- This topic has 34 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 11 months ago by
Allan from Fallbrook.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 8, 2012 at 9:33 AM #743252May 8, 2012 at 9:59 AM #743257
Allan from Fallbrook
Participant[quote=briansd1]What bothers most of the Republicans is that they call Obama socialist and radical. That shows how right-wing radical Republicans have become.
As pointed out by Allan himself, Obama is a centrist president. The Democratic party has moved to the right, to the dissappointment of many long time Democrats.
I’ve asked Republicans what’s so radical about Obama and they always mention the bailouts. But those bailouts were Bush’s doing. Other than that they can’t think of anything radical.
I’ve talk to people from the South. What’s really radical is his race.[/quote]
Brian: Strawmen abound. You use terms like “most” or “many”, but, in truth, these are just generalizations or stereotypes.
Just like saying you’ve spoken to the people in the South. Whom, exactly, and where? I deal with Southerners in my business, as well as Westerners, those from the Middle West and the Eastern seaboard. I’d suggest you speak to some people in the Raleigh-Durham tech triangle, or outside the research centers in Florida, Alabama and Georgia or Silicon Gulch in Austin, TX. My point is this: There are plenty of ignorant, bigoted people everywhere in the US, not just the South. You might opine that MORE of them reside in the South, but I believe your bias against the “redneck culture” has blinded you to certain realities, just as much as your bias against conservatives has led you to believe the GOP is somehow marching into oblivion.
I have nothing against Obama. As I’ve opined previously, I think he’s a likeable cat and obviously highly intelligent. He is, however, in over his head, just as his predecessor was. The world has changed rapidly in the last 20 years and our government and political class has failed to catch up and, most important, has failed in their mission to create the best environment for America to compete.
Whether it’s a failure of will to reform taxes and entitlements, or confront the looming specter of the true costs (economic as well as social/cultural) of the welfare state, or restrain the worst impulses of Big Money, Big Oil, Big Labor and the Military-Industrial-Prison Complex or to protect, at all costs, our most important rights and liberties, we’ve been sold down the river by BOTH parties.
Obama simply represents the latest in a long line of presidents willing to bend us collectively over the table whilst gently whispering some pabulum about all being well and, not to worry, the big Nanny State will take care of everything as it takes over everything (see “Life of Julia”.) It won’t and it can’t and we’re watching as the whole thing starts to unravel right before our eyes.
May 8, 2012 at 11:14 AM #743266briansd1
Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
The world has changed rapidly in the last 20 years and our government and political class has failed to catch up and, most important, has failed in their mission to create the best environment for America to compete.
[/quote]I absolutely agree with you there.
About Republicans, I wasn’t talking about you, Allan. Since you don’t vote Republican, then my comments obviously don’t apply to you.
However, there is a narrative in the Republican party of Obama as socialist radical. In truth, nothing Obama has done is radical. His policies are more center right, IMO.
May 9, 2012 at 12:04 PM #743367GuestFor better or for worse, the defeat of Dick Lugar shows that the Republican party is headed right into their arms of the Tea Party. I don’t think there’s any room for Jon Huntsman.
“Just yesterday, France elected a socialist,” Mourdock declared in his victory speech. “There are those I’m sure in the administration and in the left side of the Democratic Party that were cheering for that. But we’re not going to stand for that in Indiana because the supporters of Barack Obama are not going to win!”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obamas-american-exceptionalism/2012/05/09/gIQAmKDRDU_story.htmlMOURDOCK: I certainly think bipartisanship ought to consist of Democrats coming to the Republican point of view. … If we [win the House, Senate, and White House], bipartisanship means they have to come our way, and if we’re successful in getting the numbers, we’ll work towards that.
May 9, 2012 at 2:14 PM #743382Anonymous
Guest[quote=briansd1]What bothers most of the Republicans is that they call Obama socialist and radical. That shows how right-wing radical Republicans have become.
As pointed out by Allan himself, Obama is a centrist president. The Democratic party has moved to the right, to the dissappointment of many long time Democrats.
I’ve asked Republicans what’s so radical about Obama and they always mention the bailouts. But those bailouts were Bush’s doing. Other than that they can’t think of anything radical.
I’ve talk to people from the South. What’s really radical is his race.[/quote]
Brian –
Running up $16T in debt and bailing out every industry and not letting anything fail is socialist, radical and down right nuts. It has collapsed every other major super power before that has tried the same approach. Obama is spending $4T this year and making $2T. That is absolutely absurd on all levels. It is not okay. It is not okay to leave that debt to our children unless we hate them.Your perspective should not be the last 20 years of politics in this country, it should be world history and debt levels of the other failed super powers of the past.
