UnderGround Forums
 

PoliticalGround >> attn: thirdleg, marck, and other neocons


2/15/09 1:59 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Buddhadev
21 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 02/15/09 2:00 PM
Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 3495
I want to further explore something else Information said.

Information - No. Ron Paul's ideology is fatally flawed and potentially devestating to our country. I would rather have Obama as President than I would Ron Paul.


Info, between mass immigration, big government, increased socialization of medicine (Bush's prescription drug plan), and heavy-handed foreign policy interventionism, America has essentially been testing your ideology under laboratory conditions for eight years (arguably for 20 or even 45 years, but let's leave it at eight). And look where it's brought us.

You attack Paul's ideology as "fatally flawed" and "potentially devastating" and yet here we are with our country genuinely faced with devastation. We have a daunting, paradoxical combination of monetary inflation, unemployment, AND a credit crunch. We have all of this after years of policies that you whole-heartedly approve of with more such policies (I imagine you're pro-TARP and pro-stimulus, correct me if I'm wrong) to come.

Will there ever come a point when you're willing to entertain the idea that globalism might be a bad idea and that America should live smaller, be more cautious, make less trouble, accept the rest of the world the way it is, and focus on its own survival and financial sustainability? Or does America need to turn into Zimbabwe or Argentina before you'd ever consider the fact that Ron Paul might be right?
2/16/09 12:00 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Information
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 23152
Info, between mass immigration, big government, increased socialization of medicine (Bush's prescription drug plan), and heavy-handed foreign policy interventionism, America has essentially been testing your ideology under laboratory conditions for eight years (arguably for 20 or even 45 years, but let's leave it at eight). And look where it's brought us.

Where has it brought us? The largest, most advanced and diverse economy in the world? Yes, what a horrible position to be in.

You attack Paul's ideology as "fatally flawed" and "potentially devastating" and yet here we are with our country genuinely faced with devastation.

Devestation? You're being hyperbolic.

We have a daunting, paradoxical combination of monetary inflation, unemployment, AND a credit crunch. We have all of this after years of policies that you whole-heartedly approve of with more such policies (I imagine you're pro-TARP and pro-stimulus, correct me if I'm wrong) to come.

No, I'm not pro-TARP nor am I pro-stimulus. Further, you're committing the most basic of economic fallacies-- connecting unwanted results with unrelated causes. To imagine that globalization had much if anything to do with the current crisis is completely ridiculous.

Will there ever come a point when you're willing to entertain the idea that globalism might be a bad idea and that America should live smaller, be more cautious, make less trouble, accept the rest of the world the way it is, and focus on its own survival and financial sustainability?

What makes you believe that I am not continuously re-evaluating my beliefs? Because I'm not reaching your conclusions?

My advice to you is to lay off the hyperbole and settle in to some rational and reasonable lines of thought. You're attempting to conflate temporary economic weakening with structural deficiency and then utilizing that conclusion to pimp for your candidate of choice. That's fairly weak.

Or does America need to turn into Zimbabwe or Argentina before you'd ever consider the fact that Ron Paul might be right?

Oh Jesus, you are in high pitch at this point. Zimbabwe? LOL.
2/16/09 12:07 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Information
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 23153
I stated my premises (public opinion on the three arguably biggest issues of this election cycle and the fact that Ron Paul is closer to the popular positions on them than John McCain is). Where's the ridiculous part? Or is it just ridiculous because you say it is?

It is ridiculous to believe that the "whole man" concept is not taken into consideration when choosing a candidate for office. While in your world those three issues represent the defining criteria for choosing a candidate, to most normal people choosing someone with a limited, fairly homogeneous support network based only upon his positions on three topics is simply ridiculous.

I believe there were plenty of white supremacist groups that fell in line with Ron Paul's views on those issues. Would they have been stronger candidates?
2/21/09 2:00 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Buddhadev
21 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 3497
I'll be out this wek with guard stuff. I'll get back to you after that.
3/5/09 12:06 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Buddhadev
21 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 3501
Where has it brought us? The largest, most advanced and diverse economy in the world? Yes, what a horrible position to be in.


No, what it's done is SQUANDER the largest, most advanced, etc., economy in the world--especially over the last eight years. Between pissing off the rest of the world and maintaining a leviathan at home, you people have eaten the seed corn.

Further, you're committing the most basic of economic fallacies-- connecting unwanted results with unrelated causes. To imagine that globalization had much if anything to do with the current crisis is completely ridiculous.


I didn't say "globalization" (free trade, et. al), I said globalISM -- the ideology that America can't just be a normal, quiet country that pays its bills, minds its own business, and leads by example, but rather, has to be the engine of a new world order.

