• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

President Donald J. Trump

Started by The General, February 11, 2011, 01:33:34 AM

136 or 142

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on October 08, 2017, 09:27:55 PM
Just read the fucking article.

You added that link afterwards.

Oh dear, the Mises Institute.  Poor Ludwig Von Mises did nothing to deserve becoming the hero of the loony libertarians.  The worst that can be said about Von Mises is that he promoted some idiotic concept that social science theories were un-quantifiable and, therefore, un-provable (un-verifiable).  His own economic theories were actually quite mainstream.

I understand the loony libertarians apply Mises' concept on social science being un-verifiable to promote their own economic theories, which is why they worship him.

Kidnostad3

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 08, 2017, 09:23:57 PM
If you are referring to an article mentioned in the comments section, I'm not going to read the comments section, I explained why not when I edited my previous post.

There are a number of links in that article, if you want me to read one of them, why not just post the link to it here.

Mainstream Hitler biographers also say that Hitler had no interest in economics, and mainstream Historians say that the Nazis had no real interest in economics because of that.  As I've now written twice, the Nazis placed the German economy on a war footing as soon as they took control, nobody can really know what they would have done had they won World War II.

No but the Vice Chancelor, Herman Guering did.   I have no use for mainstream academics. 



Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 08, 2017, 09:22:35 PM
Oh, did Fox 'News' or Breitbart or the Daily Caller exist back then?

I agree with you that those outlets would adore Hitler if he was around today.



Nein!

136 or 142

Quote from: albrecht on October 08, 2017, 09:28:00 PM
A war economy is not an economy? How so? It could be argued by some that we have been in some kind of war, or pseudo-war, economy since the last Great War, so we have no economy? Or no economic policies for all those decades? And even before the war all the tax policies, business/land/tax dealings, economic talk and theorizing, decades before war of economic policy, social welfare policies, business and banking deals, trade, even support/desire for colonies and proxy wars and NAZIs were not about economics? I think you need to reexamine the NAZIs and, like any party/country, had many internal disputes and even nuance than your media would have you hold (especially since the NAZIs have supposedly already taken over the USA via Trump. Oh wait, that was the Russians? But they fought the NAZIs? I'm confused on the latest Leftist narrative....)

It's a matter of degree.  Even at the height of the Cold War, the percentage of the United States economy spent on military materiel never came close to approaching that which was spent by the Nazis.  the accurate comparison would be the United States/U.K economy from 1941-1945 to that of Nazi Germany.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 08, 2017, 09:22:35 PM
Oh, did Fox 'News' or Breitbart or the Daily Caller exist back then?

I agree with you that those outlets would adore Hitler if he was around today.



136 or 142

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on October 08, 2017, 09:32:43 PM
No but the Vice Chancelor, Herman Guering did.   I have no use for mainstream academics.

I have no use for the Mises Institute. I quit reading after the second paragraph: "Faced with this situation, we need to be more resolute than ever in defense of the free market, with no government restrictions whatever. If we do not defeat these measures, we face grave danger. "

So, any government regulations (restrictions) are 'the road to serfdom' (Hayek not Von Mises.)  That is entirely consistent with what I wrote about them before starting to read the article.

Kidnostad3

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 08, 2017, 09:31:59 PM
You added that link afterwards.

Oh dear, the Mises Institute.  Poor Ludwig Von Mises did nothing to deserve becoming the hero of the loony libertarians.  The worst that can be said about Von Mises is that he promoted some idiotic concept that social science theories were un-quantifiable and, therefore, un-provable (un-verifiable).  His own economic theories were actually quite mainstream.

I understand the loony libertarians apply Mises' concept on social science being un-verifiable to promote their own economic theories, which is why they worship him.

Want more?  Here’s more.  Why don’t you just admit that you are unwilling to consider anything that tends to gainsay the leftist bullshit that you are steeped in.  Please point out for us one instance in which application of anything approaching true Marxist doctrine has produced the promised worker’s paradise or even a sustainable economy (and please don’t cite China because it was foundering until it adopted a quasi capitalist system.)

https://fee.org/resources/the-economic-policy-of-the-nazis/

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on October 08, 2017, 09:53:40 PM
Want more?  Here’s more.  Why don’t you just admit that you are unwilling to consider anything that tends to gainsay the leftist bullshit that you are steeped in.  Please point out for us one instance in which application of anything approaching true Marxist doctrine has produced the promised worker’s paradise or even a sustainable economy (and please don’t cite China because it was foundering until it adopted a quasi capitalist system.)