May 9, 2012 at 3:44 PM #743392Guest[quote=gregw9898][quote=briansd1]What bothers most of the Republicans is that they call Obama socialist and radical. That shows how right-wing radical Republicans have become.
As pointed out by Allan himself, Obama is a centrist president. The Democratic party has moved to the right, to the dissappointment of many long time Democrats.
I’ve asked Republicans what’s so radical about Obama and they always mention the bailouts. But those bailouts were Bush’s doing. Other than that they can’t think of anything radical.
I’ve talk to people from the South. What’s really radical is his race.[/quote]
Brian –
Running up $16T in debt and bailing out every industry and not letting anything fail is socialist, radical and down right nuts. It has collapsed every other major super power before that has tried the same approach. Obama is spending $4T this year and making $2T. That is absolutely absurd on all levels. It is not okay. It is not okay to leave that debt to our children unless we hate them.Your perspective should not be the last 20 years of politics in this country, it should be world history and debt levels of the other failed super powers of the past.[/quote]
Since Rich is so good with numbers and historical data, I would love to see a comparison of our debt levels currently as compared to the estimated debt/GDP levels of the Roman, Byzantene, Russian, English and other empires that went under due to GOV spending. I’m not sure there would be accurate data but it would be a great article!!
May 9, 2012 at 3:51 PM #743395GuestI’m not sure empires are good for the lives of citizens.
For example, during the Russian Empire the peasant population were serfs. The people of Switzerland, on the other hand, had it pretty good through history.
Empires are good for kings and politicians but not necessarily good for the common person.
May 9, 2012 at 4:34 PM #743403Participant[quote=gregw9898]
Since Rich is so good with numbers and historical data, I would love to see a comparison of our debt levels currently as compared to the estimated debt/GDP levels of the Roman, Byzantene, Russian, English and other empires that went under due to GOV spending. I’m not sure there would be accurate data but it would be a great article!![/quote]Markmax Redux: You’re obviously unfamiliar with the work of economic anthropologist David Graeber: http://www.amazon.com/Debt-The-First-000-Years/dp/1933633867/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1336510491&sr=8-1
This book is absolutely filled with historical data and will utterly debunk many of the falsehoods you’ve attempted to deploy here (under this and your other nom-de-plume.)
Of course, I wouldn’t expect someone who doesn’t even know how to properly spell “Byzantine” to know much about actual history.
Marshal your facts, correctly assemble your argument and then open your mouth.
May 9, 2012 at 5:09 PM #743409Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=gregw9898]
Since Rich is so good with numbers and historical data, I would love to see a comparison of our debt levels currently as compared to the estimated debt/GDP levels of the Roman, Byzantene, Russian, English and other empires that went under due to GOV spending. I’m not sure there would be accurate data but it would be a great article!![/quote]Markmax Redux: You’re obviously unfamiliar with the work of economic anthropologist David Graeber: http://www.amazon.com/Debt-The-First-000-Years/dp/1933633867/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1336510491&sr=8-1
This book is absolutely filled with historical data and will utterly debunk many of the falsehoods you’ve attempted to deploy here (under this and your other nom-de-plume.)
Of course, I wouldn’t expect someone who doesn’t even know how to properly spell “Byzantine” to know much about actual history.
Marshal your facts, correctly assemble your argument and then open your mouth.[/quote]
Sorry for the misspelling but I wasn’t asking you and also you didn’t address my point. That book doesn’t seem to address my post either.
I would like a comparison of debt levels between the major empires from a well respected economist, not historian. Don’t acuse me of not getting my facts straight if you can’t understand a blog post first.
May 9, 2012 at 5:11 PM #743408Guest[quote=briansd1]I’m not sure empires are good for the lives of citizens.
For example, during the Russian Empire the peasant population were serfs. The people of Switzerland, on the other hand, had it pretty good through history.
Empires are good for kings and politicians but not necessarily good for the common person.[/quote]
We have an empire already. We are in 150 countries. We tell people how they can run their countries and destroy the GOVs that don’t agree with us and install people we like that we can pay off for our favor. We have the debt of all the other “empires” too.
The 15-20% of real unemployment are the serfs. Obama has expanded serfdom if that’s your measure.
May 9, 2012 at 5:28 PM #743410Participant[quote=gregw9898][quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=gregw9898]
Since Rich is so good with numbers and historical data, I would love to see a comparison of our debt levels currently as compared to the estimated debt/GDP levels of the Roman, Byzantene, Russian, English and other empires that went under due to GOV spending. I’m not sure there would be accurate data but it would be a great article!![/quote]Markmax Redux: You’re obviously unfamiliar with the work of economic anthropologist David Graeber: http://www.amazon.com/Debt-The-First-000-Years/dp/1933633867/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1336510491&sr=8-1
This book is absolutely filled with historical data and will utterly debunk many of the falsehoods you’ve attempted to deploy here (under this and your other nom-de-plume.)