What makes you believe that I am not continuously re-evaluating my beliefs? Because I'm not reaching your conclusions?


Because you stubbornly cling to your views in the face of the havoc your ideology has wrought.

My advice to you is to lay off the hyperbole and settle in to some rational and reasonable lines of thought. You're attempting to conflate temporary economic weakening with structural deficiency and then utilizing that conclusion to pimp for your candidate of choice. That's fairly weak.


Condescension isn't an acceptable substitute for logic.

Have you put your money where your optimistic mouth is and thrown your savings into the stock market? If you have, then I genuinely feel sorry for you as someone who I personally like since you would have bled tremendous amounts of money in the time between your last post and my response now.

The sad thing is that if it is "temporary" what we'll likely see is the same sort of bubble-driven false prosperity and false recovery that we had from 2004-2007: debt/inflation-fueled, unsustainable, marked by record numbers of bankruptcies, weak employment numbers (that the government will continue to pretty-up by shuffling the long-time unemployed into its numbers for the "permanently discouraged"), and ridiculously high living and housing expenses.

Oh Jesus, you are in high pitch at this point. Zimbabwe? LOL.


America's devastation that I worried aloud about previously isn't a complete immolation, but us turning into an Argentina, Brazil, or (god forbid) Zimbabwe. We're steadily becoming a country of gated communities of wealthy one side and the poor and desperate on the other with no one in-between.

Recessions are one thing, but what will really destroy the middle class are the false recoveries of the sort we saw during the Bush years and the housing bubble. People of middle class means and sentiments will find that they can't afford to settle down, buy houses, and raise families while maintaining the levels of material comfort they've come ot expect. So they won't: They'll live single, with roommates, or as married DINKS and they'll be replaced by Mexicans who are willing to stuff 16 people into a three bedroom house. And America as we knew it will not persist.

It is ridiculous to believe that the "whole man" concept is not taken into consideration when choosing a candidate for office. While in your world those three issues represent the defining criteria for choosing a candidate, to most normal people choosing someone with a limited, fairly homogeneous support network based only upon his positions on three topics is simply ridiculous.

I believe there were plenty of white supremacist groups that fell in line with Ron Paul's views on those issues. Would they have been stronger candidates?


I didn't say ANYONE with those positions would have been stronger than McCain, I said Ron Paul would have been. And...lol...you don't even want to start comparing their "whole man" elements. Ron Paul has led the most clean, wholesome, accomplished, and skeleton-free life of virtually any politician in America today. He compares favorably with John McCain's liasons with Charlie Keating, his dumping of his first wife because she wasn't pretty anymore after her accident, and his John Kerry-esque careerist giggoloing to rich heiresses with well-connected fathers.

McCain's ideology was almost a caricature of anti-Main Street opinions that were not only foolish, but unpopular as well:

- "security" from terrorism through aggressive war, but open borders and liberalized immigration.

- "anti-Socialist" but pro-bailout, pro-tax, pro-war, and pro-regulation

- "pro-freedom" but not in terms of political speech or the right to criticize politicians (McCain-Feingold)

You know, it's entirely possible that Sarah Palin wasn't as stupid as she seemed, but that she was just bamboozled by trying to defend the confusing clusterfuck that is McCain's ideology.

Info, I certainly appreciate all the sage advice you're offering. Let me give you some in return: your political views will return to some level of sanity when you stop looking at America as a vehicle for your Utopian ideology and learn to see individual Americans as people worthy of being left alone to pursue their own dreams in peace. It's good enough for them to tend to their families and communities without having to be bled dry to support Israel, Georgia, Darfur, or NATO expansion.
3/14/09 1:59 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Buddhadev
21 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 3514
jimmydoylee - Obama will fail, same as Carter, and every other far left fruit cake over the past century. Just a matter of time. Libs refuse to learn from history.


I agree, but the GOP turned down their one guy (Ron Paul) who could have stopped him
9/24/09 3:34 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Buddhadev
21 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 3714
Let's see how "temporary" (as Info claims) this meltdown is:

- Gold is practically at the same heights it reached at the top of the housing/asset bubble -- pointing to weakening dollar

- If we calculated unemployment the same way we did during the Great Depression, we'd be close to those levels and have seen no signs of it improving

- We're approaching deficits that are greater than the size that the entire national debt was when I was born.

