Japan. They are too committed to State run economics, just as they spent money on totally unnecessary cities, where nobody lives, and are slowly falling apart. Perhaps the Chinese economic engine, in smaller scale?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it" - Jonathan Swift, 1710
Reply
#57
the article Wrote:There's an idea out there I regard as pernicious. Roughly stated, it's that the economy is now so complex that we've got to guide it. Plan it,...
My goodness, this has been discredited so often in the last 100 years, it is embarrassing.

Yet, it retains a seductive appeal, that some how "experts" are able to master intricate complex systems. The rubes in the streets buy this almost every time.

What is the philosophical/propaganda antidote for this common fantasy? One must be found which is easily explainable to people who are not familiar with history of Hayek.
Jefferson: I place economy among the first and important virtues, and public debt as the greatest of dangers. To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our choice between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of caring for them, they will be happy.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)