https://fee.org/resources/the-economic-policy-of-the-nazis/

Don't forget that there was also US support or quasi-US support of the Maoist regime through aid organizations.  ;)

136 or 142

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on October 08, 2017, 09:53:40 PM
Want more?  Here’s more.  Why don’t you just admit that you are unwilling to consider anything that tends to gainsay the leftist bullshit that you are steeped in.  Please point out for us one instance in which application of anything approaching true Marxist doctrine has produced the promised worker’s paradise or even a sustainable economy (and please don’t cite China because it was foundering until it adopted a quasi capitalist system.)

https://fee.org/resources/the-economic-policy-of-the-nazis/

Why would I want to do that?  I'm not a Marxist.

I'm actually a pretty doctrinaire follower of Neo-classical economics.  I'm not even a Keynesian (or Post Keynesian)

136 or 142

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on October 08, 2017, 09:53:40 PM
Want more?  Here’s more.  Why don’t you just admit that you are unwilling to consider anything that tends to gainsay the leftist bullshit that you are steeped in.  Please point out for us one instance in which application of anything approaching true Marxist doctrine has produced the promised worker’s paradise or even a sustainable economy (and please don’t cite China because it was foundering until it adopted a quasi capitalist system.)

https://fee.org/resources/the-economic-policy-of-the-nazis/

That's a much more interesting article from Von Mises, himself.  Of course, since this is from 1941, a good deal of the economic theories he promotes or says others promoted back then are outdated.  I only read half of it so far, because I've been on line for several hours and my eyes are starting to hurt (even after I look away) but I will finish it.

Ultimately I still disagree with Von Mises' premise, because nobody can really know what economic policies the Nazis would have pursued with a peace time economy had they won the war.

In terms of being 'outdated' it seems some other things flip around in terms of who supports what:

6. The advantage derived from foreign trade lies exclusively in exporting. Imports are bad and should be prevented as much as possible. The happiest situation in which a nation can find itself is where it need not depend on any imports from abroad. (The “progressives,” it is true, are not enthusiastic about this dogma and sometimes even reject it as a nationalist error; however, their political acts are thoroughly dictated by it.)

It sounds as if he's quoting what Trump and his idiot supporters believe when it comes to foreign (free) trade.



Kidnostad3

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 08, 2017, 10:10:41 PM


No, you are more of a neo Marxist or post Marxist who recognize the fallacies of Marxist economic theory and are now focused on leveraging the ambitions of social identity groups as opposed to economic class to achieve the same aims as traditional Marxistâ€"power, control and dimunition personal rights and national sovereignty.  It’s not your opposition to Trump that tells me this, it’s your unquestioning adherence to contemporary leftist dogma.  I suspect that you are in one of the identity groups that the lefttist politicians pander to and exploit who are not really interested in the overall good of the Nation but only in advancing their own particular agendas. In shilling for Obama and Clinton you walk like a duck and quack like a duck and it’s only reasonable to conclude that you are a duck.  Oh and then there’s the heroic effort you put into denying, minimizing or even defending what are the indefensible crimes and misdemeanors of the politicians who make up the Democrat establishment.

136 or 142

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on October 08, 2017, 11:03:14 PM
No, you are more of a neo Marxist or post Marxist who recognize the fallacies of Marxist economic theory and are now focused on leveraging social identity groups as opposed to economic class to achieve the same aims as traditional Marxistâ€"power, control and dimunition personal rights and national sovereignty.  It’s not your opposition to Trump that tells me this, it’s your unquestioning adherence to contemporary leftist dogma.  I suspect that you are in one of the identity groups that the lefttist politicians pander to and exploit who are not really interested in the overall good of the Nation but only in advancing their own particular agendas. In shilling for Obama and Clinton you walk like a duck and quack like a duck and it’s only reasonable to conclude that you are a duck.  Oh and then there’s the heroic effort you put into defending what are the indefensible crimes and misdemeanors of the politicians who make up the Democrat establishment.

Fairly meaningless since you posted a link to the article from Mises.org and then from Fee.org (they're not loony libertarian but still libertarian) it's reasonable to assume that you are an adherent of loony libertarian Austrian economics, and as that quote from the Mises.org article that I previously quoted, any economic regulation either is on the way to or is itself Marxist (or Neo Marxist or Post Marxist, whatever they are.)