Hmm...sounds like this "temporary" problem has the potential of being just as "temporary" as the Great Depression or 1970's stagflation were.
9/24/09 3:34 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Buddhadev
21 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 09/24/09 4:12 PM
Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 3715
9/25/09 12:58 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Buddhadev
21 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 3717
rock,

Are you a neocon? (look at the diagnostic questions I asked Thirdleg above)
9/29/09 10:54 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Information
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 26161
Hmm...sounds like this "temporary" problem has the potential of being just as "temporary" as the Great Depression or 1970's stagflation were.

It's been slightly more than 7 months. If you think that somehow proves that the current economic environment is structural than you're an idiot. There's no way to sugarcoat it.
9/29/09 8:33 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Buddhadev
21 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 3720
^^^Gee, and here I thought we were friends. ;-)

Maybe you'd feel friendlier to me if you and I entered into an economic arrangement wherein I built things and loaned you the money to buy them from me?

I think the most interesting thing coming from this exchange might (inadvertently) have been Squatdog's participation--because of the questions that his charges against you beg. He seemed to be quite eager to rake you over the coals on the areas where he disagrees with you, but doesn't seem terribly eager to engage the issue of the degree to which your ideologies harmonize and depend on many of the same foundational assumptions.
9/30/09 10:11 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Information
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 26201
^^^Gee, and here I thought we were friends. ;-)

We are, but if I were being an idiot I'd hope you call me out on it. That's the definition of a true friend. :)

Maybe you'd feel friendlier to me if you and I entered into an economic arrangement wherein I built things and loaned you the money to buy them from me?

My access to capital is quite unhindered by any sort of limitation at the moment, but thank you for the offer. Now, what is it that you'd like to sell me?

I think the most interesting thing coming from this exchange might (inadvertently) have been Squatdog's participation--because of the questions that his charges against you beg. He seemed to be quite eager to rake you over the coals on the areas where he disagrees with you, but doesn't seem terribly eager to engage the issue of the degree to which your ideologies harmonize and depend on many of the same foundational assumptions.

Squattie's not the brightest bulb, so I forgive a great many of his transgressions.
9/26/10 9:14 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Buddhadev
21 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 3950
Hey Info,

Not sure if you're following this thread or not still:

Gold closing in on 1300.

Dollar index back below 80.

Unemployment at 9.6%

Still think our problems are NOT structural?
9/27/10 6:46 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Information
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 29119
Yes.

Look, seriously-- you need to take a Macroeconomics course. Now.

You're claims are patently ludicrous. You go from pontificating on having the most prosperous advanced economy (while we were partaking in globalization, mass immigration, big government, increased socialization of medicine, and heavy-handed foreign policy interventionism) to now having an economy on par with Zimbabwe...because we partook in globalization, mass immigration, big government, increased socialization of medicine, and heavy-handed foreign policy interventionism.

When you get your head out of Ron Paul's ass and actually take a look at what's going on in our economy and country you'll better be able to decipher why we're at where we're at. Until then you'll continue to make silly, uneducated guesses.

Your choice.
9/27/10 10:06 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Buddhadev
21 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 09/28/10 2:36 AM
Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 3951
Information - Yes.




(On a side note: Yay! I'm glad you're still on this thread! The offer to buy you a beer if you're ever in the Seattle/Tacoma area still stands!)



Look, seriously-- you need to take a Macroeconomics course. Now.




I'd tell you when I took Macroeconomics, but that would highlight my age and make me feel depressed about being old, so I'll dispense with that.



Interestingly enough, I got more out of my high school Marco class than my college one because in the former case, I didn't care about my grade and so happily ate up entire class periods arguing with the teacher.



More sadly, in my college econ class, many people were, like me, working students who didn't really challenge the professor at all and probably came out of that class believing that Paul Krugman is either the second coming of Jesus or the tenth avatar of Vishnu.



Fortunately for me, I've had a curious mind and enough self-learning to realize that labor and capital actually have to PRODUCTIVE rather than just ACTIVE and that the bipartisan consensus behind our current policies is unsustainable for the country.





You're claims are patently ludicrous. You go from pontificating on having the most prosperous advanced economy (while we were partaking in globalization, mass immigration, big government, increased socialization of medicine, and heavy-handed foreign policy interventionism) to now having an economy on par with Zimbabwe...because we partook in globalization, mass immigration, big government, increased socialization of medicine, and heavy-handed foreign policy interventionism.





Your claims are patently ludicrous! You go from pontificating about me being ripped and athletic when I started partaking in unhealthy foods, smoking, late nights, and alcohol and to now having health on par with Barney from the Simpsons...because I partook in unhealthy foods, smoking, late nights, and alcohol!