Of course, I wouldn’t expect someone who doesn’t even know how to properly spell “Byzantine” to know much about actual history.
Marshal your facts, correctly assemble your argument and then open your mouth.[/quote]
Sorry for the misspelling but I wasn’t asking you and also you didn’t address my point. That book doesn’t seem to address my post either.
I would like a comparison of debt levels between the major empires from a well respected economist, not historian. Don’t acuse me of not getting my facts straight if you can’t understand a blog post first.[/quote]
Markmax Part Deux: Okay, I won’t “acuse” you.
You have shown a marked propensity for either ignoring facts, or not understanding them.
Graeber, AS I CLEARLY STATED, BUT YOU IGNORED: is NOT an historian, but, rather, an economic (NOTE THE WORD “ECONOMIC”) anthropologist. Thus, he is a mix of ECONOMIST and ANTHROPOLOGIST.
The referenced book EXACTLY addresses the issues of debt, credit and fiat money and does so in an historical arc that covers 5,000 YEARS, meaning it encapsulates ALL of the empires you mentioned, including the “Byzantene” one.
How this fails to address and, most important, debunk your salient points is beyond me, but, as stated at the outset, you never seem to let the facts get in the way of a good story.
READ the FACTS. UNDERSTAND the FACTS. ARGUE by using the FACTS. Or not.
May 9, 2012 at 5:33 PM #743411Participant[quote=briansd1]I’m not sure empires are good for the lives of citizens.
For example, during the Russian Empire the peasant population were serfs. The people of Switzerland, on the other hand, had it pretty good through history.
Empires are good for kings and politicians but not necessarily good for the common person.[/quote]
Brian: This one’s for you. Came across this article in The Atlantic and thought of you: http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/05/american-snobbery/256931/
Give it a read and I’d love to hear your thoughts. Clive Crook, the author, is British and delves into the key differences between British and American snobbery (including disdain for “rednecks”.)
May 9, 2012 at 5:45 PM #743412Arraya
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Markmax Redux: You’re obviously unfamiliar with the work of economic anthropologist David Graeber: http://www.amazon.com/Debt-The-First-000-Years/dp/1933633867/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1336510491&sr=8-1
This book is absolutely filled with historical data and will utterly debunk many of the falsehoods you’ve attempted to deploy here (under this and your other nom-de-plume.)
[/quote]
Absolutely Fantastic book! I just picked it up and ploughed through half of it in the past couple days.
fyi- Graeber is one of the architects of Occupy
May 9, 2012 at 5:58 PM #743413Participant[quote=Arraya][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Markmax Redux: You’re obviously unfamiliar with the work of economic anthropologist David Graeber: http://www.amazon.com/Debt-The-First-000-Years/dp/1933633867/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1336510491&sr=8-1
This book is absolutely filled with historical data and will utterly debunk many of the falsehoods you’ve attempted to deploy here (under this and your other nom-de-plume.)
[/quote]
Absolutely Fantastic book! I just picked it up and ploughed through half of it in the past couple days.
fyi- Graeber is one of the architects of Occupy[/quote]
Arraya: Yup, you enjoying this book makes perfect sense. I did know of Graeber’s involvement with Occupy, you’re also undoubtedly aware that he’s an Old School Anarchist, too. His writings on Anarchy are especially good.
I read his book as something of a tetralogy, including Niall Ferguson’s “Ascent of Money” and two of Satyijit Das’ books: “Traders, Guns and Money” and “Extreme Money.”
If you choose to read all four, I’d strongly recommend having copious amounts of alcohol close at hand. Kidding aside, all four of these strongly support some of your postings regarding “end stage capitalism.”
May 10, 2012 at 6:41 AM #743424GuestInteresting book recommendation. This is from the Amazon link in the “About the Author” section:
In the summer of 2011, he worked with a small group of activists and Adbusters magazine to plan Occupy Wall Street. Bloomberg Businessweek has called him an “anti-leader” of the movement. The Atlantic wrote that he “has come to represent the Occupy Wall Street message… expressing the group’s theory, and its founding principles, in a way that truly elucidated some of the things people have questioned about it.”
Slight change of subject, but another interesting historical aspect of debt is the association between debt and the Jews in Europe. Since usury was outlawed by the Christian church and Jews were often not allowed to own land that they could farm, Jews took on the roles of merchants and moneylenders. At the time these roles were not viewed as carrying any status, but of course it turned out to be one of the better “career choices.”
This concentration of Jews in the early “financial industry” is where the stereotype of the “rich, greedy Jew” developed and what ultimately led to some pretty bad stuff that we aren’t supposed to mention on internet forums.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.