So, it's reasonable to conclude that you believe that anybody who isn't an adherent of Austrian School Economics is a Marxist of whatever variety.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 08, 2017, 11:20:01 PM
Fairly meaningless since you posted a link to the article from Mises.org and then from Fee.org (they're not loony libertarian but still libertarian) it's reasonable to assume that you are an adherent of loony libertarian Austrian economics, and as that quote from the Mises.org article that I previously quoted, any economic regulation either is on the way to or is itself Marxist (or Neo Marxist or Post Marxist, whatever they are.)

So, it's reasonable to conclude that you believe that anybody who isn't an adherent of Austrian School Economics is a Marxist of whatever variety.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9_VP1orFUc

Kidnostad3

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 08, 2017, 11:20:01 PM
Fairly meaningless since you posted a link to the article from Mises.org and then from Fee.org (they're not loony libertarian but still libertarian) it's reasonable to assume that you are an adherent of loony libertarian Austrian economics, and as that quote from the Mises.org article that I previously quoted, any economic regulation either is on the way to or is itself Marxist (or Neo Marxist or Post Marxist, whatever they are.)

So, it's reasonable to conclude that you believe that anybody who isn't an adherent of Austrian School Economics is a Marxist of whatever variety.

You are being knowingly obtuse.  There are points in both articles that address the misanthropic left’s use of wedge issues (real and invented) to gain the support of the never-enough, hair on fire radicals that we’ve all come to know and love.   



Jackstar

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 08, 2017, 07:18:50 PM
There is no problem of in-person fraud.

How did you prove this negative?


Quote from: Kidnostad3 on October 08, 2017, 11:39:58 PM
You are being knowingly obtuse.

I've had this stupid cunt on /ignore for the last two years. Two years. When I bitch at mv for disabling post filtering? It's because of this guy. I hope it dies in a fucking fire.


Quote from: Swishypants on October 08, 2017, 08:33:32 PM
(fuck your apostrophe hate)

I would prefer not to.

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 08, 2017, 11:20:01 PM
Fairly meaningless since you posted a link to the article from Mises.org and then from Fee.org (they're not loony libertarian but still libertarian) it's reasonable to assume that you are an adherent of loony libertarian Austrian economics, and as that quote from the Mises.org article that I previously quoted, any economic regulation either is on the way to or is itself Marxist (or Neo Marxist or Post Marxist, whatever they are.)

So, it's reasonable to conclude that you believe that anybody who isn't an adherent of Austrian School Economics is a Marxist of whatever variety.

But doubling the national debt in eight years, while being the first two-term president to manage to hold economic growth under 3% every single year* he was in office - that's a proud economic achievement, right?


*  One would reasonably have expected a considerable growth rate in GDP and in jobs in comparison to a base year that was the post WWII low, but one would have been wrong.  Our worst president provided no reason for business confidence or consumer confidence to rebound, or provide inducements to produce and hire - and he had no interest in doing so.  And here's a shocker - a Hilary Clinton presidency promised more of the same, and the voters turned her down.

But, you know, anyone not advocating more government waste, more bureaucracy, higher taxes, more government intrusiveness, and not handing control of our healthcare system over to an unresponsive government can't possibly know a thing about economics.  And PS, it's not Marxism.  Do I have all that all about right, 136? 


Quote from: Kidnostad3 on October 08, 2017, 11:39:58 PM
You are being knowingly obtuse.  There are points in both articles that address the misanthropic left’s use of wedge issues (real and invented) to gain the support of the never-enough, hair on fire radicals that we’ve all come to know and love.

He spends his time selectively reading things he agrees with, then seeking out support for it.  You know, selection bias.  He's been told that's ''critical thinking'', and praised for doing so. 

136 or 142

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on October 08, 2017, 11:39:58 PM
You are being knowingly obtuse.  There are points in both articles that address the misanthropic left’s use of wedge issues (real and invented) to gain the support of the never-enough, hair on fire radicals that we’ve all come to know and love.

I didn't read the Von Mises article after the first two paragraphs, as I told you, and the article from Ludwig Von Mises himself was written in 1941.  So no, not being knowingly obtuse on either of those articles.  If you find something that I specifically wrote that you believes backs up your argument, post it.

Am I wrong in claiming that, to you, anybody who is not a believer in Austrian School Economics is a Marxist of some variety?

136 or 142

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on October 09, 2017, 01:02:04 AM
He spends his time selectively reading things he agrees with, then seeking out support for it.  You know, selection bias.  He's been told that's ''critical thinking'', and praised for doing so.