(Info, I've debated with you often enough that I can see it coming a mile away when you run with sophistries, rhetorical games, ridicule, and over-simplifications. Instead of trying to "win" or embarrass me, look deep into why you believe what you do and present a counter argument that substantively addresses what I've said. I don't mean to come off preachy when I say this.)





When you get your head out of Ron Paul's ass and actually take a look at what's going on in our economy and country you'll better be able to decipher why we're at where we're at. Until then you'll continue to make silly, uneducated guesses.



Your choice.




I've taken a look at what's going on in our economy and country. The conclusions I've drawn, unfortunately, won't win me too many friends at cocktail parties thrown by people who read The New Republic or The Atlantic, but I don't see any alternative until someone provides a logical and factual refutation rather than just snottiness. 
7/12/11 1:56 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Buddhadev
21 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 3996
A few years into it...gold is at 1500, unemployment is still north of 9% (and it's been going back up in recent months), budget deficit is two trillion and climbing, we're facing the possibility of an actual debt default, moody's has talked about downgrading the AAA rating of us treasuries, and if all this wasn't bad enough our sugar daddy China is seeing its growth cool off and its diversifying its reserves.

But apparently this is all still "temporary" and we can't POSSIBLY consider voting for Ron Paul and changing course away from our Invade-the-World/Invite-the-World path.
7/12/11 2:24 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Information
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 32492
Buddhadev - A few years into it...gold is at 1500, unemployment is still north of 9% (and it's been going back up in recent months), budget deficit is two trillion and climbing, we're facing the possibility of an actual debt default, moody's has talked about downgrading the AAA rating of us treasuries, and if all this wasn't bad enough our sugar daddy China is seeing its growth cool off and its diversifying its reserves.

But apparently this is all still "temporary" and we can't POSSIBLY consider voting for Ron Paul and changing course away from our Invade-the-World/Invite-the-World path.

And yet you haven't even addressed one of my points.

If this is a structural weakness, which part of our economy's structure changed between the "boom times" and now?

You didn't answer the question before and I highly doubt you'll answer it now.
7/12/11 7:40 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Buddhadev
21 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 3998

And yet you haven't even addressed one of my points.


If you'll notice, I actually tend to quote you line by line and reply to each assertion. I guess you can feel free to show me some argument you made which you feel I didn't address.

If this is a structural weakness, which part of our economy's structure changed between the "boom times" and now?


Which "boom time" specifically? Boom time as defined by what? GDP growth? Low misery index? Financial health of all levels of gov't? I don't necessarily see GDP growth as always being an end in and of itself or always the best indicator of the economy's health (afterall we have GDP growth both now and through all of the 0's decade and neither of those were economic situations I'd consider healthy).

I'm not trying to be difficult, I'm genuinely trying to make an effort to establish some definable and understandable context to give you a good answer to your question.

In *general* however, every economy is always some mix of allocation of resources to productive ends and unproductive ends/malinvestment. To the extent that "now" differs to some time whose policies I'd prefer, it's because we're structured to allocate more resources to things that are not productive (social welfare, law enforcement beyond a certain level, education beyond a certain level, war/defense, entitlement programs).
7/12/11 10:23 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Buddhadev
21 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 3999
Info:

I'm rereading a lot of what I wrote and I came off and more snide and sniping that I wanted to. I apologize for any disrespect that may have come through in my tone.

At the end of the day, part of the reason that I "bump" our debates is that I think you're a genuinely intelligent guy. Being that I'm not someone who's emotionally attached to my views, many of the questions I ask and arguments I make are because I'm genuinely trying to understand where you're coming from.

Just out of curiosity (and I don't mean to derail our current conversation...please continue that one as well), where are you on our current Libya policy and our campaigns in Yemen and Pakistan?

Also, what is your opinion on our troop reduction in Iraq--both in terms of whether or not you endorsed such a policy and what you see happening as a result of it.
7/13/11 11:01 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Information
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 32502
Buddhadev - Info:

I'm rereading a lot of what I wrote and I came off and more snide and sniping that I wanted to. I apologize for any disrespect that may have come through in my tone.

I'll get to the other stuff in a couple hours when I have a chance to breathe but I wanted to put something forward on this real quick-- I appreciate your apology. Certainly if I have ever truly offended you I apologize. My intent is never to demean or insult you personally, but I can understand if you at times take it that way. You're a good guy and I've enjoyed our discussions immensely.

*Goes into NCO mode* With that said, get the f*ck out of here with that apology BS. We've interacted for almost a decade-- you know that I don't mind the snide and sniping tone if it ever even existed. If I didn't respect you I'd simply call you an idiot and be done with it. I enjoy sparring, and learning, with you. Don't ruin the fun for me! ;D

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.