Every article you link to here is from the Daily Caller or the Washington Examiner and possibly the Washington Times.  All of them are hyper partisan Republican 'news' sites and none of them are well regarded for being intellectually honest.  So, you're the one in a bubble, but you're such a hopeless retard that those sites tell you they're the 'real news' and that any other sources are 'fake news' and you believe them.  If you think mindlessly regurgitating from those news sites and mindlessly regurgitating the Trump cult chants of 'fake news' makes you a critical thinker, you should question the value of your existence and kill yourself.

Swishypants

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 09, 2017, 03:00:28 AM
Every article you link to here is from the Daily Caller or the Washington Examiner and possibly the Washington Times.  All of them are hyper partisan Republican 'news' sites and none of them are well regarded for being intellectually honest.  So, you're the one in a bubble, but you're such a hopeless retard that those sites tell you they're the 'real news' and that any other sources are 'fake news' and you believe them.  If you think mindlessly regurgitating from those news sites and mindlessly regurgitating the Trump cult chants of 'fake news' makes you a critical thinker, you should question the value of your existence and kill yourself.

All those sites are LIBERAL sites doofus! Dear God, the horror on your face when the Juggernaut descends from the sky to rip your liberal face off; it's going to be hysterical. "But, but; I NEVER KNEW!" Damn right you didn't! Hell is coming boy! :) 

136 or 142

Quote from: Swishypants on October 09, 2017, 03:08:32 AM
All those sites are LIBERAL sites doofus! Dear God, the horror on your face when the Juggernaut descends from the sky to rip your liberal face off; it's going to be hysterical. "But, but; I NEVER KNEW!" Damn right you didn't! Hell is coming boy! :)

The Juggernaut?  You mean Jesus?  I'm Jewish.  We're brothers.

Swishypants

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 09, 2017, 03:10:51 AM
The Juggernaut?  You mean Jesus?  I'm Jewish.  We're brothers.

Pray for Hitler; he's your only friend now.



136 or 142

Quote from: Swishypants on October 09, 2017, 03:14:14 AM
Pray for Hitler; he's your only friend now.

Yeah, Hitler was a real Fuhrer figure for me.

Swishypants

Quote from: 136 or 142 on October 09, 2017, 03:16:48 AM
Yeah, Hitler was a real Fuhrer figure for me.

Liberals are losing so badly because they have no idea of the depths that confront them. All those things your fear are child's play. One day soon you will WISH the things you feel are right-wing were what you thought they were. It's the Devil you know, and the 60's are over pal!

136 or 142

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on October 09, 2017, 12:49:19 AM
But doubling the national debt in eight years, while being the first two-term president to manage to hold economic growth under 3% every single year* he was in office - that's a proud economic achievement, right?


*  One would reasonably have expected a considerable growth rate in GDP and in jobs in comparison to a base year that was the post WWII low, but one would have been wrong.  Our worst president provided no reason for business confidence or consumer confidence to rebound, or provide inducements to produce and hire - and he had no interest in doing so.  And here's a shocker - a Hilary Clinton presidency promised more of the same, and the voters turned her down.

But, you know, anyone not advocating more government waste, more bureaucracy, higher taxes, more government intrusiveness, and not handing control of our healthcare system over to an unresponsive government can't possibly know a thing about economics.  And PS, it's not Marxism.  Do I have all that all about right, 136?

Much better job creation numbers than during George W Bush's time:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs_created_during_U.S._presidential_terms

I can't find final average annualized real GDP rates under Obama, but there is this:
Without complete data for 2016, the average growth rate during Obama’s two terms was 2 percent, Weller said. That was on par with George H.W. Bush’s term and faster than George W. Bush’s average.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/oct/31/donald-trump/trumps-claim-about-weak-economic-growth-under-obam/

George W Bush averaged 1.6 over his eight years in office.

We'll see where Trump ends up after a term, but job growth seems to already be slowing down.

I do have a theory as to why job creation and GDP growth weren't that great over Obama's term but were picking up at the end that is completely consistent with Neo-Classical economic theory, but, as I've written many times, I'd rather discuss these things with a rock than with you, because while, like you, a rock has no intelligence, at least, unlike you, it doesn't believe it knows all sorts of things to be facts that are actually wrong.

However,  if you don't respond to this post here with your likely 'wiki and politifact are 'fake news' ' garbage, I could give it a shot. I suspect you're not interested to begin with though.


Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod